HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » n2doc » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 1161 Next »

n2doc

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Home country: USA
Current location: Georgia
Member since: Tue Feb 10, 2004, 12:08 PM
Number of posts: 37,818

About Me

Environmental Scientist

Journal Archives

The Cost of an Adjunct

LAURA MCKENNA


Imagine meeting your English professor by the trunk of her car for office hours, where she doles out information like a taco vendor in a food truck. Or getting an e-mail error message when you write your former biology professor asking for a recommendation because she is no longer employed at the same college. Or attending an afternoon lecture in which your anthropology professor seems a little distracted because he doesn’t have enough money for bus fare. This is an increasingly widespread reality of college education.

Many students—and parents who foot the bills—may assume that all college professors are adequately compensated professionals with a distinct arrangement in which they have a job for life. In actuality those are just tenured professors, who represent less than a quarter of all college faculty. Odds are that students will be taught by professors with less job security and lower pay than those tenured employees, which research shows results in diminished services for students.

Currently, half of all professors in the country are adjuncts or contingent faculty, according to the American Association of University Professors. They teach all levels within the higher-education system, from remedial writing classes to graduate seminars. Unlike graduate teaching assistants, or TAs, they have the same instructional responsibilities as tenured faculty, including assembling syllabi, ordering textbooks, writing lectures, and grading exams. (The remaining quarter or so of American faculty are professors on temporary contracts who have more regular job arrangements than adjuncts, but are not eligible for tenure.)

Adjunct professors earn a median of $2,700 for a semester-long class, according to a survey of thousands of part-time faculty members. In 2013, NPR reported that the average annual pay for adjuncts is between $20,000 and $25,000, while a March 2015 survey conducted by Pacific Standard among nearly 500 adjuncts found that a majority earn less than $20,000 per year from teaching. Some live on less than that and supplement their income with public assistance: A recent report from UC Berkeley found that nearly a quarter of all adjunct professors receive public assistance, such as Medicaid or food stamps. Indeed, many adjuncts earn less than the federal minimum wage. Unless they work 30 hours or more at one college, they’re not eligible for health insurance from that employer, and like other part-time employees, they do not qualify for other benefits.

more

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/05/the-cost-of-an-adjunct/394091/?utm_source=SFTwitter

When is a Felony Not a Felony? When You’re a Bank!

Good news, America: We can now get guilty pleas from banks!

Bad news, America: That’s only because guilty pleas from banks are now absolutely meaningless.

Last week, JP Morgan, Citigroup, Barclays, and Royal Bank of Scotland pled guilty to felony charges of conspiring to manipulate currency prices, and UBS pled guilty to manipulating benchmark interest rates. Regulators and prosecutors found the misconduct because the traders left extensive, written tracks — in chatrooms called “The Cartel” and “The Mafia.” James Kwak wrote that Stringer Bell from the popular television series The Wire would never have tolerated the brazen, “amateurish behavior” these traders exhibited. But why should traders bother to cover their tracks, when they know they have the absolute best clean-up crew in the business — the financial regulators and law enforcement meant to police them?

When an individual is convicted of a felony, they face years of disenfranchisement — from being denied the right to vote in many states, to facing barriers to finding work, felony convictions have real-world consequences for people. But when it comes to banks, regulators and law enforcement work together to ensure collateral consequences don’t occur.

It’s not supposed to be that way. When a bank is charged with a crime, there are certain penalties that automatically kick in. Here is what the banks were facing as a result of their felonies:

Disqualification from managing mutual funds and exchange-traded funds for RBS, JP Morgan, Citigroup and UBS.

New barriers for issuing securities. All the convicted banks are “well-known seasoned issuers,” which is a special status that lets them quickly raise capital without having to get SEC approval first. A criminal conviction automatically disqualifies a bank from this status.

No more immunity for earnings projections. Since you can’t verify the accuracy of the future, the law gives companies a “safe harbor” that allows them to make forward-looking statements anyway — without fear of lawsuits. The felony pleas would disqualify UBS, Barclays and JP Morgan from this immunity, thus subjecting all of their statements to the normal liability standards for fraud.

UBS and Barclays could no longer raise unlimited amounts of money though the sale of private securities.


How many of these consequences do you think the banks actually faced? If you guessed ZERO out of four, you are correct!

more

https://medium.com/bull-market/when-is-a-felony-not-a-felony-when-you-re-a-bank-232a5371d7c1

Look who just crawled out of the woodwork- Paula Jones

Paula Jones: Hillary Clinton unfit to be president
By NICK GASS 5/28/15 8:36 AM EDT

Paula Jones, the woman who sued President Bill Clinton for sexual harassment while he was governor of Arkansas, says Hillary Clinton is not fit to be president because of her husband’s past behavior.

“There is no way that she did not know what was going on, that women were being abused and accosted by her husband,” Jones said in an interview with Daily Mail Online. “They have both lied,” she said.

Jones, now 48, sued Clinton in 1994, alleging that he propositioned her in an Arkansas hotel room while he was governor. The lawsuit preceded revelations about the president’s affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky and his impeachment and later acquittal.
“She should not be running with the terrible history they have,” Jones said, warning that the former president should not be allowed back in the White House.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/paula-jones-hillary-clinton-unfit-president-118368.html#ixzz3bRONtimS

The Senate Votes That Divided Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders

Hillary Rodham Clinton is a liberal Democrat on domestic matters, and Bernie Sanders is a socialist. They voted the same way 93 percent of the time in the two years they shared in the Senate.

In fact, from January 2007 to January 2009, Mrs. Clinton, representing New York, voted with Mr. Sanders about as often as she did with the like-minded Democrats Ron Wyden of Oregon and Barbara Mikulski of Maryland.

In many of the cases in which she differed with Mr. Sanders, who represents Vermont and is also running for the Democratic presidential nomination, Mrs. Clinton went with the crowd. She voted with an overwhelming majority of her colleagues, including Republicans. Her positions on the votes that differed from Mr. Sanders represented policy differences but also political calculations by Mrs. Clinton, who was preparing for a presidential run in 2008.

The 31 times that Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Sanders disagreed happened to be on some the biggest issues of the day, including measures on continuing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, an immigration reform bill and bank bailouts during the depths of the Great Recession. Mr. Sanders, who formally kicked off his campaign Tuesday evening in Burlington, Vt., was opposed to all these actions.

more
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/28/upshot/the-senate-votes-that-divided-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0

Scott Walker says he would sign prevailing wage repeal

Gov. Scott Walker would sign a bill repealing the state’s prevailing wage if it passes the Legislature, his spokeswoman said Wednesday.

Laurel Patrick made the comments as an Assembly committee heard testimony on a repeal bill, which the committee later approved 5-4.

Walker has said prevailing wage wasn’t a priority, and he has faced criticism from fellow Republicans for not more forcefully backing the legislation.

Rep. Andre Jacque, R-De Pere, chairman of the Assembly labor committee, said he decided to schedule the Wednesday public hearing and vote a little more than 24 hours in advance so the measure could be considered by the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee as it drafts the last pieces of the state budget this week. Jacque said he would also support the measure as a standalone bill.



Read more: http://host.madison.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/scott-walker-says-he-would-sign-prevailing-wage-repeal/article_7eda681e-e96f-5b79-8e5f-79492802bf1c.html#ixzz3bRNNiiKh

Scott Walker to Sign Ban on Abortions for Rape, Incest

Potentially complicating his 2016 bid, the Wisconsin governor has said he will sign a 20-week abortion bill that includes no exemption for rape or incest.


That’s because Republicans in the Wisconsin state legislature have introduced legislation banning abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

The bill is expected to get a vote in the next few weeks, before the state’s biennial budget passes. But unlike a federal bill on the issue, this legislation doesn’t include an exception allowing abortions for victims of rape or incest.

The governor plans to sign the legislation, Laurel Patrick, a spokeswoman for Walker’s office, emailed.

more
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/28/scott-walker-pledges-to-sign-no-excuses-abortion-bill.html

Pot still illegal for government workers

By Tim Devaney -

Smoking marijuana is still illegal for federal employees, even those who reside in states and cities that have approved the drug for use by the general public, the Obama administration said Wednesday.

The federal government’s prohibition on marijuana has increasingly come in conflict with a number of states.

“These changes to state law have raised questions about whether federal employees in these jurisdictions may use marijuana as provided for in state law,” Office of Personnel Management Director Katherine Archuleta wrote in a memo to federal agencies.

“Federal law on marijuana remains unchanged,” she added. “Marijuana is categorized as a controlled substance. …Thus, knowing or intentional marijuana possession is illegal, even if an individual has no intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense marijuana."

Recreational marijuana was also legalized earlier this year in Washington, D.C., but federal workers in the nation’s capital will still be prohibited from smoking pot.

more

http://thehill.com/regulation/administration/243224-pot-illegal-for-feds

Thursday TOON Roundup 5- The Rest

Banksters



NSA



Middle East







Court


Zimmerman




Phones




Education



Character





Thursday TOON Roundup 4- Ireland


















Thursday TOON Roundup 3- Texas Flood













Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 1161 Next »