mcw casino 77
Cam Akers reached down in front of him to scoop a sinking pass from Sam Darnold, bringing it into his body as he tumbled backwards. As he did, two words ran through his mind: game over. Akers’ late catch, which came with less than two minutes left in the game on a third-and-2 pass, sealed a 27-25 win for the Vikings over the Green Bay Packers on Sunday afternoon in a game at U.S. Bank Stadium that got tight late. ADVERTISEMENT “I’m blessed,” Akers said. “On my journey from where I’ve come from, to be able to be in there, crunch time, fourth quarter, the coaches trust me, the team trusts me,” Akers said. “I’m blessed.” It’s been a long journey for the running back, who has dealt with two serious Achilles injuries in previous seasons. But Akers, now in his second stint with the Vikings, has rewarded the coaching staff for its faith in him. He also caught a 9-yard touchdown pass late in the third quarter, one which ended up proving the difference in the win. His opportunities on Sunday came in part because Aaron Jones took a shot to the quad earlier in the game, which he played through before watching the end of the game from the sidelines. His last carry in the game came near the end of the third quarter. “Coach was like, ‘Hey, we’re going to hold you for a little bit,’ but I was good,” Jones said. “I kept warm just in case they needed me. Kept my helmet on.” They didn’t wind up needing him, thanks in large part to Akers. “Cam has something inside him that allowed him to push through the adversity of what’s happened to him over the course of his career,” coach Kevin O’Connell said. “His teammates were probably the most excited all season when Cam scored on that screen and then obviously the catch late. He just brings something. He brings physicality. He brings a level of mental and physical toughness that I think makes us all better.” ADVERTISEMENT Darnold aired it out and found his receiver, on the run, open in the end zone. It wasn’t Justin Jefferson, nor Jordan Addison, but Jalen Nailor, who hauled in the 31-yard pass for the Vikings’ first touchdown of the game. “I just had a post route. I’ve seen the far safety. He wasn’t there,” Nailor said. “I just took off running as fast as I could and Sam found me.” Darnold found Nailor a season-high five times on Sunday. He finished the day with 81 yards, also a season-high, and his touchdown was his first in more than a month, with the last one coming in the Vikings’ Nov. 24 win over the Bears. “It just felt good to be out there, just help the team win,” Nailor said. “That’s all I’m trying to do.” Will Reichard’s first field goal attempt Sunday hit the crossbar. The rookie kicker missed a 55-yard attempt near the end of the first half, but a Green Bay penalty negated his miss and a subsequent Packers’ timeout took away a 50-yard make. He then connected from 50 yards to send the Vikings into halftime up 10. His last field goal attempt of the day went off the left upright from 43 yards. But despite a shaky day, O’Connell’s confidence in the 23-year-old, who also converted on a short kick in the second quarter, hasn’t wavered. ADVERTISEMENT “I just told him, ‘Hey, next one’s going to be the best one.’ My confidence in Will is sky high,” O’Connell said of Reichard. “If we think we’re anywhere near the range, I’m going to give him the swing. He’s a phenomenal kid, great makeup. The next kick’s going to be his best kick.” ______________________________________________________ This story was written by one of our partner news agencies. Forum Communications Company uses content from agencies such as Reuters, Kaiser Health News, Tribune News Service and others to provide a wider range of news to our readers. Learn more about the news services FCC uses here .
Cardinals are average through 12 games and the frustration is it feels as if they could be betterThe Arizona Cardinals are 6-6 through 12 games, which makes them an average football team. That's much better than the previous two years, which both ended with just four wins. But after two straight frustrating losses, it's not providing much consolation for a franchise that feels as though it should be much better. Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec 29, 2024-- Halper Sadeh LLC, an investor rights law firm, is investigating whether the merger of Better Choice Company Inc. (NYSE American: BTTR) and SRx Health Solutions Inc. is fair to Better Choice shareholders. Upon completion of the proposed transaction, Better Choice shareholders will own approximately 15% of the combined company. Halper Sadeh encourages Better Choice shareholders to click here to learn more about their legal rights and options or contact Daniel Sadeh or Zachary Halper at (212) 763-0060 or sadeh@halpersadeh.com or zhalper@halpersadeh.com . The investigation concerns whether Better Choice and its board violated the federal securities laws and/or breached their fiduciary duties to shareholders by failing to, among other things: (1) obtain the best possible consideration for Better Choice shareholders; and (2) disclose all material information necessary for Better Choice shareholders to adequately assess and value the merger consideration. On behalf of Better Choice shareholders, Halper Sadeh LLC may seek increased consideration for shareholders, additional disclosures and information concerning the proposed transaction, or other relief and benefits. We would handle the action on a contingent fee basis, whereby you would not be responsible for out-of-pocket payment of our legal fees or expenses. Halper Sadeh LLC represents investors all over the world who have fallen victim to securities fraud and corporate misconduct. Our attorneys have been instrumental in implementing corporate reforms and recovering millions of dollars on behalf of defrauded investors. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. View source version on businesswire.com : https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20241229018924/en/ CONTACT: Halper Sadeh LLC Daniel Sadeh, Esq. Zachary Halper, Esq. (212) 763-0060 sadeh@halpersadeh.com zhalper@halpersadeh.com https://www.halpersadeh.com KEYWORD: NEW YORK UNITED STATES NORTH AMERICA INDUSTRY KEYWORD: CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LEGAL SOURCE: Halper Sadeh LLC Copyright Business Wire 2024. PUB: 12/29/2024 10:47 AM/DISC: 12/29/2024 10:46 AM http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20241229018924/en
The HondaJet Series: A Look At The Popular Very Light Business JetThis story was originally published by Yale E360 and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. The angry Alaskans gathered in Fairbanks to burn the president’s effigy. It was early December 1978 and President Jimmy Carter was that unpopular in Alaska. A few days earlier Carter had issued an unusual executive order, designating 56 million acres of Alaskan wilderness as a national monument. He did so unilaterally, using a little known 1906 Antiquities Act that ostensibly gave the president the executive power to designate buildings or small plots of historical sites on federal land as national monuments. No previous president had ever used the obscure act to create a vast wilderness area. But Congress was refusing to pass the necessary legislation, so Carter, who passed away Sunday at the age of 100, decided to act alone. The Alaskan political establishment was flabbergasted. Despite the unpopularity of the unusual sequestration order, Carter announced that it would stand until Congress agreed to pass its own legislation. For the next two years Carter stubbornly held his ground, explaining that he wasn’t opposed to oil and gas development, but that he would not accept any bill that jeopardized the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge—the calving grounds and migratory route for one of the world’s last great caribou herds. Finally, Alaska’s senior politician, Republican Senator Ted Stevens agreed in late 1980 to break the impasse. At one point in their wrangling over what became known as the Alaska Lands Act, Senator Stevens argued that one small region should be excluded from the proposed wilderness refuge. “Well, let’s check that,” Carter said. The president then rolled out an oversized map on the floor of the Oval Office. Stevens was astonished to see the president on his hands and knees, inspecting the area in question. “No, I don’t think you are right,” Carter observed. “You see, this little watershed here doesn’t actually go into that one. It comes over here.” The senator had to concede the point, and on the car ride back to Capitol Hill he turned to his aide and remarked, “He knows more about Alaska than I do.” Sen. Ted Stevens and President Carter discuss the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. Anchorage Daily News/Tribune News Service/Getty That was vintage Carter, the president who always paid attention to details. But it also illustrates Carter’s legacy as a president devoted to protecting the environment. Carter was still negotiating with Senator Stevens weeks after his defeat in the November 1980 election. But on December 2, 1980, this now lame-duck president signed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, creating more than 157 million acres of wilderness area, national wildlife refuges, and national parks—tripling the size of the nation’s Wilderness Preservation System and doubling the size of the National Park System. It was, and still is, the largest single expansion of protected lands in American history. More than four decades later, before he entered hospice care in his simple Plains, Georgia home in February, Carter signed an amicus brief, appealing to the courts and President Joe Biden, not to permit the building of a gravel road through one small portion of the designated wilderness area. It was his last act in the public arena. And it succeeded: On March 14, 2023, the Interior Department canceled a plan that would have allowed the road’s construction. Carter was always annoyed when pundits proclaimed him a “model” ex-president, but a failed president. And he was right to be annoyed because his was actually a quite consequential presidency, and no more so than on questions of conservation and the environment. Carter signs the Energy Bill on November 9, 1978. HUM Images/Universal Images Group/Getty Early in his presidency, in the spring of 1977, he famously vetoed a slew of water projects, mostly small dams and river diversion facilities, in dozens of congressional districts around the country. Federal funding of such projects was often a waste of taxpayer funds. And these boondoggles, always encouraged by the US Army Corps of Engineers, often harmed the rivers’ natural habitat. Carter knew he was doing the right thing—even though it eroded his support in a Democratic-controlled Congress. Carter’s instincts for conservation had been evident earlier when, as governor of Georgia, he had opposed unbridled commercial development, favored tough regulations to protect the state’s coastal wetlands, and endorsed the creation of two major seashores and river parks. But when Carter got to the White House, he shocked many observers by appointing James Gustave Speth, age 35, to the President’s Council on Environmental Quality. Speth was regarded by the Washington establishment as a radical on environmental issues. A Yale-trained lawyer and Rhodes Scholar, he had co-founded in 1970 the Natural Resources Defense Council, a tough advocacy group on environmental issues. Speth, who later served as dean of the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, used his position in the administration to educate Carter about the dangers of acid rain, carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere, and the likely extinction of 100,000 species during the next quarter century. Just before leaving office, Carter released a prophetic report, largely written by Speth, that predicted “widespread and pervasive changes in global climatic, economic, social and agricultural patterns” if humanity continued to rely on fossil fuels. The Global 2000 Report to the President became an early clarion call for scientists studying climate change. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Danielle Brigida/US Fish and Wildlife Service History will judge Carter as a president ahead of his time. He set a goal of producing 20 percent of the nation’s energy from renewable sources by 2000. In an age of soaring energy prices and stagflation, he famously wore a cardigan on national television during a fireside chat in which he urged Americans to lower their thermostats and conserve energy. He put solar water heating panels on the roof of the White House, telling reporters, “A generation from now this solar heater can either be a curiosity, a museum piece, an example of a road not taken, or it can be just a small part of one of the greatest and most exciting adventures ever undertaken by the American people.” Ironically, while Carter put federal money into solar energy research, a few years later his successor Ronald Reagan ripped the solar panels off the White House roof—and a few are still displayed in museums. Carter spent much of his time in office trying to deal with energy issues. He proposed a 283-page National Energy Act (NEA) that included a tax on oversized, gas-guzzling cars, tax credits for home insulation, and investments in solar and wind technologies. Carter insisted that his energy bill was the “moral equivalent of war.” In response, The Wall Street Journal labeled it with the sarcastic acronym MEOW. Republican Party chairman Bill Brock charged that the president was “driving people out of their family cars.” Michigan Democratic Congressman John Dingell told Carter aides that it was an “asinine bill.” The legislation nevertheless passed the House, but then encountered much more opposition in the Senate. Carter complained in a private White House diary, “The influence of the oil and gas industry is unbelievable, and it’s impossible to arouse the public to protect themselves.” Carter announces his solar energy policy in front of PV panels installed on the West Wing roof. Warren Leffler/Library of Congress The final bill, passed in October 1978, was a complicated compromise—but it did impose penalties on gas-guzzling cars, required higher efficiency standards for home appliances, and provided tax incentives to develop wind and solar technologies. But environmentalists would criticize it for also providing incentives to mine domestic coal and produce corn-based gasohol. Carter’s goal here was to lessen the country’s dependence on imported Arab oil—and in this he was marginally successful, leading to a decline in oil imports during his term in office. But in an unintended consequence, environmentalists would complain that a part of the bill required that any new power plants be fired with fuels other than oil or natural gas. In practice, that meant coal received a major boost. In retrospect, the most consequential part of the energy bill was the phased decontrol of natural gas prices. This deregulation eventually stimulated exploration for natural gas in the United States and created the market conditions decades later for the innovative fracking technology that would make the country a major supplier of liquefied natural gas. Politically speaking, Carter’s energy policies were criticized by both sides. He was faulted by liberals for enacting too much deregulation, while conservatives perceived him as an enemy of the oil and gas industry. Former President Carter with grandson Jason Carter during a ribbon cutting for a solar project on family farmland in Plains, Georgia. David Goldman/AP If environmentalists should remember one thing about the Carter presidency it should be his so-called “malaise speech” in July 1979. It was an extraordinary sermon about America’s limits—a most un-American idea for a people constantly fed on the manna of manifest destiny. “We’ve always had a faith that the days of our children would be better than our own,” he said. “Our people are losing that faith...In a nation that was once proud of hard work, strong families, close-knit communities, and our faith in God, too many of us now tend to worship self-indulgence and consumption.” Taking a page straight from Christopher Lasch’s The Culture of Narcissism (which Carter had recently read), Carter observed, “Human identity is no longer defined by what one does, but by what one owns. But we’ve discovered that owning things and consuming things does not satisfy our longing for meaning. We’ve learned that piling up material goods cannot fill the emptiness of lives which have no confidence or purpose.” This was the born-again Southern Baptist in Jimmy Carter speaking, the Southern populist, warning his people about the need to be aware of our environment’s fragility and limitations. It was not a message most Americans wanted to hear. But it remains a key part of his presidential legacy.
Citigroup Inc. reduced its stake in shares of iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF ( NYSEARCA:DGRO – Free Report ) by 15.7% during the third quarter, according to the company in its most recent 13F filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The firm owned 137,902 shares of the company’s stock after selling 25,726 shares during the quarter. Citigroup Inc.’s holdings in iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF were worth $8,645,000 at the end of the most recent reporting period. Other institutional investors have also added to or reduced their stakes in the company. Vanguard Group Inc. raised its stake in iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF by 2.5% in the first quarter. Vanguard Group Inc. now owns 31,878 shares of the company’s stock worth $1,851,000 after buying an additional 780 shares in the last quarter. Price T Rowe Associates Inc. MD lifted its stake in shares of iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF by 144.6% in the 1st quarter. Price T Rowe Associates Inc. MD now owns 21,827 shares of the company’s stock valued at $1,268,000 after purchasing an additional 12,905 shares during the period. GAMMA Investing LLC boosted its position in shares of iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF by 12.9% during the second quarter. GAMMA Investing LLC now owns 52,031 shares of the company’s stock valued at $2,997,000 after purchasing an additional 5,936 shares in the last quarter. Marcum Wealth LLC grew its stake in iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF by 27.0% in the second quarter. Marcum Wealth LLC now owns 9,405 shares of the company’s stock worth $542,000 after purchasing an additional 2,000 shares during the period. Finally, Modus Advisors LLC raised its holdings in iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF by 1.1% in the second quarter. Modus Advisors LLC now owns 167,485 shares of the company’s stock worth $9,649,000 after purchasing an additional 1,835 shares in the last quarter. iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF Trading Up 0.3 % Shares of iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF stock opened at $64.94 on Friday. The business has a fifty day simple moving average of $63.13 and a two-hundred day simple moving average of $60.52. The firm has a market capitalization of $30.75 billion, a P/E ratio of 19.25 and a beta of 0.71. iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF has a 12 month low of $51.19 and a 12 month high of $65.08. iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF Company Profile The iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF (DGRO) is an exchange-traded fund that is based on the Morningstar US Dividend Growth index. The fund tracks an index of US stocks that are selected by dividends, dividend growth and payout ratio, then weighted by dividend dollars. DGRO was launched on Jun 10, 2014 and is managed by BlackRock. Read More Want to see what other hedge funds are holding DGRO? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF ( NYSEARCA:DGRO – Free Report ). Receive News & Ratings for iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .GEORGETOWN 100, ALBANY 68
Mets Named 'Perfect Fit' For Two Top Free Agents Projected to Earn $357 MillionWASHINGTON , Nov. 21, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- The Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) today announced Western Digital (NASDAQ: WDC) CEO David Goeckeler has been elected Chair of the SIA Board of Directors . SIA represents 99% of the U.S. semiconductor industry by revenue and nearly two-thirds of non-U.S. chip firms. " We are thrilled to welcome our new chair for 2025, David Goeckeler of Western Digital," said SIA President and CEO John Neuffer . "David possesses years of experience in the technology and semiconductor industries, and is an outstanding advocate for our work. He will be a fantastic leader of the SIA Board of Directors in 2025." Over more than four decades, Goeckeler has focused on innovating and growing industries ranging from semiconductors to global networking to enterprise software. As CEO of Western Digital, Goeckeler has led the company's transformation as a leading data storage producer in the industry. Prior to this, he served as Executive Vice President and General Manager of Cisco's Networking and Security Business, after starting his career at Bell Laboratories. Goeckeler was recently appointed Chairman of the U.S. Chamber's U.S.-Japan Business Council (USJBC). "Semiconductor innovation is the transformative backbone of everything from the smartphone in your pocket to hyperscale cloud infrastructure to artificial intelligence that uplift society and improve our quality of life," said Goeckeler . "As we grow our industry, the role of effective government policies is more crucial now than ever to accelerate innovation and expansion in this sector. Through partnership with my colleagues on the SIA Board, I look forward to strengthening our shared industry priorities in Washington and around the world." Media Contact Dan Rosso Semiconductor Industry Association 240-305-4738 drosso@semiconductors.org About SIA The Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) is the voice of the semiconductor industry, one of America's top export industries and a key driver of America's economic strength, national security, and global competitiveness. SIA represents 99% of the U.S. semiconductor industry by revenue and nearly two-thirds of non-U.S. chip firms. Through this coalition, SIA seeks to strengthen leadership of semiconductor manufacturing, design, and research by working with Congress, the Administration, and key industry stakeholders around the world to encourage policies that fuel innovation, propel business, and drive international competition. Learn more at www.semiconductors.org . View original content to download multimedia: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/western-digital-ceo-david-goeckeler-elected-chair-of-semiconductor-industry-association-302313650.html SOURCE Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA)
"Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum." Section 1.10.32 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum", written by Cicero in 45 BC "Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam, eaque ipsa quae ab illo inventore veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur? Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit qui in ea voluptate velit esse quam nihil molestiae consequatur, vel illum qui dolorem eum fugiat quo voluptas nulla pariatur?" 1914 translation by H. Rackham "But I must explain to you how all this mistaken idea of denouncing pleasure and praising pain was born and I will give you a complete account of the system, and expound the actual teachings of the great explorer of the truth, the master-builder of human happiness. No one rejects, dislikes, or avoids pleasure itself, because it is pleasure, but because those who do not know how to pursue pleasure rationally encounter consequences that are extremely painful. Nor again is there anyone who loves or pursues or desires to obtain pain of itself, because it is pain, but because occasionally circumstances occur in which toil and pain can procure him some great pleasure. To take a trivial example, which of us ever undertakes laborious physical exercise, except to obtain some advantage from it? But who has any right to find fault with a man who chooses to enjoy a pleasure that has no annoying consequences, or one who avoids a pain that produces no resultant pleasure?" 1914 translation by H. Rackham "But I must explain to you how all this mistaken idea of denouncing pleasure and praising pain was born and I will give you a complete account of the system, and expound the actual teachings of the great explorer of the truth, the master-builder of human happiness. No one rejects, dislikes, or avoids pleasure itself, because it is pleasure, but because those who do not know how to pursue pleasure rationally encounter consequences that are extremely painful. Nor again is there anyone who loves or pursues or desires to obtain pain of itself, because it is pain, but because occasionally circumstances occur in which toil and pain can procure him some great pleasure. To take a trivial example, which of us ever undertakes laborious physical exercise, except to obtain some advantage from it? But who has any right to find fault with a man who chooses to enjoy a pleasure that has no annoying consequences, or one who avoids a pain that produces no resultant pleasure?" To keep reading, please log in to your account, create a free account, or simply fill out the form below.Mumbai: Cyber Police Freeze ₹4.65 Crore In Record Time Amid ₹7.50 Crore SIM Swap Fraud Case
The union representing striking postal workers says most provinces, including New Brunswick, turned down a free offer for its members to voluntarily deliver welfare cheques to those in need at their homes. Critics say the New Brunswick Liberal government’s decision could force hundreds, if not thousands, of the most impoverished people in rural areas to travel many kilometres to get their monthly social assistance cheques from government offices. On Friday, Premier Susan Holt told reporters at the legislature that government staff had worried the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, or CUP-W, wouldn’t deliver the Dec. 1 cheques on time. “Originally, the reason for the rejection was because of the timing. There was concern that CUP-W wouldn’t be able to deliver the cheques in as timely a way as the department felt they could, and there was an urgency to making sure those cheques were getting out to the people who need them.” In the face of criticism, the premier said the department is re-evaluating its position. “They perhaps do have the ability to deliver to the timelines that we want to see and help get those cheques to people as soon as possible. So the conversation is happening.” The day before, the minister of social development, Cindy Miles, told reporters at the legislature she didn’t know why her department had turned down the offer, but insisted that welfare recipients could visit with their case workers to get the monthly social assistance cheques in person or set up automatic bank deposits. When it was pointed out that some of people in rural New Brunswick live very far away from government offices, she said civil servants could travel to the recipients in person to deliver their cheques. The revelation about the spurned offer raised concerns in question period on Thursday, with opposition Progressive Conservative critic Margaret Johnson demanding answers. “We’re talking about serving our vulnerable populations who struggle with transportation and financial insecurity. How could the department ignore this reality?” Johnson is the Tory MLA for Carleton-Victoria, a sprawling riding in the northwest of the province. She said for many poor people, it would be tough to get to a provincial office. “For some in my riding, getting their cheques means finding a way to get from Juniper to Woodstock or Perth-Andover – that is 71 kilometres or 53 km – and then back home again,” she said Thursday in the House. “If they live in Plaster Rock, that means driving 39 km and back. If they’re in Nackawic, they have the choice of 64 km to Fredericton or 47 km to Woodstock and back home. “As I said, we’re talking about serving vulnerable populations who struggle with transportation and financial insecurity. “Gas costs money. We all know that, which is why it causes me to shake my head.” In an open letter sent to supporters last week, the CUP-W’s Atlantic national director, Jeff Callaghan, said the union’s striking postal members had delivered cheques to communities around the country, as outlined in the “Socio-Economic Cheque Memorandum of Agreement” with Canada Post. The document states that unionized workers have agreed to voluntarily process and deliver government payments to senior citizens, low-income people and others who receive pension cheques and other forms of social assistance. “Despite our offer to continue this service during the strike, there were no provincially issued cheques included in these deliveries from the provinces of Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, or Prince Edward Island,” Callaghan wrote. “Canada Post reached out and offered the Socio-Economic Cheque service to all provinces and territories. Only three accepted, and one has since backed out.” Brunswick News contacted the union’s Atlantic office to learn more details, but no officials were made available. Miles provided no insight as to why the provincial government turned down the offer. “That’s something I’d have to get back to you on,” the Liberal minister told reporters on Thursday. “I don’t know what that conversation looked like. But as I said before, relationships are so important. And folks have relationships with the folks in the central office or their regional office. There will be accommodations for folks in order to receive their cheques that they so desperately need.” Miles said she’d speak with her staff about the possibility of allowing the union workers to deliver the cheques. She also said special arrangements could be made for government employees to travel to recipients who have no vehicle or gas money. “We can have staff go out and meet them where they are at.” But such a task would be a logistical nightmare if every welfare recipient wanted their cheque delivered personally to them. The latest statistics for November show that 24,709 cheques went out, helping more than 37,500 people and their families. Green Deputy Leader Megan Mitton also criticized the Liberal government’s decision to turn down the offer. “That’s unacceptable. It’s putting the burden on the most vulnerable to travel to get their cheques. I think that’s wrong.” In a news release on Wednesday, the Department of Social Development said that due to the postal strike, December’s social assistance payments had been sent to its regional offices for preparation by staff. The release also encouraged clients who do not receive their monthly payments by direct deposit to pick up a form at their local office to set it up. About 55,000 Canada Post workers went on strike Nov. 15 over wage and benefit demands. The two sides – Canada Post and The Canadian Union of Postal Workers – are said to be far apart on the issues. Negotiations broke down Wednesday.Best of Central Valley Business Awards: Essential services and community impact
Jimmy Carter: A brief bioAlphabet GOOGL has outperformed the market over the past 5 years by 10.5% on an annualized basis producing an average annual return of 23.87%. Currently, Alphabet has a market capitalization of $2.40 trillion. Buying $1000 In GOOGL: If an investor had bought $1000 of GOOGL stock 5 years ago, it would be worth $2,883.87 today based on a price of $196.15 for GOOGL at the time of writing. Alphabet's Performance Over Last 5 Years Finally -- what's the point of all this? The key insight to take from this article is to note how much of a difference compounded returns can make in your cash growth over a period of time. This article was generated by Benzinga's automated content engine and reviewed by an editor. © 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.