Districts around California are pursuing the idea of building rent-restricted housing to help hire and retain employees amid a worsening housing crisis.Silver prices to rise amid increasing industrial demand: Safe Haven Hub
It was a frustrating night for the home side and especially Julio Enciso. The Paraguay striker had a host of opportunities to score but couldn’t make them count. Along with Southampton, Brentford has the worst away record in the league with seven losses and two draws and it was easy to see why in this toothless performance. Brentford had an early goal from Yoane Wissa ruled out for offside and, although it came a bit more into the game in the second half, it failed to pressure Icelandic goalkeeper Hakon Valdimarsson, who made his Premier League debut eight minutes before halftime when Mark Flekken went off with a thigh injury. One bright spot for the home side was the return of winger Solly March. He came on as a late substitute to make his first appearance for Brighton since injuring a knee against Manchester City 14 months ago. The result leaves Brighton in 10th place with 26 points, one spot and two points ahead of the Bees. Arsenal was hosting Ipswich in Friday's other game in the Premier League, AP soccer: https://apnews.com/hub/soccerNone
MINNEAPOLIS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec 10, 2024-- The Board of Directors of U.S. Bancorp (NYSE: USB) has declared a regular quarterly dividend of $0.50 per common share, payable January 15, 2025, to stockholders of record at the close of business on December 31, 2024. At this quarterly dividend rate, the annual dividend is equivalent to $2.00 per common share. The Board of Directors also declared the following: About U.S. Bancorp U.S. Bancorp, with more than 70,000 employees and $686 billion in assets as of September 30, 2024, is the parent company of U.S. Bank National Association. Headquartered in Minneapolis, the company serves millions of customers locally, nationally and globally through a diversified mix of businesses including consumer banking, business banking, commercial banking, institutional banking, payments and wealth management. U.S. Bancorp has been recognized for its approach to digital innovation, community partnerships and customer service, including being named one of the 2024 World’s Most Ethical Companies and Fortune’s most admired superregional bank. Learn more at usbank.com/about . View source version on businesswire.com : https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20241210470741/en/ CONTACT: Investor contact: George Andersen, Director of Investor Relations, U.S. Bancorp Investor Relations george.andersen@usbank.comMedia contact: Jeff Shelman, U.S. Bancorp Public Affairs and Communications jeffrey.shelman@usbank.com KEYWORD: MINNESOTA UNITED STATES NORTH AMERICA INDUSTRY KEYWORD: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PAYMENTS TECHNOLOGY FINANCE BANKING PERSONAL FINANCE ACCOUNTING SOURCE: U.S. Bancorp Copyright Business Wire 2024. PUB: 12/10/2024 04:57 PM/DISC: 12/10/2024 04:58 PM http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20241210470741/en
If voters delivered any certain message on Nov. 5, it’s that they were angry enough not to take it any longer. There’s much to be angry about, but it’s harder to tell just what voters were protesting. To some so-called experts, they were angry at the “elites,” narrowly defined as people with college degrees and liberal social views on gender and religion who supposedly control the Democratic Party. The truth is, the elites who actually run our country care little about social issues. What concerns them is the wealth they control, and how to increase it. That was the point of a major study 10 years ago which documented that we had become an oligarchy run by “economic elites and organized groups representing business interests.” When their interests and those of the general public coincide, both often get what they want. But when they clash, the wealthy usually prevail. Authors Martin Gilens of Princeton and Benjamin Page of Northwestern compared a large database of public opinion polls to political outcomes. “Not only do ordinary citizens not have uniquely substantial power over policy decisions; they have little or no independent influence on policy at all,” they wrote. “When the preferences of economic elites and the stands of organized interest groups are controlled for, the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.” Writing two years later to rebut their critics, the authors offered some interesting examples. “On most aspects of national defense, environmental policy, drug policy and education, for example, the views of the affluent and the poor are nearly identical,” they explained. “Even on redistributive economic policies, there is often more agreement than one might expect. Lower and higher income Americans, for example, are equally supportive of unpaid family leave laws and equally opposed to a national sales tax.” However, they added, “Middle-income Americans, for example, are more likely to support raising the minimum wage or indexing it to inflation; increasing income taxes on high earners or corporations; and cutting payroll taxes on lower income Americans. And they’re more likely to be opposed to tax cuts for upper-income individuals, spending cuts in Medicare, and roll-backs of federal retirement programs.” Gilens cited other examples in an email to the Sun Sentinel Editorial Board. “Lower and higher income Americans were often in agreement on military policies (e.g., in support of invading Afghanistan and in opposition to giving aid to the Sandinistas). But they often disagreed on free trade (e.g., NAFTA, GATT), where the affluent supported free trade agreements while low-income Americans opposed them,” he wrote. Most Americans don’t need statistics to know that something is fundamentally wrong. People struggle to put food on the table. The federal minimum wage hasn’t been raised in 15 years, and at $7.25 an hour is worth only 40 cents of every dollar of value at its peak in 1968. By any practical respect, that’s a poverty wage, but Congress won’t raise it because the oligarchs who pay for their elections won’t stand for it. Florida’s $13 an hour minimum wage is better only because of a barely successful 2020 voter initiative, which the state’s oligarchs fiercely opposed. The data confirms that the wealthiest 10 percent now control 60 percent of all wealth. But nobody needs statistics to know that the middle class has declined in status and purchasing power. They can see all the shuttered factories that once paid good wages to people without college degrees. At the grocery, they see for themselves how agribusiness exploits them. So many people no longer see the bright future that their parents did. It’s no wonder the public is so angry. But people will soon discover that they voted against their own economic self-interest. Under Donald Trump, income inequality will worsen. By putting their faith in Trump, who promises a tariff wall — the device that exacerbated the Great Depression — they voted to make things worse and reignite inflation. They also voted to renew Trump’s skewed tax cuts that will make the rich richer and leave most others relatively poorer. People rejected Kamala Harris, who promised explicitly to make first-home buying more affordable, in favor of a man who has already spooked a hike in mortgage rates, making homes less affordable. Democrats need to be more strident and populist, but they too depend on campaign money from oligarchs. One of their persistent “what ifs” is whether they should have nominated Bernie Sanders eight years ago. Trump’s populism is phony. Democratic populism is muted. The oligarchy still rules.