Dear Friends -- Below are links to today's Sunday Philadelphia Inquirer and Saturday's Philadelphia Daily News articles on the lawsuit we filed Friday afternoon on behalf of 18 property owners from throughout the City. If the links don't work, copy and paste them into your browser.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20110130_Group_sues_to_force_new_Phila__tax_system.html
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20110129_Group_sues_city_over_planned_property-tax_increase.html
As with any reporting, the articles reflect the views of the writers and cannot give a full picture, so I urge you to read the entire complaint when you get a chance. You can obtain copies of the 36-page Complaint and its exhibits by visiting www.FixPhillyTaxes.org and scrolling to the bottom of the webpage. If you have any trouble, email me and I can send the legal docs to you in pdf format.
You can help to keep the momentum going by forwarding this to your friends, colleagues, neighbors, neighborhood associations, civic groups, etc. and by clicking on the Inquirer article and writing a comment about the suit.
We have never claimed to have all the answers to the many tough policy questions that must be addressed in resolving the long-standing illegalities plaguing our beloved City's assessment system, BUT we have to got to talk about and face them in order to make progress. If nothing else, the lawsuit should help to kickstart and motivate these discussions.
Thanks for your support of this important reform effort.
Rev. Ken Metzner
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
Property Tax lawsuit in Philly
Monday, January 31, 2011
Apples to Apples. Go figure
(posted by me at another blog in a thread about the SI article about Aliquippa.)
Think again.
The PIAA and high school sports are NOT about districts, but rather about schools (for classification only) and teams from schools and athletes from schools. The district is not REALLY a factor in athletics.
I am not mixing the apples and oranges -- nor making bad analogy defenses.
Team to team comparisons are what matters in sports the most, then it is school to school. District to district, not so much.
As per talk of ALL OF THEM -- as in All Schools -- then talk about the LEAGUES, the WPIAL, the District VIII, the PIAA.
"Do you think you are fooling someone?" No. Do you?
Teachers do not NEED to be faceless. It is a choice. Anonymous is fine. Posters don't need to be bullies either. What you surmise and what I do are different. BTW, I surmise that you are him too, but just with a different handle, again.
Ready....
Apples = students;
Apple bushel buckets = teams;
Apple trees = schools;
Apple orchards = leagues;
One orchard (DVIII) is right in the middle of another orchard (DVII = WPIAL).
The school district could be represented as various farmers with certain choices of fertilizers, ambitions and options. Some farmers might only have one apple tree. Others a few. Farmers would also have other realms to care for (say oranges, livestock, etc.).
Competitions in HS sports are among student to students and among teams to teams. That's apples to apples and bushels to bushels.
An orange, go figure, could be a musician -- or -- a student in a calc class -- or -- some fully different asset to a farmer.
The head farmer, say Farmer Lane, could choose to focus 100% of the efforts on the chickens, a stable of horses and other fields and gardens and leave the apples to their own -- out of sight, out of mind. Ripe, rot, no worries.
Meanwhile, we're still waiting for you to deliver some analogy and any value for moving the conversation in the wake of the SI feature.
Think again.
The PIAA and high school sports are NOT about districts, but rather about schools (for classification only) and teams from schools and athletes from schools. The district is not REALLY a factor in athletics.
I am not mixing the apples and oranges -- nor making bad analogy defenses.
Team to team comparisons are what matters in sports the most, then it is school to school. District to district, not so much.
As per talk of ALL OF THEM -- as in All Schools -- then talk about the LEAGUES, the WPIAL, the District VIII, the PIAA.
"Do you think you are fooling someone?" No. Do you?
Teachers do not NEED to be faceless. It is a choice. Anonymous is fine. Posters don't need to be bullies either. What you surmise and what I do are different. BTW, I surmise that you are him too, but just with a different handle, again.
Ready....
Apples = students;
Apple bushel buckets = teams;
Apple trees = schools;
Apple orchards = leagues;
One orchard (DVIII) is right in the middle of another orchard (DVII = WPIAL).
The school district could be represented as various farmers with certain choices of fertilizers, ambitions and options. Some farmers might only have one apple tree. Others a few. Farmers would also have other realms to care for (say oranges, livestock, etc.).
Competitions in HS sports are among student to students and among teams to teams. That's apples to apples and bushels to bushels.
An orange, go figure, could be a musician -- or -- a student in a calc class -- or -- some fully different asset to a farmer.
The head farmer, say Farmer Lane, could choose to focus 100% of the efforts on the chickens, a stable of horses and other fields and gardens and leave the apples to their own -- out of sight, out of mind. Ripe, rot, no worries.
Meanwhile, we're still waiting for you to deliver some analogy and any value for moving the conversation in the wake of the SI feature.
Open Knowledge Foundation Blog Blog Archive � Open Public Data: Then What? - Part 1
Open Knowledge Foundation Blog Blog Archive Open Public Data: Then What? - Part 1: "We tend to assume that the opening up of public data will only produce positive outcomes for individuals, for society and the economy. But the opposite may be true. We should start thinking further ahead on the possible consequences of releasing public data, and how we can make sure they are mostly positive."
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Interesting doping theory about a cyclist suspension
Posted on the Supertraining public list and worth repeating as a theory.
----
Clenbuterol
Posted by: "wreckless61a" Johan.Bastiaansen@pandora.be
I don't know how much information about the Contador case got through to the US. But here's the rumour from Europe.
First of all, Alberto Contador was found to have very low levels of clenbuterol in his blood. The amount found was 400 times less than what a WADA accredited lab must be able to detect. It is strange that a lab used such an accurate and expensive test. Unless they had a reason.
Anyway, that's what he was accused of.
He then claimed it was a very low dose (true) and he got it from eating tainted beef that was wrapped in plastic. This was either given to him as a gift, or a cook bought it on the local market. Both explanations are highly unlikely, but what's interesting is the explicit mention of the plastic wrap.
The most likely scenario is this. Contador was using micro dosages of clenbuterol early in the season during training. Also he was tapping his blood to be used for blood doping later in the competition. Perhaps they had the blood tested but it wasn't flagged because of the low levels.
Riding the Tour de France he used this blood. The lab initially didn't find the clenbuterol. What they did find however were plasticizers in his blood, a sure evidence of blood being stored in plastic bags and injected in his bloodstream.
So now they knew he was dirty, but they didn't have anything to charge him with, since this test was not accepted by WADA.
That's when they turned around and took a closer look at his blood. And that's when the low levels of clenbuterol were found.
To me, this is a very likely scenario, because it explains why Contador mentioned the plastic wrap of the meat, and it also explains why the lab would use a test that is 400 times more accurate than required.
Regards,
Johan Bastiaansen of Hasselt, Belgium
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®
----
Clenbuterol
Posted by: "wreckless61a" Johan.Bastiaansen@pandora.be
I don't know how much information about the Contador case got through to the US. But here's the rumour from Europe.
First of all, Alberto Contador was found to have very low levels of clenbuterol in his blood. The amount found was 400 times less than what a WADA accredited lab must be able to detect. It is strange that a lab used such an accurate and expensive test. Unless they had a reason.
Anyway, that's what he was accused of.
He then claimed it was a very low dose (true) and he got it from eating tainted beef that was wrapped in plastic. This was either given to him as a gift, or a cook bought it on the local market. Both explanations are highly unlikely, but what's interesting is the explicit mention of the plastic wrap.
The most likely scenario is this. Contador was using micro dosages of clenbuterol early in the season during training. Also he was tapping his blood to be used for blood doping later in the competition. Perhaps they had the blood tested but it wasn't flagged because of the low levels.
Riding the Tour de France he used this blood. The lab initially didn't find the clenbuterol. What they did find however were plasticizers in his blood, a sure evidence of blood being stored in plastic bags and injected in his bloodstream.
So now they knew he was dirty, but they didn't have anything to charge him with, since this test was not accepted by WADA.
That's when they turned around and took a closer look at his blood. And that's when the low levels of clenbuterol were found.
To me, this is a very likely scenario, because it explains why Contador mentioned the plastic wrap of the meat, and it also explains why the lab would use a test that is 400 times more accurate than required.
Regards,
Johan Bastiaansen of Hasselt, Belgium
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Fir for how long now?
The below may be of interest:
http://well. blogs.nytimes. com/2010/ 12/29/phys- ed-if-you- are-fit-you- can-take- it-easy/.
...a number of newly published studies offer compelling reasons to get out and exercise on the one hand, as well as new estimates of just how little we can do and still benefit on the other.
The most sobering of the recent studies, published last month in The British Journal of Sports Medicine, looked at a large group of retired elite male athletes, most now in their 50s. Some had remained physically active, although they were no longer competing. Others had taken fully to sloth, avoiding almost all exercise. When the researchers examined the health profiles of the two groups, they found, to no one's surprise, that the sedentary ex-athletes had a much higher risk of metabolic abnormalities, including insulin resistance, than their more active counterparts. Training hard and often in their youth had not conferred lifelong health benefits on the athletes as they aged, not if they now sat around all day.
Similarly, although in a more compressed time frame, a study published earlier this year found that when a group of world-class kayakers completely quit training (at the end of a competitive season), they rapidly lost strength and endurance. After only five weeks of not training, according to one measure of strength, they'd sloughed off about 9 percent of their muscular power and 11 percent of their aerobic capacity.In other words, being almost completely inactive, whether for a short or prolonged period of time, inexorably de-tones muscles and compromises health. The benefits of regular activity don't last long.
But there is a loophole. In these same studies, as well as others, relatively small amounts of activity allowed participants to maintain much of the health and fitness they had previously gained. In the kayaking study, for instance, some of the athletes didn't completely cease their training at the end of the season; they merely cut back, limiting themselves to one weight-training session and two endurance workouts per week (a fraction of their full-season training) and consequently lost barely half as much of their aerobic power as the kayakers who stopped exercising altogether. Five weeks "of markedly reduced training in a group of elite athletes seems effective for minimizing the large declines" in conditioning "that take place by completely stopping physical training," the authors wrote.Even more relevant to those of us who aren't world-class athletes (and aren't, therefore, likely to reduce our training to three sessions a week), a study just published in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise suggests that visiting the gym only once a week may be enough for young and older athletes to hold onto past strength gains.
For the study, researchers with the University of Alabama at Birmingham recruited one group of adults in their 20s and 30s and another in their 60s and 70s and had both groups undertake a four-month program of fairly strenuous weight training, with thrice weekly, multiset sessions at the gym. By the end, all of the volunteers were dramatically stronger and had added considerable muscle mass.The researchers then randomly assigned the volunteers to different groups for the next eight months. One group quit all exercise. Another cut the number of their training sessions by two thirds, showing up at the gym only once a week. The final group not only reduced the number of their gym sessions to once a week, but completed only a third as many exercises during that session, for a total reduction in exercise volume to one-ninth.
At the end of the eight months, the groups' muscle size and strength varied markedly. The volunteers who stopped all exercise, whether they were young or old, had lost most of their newly acquired muscle mass, as well as a large portion of their strength. Those who'd continued to train once a week, however, had maintained much of their muscle mass, as well as their strength. The younger volunteers had even added muscle mass with the once a week full sessions (although not with the shortened bouts). Older volunteers hadn't augmented their muscle size during the maintenance routines, but they had lost little of their strength gains, even when their exercise volume was reduced to a ninth. A "once per week exercise dose was generally sufficient to maintain positive neuromuscular adaptations," the study authors concluded.
There are caveats to these encouraging findings, of course. You must have a baseline level of fitness to maintain, for one thing. Before they moved to the once-a-week routine, the weight trainers completed four months of three-times- a-week sessions. If you have no fitness base, resolve now to build one. The latest studies also did not pin down just how long you can maintain a reduced level of exercise, without the vestiges of fitness finally slipping away. The maintenance portion of the strength-training experiment lasted eight months; the kayaking study stretched only to five weeks. At some point, you probably have to return to a full exercise program. But for now, a little may be enough.
http://well. blogs.nytimes. com/2010/ 12/29/phys- ed-if-you- are-fit-you- can-take- it-easy/.
...a number of newly published studies offer compelling reasons to get out and exercise on the one hand, as well as new estimates of just how little we can do and still benefit on the other.
The most sobering of the recent studies, published last month in The British Journal of Sports Medicine, looked at a large group of retired elite male athletes, most now in their 50s. Some had remained physically active, although they were no longer competing. Others had taken fully to sloth, avoiding almost all exercise. When the researchers examined the health profiles of the two groups, they found, to no one's surprise, that the sedentary ex-athletes had a much higher risk of metabolic abnormalities, including insulin resistance, than their more active counterparts. Training hard and often in their youth had not conferred lifelong health benefits on the athletes as they aged, not if they now sat around all day.
Similarly, although in a more compressed time frame, a study published earlier this year found that when a group of world-class kayakers completely quit training (at the end of a competitive season), they rapidly lost strength and endurance. After only five weeks of not training, according to one measure of strength, they'd sloughed off about 9 percent of their muscular power and 11 percent of their aerobic capacity.In other words, being almost completely inactive, whether for a short or prolonged period of time, inexorably de-tones muscles and compromises health. The benefits of regular activity don't last long.
But there is a loophole. In these same studies, as well as others, relatively small amounts of activity allowed participants to maintain much of the health and fitness they had previously gained. In the kayaking study, for instance, some of the athletes didn't completely cease their training at the end of the season; they merely cut back, limiting themselves to one weight-training session and two endurance workouts per week (a fraction of their full-season training) and consequently lost barely half as much of their aerobic power as the kayakers who stopped exercising altogether. Five weeks "of markedly reduced training in a group of elite athletes seems effective for minimizing the large declines" in conditioning "that take place by completely stopping physical training," the authors wrote.Even more relevant to those of us who aren't world-class athletes (and aren't, therefore, likely to reduce our training to three sessions a week), a study just published in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise suggests that visiting the gym only once a week may be enough for young and older athletes to hold onto past strength gains.
For the study, researchers with the University of Alabama at Birmingham recruited one group of adults in their 20s and 30s and another in their 60s and 70s and had both groups undertake a four-month program of fairly strenuous weight training, with thrice weekly, multiset sessions at the gym. By the end, all of the volunteers were dramatically stronger and had added considerable muscle mass.The researchers then randomly assigned the volunteers to different groups for the next eight months. One group quit all exercise. Another cut the number of their training sessions by two thirds, showing up at the gym only once a week. The final group not only reduced the number of their gym sessions to once a week, but completed only a third as many exercises during that session, for a total reduction in exercise volume to one-ninth.
At the end of the eight months, the groups' muscle size and strength varied markedly. The volunteers who stopped all exercise, whether they were young or old, had lost most of their newly acquired muscle mass, as well as a large portion of their strength. Those who'd continued to train once a week, however, had maintained much of their muscle mass, as well as their strength. The younger volunteers had even added muscle mass with the once a week full sessions (although not with the shortened bouts). Older volunteers hadn't augmented their muscle size during the maintenance routines, but they had lost little of their strength gains, even when their exercise volume was reduced to a ninth. A "once per week exercise dose was generally sufficient to maintain positive neuromuscular adaptations," the study authors concluded.
There are caveats to these encouraging findings, of course. You must have a baseline level of fitness to maintain, for one thing. Before they moved to the once-a-week routine, the weight trainers completed four months of three-times- a-week sessions. If you have no fitness base, resolve now to build one. The latest studies also did not pin down just how long you can maintain a reduced level of exercise, without the vestiges of fitness finally slipping away. The maintenance portion of the strength-training experiment lasted eight months; the kayaking study stretched only to five weeks. At some point, you probably have to return to a full exercise program. But for now, a little may be enough.
Friday, January 28, 2011
College tour of Historically Black Schools in the South
The 5th Annual NEED Tour of Historically Black Colleges and Universities is accepting applications for 10th grade students to visit colleges and universities in Alabama, Atlanta, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and District of Columbia. The tour will take place April 16th - April 23, 2011. Please visit the NEED website http://www.needld.org to download the HBCU Tour Application. There are a limited number of spaces available, therefore send in the application as soon as possible. If you have questions, please contact Arlene Tyler Holland at atyler@needld.org or 412.566.7393.
Sole Trader, Partnership, Company and Trust Business Structures
My photo from Auckland was used in a business article on the web. Cool.
Sole Trader, Partnership, Company and Trust Business Structures
Sole Trader, Partnership, Company and Trust Business Structures
Before starting a new business it is important to understand how different business structures affect income tax payments. Being informed helps to determine which structure best suits a business and its owner.
Read more at Suite101: Sole Trader, Partnership, Company and Trust Business Structures http://www.suite101.com/content/nz-business-structures---sole-trader-partnership-company-trust-a222303#ixzz1CLxoeHSE
Thursday, January 27, 2011
TV dictates USA Sevens: Sport: Rugby: Sevens
Start to tune into Rugby Sevens now -- because the NFL season next year is NOT going to happen without a labor agreement. Rugby -- as the nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
The pools and match schedule have been announced for the 2011 USA Sevens, the fourth event in this year’s HSBC Sevens World Series, to be played in Las Vegas on February 12-13.
As current World Series leaders, England head Pool A as top seeds. All four Cup quarter-finals will be played at the end of day one, February 12, allowing the Cup final to be broadcast live throughout the US on February 13.
USA Sevens Tournament Director Dan Lyle added: “Four years ago, USA Sevens set out to attain mainstream legitimacy and exposure in the context of American sport, and this exciting new partnership with NBC reflects the hard work achieved to realise this opportunity.
“Working with our event partners NBC Sports, the IRB, USA Rugby and some fantastic new sponsors, we look forward to presenting the 2011 tournament to the largest US audience ever to have watched our great sport.”
In addition to the four Cup quarter final ties being played at the end of a lengthened day one, the four trophy finals are also rearranged at the end of day two. In order for the Cup final to coincide with prime time across the east coast of America, the showpiece match will be played before the three other finals at 14:15 local time.
Top seeds England won the first event of the season in Dubai. On day one in Las Vegas they face Argentina, France and Caribbean qualifiers Guyana in Pool A.
Eight-time World Series winners New Zealand won the second event in George line up as second seeds in Pool B with opening matches against Wales, Kenya and South American qualifiers, Uruguay.
Samoa and Fiji currently lie in third and fourth position respectively in the World Series standings. Fiji face Australia, Scotland and Canada in Pool C, while defending USA Sevens champions Samoa face a mouth-watering tie against hosts US as well as South Africa and Japan in Pool D.
After the first two events in Dubai and South Africa, England lead the HSBC Sevens World Series with 44 points. New Zealand are second (40), Samoa third (36), Fiji fourth (32) and South Africa fifth (24).
The third leg of the World Series will be played in Wellington, New Zealand on February 4-5, after which the teams will travel on to Las Vegas for the USA Sevens.
Contador blasts 'unfair' ban: Sport: Other Sport: Cycling
Contador blasts 'unfair' ban: Sport: Other Sport: Cycling
The International Cycling Union (UCI) had provisionally suspended Contador in August, in advance of a decision on his immediate future by the REFC, after trace amounts of clenbuterol, a banned weight loss/muscle-building drug also used to fatten cattle, were found in a urine sample taken during the Tour de France.
Contador denies any wrongdoing, and says he unknowingly ingested the clenbuterol from beef brought from Spain to France during the second rest day of the Tour, just four days before he won his third title on 25 July.
Clenbuterol was banned by the European Union in 1996, but it is still administered illicitly by some cattle farmers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
