Hopeful parents to be are turning to crowdfunding sites to raise thousands of dollars from friends, family and even complete strangers.
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
The gender pay gap for physicians may be even bigger than previously thought, according to an analysis from the Doximity social network.
In a report released Wednesday morning, Doximity said that on average, women doctors earned $91,284 less than their male counterparts in annual pay.
The figures came from self-reported compensation for 36,000 of Doximity's verified licensed physicians who reported they practiced at least 40 hours per week and were reported for 2014 to 2017.
"One of the surprising things is that for all geographies and specialties, we find that women make less than men, an average of 27% difference," said report author Christopher Whaley, of the RAND Corporation and the University of California Berkeley.
That's "even after controlling for things like specialty, where they practice, the number of hours per week they work and the amount of time they've been practicing medicine."
Doximity's national average figures reflected adjustments for a variety of factors including region, specialty, length of time practicing, and weekly hours worked. Responses in the survey did not specify whether income was for patient care versus research, consulting or other non-patient care tasks.
The report detailed large annual gender gaps in each of 48 specialties. For example, female neurosurgeons earned $92,918 less than their male counterparts while female thoracic surgeons earned $81,594 less and vascular surgeons, $88,800 less. Gaps were smaller but still significant for primary care, such as $41,771 less for internal medicine doctors and $42,555 for family practice physicians.
On a predictably gorgeous South Florida afternoon, Coral Gables Mayor Jim Cason sat in his office overlooking the white-linen restaurants of this affluent seaside community and wondered when climate change would bring it all to an end. He figured it would involve a boat.
When Cason first started worrying about sea-level rise, he asked his staff to count not just how much coastline the city had (47 miles) or value of the property along that coast ($3.5 billion). He also told them to find out how many boats dock inland from the bridges that span the city’s canals (302). What matters, he guessed, will be the first time a mast fails to clear the bottom of one of those bridges because the water level had risen too far.
“These boats are going to be the canary in the mine,” said Cason, who became mayor in 2011 after retiring from the U.S. foreign service. “When the boats can’t go out, the property values go down.”
In a landmark bout of activity, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has
announced that it is, in fact, watching celebrities, athletes, and other
influencers on Instagram. According to a statement from the government
agency, after reviewing Instagram posts by celebrities and influencers, its
staff has sent out more than 90 letters reminding influencers and marketers
that they must clearly and conspicuously disclose their relationships when
promoting or endorsing products through social media.
If we are going to #AxTheTax, we need strong leaders who will help hold our government accountable. Thankfully YAL and others continues to cultivate more leaders every day. Perhaps someone in their organization can be the next Ron Paul setting the record straight that, “Taxation is theft.”
As millions of Americans scramble to file their tax returns, one group is protesting the complexity of the U.S. tax code by reading it out loud in front of the Internal Revenue Service headquarters in Washington on Tuesday.
The Tax Revolution Institute, a nonprofit advocating for a simpler and "voluntary" tax system, organized the protest and hopes members of the public will stop by their setup, complete with plush recliners, and help them read as much of the tax code as they can before sundown.
"The purpose of the protest is to highlight the absurdity of the U.S. tax code," says Dan Johnson, the executive director of the Tax Revolution Institute. "Few Americans can comprehend it, much less comply with it."
Coming in at 74,608 pages in length, the U.S. tax code is the longest in the world. It has grown steadily over time, with most of the growth coming in the last 30 years. It has nearly tripled in length since 1984.
It's April 14th. Yet through a cruel twist of fate, you've still got FOUR DAYS - including an extra weekend -- of tax season left. It's been two months since you bid goodbye to your family and relocated to your office, and you're at your breaking point. You spend the majority of your waking hours either quietly sobbing in your car, or daydreaming of an alternate existence. One where you're a racecar driver. Or an underwear model. But most importantly, one where the tax law doesn't even exist.
Well, do I have some welcome news for you. If one Congressman has his way, you've only got four busy seasons left, and that holds true whether you're sixty years old or just starting your career. Because beginning in 2020, the tax law will be no more.
As you may have noticed, our current Internal Revenue Code is a bit of a mess. Between the Code and Regulations it comprises nine volumes of text, and that doesn't include a century's worth of administrative rulings and judicial precedent. There are tens of thousands of pages. Tangles of limitations, thresholds, and exceptions to exceptions. At the moment, we have a whopping ten possible tax rates on ordinary income, and another five on long-term capital gains and dividends. It's a disaster.
Tax reform is the answer, but it's much easier to talk about than to execute. The Code got to be the monstrosity that it is through the catering to special interests groups by Congress, and those special interest groups, and the Congressman in their pockets -- remain. As a result, removing even a single loophole has become a Herculean task.
As we approach the November election, you'll hear both sides loudly proclaim their desire for an overhaul of the tax system and the need for simplicity, but it's little more than posturing. Republicans and Democrats have such disparate views of the basic elements of an effective tax system -- with Democrats embracing ever-higher rates, while Republicans want lower rates and fewer deductions -- dreaming of an easier-to-manage Code is a fool's errand. To get both sides to agree, some drastic measure would have to be the impetus for change.
Enter Congressman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and his "Tax Code Termination Act." Goodlatte sponsored H.R. 27, a bill that would do exactly what it sounds like: put an end to the Internal Revenue Code.
Dr. David Dao's nose was broken, two of his front teeth were lost, and he suffered a concussion during the incident, his attorney said Thursday morning.
“I want to express our extreme regret for the actions of our officers," Evans said at an emergency hearing of the City Council Aviation Committee.
Zalewski said there were no excuses for the incident that began when several Aviation security officers gathered around Dao's seat before one officer lunged at him, dragging him forcefully out of his seat as the doctor wailed.
"We have to make sure this never happens again," Zalewski said.
Three Aviation security officers have been suspended with pay in connection with their role in this incident.
None of the officers, who are represented by the Service Employees International Union, have been identified by city officials.
Evans said a complete investigation of the incident was underway, and the results would be released publicly when the investigation is complete.
In response to heated and repeated questioning by 14th Ward Ald. Ed Burke, Evans acknowledged that Aviation security officers had been ordered to no longer wear uniforms emblazoned with the word "police."
Evans said the Aviation security officers were told in January to identify themselves as "security."
U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen announced on Wednesday the Customers Not Cargo Act, which would prohibit airlines from forcibly removing passengers after they have already boarded the plane due to overbooking or airline staff seeking to fly as passengers.
This comes days after a Kentucky man was forcibly pulled from his seat aboard an overbooked United Express plane in Chicago.
Van Hollen wrote to his colleagues to invite them to join the legislation as he finalizes the bill text.
This is a first hand account by LGBTQ Heritage founder, Tim. "I joined the British Royal Navy as a officer in 2006. It was only six years after the ban on gay people serving in the military was lifted but this actually never even entered my mind in deciding to join up. At the time…
Scientist Alec Bogdanoff, PhD Science Director of Coastal Risk Consulting (CRC) in Plantation, FL (www.coastalriskconsulting.com) will present about causes and effects of local flooding caused by King Tides, storm surges, and sea level rise.
Gook by Justin Chon Justin Chon’s Gook will be screened nationwide this summer. The Next Audience Award winner at the Sundance Film Festival has been picked up by Samuel Goldwyn Films, reported Variety. The film evolves around the story of two Korean American brothers and their unlikely friendship with an 11-year-old African American girl during the height of racial tensions and the 1992 Los Angeles riots. “The core ethos of our company is to offer original voices and uniquely told stories the opportunity to reach a broad audience and we could not be more proud to bring such a relevant film from an emerging filmmaker into the marketplace,” said Peter Goldwyn, president of Samuel Goldwyn Films. Chon both directs and stars in the film alongside David So and Simone Baker, who portrays the 11 year old. Gook is also scheduled to play at the upcoming San Diego Asian Film Festival on April 29th. The film is produced by James J. Yi and Alex Chi and is based on an incident during the Koreatown riots.
Analysts from the Tax Revolution Institute (TRI), a Washington D.C.-based libertarian thinktank, are attempting to read the entire federal tax code outside the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) building. They will read for 14 straight hours today through the convoluted minutia of the documents, hoping to finish reading it in its entirety when the day is concluded. They are calling their display the "Tax Day Reading of Our Glorious Tax Code" and it is already underway. The livestream of this demonstration can be found here. "Complying with the tax code costs the United States a cool trillion dollars per year. That’s the entire GDP of Mexico," TRI Communications Director Robin Koerner said in a Liberty Beacon op/ed. In the fiscal year 2016, the federal government confiscated an incredible $3.27 trillion from taxpayers, which set a new record. Income taxes contributed a staggering $1.55 trillion to that total, nearly half of the revenue collected. This still wasn't enough to cover the operating costs of the federal government, as they still ran a deficit of $587 billion. The income tax system has drawn frequent ire from conservatives and libertarians, but substantial reform has been a non-starter. The TRI is bringing a new idea to the forefront of the discussion that they hope will finally gain enough traction to be enacted: voluntary taxation. Founded in 2015, TRI's goal is to create less coercive federal tax code. They envision a tax code where individuals could choose to spend their money on programs that they support. The project is in its initial stages, and TRI hopes to raise awareness of their solution with protests and displays like the one they are holding today. "The future is promising if we take decisive action. The American people deserve better. We can do better," TRI founder Daniel Johnson said. The demonstration is expected to go into the long hours of the night. | The Liberty Conservative is an online political magazine devoted to the vision of less government and more liberty in achieving true prosperity for all. We intend to accomplish this by informing and educating our readers on our core values of free markets, limited government, non interventionism, and personal freedom.
After a 69-year-old doctor forcibly removed from a United Airlines flight because the airlines needed his seat for a crew member, a Korean pastor has launched a lawsuit against American Airlines alleging discrimination in being bumped from a flight.
Pastor Benny Shin filed the lawsuit Thursday. The suit was formally filed about two hours after Dr. David Dao’s lawyers held a press conference announcing they are most likely going to file a lawsuit against United Airlines for injuries caused to their client after he was forcibly removed from a United flight on Sunday.
Minh Phu Le’s cousin called her about the news shaking up Little Saigon: The man who’d been dragged off a United Airlines flight, seen in a viral video, was someone they all knew.
"I can't believe it's him,” Le recalled saying after viewing the footage, over and over, of Dr. David Dao. “And I can't believe they're treating him like that, bloodied and confused. I was so angry."
Dao is a familiar presence in Orange County’s Vietnamese cultural district, where he frequently performs traditional music, as well as his own compositions, at community concerts.
Talk of his online image — ashen and injured — has dominated discussions this week at bakeries where immigrants sipped iced coffee and in hair salons in between cuts and perms.
Dao, 69, had been heading home to Kentucky after celebrating at a reunion of medical school friends in California. During a stop in Chicago, officials forcibly removed him from his seat after he refused to leave the overbooked United flight.
Dung Nguyen, a leader in Kentucky's Vietnamese community, said he was stunned when he recognized Dao as the central figure in the viral video.
We live in a society where everyone is a potential source of video ‘news’. Today people tend to reach for their phone to video a situation rather than to make any attempt to intervene or help. This week United Airlines felt the brunt of amateur news footage. Several people on United Airlines flight no. 3411 taped the aggressive removal of Dr. Dao from the plane. The videos went viral, and the incident dominated the headlines. As a result United lost an estimated $1.4billion in market value[i] and this is just the beginning. Just 3 days after the incident, Dr. Dao has already begun his legal filings. On April 12, 2017, lawyers on behalf of Dr. Dao filed a motion to preserve evidence. With the filing of the first court document in this matter it appears likely that a lawsuit will follow shortly.
Pundits have by and large argued that United was within its legal right to forcibly remove Dr. Dao from flight 3411 under the terms and conditions of United Airlines contract of carriage. A closer look at the contract for carriage itself, leads me to conclude that this is not the case. Two rules in the contract for carriage are particularly relevant to this discussion - Rule 21 and Rule 25. United Airlines Contract of Carriage Rule 21 deals with “Refusal of Transport”[ii] and Rule 25 addresses “Denied Boarding Compensation”. [iii]
Rule 25 “Denied Boarding Compensation” has two sections (A and B) but only section A is relevant to Dr. Dao’s case. Section A of Rule 25 lists 6 provisions:
1. Request for Volunteers
2. Boarding Priorities
3. Transportation for Passengers Denied Boarding
4. Compensation for Passengers Denied Boarding Involuntarily
5. Payment Time and Form for Passengers Traveling Between Points within the United States or from the United States to a Foreign Point
6. Limitation of Liability – doesn’t apply because this was not a denied boarding incident.
The provisions at issue in the Dr. Dao case are 2, 4 and 6.
Under provision 2 ‘Boarding Priorities’, United may deny boarding if, after offering compensation, there are not enough volunteers to willingly give up their seat. If a passenger is denied boarding involuntarily it is to be done in accordance with UA’s boarding priority which in Dr. Dao’s situation would be:
Under provision 4 ‘Compensation for Passengers Denied Boarding Involuntarily’ UA shall pay passengers denied boarding involuntarily 400% of the fare up to a maximum of $1350USD.
Provision 6 ‘Limitation of Liability’ limits United’s liability to actual damages up to $1350USD and also excludes recovery for punitive, consequential or special damages for ‘failing to provide the Passenger with confirmed reserved space.’
Rule 21 “Refusal of Transport” gives United to the right to remove from the aircraft a passenger who violates any of the stated reasons. Based on the facts as they have been presented to date it appears that Dr. Dao was not removed for any of the stated reasons in Rule 21: 1) Dr. Dao did not breach the contract of carriage; 2) He was not asked to leave because of a government request, regulation or security directive; 3) There was no force majeure or other unforeseeable condition; 4) There was no necessity to search Dr. Dao or his property; 5) There was no issue with his identification; 6) Dr. Dao had paid for his ticket; 7) He was not travelling across international boundaries and finally; 8) None of the 19 safety issues stated in Rule 21 applied.
The problem that United faces is that, it appears, they breached their own Carriage Contract. Dr. Dao was not denied boarding. United should have, as most carriers do, taken care of the oversold situation before boarding passengers. Once boarded, UA’s own contract controls with respect to why a passenger can be removed from a plane and being oversold is not a stated reason.
It has been argued that ‘boarding’ includes being seated on the plane while the plane is still at the gate. As boarding is not defined in the contract, and when read in conjunction with Rule 21 which uses the language ‘remove from the aircraft’, there is at best ambiguity and as anyone who has studied contracts knows – ambiguity is construed against the drafter.
It would appear after analyzing the Contract of Carriage that United was not within their right to have Dr. Dao forcibly removed.
This ultimately leads to an analysis of the limitation of liability clause. This too should fail. The limitation of liability should be restricted to instances where there was a denial of boarding. Nothing in United’s limitation of liability should apply to Dr. Dao’s inevitable myriad of claims associated with his forcible removal from the plane.
Simple common sense, not to mention following their own terms and conditions, could have averted this PR nightmare for United. The terms and conditions provides for up to $1350USD in compensation for an involuntary bump, so why stop at $800USD when they most likely would of had takers once it crossed the $1000 threshold. Hopefully lesson learned by United and the other carriers who are overselling flights.
(USA TODAY) -- After days of controversy and outrage surrounding videos of a United Airlines passenger being dragged off of a flight , a news conference on the passenger's behalf will be held in Chicago. Dr. David Dao's attorney and daughter are expected to speak at around 11:00 a.m. ET. You can watch it live in the player above.