中山市哪家医院痔疮好(中山那家医院做外痔手术好) (今日更新中)

Rising prices and plummeting listings — not to mention a global pandemic, record unemployment and recession — didn’t keep first-time home buyers from the market in the second quarter of 2020.Ordinarily, in April, as the second quarter of the year begins, homebuying season is well underway, and inventory and prices are both rising toward a summer peak. But the second quarter of 2020 was unusual, to say the least.Across the nation and among the most populous metropolitan areas, prices increased modestly in the second quarter and inventory became even more constrained in an already sparse market. Homeowners who’d been planning to sell reconsidered — though listings ticked up slightly in April, they fell sharply in May and June — and people who’d been thinking of buying, at a minimum, took a beat. But real estate professionals scrambled to implement virtual tours and finalize home purchases in parking lots, and market participants, particularly economically secure buyers, cautiously came out of hiding.Lured in part by record low mortgage rates, first-time home buyers made up 35% of existing home sales in June, according to the National Association of Realtors, a higher share than in the past several years. For first-timers who have stability in the COVID-19 economy, and the wherewithal to stomach a highly competitive market, buying can still make sense.In this quarterly report, we analyze median incomes in the first-time home buyer age range (25-44) compared with listing prices among the 50 most populous metro areas to come up with an affordability ratio. Budgeting for a home that costs roughly three times your annual income (an affordability ratio of 3.0) has been a rule of thumb for years, but first-time buyers often have to stretch beyond this to account for higher prices in metro areas and their lower incomes compared with repeat buyers. By weighing the affordability ratio versus home availability in the largest metro areas, we can get an idea of the conditions first-time buyers are facing when they set out to become homeowners.By looking at both quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year changes, we can get a better picture of the effects of the COVID-19 economy on this year’s homebuying market. The former can provide insight into chronological market responses to the pandemic — our first-quarter affordability report captured data only through March, just the beginning of 2020’s atypical spring season. The latter can show how this year’s second quarter contrasts with similar periods in relatively normal times.Affordability down overallHouses got slightly more out of reach for first-time home buyers in April through June, rising nationally from 4.5 times first-time home buyer income in the first quarter to 4.7 times in the second, and among the 50 largest metros from 5.1 to 5.2 times first-time buyer income. This trend is expected at this time of year. Home prices rise as the housing market heats up in the late spring and summer, but incomes don’t rise in a similar seasonal fashion. If anything, we might’ve expected a more dramatic change, but economic uncertainty on the part of sellers could have kept steeper list price increases at bay.Nine of the 50 metros analyzed bucked this trend and saw affordability improve, but barely, sometimes only by a fraction of a percent.The five most affordable metros for first-time home buyers in the second quarter include Pittsburgh (homes listed at 3.1 times first-time buyer income), St. Louis (3.4), Cleveland (3.5), Hartford, Connecticut (3.5), and Buffalo, New York (3.6). The least affordable, all in California, include Los Angeles, topping the list for the second quarter in a row, with homes listed at 12 times first-time buyer income; San Diego (9.0); San Jose (8.2); San Francisco (7.6); and Sacramento (6.6).First-time buyer guidance: Homes get less affordable in late spring to early summer, and in this regard, the second quarter of 2020 is no different. First-time buyers who are economically secure may be able to make up for the rise in home prices by qualifying for record low mortgage rates. For example, the monthly payment on a 0,000 mortgage at 4.1% interest — roughly the average rate a year ago — is ,160 per month, with 7,483 in interest over the 30-year life of the loan. However, at today’s rate of 3.1%, you’d pay ,025 per month and 8,942 in interest over the life of the loan — nearly ,000 in savings, total, and a 5 monthly break on your payment. Use a mortgage calculator to see what the difference in rates means for your budget.Unseasonal scarcity in the second quarterEven in years when supply is limited, an influx of homes hits the market during the spring homebuying season. Nationally, inventory grew 10% from the first to the second quarter of 2018, and 6% during that period last year. But in 2020, nationwide inventory dipped, albeit slightly, by about 2% quarter-over-quarter.Half of the largest metros in the country saw a decrease in average active listings from Q1 to Q2, with the largest quarter-over-quarter declines in Cleveland (-17%), Louisville, Kentucky (-14%), and Memphis, Tennessee (-14%). However, other large metros saw remarkable increases: San Jose (+62%), Denver (+47%) and San Francisco (+39%), for example. These dramatic climbs helped push the average quarter-over-quarter change among the largest 50 metros to +4%.Stepping back to look at year-over-year changes and how the supply of homes changed from Q2 2019, we found inventory dropped 23% among the 50 largest metros, on average, with 21 metros witnessing a decrease in available homes of 25% or more. Active listings in Las Vegas decreased 8%, the smallest quarterly drop of any metros analyzed and the only one of less than 10%.We’ve been in a strong seller’s market for some time now, as the supply of homes hasn’t kept pace with demand. Having fewer homes hitting the market during the first months of the pandemic only stood to worsen the situation. A highly competitive market has grown even more so, and buyers without room to negotiate could be priced out entirely.First-time buyer guidance: If you’re at all uncertain about your economic security this year and buying would mean an increase in overall housing costs or leave you with no source of emergency funds, you may want to postpone your first home purchase. The low supply of homes means you’re less likely to find a home that checks all the boxes on your wish list. A loss of income, a bout of poor health or caring for a sick loved one could be overwhelming on top of a down payment, closing costs and the expenses associated with moving.Home prices rise, as expectedWe expect prices to rise as the housing market heats up, and if 2020 is sticking to the script in any way, this is it. From the first quarter to the second, national median list prices grew 7% in 2018 and 8% in 2019. This year, they grew 7% nationally, and slightly less, 5%, on average, among the largest metros, quarter-over-quarter.Year-over-year growth was similar, rising about 3%, on average, among the 50 largest metros, after adjusting for inflation.This overall relatively unremarkable growth in prices is one silver lining for first-time buyers. Having a dramatic shortage of homes for sale could drive prices up, but it doesn’t appear that sellers are listing their homes disproportionately higher than last quarter or than at this time last year. That said, list prices are only part of the story, and there’s little doubt that the lack of supply is driving hard bargaining in the negotiation process.First-time buyer guidance: The price you see on a listing doesn’t tell the whole story. If you’re shopping in a seller’s market, be ready to act fast with an offer and compete with other buyers. You may end up paying more than list price, so shopping for homes listed under your max budget will give you a little more wiggle room if you find yourself in a bidding war.Metro spotlight: Cincinnati, Cleveland and ColumbusOhio has three metro areas in our analysis. It was also among the first states to begin canceling large events, declare a state of emergency and issue statewide restrictions to slow the spread of COVID-19. These factors may have played a role in changes in the local housing markets.Cincinnati, Cleveland and Columbus were some of the more affordable populous metros in the second quarter, with home prices averaging 4.7, 3.5 and 4.5 times the median first-time home buyer income, respectively. Even so, all three showed rising prices compared with the same period last year. Median home prices in Cincinnati rose 12%, the third-highest increase of all metros analyzed.But the big story in these Ohio metros is a lack of availability. Though inventory among all metros analyzed fell 23%, on average, compared with last year, it fell 34% in Cincinnati, 33% in Cleveland and 25% in Columbus.When comparing this quarter’s listed homes with last quarter’s, we find a similarly dramatic decrease. Cleveland saw the largest quarter-over-quarter dip in active listings among all metros analyzed: inventory fell 17% from the first quarter. Active listings fell 10% in Cincinnati and 7% in Columbus at the time of year when most markets would typically be flooded with home listings.The one thing saving buyers from being completely locked out of homeownership: affordability. So while finding a home will prove tricky due to a lack of inventory, homes on the market are more likely to be within budget for first-time buyers.Analysis methodology available in the original article, published at NerdWallet.More From NerdWalletMortgage Outlook: A Light Lift to September RatesSmart Money Podcast: Lower Mortgage Rates, and Moving During a PandemicMortgage Outlook: Recession Presses Down on August RatesElizabeth Renter is a writer at NerdWallet. Email: elizabeth@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @elizabethrenter. 9901

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — As the political battle to overturn California's gas tax increase intensified, the state transportation agency coordinated frequently with the public affairs firm working to block the repeal on behalf of unions, construction companies and local government groups, emails obtained by The Associated Press show.The California State Transportation Agency and Sacramento-based Bicker, Castillo & Fairbanks organized news conferences and other efforts to promote legislation to raise the tax to fund road and bridge repairs, which passed the Legislature in April 2017. After Gov. Jerry Brown signed it, the agency and firm continued planning events and coordinating social media posts as opponents gathered signatures for repeal.Three ethics experts interviewed by the AP said the emails raise concerns that the agency's relationship with the firm was too close, but none saw a clear violation of campaign laws, which prohibit the use of public resources for political campaigns.REPORT: Gas tax funds reportedly being used to campaign against Prop 6The repeal qualified for the November ballot in June. The firm, BCF, continues to work for the anti-repeal coalition, which includes the League of California Cities and the California Chamber of Commerce.Some communications between BCF and the state agency involved politics, according to more than 200 emails from 2017 and the first half of this year obtained by the AP through the California Public Records Act.Last fall, the agency and firm discussed opinion pieces "targeting" U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa and three other vulnerable Republicans in Congress. National Democratic leaders see those seats as key to winning control of the U.S. House.RELATED: Caltrans' gas tax freeway signs raise concerns with FedsIn January, a BCF partner, Kathy Fairbanks, communicated with the agency about designing a campaign logo for Proposition 69, a June ballot measure involving how gas tax proceeds are spent. And an undated memo shows the agency and firm also planned to coordinate efforts for several months through the primary.Loyola Law School Professor and government ethics expert Jessica Levinson said the relationship between the firm and agency appears too close, and the exchange about the congressmen crossed an ethical line.RELATED: California campaign watchdog investigates gas tax campaign"I mean way over the line," she said.BCF and agency officials said the communications were appropriate to educate the public about the law and that they ramped down coordination when the firm took an official campaign role."Clearly the agency was trying to coordinate with the campaign, and they shouldn't have," said Bob Stern, a government ethics expert who helped write California's campaign laws. But he added the actual amount of time government workers spent coordinating with the firm was likely minimal.Ann Ravel, who served on the Federal Election Commission and California's Fair Political Practices Commission, said the volume of emails raises questions about whether the agency aided one side.RELATED: Poll: Support strong for Proposition 6, which repeals California's gas tax"It seems like maybe it's a little too cozy, but I wouldn't say that it's clearly inappropriate," Ravel said.The legislation approved last year raised gas taxes by 12 cents per gallon and added diesel and vehicle fees to generate billion annually. Proposition 6 would repeal the increase and require voters approve gas and vehicle tax increases.The ballot measure is a centerpiece of California Republicans' efforts to boost turnout. GOP Congress members — including House Speaker Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield and Orange County's Mimi Walters — are among the repeal's biggest financial backers.Leaders of the repeal campaign have asked the federal government to investigate their claims that public resources have been used against them, based on emails and other documents that show local government workers discussing the repeal effort. Those documents are different from the ones the AP obtained. Opponents also circulated a video of a Caltrans contractor passing out anti-Proposition 6 fliers to drivers.The California Department of Transportation, known as Caltrans, falls under the state transportation agency.Melissa Figueroa, the agency's deputy secretary for communications and strategic planning, said it's the agency's job to inform the public about the impact of laws, and it has done so in the past, including for California's "motor voter" registration law."We're trying to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars," Figueroa said.The agency communicated much less frequently with the firm and stopped coordinating social media posts once the official anti-Proposition 6 campaign started, Figueroa said."Prior to that point, it was more of a collaborative effort because they were not in campaign mode," Figueroa said.BCF partner Brandon Castillo said the coalition registered as a fundraising committee in December and officially became a ballot measure campaign in March to support Proposition 69.BCF and other gas tax supporters routinely asked the agency for information, but they did not coordinate on creating campaign materials, Figueroa said. The agency also fulfilled numerous public records requests filed by gas tax opponents, she said.However, an undated memo outlining agency and coalition plans from March through the primary election shows the firm and the agency coordinated the timing of announcements and events. It details plans for the state to tout new construction projects while the coalition campaigned for Proposition 69.The agency and coalition coordinated their schedules, but the agency wasn't involved in campaigning for Proposition 69, Figueroa said.Castillo sent the email about op-eds focused on GOP candidates Sept. 20, 2017."Hey Melissa — We're penning opeds (sic) targeting the following congressional republicans," he wrote. He identified Reps. Jeff Denham, Steve Knight, Walters and Issa and asked Figueroa for information about projects funded by the gas tax increase in their districts.At the time, the coalition was working to persuade California's influential Republican congressional delegates to reject the repeal.Several days after Castillo's email, Figueroa suggested she or Brian Kelly, then the agency's leader, help find an author for the piece targeting Issa, considered the most vulnerable California incumbent before he decided against seeking re-election.Castillo responded saying coalition members were working on it and asked: "Do you have anyone in mind that could influence Republicans/Issa?"The documents obtained by the AP don't include further exchanges on the issue. In interviews, Castillo and Figueroa said the agency never suggested an author. Figueroa said she offered help because the op-ed would educate people in Issa's district.The piece ultimately was written by the mayor of Encinitas, a suburb north of San Diego, and ran the following month in the San Diego Union-Tribune. It touted projects in the district funded by the gas tax increase but didn't mention Issa.Levinson found the exchange surprising because it seemed to directly reference campaign activities."I don't want to say it's a smoking gun, but that is so much more explicit than I ever would have predicted they would be," she said.Prominent gas tax repeal supporters, including gubernatorial candidate John Cox and conservative activist Carl DeMaio, criticized the agency's activity."It's against the law, and it also shows that you can't trust them with money," DeMaio said. "I think that what you're seeing is just the tip of the iceberg." 7732

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a longtime member of the United States Supreme Court, has died at the age of 87, the Supreme Court confirmed in a statement. Ginsburg has been a justice on the nation's highest court since being appointed by President Bill Clinton. She was just the second woman appointed to the United States Supreme Court. “Our Nation has lost a jurist of historic stature. We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague," Chief Justice John Roberts said. "Today we mourn, but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her -- a tireless and resolute champion of justice.”Ginsburg has been in and out of the hospital for the last several months as she battled metastatic pancreas cancer. Despite her multiple battles with cancers, Ginsburg remained active on the bench, and participated in a number of important rulings over the summer.Ginsburg died in her home surrounded by family, the Supreme Court said in a statement. Just yesterday, Ginsburg was honored by the National Constitution Center, receiving the Liberty Medal. President Donald Trump learned of her death from reporters after leaving a rally in Minnesota. "She just died? Wow. I didn't know that," Trump said."She led an amazing life. What else can you say? She was an amazing woman, whether you agree or not. She was an amazing woman who led an amazing life. I'm actually sad to hear that."Trump's opponent in the November election, Joe Biden, also reacted to her death. "Ruth Bader Ginsburg stood for all of us," Biden said. "She fought for all of us. As a young attorney, she persisted through every challenge that an unequal system placed in her way to change the laws of our land and lead the legal charge to advance equal rights for women. It was my honor to preside over her confirmation hearings, and to strongly support her accession to the Supreme Court. In the decades since, she was consistently and reliably the voice that pierced to the heart of every issue, protected the constitutional rights of every American, and never failed in the fierce and unflinching defense of liberty and freedom. Her opinions, and her dissents, will continue to shape the basis of our law for future generations."Several former presidents reacted to Ginsburg's death on Friday. "Rosalynn and I are saddened by the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg," President Jimmy Carter said. "A powerful legal mind and a staunch advocate for gender equality, she has been a beacon of justice during her long and remarkable career. I was proud to have appointed her to the U.S. Court of Appeals in 1980. We join countless Americans in mourning the loss of a truly great woman. We will keep her family in our thoughts and prayers during this difficult time.""Laura and I join our fellow Americans in mourning the loss of Ruth Bader Ginsburg," President George W. Bush said. "She dedicated many of her 87 remarkable years to the pursuit of justice and equality, and she inspired more than one generation of women and girls. Justice Ginsburg loved our country and the law. Laura and I are fortunate to have known this smart and humorous trailblazer, and we send our condolences to the Ginsburg family."Ginsburg's death and what becomes of her seat will certainly become a political battle, much like what happened in the weeks and months following the death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016. Scalia's death, which came nine months before the presidential election, became a focal point of that year's election. President Barack Obama attempted to fill the seat, but Republicans in the Senate blocked the appointment. 3643

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers on Tuesday moved to cap annual rent increases statewide for most tenants as a limited housing supply in the country's most populous state continues to drive up the cost of living while pushing more people to the streets.The California Senate voted 25-10 to cap rent increases at 5% each year plus inflation for the next decade while banning landlords from evicting tenants without just cause. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom says he will sign the bill into law, but first it must survive a final vote in the state Assembly where the California Association of Realtors is pushing to defeat it. Lawmakers must act by Friday.California's largest cities, including Los Angeles, Oakland and San Francisco, have some form of rent control, but a state law passed in 1995 has restricted new rent control laws since that year. In most places, landlords can raise rents at any time and for any reason, as long as they give advance notice.In Pomona, about 30 miles (48 kilometers) east of Los Angeles, Yesenia Miranda Meza says her rent has jumped 20% in the past two years. Monday, she marched with other tenants through the halls of the state Capitol chanting: "Once I've paid my rent, all my money's spent.""I'm a rent increase away from eviction, and that's with me having two jobs," she said "So if this (bill) doesn't go through and I get another rent increase, I really don't know what I'm going to do. I'm either going to be homeless or I'll have to cram into a room with a whole bunch of other people."Opponents have likened the proposal to rent control — a more restrictive set of limitations on landlords. California voters overwhelmingly rejected in a statewide ballot initiative to overturn the 1995 law last year.California Association of Realtors President Jared Martin said the group's 200,000 members strongly oppose the bill because it will "reduce the supply and quality of rental housing." It's an argument echoed by Republican Sen. Jeff Stone, who said developers would have no reason to build new housing if they can't make money off their investment."We'll see even a greater housing crisis because of the low supply of housing," Stone said. "Either this will force our constituents to join a 60,000 homeless population that we see in the LA area, or they will simply just move to another state."But supporters say the bill includes lots safeguards to prevent that from happening. The rent caps don't apply to new construction built within the last 15 years — a provision that prompted the California Building Industry Association to drop its opposition.Plus, the caps don't apply to single family homes, except those owned by corporations or real estate investment trusts. And duplexes where the owner lives in one of the units are also exempt."We all desperately want to build more housing. It was a very important aspect of this bill," Democratic Assemblyman David Chiu said.But even some Democrats who voted for the bill on Tuesday signaled they didn't like it, a sign the bill is not guaranteed to pass. Sen. Steve Glazer, a Democrat representing a district in the San Francisco Bay area, cited a 2018 study by Sanford University showing landlords under rent control are more likely to nudge tenants out by spending less on maintenance."Any time you reduce rate of return on an investment, you make that investment less attractive, and this is true even if new investment is exempted for 15 years as this bill does," he said.But Carolyn Wilson, a 71-year-old Sacramento resident, said she needs help now. She said her rent has increased about 0 each year and her landlord just gave her a 60-day notice to move out for on reason."All I do is get up on the computer looking for some place to go," she said. "With my income, I can't afford anything." 3819

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A California appeals court says it's legal to have small amounts of marijuana in prison — so long as inmates don't inhale.The 3rd District Court of Appeal ruled that California voters legalized recreational possession of less than an ounce (28 grams) of cannabis in 2016, with no exception even for those behind bars.But the court says state law does prohibit smoking weed in prison. Prison officials can also still punish pot possession as a rules violation."According to the plain language of ... Proposition 64, possession of less than an ounce of cannabis in prison is no longer a felony," the court ruled Tuesday. "Smoking or ingesting cannabis in prison remains a felony."RELATED: City votes in favor of marijuana production site in Kearny MesaThe court overturned the Sacramento County convictions of five inmates who had been found with marijuana in their prison cells."The voters made quite clear their intention to avoid spending state and county funds prosecuting possession of less than an ounce of marijuana, and quite clear that they did not want to see adults suffer criminal convictions for possessing less than an ounce of marijuana," Sacramento County Assistant Public Defender Leonard Tauman said in an email. The appeals court "quite properly honored what the electorate passed."Attorney General Xavier Becerra's office said it is reviewing the ruling and did not say if he will appeal.RELATED: Nevada becomes first state to ban pre-employment marijuana tests"We want to be clear that drug use and sales within state prisons remains prohibited," said corrections department spokeswoman Vicky Waters. She said the department "is committed to providing a safe, accountable environment for prisoners and staff alike and we plan to evaluate this decision with an eye toward maintaining health and security within our institutions."The three-judge panel rejected the state's argument that guards will lose control over prisons if inmates are free to possess small quantities of marijuana, noting that possession can still be punished as a rules violation with longer prison terms or a reduction in privileges.While prison officials can still punish inmates for violating the rules, "this ruling will prevent inmates from having years added to their sentences for simple possession, reducing overcrowding and saving ,000-75,000 a year in unnecessary costs," said Assistant Public Defender David Lynch.RELATED: More than 100 illegal pot farms busted in Anza, tons of weed seizedThe judges scolded the attorney general's office for a counter-argument it said "uses arcane rules" and "twists the meaning of the words of the statute."Becerra's office argued that the court's reading of the law was absurd because it in effect allows controlled substances into prisons. But the court noted that it previously ruled that it's not illegal for inmates to have properly prescribed medications or medical marijuana behind bars — though it may be against the rules."The Attorney General raises the same hackneyed and losing arguments in each case involving contraband in jails or prisons," the judges wrote.Lawmakers held "an over abiding consensus" in the 1940s that drug use by inmates was "the ultimate evil," they wrote. But those old laws belie "a gradual change in attitude" first toward medical and eventually toward recreational marijuana."As a matter of public policy, his position may be sound," the judges wrote. "The fact that the Attorney General may not agree with the voters does not empower us to rewrite the initiative."They ultimately concluded that "a result is not absurd because the outcome may be unwise." 3667

来源：资阳报