济南阳痿了咋办(济南前列腺增生吃什么药好呢) (今日更新中)

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Inside one Washington D.C. bicycle repair shop is a cacophony of sounds, where both the bicycles and employees get a chance they may not have otherwise.“Working with your hands is still very important,” said Keith Jackson, operations manager at Gearin’ Up Bicycles.The nonprofit trains Black teens about everything it takes to run a bike shop.“For a lot of the young Black youth, this is really their only opportunity to get their feet wet in a bicycle business,” Jackson said.It’s an opportunity Daiquan Medley knows firsthand.“I’ve been here a long time now,” he said.Medley started coming to Gearin’ Up Bicycles several years ago, eventually working his way up to youth shop manager. It is quite a journey for someone who didn’t take to bicycling right away.“I couldn’t ride at first,” he said.Eventually, though, Medley picked it up and now envisions a future full of bicycles.“I would still have a full-service bike shop,” Medley said, “but then also have programs within it to actually still be able to teach people and they can learn how to maintain their bike on their own.”It’s an inspiration drawn from Gearin’ Up Bicycles, which helps young people build their own bicycles to keep and teaches them how to fix donated bikes that otherwise may have ended up in a landfill.“Our main goal obviously is workforce development, but I hope they get a sense of confidence and empowerment that they can do any job once they leave here,” said Lauren Shutler, the organization’s outreach coordinator.The repaired bicycles are then resold during Saturday sales, which have grown increasingly popular during the pandemic’s global bicycle shortage.“Our general sales are up 60%,” Jackson said. “Our bicycle sales are up 330% over last year.”The money from the sales then goes back into the nonprofit, though they say there’s always room for more.“As a nonprofit, we need people to come in and support us in that way,” Shutler said.It’s all part of the program to keep these wheels, and lives, in motion.“We've got them,” Jackson said.For more information on Gearin’ Up Bicycles and how you can help, click here. 2135

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court agreed to review a Trump administration policy that makes asylum-seekers wait in Mexico for U.S. court hearings.As is typical, the court did not comment Monday in announcing it would hear the case. Because the court's calendar is already full through the end of the year, the justices will not hear the case until 2021.If Joe Biden were to win the presidential election and rescind the policy, the case would become largely moot.President Donald Trump's "Migrant Protection Protocols" policy is known informally as "Remain in Mexico" and was introduced in January 2019.More than 60,000 asylum-seekers were returned to Mexico under the policy. 687

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration has laid down rules aimed at preventing residents in high-tax states from avoiding a new cap on widely popular state and local tax deductions. The action over the new Republican tax law pits the government against high-tax, heavily Democratic states in an election-year showdown.The Treasury Department's rules released Thursday target moves by states like New York, New Jersey and California — where residents could see substantial increases in their federal tax bills next spring because of the ,000 cap on state and local deductions. Experts say the issue likely will have to be resolved by the federal courts.Four states — Connecticut, Maryland, New Jersey and New York — already have sued the federal government over the deduction cap, asserting it's aimed at hurting a group of Democratic states and tramples on their constitutional budget-making authority.A dozen states have taken or are considering measures to get around the cap. Most of the workarounds take advantage of federal deductions for charitable contributions — which aren't capped — in place of the old deductions for paying state and local income taxes. So people's state and local taxes exceeding ,000, which can't be deducted, are turned into deductible charitable donations.The new rules' "dollar-for-dollar" limit also applies to many other states that already have charitable funds offering tax breaks, senior Treasury officials said. Those states include solidly Republican ones and others with relatively low taxes. In those programs, donors to schools, hospitals or land conservation programs can get their state taxes reduced in return — plus a charitable deduction on their federal tax returns.The limit means taxpayers only can deduct as a charitable contribution the portion of their donation for which they don't also get a state tax credit.But some experts said the Treasury rules seem to be designed to protect those existing charitable programs in some states. An exception to the "dollar-for-dollar" requirement "plainly appears to be designed to protect certain ... pre-existing state regimes," said Daniel Rosen, a tax lawyer at Baker McKenzie who is a former IRS official.Treasury said it expects that only about 1 percent of all U.S. taxpayers would see a reduction of their tax credits for donations to private-school voucher fund. Several states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Montana and South Carolina — allow taxpayers who donate to private-school funds to get a 100 percent credit against their state taxes, according to data compiled by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.___HOW DO THE LIMITS WORK UNDER THE NEW RULES?Dollar-for-dollar: When a taxpayer receives a benefit in return for donating to charity, the taxpayer should only be able to deduct the net value of the donation as a charitable contribution, Treasury says.An example: You donate ,000 to a charity in a state that offers a 70 percent tax credit, so 0 in this case. You would only be able to claim a 0 charitable deduction on your federal return.There is an exception. If the state tax credits don't exceed 15 percent of the amount donated, so up to a 0 state tax credit on a ,000 donation, the taxpayer could claim the full amount as a charitable deduction.___WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?Taxpayers could have less incentive to donate without getting a deduction or having the deduction reduced.All states rely on property and income taxes to fund an array of services such as education, health care and public safety. Advocates for restoring the full state and local deductions say that the reduced property tax deduction brings a decrease in the value of taxpayers' homes, possibly spurring residents of high-tax states to move elsewhere and crimping funding for local programs.___WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE HIGH-TAX STATES?Measures designed to work around the ,000 cap have been adopted in Connecticut, New Jersey, New York and Oregon, and introduced or explored publicly by officials in California, Illinois, Maryland, Nebraska, Rhode Island, Virginia, Washington and the District of Columbia.New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, has called the state-local deduction cap an "assault" on New York by Trump and Republican lawmakers in Washington.In some key "blue" states:—Connecticut has a new law establishing a state charitable fund; donors can get tax credits in exchange for giving.—In New Jersey, where high local property taxes are the major issue, the state is allowing local schools and governments to use the charitable workaround. But so far, no towns have notified authorities that they've set up funds to receive contributions — because state regulators haven't issued the necessary rules, experts say.—New York is offering three options: One like Connecticut's, one like New Jersey's and another to let employers pay payroll taxes for employees, who would receive credits to cancel out the income taxes they would have paid otherwise.—In Maryland, about 500,000 residents — over 18 percent of state taxpayers — will together lose .5 billion in state and local deductions, according to state estimates.___Mulvihill reported from Cherry Hill, New Jersey. Associated Press writer Michael Catalini in Trenton, New Jersey, contributed to this report. 5305

We are heartbroken to hear this sad news about Grant. He was an important part of our Discovery family and a really wonderful man. Our thoughts and prayers go out to his family. ?? https://t.co/5k3GydZCzn— Discovery (@Discovery) July 14, 2020 250

WASHINGTON, D.C. – This year has been a historic one for the U.S. Supreme Court. Not only did the justices rule on several important cases with far-reaching consequences, but they’ve done a majority of their work virtually due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.The justices released the last of their opinions on Thursday. Catch up on some of the most significant rulings from the term:Trump’s financial recordsOn Thursday, July 9, the court made rulings in two separate cases regarding President Donald Trump’s tax returns and other financial records.The first decision was a blow to Trump. Justices ruled that New York prosecutors could see the financial documents as part of a criminal investigation that includes hush-money to women who claim they had affairs with Trump.But in the second case, the court ruled that Congress could not obtain many of the same records, at least for now. The case will be returned to the lower courts, which will consider separation of powers concerns.In the end, the decisions mean the records will likely remain shielded from the public until after the election, or perhaps infinitely.Native American land and OklahomaOn Thursday, July 9, the court ruled that nearly half of the state of Oklahoma falls within an Indian reservation, including much of Tulsa.The case revolved around a Native American man who argued that state courts didn’t have authorities to try him for crime committed on the lands of Muscogee (Creek) Nation.Justices agreed that Oklahoma prosecutors lack the authorities to pursue criminal cases in the large chunk of the state that remains a Native America reservation.“Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for purposes of federal criminal law,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote. “Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word.”Religion and teachersOn Wednesday, July 8, the court ruled that federal discrimination laws don’t apply to teachers at religious elementary schools.The justices expanded the "ministerial exception," siding with a California Catholic school that did not renew the contracts of two teachers.Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito said "state interference" in religious education would violate the free exercise of religion guaranteed by the First Amendment.Birth controlOn Wednesday, July 8, the court upheld a Trump administration regulation that lets some employers refuse to provide free contraceptive coverage on religious or moral grounds.A provision in the Affordable Care Act mandated that most employers provide cost-free coverage for contraception, but the current administration moved to end that requirement.The decision could leave 70,000 to 126,000 without contraceptive coverage. The women may have to pay to per month out of pocket.Electoral College and statesOn Monday, July 6, the court ruled that states can require presidential electors to back their states’ popular vote winner in the Electoral College.The ruling upholds laws across the country, like in Colorado and Washington, that remove or punish delegates who refuse to cast their votes for the presidential candidate they were pledged to support.In states without such penalties, electors remain free to change their votes.“The Constitution’s text and the nation’s history both support allowing a state to enforce an elector’s pledge to support his party’s nominee — and the state voters’ choice — for president,” Justice Kagan wrote in the opinion.Religion and schoolsOn Tuesday, June 30, the court ruled that states can’t cut religious schools out of programs that send public money to private education.The case involved parents in Montana who sought to use a state scholarship program to send their children to religious schools."A State need not subsidize private education. But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious," Roberts wrote in the majority opinion.Abortion and clinic doctorsOn Monday, June 29, the court struck down a Louisiana law that regulated abortion clinics.Justices ruled that law, which requires doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospital, violates abortion rights established in the Roe v. Wade decision.If the court would have upheld the law, Louisiana would have been left with only one abortion clinic in the state. The court struck down a nearly identical law out of Texas in 2016.The ruling was a major setback for conservatives hoping that the court would sustain abortion restrictions and eventually overrule Roe v. Wade.Dreamers and immigration lawOn Thursday, June 18, the court ruled that the Trump administration may not proceed with its plan to end legal protections for 650,000 young immigrants, known as Dreamers.Roberts joined the court’s four more liberal justices in upholding the Differed Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, but the chief justice said the decision was based on procedural issues and that Trump could try again to end protections.Former President Barack Obama established DACA through an executive order in 2012. The program allows undocumented immigrants, many who were brought to the U.S. as children, to continue working in America.Given Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric during his 2016 campaign and the restrictions the White House has imposed since then, the president is expected to use the court’s decision to elevate immigration issues in his bid for reelection.LGBTQ and workplace rightsOn Monday, June 15, the LGBTQ community celebrated a historic ruling from the court. Justices ruled that the 1964 Civil Rights Acts protects gay, lesbian and transgender employees from discrimination based on sex.“An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender defies the law,” wrote Trump’s first appointee Neil Gorsuch in the majority opinion.Until the ruling, it was legal in more than half of the states to fire workers for being gay, bisexual or transgender.The ruling came as a surprise to many, with Gorsuch joining Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s four liberal leaning justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. 6222

来源：资阳报