阜阳秃头没头发了咋治阜阳痤疮去哪里看好,阜阳治疗荨麻疹专业医院,阜阳怎么治皮肤癣,阜阳市最大的皮肤科医院,阜阳看股癣医院,阜阳皮肤科谁好,阜阳那看皮肤病病

Businesses may be reopening, but they're still struggling to pay their rent.About 40% of major retailers didn't pay their rent in May, according to numbers from data firm Datex Property Solutions.Some companies are warning they won't be able to pay rent for months. Starbucks for example is asking for landlords to adjust lease terms and rent for at least 12 months.It's an even worse situation for some small businesses.“I would think landlords ordinarily are not that sympathetic, right, because they can get somebody else to pay the bill,” said Jack Strauss, an economics expert and professor at the University of Denver. “In this case, a landlord is foolish to ignore the struggling small business.”Strauss says it will be difficult for landlords to find a new tenant quickly, so they have an incentive to delay or partially reduce rent.Businesses in malls are getting hit especially hard. The country's latest mall owner recently sued Gap over three months of unpaid rent.“Being sued kind of makes sense by the landlord to take a heavy hand, but at the same time, it doesn't make sense because they're going to have a lot of, they're potentially going to have a lot of empty spaces,” said Strauss.Punchbowl Social, a national restaurant and entertainment spot just closed one location in the Denver area and one in the Chicago area, acknowledging that landlords are trying to ensure the success of their business.But the CEO says, "landlords cannot expect to maintain status quo economic terms that were negotiated in pre-pandemic times."Strauss agrees with that. He thinks landlords should provide one-year temporary rent reductions to businesses, just like many workers are taking pay reductions right now.He says after a year, the landlords and businesses can renegotiate their rent. 1799

Capping days of commemorations of her extraordinary life, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg becomes the first woman in American history to lie in state in the U.S. Capitol Friday.Ginsburg’s casket was brought to the Capitol Friday morning for a private ceremony in Statuary Hall attended by her family and lawmakers, and with musical selections from one of Ginsburg’s favorite opera singers, mezzo-soprano Denyce Graves. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi welcomed everyone to the Capitol, and Rabbi Lauren Holtzblatt spoke during the ceremony.Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his wife, Jill, and running mate Senator Kamala Harris also attended.Members of the House and Senate who are not invited to the ceremony because of space limitations imposed by the coronavirus pandemic are paying their respects before a motorcade carrying Ginsburg’s casket departs the Capitol early afternoon. 915

California regulators want to tax text messages to increase funds for programs that bring connectivity to underserved residents.A new surcharge proposed by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) wouldn't be a per-text tax, but a monthly fee based a cellular bill that includes any fees for text-message services. Most carriers offer a flat fee option for texting, and already charge a similar fee for other services included in the bill — such as phone calls. The exact structure of the charge would vary from carrier to carrier.The commission will vote on the measure January 10, 2019, and is facing strong opposition from industry trade groups like the CTIA, which represents AT&T Mobility, Sprint, and T-Mobile. (AT&T is the parent company of CNN.)The 52-page proposal by CPUC Commissioner Carla J. Peterman lays out the details of the plan, and says the state's Public Purpose Program budget is going up while incoming fees to fill it are decreasing. Currently the surcharge rate is less than 7%.The proposed plan could be complicated by a new Federal Communication Commission ruling. On Wednesday, the FCC approved a new rule that classifies text messages as an "information service" like email. Proponent of the rule say it will give carriers the ability to crack down on spam messages, and critics say it could lead to carriers censoring messages.The CTIA argued in a legal filing submitted Wednesday that if texts are an information service, then the CPUC doesn't have authority over them and can't add on surcharges. It claims the proposal would go against federal law.The industry group also says the proposal would create inequity "between wireless carriers and other providers of messaging services," such as WhatsApp, iMessage and Skype."Subjecting wireless carriers' text messaging traffic to surcharges that cannot be applied to the lion's share of messaging traffic and messaging providers is illogical, anticompetitive, and harmful to consumers," the CTIA said in its filing.In light of the FCC ruling and other legal filings submitted to the CPUC, the group could change its draft proposal before the vote next month.According to the CPUC, the charges go to a number of different programs, including 911 services, subsidized phone service for low-income residents, and equipment for deaf and hard-of-hearing users. 2379

CARLSBAD, Calif. (KGTV) - The Carlsbad Pumpkin Patch is officially open for the 2020 season. Located at 1050 Cannon Road just off Interstate 5, the pumpkin patch will be open every day through Nov. 8 from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m.The family business has been a u-pick strawberry company since 1972, adding pumpkins and a corn maze in the last six years.This year, there will be two corn mazes. One will be haunted beginning Oct. 2. There is also a bounce house and food vendors on the weekends. Brand new this year is an apple cannon that shoots apples more than 100 MPH. Scattered around the lot are sanitizing stations, and the pumpkin patch was also moved closer to the front so visitors do not have to ride a tractor to get to the pumpkins.It’s for general admission ages six and up, and each activity has an additional cost. 831

California's attorney general sued Sutter Health, accusing the hospital giant of illegally quashing competition and for years overcharging consumers and employers.The lawsuit marked a bold move by state Attorney General Xavier Becerra against the dominant health care system in Northern California as concerns mount nationally about consolidation among hospitals, insurers and other industry middlemen."It's time to hold health care corporations accountable," Becerra said at a news conference Friday. "We seek to stop Sutter from continuing this illegal conduct."The antitrust suit, filed in San Francisco County Superior Court, asks the court to prevent Sutter from engaging in anticompetitive practices and "overcharges."It said Sutter employs a variety of improper tactics, such as gag clauses on prices, "punitively high" out-of-network charges and "all-or-nothing" contract terms that require all of its facilities to be included in insurance networks.Taken together, Sutter's actions "improperly block any and all practical efforts to foster or encourage price competition between Sutter and any rival Healthcare Providers or Hospital Systems," according to the state's complaint. "Sutter's conduct injured the general economy of Northern California and thus of the state.Sutter, which owns 24 hospitals, reported net income of 3 million last year on .4 billion in revenue. Sutter's nonprofit health system also has 35 surgery centers, 32 urgent-care clinics and more than 5,000 physicians in its network.In a statement, Sutter it was reviewing the complaint and couldn't comment on specific claims.Overall, Sutter said, "healthy competition and choice exists across Northern California" for consumers seeking medical care. It also said its charges for an inpatient stay are lower than what other nearby hospitals charge."Sutter Health is proud to save patients, government payers and health plans hundreds of millions of dollars each year by providing more efficient and integrated care," the statement said.This high-profile legal fight caught the attention of employers and policymakers across the country amid growing alarm about the financial implications of industry consolidation. Large health systems are gaining market clout and the ability to raise prices by acquiring more hospitals, outpatient surgery centers and physicians' practices.Martin Gaynor, a health care economist at Carnegie Mellon University, said California's lawsuit may portend more litigation at the state level."There are a number of markets in the U.S. that are dominated by one very large, powerful health system," Gaynor said. "It could be that we're going to see a new level of activity by state antitrust enforcers looking at competition in their own backyards."Glenn Melnick, an economist and expert on hospital finances at the University of Southern California, said if the state prevails against Sutter it could put "a chill on anticompetitive practices that are being adopted across the U.S. and that could help slow down hospital price increases. That would be good news for consumers."The complaints about Sutter's high prices and market power have persisted for years.The state said its investigation started in 2012 under Kamala Harris, California's previous attorney general and now a U.S. senator. Six years ago, her office sent subpoenas to several health systems and insurers seeking information about market concentration and its effect on medical prices.A 2016 study found that hospital prices at Sutter and Dignity Health, the two biggest hospital chains in California, were 25% higher than at other hospitals around the state. Researchers at the University of Southern California said the giant health systems used their market power to drive up prices — making the average patient admission at both chains nearly ,000 more expensive.Last week, researchers at University of California, Berkeley issued a report that examined the consolidation of the hospital, physician and health insurance markets in California from 2010 to 2016. The authors said 44 of California's 58 counties had "highly concentrated" hospital markets.After the report was issued Monday, Becerra said his office would be reviewing those findings and pledged to apply more scrutiny to health care mergers and anti-competitive practices across the state.Sutter Health has gobbled up doctors' practices across the Bay Area, gaining market muscle that has pushed costs upward. Obstetricians employed by Sutter Health, for example, are reimbursed about three times more for the same service than independent doctors, according to a KHN review of OB-GYN charges on several insurers' online cost estimators. It's a key reason why Northern California is the most expensive place in the country to have a baby.At his news conference, Becerra said he's committed to scrutinizing other players besides Sutter in the health care industry who may be engaging in anticompetitive behavior and potentially harming consumers.Consumer advocates and state lawmakers applauded Becerra's aggressive action because of the toll high prices take on millions of Californians. Many residents struggle to pay rising insurance premiums and out-of-pocket expenses for emergency room visits or routine hospital tests."Consumers bear the burden of these monopolistic activities," said state Sen. Ed Hernandez (D-West Covina), chairman of the Senate health committee. "To ensure health care is affordable and accessible to all, we have to get a handle on predatory pricing."In many ways, Becerra's lawsuit mirrors a similar civil case filed in 2014 by a grocery workers' health plan.The attorney general's office filed a motion in court asking for its lawsuit and the class action to go to trial together before the same judge. The trial is scheduled for June 2019 in San Francisco."While we certainly would have preferred this happened earlier, we respect the attorney general's care in conducting a thorough investigation before filing charges," said Richard Grossman, the lead plaintiffs' lawyer representing the class of more than 1,500 employer-funded health plans.In its lawsuit, the attorney general's office blamed Sutter for much of the increase in health care costs across Northern California because "Sutter embarked on an intentional, and successful, strategy of securing market power in certain local markets." State lawyers also pointed out that Sutter's conduct triggered an "umbrella effect" by encouraging other providers to raise their own prices.The state's lawsuit said Sutter used its windfall from excessive prices to acquire more hospitals and medical groups. It also enabled Sutter to "bestow extremely high salaries for its officers and upper management," according to the state complaint.Patrick Fry, Sutter's chief executive from 2005 to 2016, had .4 million in total compensation during his last year there, according to Sutter's 990 tax filing for 2016, the most recent year available.Overall, 18 executives at Sutter had million or more in total compensation during 2016, the federal tax filing shows.Karen Garner, a Sutter spokeswoman, said Fry's compensation in 2016 reflects retirement benefits he accrued over many years. She added that "industry comparisons show our salaries are reasonable and competitive, given the size, scope and complexity of our organization." 7370