濮阳东方电话多少-【濮阳东方医院】,濮阳东方医院,濮阳市东方医院收费正规,濮阳东方医院看男科病技术非常哇塞,濮阳东方医院口碑,濮阳东方妇科医院做人流手术便宜吗,濮阳东方医院治阳痿技术先进,濮阳东方医院看男科专业

The Transportation Security Administration is considering eliminating passenger screening at more than 150 small and medium-sized airports across the US, according to senior agency officials and internal documents obtained by CNN.The proposal, if implemented, would mark a major change for air travel in the US, following nearly two decades of TSA presence since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and comes as the Trump administration has stepped up screening measures for items such as laptops and tablets.Internal documents from a TSA working group say the proposal to cut screening at small and some medium-sized airports serving aircraft with 60 seats or fewer could bring a "small (non-zero) undesirable increase in risk related to additional adversary opportunity."The internal documents from June and July suggest the move could save 5 million annually, money that could be used to bolster security at larger airports.According to the proposal, passengers and luggage arriving from these smaller airports would be screened when they arrive at major airports for connecting flights instead of the current practice of joining the already screened population at the larger airport. The high-volume airports have greater capacities and more advanced security measures than smaller locations, the documents say.CNN terrorism analyst Paul Cruickshank said it was "stunning that this is even seriously being considered.""Al Qaeda and ISIS still regard aviation as a priority target -- that includes aircraft where you have fewer than 60 people on board," he said. "They would see that as a way to hit the headlines. They would see that as a way to inflict severe economic damage on the United States. If you have an aircraft of 50 or so people being blown out of the sky there is going to be a great amount of panic and there will indeed be significant economic reverberations, and of course significant loss of life.""This is so dangerous," a TSA field leader at a large airport said. The individual is not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.Two senior TSA officials, who asked not to be identified, expressed serious national security concerns over the proposal. They said the idea was explored as far back as 2011 and has been resurrected. The documents referred to some 150 small airports in addition to some midsize ones. TSA currently screens passengers at 440 airports, according to its website.The working group determined that the policy change would affect about 10,000 passengers who are screened by 1,299 TSA employees daily, which amounts to about 0.5% of the people who fly out of US airports on any given day. The report does not list specific airports that could be affected by the policy change.TSA spokesman Michael Bilello said the study reflects a recurring debate within the agency about its legal requirements."This is not a new issue," he said via email. "The regulations which established TSA does not require screening below a certain level, so every year is 'the year' that TSA will reconsider screening." Bilello did not respond to a request for the text of the regulations.The two TSA senior officials said the level of activity around the proposal this year -- the formation of a working group to conduct a risk and cost analysis -- mean this is more than an annual exercise.The documents said a TSA working group of 20 people, including a representative of the agency's administrator's office, met on June 21 to examine the potential risks of the policy change. An internal TSA memo dated July 17 from TSA Director of Enterprise Performance and Risk Strategy Jerry Booker to the TSA administrator's chief of staff, Ha Nguyen McNeill, outlines the group's findings. It contains no formal recommendation. 3761
The risk of homelessness looms large for many across the country as people deal with job loss and economic uncertainty brought on by the coronavirus pandemic.The National Alliance to End Homelessness estimates, right now, there are 567,000 people who call the streets their home, a number that has only risen since March.There are shelters, soup kitchens, and myriad charities to help, but the group Foundations for Social Change, a charitable organization based in Vancouver, Canada, suggests one source of help trumps the rest: money.“Sometimes a little bit of a hand up can mean all the difference in whether or not someone is going to stabilize and get into housing or not,” said chief public policy officer for the Colorado Coalition for the Homeless Cathy Alderman.It might seem like an obvious solution, but it is challenged by the preconceived notion that people battling homelessness might squander the money or spend it on harmful habits like alcohol, drugs, or cigarettes.“I think it’s not surprising at all that people who are struggling with the cost of living and forced to sleep outside would use dollars given to them to get inside into a home,” said Alderman.In September, Foundations for Social Change wrapped up nearly two years of research that suggests those in less fortunate circumstances would use money to help secure food and housing, rather than illicit substances.Back in 2018, the group gave 50 people battling homelessness in Vancouver a lump sum of ,700, without restriction, to see what they would spend it on, and they compared the findings to a group of 60 homeless individuals who were not given any lump sum.Foundations for Social Change found that in the first month, the group that received the payment, 70 percent of them were able to access a sustainable food source that they maintained for the rest of the year. They also found stable housing at a rate that outpaced those who had not received the payments by 12 months.The researchers also found that spending on items like drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes decreased by 39 percent.“The key findings were phenomenal and were even well beyond my expectations,” said one of the head researchers, Dr. Jiaying Zhao. “This actually is counter to our common assumptions of how these folks will spend their money and cash, so that was very good to see.”“I would save a third, spend a third on things I know I needed, and then give a third away,” said Benjamin Dunning, who was homeless for nearly five years following the Great Recession in 2008. “There just wasn’t any work available and I was like, 'well, better dig in for the long haul.'"Dunning says following an injury that prevented him from working he was no longer able to afford rent in the Denver suburb where he lived. He says he moved from shelter to shelter, trying to weather the storm before he was able to find a community of other people in a similar situation that offered a little more stability and a consistent roof over his head.“One thing I found out is [the homeless people I was around] were just like my neighbors in the suburbs,” said Dunning. “Most of them were people who had gotten stuck on hard times and trying to figure out how to deal with it.”The study by Foundations for Social Change focused on people who had been homeless for a year or less and who had been screened for a low risk of mental health challenges and substance abuse. So, Dr. Zhao says this is not a silver bullet, but an encouraging sign to help solve an issue that has several layers of complexity. 3546

The United States is at the beginning of a second wave of significant job loss.“We are seeing a resurgence in layoffs that has been quite clearly indicated in the last couple of weeks,” said Daniel Alpert, an adjunct professor and senior fellow at Cornell University.Cornell University recently published a study showing about a third of the people who went back to work during the pandemic have now been laid off for a second time. Another 26 percent of workers have been warned by their employers that future furloughs and layoffs may soon come.“The problem is that you get an echo,” said Alpert. “So, if you have a resurgence in layoffs, a decrease in spending, that creates more contraction on the part of businesses, which creates more layoffs. The question is, when can you put a floor under this spiraling situation? It is a classic economic spiral.”The cycle--of job loss eventually leading to more job loss--is causing some to fear it could lead to a third wave of unemployment in a few months. Experts, like Alpert, believe the only way to stop the cycle would be a vaccine or for Congress to come together on another stimulus bill that props up households and businesses until a vaccine is released.“We are very concerned about the current rollercoaster effect on resumed layoffs, but longer term, we are really scared about seeing huge numbers, tens of millions of businesses vanish,” said Alpert.The more waves of unemployment we see, the higher likelihood of that. 1486
The University of Florida issued a statement of apology on Sunday, one day after several black students were removed from the stage by a white faculty member during the university's commencement. Video of the incident showed the graduates celebrating their walk down the graduation aisle by dancing, when the usher grabbed the students. University of Florida President W. Kent Fuchs released a statement, saying the staffer was "inappropriately aggressive." 496
The U.S. dollar is cooling off after a red-hot surge.Though it rose in the weeks following President Trump's election victory last November, the greenback has steadily fallen this year. It's now down to its lowest level since January 2015. Since January 3, the first trading day, the dollar is down 11 percent.It's down nearly 17 percent against the Mexican peso this year, a reversal of fortunes after Trump's campaign threats caused the peso to plunge. It's also down 12 percent against the euro and 7% against the pound. 541
来源:资阳报