济南有痛风石可以服用别嘌醇片吗(济南痛风要开刀吗) (今日更新中)

Fifty thousand well-paid jobs, a billion investment, winning the affection of perhaps America's most dynamic and fast-growing company: Why wouldn't a city go all out to win Amazon's second headquarters?A few reasons, actually. And as a fight over taxes in Amazon's home city of Seattle comes to a head, some of the contenders are starting to worry about the potential side effects that could come with it.The dispute in Seattle has arisen from the rapid escalation in housing prices and a resulting surge in homelessness, due in no small part to the influx of highly paid workers employed by Amazon and other area tech companies. To help alleviate its shortage of affordable housing, several city council members proposed a?26-cent tax for each working hour at companies with more than million in annual revenue — the largest impact of which would fall on Amazon, with its 45,000 local employees.Amazon took exception to the proposal, saying that it would pause construction planning on a new skyscraper downtown and might sublease space in another that's already being built.Although Amazon has taken some steps to help ease the city's homelessness problem, such as donating space to shelter 200 homeless people in one of its new buildings and additional million to a city-managed fund for affordable housing, the measure's backers took Amazon's move as an ominous sign."Obviously Amazon can afford to pay the 26 cents," says Seattle Councilmember Mike O'Brien, who supports the tax. "It's really a question of, do they feel loved? And they're offended. They're like, 'you don't recognize all the good stuff we do in the community and we get blamed for all the bad stuff. We want to go somewhere that's more generous to us, and we're pissed.'"The council members' vote on the tax is scheduled for Monday.Amazon declined to comment for this story.Now, Amazon's resistance has others wondering how the company could help blunt a Seattle-style affordability problem in the city it chooses for its HQ2 — or whether it would.In the shortlisted city of Dallas, for example, a 50,000-person outpost would make Amazon by far the city's largest private-sector employer. The metro area is already expanding fast, having added 86,000 jobs in 2017, led by the energy and financial services industries. Housing prices have already been escalating rapidly, as builders struggle to keep up with a hot job market, and city council member Phil Kingston worries that pouring on more growth without proper planning could make life difficult for current residents."It is entirely possible to have booming economic development that fundamentally doesn't benefit its host city," Kingston says.To head off an even worse housing crunch, Kingston would like to see Amazon build a campus with space for both retail and housing, and invest its own money in affordable housing in other parts of the city. The company has been meeting with nonprofits in its potential HQ2 host cities to discuss how it could help avoid displacing longtime residents.However, the spat in Seattle makes Kingston worry about Amazon's willingness to play cities off one another in order to avoid taking responsibility for the consequences of its rapid growth in the future."If you sleep with someone who's cheating on a spouse," Kingston jokes, "you already know for a fact that person is capable of cheating."Cities do have many tools at their disposal to cushion the impact of an influx of high-income newcomers on lower-income residents.Barry Bluestone, a professor specializing in urban economic development at Northeastern University in Boston, cautions against imposing per-employee taxes, like Seattle is proposing. Instead, he says, cities should rely on personal income and property taxes, which are less likely to repel businesses or keep them from growing."Seattle and Boston share a lot in common because we've been able to take advantage of new industries," Bluestone says. "The downside is, if you don't build more housing, prices go through the roof. The answer is not to constrain demand, but increase the supply of housing."In Boston, another Amazon HQ2 contender, Bluestone is pitching high-density developments aimed at millennials and empty-nesters who are downsizing. Large employers and educational institutions, he says, would then jointly hold the master lease to these buildings with the developers and sublease the units to employees or students. Absorbing those newer residents into apartment or condo buildings could take the pressure off the city's older housing stock that's more suitable for families.That type of development would be easier in many cities — particularly places like San Francisco and Washington D.C. — if they eased zoning restrictions on building height, unit size, and parking.But still, building low-income housing may never be profitable without subsidies, and extra tax revenue to finance it can be hard to find. Many cities, including Seattle and HQ2 hopefuls Dallas, Austin and Miami, are forbidden by state law from imposing any income taxes. Others have capped property or sales taxes.That's why some groups have taken the position that their cities shouldn't be pursuing Amazon at all, whether it asks for tax breaks or not. Monica Kamen, co-director of the 60-organization Fair Budget Coalition in Washington, D.C., thinks the city should prioritize smaller businesses and community-based entrepreneurship instead."The kind of development we're hoping to see is hyper-local, looking at the folks who need jobs most in our community," Kamen says. "We don't really need more giant corporations coming here to jump-start economic development."The hesitance among some to welcome Amazon comes from a recognition that for cities, growth is not an absolute win. It comes with challenges that, if not met, can decrease the quality of life for those who live there.That's why some backers of the Seattle measure say it might not be a bad thing if Amazon sent some of its jobs elsewhere, as it's already been doing. To Mike O'Brien, Seattle could slow down a bit and still have an incredibly healthy economy — maybe even one that allows other businesses to grow faster, if Amazon weren't sucking up all the available tech talent and downtown office space.But he has one warning for Amazon's prospective new hometowns: Don't wait until homeless encampments crowd the underpasses before doing something about housing."When they start growing at thousands of jobs a month, it's too late," O'Brien says. "So you need to tell Amazon, we need to know exactly what you're going to do, and we need a commitment up front."  6710

Five years since the U.S. Supreme Court made same-sex marriage in this country legal, around 300,000 same-sex couples have wed. The June 26, 2015 ruling added to the day’s significance, which already has a decades-long history in the battle for LGBTQ rights.On June 26, 2003, the highest court in the country overturned a Texas statue making it a crime for two persons of the same sex to engage in certain intimate sexual conduct.In the ruling, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote “The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives. The State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime. Their right to liberty under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government.”Ten years later, on June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court issued their ruling on United States v. Windsor, stating that a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional.In that ruling, Justice Kennedy wrote, “DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) instructs all federal officials, and indeed all persons with whom same-sex couples interact, including their own children, that their marriage is less worthy than the marriages of others.”In 2013, 12 states and the District of Columbia recognized same-sex marriages. Just two years later, that number was at 37 states and the District of Columbia. Then on June 26, 2015, same-sex marriage became legal across the country in Obergefell v. Hodges.“The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity. The petitioners in these cases seek to find that liberty by marrying someone of the same sex and having their marriages deemed lawful on the same terms and conditions as marriages between persons of the opposite sex,” the ruling states.Articles written at the time of the ruling wondered if June 26 would become a national holiday to mark the significance of the decisions on this day.In 2017, on June 26, the Supreme Court ruled same-sex couples should both be listed on birth certificates in Pavan v Smith. Arkansas at the time said only biological parents could be listed on birth certificates.Already in 2020, the justices have ruled that a bar on sex discrimination in the workplace extends to gay, lesbian and transgender workers. 2426

Following a three-month break from the campaign trail, President Donald Trump told reporters from the White House pool on Wednesday that he is planning to resume campaign rallies soon.An exact date and location for upcoming rallies isn’t available yet, but Trump said that he has visits to Oklahoma, Florida, Arizona, North Carolina on his schedule. Trump and rival Joe Biden were forced off the campaign trail in March as the coronavirus began to spread in earnest throughout the US.The CDC still recommends against large gatherings of 250 people or more,, and some states are still seeing an increase of coronavirus cases. One of those states is Arizona, where the state’s governor has told hospitals to prepare to go over capacity as the state is seeing a surge in coronavirus-related hospital stays.Trump’s announcement comes on the heels of reports that the Republican Party is planning on moving its convention to Jacksonville, Florida, from Charlotte, North Carolina, as the state’s governor would not commit to lifting a ban on mass gatherings at the time of the August event. 1092

For months, President Donald Trump has relentlessly attacked the Russia probe, and his missive Wednesday saying Attorney General Jeff Sessions should stop the investigation reignited the question of whether Trump's actions would constitute obstruction of justice.Soon after becoming President, Trump asked then-FBI Director James Comey to stop investigating former national security adviser Michael Flynn, according to Comey. Trump later fired Comey, and said Russia had been on his mind when he made the decision. After special counsel Robert Mueller was appointed to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 US election, Trump apparently considered firing Mueller.Now as Mueller's first trial is underway, of the President's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Trump has ramped up calls to end the whole probe. "This is a terrible situation and Attorney General Jeff Sessions should stop this Rigged Witch Hunt right now, before it continues to stain our country any further," Trump tweeted.As Mueller has been investigating Russian interference and any links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign, his team is also exploring whether Trump has attempted to obstruct the investigation.Yet prosecutors say obstruction is not a clear-cut matter and corrupt "intent" would have to be proved. And ultimately, Trump's actions might not be tested in a court of law but rather in the chambers of Congress. The traditional venue for action against presidential wrongdoing is the impeachment process, where it would fall to the House and Senate to determine whether Trump's actions warrant punishment.Trump's tweets prompted an immediate response from Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, who said on Twitter that the demand from the President "is an attempt to obstruct justice hiding in plain sight" and added, "America must never accept it."Sessions last year recused himself from the investigation related to Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. (Sessions had earlier failed to disclose during his Senate confirmation hearing contacts with Russia's ambassador to Washington.) Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller as special counsel to look into the Russian interference and any Trump campaign officials' involvement.Trump has repeatedly denied any connections and has also said there has not been any obstruction. As Manafort's trial began this week, the President repeated his "there was no collusion" mantra. Earlier this week Trump's lawyer Rudy Giuliani said on CNN that Trump would not be found "colluding" with the Russians.Yet as much as the word "collusion" has been invoked to describe possible complicity between Trump associates and Russian operatives, there is no federal crime of "collusion" in this kind of investigation.The crimes that might be charged would be conspiracy, making false statements, destruction of evidence or obstruction of justice.That last offense covers any attempt by someone to "influence, obstruct, or impede" the "due administration of justice." The key question in a criminal case is whether the individual acted with a corrupt intent.Former federal prosecutor and CNN legal analyst Renato Mariotti suggested that special counsel investigators may view Trump's directive to Sessions as evidence of such corrupt intent."They think this is more evidence of corrupt intent. I think that the Mueller team is adding more tabs to their exhibit binder," Mariotti told CNN's Kate Bolduan on "At This Hour" in response to a question about what Mueller's team might think about the latest tweets. He added that "what these tweets are are presidential statements."Mariotti cautioned that he did not think the tweet would be used by Mueller as the specific basis for an "obstructive act," but said that "today's tweet is a very, very strong indicator that the President is willing to do whatever it takes to make sure that he and his friends are protected from the investigation."Giuliani attempted to downplay the President's tweet on Wednesday by saying it was not a presidential order."The President was expressing his opinion on his favored medium for asserting his First Amendment right of free speech," Giuliani told CNN's Dana Bash. "He said 'should', not 'must', and no presidential order was issued or will be."White House press secretary Sarah Sanders echoed that interpretation, telling reporters that Trump "wants to see it come to an end, as he has stated many times, and we look forward to that happening." She added, "The President is not obstructing. He's fighting back." 4666

Florida and Arizona hold primaries on Tuesday, teeing up the House and Senate races that will be critical to the balance of power in Washington come November.Democrats must hold on to Sen. Bill Nelson's seat in Florida and win in Arizona's Senate race in order to have a shot a taking the majority in the Senate.In Arizona, a Republican Senate candidate's reaction to Sen. John McCain's ailing health caused a last-minute controversy. In Florida, the Senate contest is already set, but both parties will select their nominees for governor in what is expected to be a competitive race in November.Oklahoma is also holding a runoff election to determine who will be the Republican gubernatorial nominee. Democrats are eyeing this race as a potential flip this year. 771

来源：资阳报