秦都区中学补习学校实力提分快(渭南应届生民办高中哪里好) (今日更新中)

The world’s population has been growing, spiking in the last few centuries, and now sits around 7.6 billion. A study published this week suggests global population will peak around the year 2064 at roughly 9.73 billion people.Researchers looking at the models believe the world’s population will then begin declining, reaching roughly 8.79 billion in the year 2100. Their reasoning for the decline is that “continued trends in female educational attainment and access to contraception will hasten declines in fertility and slow population growth.”According to the study, funded in part by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and published in The Lancet, the five largest countries, population-wise, in 2100 are projected to be India, Nigeria, China, the U.S. and Pakistan. They are projecting America will have a population of roughly 336 million people in 2100. Currently, there are an estimated 331 million people living in the U.S.The average life expectancy in 2100 will be around 80 years old. The current global life expectancy is estimated at 72 years old. 1073

The town of Blandford in western Massachusetts has a population of about 1,200 people, served by a four-person police force.As of Monday night, there were zero town police officers working to serve them.A mass resignation of Blandford's entire police department, led by Interim Police Chief Roberta Sarnacki, occurred after they claim they endured unsafe working conditions."We regret leaving the town without a town police force," Sarnacki and her three officers said in a statement, "but we have no choice given the situation we face."Blandford residents are still able to call 911 in an emergency, and can contact Massachusetts State Police for other concerns. 671

The Senate voted Wednesday to pass a measure that would repeal changes to net neutrality rules that were recently adopted?by the Republican-controlled Federal Communications Commission.The measure, which was backed by all 49 Democrats and Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and John Kennedy of Louisiana, will be sent to the GOP-led House, where it'll likely go nowhere -- and President Donald Trump is unlikely to back it.While Collins' support had been public leading up to the vote, Murkowski's and Kennedy's "yes" vote came as a surprise to some.Democrats used the Congressional Review Act to force a vote -- a law that allows Congress to repeal agency rules and regulations on a simple majority vote, instead of a 60-vote threshold needed to break procedural hurdles on most legislation, the kinds of traditional roadblocks where Senate leadership could typically hold up such a proposal.Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer spoke after the vote to begin debate earlier Wednesday, arguing that "at stake is the future of the Internet.""That fundamental equality of access is what has made the internet so dynamic," he said on the Senate floor. "Net neutrality protected everyone ... that era, the era of an open Internet, will unfortunately soon come to an end."He continued: "The Democratic position is very simple. Let's treat the internet like the public good that it is."The FCC voted in December to repeal Obama-era protections. The net neutrality rules, approved by the same organization two years earlier, prohibited Internet service providers -- such as Comcast and Verizon -- from speeding up or slowing down traffic from specific websites and apps.Democrats argued the new FCC rules give too much power to Internet service providers, which they fear will throttle down speeds for some websites and services while ramping it up for others who pay more.Schumer said in an earlier statement, "The repeal of net neutrality is not only a blow to the average consumer, but it is a blow to public schools, rural Americans, communities of color and small businesses. A vote against this resolution will be a vote to protect large corporations and special interests, leaving the American public to pay the price."While Democrats recognize they are unlikely to reverse the FCC's rule, they see the issue as a key policy desire that energizes their base voters, a top priority ahead of the midterm elections. 2456

The US Postal Service is asking for the biggest price jump on stamps in its history.Facing pressure from the Trump administration to address a revenue shortfall, the Postal Service on Wednesday proposed raising the price of 1-oz. letters from 50 cents to 55 cents, which would be a record nominal increase if approved. The price of each additional ounce would go down slightly.The request was made by the USPS' board of governors, which has been operating on an emergency basis?because of a lack of confirmed members. It will have to be approved by the Postal Regulatory Commission."The Governors believe these new rates will keep the Postal Service competitive while providing the agency with needed revenue," the USPS said in a press release. "The Postal Service has some of the lowest letter mail postage rates in the industrialized world and also continues to offer a great value in shipping."Rates for mailing services -- which includes catalogs and magazines as well as letters -- are pegged to consumer prices. Those have been rising faster this year, but still limited the price hike for that category to 2.5 percent.Prices for packages, however, can float with market rates. The USPS wants to boost Priority Mail prices by an average of 5.9%. A small flat-rate box that costs .20 to ship, for example, would next year cost .90.The steep price increases come at a time when the USPS' losses have been mounting, dragged down in part by a requirement that the quasi-public agency pre-fund the cost of retiree health benefits.As letters and advertising mailers have been replaced by e-mail and online ads, the USPS has been making less and less money. Revenue from first-class mail declined from .4 billion in fiscal year 2015 to .6 billion in 2017.Package revenues fueled by the rise in e-commerce have been a bright spot, bringing in .5 billion in 2017, up from billion in 2015. But it hasn't made much of a dent in the .7 billion net deficit that the Post Office has accumulated over the years.The White House has proposed privatizing the Post Office, a plan that postal unions protested in nationwide demonstrations on Monday.President Donald Trump has repeatedly criticized the terms of USPS' contract to deliver Amazon packages, the details of which are confidential. The Postal Service says it makes a profit through the arrangement."Why is the United States Post Office, which is losing many billions of dollars a year, while charging Amazon and others so little to deliver their packages, making Amazon richer and the Post Office dumber and poorer?" Trump tweeted last December. "Should be charging MUCH MORE!"In April, Trump ordered a review of the Postal Service's business model by a task force led by the Treasury Department. Postal Service spokesman Carl Walton says the review has been completed, but that the agency hasn't seen it yet."I think they're waiting until after the elections," Walton said. "We're waiting just like everybody else." 3041

The terms "signing bonus: and "recruiting" are usually reserved fro top-paid professional athletes. Now add nurses to that list.Hospitals across the country are facing a shortage of nurses, and they're stepping up the incentives to fill the jobs.Patients aren't the only ones happy that Christina Predo is working at UCHealth. After all, the hospital gave her a ,000 signing bonus as an incentive to take the job."Other offers before that hadn't even come close," Predo said.Predo needed to find a job where her husband was being relocated. With several offers on the table, in the end it was UCHealth's signing bonus and other perks that sealed the deal."They offered all sorts of help to help move here," Predo said. "They offered someone to actually find me a neighborhood to live in which was awesome. None of the other hospitals actually offered to do that."What's behind the big bonuses? A shortage of nurses. With more than 500,000 seasoned registered nurses expected to retire by 2022, there's a projected need for 1.1 million new nurses to avoid a shortage.Hospitals across the country, including UCHealth, are feeling that crunch already."Well I'll tell you what, we have about 300 positions open," said Kathy Howell, Chief Nursing Executive at UCHealth.Howell says growth has created a greater demand for nurses, and a good economy means more nurses are opting to retire. That's why there's a concerted effort to make the offer to work at UCHealth as attractive as possible, even allowing out-of-state nurses to try out the hospital for a year and covering their housing costs."They go from assignment to assignment within our health system," Howell says. "We also give them a housing stipend, and we usually convert between 35 and 40 percent of them to full-time employees."Most new nurse hires get around ,000 to sign, which Howell doesn't think is out of line."When you look at what turnover of nurses costs and what not having the right nursing complement is to your hospital," Howell says. "That is a very reasonable investment."Ultimately, Howell says it's about delivering the right care to patients, and creating the right environment for the nurses they hire."It's a real comradery. Everyone is super super nice, you really have a say in what you're doing here, your opinion actually matters you don't feel like a number," Predo said.A new way to fill the need for nurses, with a payoff, multifold. 2476

来源：资阳报