first_imgDefending daCosta Cup champions Clarendon College will get their title defence under way when they clash with Group H rivals Edwin Allen High to open the 2015 Flow/ISSA schoolboy football season at the Montego Bay Sports Complex.The game is the second of a triple-header. Action begins at 2:30 p.m. with a Manning Cup showdown between defending champions Jamaica College and Calabar High. This will be followed by the Clarendon College/Edwin Allen clash at 4:20 p.m.The evening’s final match will pit many-time daCosta Cup winners Cornwall College against Irwin High in the opening Group A encounter starting at 6:45 pm.Head coaching duty at Edwin Allen resides with Conroy Brown, the man who steered them to the inter-zone round last year, and he is already brimming with confidence ahead of his team’s clash against the champions.He told The Gleaner that team spirit is high and they are rearing to get a crack at the Paul ‘Tegat’ Davis-conditioned Clarendon College outfit.”We are well prepared; we are confident and we are ready to go do the job,” said Brown.No surprise there, as although they were defeated twice by the eventual champions in the group stage last year, including a 1-2 loss in their return fixture, coach Brown is positive it will be a different result after this evening’s final whistle.”Edwin Allen will be in Montego Bay to win; not to lay down and play dead this time around. We have an idea of what this Clarendon College team will put out there and we are focused on getting three points from our first match,” he said.It’s a much more straightforward deal for Clarendon College. Davis said he is under no pressure to win, but will be positioning his team for victory nonetheless and will play like the champions they are.Confident nevertheless”We are under no pressure at all to perform. We know what we have to do and we have the team to get it done. This game, like all the others, will be tough, but we are confident of a good showing,” Davis said.Meanwhile, Cornwall College, the 11-time champions look set for a strong start to the competition against Irwin, who they swamped 11-0 in one match and 3-0 in the return game of the group stage for a 14-0 aggregate. It could be a similar mountain to climb for Oscar Irving’s Irwin this year.The pundits all believe this Dr Dean Weatherly team is even more impressive than the one they had last year, and that should send shivers down the spines of Irwin.”It wasn’t nice looking at the score against us. But it’s a new season with the same team, so we have that experience behind us. I think we can spring a surprise against Cornwall; it’s what the players keep talking about,” Irving said.Dr Weatherly wants a good start.”It’s always important to start on the front foot and that is our aim. Three points in any situation is important and as a team we strive to be the best. Therefore a victory is what we are expecting against Irwin,” he said.last_img read more

first_img(Visited 76 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享2 Jonathan Gruber has published papers justifying abortion for improving the lives of the living.  Did he suggest that for the elderly in the Affordable Care Act?The MIT economist who has taken heat in recent months for year-old videos calling American voters “stupid” for falling for the Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly known as Obamacare, and who considered lack of transparency a political advantage, was grilled by Congresspersons in the House Oversight and Government Reform (OGR) Committee today (Dec. 9, 2014).  Jonathan Gruber denied being the “architect” of the ACA despite receiving high praise as a key expert from Democrats before and after it was passed, from the President and the Speaker of the House.  There was no effort to distance the law from Gruber’s expertise till his embarrassing videos started playing on the nightly news.Gruber began with an apology for his “insulting” and “glib” comments, which some of the committee members noted came over a year after he made them, and then, not until the damning videos came to public light.  He apparently found, once again, that “lack of transparency is a huge political advantage” as he dodged questions with a lateral pass to his counsel, and couldn’t remember key things, like how much taxpayer money he was paid.  While Trey Gowdy (R-SC) pinned him on the insincerity of his apology, it was Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky), also an MIT alumnus, who perhaps probed into one of the most “chilling” facts about Dr. Gruber’s background.Massie referred Gruber to a paper he had co-authored in 1997, “Abortion Legalization and Child Living Circumstances: Who is the Marginal Child?” for the National Bureau of Economic Research.  This paper had been updated in the The Review of Economics and Statistics (MIT), The Blaze reports, in 2009—just when the ACA was being formulated.  These papers evaluated the living circumstances of children born before and after abortion was legalized, and concluded that the unborn would have had hard lives.  Those remaining, however, would enjoy better living circumstances because of “selection.”  Beyond that, the paper states that the abortion saved the government $14 billion in welfare payments.  Here is the Abstract from the 1997 paper:We estimate the impact of changes in abortion access in the early 1970s on the average living standards of cohorts born in those years. In particular, we address the selection inherent in the abortion decision: is the marginal child who is not born when abortion access increases more or less disadvantaged than the average child? Legalization of abortion in five states around 1970, followed by legalization nationwide due to the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, generates natural variation which can be used to estimate the effect of abortion access. We fmd that cohorts born after abortion was legalized experienced a significant reduction in a number of adverse outcomes. Our estimates imply that the marginal child who was not born due to legalization would have been 70% more likely to live in a single parent family, 40% more likely to live in poverty, 50% more likely to receive welfare, and 35% more likely to die as an infant. These selection effects imply that the legalization of abortion saved the government over $14 billion in welfare expenditures through 1994.The word “selection” permeates the paper, and often as “positive selection.”  The 2009 Abstract is shorter but similar, still using the word “selection”:Abortion legalization in the early 1970s led to dramatic changes in fertility. Some research has suggested that it altered cohort outcomes, but this literature has been limited and controversial. In this paper, we provide a framework for understanding selection mechanisms and use that framework to both address inconsistent past methodological approaches and provide evidence on the long-run impact on cohort characteristics. Our results indicate that lower-cost abortion brought about by legalization altered young adult outcomes through selection. In particular, it increased likelihood of college graduation, lower rates of welfare use, and lower odds of being a single parent.Since the ACA includes a new agency, the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), which is tasked with reducing costs of healthcare without (presumably) reducing quality, Massie queried whether “selection” via abortion as a cost-cutting effect might also apply to the elderly once the ACA goes into full effect.  Regarding the implication that Gruber approved of abortion for cost savings, he responded, “That’s not what my paper was about; it was about empirical facts…”  But then, Massie continued reading from the paper.  A transcript of the interchange (watchable on YouTube) follows:Massie (quoting Gruber’s paper): “By 1993 all cohorts under the age of 18 were born under legalized abortion, and we estimate steady-state savings of 1.5 billion dollars per year from positive selection.”  What did you mean by “positive selection”?  Because, in this paper, you’re talking about providing more access to abortions to a socio-economic strata of our constituents.Gruber: What the paper did was look at…Massie: What did you mean by “positive selection”?Gruber: In that paper, we were studying the characteristics of children who were born before and after abortion was legalized.  If by comparing those characteristics you can infer the characteristics of the kids who were not born—Massie: So what you inferred I find chilling.  What you inferred is that if we reduce the number of children born, life will be better for the rest of us still living. Specifically, you seem to suggest that if we eliminate or reduce the number of poor people that are born, this will make life better for all Americans.  And this gets me to my final point, which is the Independent Payments Advisory Board.  My constituents fear that this is in fact a method by which Obamacare will ration care for the elderly, and therefore implement cost savings for Medicare.  So my question to you is, does your philosophy on abortion, that it can save money and improve outcomes, have any implications in the realm of end-of-life care?  You argued that abortions of poor children raised the average living circumstances in your paper for the rest of us, and save the government money.  So Dr. Gruber, if there are fewer elderly people, particularly poor elderly people, wouldn’t that save a ton of money, too?  As an economist, wouldn’t that save a ton of money, too?  Do you understand the dangerous implications of going down this path?Gruber: I have no philosophy of abortion; I have no philosophy of end-of-life care.  My job as an economist is to deliver the empirical facts [inaudible] can make the necessary—Massie interrupted his answer to focus on his views on rationing.  Gruber stated, “I do not advocate the Federal Government should ration end-of-life care.”  His time up, Massie yielded back to Chairman Darrel Issa.Chilling is right!  Don’t buy into Gruber’s excuse that he is a mere number cruncher, blindly running models and delivering ethically-neutral “empirical facts” to other decision makers who will use his facts for good or ill.  If, as a PhD professor at one of the most prestigious universities in the country, Jonathan Gruber is so uneducated on the history of eugenics as to be totally clueless on the “dangerous implications of going down this path,” then we have a vacation to sell you on the Isle of DeBris.  Notice that his views were unchanged 12 years after the first paper.  This was not a one-time slip, but represents the man’s professional career views.  Abortion, he thinks, can have a positive good on the living.  Death to those who drag down society: that’s eugenics.What adds to the chilliness of this revelation is Gruber’s use of the word “selection.”  Abortion, he said, is not just a “selection,” but a “positive selection,” he said.  That term is not an economist’s jargon; it’s frequently used in science journals to refer to Darwinian natural selection for survival of the fittest.  The reference is strengthened by his reference to abortion creating “natural variation” in the population, on which selection acts.  Putting this together it means that getting rid of the unfit makes life better for “the rest of us.”This is as ghastly as Hitler.  Can you imagine any economic adviser to Hitler washing his hands of the atrocities at Hadamar by telling the Nuremberg judges that “I’m just a number cruncher; the Fuhrer needed some empirical facts, so my job as an economist was just to provide the data.  I have no philosophy of extermination.”  Picture the notorious Nazi propaganda film about the mentally retarded and imbeciles playing on the screen overhead as he speaks.So this is the man the Democrats and the President sought out to model a healthcare bill: a published eugenicist, who believes that “positive selection” leads to improved survival of the fittest.  (Moderate Republicans, take note: Gruber helped Romney with Romneycare, too.)  There’s no other way to describe this.  It cannot be prettied up.  “Positive selection” is code for Darwinism.  When used about humans, it’s code for Social Darwinism.  There’s a Malthusian element to his chilling scheme as well.  We have limited resources for healthcare.  It needs to be “affordable.”  Too many unfit individuals raise costs, and drag down the benefits for the rest of us—especially the poor and most needy.  Abortion has been a social good, raising the fitness of the living; it led to “positive selection.”  The unborn wouldn’t have been happy anyway.It’s only a short step to “The elderly cost too much.  They’ve already had a good life, and now they are a burden on society.  They need to make room for the younger, fitter individuals.  Why, think how much money the government could save!“Oh, but didn’t Gruber deny advocating that the Federal Government should ration end-of-life care?  Don’t be a sucker.  He had to say that.  Do you think for a minute he would admit under oath, on camera, that he advocates rationing healthcare for seniors?  His response is riddled with loopholes.  He said “I” do not advocate it, but, after all, he’s just an economist.  That’s not his job.  It allows him to still “believe” in rationing, but let others advocate it and carry it out.  And there are ways the “federal” government can pass the buck to the states; i.e., you don’t get your subsidies unless you control costs.  He could also say that he does not advocate that the feds “should” ration, while advising that they “could” do it, if they want to save money.  All he has to do is say, “Mr. President, I’m not saying you ‘should’ do this, but our studies on abortion showed that you ‘could’ save a lot of money by concentrating care on those with the best quality of life.”  If sued over his denial, he can always say that he was misunderstood.Gruber has zero credibility, so his apology and excuses should be ignored (if he admits the ACA was built on lies, then his apology is a lie from a known liar).  The real Gruber is the one who freely published, in 1997 and 2009, that selection by death leads to economic good for the living (who just happen to be richer and fitter). By using the term “positive selection,” he has pledged allegiance to Charles Darwin and his cousin, Francis Galton—the father of eugenics.  He’s in the line of Margaret Sanger who created Planned Parenthood to eliminate the poor, blacks, and unfit by abortion.  He’s in the line of H. G. Wells who preached that people should justify their existence or get out of the way, so as not to be a drain on society.  This thinking is completely opposite the teaching of Christ and the apostles, and by the bitter fruit of selectionist eugenics in the 20th century, we should know them.For more on Darwin’s ugly influence on society, see Discovery Institute’s recent documentary, The Biology of the Second Reich.  Also worth watching is Todd Friel’s documentary, What Hath Darwin Wrought?  There may still be time to stop history from repeating itself in our time.  Get informed, and speak up!last_img read more

first_imgA Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… A little over six weeks out and already everybody’s talking about what company will break out at this year’s SXSW Interactive. There’s been a lot of talk about apps like GroupMe, Beluga and Fast Society, which all make group communication quick and easy, but what about talking to people who you don’t already know? Enter Yobongo, the iPhone app that “makes it super fun and easy to chat with people nearby.” Today, the company is launching into private beta and ReadWriteWeb readers will get priority access after the jump.Yobongo was started by Caleb Elston, former VP of product at, and David Kasper, a software engineer at Both left the company last October, with Elston writing at the time that they wanted Yobongo to be what other apps hadn’t yet realized.It is clear to us that there will emerge new ways to communicate as a result of the proliferation of always connected location aware mobile devices. We have not seen anything truly new created yet, imagined from the ground up, that takes advantage of the unique characteristics of these new mobile devices. We believe Yobongo will be a new way to communicate and share with people nearby from your mobile device.According to the current landing page, using the app is as simple as opening it up. “There aren’t rooms to select, friends to find, or people to follow. We magically connect you to the conversation that’s happening around you.”Elston explained that they’ve taken a different approach than other location apps with Yobongo and that it isn’t just about where you are.Our algorithm takes into account all of the users who are in the app and where they are in relation to each other. When a new user opens the app, we determine which people to put them with based on various heuristics.  Unlike many location services, we think the organizing principle should be around people, not GPS coordinates. The room algorithm is dynamic, so less dense areas will still have a positive experience. Therefore we target a manageable number of people per conversation.In order to avoid abuse by users hiding behind Internet anonymity, Yobongo will allow users to sign in using Facebook Connect or to create a Yobongo account. Elston explains that they will check all accounts for legitimate names and photos, similar to how Facebook does, saying that they believe that “real identity is critical to fostering real communication.”Serendipitous ConnectionsThis certainly isn’t the first attempt we’ve seen at solving the puzzle of serendipitous meetings. Last year, we wrote about a service called Meet Gatsby that approached a similar problem. The idea behind it was simple – you listed your interests and, whenever you checked in using Foursquare, if someone else had recently checked in nearby and had similar interests, it would text you. In theory, it sounded great, but in practice I (for one) found at that a whole lot of people like bikes, beer and the Internet. Now, listing these general interests may have been my fault, but it’s also not necessarily the case that with every Foursquare check-in you’re looking to make a new friend. With Yobongo, you only open the app with the express intent of chatting and potentially meeting with complete strangers in relative proximity.So, where do we actually see Yobongo getting used? At something like SXSW, there are a thousand crowded rooms full of people who may or may not actually have something to say to each other. At times, it can feel like you’re a ball in a pinball machine, as you bounce from one person to another. Perhaps Yobongo could help act as that initial filter. Rather than talking to whoever catches your eye or happens to be standing in the same line, Yobongo could help connect you with someone who shares similar interests or intentions.Outside of techie events like SXSWi, Yobongo could be useful in a variety of situations. The group dynamic could make it easier to make initial contact with strangers and find out if there’s any reason to go beyond chatting in an iPhone app. With something like Foursquare, your only real choice is a face-to-face interaction. Unfortunately, we haven’t gotten to play with it yet, so it’s all speculation, but we’re looking forward to seeing how it works. Elston has offered priority access to ReadWriteWeb readers and the first invites should be sent out today. Related Posts 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic…center_img mike melanson Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting Tags:#news#web last_img read more

first_imgPistons: Visit the Atlanta Hawks on Sunday. John Lloyd Cruz a dashing guest at Vhong Navarro’s wedding After the game, Griffin headed straight toward the locker room and did not stick around to commiserate on the court.BIG MENAndre Drummond of the Pistons and DeAndre Jordan of the Clippers came into the game ranked 1-2 in the NBA in rebounding. They matched each other with 17 rebounds apiece.TIP-INSClippers: G Milos Teodosic (right foot) missed the game. … Los Angeles has won 11 of its last 15.Pistons: Jameer Nelson and James Ennis, who were acquired in trades Thursday, did not play. Ennis was not able to make it to Detroit because of snowy weather in Michigan.UP NEXTClippers: Visit the Philadelphia 76ers on Saturday night.ADVERTISEMENT Korver drops 30, James posts triple-double as Cavs top Hawks 2 ‘newbie’ drug pushers fall in Lucena sting NBA: Kawhi, George seek more for Clippers than beating Lakers PLAY LIST 01:48NBA: Kawhi, George seek more for Clippers than beating Lakers00:50Trending Articles01:07Cops linking 2 drug cases to murder of Tagudin judge – CJ Peralta01:29Police teams find crossbows, bows in HK university01:35Panelo suggests discounted SEA Games tickets for students02:49Robredo: True leaders perform well despite having ‘uninspiring’ boss02:42PH underwater hockey team aims to make waves in SEA Games01:44Philippines marks anniversary of massacre with calls for justice01:19Fire erupts in Barangay Tatalon in Quezon City Detroit had won five in a row, with Griffin playing in four of those games.Tobias Harris scored 12 points and Avery Bradley had 10. They were the key players the Clippers acquired in last week’s deal that sent Griffin to Detroit.FEATURED STORIESSPORTSWATCH: Drones light up sky in final leg of SEA Games torch runSPORTSLillard, Anthony lead Blazers over ThunderSPORTSMalditas save PH from shutoutAustin Rivers scored 16 points for Los Angeles in his first game back from a right ankle injury.Bradley and especially Harris received ovations from the Detroit crowd when they were introduced in the starting lineup, but when the teams came out for the opening tip, there wasn’t anything too unusual in terms of pregame greetings. In fact, Griffin and Bradley were hit with simultaneous technical fouls in the first quarter after battling for rebounding position. AFP official booed out of forum View comments Brace for potentially devastating typhoon approaching PH – NDRRMC Read Next Globe Business launches leading cloud-enabled and hardware-agnostic conferencing platform in PH LATEST STORIES Detroit Pistons forward Blake Griffin (23) blocks a shot by Los Angeles Clippers forward Montrezl Harrell (5) during the second half of an NBA basketball game, Friday, Feb. 9, 2018, in Detroit. (AP Photo/Carlos Osorio)DETROIT — Lou Williams scored 26 points, and the Los Angeles Clippers handed former teammate Blake Griffin his first loss with Detroit, beating the Pistons 108-95 on Friday night.It was a bit of an off night for Griffin, who scored 19 points but shot 7 of 19 from the field. The whole Detroit team faded down the stretch. The Pistons led 80-77 after three quarters but scored only 15 points in the fourth.ADVERTISEMENT NEXT BLOCK ASIA 2.0 introduces GURUS AWARDS to recognize and reward industry influencers Typhoon Kammuri accelerates, gains strength en route to PH MOST READ Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. Slow and steady hope for near-extinct Bangladesh tortoiseslast_img read more