Hot XXX Collection
Present
Horny Student Show Boobs And Fuck Hard
⬇️
Here is " Horny Student Show Boobs And Fuck Hard " Video
⬇️
Friday, February 26, 2021
Horny Student Show Boobs And Fuck Hard | Hot XXX Collection
Here is " Horny Student Show Boobs And Fuck Hard " Video
Wednesday, February 24, 2021
Milf With Big Tits Fuck Hard | Hot XXX Collection
Hot XXX Collection
Present
Milf With Big Tits Fuck Hard
⬇️
Here is " Milf With Big Tits Fuck Hard " Video
⬇️
Friday, February 19, 2021
Street Girl Fucked For Money | Hot XXX Collection
Hot XXX Collection
Present
Street Girl Fucked For Money
⬇️
Here is " Street Girl Fucked For Money " Video
⬇️
Thursday, February 18, 2021
'At a time when we have jobless growth, why do we want jobless agriculture?' -- My interview
Devinder Sharma, a distinguished food and trade policy analyst has been a voice to listen to during the farmers’ agitation as he eloquently opens up numerous threads of discussion on the complicated story of Indian agriculture. It is a saga that many of us in urban India do not understand or even care about as it does not directly affect our livelihoods and our lifestyle. Trained as an agricultural scientist, he began as a journalist with the Indian Express. He quit journalism to research issues close to his heart. Some of them were on sustainable agriculture, biodiversity, intellectual property rights, food security and poverty, biotechnology and hunger, and the implications of the free trade paradigm for developing countries. In a candid interview with The Leaflet’s Editor-in-Chief RAMESH MENON, he says that it is high time we looked at the travails of 600 million people who are involved with farming with more understanding and empathy. The following are excerpts from the conversation.
——–
You have been travelling to the sites where farmers are agitating. What is the sense you got?
The first thing is that the impression that many have created saying that the farmers have been misled into agitating is absolutely not true. Farmers know why they are battling a severe winter in the open. They just feel that with the new farm laws that have been passed, they need to be heard. The pain they have been living with needs to be appreciated. They have suffered long enough. This protest is an outcome of the compounded anger built over years. What the farmers are now looking for is an assured income by way of an assured price.
Farmers understand not only these laws but also the political economy behind them. That the farmers can decipher the laws and understand the intricacies has come as a surprise for the policymakers.
What is really striking is their amazing resolve of returning home only after the laws are repealed. They have repeatedly said: Bill wapsi, ghar wapsi. They have come with their families, they have dug in and said they will stay here as long as the government wants them to. They have come with bags and baggage, food supplies, tents and warm clothing.
Farmers understand not only these laws but also the political economy behind them. That the farmers can decipher the laws and understand the intricacies has come as a surprise for the policymakers.
At Singhur and Ghazipur borders, I noticed there were so many women and teenagers among the protesting farmers. There were very elderly farmers in their eighties and seventies with their grandchildren. I have never seen any protest like this anywhere in the world.
The resilience of the farmers is amazing. Each one is doing something there for each other. The bonhomie and spirit to call attention to the problems in agriculture are striking.
What you are saying is what Punjabi culture stands for. Just read any of the Punjabi scriptures. It is all about sharing and caring. It is not surprising to those who have seen Punjabis how they live their lives.
Punjab’s culture is agriculture. This is what most of us have not understood. Look at the protest sites. They are so supportive and helpful to each other. There are men and women cooking for thousands, they have even set up a library for those who want to read, there are scores of volunteers cleaning up, organising the protest, distributing blankets and clothes and doing everything to keep the protest going. Even those who are coming for the protest from the villages do not come empty-handed. They bring something to distribute as they know what the suffering is all about. Punjabis all over the world are supporting the protest.
We probably missed reading their inherent strength. Nobody believed that a protest could carry on like this for so long.
Government spokespersons have been saying that it is only the farmers from Punjab and Haryana who are protesting.
What is wrong with Punjab and Haryana farmers protesting? These farmers know that the Minimum Support Price (MSP) will ultimately go away and the mandis will become redundant. In any case, to say that rich farmers from Punjab are protesting is also wrong.
Farm households in Punjab carry a debt of Rs 1–lakh crore. A house to house survey by three public sector universities – Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana; Punjabi University, Patiala and Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar – had shown that between 2000 and 2015 more than 16,600 farmers and farm workers had committed suicide. Every third farmer in Punjab is below the poverty line. Therefore to say this is a protest by rich farmers is awfully wrong.
To the question of why farmers in other parts of the country are not protesting, the answer is that majority of India’s farmers have never received MSP. Only 6% of farmers get MSP in India, and the remaining 94% are dependent on markets. These farmers do not even know what they have been missing all these years.
Even Sharad Pawar had acknowledged this when as agriculture minister, he had told parliament that 71 percent of Indian farmers do not know what is MSP, they don’t understand the concept behind MSP.
Now, farmers are slowly getting aware.
What are the implications of this agitation?
It has an impact not just on India but has tremendous international implications. Once Indian farmers provide a model, the rest of the world also would like to follow that. Therefore it has huge implications.
Farmers in the United States and Europe are also facing a severe agrarian crisis. They are being driven out of agriculture despite getting huge subsidies. This is happening in rich countries that had adopted market-oriented agricultural reforms some six to seven decades back. Europe provides 100 billion dollars in subsidies out of which 50 percent goes as direct income support. Despite this, one farmer quits agriculture every minute in Europe. In the US, since the seventies, 93 percent of the dairy farms have closed down. But milk production has gone up as the corporates have got into dairying and set up mega-dairy farms.
But after the UK dismantled the Milk Marketing Board, which regulated prices, prices crashed. Today, there are just about 8,000 dairy farms left. Dairy farmers are struggling to cover up their cost of production. What does this tell you? It tells you that market-oriented agriculture invariably comes at the cost of small farmers.
The crisis has been there for several years. I remember a tragic farm suicide in America, I can’t ever forget that. About 13 years ago, one dairy farmer first shot each of his 51 cows and then he shot himself. This shows the distress that prevailed.
If markets are so good why would the US provide 62,000 dollars as a subsidy to farmers? Why should Europe provide such huge subsidies? Take the case of the dairy sector in the United Kingdom. In the nineties, there were about 32,000 dairy farms in the UK. But after the UK dismantled the Milk Marketing Board, which regulated prices, prices crashed. Today, there are just about 8,000 dairy farms left. Dairy farmers are struggling to cover up their cost of production. What does this tell you? It tells you that market-oriented agriculture invariably comes at the cost of small farmers. Remember, when Richard Nixon was the US President, and this was in the early seventies, his agriculture secretary had said: “Get big or get out.”
Even the Director-General of Washington DC-based International Food Policy Research Institute has suggested that India should follow a policy of: “Move up or move out.”
But the bigger question is if we move a large section of small farmers out of agriculture what do we do with 50 percent of our population engaged in agriculture where 86 percent of our farmers own less than five acres? Why do we have to abandon them and not instead make agriculture sustainable? Why are we copying failed policies from the west?
At a time when we have jobless growth, why do we want jobless agriculture? Why do we entrust corporate to produce food when our farmers are capable of doing it?
You mean to say market-oriented agriculture has failed to prop up farm incomes.
Well, policymakers are saying that these reforms will help increase farm incomes. It will increase the bargaining power of small farmers, and thereby help enhance their incomes. But a study by the London School of Economics has shown that similar reforms in Kenya, where farmers have small holdings, have failed and pushed farmers deeper into crisis.
I remember a report of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) which had concluded that between the mid-eighties and mid-2000, a period of 20 years, the output price globally had remained static if you adjust for inflation. Rich countries compensated farmers with subsidies. Poor countries had no money for subsidies.
Because the intelligentsia, the academia and the media failed to stand for farmers, they realise they have to stand for themselves.
Another study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) along with ICRIER had estimated that said that between 2000 and 2016-17, Indian farmers lost Rs. 45 lakh crores. That meant it every year farmers lost approximately Rs 2.64 lakh crore. was lost! It happened at a time when 94% of farmers were dependent on markets.
Globally too farmers have suffered the markets. Farmers all over the world are hurt by the volatility of the market.
Take for instance the coffee industry. It has a turnover of 102 billion dollars. There are around 50 to 60 million coffee farmers in the world. For the last 13 years, the prices of coffee beans have been depressed. As a result, a majority of these coffee farmers have an income level of less than 1.9 dollars a day which falls within the acute poverty line according to the United Nations.
Look at cocoa. The confectionery industry is worth 210 million dollars. The cocoa farmers get only 1.3 dollars a day which is less than the price of an average chocolate bar that you buy. This is at a time when bulk of cocoa and coffee were traded on the commodity exchanges. Imagine if these farmers had MSP. Wouldn’t their livelihoods would have been much better?
Alright. But what are the agitating Indian farmers so angry about?
Farmers are angry over the neglect and injustice they have faced over the past few decades. They fear that these farm laws have been designed for the corporate, not for farmers. The compound anger of all these years is perhaps what is coming out.
Look at their plight. There are reports every now and then of farmers throwing tomato, potato and onions on the streets. See what they get for their produce. In Madhya Pradesh, farmers got one rupee for a kilo of bhindi while in the urban market it was selling for Rs. 40 a kilo. Look at the brutality of the markets.
We should we aiming at reforms that provide more income in the hands of small farmers, making agriculture sustainable and economically-viable thereby achieving the Prime Minister’s vision of Sabka Saath Sabka Vikas.
Economic Survey 2016 told us that the average income of a farming family in 17 states of India is only Rs. 20,000 a year, which means less than Rs. 1,700 a month. Have we ever pondered how are these farming families surviving? Hasn’t society at large failed to stand up for the farmers? Did we ever call for economic justice for farmers?
Because the intelligentsia, the academia and the media failed to stand for farmers, they realise they have to stand for themselves. After all, farmers also have families to look after. They have to take care of the education and health expenses of their family. They also want to live a better life.
All that the Farmers are essentially asking for is an assured price for their crops. They want MSP as a legal right for 23 crops for which MSP is announced every year. Farmers too need an economically viable system to survive.
What kind of reforms do you envisage?
Instead of borrowing from abroad, our emphasis should be on creating our own models, banking on our own strengths, our own needs and requirements. We should we aiming at reforms that provide more income in the hands of small farmers, making agriculture sustainable and economically-viable thereby achieving the Prime Minister’s vision of Sabka Saath Sabka Vikas.
First, make MSP a legal right for farmers. The delivery of MSP has remained confined to primarily two crops – wheat and paddy – and that too predominantly in Punjab and Haryana, where farm incomes are relatively higher than the rest of the country. It is time to extend this to the entire country, and to all the 23 crops for which MSP is announced every year. This means basically upping the benchmark prices to ensure that no trading takes place below MSP. This means the private trade too will need to make purchases at MSP or above. It does not mean that the government will have to procure everything.
Secondly, to ensure smooth marketing, the network of APMC regulated markets needs to be expanded to reach every nook and crook. Against the 7,000-odd PMC mandis that exist today, we need a network of 42,000 APMC mandis if a mandi has to be provided in a radius of five kms. We also know that there are problems with the working of APMC mandis. The mandi structure needs to be reformed, not thrown away. Regulated markets are absolutely essential for price discovery.
And finally, we need an alternative system that can provide more money in the hands of farmers. In America, as per the US Department of Agriculture, farmers share in every food dollar a consumer spends is only 8 percent. Why emulate a system that aggravates agrarian distress? What we need is to learn from our own Amul dairy cooperative design that provides at least 70 percent share of the end consumer price to farmers. We need to launch a nationwide programme to replicate the Amul model to vegetables, fruits and pulses.
Source: At a time when we have jobless growth, why do we want jobless agriculture? The Leaflet. Jan 21, 2021 https://www.theleaflet.in/at-
School Expulsion Hearing Evidence Q & A
By Michelle Ball, California Education Attorney for Students since 1995
No.
Simply request it, preferably in writing and via email.
What is hearsay evidence for purposes of an expulsion hearing?
In very rudimentary terms, hearsay evidence is evidence offered to prove something happened from someone not directly testifying or who was not an actual witness to what happened. For example, sometimes schools submit statements where students write rumors- the statement and the contents are hearsay. [Please note: hearsay is a highly complicated subject and this is not a complete discussion of hearsay or its exceptions]
What if a student did see something happen, but does not testify at an expulsion hearing? Is their written statement hearsay?
Yes, usually. A written statement, when the student does not present themselves for questioning is typically hearsay. There is an exception when a hearing panel rules that a student would be "subject to an unreasonable risk of harm," were they to testify and the panel can decide to accept their written statement instead (see California Education Code 48918(i)(3)) and it then will not be considered hearsay.
A statement from an accused person, where they admit they "did it," is considered an admission and is acceptable under a hearsay exception (see California Evidence Code section 1220).
Can a student be expelled based on hearsay alone?
No. This is specifically prohibited in California Education Code section 48918(f)(2).
Why are we talking about hearsay and what does it matter to the student being expelled?
It matters because if a student did not admit the allegations, and there was only hearsay at the hearing, the expulsion may be overturned on an appeal to the county board of education.
What evidence is presented at most school hearings?
A school or the district will usually present a packet of information, including written statements, testimony from an administrator (like the vice principal or principal) and may present an eye witness to the alleged wrong. Districts vary in how well they conduct hearings.
What can a parent submit at an expulsion hearing?
Paper evidence, witnesses, character witnesses, letters supporting the student, pictures, videos or any other evidence they want which is relevant. They may also submit a legal brief (paper with the law and facts) or arguments supporting the student's innocence.
What can a parent say at the hearing?
The parent or their attorney or a nonattorney advisor can usually do an opening and closing statement, and can question witnesses.
Can a Parent be a witness?
Yes, if the parent saw the act happen, they can testify as a direct witness. If not, a parent may be a character witness.
Can a parent ask a school to help them force witnesses to testify at the hearing (aka subpoena them)?
Yes. A parent can ask the school board to issue subpoenas to witnesses who actually saw what happened, aka percipient witnesses (see California Education Code 48918(i)(1)).
If there is an evidence issue at hearing, who rules?
The person or group overseeing the proceeding (for example the expulsion panel, board of education or hearing officer) should review the question and make a ruling.
Can a parent record an expulsion hearing?
Not without permission, which is usually denied. The school district will make an official record, with either a recording or a court reporter.
Best,
Michelle Ball
Education Law Attorney
LAW OFFICE OF MICHELLE BALL
717 K Street, Suite 228
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-444-9064
Email:help@edlaw4students.com
Fax: 916-444-1209
Website, Blog, Twitter, Youtube, Facebook
Please see my disclaimer on the bottom of my blog page. This is legal information, not legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is formed by this posting. This blog may not be reproduced without permission from the author and proper attribution of authorship. This blog may not reflect the current state of the law.
Tuesday, February 16, 2021
When a tractorcade stormed into Washington, DC ...
When tractors rolled into Washington, DC
Pic courtesy: modernfarmer.com
On a cold winter morning, hundreds of tractors had rolled down the streets of Washington DC. This was on Feb 5, 1979 when more than 900 tractors (some estimates say more than 1,500) had descended on the American capital to protest against policies which depressed farm prices, resulting in declining farm incomes and demanding a guaranteed farm income to enable them to stay on the farm.
Forty-two years later, the iconic Indian farm movement – unprecedented in recent Indian history – too echoes the same sentiments, with almost similar demands.
The American Agricultural Movement (AAM) – as it was called – arose after the 1977 US Farm Bill failed to protect farm prices at a time of surplus food production. While commodity prices continued to decline, farmers found it difficult to cover even the cost of production. This resulted in small farmer’s increasingly quitting agriculture, and in the process leading to soaring auctions of farm lands. Farmers argued that the government was more concerned about keeping food prices low for consumers than caring for farmers. Sounds familiar, isn’t it?
Wheat price for instance, when adjusted for inflation, was lower than what American farmers had received after the Second World War. Another study showed that adjusted for inflation, the US farm income in 1976 were less than the annual farm income during the Great Depression years in the 1930s.
It was then that a group of farmers met at Campo, in Colorado, and decided to launch a series of strikes across state capitals to show how the rural family structures were crumbling, increasingly leading to agricultural population declining to obscurity. Using tractor as a symbol of farm discontent, thousands of tractors were used in the next two years to demonstrate in the state capitals. Trying to reach the urban population, these tractor demonstrations -- which began to be known as Tractorcade -- helped take the message of agrarian distress to the urban population, which knew little about the economic disparities plaguing rural America.
According to the US Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, what the farmers wanted was ‘100 percent parity on domestic and exported agriculture products, all agriculture products contracted at 100 percent parity, food imports prohibited until domestic supplies were used to fulfil domestic demand, agriculture policy announcements made in advance to give farmers time to adjust production, and a way to give farmers an influence in policy matters’. In other words, American farmers were seeking a price assurance, and even wanted protection at times of trade distortions.
When I look at the demands of the protesting Indian farmers, and compare with what the American farmers were asking for, I see a similarity. While the Indian farmers are not using the word ‘parity’ but what they are demanding is an income assurance by way of an assured price. Knowing that farmers everywhere have suffered the brutality of markets, farmers want Minimum Support Price (MSP) to be made a legal right. This will definitely impact trade policy, but that is a small price compared to the loss of livelihood that millions of farmers suffer year after. When they ask for repealing the three central laws, which were pushed in without any meaningful stakeholder consultation, they are in reality seeing a role in formulating future farm policies.
The historic 1979 Tractorcade that stormed Washington DC had attracted farmers from across the country. In an interview, Beverly Anderson, probably the only woman who drove a tractor from 1,300 miles away, recalls: “Sometimes the tractorcaders were fed by people of the communities where they stayed, and people took notice of them as they drove down the highways. In that respect, their mission was a success — the contacts allowed farmers to tell their stories — that wheat was selling for about the same price as it had at the end of World War II, while production prices increased, that it cost more to put in a crop than they would realize at sale, and that failure of the family farm system would make the country dependent upon imported food.”
Initially, the residents were unhappy, wanted the farmers to be moved out. But then it so happened that the city was hit with a blizzard and life came to a halt. Public transport was all shut down. It was at that time farmers used the tractors to clear the streets, pull out the cars from under the snow, and take doctors and nurses to hospitals and so on. This helped develop bonhomie with the urban population who began to see farmers as fellow citizens. For several weeks, farmers would drive their tractors daily through various parts of the city appraising people of their plight. Some farmers even stayed back for months.
The then American President, Jimmy Carter, is reported to have said: “I don’t know of any other group that has suffered more from inflation than farmers. Being a farmer himself he could better understand the pain farmers were undergoing. But the bureaucracy of course was not convinced. They had more faith in the markets. As Anderson reminisced: “We were successful in telling the story of the plight of the American farmer. As far as any legislation that helped, not really.”
If only the policy makers had listened to the farmer’s woes, and provided farmers with at least a guaranteed price, American farming wouldn’t have been left devastated, with farm lands gobbled up, forcing small farmers to move out. Intensive agriculture has destroyed the soil, polluted the groundwater, and chemical pesticides have contaminated the food chain. With the real cost of cheap feed externalized, American agriculture is crying for regeneration. Decades later, the headline of a Time cover story (Nov 27, 2019) says it all: “‘They’re trying to wipe us off the map’. Small American farmers are nearing extinction.”
There are lessons here. Free market orthodoxy hasn’t helped increase farm incomes in America and for that matter anywhere in the world. It has only pushed small farmers out of agriculture. To make farming a economically viable and sustainable enterprise for small farmers, India needs to carefully listen to the protesting farmers. There may not be another opportunity again. #
Monday, February 15, 2021
Switching Schools Within Your District: Open Enrollment And Intradistrict Transfer Options
By Michelle Ball, California Education Attorney for Students since 1995
Open Enrollment
What is school district open enrollment? This is a process where a student living within a district can opt to attend any school in that district. All a parent needs to do usually is return the relevant forms, listing their top choices for schools.
The school open enrollment process usually happens at the end of the prior year or early in the calendar year when the transfer will apply (e.g. late 2021- early 2022 deadline for a move at the beginning of the 2022-2023 school year). Due dates for submissions vary by school district.
Certain priorities will apply. For example, open enrollment cannot cause the displacement of residents who want to attend their school of residence. After the residents of a school are placed, other students with priorities should be placed. Priorities can exist for siblings of a student already in attendance and/or as outlined in school district policies. If there end up being spaces and too many students vying for those spaces, an unbiased student lottery should occur.
Intradistrict Transfer
If open enrollment request time has passed, and a parent wants to transfer to another school in their district, they could pursue an intradistrict transfer.
What is an intradistrict transfer? It is a transfer to another school WITHIN the same school district. This is different from an interdistrict transfer, which is between two different school districts.
There may be deadlines to apply for intradistrict transfers, but many districts may accept requests outside the timelines as well, depending on the reasons for the request. If the regular timeline can be met, that is a good idea.
The rules related to these transfers will be outlined in school board policies, usually found on most school district websites under a tab titled "School Board" or "Board of Education," or by contacting the school district office. There may be a place on a school district website referencing intradistrict transfers and requirements to obtain one.
Most districts outline certain parameters for the granting of intradistrict transfer requests such as the new school having a program not at the school of residence, the school where the student resides being persistently dangerous, a court order, bullying, or the mental health of the student, among other possible bases.
Other Ways To Transfer
Students who are in special education may be transferred without ever applying via this process, if their IEP (Individualized Educational Program) team places them due to services needed at a particular school.
Sometimes an involuntary intradistrict transfer may be imposed on a student who has committed a harmful act and/or agreed to by their parent to avoid a school expulsion.
Best,
Michelle Ball
Education Law Attorney
LAW OFFICE OF MICHELLE BALL
717 K Street, Suite 228
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-444-9064
Email:help@edlaw4students.com
Fax: 916-444-1209
Website, Blog, Twitter, Youtube, Facebook
Please see my disclaimer on the bottom of my blog page. This is legal information, not legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is formed by this posting. This blog may not be reproduced without permission from the author and proper attribution of authorship. This blog may not reflect the current state of the law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)