- CelebrityYahoo Celebrity
Will Smith says he's been called the N-word to his face '5 or 6 times' — but never 'by a smart person'
Will Smith says he's been called the N-word to his face — but never by anyone intelligent.
- PoliticsBusiness Insider
I lost my job at 55 and started my own successful business. I now constantly get texts from friends and former coworkers asking how I did it. What do I do?
‘I liken these friends and former colleagues to the kids at school who march right to the head of the lunch line to get their food, without waiting in line like the rest of us.’
- LifestyleDr. Phil CBS
Heather claims her boyfriend, Collin, has “rules” for their relationship and says she’s tired of him trying to control her. She admits that Collin has put his hands on her, pushed her, and once bit her on the face, but says, “I don’t like to say he’s an abuser. I don’t look at him as an abuser.” “When we’re talking about an abusive relationship – you are in an abusive relationship,” says Dr. Phil’s wife, Robin McGraw, to Heather in the video above. Robin is the founder and CEO of When Georgia Smiled, The Robin McGraw and Dr. Phil Foundation, which supports organizations and programs that build awareness, offer solutions, and address the needs of children and families to live healthy, safe, and joy-filled lives free of domestic violence and sexual assault. And later, when Dr. Phil advises Heather that she’s in danger, does she take his advice to leave her relationship? Watch more from Wednesday’s conclusion of this two-part Dr. Phil, “Toxic Love: Will Heather Leave Collin? Check your local listing. WATCH: ‘This Is A Dangerous Relationship For You,’ Dr. Phil Warns Man Who Admits To Putting Hands On His Girlfriend TELL DR. PHIL YOUR STORY: At your final breaking point?
- U.S.National Review
The notion of student-loan cancellations has been capturing the attention of politicians and those in the realm of higher-education policy for well over a year now. Despite the popularity of this hugely regressive idea, it’s a terrible one. Thankfully, there’s a better, more moderate way to address federal student debt. And it’s hiding in plain sight. Income-driven repayment (IDR), an existing set of programs that function somewhat poorly, can be improved to ensure that not a single borrower will ever have to make an unaffordable payment on federal student loans. Under IDR, monthly payments are tied to a borrower’s income and unaffordable balances are ultimately forgiven. IDR accomplishes this in a way that minimizes moral hazard and delivers benefits in a true progressive manner — with more benefits going to people who invested in a college degree, and took on debt to do so, but didn’t see the return they were promised in the form of a high-paying job. IDR also makes college more accessible to children in low-income families, in effect enabling higher education to function as a mechanism for social mobility. The monthly payments of traditional loans are determined at the outset, with repayment of the principal and interest spread over a definite time period. In contrast, IDR allows borrowers to make monthly payments that are equal to a fixed percentage of their current disposable income. When income is high, they pay the full amount due, and when income is low, they can make a reduced payment without penalty. This ensures that monthly payments are affordable. The balance is forgiven once a borrower has made a requisite number of IDR payments. This takes between ten and 25 years depending on the student’s eligibility and choice of IDR program. Borrowers may not like having a balance hanging over their head for that long, but the reduced monthly payments (often reduced to zero) mean the process isn’t excessively burdensome. By reserving benefits for those who are truly in need, the IDR mechanism also reduces the perversion of incentives that often come with implementing safety nets. A less targeted relief program, like the student-loan forgiveness being proposed, would likely encourage future students to borrow more than they would have otherwise, attend more expensive schools, and make less of an effort to constrain living expenses (also paid with loans). It would also fuel hope for another politically supported round of loan forgiveness down the road. Taxpayers, who ultimately pay the price for these programs, are thereby saddled with even more costs. Colleges and universities would in turn raise prices to respond to the surge in demand, which would exacerbate the already out-of-control inflation in the higher-education industry. Some might wonder if a safety net for student borrowers is really necessary. But if we want more Americans to use our system of higher education, which includes both work-training and degree programs, we have to minimize the financial risk students face. While investment in higher education generally pays huge dividends, degrees don’t always lead to high earnings that would justify the cost. Students who start school but don’t finish are the worst off, as they end up with a significant loan balance to repay without access to earning levels that would make repayment affordable. Without a safety net, it is still not truly affordable for students from low-income families to attend college. Delivering relief through a safety net allows for a more efficient allocation of resources, because benefits needn’t be paid to those who invest in college and end up with a lucrative career. Despite the IDR system’s appropriateness for the policy challenge at hand, the system hasn’t been working well. The reason for this is largely that IDR is administered through a variety of programs each with different eligibility criteria and a range of program parameters. The amount borrowers are expected to pay is calculated differently across programs, as is the number of years before borrowers can qualify to have their balance forgiven. The result is a system that is excessively complex to navigate, with many borrowers unaware of the benefits that are available to them. While IDR is now universal for all federal student borrowers, it became that way only after a series of legislative and executive interventions, between 1992 and 2015, stitched together a patchwork of loosely related programs. Factual evidence about how IDR has been used is limited, but anecdotes about the challenges of navigating the system, even by financially savvy consumers, indicate systemic problems. This rickety policy framework desperately needs to be replaced with a single user-friendly, income-driven repayment plan that can be universally marketed and better understood. Reasonable people can disagree about how generous IDR should be. Moving the conversation away from mass loan forgiveness to reforming IDR would be a step in a fairer and more efficient direction.
- U.S.The Telegraph
North Carolina mocked after prioritising anyone who has smoked 100 cigarettes in their lifetime for a vaccine
North Carolina is offering priority vaccination to anyone who has smoked 'at least 100 cigarettes in their lifetime'. The roll-out plan, announced on Tuesday, was mocked online as residents claimed they would immediately chain-smoke their way to the top of the queue. Governor Roy Cooper, a Democrat, said that all frontline essential workers can have their vaccine now while giving three weeks' notice for those who are obese, in jail, pregnant, homeless - or who have smoked just five packets of cigarettes in their life. The cohort including smokers will be called forwards on March 24, and is designed to include adults at higher risk of virus exposure or who are at an increased risk of having a severe illness Smokers are defined as “current or former” having “smoked at least 100 cigarettes in their lifetime.”