Related Posts Editor’s note: This story is part of ReadWriteWeb’s Online Finance series, a weekly, three-month-long look at how the Internet has transformed finance. Up until April 15, which is the deadline for U.S. readers to file their taxes, we’ll be looking at how online finance has evolved, analyzing top web tools and posting video of our conversations with the people who are shaping online finance. If you are interested in sponsoring the rest of this Content Series on Personal Finance, please contact our COO Sean Ammirati.Mint: Leading the ChargeCurrently, the two most well-known online tools for personal finance management are arguably Mint and Intuit’s Quicken Online. Mint stood out from the pack early on because the company made it extremely easy to keep track of all your expenses. After giving Mint access to your bank and credit card account, the service simply downloads your financial information at regular intervals and organizes it. Mint can even track your 401(k) for you. Mint launched in September 2007 and quickly became the darling of the Web 2.0 world. Unlike most of its desktop-bound competitors, Mint managed to talk to virtually every bank and credit card issuer from day one. In October 2008, Mint came out of beta. Today, the company has more than 1.7 million registered users and sees roughly 700,000 active users every month. In October 2009, the company was signing up 30,000 new users per week. Mint’s success didn’t go unnoticed by the incumbent market leaders and Intuit acquired Mint in October 2009. In November 2009, Intuit announced that it would begin to phase out Quicken Online in favor of Mint. Microsoft suspended sales of Microsoft Money on June 30, 2009 and doesn’t plan to compete in the market anymore. Correction: In December, Microsoft actually announced a plan to enter the personal finance market again with a Mint-like tool it is developing in collaboration with Citi.Beyond MintWhile Mint gets most of the mindshare on the web these days, it’s by no means the only player in this market. Indeed, the success of Mint has given rise to a plethora of similar tools and legitimizes the efforts of companies that tried to enter this market before Mint. ClearCheckbook.com, for example, launched in May 2006. The company focuses on bringing checkbook management online. A number of other tools are competing more directly with Mint. Wesabe, for example, also focuses on giving users an overview of how they spend their money. Sadly, Wesabe makes downloading your information from your checking and credit card accounts a bit more difficult than Mint. Since acquiring Exepnsr, Strands now also offers its own personal finance tool for setting up and tracking personal budgets and staying on top of your finances. Geezeo – which was founded in 2006, and also looks a lot like Mint, has a very strong focus on budgeting.Most of these tools focus on the U.S. market, but more and more of them are also now available outside of the United States. Kublax, for example, offers a Mint-like service in the U.K.Going MobileJust like almost every other category of online tools, personal finance tools are also making the move to mobile. Mint and Wesabe, for example, offer both an iPhone app and mobile-optimized websites. Most importantly, all of these services are also able to send out alerts to your phone – either through push alerts on the iPhone or as text messages. Whenever you run the risk of exceeding your credit card limit, for example, these services will send you an alert. Of course, a number of banks have also gotten into this game and now offer their own mobile apps. The Bank of America, Chase Mobile and Wells Fargo apps are currently among the top 10 most downloaded free finance iPhone apps, for example.When it comes to paying your bills, apps like BillMinder and BillTracker make it easy to never forget when a bill is due. What’s Next?Over the last few years, the web has clearly transformed the way we use personal finance software. Over the next few months, we will have a closer look at the current generation of personal budgeting and finance tools on the web. We will also analyze the current trends around online finance software.This is the first post in our upcoming series about online finance. If you are interested in sponsoring the rest of this Content Series on Online Finance, please contact our COO Sean Ammirati. Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting Tags:#Features#Finance#Product Reviews#Trends#web frederic lardinois Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… Not too long ago, personal finance tools like Quicken and Microsoft Money used to be bound to the desktop. Exchanging information with your banks used to be a hassle. Keeping track of credit card purchases was often a question of waiting for statements to arrive by mail and then entering data by hand. Today, free tools like Mint, moneyStrands and Wesabe make it easy to track all of this information. Thanks to this, you can now get a better overview of your personal finances than ever before. 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… RWW’s Online Finance Series:How The Web is Transforming Personal FinanceThe Evolving Online Finance Ecosystem
Garth Heutel is an associate professor of economics at Georgia State University. This post originally appeared at The Conversation. Environmental economics 101Many renewable energy experts, including economists like me, want governments to do something to address climate change but question the mandate.University of California, Berkeley economist Severin Borenstein summed up this take in his open letter to the California Energy Commission opposing the rule. University of California, Davis economist James Bushnell also opposes the mandate for similar reasons.Above all, what we economists call “command-and-control policies” like this mandate — inflexible requirements that apply to everyone — often don’t make sense. For example, going solar is less economical in some cases. Even in sunny California, builders can construct housing in shady areas, and not all homeowners use enough electricity for the investment to pay off before they move away.The mandate does have some exemptions tied to shade and available roof space, but there could property owners subjected to the requirement to own or lease solar panels who might consider it unreasonable.We tend to think that “market-based policies” would work better. By relying on incentives instead of requirements, people get to decide for themselves what to do.Good examples of these policies include a tax on pollution, like British Columbia’s carbon tax, or a cap-and-trade market, like the European Union’s Emissions Trading System. Instead of restricting the right to pollute, these approaches make people and businesses pay to pollute, either through taxation or by buying mandatory permits.The flexibility of market-based policies can make meeting pollution reduction goals cost-effective. When people — or businesses — have to factor the costs of pollution into their decision-making, they have a financial incentive to pollute less and will find ways to do so. By reducing pollution as cheaply as possible, more money is left over to spend on other pressing needs like housing, health care and education.This advantage is not merely theoretical. By many accounts, market-based policies have successfully worked according to theory, including the U.S. sulfur dioxide trading program and the EU’s carbon trading program.California itself has a cap-and-trade market. I believe that expanding and improving it would cut carbon emissions more cost-effectively than the solar mandate would.Many economists also fear that the mandate will worsen California’s housing unaffordability. This crisis has many causes, such as restrictive zoning regulations that curtail construction. But the solar-panel requirement, which could increase the cost of a new home by more than $10,000, probably won’t help, even though supporters of the policy argue that the solar panels will pay for themselves in terms of lower monthly electricity costs. More than two sidesYou might expect the debate over this policy, which became official when the California Energy Commission unanimously voted in favor of it on May 8, to pit two well-defined camps against each other.Environmentalists who prize fighting climate change might love it due to a presumption that increasing the share of power California derives from solar panels will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by cutting demand for natural gas and coal.On the other hand, those who question whether the costs of addressing climate change are worth it might hate the solar mandate, since they either see no benefits or think the benefits aren’t worth the costs. More California rooftops will soon sport solar panels, partly due to a new state mandate requiring them for all new houses and low-rise residential buildings by 2020.This rule immediately sparked lively debates. Even experts who generally advocate for solar energy expressed skepticism that it was actually a good idea.As an environmental economist who studies the design of environmental policies, I believe that doing something about climate change is important, but I don’t consider this new solar mandate to be the best way to achieve that goal. I’m also concerned that it could exacerbate problems with California’s housing market. But there are more than two sides. A practical policyAfter mulling all the various arguments made by these different camps, I don’t think that whether California’s rooftop solar mandate is the perfect policy for the climate or the state’s homebuyers is the question.The answer to that question is a resounding no — but that is beside the point because no policy is perfect. The key question is whether this policy — given its imperfections and given the difficulty in passing more cost-effective policies — is a winner overall. That question is harder to answer.Ultimately, I believe the mandate will yield some environmental benefits, though they could be more cost-effectively achieved through other means. The solar mandate’s fansThe solar mandate’s defenders, including Gov. Jerry Brown and Sierra Club leader Rachel Golden, make several arguments — two of which I find credible.The first is what I’d call the “Panglossian” argument, after the character in Candide, Voltaire’s 18th-century classic satire. In what Voltaire would call “the best of all possible worlds,” taxing carbon would make perfect sense.But this is a world riddled with political obstacles that make enacting almost any climate policy next to impossible. If a big American state can enact an imperfect law like this mandate that might do some good, then it should go for it.The other argument I find reasonable is that by drumming up more demand, the solar mandate will expand the solar panel market — thereby driving solar costs down, perhaps more quickly than a carbon tax would. There’s some evidence supporting the theory that these mandates can spur innovation in renewable electricity technologies.If the mandate works out, it might address two issues at once: shrinking California’s carbon footprint and bolstering technological progress in the solar industry.To be sure, the cost of residential solar panels has plummeted in recent years, although generating solar energy through rooftop panels remains less cost-effective than power from utility-scale solar farms. RELATED ARTICLES California Poised to Require Solar PanelsThe California ModelTo Net Zero and Beyond The Department of Energy Chooses a Definition for Net ZeroBuilding a Low-Cost Zero-Energy HomeRevisiting Net Zero Energy
Arsenal boss Emery: We can only make loan signingsby Freddie Taylor10 months agoSend to a friendShare the loveArsenal manager Unai Emery has confirmed the club will only sign loan players this month. The Gunners want to bring Barcelona midfielder Denis Suarez to the Emirates, but are reluctant to part with a fee for the 25-year-old. And Emery has confirmed the club are only looking for temporary signings.”We cannot sign anyone permanently,” Emery said ahead of the Gunners’ game against West Ham on Saturday. “Only loan players this January.”Asked specifically about Suarez, Emery added: “I do not know his situation.”But I know the club is working for the possibility of players who can help us with this condition (on loan).” TagsTransfersAbout the authorFreddie TaylorShare the loveHave your say
APTN National NewsThe province of Ontario has launched an investigation to find out whether human remains were extracted from a development on an ancient First Nations village site.An archaeologist hired by the developer initially told APTN National News that bones were found on the site, but then denied the claim.APTN National News reporter Wayne Roberts pulls the pieces together.
APTN National NewsAt the time of her disappearance, Tina Fontaine was a ward of a child and family services agency and now Manitoba’s Children’s Advocate says they’re in the very early stages of an investigation into her case.“We’re still in the process of determining how large the review is going to be,” said spokesperson Ainsley Krone. “Our role is really to look at the quality and the type of service that was provided to the child.”Krone couldn’t discuss specific details or provide a timeline for their investigation but says when the review is completed, her office could provide recommendations to the province and agencies involved.The discovery of 15-year-old First Nation girl’s body in a Winnipeg river has sparked sadness and anger.Winnipeg police still haven’t said how Tina Fontaine died but they are asking the public to contact them with any details that may help the investigation. Her remains were reportedly found in a bag in the Red River.Police said her body was found while searching for another missing man Faron Hall. Police divers located her body then.It’s a case that has shocked even police.“She’s a child. This is a child that’s been murdered. Society would be horrified if we found a litter of kittens or pups in the river in this condition. This is a child,” Winnipeg police Sgt. John O’Donovan told reporters at a press conference. “Society should be horrified.”Fontaine was from the Sagkeeng First Nation, an Ojibway community 121 km north of Winnipeg. Police say she had only been in the city for a month before she disappeared on August 9.“She’s definitely been exploited and taken advantage of,” said O’Donovan.A monument to missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls was only unveiled days ago in Winnipeg. On Facebook, provincial Aboriginal Affairs Minister Eric Robinson expressed his outrage that Fontaine’s body was found not far from that same monument.“Last week we unveiled a monument and plaque to honor missing and murdered Aboriginal women and girls,” wrote Robinson. “Little did we know a young girl would be found on the Red River, determined to have been murdered only 7 days later.”Robinson says it’s time the federal government calls a national inquiry.In May, the RCMP released a report that found nearly 1,200 Indigenous women had been murdered or went missing in the past three decades across Canada.firstname.lastname@example.org
BREAKING: West Moberly FN attempt to get injunction to halt Site C dam has been dismissed. #bcpoli— Keith Baldrey (@keithbaldrey) October 24, 2018More to come… VANCOUVER, B.C. – A court injunction to stop work at the Site C Dam has been dismissed.According to tweets from reporters in Vancouver, the injunction filed by West Moberly and Prophet River First Nations in January of this year has been dismissed.The two First Nations applied for seeking a complete stoppage to work on the dam, or for work to stop in so-called “critical areas” for a period of 18 months – which is the period of time that an expedited trial for the treaty infringement suit is estimated to take.
Washington: China on Thursday defended its fourth “technical hold” on the designation of Pakistan-based JeM chief Masood Azhar as a global terrorist, saying the move would give it time for a “thorough and in-depth assessment” of the case and help the parties concerned to engage in more talks to find a “lasting solution” acceptable to all. The proposal to designate Azhar under the 1267 Al Qaeda Sanctions Committee of the UN Security Council was moved by France, the UK and the US on February 27, days after a suicide bomber of the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) killed 40 CRPF soldiers in Jammu and Kashmir’s Pulwama, leading to a flare-up in tensions between India and Pakistan. Also Read – Squadrons which participated in Balakot air strike awarded citations on IAF DayThe Al Qaeda Sanctions Committee members had 10 working days to raise any objections to the proposal. Just before the deadline ended, China put a “technical hold” on the proposal seeking “more time to examine” it. The proposal was the fourth such bid at the UN in the last 10 years to list Azhar as a global terrorist. Asked why China once again resorted to blocking the move, Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang told a media briefing here that Beijing’s decision is in line with the rules of the committee. Also Read – SC declines Oil Min request to stay sharing of documents on Reliance penalty”Only a solution that is acceptable to all sides could fundamentally provide a chance for a lasting solution to the issue. China is ready to communicate and coordinate with all sides including India to properly handle this issue,” he said. The Security Council 1267 Committee has clear standards on the procedures of designating terrorist organisations and individuals, Lu said. “China conducts a thorough and in-depth assessment of these applications and we still need more time, so that is why we put forward the technical hold,” he said. India Wednesday expressed disappointment soon after China put a technical hold on designating Azhar. The External Affairs Ministry in New Delhi said India will continue to pursue all available avenues to ensure that leaders of terror groups involved in heinous attacks on Indian citizens are brought to justice. Outraged by China blocking for the fourth time a move to designate JeM chief Masood Azhar a global terrorist, responsible UNSC members warned they “may be forced to pursue other actions” at the Security Council if Beijing continued with this policy. The senior diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity to give a sense of the frustration of the other members of the Security Council after China on Wednesday put a technical hold on the proposal.
New Delhi: Navy Chief Admiral Sunil Lanba on Monday held extensive talks with Chief of US Naval Operations Admiral John Michael Richardson on ways to further deepen cooperation between navies of the two countries.Admiral Richardson is on a three-day visit to India which began on Sunday. “Major issues discussed included operations and exercises, training interactions, information exchange, capacity building and capability enhancement,” the Indian Navy said. It said Admiral Richardson’s visit is intended to consolidate bilateral naval relations between India and the US and also to explore new avenues for naval cooperation. The US naval official also interacted with Defence Secretary Sanjay Mitra and Chief of the Air Staff Air Chief Marshal B S Dhanoa among others.
The very first women’s NCAA basketball tournament was held in 1982, and Louisiana Tech took center stage. The Lady Techsters had already compiled a 109-9 record over the previous three seasons, winning the 1981 AIAW Championship (the precursor to the women’s tourney) with a perfect 34-0 record. Led by Wade Trophy winner1Given to the nation’s best women’s college player each season. Pam Kelly, the team put the finishing touches on another title in 1982 by defeating Cheyney and legendary coach C. Vivian Stringer in the final. It was the first of two NCAA championships Louisiana Tech would win in the 1980s and started a run of seven No. 1 seeds across nine NCAA tournaments.Louisiana Tech was the UConn of the women’s NCAA tourney’s early era. But aside from a few more strong seasons in the 1990s, it’s been downhill since. The Lady Techsters haven’t made the NCAA field since 2011 — at 14-14 this season, they aren’t likely to end that drought soon — and they haven’t had an All-American since Tamicha Jackson in 2000.Louisiana Tech isn’t alone among once-great programs whose talent pipelines have dried up. A number of teams that were the titans of the early NCAA tournament have struggled in recent decades. And in their place, a new ruling class of schools has emerged to become the defining programs of the modern age. In a championship as young as the women’s tournament, it’s been fascinating to watch the rise and fall of programs that, not very long ago, were in a very different place.To visualize the progress of women’s programs in the absence of game-level data, such as our Elo ratings, we can use NCAA Tournament seeds as a proxy for team strength over time. This doesn’t explicitly factor in how a team performs in the tournament itself, but it does measure the general quality of a team’s entire season — plus, higher seeds tend to win more in the tournament anyway2Both because they are better teams and because the women’s NCAA tournament gives higher seeds home games early in the bracket.. To measure this, we awarded “seed points” in proportion to a given seed number’s expected wins in the tournament, calibrated to a 100-point scale where the No. 1 seed gets 100 points, No. 2 gets 70 points, and so forth.3Using data since the women’s tournament expanded to 64 teams in 1994. 1Tennessee73.795.487.468.982.1 Which women’s programs have been most successful during the NCAA tournament era?Seed points* in NCAA tournaments held for women’s programs, by decade and overall since 1982 2UConn2.272.089.4100.068.4 3Stanford15.783.351.177.458.5 10Notre Dame0.010.935.993.435.4 7Texas76.429.835.035.142.6 5Georgia65.045.742.924.644.0 4Duke2.723.389.455.344.5 Some teams, such as Tennessee, have been relatively consistent throughout the NCAA era. Although the Lady Vols were at their best under coach Pat Summitt during the 1990s, ranking first among all programs in seed points per tournament, they were also the third-best program of the 2000s according to our metric, fourth-best of the 1980s and even fifth-best of the 2010s, though the past few years haven’t been as strong by Tennessee standards. (The Vols probably won’t be adding to their tally this season, either: Tennessee is currently 18-11 and ranks 63rd in the RPI ratings, making it a bubble team at best for this year’s bracket.)Maryland and North Carolina have also been relatively good throughout the history of the women’s tournament. But more striking on the list above is how many programs followed the Louisiana Tech path — dominating the early days of the tourney, only to drop off the face of the Earth later. In addition to the Lady Techsters, three other programs — Long Beach State, Southern Cal and Old Dominion — have seen the biggest drop-off in seed points per tournament between the tournament’s first two decades and its two most recent. 6Louisiana Tech92.6188.8.131.524.0 18Old Dominion57.242.517.10.028.5 14Baylor0.00.041.183.731.5 *Seed points award a score on a 100-point scale; a No. 1 seed gets 100 points, while the rest descend in proportion to the seed’s expected wins during the tournament.Source: NCAA Other stunning out-of-nowhere success stories include current No. 1 Baylor, which made its first NCAA tournament in 2001(!); defending champion Notre Dame, which didn’t win an NCAA tournament game until 1996; and Duke, which — despite the success of its men’s team — failed to make much noise on the women’s side until the late 1990s/early 2000s. With the exception of the Blue Devils (who at 14-14 are unlikely to make the tournament), all of these programs have continued to be great this season. In fact, many more of today’s top teams — such as Louisville, Mississippi State and South Carolina — all emerged from humble results during the 1980s and ‘90s.Most sports see early champions maintain some sort of strong presence into modern times, like the New York Yankees in baseball and Boston Celtics in basketball. So it’s surprising that this many of the most dominant teams of the early women’s tourney have vanished from the competitive landscape. It’s not impossible to imagine Louisiana Tech returning to its former glory someday, but for now the Lady Techsters’ success is a memory fading quickly into ancient history.Sara Ziegler contributed research. Seed Points Per Tournament, by decade 15Virginia40.858.419.34.931.0 11Penn St.31.048.732.319.633.4 13Purdue184.108.40.2067.531.5 19Iowa220.127.116.11.026.0 17LSU25.216.860.017.430.5 16Vanderbilt11.146.948.510.530.8 12Ohio St.46.115.536.233.832.1 School1980s1990s2000s2010sOverall 20NC State41.326.619.512.924.6 A more basic scoring system might assign 16 points to a No. 1 seed, 15 to a No. 2, etc., all the way down to 1 point for a 16 seed. But that would understate the power of a high seed: Instead of being only twice as valuable as, say, a 9 seed, a No. 1 seed wins about seven times as many games during the average tournament.Averaging those seed-based point totals over all the women’s tournaments held since 1982, here are the top overall programs of the entire NCAA tourney era. 9North Carolina25.438.362.520.237.7 At the other end of the spectrum, we have the programs that started slow and picked up steam into the present day. And as hard as it is to believe now, Connecticut wasn’t always the unstoppable force we see today. The Huskies didn’t make their first NCAA tournament appearance until 1989 and didn’t win a championship before 1995. Now it’s shocking news when UConn might not be a No. 1 seed, and it’s currently riding a streak of 11 straight Final Four berths. According to our metric, no team’s fortunes have improved more between the NCAA tourney’s early period in the 1980s and the current era than the Huskies’. 8Maryland43.520.838.650.437.7
OSU freshman forward Maddy Field (22) fights for the puck during a game against Minnesota State on Oct. 23 at the Schottenstein Center. OSU won 5-3.Credit: Courtesy of OSUIn the final weekend of matchups of the regular season, the Ohio State women’s ice hockey team (10-23-1, 6-21-1) split its series with the No. 9-ranked University of North Dakota (16-11-5, 13-10-5).OSU showcased the strides it has made this season as it beat the Fighting Hawks 3-1 on Friday before falling 3-2 in a tight contest a day later.On Friday, after an extremely competitive first period, the Buckeyes and Fighting Hawks were tied 0-0. Despite 17 combined shots from both teams, neither OSU nor North Dakota was able to find the back of the net.However, that turned around 16:51 into the second period, as OSU got on the board off a goal from freshman forward Maddy Field. Sophomore defenseman Dani Sadek then doubled the Buckeyes’ lead less than three minutes later.In the third period, North Dakota’s Meghan Dufault knocked the puck past OSU goalie Alex LaMere to cut the Buckeyes lead in half with a little more than three minutes to play. The Fighting Hawks pulled their goalie in an attempt to find the equalizer, but that alllowed OSU junior Claudia Kepler to score with four seconds remaining on an open nut to seal the 3-1 result.In Saturday’s senior day affair, OSU jumped out to its fastest start of the season with two goals in the first three minutes. Junior Alexa Ranahan and sophomore Lauren Spring scored the goals for the Scarlet and Gray, with Ranahan’s being her first of the season. However, North Dakota answered with a goal with less than three minutes left in the first period — a sign of things to come in the contest.In the second period, North Dakota was able to get two shots past redshirt senior goalkeeper Stacy Danczak, who got the start in her final game at OSU. Becca Kohler and Dufault scored the two goals for the Fighting Hawks. Neither team was able to score in the third, as the game culminated in a 3-2 final score.After the game, seven senior Buckeyes — Danczak, Melani Moylan, Julia McKinnon, Kendall Curtis, Cara Zubko, Maggie Rothgery and Bryanna Neuwald — were honored at center ice in recognition for their time wearing scarlet and gray.Both games were close contests, and OSU assistant coach Carson Duggan said she thinks the second game was decided by a few more positive plays for North Dakota.“Those are two evenly matched teams and it was just they executed one more time than we did,” Duggan said. “I think we had our chances and we battled hard. We came out with a lot of energy and it’s an emotional day for a lot of kids, but I think that was the only difference is that they executed one more time than we did.”Field, however, offered a different explanation for Saturday’s defeat, citing the referees as an issue in the second game and the way the team let the officials’ calls affect their play.“Obviously you can’t blame it on the reffing, but I think the reffing kind of let the game get out of control,” she said. “We had a really good start but I think we let the reffing get in our head and we let a weak goal in.”The team was only able to score on one of eight power plays over the weekend, which is something they will look to improve upon in their first-round playoff series against Minnesota next weekend.“I think that we won a lot of our battles and we were getting shots at the net,” Field said. “I think we need to work on capitalizing on power plays but I think we did really well penalty killing.”Duggan said she thinks the team’s drive and tenacity will be keys to the playoff games next weekend.“I think just leaving it out there. At this point in the season it’s who wants it more and how bad do you want it and what are you willing to do to get it, and I think our girls showed a lot of character and a lot of heart this weekend,” Duggan said. “We have a short bench, and the girls battled hard, as a coach that’s all you can ask for. So I think just taking that mentality and why not let’s see what we can do in Minnesota.”OSU is scheduled to travel to Minnesota next weekend to take on the Golden Gophers in the first round of the Western Collegiate Hockey Association playoffs. The puck is set to drop in Minneapolis on 8:07 p.m. on Friday and 5:07 p.m. on Saturday. If Friday’s and Saturday’s games are split, there will be a deciding game on Sunday.