#appointment letters

[brightpunjabexpress]

Power department completes recruitment process of 2424 vacancies, will hand over appointment letters soon: Harbhajan Singh ETO

• Says, regular employment given to 1397 youths in Power department during last one year Chandigarh, March 26: The state government led by Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann has continuously been providing employment to the youth of the state and the Power department will soon hand over appointment letters to the candidates who have been selected against 2424 vacancies. Giving this information, the…

[printletterforpatient]

Patient Statement Printing and Mailing Services

Whether you're a hospital, clinic, medical practice, health insurance company or government agency, you need to send patient statements that are HIPAA compliant. You need a vendor who can handle the printing and mailing of your statements quickly and efficiently.

Your statements should be branded correctly so that patients can easily recognize your name, logo, and contact details. They should also contain payment links that enable them to make payments online or via mobile devices.

To make sure that your statements are sent to the right place, it's important to have a robust address correction system. This helps your team prevent address errors and skip tracing.

In addition, you should look for a print and mail vendor that offers real-time tracking. This ensures that you're always aware of your statements' status and delivery date so that you can respond to them quickly.

Another feature you'll want in your print and mail vendor is the ability to add Intelligent Mail Barcodes (IMBs). These 65-bar barcodes can be scanned by USPS to track domestic and international mail.

Discharge summaries, operative reports and medical test results are some of the medical documents that you need to print and mail to your patients. These reports contain a lot of information about the current health of the patients and upcoming checkups.

SITES WE SUPPORT

Print Letter For Patient – Wix

[liatai]

Question!

Neurodivergent peeps of Tumblr, I have a question.

I know that "nonverbal" or "selectively mute" are specific terms that mean "I cannot force words out no matter how hard I try," so... is there a term for "I can speak if I have to, but right now it requires extra energy?"

Like, I'm autistic. I have times where I can speak and even hold conversations, but stringing a verbal sentence together takes effort, the same kind of effort lifting a heavy load with your body would but in your mind. I can be perfectly eloquent and verbose in text when this happens, and sometimes I'll even make some of the limited signs I know in ASL without an issue, but speaking aloud uses up all my mental RAM and I can feel the metaphorical fans of my mind-computer whirring in overdrive. X3;

It's exhausting, too. Usually if I've been verbally social for a while, that's when it kicks in.

I can understand spoken words just as well as other times when this happens, as long as I don't have to speak to reply. If I have to speak, the mental effort and stamina needed to do it tends to push details aside in an endeavor to save processing power. ^^;

I know autism is a spectrum, and I'm hoping someone might have a name for this "not QUITE nonverbal but verbal words are VERY hard right now" feeling ^^; "Partially nonverbal" or "partially selectively mute" doesn't seem quite right.

Help?

[pochapal]

gp nurses when you ask them to administer a medication that is not an immediately recognizable common household drug

[buttfrovski]

transitioning feels like the "navigating the american healthcare system" song

but also the legal system

[trans-elrond]

.

[suntails]

if someone gives me a number between 1 and 62, ill share a wip of that frame of the silver video im working on. i'm deranged and posting them/sharing them privately w friends and Also posting bits to twitter is Not Enough. i am going Crayzee

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Guy Venables

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

November 16, 2024

Heather Cox Richardson

Nov 16, 2024

One of President-elect Trump’s campaign pledges was to eliminate the Department of Education. He claimed that the department pushes “woke” ideology on America’s schoolchildren and that its employees “hate our children.” He promised to “return” education to the states. 

In fact, the Department of Education does not set curriculum; states and local governments do. The Department of Education collects statistics about schools to monitor student performance and promote practices based in evidence. It provides about 10% of funding for K–12 schools through federal grants of about $19.1 billion to high-poverty schools and of $15.5 billion to help cover the cost of educating students with disabilities.

It also oversees the $1.6 trillion federal student loan program, including setting the rules under which colleges and universities can participate. But what really upsets the radical right is that the Department of Education is in charge of prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race and sex in schools that get federal funding, a policy Congress set in 1975 with an act now known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This was before Congress created the department.

The Department of Education became a stand-alone department in May 1980 under Democratic president Jimmy Carter, when Congress split the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare into two departments: the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education. 

A Republican-dominated Congress established the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in 1953 under Republican president Dwight D. Eisenhower as part of a broad attempt to improve the nation’s schools and Americans’ well-being in the flourishing post–World War II economy. When the Soviet Union beat the United States into space by sending up the first  Sputnik satellite in 1957, lawmakers concerned that American children were falling behind put more money and effort into educating the country’s youth, especially in math and science. 

But support for federal oversight of education took a devastating hit after the Supreme Court, headed by Eisenhower appointee Chief Justice Earl Warren, declared racially segregated schools unconstitutional in the May 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision. 

Immediately, white southern lawmakers launched a campaign of what they called “massive resistance” to integration. Some Virginia counties closed their public schools. Other school districts took funds from integrated public schools and used a grant system to redistribute those funds to segregated private schools. Then, Supreme Court decisions in 1962 and 1963 that declared prayer in schools unconstitutional cemented the decision of white evangelicals to leave the public schools, convinced that public schools were leading their children to perdition. 

In 1980, Republican Ronald Reagan ran on a promise to eliminate the new Department of Education.

After Reagan’s election, his secretary of education commissioned a study of the nation’s public schools, starting with the conviction that there was a “widespread public perception that something is seriously remiss in our educational system.” The resulting report, titled “A Nation at Risk,” announced that “the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people.”

Although a later study commissioned in 1990 by the Secretary of Energy found the data in the original report did not support the report’s conclusions, Reagan nonetheless used the report in his day to justify school privatization. He vowed after the report’s release that he would “continue to work in the months ahead for passage of tuition tax credits, vouchers, educational savings accounts, voluntary school prayer, and abolishing the Department of Education. Our agenda is to restore quality to education by increasing competition and by strengthening parental choice and local control.”

The rise of white evangelism and its marriage to Republican politics fed the right-wing conviction that public education no longer served “family values” and that parents had been cut out of their children’s education. Christians began to educate their children at home, believing that public schools were indoctrinating their children with secular values. 

When he took office in 2017, Trump rewarded those evangelicals who had supported his candidacy by putting right-wing evangelical activist Betsy DeVos in charge of the Education Department. She called for eliminating the department—until she used its funding power to try to keep schools open during the covid pandemic—and asked for massive cuts in education spending.

Rather than funding public schools, DeVos called instead for tax money to be spent on education vouchers, which distribute tax money to parents to spend for education as they see fit. This system starves the public schools and subsidizes wealthy families whose children are already in private schools. DeVos also rolled back civil rights protections for students of color and LGBTQ+ students but increased protections for students accused of sexual assault. 

In 2019, the 1619 Project, published by the New York Times Magazine on the 400th anniversary of the arrival of enslaved Africans at Jamestown in Virginia Colony, argued that the true history of the United States began in 1619, establishing the roots of the country in the enslavement of Black Americans. That, combined with the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, prompted Trump to commission the 1776 Project, which rooted the country in its original patriotic ideals and insisted that any moments in which it had fallen away from those ideals were quickly corrected. He also moved to ban diversity training in federal agencies. 

When Trump lost the 2020 election, his loyalists turned to undermining the public schools to destroy what they considered an illegitimate focus on race and gender that was corrupting children. In January 2021, Republican activists formed Moms for Liberty, which called itself a parental rights organization and began to demand the banning of LGBTQ+ books from school libraries. Right-wing activist Christopher Rufo engineered a national panic over the false idea that public school educators were teaching their students critical race theory, a theory taught as an elective in law school to explain why desegregation laws had not ended racial discrimination. 

After January 2021, 44 legislatures began to consider laws to ban the teaching of critical race theory or to limit how teachers could talk about racism and sexism, saying that existing curricula caused white children to feel guilty.

When the Biden administration expanded the protections enforced by the Department of Education to include LGBTQ+ students, Trump turned to focusing on the idea that transgender students were playing high-school sports despite the restrictions on that practice in the interest of “ensuring fairness in competition or preventing sports-related injury.” 

During the 2024 political campaign, Trump brought the longstanding theme of public schools as dangerous sites of indoctrination to a ridiculous conclusion, repeatedly insisting that public schools were performing gender-transition surgery on students. But that cartoonish exaggeration spoke to voters who had come to see the equal rights protected by the Department of Education as an assault on their own identity. That position leads directly to the idea of eliminating the Department of Education.

But that might not work out as right-wing Americans imagine. As Morning Joe economic analyst Steven Rattner notes, for all that Republicans embrace the attacks on public education, Republican-dominated states receive significantly more federal money for education than Democratic-dominated states do, although the Democratic states contribute significantly more tax dollars. 

There is a bigger game afoot, though, than the current attack on the Department of Education. As Thomas Jefferson recognized, education is fundamental to democracy, because only educated people can accurately evaluate the governmental policies that will truly benefit them.

In 1786, Jefferson wrote to a colleague about public education: “No other sure foundation can be devised for the preservation of freedom, and happiness…. Preach, my dear Sir, a crusade against ignorance; establish and improve the law for educating the common people. Let our countrymen know that the people alone can protect us against [the evils of “kings, nobles and priests”], and that the tax which will be paid for this purpose is not more than the thousandth part of what will be paid to kings, priests and nobles who will rise up among us if we leave the people in ignorance.”

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[pocketramblr]

fae court but it's a legal court, changelings are fae they leave in place of human jurors during the trial because it's the best way to prevent the trial from just becoming a bunch of fairies trying to one up the best bargain for their vote with the accused

[jonsnowunemploymentera]

Individuals I never take seriously: the “Jon deserved to die” discoursers and the “Red Wedding was justified” contrarians. Y’all are never going to be right I fear.

[wonder-worker]

"Hannes Kleineke cites Dean and Canons of Windsor MS XI.B.6, rot. 2, for evidence of a deathbed codicil by Edward IV concerning a dispute between the knights and canons of Windsor"

remember when I said that we don't know what Edward IV's deathbed codicils were as they haven't survived? that there is no reason to automatically assume they were relevant to his son's minority? that it's entirely possible that they weren't very important at all considering how dismissively Croyland spoke of them ("some codicils thereto", with no emphasis or elaboration whatsoever)? I LOVE being proven right <3

[printletterforpatient]

What Should You Look For in an Online Print and Mail Service Provider?

Getting high-volume business printing and mailing services handled by a third party is a great way to save money, reduce costs and streamline your operations. However, finding the right vendor for your organization’s needs can be tricky. Here are four important considerations to keep in mind when choosing an online printing and mailing service.

Design and Quality:

Whether you’re looking for marketing materials or branded apparel, choosing an online direct mail provider that offers excellent design is key. These companies have extensive experience with the design process and can help you create a compelling message that’s sure to grab the attention of prospects.

Product Offerings:

Depending on your needs, some direct mail providers offer a wide range of products. This may help you maintain a consistent look and feel with your marketing materials no matter what type of campaigns you’re running.

In-House Mailing:

Some direct mail providers also offer a full-service mailing facility. This can include design, printing, presorting and submitting your mail pieces to the USPS.

Rapid Turnaround:

Ideally, you want your direct mail pieces to get into the mailboxes of prospects as quickly as possible. Fortunately, some online print and mailing services are able to deliver your mail within just a few days of receiving an order.

Affordable:

Many online print and mail services are able to offer competitive prices for both bulk and small-quantity orders. This is especially true of companies that offer low minimum quantities. In addition, some offer a free sample pack that can give you a good idea of what their products and services are like.

SITES WE SUPPORT

Print Letter For Patient – Wix

[mycological-mariner]

Friend and I came up with black market academia which is just dark academia but imagined by two people who don’t know what it is, don’t have access to any academic institution archives and need to find some guys on the inside to smuggle out copies of primary sources for us to pass back and forth as needed

[pinkfey]

ever since i was a little girl i have been so full of stress due to the world being so stressful

[michameinmicha]

i cant believe i missed this appointment and didnt even notice?? i am completely 100% sure it said november 15th, not 5th! But how am i supposed to explain that? i can't fucking tell them 'sorry i have adhd and dyscalculia so 5 and 15 are basically the same number to me' And especially since i missed the last appointment (well i got there eventually, i was just 40mins late (for reasons beyond my control) but the appointment was supposed to be just 30mins apparently) So if i say i mixed up the dates on this one it's going to sound like a cheap excuse, even though it is true and i didn't do it on purpose! God i wish i weren't like this!!!!

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Whammond

* * * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

November 25, 2024

Heather Cox Richardson

Nov 25, 2024

Today, President Joe Biden laid out very clearly the argument behind the economic policies his administration has put into place. “When I took office, the pandemic was raging and the economy was reeling,” he wrote. “From Day One, I was determined to not only deliver economic relief, but to invest in America and grow the economy from the middle out and bottom up, not the top down.”

“Over the last four years, that’s exactly what we’ve done,” he wrote. “We passed legislation to rebuild our infrastructure, build a clean energy economy, and bring manufacturing back to the United States after decades of offshoring.” Investing in America included the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that is rebuilding our roads, bridges, water systems, ports, and airports, as well as making high-speed broadband available in underserved areas; the CHIPS and Science Act that invested in bringing the manufacture of silicon chips back to the U.S. and promoting research; and the Inflation Reduction Act, which invested in technologies to combat climate change.

Today the White House announced that this federal investment has attracted more than $1 trillion in private-sector investments. “These investments in industries of the future,” Biden wrote, “are ensuring the future is made in America, by American workers.” 

He noted that more than 1.6 million construction and manufacturing jobs have been created over the last four years and that “our investments are making America a leader in clean energy and semiconductor technologies that will protect our economic and national security, while expanding opportunities in red states and blue states.”

In a White House memo, White House deputy chief of staff Natalie Quillian wrote: “The progress we've made...represents only a fraction of the full impact of this agenda. If future Administrations continue to implement at the pace we have, people across the country will enjoy the benefits of safer water, cleaner air, faster internet, and smoother commutes.”

But the incoming Trump administration will advance a different economic vision. Instead of trying to expand the economy through investment in infrastructure and manufacturing, Trump’s team has emphasized cutting taxes for the wealthy and corporations and slashing regulations.

The argument behind this approach to the economy is that concentrating wealth in the hands of investors will spur more investment, while creating an environment that’s “friendly” to business will create jobs. Jack Brook of the Associated Press reported that earlier this month, the state of Louisiana illustrated what this policy looks like to ordinary people when it cut income taxes to a flat 3% rate, reducing revenue by about $1.3 billion. They made up that revenue by increasing the sales tax to 5%, thus shifting the burden of taxation to lower- and middle-class families. “Louisiana just became a much more attractive place to do business,” Louisiana economic development secretary Susan Bourgeois told Brook.

It is becoming clear what Trump’s economic policy will look like at the national level. Super wealthy donors funded Trump’s 2024 campaign, and in a departure from every previous incoming president, Trump is refusing to sign the documents required as part of a presidential transition at least in part because those documents mandate that he disclose who is funding his transition and limit those donations to $5,000 per donor. Without that disclosure, it is impossible to see who is funding him. For all we know, that list could include foreign governments. 

As activist Melanie D’Arrigo put it on Bluesky: “‘Secret donations’ are bribes. The hundreds of millions he received from Elon Musk and other billionaires are also bribes. There’s a reason Donald Trump isn’t signing ethics pledges.” Indeed, after his first term, the watchdog organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington concluded that “there is absolutely no doubt that Trump tried at every turn to use the presidency to benefit his bottom line,” and noted that those who spent money at Trump’s properties often received favorable policy decisions from the administration. 

During the campaign, Trump promised to fight for ordinary Americans, but many of Trump’s picks to fill offices in his administration are notable for their extreme wealth. His pick for treasury secretary is billionaire Scott Bessent, a hedge fund executive who invested money for philanthropist George Soros for more than ten years. To head the Commerce Department, Trump has tapped billionaire Howard Lutnick, the chief executive officer of financial giant Cantor Fitzgerald.

Trump’s choice for education secretary, Linda McMahon, and his choice for Interior Secretary, North Dakota governor Doug Burgum, are both billionaires. And then there are the two men Trump tapped for his Department of Government Efficiency. Former pharmaceutical executive Vivek Ramaswamy is worth around a billion dollars, but Elon Musk is usually at the top of the list of the richest people in the world. He’s worth about $332.6 billion.

Laura Mannweiler of U.S. News and World Report today estimated the worth of Trump’s current roster of appointees to be at least $344.4 billion, more than the gross domestic product of 169 countries. That number does not include Bessent, whose net worth is hard to find. In comparison, Mannweiler notes, the total net worth of the officials in Biden’s Cabinet was about $118 million. 

Economist Robert Reich noted yesterday that the wealth of America’s 815 billionaires grew by nearly $280 billion after Trump’s reelection, and the president-elect is promising to extend the 2017 tax cuts that are set to expire in 2025. Now, after all their complaints about the budget deficits under Biden as he invested in the country, Republicans are, according to Andrew Duehren of the New York Times, considering rejiggering the government’s accounting so that extending the tax cuts, which will create about $4 trillion in deficits, shows up as not costing anything. 

Deregulation, too, is on the agenda. It’s a cause close to the heart of Elon Musk, who frequently complains that unnecessary regulations are making it impossible for visionary entrepreneurs to develop the technological sector as quickly and efficiently as they could otherwise. 

In the Wall Street Journal yesterday, Susan Pulliam, Emily Glazer, and Becky Peterson noted that although Musk says his goal is to “protect life on Earth,” his companies “show a pattern of breaking environmental rules again and again.” The authors report that Tesla’s facility in Fremont, California, has received “more warnings for violations of air pollution rules over the past five years than almost any other company’s plant in California,” 112 of them. Federal regulators recently fined SpaceX for dumping about 262,000 gallons of wastewater into protected wetlands in Texas. Tesla, too, has dumped contaminated water into public sewer systems.  

One staffer for environmental compliance told the Environmental Protection Agency that ““Tesla repeatedly asked me to lie to the government so that they could operate without paying for proper environmental controls.”   

People who have worked with Musk “for years” told Pulliam, Glazer, and Peterson that they expect Musk will try to cut environmental regulations, especially the ones that affect his companies. After Trump announced that he was creating DOGE and putting Musk in charge of it, Musk posted: “We finally have a mandate to delete the mountain of choking regulations that do not serve the greater good.” 

Musk’s companies have brought in at least $15.4 billion in federal contracts over the past decade, and his companies have been targeted in at least 20 government investigations recently. Eric Lipton, David A. Fahrenthold, Aaron Krolik, and Kristen Grind of the New York Times note that Trump’s victory and his appointment of Musk to an oversight role in the government “essentially give[s] the world’s richest man and a major government contractor the power to regulate the regulators who hold sway over his companies, amounting to a potentially enormous conflict of interest.”

Today, Sara Murray, Kristen Holmes, and Kate Sullivan of CNN reported that Trump’s lawyers have conducted an investigation into whether top Trump advisor Boris Epshteyn has been selling access to Trump. Payments for his promotion of candidates for administration positions or access to administration officials were as much as $100,000 a month. The lawyers recommended that the Trump team should jettison Epshteyn, but it has apparently decided not to. 

“I am honored to work for President Trump and with his team,” Epshteyn said in a statement to CNN. “These fake claims are false and defamatory and will not distract us from Making America Great Again.”

Today, special prosecutor Jack Smith moved to drop both federal cases against Trump: the federal election case for his attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, and the case concerning Trump’s retention of highly classified documents after he left office in 2021. Trump had said he would break the usual norms around special counsels when he returns to office—Biden retained the special counsel investigating his son, Hunter—and fire Smith. 

But Smith pointed to the position of the Department of Justice that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted as a reason for the cases’ dismissal. “This outcome is not based on the merits or strength of the case against the defendant,” he wrote. “The Government’s position on the merits of the defendant’s prosecution has not changed.” Smith left open the possibility that the charges could be brought again in the future after Trump leaves office.

Trump’s approach to the cases was to delay and delay and delay in hopes voters would return him to the White House, and it appears his strategy worked. As democracy lawyer Marc Elias wrote: “Justice delayed was justice denied.”

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON