text:
Category talk:Percussion instruments

Merge
I notice also a category entitled "percussion", any chance of merging these? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.176.61.57 (talk • contribs)
 * Category:Percussion has a broader scope than this one, which is a subcategory of it. If you look at the interlanguage links of that category, you'll see that it exists in a number of the other larger Wikipedias too, and in each of them this category also exists. A merge is not appropriate. Andrewa (talk) 05:48, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Steelpan
1) what is the first steelpan made

2) how did it come to antigua.     3) what is the name of the first steelpan in antigua.

4) what is the area of the first steelpan from.

5) what is the area of the second steelpan from.

6) when was the first one recorded.

7)find any dificulties in getting steelpan

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.188.174.115 (talk • contribs)

Interesting questions... sorry it's taken more than five years to look at them! If you're still interested in answers, have a look at steelpan and if they're still not answered there, perhaps raise them at the Reference desk/Entertainment. Or, if you've answered them in the meantime, consider adding this information to the article! Andrewa (talk) 05:48, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Split
IMO this category should become mainly a metacategory, with few articles and none of them on specific instruments, rather it should contain four pure metacategories (i.e. container categories), each of them with no articles: and each percussion instrument should belong to at least one subcategory of each of these metacategories. Andrewa (talk) 19:30, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Category:Percussion instruments by means of sound production
 * Category:Percussion instruments by usage
 * Category:Percussion instruments by playing technique
 * Category:Percussion instruments by tradition

title: Category talk:Percussion instruments


text: Template:Politics of Slovenia

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Template:Politics of Slovenia


text:
User talk:Spindustrious

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Whosyourjudas (talk) 19:55, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 Did you know has been updated and a fact from the article bending, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you have another interesting fact to submit, then please suggest it at the section's talk page. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 11:13, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

Bending
Congratulation for the bending article. The quality is outstanding and the field is still barely covered in Wikipedia. I will translate it right now in bg:. --Nk 14:59, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Buckled_column.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Buckled_column.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 12:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I also swiped Image:Beam_in_Bending.png and modified it to Image:Simplebeam.JPG for use in direct integration of a beam. Much thanks. JW 06:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

File:Project Delivery Methods.png missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Project Delivery Methods.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:16, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Spindustrious


text:
Pannonia Inferior

Pannonia Inferior, lit. Lower Pannonia, was a province of the Roman Empire. Its capital was Sirmium. It was one of the border provinces on the Danube. It was formed in the year 103 AD by Emperor Trajan who divided the former province of Pannonia into two parts: Pannonia Superior and Pannonia Inferior. The province included parts of present-day states of Hungary, Serbia, Croatia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. The province was bordered to the east (across the Danube) by a Sarmatian tribe—the Iazyges. Later, the Vandals appeared to the north-east.

Settlements
Major settlements in Pannonia Inferior included:
 * Sirmium (Sremska Mitrovica) which several times served as an imperial residence for several emperors.
 * Aquincum (Buda), the provincial capital.
 * Cuccium (Ilok)
 * Cibalae (Vinkovci)
 * Mursa (Osijek)
 * Certissa (Đakovo)
 * Marsonia (Slavonski Brod)
 * Sopianae (Pécs)

Aftermath and legacy
The province was yet again split during the reign of the tetrarchs into two more provinces, Pannonia Valeria in the north, with the new provincial capital at Sopianae, and Pannonia Secunda in the south with Sirmium as the provincial capital. During the Frankish period, in the 9th century, the term Lower Pannonia was used to designate eastern and southern regions of Pannonia, including the Slavic Principality of Lower Pannonia, particularly Posavina.

List of Roman governors

 * Publius Aelius Hadrianus 106-108
 * Titus Julius Maximus Manlianus 108-110/111
 * Publius Afranius Flavianus 111/112-114/115
 * Quintus Marcius Turbo 117/118-118/119
 * Lucius Cornelius Latinianus ?127-130
 * Lucius Attius Macro 130/131-133/134
 * Nonius Mucianus 134-136
 * Lucius Aelius Caesar 136-137
 * Claudius Maximus 137-c. 141
 * Marcus Pontius Laelianus Larcius Sabinus c. 141-c. 144
 * Quintus Fuficius Cornutus c. 144-147
 * Marcus Cominius Secundus 147-c. 150
 * Marcus Nonius Macrinus c. 150-c. 153
 * Marcus Iallius Bassus Fabius Valerianus c. 156-c. 159
 * Gaius Julius Geminius Capellianus c. 159-c. 161
 * Tiberius Haterius Saturninus c. 161-164
 * Tiberius Claudius Pompeianus c. 167
 * Lucius Ulpius Marcellus before 173
 * Gaius Vettius Sabinianus Julius Hospes c. 173-175
 * Sextus Quintilius Condianus c. 175-c. 179
 * Lucius Septimius Flaccus c. 179-c. 183
 * Lucius Cornelius Felix Plotianus c. 183-185
 * Gaius Pomponius Bassus Terentianus 192
 * Gaius Valerius Pudens c. 192-c. 194
 * Tiberius Claudius Claudianus c. 197/198
 * Lucius Baebius Caecilianus 199-202
 * Lucius Cassius Marcellinus between 202 and 204
 * Gaius Julius Septimius Castinus c. 211/212
 * Gaius Octavius Appius Suetonius Sabinus c. 215/216
 * Lucius Alfenus Avitianus between 218 and 222
 * Marcius Claudius Agrippa c. 217
 * Triccianus 217-218
 * Pontius Proculus Pontianus c. 219-222
 * Flavius Aelianus c. 228
 * Iasdius Domitianus between 222 and 235
 * Flavius Marcianus between 230 and 235
 * Lucius Ulpius Marcellus c.262-c.264

title: Pannonia Inferior


text: Template:Politics of Somaliland

title: Template:Politics of Somaliland


text: Category:Princes of Monaco

title: Category:Princes of Monaco


text:
CalPERS

The California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) is an agency in the California executive branch that "manages pension and health benefits for more than 1.5 million California public employees, retirees, and their families". In fiscal year 2020–21, CalPERS paid over $27.4 billion in retirement benefits, and over $9.74 billion in health benefits.

CalPERS manages the largest public pension fund in the United States, with more than $469 billion in assets under management as of June 30, 2021. CalPERS is known for its shareholder activism; stocks placed on its "Focus List" may perform better than other stocks, which has given rise to the term "CalPERS effect". Outside the U.S., CalPERS has been called "a recognized global leader in the investment industry", and "one of America's most powerful shareholder bodies".

As of 2018, the agency has $360 billion in assets, and is underfunded by an estimated $150 billion, with current assets below 70% of necessary to provide for liabilities. In an effort to reduce this shortfall, at the end of 2016 the board lowered their expected annual rate of return on investments from 7.5% to 7.0%, increasing the costs California cities must pay toward their workers' pensions.

Statistics on pension payouts, 2018

 * Total payout = $22 billion
 * Total beneficiaries = 600,000
 * Overall average = $32,224 - (including payments to survivors and workers with only a few years of service)
 * 20+ years of service average = $50,333
 * 30+ years of service average = $66,373
 * Police or Firefighters with 20+ years of service average = $78,104
 * Number of retirees with $100,000+ pension = 26,000 (This is 4% of the total number of retirees, yet this group collected 17% of the total amount CalPERS paid out in 2018.)

For comparison:
 * Average Social Security payout = $17,532

History
Discussion about providing for the retirement of California state employees began in 1921, but only in 1930 did California voters approve an amendment to the State Constitution to allow pensions to be paid to state workers, and only in 1931 was state law passed to establish a state worker retirement plan. In 1932, the "State Employees' Retirement System" (SERS) began operation. The California State Employees Association, established in 1931, began a close relationship with SERS that continues to this day.

In 1939, the state Legislature passed a bill that allowed local public agencies (such as cities, counties, and school districts) to participate in SERS. Initially, SERS could invest only in bonds, but in 1953 a new state law allowed SERS to invest in real estate. SERS then built a 670000 sqft, 16-story building in Sacramento which opened in 1965; part of the building housed SERS employees, and part of the building was leased to other state agencies.

The "first major new benefit for SERS members," health insurance, began in 1962 with the passage of a law that was later amended to become the "Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act". Because by 1967 SERS was contracting with 585 local public agencies for retirement benefits, its name was changed to the "Public Employees' Retirement System" (PERS). With the passage of a ballot proposition and a state law in 1966–1967, PERS was allowed to invest 25% of its portfolio in stocks; in 1984, Proposition 21 removed the 25% limitation.

State Treasurer Jesse M. Unruh was a PERS Board member in the mid-1980s. He began PERS' emphasis on corporate governance; in addition, he was instrumental in creating the Council of Institutional Investors, an organization of pension funds and other institutions that opposed "greenmail and other corporate practices that benefited only management".

In 1986, the headquarters building of PERS, now called "Lincoln Plaza North", was completed in Sacramento at a cost of $81 million. The building, which has 492900 sqft, is known for its six-story-high atrium and landscaped terraces.

Governor Pete Wilson
In 1990, fund value reached $49.8 billion. In July 1991, Governor Pete Wilson addressed the state's $14.3 billion budget deficit by removing $1.6 billion from the pension fund. Wilson further sought to give the governor's office control of the PERS’ actuarial projections and the appointment of a majority of its board of directors. Public employee unions responded by seeking an amendment to the Constitution of California that would guarantee the board's independence, remove the fund's duty to minimize contributions or administrative costs, and require the provision of benefits to “take precedence over any other duty.” The initiative, known as Proposition 162, passed by a single percent at the November California elections, 1992. Proposition 162, also known as the "California Pension Protection Act of 1992," gave the PERS board "the sole and exclusive fiduciary responsibility over the assets of" PERS.

To avoid confusion with public employees' retirement systems in other states, the organization's name was changed to "CalPERS" in 1992. By 1996, the CalPERS portfolio was worth $100 billion, and the number of members exceeded 1 million.

Governor Gray Davis
In 1999, fund value reached $159.1 billion, requiring $159 million in state tax dollar contributions. In 1999, the CalPERS board proposed a benefits expansion that would allow public employees to retire at age 55 and collect more than half their highest salary for life. CalPERS predicted the benefits would require no increase in the State's contributions by projecting an average annual return of 8.25% over the next decade. When Board member Phil Angelides’ aide questioned whether the stock market could grow that long, Board Chairman William Crist, a former union president, replied that they “could make all sorts of different assumptions and make predictions, but that’s really more than I think we can expect our staff to do.” CalPERS' chief actuary, objected, finding that it would be “fairly catastrophic” if the fund only grew at 4.4%.

The benefits expansion bill, SB 400, passed with unanimous backing by California State Assembly Democrats and was signed into law by Governor Gray Davis. CalPERS then produced a video promoting the legislation with Chairman Crist promising greater benefits “without imposing any additional cost on the taxpayers” and the California State Employees Association president praising it as “the biggest thing since sliced bread”.

The next year the dot-com bubble burst, and CalPERS did not grow, instead losing value in the stock market downturn of 2002. In 2001–2002, CalPERS provided technical assistance for the Sarbanes-Oxley Act because it had sustained financial losses from the Enron and WorldCom bankruptcies. After the Great Recession, in 2009 CalPERS investments lost 24%, dropping $67 billion in value. Chairman Crist retired from the board and it was later revealed he had accepted more than $800,000 from a firm to ensure hundreds of millions of investment from CalPERS.

In November 2005, CalPERS expanded its headquarters with the 560000 sqft "Lincoln Plaza East & West" buildings which cost $265 million. The architecture of the buildings, which received praise, includes an entry tower 90 ft high in a shape reminiscent of a tree which is made of steel covered with glass. The project was awarded a Gold Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating.

Governor Jerry Brown
In 2012, Governor Jerry Brown signed legislation that reduced benefits for all new state employees and sought to combat pension spiking. Legislators rejected Governor Brown's proposals to include a 401(k) type defined contribution plan and to require CalPERS Board members to be independent, not themselves pensioners. Governor Brown promoted the reform as the “biggest rollback to public pension benefits in the history of California”, but it only resulted in a 1% to 5% reduction in contribution increases. Total savings from the reform are estimated to be $28 to $38 billion.

In the fall of 2014, CalPERS named Ted Eliopoulos as chief investment officer. He won the #2 ranking in the Public Investor 100 for 2016. Blackstone Group LP announced in November 2015 that it would acquire 43 international and domestic real estate funds from CalPERS for $3 billion.

In 2015, Kevin de León, who was the California State Senate majority leader at the time, introduced legislation to require CalPERS and CalSTRS divest from coal and the California Democratic Party passed a resolution in support of fossil fuel divestment. The bill was passed and, effective June 1, 2017, CalPERS was prohibited from maintaining holdings in companies that receive at least half of their revenue from thermal coal.

In 2016, CalPERS fund value reached $295.1 billion. State tax dollar contributions have had to increase to $45 billion, a 3,000% increase from before the 1999 benefits expansion. Promised benefits exceeded funds available by $241.3 billion. Unfunded retiree healthcare costs add an additional $125 billion to California's public retirement debt.

Governor Gavin Newsom
During Gavin Newsom's tenure, activists have increasingly called for CalPERS to more broadly divest from fossil fuels. On February 17, 2022, State Senator Lena Gonzalez introduced legislation that would require CalPERS and CalSTRS divest. The CalPERS board has opposed proposals to divest. The bill passed the state senate on May 25 but was halted in the assembly by Jim Cooper.

Law
The legal authority for the activities of CalPERS can be found in the constitution, laws, and regulations of the state of California, including:
 * California Constitution, Article XVI, Section 17, under which (as amended by Proposition 162) "the retirement board of a public pension or retirement system shall have plenary authority and fiduciary responsibility for investment of moneys and administration of the system".
 * California Government Code, Title 2, Division 5, Parts 3-8 (i.e., Sections 20000–22970.89). Among other parts, Part 3 covers the administration of the retirement system including membership, contributions, and benefits; and Part 5 covers the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act on health benefits.
 * California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Division 1, Chapter 2, Sections 550–559.554.

Board of Administration
CalPERS is overseen by a 13-member Board of Administration whose members are elected, appointed, or ex officio:
 * Six are elected from CalPERS members (two by all CalPERS members, one by active State members, one by active CalPERS school members, one by active CalPERS public agency members, and one by retired members of CalPERS)
 * Three are appointed (two by the Governor, one by specified leaders of the Legislature)
 * Four are ex officio (California State Treasurer, California State Controller, Director of the California Department of Human Resources, and designee of the California State Personnel Board)

Notable past Board members have included Caspar Weinberger (1967–1969), Jesse Unruh (1983–1987), Gray Davis (1986–1994), Matt Fong (1995–1998), Kathleen Connell (1995–2003), Phil Angelides (1999–2006), Willie Brown (2000–2005), and Steve Westly (2003–2006).

As of 2017, the current Board members are Rob Feckner (President), Priya Sara Mathur, Michael Bilbrey, John Chiang, Richard Costigan, Richard Gillihan, JJ Jelincic, Henry Jones (Vice President), Ron Lind, Betty Yee, Bill Slaton, Teresa Taylor and Dana Hollinger.

Controversies
Between 1999 and 2001, several conflicts among Board members were notable: In response to such conflicts, the Board took various measures (e.g., it adopted a "document of collegiality" in October 2001).
 * In 1999, after Board member Phil Angelides (also state treasurer) criticized a statement in a report, Board chairman Charles Valdes said about Angelides "What we have here is a Greek treasurer who doesn't like Turkey, the country; who doesn't like Turks, who is trying to … drive our policy according to those ethnic hatreds". Angelides responded that he was "do[ing] what is best for the state". Valdes later apologized for the remarks.
 * Board member Kathleen Connell (also state controller) sued CalPERS in January 2001 to limit its investment managers' pay. Although CalPERS argued that the higher salaries were necessary to compete for qualified investment managers and that CalPERS had the authority under Proposition 162 to issue the higher salaries, it lost the lawsuit, which "helped prompt the fund's chief investment officer to quit".
 * Valdes endorsed a lawsuit against the Board's proposal to change its election procedures to require a majority vote (not simply a plurality vote) for Board seats chosen by CalPERS members.

Other controversies have affected the Board, such as:
 * In 1998, it was discovered that several Board members were "taking expense-paid trips and other gifts from people trying to do business with" CalPERS.
 * Articles in 2002–03 issues of BusinessWeek and The Wall Street Journal noted cronyism and conflicts of interest among Board members.
 * A president of the Board, Sean Harrigan, was removed from his position in December 2004 amid criticism for his activism on matters of corporate governance. He claimed his removal was politically motivated.
 * In September 2014, California's State controller, John Chiang criticized the fund for "passive" approach towards pension spiking - a practice of inflating workers' benefits just before retirement in order to boost their pensions- and failing to adequately review payroll data, inviting abuse.

Executives
CalPERS employees perform under the direction of the chief executive officer (CEO) of CalPERS. Past CEOs have been: Earl W. Chapman (1932–1956); Edward K. Coombs (acting, 1956); William E. Payne (1956–1974); Carl J. Blechinger (1975–1983); Sidney C. McCausland (1984–1986); Kenneth G. Thomason (acting or interim, 1987); Dale M. Hanson (1987–1994); Richard H. Koppes (interim, 1994); James E. Burton (1994–2002); Robert D. Walton (interim, 2002); Fred R. Buenrostro, Jr. (2002–2008); Kenneth W. Marzion (interim, 2008–2009); Anne Stausboll (2009–June 2016); and Marcie Frost (October 2016 – Present).

Reporting to the CEO, the executive officers of CalPERS are: deputy executive officers for customer services and support, health benefit programs, policy and planning, operations and technology, and external affairs; a general counsel; a chief actuary; and a chief financial officer; a chief information officer; a chief risk officer; and a chief investment officer. Under the executive officers, CalPERS employees work in 23 major branches, divisions, and offices. Approximately $415.1 million is budgeted in 2014-2015 for administrative functions in CalPERS, such as paying the salaries of 2,700 CalPERS employees.

Investment income gains and losses 1999-2021
CalPERS current fund balance value as of June 2021 is 466.66 Billion.

CalPERS derives its income from investments, from member contributions, and from employer contributions.

Investment Income has fluctuated in the last 15 years, 1999–2013, with five years of losses and 10 years of gains. There were investment income gains of $17 billion in 1999, $16 billion in 2000 and $5 billion in 2003. The stock market declines in 2001 led to investment income losses of 12 billion in 2001 and 10 billion in 2002. Thus, the five-year period 1999 to 2003 period had a cumulative income of $16 billion, or about three billion a year on an investment portfolio of over $200 billion.

The next four years were a period of investment income stability; a 24 billion investment income in 2004, 22 billion in 2005, 21 billion in 2006, and 41 billion in 2007. This four-year period had a cumulative investment income of $108 billion, or $27 billion a year.

With the stock market decline in 2008, during the financial crisis of 2007–2008, there were large investment income losses. There was a 12 billion dollar investment income loss in 2008 and 55 billion in 2009.

The 124 billion dollars of income in the nine-year period 1999-2007 was reduced by half as a consequence of the combined losses of 67 billion in 2008 and 2009. This totals to 57 billion dollars of investment income during this 11-year period, or about 5.1 billion a year on an investment portfolio of 261 billion in October 2007 and down to 186 billion in October 2008. This is a 2.5% return on investment over the 11-year period.

Income or loss from investments fluctuates from year to year; between 1998–99 and 2007–08, the highest income was $40.7 billion in 2006-07 and the greatest loss was $12.5 billion in 2007–08. As of October 2008, CalPERS had a total of $186.7 billion in assets invested as follows: $104.9 billion (56.2%) in equities, $41.0 billion (21.9%) in fixed income, $20.9 billion (11.2%) in real estate, $16.2 billion (8.7%) in cash equivalents, and $3.7 billion (2.0%) in inflation linked assets.

In 2010 CalPERS revised its strategic asset allocation mix using its Asset Liability Management process. By the end of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013, CalPERS had a total of $257.9 billion in assets invested as follows: $166.3 billion (64 percent) in equities, $40.2 billion (16 percent) in fixed income, $25.8 billion (10 percent) in real assets, $10.6 billion (4 percent) in cash equivalents, $9.2 billion (4 percent) in inflation-linked assets, $5.2 billion (2 percent) in hedge funds, and $0.5 billion (0.0 percent) in multi-asset class and other.

Shareholder activism
Beginning in the 1980s, and especially in the early 1990s under the pioneering leadership of CEO Dale Hanson, CalPERS has used its influence as one of the largest shareholders in the world to change the way certain things are done in business. It is especially known for its shareholder activism concerning corporate governance, in which it has been described as the most influential pension fund and as "a leader among activist institutions".

Among other examples of its shareholder activism, CalPERS has:
 * Lobbied the board of General Motors (GM) "to take a more active role in monitoring the company, which may have been a factor in the GM board's ousting chairman Robert Stempel in 1992.
 * Demanded in 1999 that U.S. companies in its portfolio disclose their Year 2000 problem readiness.
 * Starting in 2000, "screen[ed] all its investments in emerging markets for compliance with a number of human rights, environmental and labor standards".
 * As of 2002, called on companies which operate in offshore havens to repatriate to the United States.
 * With other pension funds, on September 16, 2003, called upon Richard Grasso to resign from the NYSE because of an exorbitant pay package; he resigned the next day.
 * In 2003, sued the NYSE and seven specialist firms over allegations that the firms' floor workers engage in practices which hurt investors. The firms "settled with the Securities and Exchange Commission in 2005 and paid more than $240 million in fines without admitting or denying guilt". The part of CalPERS' lawsuit aimed at the NYSE itself was later thrown out of court, and in 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court declined to reinstate that part of the lawsuit.
 * Called for reform in executive compensation, especially golden parachutes, in 2004.
 * In 2004, with other parties, opposed Michael Eisner as chairman of the board and CEO of The Walt Disney Company; Eisner was removed as chairman of the board and in 2005 resigned as CEO.
 * In 2006, banned investment of its funds in nine companies that do business in Sudan until the government of that country halts ongoing genocide; however, that decision was described as "a largely symbolic gesture" because CalPERS "did not own a stake in any of the nine".
 * From September 2006 through July, participated as lead plaintiff in a successful class-action lawsuit against UnitedHealth Group for options backdating. CalPERS had held "6.6 million shares of UnitedHealth stock valued at $360 million". In August 2009, a federal judge in Minnesota ordered UnitedHealth to pay $895 million to settle the lawsuit; furthermore, former UnitedHealth CEO William W. McGuire would pay $30 million and relinquish options to buy 3.68 million UnitedHealth shares; another former executive would pay $500,000.
 * With other institutional investors, requested in 2007 that the government "set national, mandatory standards to cut greenhouse gas emissions".
 * At Apple in 2013, CalPERS voted for a management proposal to implement majority voting for director elections and other proposals designed to enhance shareowner rights. This was a result of more than two years of engagement with Apple to change its voting standard for board candidates from a plurality model to a majority standard. Following successful CalPERS-sponsored shareowner resolutions supporting majority voting, in February 2013 Apple sponsored Proposal 2, which would amend Apple's charter to provide for majority voting for directors. The proposal would also establish a par value for Apple stock and eliminate Apple's ability to issue preferred shares without shareholder approval. CalPERS strongly supported Apple's position that preferred stock should not be issued without shareowner approval. While the 2013 vote was canceled on a technicality, majority voting was officially adopted in 2014.
 * At Nabors Industries in 2013 CalPERS sponsored a proposal to amend the company's by-laws to require shareowner approval of severance benefits that exceed 2.99 times the sum of an executive's base salary and bonus. CalPERS also voted for a proposal asking the board to elect an independent chair and for a proposal allowing shareowners to nominate candidates for election to the board.
 * CalPERS is among the signatories of the "Principles for a Responsible Civilian Firearms Industry," which seeks to engage firearms manufacturers, dealers, and retailers in promoting gun safety.

CalPERS has received some criticism for its shareholder activism:
 * As of 2002, there was a concern that CalPERS' activism had distracted from "its effectiveness as a corporate watchdog and its ability to provide for the 1.3 million public employees whose pensions it guarantees".
 * Despite the efforts of CalPERS and others, the chief counsel of TIAA-CREF was quoted in 2003 as saying that there has been "no countrywide improvement in corporate governance".
 * CalPERS votes against some companies' directors "whose sins are exceedingly small," such as "attendance gaps or minor conflicts".
 * Businesses describe CalPERS as having a "pro-labor agenda", especially because of the dominance of Democrats on CalPERS' board.
 * Some argue that CalPERS' actions unduly interfere with business and encourage the belief that California is "anti-business".

The Focus List and the "CalPERS effect"
Beginning in 1987, CalPERS placed certain companies, with which it had "concerns about stock and financial underperformance and corporate governance practices" on a "Focus List". The list was also referred to as a "name and shame" list. Beginning in 2010, CalPERS stopped publicly naming companies on the list and instead began dealing with such companies privately. In 2012, CalPERS initiated a program to monetize the Focus List. Each year, after the Board approves staff recommendations for Focus List companies, CalPERS increases investments in those companies. New Focus List companies are added to the portfolio each year, and the portfolio is rebalanced so that holdings remain equally weighted. The purpose of monetizing the Focus List is to replicate the Wilshire studies—using actual funds to demonstrate and measure the “CalPERS Effect.” Monetizing the Focus List also allows CalPERS to realize a return on the increased value that typically occurs following an engagement. In 2014, a study by Wilshire Associates showed the companies engaged by CalPERS significantly outperformed the Russell 1000.

Analysis of performance of companies on the Focus List
In 1994, Nesbitt published a study that found that companies on the Focus List trailed the S&P 500 prior to being put on the list, but outperformed the S&P 500 after being put on the list, and named this phenomenon the "CalPERS effect". The term has been used in the newsmedia. Whether a "CalPERS effect" actually exists has been studied in a number of subsequent papers, including:
 * Michael P. Smith (1996) determined that shareholder wealth increased for companies that adopted changes proposed by CalPERS or made changes that resulting in reaching a settlement with CalPERS; however, shareholder wealth decreased for companies that resisted CalPERS' proposals.
 * Wahal (1996) analyzed the efficacy of pension-fund activism for CalPERS and eight other funds such as TIAA-CREF. Of the firms targeted by the nine funds, "only firms targeted by Calpers experience[d] a positive stock price reaction".
 * Crutchley et al. (1998) discovered that CalPERS' "less visible activism" in 1995-1997 corresponded with less returns on stocks than in 1992-1994 when CalPERS' activism was more aggressive.
 * Two studies published by CalPERS staff (i.e., Anson et al.) in 2003-2004 found that stocks on the CalPERS Focus List experience "positive excess stock returns of about 12% over the three months following release of the list" and "an average one-year cumulative excess return of 59.4 per cent".
 * English et al. (2004) concluded that CalPERS targeting produces a statistically significant improvement in short-term returns but not necessarily in long-term returns (depending on the specific methods used to calculate long-term returns).
 * Nelson (2006) claimed that his study addressed problems in the methodologies of previous studies (e.g., by controlling for the "contaminating events" of The Wall Street Journal articles appearing just before or just after the dates that CalPERS released Focus List information). He found "no evidence to support the persistence of a 'CalPERS effect'" after 1993.
 * Barber (2006) asserted that in his analyses "CalPERS activism yields small, but reliably positive, market reactions" in the short term. In contrast, although the long-term returns of companies "are uniformly positive and economically large" after being placed on the CalPERS Focus List, due to market volatility he could not conclude that the long-term returns were unusual. Barber's paper won a 2006 prize for best study in the area of socially responsible investing from the Haas School of Business.
 * Junkin and Toth (2008), in an update of Nesbitt's 1994 study, found that the "CalPERS effect" was still present in that "the average targeted company produced excess returns of 15.7% above their respective benchmark return on a cumulative basis," but that the effect had decreased over time.

Notable investments

 * The agency both lost and gained from investments in Enron (which went bankrupt in 2001) and its affiliated companies. Its losses included common stock worth $40 million; "stock in a different portfolio, some bonds and a separate investment in New Power Co." worth $100 million; and $4 million from the liquidation of Enron's JEDI II project (i.e., CalPERS had paid $175 million for its stake but received only $171 million in return). However, as CalPERS had earned $132.5 million from the sale of its stake in Enron's JEDI I project to Enron's Chewco project, its total Enron losses were only about $11 million. Although CalPERS "was alerted by its advisers in December 2000 about the serious and potentially embarrassing conflicts inherent in one of a web of private partnerships set up by Enron's chief financial officer, Andrew S. Fastow", it later denied that it could have taken actions to prevent Enron's downfall. Nevertheless, as a result of the Enron experience, in 2002 the CalPERS board did resolve to improve accounting and auditing standards among companies in which it invests.
 * In June 2000, CalPERS announced that it would invest $500 million in biotech as part of its California Biotechnology Program. Ultimately, $235 million went to California-base venture capital firms specializing in the biotech sector.
 * In 2002, the Republican Party questioned CalPERS' investing $100 million in a firm that was co-founded by a Democratic supporter. CalPERS denied any political influence in its investment decision.
 * In 2002, it was revealed that CalPERS had invested $700 million in venture capital funds of billionaire Ronald Burkle who had donated "$1.9 million to Democratic candidates and causes". Phil Angelides denied that CalPERS made its decision because of the donations.
 * As of 2002, CalPERS had invested $3.5 billion in "underserved areas of California".
 * In 2002, CalPERS evaluated emerging markets for "evidence of political stability, humane labor laws, a fair and functional legal system and financial transparency"; on the basis of the evaluation, CalPERS placed the Philippines on "probation" for investment. In 2004, a consultant's recommendation to remove the Philippines from the "approved" list "contributed to a 3.3% drop... in the $55-billion Manila stock market". By 2006, CalPERS had given higher ratings to the Philippines, for which its President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo personally expressed appreciation.
 * CalPERS has been criticized for being foolish to invest in collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) before the July 2007 mortgage meltdown and for not publicly addressing the issue.
 * In June 2008, after Los Angeles-area property developer LandSource filed for bankruptcy protection, CalPERS was criticized for having invested $947 million in LandSource in 2007; a CalPERS spokesperson described the investment as "small" relative to CalPERS' total assets.
 * As of 2021, CalPERS has invested about $30 billion in fossil fuels, which has been criticized by environmentalists.

Studies commissioned by CalPERS on its economic impacts
CalPERS commissioned three studies that were released in 2007-2008 about the economic impacts of the following:
 * CalPERS retirement benefits payments. Prepared by California State University, Sacramento, and released in April 2007, this study found that the direct payments of $7.7 billion in 2006 led to a total impact (including "the ripple effect of business and government revenues as spending from... benefit checks works its way through the economy") of $11.8 billion.
 * CalPERS investments. Prepared by California State University, Sacramento, and released in September 2007, this study found that the direct investments of $8.3 billion in 2006 led to a total impact of $15.1 billion.
 * CalPERS health care benefits payments. Prepared by Lincoln Crow Benefits Research Group and released in April 2008, this study found that the direct payments of $4.2 billion in 2006 led to a total impact of $7.6 billion.

Key findings of the CalPERS Economic Impacts in California Report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2012 included:
 * CalPERS benefits (retirees spending their pensions) returned $10.85 in economic activity to California for each taxpayer dollar (public funds) contributed to the system.
 * The total economic revenue generated by CalPERS benefits was more than $30.4 billion.
 * CalPERS benefits created 113,664 jobs throughout California.
 * Investments in California accounted for $20.7 billion, or approximately 8.9 percent, of the CalPERS portfolio.
 * The CalPERS investment portfolio, which included public and private equities, real estate, fixed income, and infrastructure, supported 1.5 million jobs.

CalPERS touted the studies as demonstrating the value of the agency with news releases such as "CalPERS and CalSTRS Pensions Power Up State and Local Economies". The studies and their use by CalPERS were criticized as follows:
 * A reporter summarized the opinion of the lead author of the first study as "his study was never intended as any sort of implied commentary on the wisdom of CalPERS' policies".
 * If the money that CalPERS paid in benefits were returned to taxpayers, the money would be spent and would therefore still cause "ripple effects".
 * The economic impact "might be the same if a private investment firm managed the fund's portfolio".

Employee recognition program
Among other "offerings to ensure [its] workers are happy as well as healthy," CalPERS has an onsite Montessori method child care facility, conducts employee surveys every two years, offers a training and wellness program, and administers a nationally known employee recognition program. The employee recognition program has several components:
 * An informal day-to-day employee-to-employee program with a "You are the Rock" theme. The program includes a river rock that is passed around to employees who are "rock solid," rock-shaped notes with appreciative sentiments written on them, and rock-themed e-cards.
 * The quarterly ACE (Achieving Communication Excellence) award, consisting of a lapel pin and an informal celebration.
 * A formal annual recognition called APEX (Achieving Performance Excellence), with a crystal trophy, a cash award, and a luncheon.
 * Managers are "encouraged to thank workers more often" and "are graded for the amount of ongoing feedback they gave employees".

Two CalPERS employees received 2000 National Association for Employee Recognition (NAER) Recognition Champion Awards for the employee recognition program. In addition, CalPERS itself won a 2002 Best Practices award from NAER. The employee recognition program was reported to contribute to high employee satisfaction and a low employee turnover rate at CalPERS.

Member contributions
CalPERS members contribute a percentage of their salary throughout their active membership. Member contribution rates are set by statute and can vary by membership category (miscellaneous or safety) and by benefit formula. Member contribution rates can change based on legislative law changes. However, the rise and fall of the contribution percentages does not affect member-accrued retirement benefits, which are guaranteed by law.

The percentage contributed above the monthly compensation breakpoint depends upon the benefit formula as shown in the “employee contributions” subsection of the summary of Plan Provisions in Appendix B of each public agency, state and schools annual valuation report.

With the passage of Assembly Bill 340 (AB 340), the pension reform legislation by the California Legislature, CalPERS members hired after January 1, 2013, are expected to pay 50 percent of the Total Normal Cost of the benefit plan in which they participate.

Employer contributions
On average, schools and other public agencies contribute 12.7% of payroll for their employees' retirement benefits; however, the rates can increase if CalPERS' investments perform unfavorably and decrease if CalPERS' investments perform favorably. According to CalPERS, "The School Pool contribution rate is affected by the investment return of a given fiscal year in the second year that follows" and "Local public agency contribution rates are affected by the investment return of a given fiscal year in the third fiscal year that follows". CalPERS' earnings and losses are averaged over 15 years to prevent extreme changes in employers' contribution rates. Nevertheless, in 2008 "CalPERS warned that it might ask for more money from the state starting in July 2010 and from local-government employers starting in July 2011" if CalPERS' investments are performing poorly as of June 30, 2009.

Employers’ contributions and stated unfunded liabilities are calculated using actuarial present value, which assumes the fund will continually grow at 7.5%. However, if an employer seeks to leave CalPERS, it will be required to immediately payoff the undisclosed current market value of the unfunded liabilities, which only assumes 2.56% growth. At a 2011 legislative hearing, Governor Jerry Brown called CalPERS asserted reliance on bringing in new members “a Ponzi scheme”.

After the financial crisis of 2007–2008, many cities in California came under financial stress due to a combination of factors, which led to three high-profile municipal bankruptcy filings by Vallejo, Stockton, and San Bernardino that received nationwide attention. During the proceedings some creditors accused CalPERS's increased post-crisis employer payments and future unfunded liabilities as a cause of insolvency and sought to have CalPERS employer contributions reduced. This was vigorously opposed by CalPERS. According to 2011 state figures, the CalPERS system is 78% funded with unfunded future liabilities of $133 billion. Non-government estimates show a larger shortfall.

Benefits
CalPERS provides benefits to all state government employees and, by contract, to local agency and school employees. CalPERS administers the following categories of benefits to members:
 * Retirement benefits under defined benefit plans
 * Deferred compensation and other supplemental income plans
 * Disability retirement and industrial disability retirement
 * Death benefits
 * Health benefits
 * Long-term care benefits

Retirement benefits under defined benefit plans
As of 2020, CalPERS paid monthly allowances to 732,529 retirees, survivors, and beneficiaries. In the fiscal year 2019-20, CalPERS paid $25.8 billion in benefits. The retirement benefits "are calculated using a member's years of service credit, age at retirement, and final compensation (average salary for a defined period of employment)," and the retirement formulas "are determined by the member's employer (State, school, or local public agency); occupation (miscellaneous (general office and others), safety, industrial, or peace officer/firefighter); and the specific provisions in the contract between CalPERS and the employer".

In addition, CalPERS administers the Legislators' Retirement System, Judges' Retirement System, and Judges' Retirement System II.

Besides CalPERS, California has a number of other public retirement systems, including: CalPERS has reciprocity agreements with many of these California public retirement systems that allow retirees with service credit and contributions in two systems to receive payments from both systems.
 * At least 22 counties (Alameda, Contra Costa, Fresno, Imperial, Kern, Los Angeles, Marin, Mendocino, Merced, Orange, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Francisco [county as well as city], San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Tulare, and Ventura)
 * At least 6 cities (Concord, Fresno, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco [also a county], and San Jose)
 * The University of California
 * The California State Teachers' Retirement System (CalSTRS)

Some people prefer defined contribution plans to CalPERS' defined benefit plan. For example: Among other arguments, CalPERS claims that defined contribution plans cost more to manage than defined benefit plans and fail to provide adequate funds to retirees.
 * In 1996, Howard Kaloogian sponsored a bill in the State Assembly to allow state employees to choose between CalPERS' defined benefit plan and a defined contribution plan; the bill failed in a State Senate committee.
 * In early 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed a ballot initiative to require new public employees to join a 401(k)-like plan, but dropped the proposal after opposition to a provision in the initiative to "reduce benefits for widows of officers and firefighters killed in the line of duty".
 * In November 2008, the voters of the city of Pacific Grove passed an advisory measure to leave CalPERS in favor of a defined contribution plan.

Deferred compensation and other supplemental income plans
CalPERS is responsible for a deferred compensation retirement plan (457 plan) and two other plans to supplement income after retirement or permanent separation from State employment. As of December 2014:
 * The CalPERS 457 Plan serves 27,526 participants and had $1.296 billion in assets.
 * The Peace Officers' & Firefighters' Defined Contribution Plan had 33,128 participants and $497 million in assetsfunded by a State contribution of 2% of base pay.
 * A member-funded Supplemental Contributions Program for 521 participants had $20.3 million in assets.

Disability retirement and industrial disability retirement
CalPERS offers two types of retirement benefits if a worker is disabled. In "industrial disability retirement," the "disability is due to a job-related injury or illness"; in contrast, "disability retirement" implies that the disability was not necessarily caused by employment. The specific benefits vary by employer, by the contract between CalPERS and the employer, and by the employee's occupation.

Two major controversies have affected CalPERS' disability retirement and industrial disability retirement program over the years. First, in the mid-1990s and again in the mid-2000s there were concerns about inappropriate industrial disability retirement for public safety personnel, including:
 * Some non-disabled persons fraudulently claim industrial disability retirement, such as "a 'disabled' highway patrol officer riding in a rodeo." Unfortunately, "state law forbids Calpers from requiring disabled retirees who are 50 or older to submit to another medical evaluation, even if there is evidence of possible fraud".
 * "A series of bills that expanded eligibility for these medical pensions - and made it easier to get them" increased costs for state and local governments.
 * The list of "disabilities automatically presumed to be job-related for public-safety workers" has grown to include diseases and conditions that may or may not be caused by employment, such as lower back pain, heart disease, cancer, syphilis, HIV, and mad cow disease.
 * Retirees can receive two safety disability retirements for the same condition if they are covered by two separate pension systems.
 * Because California law prevents light-duty assignments in the California Highway Patrol, some officers are "forced to retire against their will."

Second, "a 1980 state law that tied public safety officers' disability benefits to the age at which they were hired" caused an age discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in 1992 which eventually led to a 1995 class action lawsuit against CalPERS and other state and local agencies. In January 2003, CalPERS settled the suit by agreeing to pay $50 million in retroactive benefits and $200 million in future benefits to 1,700 officers; the settlement "was by far the largest in the EEOC's history". Furthermore, CalPERS agreed to not use an age-based formula in the future, which "basically nullifie[d]" the 1980 state law.

Death benefits
If a CalPERS member dies before retirement, CalPERS may provide death benefits to certain beneficiaries. The benefits can include one-time payments and/or monthly payments, but "depend on the member's age, years of service, job classification, employer's contract with CalPERS, eligible beneficiary, date of separation from employment, and whether or not they were eligible to retire at the time of death".

California Employers’ Retiree Benefit Trust Fund
The California Employers’ Retiree Benefit Trust Fund was established by CalPERS in March 2007 to provide California public agencies with a cost-efficient, professionally managed investment vehicle for prefunding other post-employment benefits (OPEB) such as retiree health benefits. Prefunding reduces an agency's long-term OPEB liability. Participating agencies can use investment earnings to pay future OPEB liabilities, similar to the CalPERS pension fund in which three out of four dollars paid in retirement benefits come from investment earnings.

Health benefits
In 1961, the Meyer-Geddes Hospital and Medical Health Care Act was passed, which led to SERS' offering health insurance for state employees beginning in 1962. After the Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) Act of 1973, PERS began to deal with HMOs "to create more unified and standardized health care benefit rates". In 1978, the Meyer-Geddes Act was renamed the "Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act".

By the early 1990s, CalPERS received national attention for its attempt at implementing "managed competition," which is the theory that health care costs "can be controlled by forcing health providers to compete with one another under government supervision". As of 1994–1995, CalPERS contracted with 24 health plans for its "over 900,000" members and was able to reduce health insurance premiums by 1% compared with 1993–1994. At the time CalPERS was "called a model for the so-called health alliances" proposed in the 1993 Clinton health care plan.

Rates continued to decline by 5.3% in 1996 and 1.4% in 1997, but rose by 2.7% in 1998 and 5.1% in 1999. CalPERS attracted national attention again in the mid-2000s, this time for health maintenance organization rate increases of 25% in 2004 and 18% in 2005. Meanwhile, the number of participating plans dropped to seven as of 2003, and "more than two dozen cities, counties and school districts" (representing 4% of membership) left CalPERS as of 2004 because of high medical insurance rates.

A 2006 study by the Government Accountability Office determined that from 1997 through 2002 the average annual growth in CalPERS premiums (6.5%) was lower than that of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP, 8.5%) and of other surveyed employer-sponsored health benefit programs (7.1%); however, between 2003 and 2006–7, the average annual growth rate in CalPERS premiums (14.2%) was higher than that of FEHBP (7.3%) and of other surveyed employer-sponsored health benefit programs (10.5%). As of 2008, CalPERS eliminated copayments for preventive care visits, raised copayments for other types of office visits, and took other measures in an attempt to reduce costs.

In 2010, Blue Shield of California, Dignity Health, and Hill Physicians Medical Group initiated an integrated health management program (similar to an Accountable Care Organization) that covered 41,000 CalPERS members.

In 2019, CalPERS provided more than $9.2 billion in health benefits for 1.5 million active and retired state, public agency, and school workers and their dependents. Therefore, it was the nation's second largest public purchaser of health benefits, behind the FEHBP which covered "about 8 million federal employees, retirees, and their dependents". Of the enrollees, 59% are state employees and 41% are local government and school employees; 68% are working and 32% are retired.

Enrollees can join three types of plans:
 * 68% are enrolled in health maintenance organization plans administered by Blue Shield of California and by Kaiser Permanente.
 * 25% are enrolled in preferred provider organization plans called "PERS Select," "PERSCare," and "PERS Choice," which are administered by Anthem Blue Cross (the California subsidiary of WellPoint).
 * 7% are enrolled in "association" plans for the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, the California Association of Highway Patrolmen, and the Peace Officers Research Association of California.

Long-term care benefits
California's "Public Employees' Long-Term Care Act," as passed in 1990 and amended in 1996, led to CalPERS' administering a Long-Term Care Program for "California public employees and retirees, as well as their spouses, parents, parents-in-law, adult children and adult siblings between the ages of 18 and 79." Described as the "largest self-funded program of its kind", the program provides "nursing home care, residential assisted living, home health care, homemaker services and adult day care".

The program is funded by participant premiums and by proceeds from investments in the CalPERS Long-Term Care Fund. During an economic downturn in 2002, premiums for the program rose an average of 9% and investment losses were $99 million. Another premium increase of an average of 33.6% occurred in 2007 due to "a projected $600 million shortfall in the program over the next 50 to 60 years". The causes of the deficit predicted as of 2007 were less investment income than expected, a higher volume of claims than expected, and a lower dropout rate than expected. As of 2020, the program had 116,832 members who paid annual premiums of $278.5 million and who collectively received $337.3 million in benefits annually.

As of December 2014, the LTC program had 144,936 enrolled participants who paid annual premiums of more than $168 million from July 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013. The average premium collected during that time period was $2,177. The decrease in the total long-term care participant count may be attributable to the LTC program stabilization and sustainability measures and realized participant population morbidity.

The total benefits paid since the LTC program's inception in 1995 through June 30, 2013 have reached approximately $1.3 billion. A summary of plan types and a five-year historical participant count are available online in the CalPERS Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.

Member Home Loan Program
As of December 15, 2010, the CalPERS Board of Administration approved the suspension of the CalPERS Member Home Loan Program and stopped accepting new applications.

Unfunded Liabilities Crisis
CalPERS faces significant unfunded liabilities which is likely to challenge its long-term financial stability. Official estimates place the liabilities at approximately $150 billion, an increase from $22 billion in 2002. The unfunded liabilities figure is a projection that takes into account returns on CalPERS investments. The $150 billion figure is based on a long term return of 7%; if the returns are higher, the true liability is much smaller, but if returns are lower than the liabilities are much larger. CalPERS itself projects that it will return 6.1% over the next decade and 8.3% for the decade after that. There are significant concerns that to keep up, contributions by municipal and state authorities will have to rise drastically, putting financial strain on those authorities.

According to the CalPERS chart Historical Factors Impact Funded Status (1993-2018), the most recent year with no unfunded liabilities was FY 2007.

Criticisms
CalPERS has received criticism for the number of retirees (26,000 in 2018) who collect over $100,000 a year in pension. That group of people, while less than 4 percent of the total number of retirees receiving benefits from CalPERS, collect 17 percent of the total yearly pension payouts.

title: CalPERS


text: Template:Politics of South Korea

title: Template:Politics of South Korea


text: Template:Politics of Spain

title: Template:Politics of Spain


text:
Luis Rafael Sánchez

Dr. Luis Rafael Sánchez, a.k.a. "Wico" Sánchez (November 17, 1936) is a Puerto Rican essayist, novelist, and short-story author who is widely considered one of the island's most outstanding contemporary playwrights. Possibly his best known play is La Pasión según Antígona Pérez (The Passion according to Antigona Perez), a tragedy based on the life of Olga Viscal Garriga.

Early years
Sánchez was born and raised by his parents in the city of Humacao, Puerto Rico, in the eastern part of Puerto Rico. There he received his primary education. His family moved to San Juan, where Sánchez continued to receive his secondary and higher education. He enrolled in the University of Puerto Rico in 1955 after graduating from high school, earning a Bachelor of Arts degree. It was during his days as a student at the university that he became interested in acting.

Sánchez's interest in literature led him to enroll at the City University of New York where in 1959 he earned his master's degree in dramatic arts. He eventually went to Madrid, Spain and earned his Doctorate in Literature in 1976 from the Complutense University of Madrid.

La Pasión según Antigona Pérez
Sánchez's best known play is La Pasión según Antigona Pérez (The Passion of Antigona Perez), a tragedy set in present-day Latin America, suggested by Sophocles' Antigone. The character of Antigona was based on the life of Olga Viscal Garriga (1926–1995). Her life was rooted in politics and her three children. She was a member of the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party and an accomplished speaker who spent time in jail for her political beliefs yet, she saw herself as a simple woman with simple needs. But, in fact, she was a very complex woman with many facets of her personality. The world premiere production took place in 1968 at Old San Juan's Tapia Theater, starring Myrna Vázquez as "Antigona", during the 11th Annual Puerto Rican Theater Festival.

A highly acclaimed all-star revival opened in 1991 at San Juan's Performing Arts Center featuring Alba Nydia Diaz as Antigona, Walter Rodriguez as Creon, Samuel Molina as Monsignor Escudero, Marian Pabon as Pilar Vargas, Noelia Crespo as Aurora, and Julia Thompson as Irene. The production, which integrated video and broadcast technology, was directed by Idalia Perez Garay for Teatro del Sesenta Theater Company. It featured original music by Pedro Rivera Toledo, sets by Checo Cuevas, and film sequences supervised by Puerto Rican filmmaker Luis Molina Casanova. A new production opened at San Juan's Performing Arts Center on April 8, 2011, featuring Yamaris Latorre as Antigona, directed by Gilberto Valenzuela for Tablado Puertorriqueño Theater Company.

La Guaracha del Macho Camacho (Macho Camacho's Beat)
La Guaracha del Macho Camacho (Macho Camacho's Beat) was published in 1976. This novel moves to a guaracha, a Latin rhythm, inviting readers to imagine (or learn) what this beat sounds like. It has been suggested that the song itself is the real protagonist of the tale. The Americanization of Puerto Rico is explored in this work, as well as the topic of Puerto Rican politics and the political situation of the island as a colony. One aspect of this examination can be seen as a critique of Puerto Ricans who give up their culture to assimilate into the American culture as compared to Puerto Ricans who refuse to let go of their cultural identity. The book was translated into English by Gregory Rabassa.

In his essay "La guagua aérea" ("The Flying Bus"), Sánchez explores the concept of a bi-polar culture, the question of assimilation and opposition to U.S. Anglo culture. He coined the term "La guagua aérea" which has since been used by other prominent Puerto Rican authors such as Giannina Braschi who pays homage to Sánchez's classic essay in her Spanglish novel "Yo-Yo Boing!". He also wrote En cuerpo de camisa ("In Shirt Sleeves", 1966), a collection of short stories.

Luis Rafael Sánchez is now a professor emeritus at the University of Puerto Rico and the City University of New York. He travels to Europe and Latin America, where he has been involved in the teachings and works of theater.

Other major works

 * Los ángeles se han fatigado (play, 1960)
 * Farsa del amor compradito (play, 1960)
 * La hiel nuestra de cada día (play, 1960)
 * Sol 13, interior (play, 1961)
 * O casi el alma (play, 1965)
 * En cuerpo de camisa (short story collection, 1966)
 * Quíntuples (play, 1985)
 * La importancia de llamarse Daniel Santos (novel, 1988)
 * No llores por nosotros Puerto Rico (essay collection, 1998)
 * Indiscreciones de un perro gringo (novel, 2007)

title: Luis Rafael Sánchez


text: Template:Politics of Sri Lanka sidebar

title: Template:Politics of Sri Lanka sidebar


text: User talk:70.48.122.204

title: User talk:70.48.122.204


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doogin

Doogin was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete

Doogin
Vanity article on an unencyclopedic topic. Joyous 20:00, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC) Just a note there Scott coolster.. I didn't blank your page. I left a comment. Care to tell everyone what that comment might have been? nerd.
 * Delete - speedily, preferably, this talk page has been blanked once by the page creator already. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 20:14, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - also note the page creator removed the vfd tag twice. — [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker দ (talk)]] 20:28, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - note that Doogin is a figurehead in the neo-transcendentalist movement at Carleton University. — User:Youngbuck (talk)]] 20:34, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Note that this user's user page says "see Doogin", and that their three edits to date are two to Doogin and one here. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 20:41, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Please provide a valid reason why Doogin should not be included in this encyclopedia. He is an important contemporary figure in the neo-transcendentalist movement. -- User:BillyPete & | Talk 20:44, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Because I can find no content anywhere that verifies this as a legitimate subject outside what you or your sockpuppets have added to this article, or to this discussion. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 20:59, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Note that User:Youngbuck has vandalized this page by changing delete votes to keep. Gamaliel 05:36, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - Doogin is a historical figure in the making, and deserves a spot in any encyclopedia. — [[User:BillyPete|BillyPete দ(talk)]] 20:48, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Note that this user's only edits have been to the article in question, to User:Youngbuck and to this discussion. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 20:56, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nonsense. Gamaliel 20:50, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: It's nonsense. However, no one needs to provide a reason why it shouldn't be in:  the article has to establish a reason why it is appropriate to an encyclopedia.  Geogre 21:36, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Note: "When expressing an opinion, please include your opinion, your reasoning, and sign with ~ (four consecutive tilde characters)." (My emphasis.)Dr Zen 02:24, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Being a competent reader is a good thing. "It's nonsense" is a reason.  However, this chimera of "notability is not a criterion" is an absurdity.  The burden of proof is on a submission.  Again:  folks can check the URL and see that they're not on Everything2.com.  Geogre 05:52, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I was not disputing the validity of your reason, only your assertion that "no one needs to provide a reason why it shouldn't be in", which is clearly contrary to the policy that I quoted for you. The "burden of proof" is on the would-be deleter. That is why a reason for deletion is required, why we are admonished to keep articles where there is any doubt, and also why there is no requirement for every new article to pass Votes for Inclusion.Dr Zen 01:56, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Vainity nonsens is for me a good enough reason for deletion. Jeltz 21:55, 2004 Dec 5 (UTC)
 * Delete, nonsensical vanity. -- Scott $e^{i \pi} \,\!$ 21:58, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: maybe a jocular hoax; nonsensical, vanity, trivia even if true. Hoary 02:51, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity - Cdc 06:37, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Just thought I'd point out that our friend has taken the liberty of changing all the votes to "keep" (unlike last time, when he just blanked the page—perhaps he thought this would be less noticeable?), as well as vandalizing Scott eiπ's user page. — [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker দ (talk)]] 14:19, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * That comment ("Just a note there . . . nerd") was added by 134.117.82.86 at 15:15, 6 December. IP numbers 134.117.0.0 - 134.117.255.255 belong to Carleton University, samspade informs us. Vandalism was perpetrated by 69.198.165.0 (an IP belonging to Rogers Cable, Inc. of Toronto): Scott's entire page was blanked and replaced by the one-word comment "nerd". The latter IP number has been very active (click the link to see more). -- Hoary 08:39, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete for reasons above. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 17:08, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep Doogin is a teacher for all and a great man. He will be regarded by Historians as an influential leader that helped a generation find themselves.  To delete him from this encyclopedia would be equal to deleting Herodotus from the annals of History - an irresponsible crime and a Historical degradation.
 * Anonymous votes are not counted. --Improv 18:28, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. If you're really nice, you not only get a cookie but a lesson from the great man himself on basic punctuation and capitalization skills.  :^)  Sockpuppets and Wikilove do not mix. - Lucky 6.9 22:25, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. When the historians start scibblin' try again. Wyss 01:01, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, unencyclopedia vanity. I love the sockpuppet's assertion that the author of two unpublished works, whose existence is unconfirmable outside of an article he wrote himself, is equivalent to Herodotus. Do narcissists ever realize how silly they look to other people? —No-One Jones (m) 02:02, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Well yes, but even Herodotus started small.Dr Zen 02:14, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Silly??? Who uses that word?
 * That question ("Silly??? Who uses that word?") was posed at 17:52, 7 Dec 2004 by our Canadian contributor 69.198.165.0. This prompts me to ask one of my own: Is there any non-silly reason why this silly would-be article deserves more deliberation than that faced by a speedy? -- Hoary 08:20, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Who hasn't stored illegal immigrants in their closet? - Lifefeed 02:10, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete.
 * Anonymous votes are not counted. --Improv 18:28, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Keep -- 13 is reason enough to keep.
 * FYI: The above anonymous user has just a single contribution, which was to add the vote above. — [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker দ (talk)]] 06:09, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Struck that out. Anonymous votes are not counted. --Improv 18:28, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. --Improv 18:28, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Vanity page. Those college pranksters! --MPerel 22:16, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, vanity. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 20:33, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Dpbsmith is right. Again! DoPpelgangerBSmith 20:31, 1 Apr 2007 (UTC)
 * Vanity for sure! Vanity, vanity! Ecclesiastes 20:32, 1 Apr 2007 (UTC)
 * Plus also, vexation of spirit, too! KingSolomon 20:33, 1 Apr 2007 (UTC)
 * And contributor is so stoooopid he doesn't even know it's Carleton College, not Carleton University! BeautifulNorthfieldOntario 20:34, 1 Apr 2007 (UTC)
 * umm.. its carleton university ya twit, located in ottawa ontario. what the fuck are you sayin? Comment added anonymously at 22:52:34 11 December 2004 (and not 2007) by 69.198.165.0 -- not the first time this number has appeared on this page (see above, and contributions).

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doogin


text: Template:Politics of Switzerland

title: Template:Politics of Switzerland


text: Template:Politics of Syria

title: Template:Politics of Syria


text:
RAM Racing

RAM Racing was a Formula One racing team which competed during the racing seasons of 1976 to 1985. The team entered other manufacturers' chassis from 1976 to 1980, then ran March's team from 1981 to 1983, only entering a car entirely their own in 1984 and 1985.

The team was formed in 1975 by Mike Ralph and John Macdonald, with RAM derived from their names. After running Macdonald in a GRD in British Formula Three, they entered Alan Jones in a Formula 5000 March for 1976. They also bought a pair of Brabham BT44B Formula One cars, and entered the 1976 World Championship, running Loris Kessel and Emilio de Villota for the Spanish Grand Prix, where neither qualified. However, both Kessel and another pay-driver, Patrick Nève, qualified for the Belgian Grand Prix, with Jac Nellemann, Damien Magee, Lella Lombardi and Bob Evans all making appearances in the cars. There were few finishes, and the pay-drivers meant the team were frequent non-qualifiers.

For 1977, Boy Hayje drove a RAM-entered March with little success, and a second "rent-a-car" did no better later in the year when driven by Andy Sutcliffe, Mikko Kozarowitzky or Michael Bleekemolen. However, they had some success running Guy Edwards in the Shellsport Group 8 Championship in Britain, finishing 2nd overall. For 1978 the team switched to the British Aurora Formula One series, with Edwards placing 4th overall that year in a March, and 5th overall the following season in a Fittipaldi F5A. For 1980, RAM made an investment in a pair of 1979-spec Williams FW07s, with Emilio de Villota winning the title. Sponsorship included American men's magazine Penthouse. They then entered one of these cars for Rupert Keegan in the British Grand Prix. Kevin Cogan and Geoff Lees would guest in another car in the last two rounds, but their best finish was Keegan's 9th place at the United States Grand Prix.

1981 saw RAM manage and run the returning March Grand Prix team, with Derek Daly and Eliseo Salazar driving. However, non-qualifications were frequent, and the team failed to score any points, Daly's 7th place at the British Grand Prix being their best result.

The combination stayed together for 1982, landing backing from Rothmans, and the new March 821 saw design work from a young Adrian Reynard. With veteran Jochen Mass to lead the team, backed up by Raul Boesel, hopes were high, but it was another disappointing year. Mass took 7th place at the Detroit Grand Prix, but as the car proved to be slow he lost motivation, and focused more on sports car racing with Porsche. From the German Grand Prix, Keegan took over the car, but RAM March once again failed to score points.

1983 saw the RAM name make itself onto the chassis for the first time, with Dave Kelly's RAM March 01 design. Salazar returned to drive the main entry, while a second car for Jean-Louis Schlesser was fielded at the French Grand Prix as a one-off. Salazar scored a 15th place in the season opener, but the bulky car struggled to qualify. Financial reasons saw the team skip the Detroit Grand Prix, while they only made the Canadian Grand Prix due to fielding local driver Jacques Villeneuve, Sr. and attracting some Canadian sponsorship. Kenny Acheson then took over for the rest of the season, only qualifying once, at the season-closing South African Grand Prix, where he took the team's best result of the year, 12th and last.

Astonishingly, the team pressed on into 1984. The partnership with March was dissolved, and RAM attracted sponsorship from Skoal Bandit. Two RAM 02 cars, with Hart turbo engines, were entered for Formula Two champion Jonathan Palmer and Philippe Alliot. Kelly's new design was disappointing, and the cars were frequent back-markers, and Palmer's 8th place in the opening Brazilian Grand Prix was their best result of the year (and of all time). Indeed, the team drew more notices for the crashes their drivers were involved in.

Alliot remained for 1985, with Manfred Winkelhock entered in the second car, and a new RAM 03 designed by Gustav Brunner. Winkelhock put in some improved qualifying performances, but actual results were still thin. Winkelhock's death in a sports car event in Canada in the summer was a blow to the team, and Acheson was recalled briefly, before the team slimmed down to a single entry. They missed the final two rounds altogether. Skoal withdrew their backing at the end of the year, the team's best result having been Alliot's 9th place, again at the opening Brazilian Grand Prix.

The team planned to enter a single updated RAM 03 for Mike Thackwell (who had stood in for Palmer at the 1984 Canadian Grand Prix) for the season, but the funds could not be found, and the team folded over the winter of 1985. The team would have raced as car #9 for 1986 otherwise, per the FIA entry list.

Complete Formula One results

 * Notes
 * – Not entered as a Constructor.

title: RAM Racing


text: User talk:80.44.105.248

title: User talk:80.44.105.248


text: User talk:82.147.128.2

title: User talk:82.147.128.2


text: User talk:68.214.243.187

title: User talk:68.214.243.187


text:
Dominican peso

Peso dominicano (Dominican peso) has been the name of the currency of the Dominican Republic (República Dominicana) since 2010. Its symbol is "$", with "RD$" used when distinction from other pesos (or dollars) is required; its ISO 4217 code is "DOP". Each peso is divided into 100 centavos ("cents"), for which the ¢ symbol is used. With exception of the United States dollar, it is the only currency that is legal tender in the Dominican Republic for all monetary transactions, whether public or private.

Before the 2010 constitution, peso oro (English: Gold peso) was the official name of the currency of the Dominican Republic.

History
The first Dominican peso was introduced with the country's independence from Haiti in 1844. It replaced the Haitian gourde at par and was divided into 8 reales. The Dominican Republic decimalized in 1877, subdividing the peso into 100 centavos. A second currency, the franco, was issued between 1891 and 1897 but did not replace the peso. However, in 1905, the peso was replaced by the U.S. dollar, at a rate of 5 pesos to the dollar. The peso oro was introduced in 1937 at par with the U.S. dollar, although the dollar continued to be used alongside the      peso oro until 1947.

First peso, 1844–1905
Only one denomination of coin was issued by the Dominican Republic before decimalization. This was the $1/100$ real, issued in 1844 in bronze and in both 1844 and 1848 in brass. Decimalization in 1877 brought about the introduction of three new coins, the 1, $1/4$ and 5 centavos. $2 1/2$ centavo coins were also issued between 1882 and 1888. In 1891 Dominican Republic entered in the Latin Monetary Union and changed its currency to the franco including coins of 5 and 10 centesimos struck in bronze and 50 centesimos, 1 and 5 francos struck in silver. After the franco was abandoned, silver coins were introduced in 1897 in denominations of 10 and 20 centavos, $1/4$ and 1 peso. The designs of these coins were very similar to those of the franco.

Older Coins

Peso Oro, from 1937
Coins were introduced in 1937 in denominations of 1, 5, 10, 25 centavos and $1/2$ pesos with limited numbers of 1 peso coins first minted in 1939. All coins bore the national arms on the reverse while all except the 1 centavo bore a crowned allegorical Indian head on the obverse. The 1 centavo instead depicted a palm tree, the symbol of the ruling Dominican Party. The coins were all of identical weights, diameter, and composition to U.S. coins of the era. Two denominations appeared on these coins, one in "centavos" or "pesos" and another in "gramos" to represent a pre-decimal silver weight system formerly used in much of the region. A two coin set of 1955 commemorative coins were minted for the 25th anniversary of Rafael Trujillo's reign. These consisted of a gold 30 peso (33,000 minted) and a silver one peso, both showing him in profile. 50,000 of the silver one peso coins were produced in issued into circulation, but after Trujillo was assassinated in 1961 an estimated 32,550 were recalled and melted down. In 1963 the silver content in the 10, 25, 50, and 1 peso coins was reduced from 0.900 pure to 0.650 pure. The 1963 issue also distinctively commemorated the centennial of the republic and the crowned Indian head was added to the 1 centavo, replacing the palm.

After 1963 the Peso Oro became a fiat currency and base metals replaced silver in the higher denominations, with the 10, and 25 centavos and $1/2$ pesos reintroduced in copper-nickel in 1967. 1 peso coins were struck as only commemorative in small numbers. In 1976 a new coin series was introduced featuring Juan Pablo Duarte, and in 1983 another series was released featuring various other figures important to Dominican history, including the Mirabal sisters and formally dropping the outdated "gramos" denomination reference. In 1989, the content of the coins was changed from copper-nickel to nickel-plated steel. In 1991, eleven sided circulating non commemorative 1 peso coins were reintroduced in copper-zinc, followed by bimetal 5 pesos in 1997. For the latter coin the first year of issue was a circulating commemorative for the 50th anniversary of the national bank. Both a bimetal 10 pesos and a copper-nickel 25 pesos were introduced in 2005. Due to inflation, any coins below 1 peso are now rarely found.

RECENT COINS
 * 1 Peso
 * 5 Pesos
 * 10 pesos
 * 25 Pesos

First peso, 1848–1905
Paper money made up the bulk of circulating currency for the first peso. Provisional issues of 40 and 80 pesos were produced in 1848, followed by regular government notes for 1, 2 and 5 pesos in 1849, and 10 and 50 peso notes in 1858. The Comisión de Hacienda issued 50 and 200 pesos in 1865, whilst the Junta de Crédito introduced notes for 10 and 20 centavos that year, followed by 5 and 40 centavos in 1866 and 1, 2, 5 and 10 pesos in 1867. In 1862, the Spanish issued notes for $1/2$, 2, 5, 15 and 25 pesos in the name of the Intendencia de Santo Domingo. The last government notes were 1 peso notes issued in 1870.

Two private banks issued paper money. The Banco Nacional de Santo Domingo issued notes between 1869 and 1889 in denominations of 25 and 50 centavos, 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 25 and 100 pesos. The Banco de la Compañía de Crédito de Puerto Plata issued notes from the 1880s until 1899 in denominations of 25 and 50 centavos, 1, 2, 5, 10 and 50 pesos. Note that the Banco Nacional de Santo Domingo also issued notes in 1912 denominated in dollars (called pesos in the Spanish text).

Peso Oro, 1947-2011
When the peso oro was first introduced as a local coinage in 1937, no paper money was made and US notes continued to circulate as the U.S. dollar was officially the national currency. Only in 1947 were the first peso oro notes issued by the Central Bank in denominations of 1, 5, 10, 20, 50, 500, and 1000 oros, though the latter two denominations were rarely used. These notes were printed by the American Bank Note Company, a private printing and engraving firm. Though US notes were always acceptable in exchange, they were gradually withdrawn from circulation. In 1961, low value notes were issued in denominations of 10, 25 and 50 centavos to help compensate for the value of silver in coins surpassing face value and the resulting coin shortages. Following the demise of Trujillo all banknotes afterwards dropped references to the capital city Ciudad Trujillo which had reverted to its old name, Santo Domingo.

Banknotes currently in circulation are 50, 100, 200, 500, 1000 and 2000 pesos oros. The 10 and 20 peso denomination bills have been replaced with 10 and 25 peso coins respectively in 2005. In 2010, a new 20 pesos oro polymer banknote was released. Limited editions of the 500 and 2000 peso oro notes were issued for the 1992 500th anniversary of the discovery of the Americas and year 2000 millennial celebrations, respectively, but not many of these remain in circulation. A 5000 pesos note has been considered before but not made.

All current banknotes carry the phrase "Este billete tiene fuerza libertoria para el pago de todas las obligaciónes públicas o privadas". Literally translated, (This bill has the liberatory strength to be used as payment for all public or private obligations).

2010
On July 1, 2010, the Central Bank of Dominican Republic issued a 20-peso oro banknote that is similar to the previous paper issue, but is now printed on a polymer substrate.

2011
In 2011, the Central Bank of Dominican Republic announced that all banknotes dated 2011 and later will be denominated in "Pesos Dominicanos" instead of "Pesos Oro". This decision was made in response to a mandate of the Constitution of the Dominican Republic of January 26, 2010.

2014
On October 1, 2014, the Central Bank of Dominican Republic planned to issue a new family of notes with new designs and new security features.

Relation with the U.S. dollar
The United States dollar is used as a reserve currency by the Central Bank of the Dominican Republic. Also, when agreed by both parties, both U.S. dollars and the euro can be used in private transactions (this applies mostly in tourism-related activities). This was most true during the drastic inflationary period of 2003–2004. Nowadays the U.S. dollar is widely accepted and tourists visiting the Dominican Republic can use it as a second currency.

Historical exchange rates
Historically, since the first monetary emission in 1948, the peso was worth about the same as a United States dollar.

The exchange rate for U.S. dollar vs. Dominican peso over the last few decades is as follows:
 * 1984 US$1 to 1.45 DOP
 * 1993 US$1 to 5.00 DOP
 * 1998 US$1 to 8.00 DOP
 * 2002 US$1 to 20.00 DOP
 * 2003 US$1 to 37.50 DOP
 * 2004 US$1 to 46.70 DOP
 * 2006 US$1 to 32.00 DOP
 * 2007 US$1 to 35.29 DOP
 * 2008 US$1 to 34.93 DOP
 * 2009 US$1 to 36.00 DOP
 * 2012 US$1 to 40.50 DOP
 * 2013 US$1 to 40.40 DOP
 * 2016 US$1 to 45.00 DOP

In 2004 the peso dramatically plummeted; a single US dollar was worth almost 60.00 DOP. In August 2020, 59.00 DOP mark was temporarily crossed again.

As of February 8, 2023, US$1 buys around 56.30 pesos.

As of April 5,2024, US$1 buys around 59.24 pesos.

title: Dominican peso


text: User talk:69.155.189.175

title: User talk:69.155.189.175


text:
2004 Major League Soccer season

The 2004 Major League Soccer season was the ninth season of Major League Soccer. It was also the 92nd season of FIFA-sanctioned soccer in the United States, and the 26th with a national first-division league.

After playing one season in the suburb of Southlake, the Dallas Burn returned to the Cotton Bowl.

D.C. United signed 14-year-old prodigy Freddy Adu, who made his debut as a substitute in their season opener becoming the youngest player in North American sports history. The Columbus Crew emerged as a dominant team in the second half of the regular season, running off an MLS-record 18-game unbeaten streak en route to winning the Supporters' Shield.

The regular season began on April 3, and concluded on October 17. The 2004 MLS Cup Playoffs began on October 22, and concluded with MLS Cup 2004 on November 14. D.C. United won their record 4th league title by defeating the Kansas City Wizards in MLS Cup.

Season format
The season began on April 3 and concluded with MLS Cup on November 14. The 10 teams were split evenly into two conferences. Each team played 30 games that were evenly divided between home and away. Each team played every other team in their conference, and two designated opponents from the opposite conference, four times, and the remaining teams in the opposite conference twice.

The top four teams from each conference qualified for the MLS Cup Playoffs. In the first round, aggregate goals over two matches determined the winners. The conference finals were played as a single match, and the winners advanced to MLS Cup. In all rounds, draws were broken with two 15-minute periods of extra time, followed by penalty kicks if necessary. The away goals rule was not used in any round.

The team with the most points in the regular season was awarded the MLS Supporters' Shield. Additionally, the winner of MLS Cup and the runner-up qualified for the CONCACAF Champions' Cup.

Conference semifinals
''New England Revolution advance 2–1 on aggregate.

D.C. United advance 4–0 on aggregate.

Kansas City Wizards advance 3–2 on aggregate.

Los Angeles Galaxy advance 2–1 on aggregate.

Conference finals
D.C. United advance 4–3 on penalties (3–3 after full time).

title: 2004 Major League Soccer season


text: Category:Prime ministers of Albania

title: Category:Prime ministers of Albania


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knell's Law

Knell's Law
Created by User:David Knell and a would-be orphan if it were not for his edits linking other articles to it, google has never heard of it. Delete -- Graham ☺ | Talk 20:07, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete Write a groundbreaking paper about it, wait a bit, and someone else will write this article for you. Until then this is just self-promotion. Cdc 21:49, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Original research, contradicts the Law of diminishing marginal utility. -- Scott $e^{i \pi} \,\!$ 21:54, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. What they said. Tagishsimon (talk) 23:59, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete original research, and the bloody equation doesn't even encompass the prose explanation. I propose an article on Wyss' law, e=mc^2, where ego=muffinhead x codswallop squared. Wyss 00:56, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)