ReportWire

Tag: Proposal

  • Some homeless people refuse shelter beds. In one Bay Area county, that could soon be a crime

    Some homeless people refuse shelter beds. In one Bay Area county, that could soon be a crime

    [ad_1]

    San Mateo County officials are hoping to add an unusual tactic to their multi-pronged approach to tackling the homelessness crisis: making it a crime to refuse to accept available, temporary housing.

    In a unanimous vote this week, county supervisors moved forward with the proposal — despite significant opposition from civil rights groups and some homeless advocates — which would allow authorities to issue a misdemeanor violation to anyone living in a homeless encampment who refuses to move into available, temporary housing after a health evaluation and at least two warnings.

    “One of the toughest challenges we face is addressing and assisting those in encampments who tend to decline services or refuse services,” Supervisor Dave Pine said at Tuesday’s board meeting. “The hope is it will be a tool to help move individuals into shelter.”

    Opponents worry it will criminalize homelessness.

    But Pine, along with board President Warren Slocum, co-sponsor of the ordinance, said the measure is the latest in a host of comprehensive solutions — including a street medicine team and the conversion of hotels to temporary housing — aimed at reducing homelessness in San Mateo County.

    “Forty homeless people die in San Mateo county every year. … That’s just not acceptable,” Slocum said. This proposal “isn’t about criminalizing people, it’s about helping those who really may not be able to help themselves. … We really do have the capacity to house people and get people the help they need.”

    Officials said the county has up to 30 unused shelter beds available every night, though that falls short of the estimated 44 people living in homeless encampments across unincorporated San Mateo County. Many more encampments are located in the county’s 20 cities, including Daly City and Redwood City, but this ordinance would apply only in unincorporated areas.

    After San Mateo made investments to respond to the homelessness crisis in the last two years, the number of people on the streets significantly dipped, with more accessing shelter facilities, according to County Executive Officer Mike Callagy.

    “We’re down now to the hard-to-reach population, the population that doesn’t want to come in,” Callagy said.

    If the proposal reaches final approval next week, someone in an encampment who refuses an offer for an available bed will have 72 hours to change their mind, receiving two written warnings. After that, authorities could issue a misdemeanor citation, which Callagy said would be handled through diversion programs, like mental health court.

    But no one would be cited if county officials don’t have a bed available, Callagy said. He stressed that the goal is not to issue tickets or route people into the criminal justice system but to get services and housing to those in need.

    “We believe that once offered those options, most people will avail themselves to the services,” Callagy said. He hopes the citations are rarely issued but are used as a deterrent.

    “At the end of the day, it’s about saving lives,” said David Canepa, another county supervisor. “I don’t buy into the narrative that we should do nothing.”

    County officials touting the proposal said it was based on a Houston ordinance, adopted in 2017, that made homeless encampments on public property illegal and tried to funnel people into temporary housing. While the program has been highlighted for its success at removing encampments and helping people get off the streets, the Houston Chronicle found that tickets and arrests for violating the provision — given only after a warning and an offer of housing — continue to increase.

    While many West Coast municipalities face legal roadblocks to clearing encampments, San Mateo County attorneys said the ordinance adheres to legal precedent that protects the right to sleep outside when no alternative housing is available.

    In Los Angeles, city officials have been making efforts to address growing encampments by encouraging people to accept temporary shelter and enforcing laws that forbid blocking sidewalks or other specific places.

    In San Mateo County, the proposed ordinance has drawn critics, including the American Civil Liberties Union, religious leaders and the San Mateo County Private Defender Program, which represents indigent defendants. Critics say they worry about the unintended consequences of such a law.

    “Policing is no way to get people into treatment,” said William Freeman, senior council of ACLU of Northern California, decrying the “seriously flawed ordinance.”

    While he praised the county for its recent work on homelessness, he said that “anti-camping ordinances invite over-policing and abuse.”

    Lauren P. McCombs, an Episcopal deacon and a leader for Faith in Action Bay Area, called the criminalization of homelessness “inhumane treatment of our unhoused neighbors.”

    “Our county needs to solve this crisis by ensuring safe and affordable housing options that are available to all residents, with strong incentives and not threats of incarceration,” McCombs said.

    County officials on Tuesday took into account some concerns from the public, amending the ordinance to include a health evaluation before warnings are issued and a review process scheduled to launch after a few months.

    Supervisor Noelia Corzo said her half-brother is homeless in San Mateo County, so she knows first-hand how complex the issue is. She said she is proud of the county for “doing something different.”

    “I don’t take this lightly,” she said, “but not doing anything is not working either.”

    [ad_2]

    Grace Toohey

    Source link

  • When Will He Propose ? Quiz

    When Will He Propose ? Quiz

    [ad_1]

    Are you eagerly eyeing your friends’ sparkly new diamond rings and wondering when your turn will come to join the wives club? Look no further – the “When Will He Propose Quiz” is here to demystify the situation and offer you a sneak peek into your relationship’s future. No need to be on the constant lookout for signs he is going to propose. This straightforward 8-question quiz, crafted by Dhriti Bhavsar, a skilled psychologist, draws on her master’s degree in psychology and extensive experience as a couples counsellor, providing you with expert insights into romantic relationships.

    Curious about when he might pop the question? This quiz dives into crucial topics like money matters, family backing, effective communication, and how you both handle disagreements – essentially, the essential building blocks of a robust relationship. By exploring these elements, the quiz aims to deliver a thorough analysis of your partnership’s preparedness for the next significant step. The results you receive will paint a clear picture of your partnership’s readiness for that exciting next chapter.

    So, if you find yourself pondering “when will he propose” or searching for signs that he is going to propose, this quiz is your go-to guide. Let Dhriti Bhavsar’s expertise guide you through this lighthearted yet insightful exploration, offering you a glimpse into the timing of that special moment. Take the quiz and discover the signs that indicate whether your journey toward wedded bliss is just around the corner!

    Ask Our Expert

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Speech is freer in California than in Florida, watchdog warns ahead of Newsom-DeSantis debate

    Speech is freer in California than in Florida, watchdog warns ahead of Newsom-DeSantis debate

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — 

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is due to debate California Gov. Gavin Newsom later this week about whose state offers a better model for the country, is leading an “assault on free expression in Florida” that is “almost without peer in recent U.S. history,” a watchdog warned in a pair of reports released Tuesday.

    Pen America, which defends the rights of authors and others around the world to write and speak out without fear of government reprisals, has written detailed reviews comparing the two states’ recent policies and proposals on campus speech codes, book bans, curriculum fights, diversity and inclusion, internet freedom and other 1st Amendment issues in the interstate feud between DeSantis, a Republican, and Newsom, a Democrat.

    The two men, whose states wield outsized influence on the right and left, are set to debate on Fox News Thursday night. DeSantis is hoping the debate jump-starts his flailing presidential campaign while Newsom has been trying to maintain his national stature amid speculation he will run in 2028.

    The Pen report finds fault with both states’ policies but reserves its harshest judgment for DeSantis, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination as a culture warrior on the slogan that Florida is the state “where woke goes to die.” The states’ policies have implications beyond their borders; most of the bills the report analyzed have been adopted in other states, and California is home to tech and entertainment industries with global reach.

    “Florida is setting an agenda of unprecedented censorship, rigging the system to favor the speech of those in power and silencing dissenting voices,” the Pen report states.

    Authors, journalists and others who care about free expression have to pay attention to both states, in part because of their governors’ ambitions and willingness to push barriers at a time when states are leading most of the big culture war fights, said Suzanne Nossel, Pen America’s chief executive, in an interview.

    “If you want to see where free speech is headed in this country, you have to take a close look at what they’re doing,” she said.

    The report details several bills that have been proposed or passed in the Florida Legislature in recent years, most of which were supported by DeSantis.

    They include the well-known bill that critics label “Don’t Say Gay,” which limits discussion of sexual orientation in classrooms, rules limiting the discussion of race in public colleges and universities, bills making it easier to ban books based on parental objections and those targeting mass protests with enhanced criminal penalties and drag shows.

    Some of the bills have been blocked by courts, but the report argues that they still represent a threat to free expression because they create an immediate chilling effect, could ultimately withstand court challenges and are already inspiring new laws and proposals in Florida and elsewhere that could accomplish the same goals.

    The drag show bill, which broadens the state’s obscenity law to apply to some live performances, was temporarily put on hold by a federal judge in central Florida this month after a restaurant sued.

    “Regardless of how the courts rule, the Act has already chilled LGBTQ+ expression in the state,” the Pen authors wrote, citing canceled pride events in southeast Florida and central Florida and the dissolution of a drag storytime chapter in Miami.

    DeSantis has accused critics of falsifying his record and creating “political theater,” insisting, for example, that he has expanded African American history requirements in Florida schools, even as the state placed limits on teaching about systemic racism. In the case of the drag show bill, he said it was targeted at “sexually explicit” performances.

    “People can do what they want with some of that, but to have minors there, I mean, you’ll have situations where you’ll have like an 8-year-old girl there, where you have these like really explicit shows, and that is just inappropriate,” he said at a May news conference.

    James Tager, research director of Pen America and co-author of the reports, said it was important to be “clear-eyed” and “send a warning signal” about Florida’s direction, given DeSantis’ political ambitions.

    “Florida holds itself as a blueprint for a more of free way of living, championing the rhetoric of liberty,” Tager said. “Several of their significant proposals, the primary effect is to degrade and winnow down free expression rights in the state.”

    Though Florida took the brunt of Pen’s criticism, California’s laws drew more limited scrutiny.

    The report credits California with “unambiguous wins for free expression” for passing laws to protect journalists covering protests and restricting the ability of courts to allow rap lyrics as evidence in criminal trials.

    But it faults the state for what it labels well-intended misses, including a law that requires social media companies to produce regular reports on their content moderation to the state attorney general. The authors argue that the law, though ambiguous in defining the attorney general’s role, could give the government more power to regulate speech.

    The report also cautions that a law intended to protect children on social media and other online platforms could chill free speech because it “requires businesses to predict any content or practice that lawmakers could consider to be ‘harmful’” to children. Tech industry and publishing groups have also opposed the law as overly broad, warning it could hinder content intended for adults.

    Newsom said when he signed it that the state “will not stand by as social media is weaponized to spread hate and disinformation.”

    The report also criticizes the state for a policy approved last year by the Board of Governors of California’s community college system that would evaluate college professors, in part, on their commitment to teaching anti-racist ideas untended to foster “diversity, equity and inclusion.” The policy has drawn a lawsuit from a group of professors.

    “There is a difference between protecting a school’s or faculty member’s right to include DEI programming, and mandating that they do so, especially in higher education,” the authors wrote.

    The organization labels the policy a “gag order,” arguing that it limits a professor’s academic freedom by forcing them to adopt the college system’s viewpoint.

    [ad_2]

    Noah Bierman

    Source link

  • California prisoners could get higher wages under new plan — but still less than $1 an hour

    California prisoners could get higher wages under new plan — but still less than $1 an hour

    [ad_1]

    SACRAMENTO — 

    For the first time in 30 years, the California prison system plans to nearly double most hourly wages for incarcerated workers, a proposal that comes amid a broader debate over prison labor and a push by progressive activists to prohibit forced labor as a form of criminal punishment.

    The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s proposal calls for eliminating all unpaid work assignments and reducing hours for most prison workers from full-time jobs to half time. Prison officials argue that higher wages will have several benefits, including making it easier for inmates to pay back the money they owe for damage from their crimes. Fifty-five percent of inmates’ wages go toward restitution costs, according to the Department of Corrections.

    “Increased pay will provide a stronger incentive for incarcerated people to accept and retain jobs,” department spokesperson Tessa Outhyse said in an email. “New wages will also help workers meet restitution payments for crime victims and save more money in preparation for release.”

    Approximately 40% of California’s 96,000 prisoners have jobs while they serve out their sentences, according to the department spokesperson, doing laundry and janitorial work, as well as clerking and construction. Their wages generally range from 8 cents an hour to 37 cents an hour, depending on the skill level required for the job. The proposal calls for doubling the wage range, from 16 cents an hour to 74 cents an hour.

    Although prison reform advocates have long argued that wages for incarcerated workers are insufficient, some are dubious about the proposed pay increase. They say the changes will only boost hourly wages by a few nickels and dimes, and the overall daily pay by just a few dollars.

    “We are not asking for a liveable wage, we are asking for a respectable wage,” said state Sen. Steven Bradford (D-Gardena).

    “It has made it increasingly difficult for incarcerated people just to provide for their basic needs in prison, be it deodorant or toothpaste, to help pay down their restitution that is owed to victims, helping their families or even staying in contact with their families using the phone.”

    Bradford is a member of California’s Reparations Task Force, which recommended paying fair market value for prison labor and eliminating forced labor as a criminal punishment from the state Constitution. Lawmakers considered a measure this year known as the “End Slavery in California Act” that would eliminate a provision in the state Constitution that allows for involuntary servitude as punishment for crime. It passed the Assembly in September and may be heard in the Senate next year. If passed by two-thirds of the Senate, the change would then have to be approved by voters.

    Prison officials did not respond to questions about whether the proposal to increase wages is related to the discussion about removing involuntary servitude from the constitution. But their concerns helped kill an earlier effort to pass a constitutional ban on involuntary servitude as a punishment for crime. In 2022, the Corrections Department told lawmakers that it would cost billions of dollars to pay prisoners minimum wage.

    The cost to taxpayers was one reason state Sen. Steve Glazer (D-Orinda) voted against the measure last year.

    “I was concerned about eliminating the word ‘slavery’ in the constitution without any detail on how it would be implemented in our prisons and would take power from legislatures to courts,” Glazer said in an interview.

    He said he supports raising wages for prison workers. “But at the heart of it, it’s a budget priority choice issue,” Glazer said.

    Budget projections show California is likely to face a shortfall of at least several billion dollars each of the next three years. The Corrections Department’s current plan to raise wages would not require additional funding from the state budget, spokesperson Outhyse said, because hours would be reduced while wages are increased. She said the budget allocates approximately $10 million a year for incarcerated wages and the proposed regulations “will maximize utilization of that fund.”

    State Sen. Steven Bradford is on the California Reparations Task Force, which recommended paying fair market value for prison labor and eliminating forced labor as a criminal punishment from the California Constitution.

    (Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times)

    Assemblyman Ash Kalra (D-San Jose) said he plans to push the state to consider even higher wages when lawmakers return to Sacramento in January.

    “It always sounds dramatic when you say something is being doubled,” Kalra said. “But going from 8 cents to 16 cents doesn’t really move the needle or give incarcerated workers the dignity they deserve.”

    He plans to revive Assembly Bill 1516, which stalled last year. It calls for the state to study the socioeconomic benefits of ending wages below the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour for incarcerated workers.

    “To simply raise the wages a few pennies, certainly acknowledges the fact that there is an agreement that incarcerated workers are being grossly underpaid,” Kalra added. “But I think there is a long way to go.”

    A portion of inmates who work in fire crews — and are based in separate conservation camps that provide intensive wildfire training — would see the greatest income hike under the prison system’s proposal, with some going from earning $3.34 per day to $6.68 per day and others from $5.12 to $10.24 per day.

    One category of workers would not receive a pay increase under the plan: About 5,700 inmates hired by the California Prison Industry Authority, a separate employer within CDCR, who are paid on a different wage scale. They work manufacturing jobs that create products such as eyeglasses, office furniture, shoes and license plates that are then sold to state departments. At the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, some of these workers churned out face masks for the general population.

    At a news conference Nov. 16, hosted by the Living Wage for All Coalition — a nonprofit group focused on ending sub-minimum wages — advocates and lawmakers criticized the Corrections Department’s wage increases, arguing that the changes are “unethical” and “unjust” because they do not meet rising inflation or ensure living wages.

    Shone Robinson, who was incarcerated for 22 years, said at the news conference that paying restitution while incarcerated was “a large hurdle.” Robinson was convicted in Riverside County of second-degree murder and testified that she acted in self-defense, the Press-Enterprise reported in 1997. Released from prison in 2017, she now works as a life coach at the Anti-Recidivism Coalition.

    “Not only did I pay restitution, but I also had to start my life beyond prison walls. Being locked up at a very young age did not prepare me for what I had to face,” Robinson said.

    The wage increase was proposed as a new regulation of the state prison system and can be approved after a period of public review that ended last week.

    Jeronimo Aguilar, a policy analyst for Legal Services for Prisoners with Children, told The Times that he questions whether inmates will just earn the same amount, or even less, as a result of the changes from full-time to half-time work. He also speculates that the state might end up saving money.

    Ultimately, however, he said he doesn’t want to “just blindly oppose this new regulation.”

    “We don’t want folks inside to think we’re opposing it because we want more,” he said. “We might kill an opportunity for them. Going from 8 cents to 16 cents may not be a lot for us, but for an indigent [worker] that’s huge.”

    [ad_2]

    Anabel Sosa

    Source link

  • Deal struck to remove homeless hotel housing measure from L.A.’s March ballot

    Deal struck to remove homeless hotel housing measure from L.A.’s March ballot

    [ad_1]

    Los Angeles City Council President Paul Krekorian has struck a deal with the politically powerful hotel workers’ union to remove a measure from the March election ballot that would have required hotels to participate in a city program to put homeless residents in vacant hotel rooms.

    Under the agreement, the City Council would approve a new package of regulations on the development of new hotels, forcing such projects to go through a more extensive approval process. Hotel developers also would be required to replace any housing that is demolished to make way for their projects, by building new residential units or buying and renovating existing ones.

    In exchange, the union’s proposal for placing homeless residents in vacant hotel rooms would be explicitly listed as voluntary, a move that would cause it to resemble Inside Safe, the program created by Mayor Karen Bass to combat homelessness. Hotel owners are willing participants in that program.

    Unite Here Local 11, which represents 32,000 hospitality workers in Southern California and Arizona, praised the agreement, saying it would ensure that the city places a priority on the creation of housing, not luxury hotels. Many of Unite Here’s members have been unable to find decently priced homes near their jobs, forcing them to endure punishing commutes.

    “We have said all along that our contract campaign has been about two things: housing for our members where they work and a living wage,” Kurt Petersen, the union’s co-president, said in a statement. “With this ordinance, we have done more to protect housing than any single contract demand would have done.”

    The proposal has already received signatures from five other council members — Hugo Soto-Martínez, John Lee, Katy Yaroslavsky, Nithya Raman and Traci Park — putting it two votes shy of passage. Park, who serves on the council’s trade and tourism committee, said she believes the original measure would have had “catastrophic consequences” for tourism locally had it won voter approval, by mandating that hotels take in homeless residents without accompanying social services.

    “The thought of putting individuals, many of whom have very serious mental health and substance abuse issues, [in hotel rooms] without on-site services is a recipe for disaster,” she said.

    Wednesday’s deal comes as Unite Here enters its fifth month of rolling strike actions as its members fight for higher wages and better working conditions. So far, four hotels across Southern California have reached salary agreements with the union.

    Unite Here also has been fighting a number of hotel projects that would result in the elimination of low-cost apartments, particularly those covered by the city’s rent stabilization law, which places a cap on yearly rent increases. Under the Krekorian proposal, the city would need to determine whether there is “sufficient market demand” for a new hotel project, while also identifying whether it would have an impact on demand for housing, childcare and other services.

    Unite Here has become a major force in L.A. politics, putting hundreds of thousands of dollars into a campaign to last year elect Soto-Martínez, a former Unite Here organizer himself. The union is also skilled at gathering signatures for ballot measures in and around L.A.

    Last year, Unite Here qualified a measure for the March ballot requiring the city’s Housing Department to create a new voucher program to serve the city’s unhoused population. Under that proposal, hotel managers would have been tasked with informing the city each day about the number of vacant rooms they had. Hotels also would have been required to accept temporary housing vouchers issued by the city under such a program.

    The hotel industry responded by launching a publicity campaign against the measure, warning that it would put hotel workers in danger. The campaign repeatedly pointed to problems in the city’s Project Roomkey program, which placed homeless residents in hotels after the outbreak of COVID-19.

    Project Roomkey, which is no longer in effect, generated a spate of internal City Hall reports about property damage, drug use and violence at hotels in downtown, Westlake and the San Fernando Valley.

    Heather Rozman, president and chief executive of the Hotel Assn. of Los Angeles, said her organization is still studying the proposal but commended council members for being willing to “listen to all sides of the issue.”

    Inside Safe, the program launched by Bass to combat homelessness, already uses dozens of hotels and motels as temporary housing. Bass, looking to scale back room rental costs, is also working to purchase hotel and motel properties for that program.

    The proposed ordinance would also require that both hotels and hosts of short-term rentals on platforms such as Airbnb secure operating permits from the Los Angeles Police Department. Both Krekorian and the union said such a move would help neighborhoods fight back against short-term rental properties that have “nuisance” activities, such as drug sales or noisy parties.

    “Irresponsible hotel and short-term rental operators cannot be allowed to endanger the public safety or impair the quality of life in our neighborhoods,” Krekorian said.

    [ad_2]

    David Zahniser

    Source link

  • Timing Your Moment: Should I Propose Before Or After Dinner?

    Timing Your Moment: Should I Propose Before Or After Dinner?

    [ad_1]

    Proposals hold a profound emotional and philosophical significance in relationships. Asking yourself, “Should I propose before or after dinner?” or “Is this ring good enough?” before popping the question is a personal agony but also fairly common. You might also often wonder, “Is everything exactly according to the plan?” Well, we are here to help you determine the best possible choice to make this important moment easier.

    A study published in 2017 showed that 45% of proposals are public. Choosing to go for a public or private proposal is something you should think about in more detail before moving on to ironing out the details for the rest of the unforgettable proposal.

    A good thing about going with dinner proposal ideas is that it gives you the option of keeping it public or private. It can be a bit abrupt to think that one meal means so much and can make a difference to a life-long commitment, but that’s what we’re here to help you with. Let’s do a deep dive into understanding the plethora of options and finding out exactly how you should pop the question!

    Proposing Before The Dinner

    When you ask yourself, Should I propose before or after dinner, consider this advice from a Reddit user, “If you’re thinking of proposing at the perfect restaurant, DO IT BEFORE THE MAIN COURSE!”

    Proposing before the dinner can be a very good idea for you. Read why.

    Here are a few reasons behind proposing before the meal:

    • If you propose before the dinner, it turns into that one special meal you will never forget. Make your memory a long-lasting one, which both of you will enjoy and celebrate
    • You can have more flattering pictures taken before you start eating
    • A momentous occasion such as this befits a bottle of champagne when your partner says ‘yes’. Champagne is almost always delicious, but much better at the start of a meal rather than later
    • It’s less likely to go south if you both start off in a joyful, celebratory mood. Plus, if they say ‘no’ to the proposal, you can just leave. We’re sure the entire restaurant will understand
    • Let’s say something goes wrong during the meal and you argue. It will probably not end the relationship but will certainly ruin the perfect moment for your special night. So, you might decide to postpone your perfect dinner proposal, leaving you with a huge expense and a less-than-perfect proposal

    Related Reading: The 15 Most Creative Outdoor Proposal Ideas

    Proposing After The Dinner

    If you’re sure your to-be new fiancé is a dessert person, proposing right after your delicious meal and before the sweet dishes are served may be the best move to make. Here are a few proposal ideas to consider if you’re waiting to propose until you’re done with your dinner:

    • Proposing after you eat dinner can be a romantic and unexpected way to conclude a lovely evening. It can create a memorable finale to an already special occasion
    • After dinner, the restaurant may have fewer patrons, offering a more private and intimate setting for the surprise dinner proposal, allowing for a quieter and more personal special moment. The pressure that can come with a public surprise proposal during dinner may be reduced when you propose after dinner, as the focus shifts to just the two of you
    • You can choose to propose inside the restaurant or take the moment outside to a more private location when you’re proposing after dinner. Any quiet place, such as a garden or a scenic spot, depending on the restaurant’s surroundings, may be apt
    romantic dinner proposal ideas
    Pop the question after the dinner to end the evening on the most enchanting note.

    Should You Propose During The Dinner?

    This can become a roller coaster of emotions and go many ways. Generally, when someone decides to propose in a fancy place, they either opt for a before- or after-dinner proposal. But there are certain things that make proposing during dinner a good option too. For instance:

    Related Reading: 15 Romantic Valentine’s Day Proposal Ideas That’ll Make Your Girlfriend Say Yes

    • Proposing during the dinner can be an option if you want to wait and see how the evening progresses, to check if everything is falling into place nicely
    • Waiting till the next course is served, hiding the ring in the dessert, or dropping the ring in the champagne are great ways to set up your surprise proposal

    Though these are good points to ponder on, nothing can beat a ‘pros and cons’ list to ensure you’ve got all your facts straight before making the decision. So, let’s get out those notepads and get to work. The answer to your question “Should I propose during or after dinner?” might be almost certain after going through the list below:

    Scenario Pros Cons
    Before The Dinner 1. There are many benefits, such as the entire dinner after a successful proposal becoming celebratory as well as the drinks and desserts
    2. You get great pictures without dishes or glasses when proposing before dinner
    3. There is less chance of the proposal getting postponed and less nervousness, and it sets the mood for the rest of the night    		 1. Though less likely, if your partner finds out about your plans to propose, they might stand you up for the dinner or give the ‘wrong answer’ publicly
    2. If the weather and location during your pre- dinner proposal is compromised in any way, it can ruin the whole plan
    3. If you pop the question without having discussed the chances of getting married, it can ruin the rest of the whole evening
    During The Dinner 1. You can hide the ring in your partner’s favorite dish or drink 
    2. You can ease up to the momentous occasion after getting both of you a few drinks 
    3. The desserts that follow become celebratory and, in many cases, complimentary    		 1. If you give the ring to the wait staff, they might end up losing it accidentally or sending it to another table by mistake
    2. You might risk your partner choking on food or drinks, leading to a medical emergency
    3. It can be especially expensive if you decide to hide the ring inside a glass of champagne or some pricey dessert and you might end up paying so much for nothing
    After The Dinner 1. It can be a romantic and unexpected way to conclude a lovely evening if everything goes right
    2. You can get a more private setting if it’s a little later than usual, when most guests have left the restaurant
    3. You can have more control over the timing and the execution of the memorable proposal after you’ve assessed your partner’s mood during the whole meal    		 1. You can both become too tired by the time the desserts are over, and you may already have decided to postpone the after-dinner proposal 
    2.Waiting too long to propose can result in the restaurant staff cleaning up and closing down as you get on one knee and may end up ruining the moment
    3. There is a risk of getting your photos ruined by the used glasses and dirty dishes if you propose after the dinner is over
    Table on how to time your proposal

    Besides the pros and cons of when to pop the question, there are about a dozen things that you need to think about. Let’s get into the extra tidbits that you need to have figured out on the day of your proposal.

    Things To Consider When Proposing During A Dinner Date

    Proposing can be a nerve wracking and emotional moment, but careful planning can help ensure that it goes smoothly and is the best moment of your life. Here are some important considerations for romantic dinner proposal ideas, including where to keep the ring, managing nervousness, and choosing the right restaurant:

    on stories about love and romance and more

    1. Choosing the ring

    • Set a budget and determine the gem and band options for the perfect engagement ring
    • Pay close attention to your partner’s jewelry preferences and style. Or take help from close friends of your partner to determine exactly what kind of ring they would like the most
    • Explore options other than a diamond engagement ring if it’s out of your budget or if your partner isn’t set on a particular style
    • A few tips for getting the ring right are researching different ring settings, visiting jewelry stores, and considering customization options to find or create the perfect ring. Or you can buy the jewelry online. Don’t forget to research your partner’s ring size and skin allergies/reactiveness to certain metals

    Related Reading: 14 People Shared Tips For How To Figure Out Girlfriend’s Ring Size

    2. Where to keep the ring

    • Stick with the classic ‘ring box in your pocket’, as it’s always a great idea. When you buy an engagement ring, you mostly get a beautiful ring box to house it. You can keep the ring safely in the box until it’s time to propose. Make sure it’s secure and easily accessible when you need it
    • If you prefer not to carry a bulky ring box, consider asking the restaurant management for some help. We highly suggest going with a reputed restaurant (with trusted staff) ahead of time for this. They will help ensure it’s in a secure location and not easily misplaced
    • If not the restaurant staff, consider asking trusted friends and family members. If you’re worried about accidentally revealing the ring or losing it, you could ask a close friend or family member to hold onto it until the proposal moment. You can ask them to come to the restaurant after you and your partner are already seated and ready for the evening and wait for your signal to bring the ring your way. A bonus of asking friends/family members is that they can also help with clicking pictures of the moment
    • You can also hide the ring box in a bouquet, a hollowed-out copy of a book your partner wanted, a gaming box/CD case, or anything more personal to both of you

    3. Managing nervousness

    • Practice what you want to say and do before the proposal dinner. This can help reduce anxiety and ensure that you feel more confident during the moment. You can try doing this in front of a mirror and when you’re sure you have your routine down pat. You can also ask a friend or family member to help you practice before the big day
    • Deep-breathing exercises can help calm nerves when the question “Should I propose before or after dinner?” rattles you and you’re too nervous to decide. You can excuse yourself to go to the washroom at the restaurant for a quick deep-breathing exercise and ground yourself

    Related Reading: 11 Expert Tips On How Not To Be Nervous On A Date

    • Focus on your partner and what made you want to consider proposing. Concentrate on the connection you share with your partner and the fact that you are deeply in love with them rather than dwelling on your nerves
    • Choose a fancy restaurant or an upscale place with a comfortable setting and six-course meal options. Select a location where you feel comfortable and at ease. A familiar or meaningful place can help reduce anxiety. Avoid trying to make a swift exit after proposing and try to savor the moment and the environment you’re in

    4. Choosing a good restaurant

    • To choose a nice restaurant for proposal, consider your partner and your shared favorite foods and drinks. Think about your partner’s favorite cuisine or type of restaurant. Choose a place that reflects a combination of both of your preferences. You might even consider your partner’s favorite restaurant or fine-dining place
    • Look for a restaurant with a romantic ambience, dim lighting, and a cozy atmosphere to set the mood for the marriage proposal
    • Consider the location of the restaurant. Is it conveniently located for both of you? Is it in a safe area? Also, remember to look up reviews of the restaurant’s food and staff in general to avoid disappointments on your big day
    • Make sure to get a reservation well in advance to ensure you have a table at the desired time. You can also make a request for a specific table for the restaurant proposal
    • Mention any special requests for the proposal plan to the restaurant staff, so they can assist you. Additionally, you can inquire if they would agree to personalize the menu if there are any dietary restrictions. This is important to make your romantic marriage proposal ideas more successful
    • In case your partner wants a low-key celebration of your engagement then opt for asking restaurant staff for help and request them to keep their involvement to a minimum in your routine

    Related Reading: 25 Questions You Should Ask Before Getting Married

    5. Capturing the moment

    Slyly, find out if your partner would prefer the proposal to be videographed and photographed. After that, consider arranging for a photographer or videographer to discreetly document the proposal. Or simply ask a friend to help capture your priceless precious moments.

    dinner proposal ideas
    Having photographs and videos that you can cherish together for a lifetime is an absolute treasure.

    6. Considering low-key settings

    • Consider arranging a proposal dinner at home if your partner is not a big fan of public proposals. This also makes the dilemma of ‘should I propose before or after dinner’ easier to handle

    Related Reading: Surprising Psychological Benefits Of Women Proposing To Men And 19 Ways To Do It Right

    • Plan an at-home candlelit dinner proposal or choose the spot of your first date or a place of great significance to your relationship if that’s more suited to your partner’s wishes. Go in with the acceptance that there is no right or wrong answer to a proposal dinner at home or in public, and no matter what you choose, it will all work out because you and your partner love each other

    Key Pointers

    • Only plan on proposing if you’ve talked about getting married to your partner beforehand and they are on board with the idea. Avoid making a public proposal if it is something your partner doesn’t seem too excited about
    • Remember to pay attention to the seemingly less important stuff, such as proper light, music, ambience, and the overall atmosphere of the place you decide to propose in
    • Don’t hesitate to ask friends and family to help you out with executing your plan to propose to your partner
    • Research your partner’s jewelry style, ring size, skin allergies, and gem preferences, and take the help of a trusted friend/family member who might know more about it
    • Remind yourself of the pros and cons of every scenario (before, during, and after dinner) and make the choice best suited for both of you to pop the question

    To conclude, be especially sure that your partner will be thrilled to get proposed to in public. Otherwise, it might make them feel trapped and coerced into saying yes to avoid coming off as rude or ungrateful to onlookers. Remember that the most important aspect of the proposal is the love and commitment you’re expressing to your partner. You are saying I love you in the best possible way. Plan in a way that feels authentic to your relationship, and don’t be afraid to seek assistance from friends, family, or the restaurant staff to help give the moment special meaning. It’s a unique and personal experience that should reflect your bond and your partner’s preferences. Now that you’re ready, we wish you good luck. Break a leg!

    7 Things A Girl Should Do With Her Bestie Before Getting Married

    10 Best Ways To Propose A Boy [He Will Say Yes For Sure]

    When You Meet The Right Person You Know It – 11 Things That Happen

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Research Square: Cracking the (Tax) Code to True Love

    Research Square: Cracking the (Tax) Code to True Love

    [ad_1]

    Press Release
    –


    updated: Feb 28, 2018


    DURHAM, N.C., February 28, 2018 (Newswire.com)
    –
    They don’t usually top the list of reasons to get married, but tax bonuses are a real perk for many newlyweds. New research shows, however, that they could actually stop a couple from getting married. The findings were published by an international team of researchers hailing from the University of Augsburg in Germany, the University of Toulouse Capitole in France, and the University of Bologna in Italy. Using game theory, they’ve concluded that couples who stand to gain a tax incentive from marriage are – perhaps surprisingly – less likely to wed.

    The team modeled the fate of a fictitious couple – Sam and Robin – under two different scenarios: whether their marriage boosted their earnings thanks to a tax bonus or came at the cost of a tax penalty. Surprisingly, they found that a tax bonus could actually lower the probability that the couple gets married.

    A marriage proposal, on the other hand, entails costs – for example, Sam has to spend the time to plan the proposal and is exposed to the potential cost of divorce. Only a strongly-in-love partner is willing to pay these costs.

    Kerstin Roeder, Professor for Applied Microeconomics, University of Augsburg

    Just why would the chance to bring in extra cash potentially lead to an “I don’t”? The answer may come down to a matter of motive.

    A tax liability can affect the communication of strong love by changing the costs associated with marriage, according to the researchers. “A simple ‘I love you’ doesn’t cost anything and is therefore not credible for Robin,” says Kerstin Roeder, one of the investigators for the work. “A marriage proposal, on the other hand, entails costs – for example, Sam has to spend the time to plan the proposal, and is exposed to the potential cost of divorce. Only a strongly-in-love partner is willing to pay these costs.”

    And tax penalties add to the cost, signaling to Robin that Sam’s eagerness to get married comes only from a place of true love.

    The model’s predictions help reveal the effects that a tax system can have on the marriage decision, which could have important repercussions for how tax policy is designed. “Our analysis shows that tax (dis)incentives for marriage can have strong implications on the number of marriages,” Roeder says, “and on whether they are based on love or tax benefits.”

    Original citation: Barigozzi, Francesca and Cremer, Helmuth and Roeder, Kerstin, Until Taxes Do Us Part: Tax Penalties or Bonuses and the Marriage Decision (October 24, 2017). Quaderni – Working Paper DSE N° 1111. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3058874 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3058874

    Source: Research Square

    [ad_2]

    Source link