Jual Genset Perkins Murah di Malang Hubungi : 0821 - 1310 - 3112/(021) 9224 - 2423 PT. Tribuana Diesel Adalah penjualan Generating-Set (genset) berkualitas import (builtup) bagi anda yang membutuhkan product berkualitas serta pengadaan yang cepat urgent tanpa berbelit-belit, Genset kami di lengkapi dengan dokumen Certificate Of Original , Manual book engine dan manual book generator, Kami sediakan Genset kapasitas 10 Kva - 650Kva (ANDA PESAN KAMI ANTAR).
Jual Genset Perkins Murah di Malang Kami juga menerima pembuatan box silent dan perakitan diesel generator set. Produk kami meliputi berbagai diesel generator set model open, silent lokal yang ukuranya menyesuaikan lokasi pondasi genset, mobile/ trailer . Sebagian besar mesin kami menggunakan Merk : Perkins, Cummins, Deutz, Lovol, Isuzu Foton dengan generator Leroy Somer, Stamford, kualitas terbaik brushless alternator. Jual Genset Perkins Murah di Malang
Genset Cummins 37 Kva Silent Murah di Maluku Barat Daya Hubungi : 0821 - 1310 - 3112/(021) 9224 - 2423 PT. Tribuana Diesel Adalah penjualan Generating-Set (genset) berkualitas import (builtup) bagi anda yang membutuhkan product berkualitas serta pengadaan yang cepat urgent tanpa berbelit-belit, Genset kami di lengkapi dengan dokumen Certificate Of Original , Manual book engine dan manual book generator, Kami sediakan Genset kapasitas 10 Kva - 650Kva (ANDA PESAN KAMI ANTAR). Genset Cummins 37 Kva Silent Murah di Maluku Barat Daya
HARGA BESI BETON
Jika kita membutuhkan besi beton, dan mencari penjual besi beton, tentu lumrah jika kita membandingkan harganya dari berbagai ag
Jika kita membutuhkan besi beton, dan mencari penjual besi beton, tentu lumrah jika kita membandingkan harganya dari berbagai agen, distributor atau pabrik. Dengan mengisi form yang ada disini, Anda juga bisa mendapatkan harga terbaru besi beton polos dan besi beton ulir.
Daftar harga yang pernah dibagikan di website ini, tentu saja adalah harga pada saat daftar tersebut dipublikasikan. Sedangkan harga besi beton, sebagaimana komoditi yang lainnya, tentu harganya selalu berubah dari waktu ke waktu. Untuk itu update harga terbaru perlu diinformasikan via email. Data yang Anda masukkan ke dalam form tersebut hanya digunakan untuk dapat membuat penawaran besi beton sesuai yang Anda minta, tidak akan dipergunakan untuk kepentingan yang lain.
Untuk bisa mendapatkan penawaran resmi harga besi beton, sebaiknya Anda bukan saja melengkapi data Anda dan email yang falid, namun juga melengkapi dengan masing-masing ukuran beserta jumlahnya.
Ukuran dan jumlah masing-masing sesuai kebutuhan Anda, bisa Anda tuliskan di kolom pesan.
Harga besi beton telah ditentukan oleh harga bahan baku, ongkos produksi, angkutan, dan perbandingan antara permintaan dan persediaan. Harga bahan baku sering berubah, yang menjadi bahan baku produksi besi beton adalah billet, dan yang telah menjadi bahan baku produk billet adalah scrap atau besi tua. Semua produk terbut adalah komoditi yang fluktuasi harganya sangat tinggi. Ongkos produksi banyak dipengaruhi oleh efisiensi pabrik dalam proses produksi. Harga proses produksi banyak dipengaruhi oleh harga listrik, bahan bakar, harga spare part, dan tenaga kerja. Semua itu juga memberikan harga yang berubah-ubah setiap waktu.
Berikutnya angkutan juga telah memberikan pengaruh nilai atau harga besi beton cukup signifikan. Sebagai produk yang besar dan berat, ongkos pengiriman besi beton dari pabrik, ke distributor hingga ke lokasi proyek, memberikan pengaruh yang besar pula.
Sebagaimana semua produk di pasaran, perbandingan antaranya ketersediaan produk dengan banyaknya permintaan, sangat mempengaruhi harga. Jika permintaan naik, tentu harga biasanya juga ikut naik. Jika permintaan produk turun, harga juga biasanya ikut turun. Berkaitan juga dengan pasokan dari pabrik-pabrik yang ada, juga mungkin adanya import. Jika pasokan sangat banyak, bahkan mungkin melebihi permintaan, bisa jadi harga besi beton akan turun, demikian juga sebaliknya, jika pasokan berkurang, mungkin harga akan naik.
Harga besi beton, sering dicari oleh pelaku pasar, yang berhubungan dengan besi beton. Marketing pabrik besi beton, distributor besi beton, juga kontraktor, dan masyarakat konsumen.
MANFAAT JERUK NIPIS
saco-indonesia.com, Bagi masyarakat Indonesia, jeruk nipis jamak digunakan sebagai bahan minuman atau bahan pelengkap dari makan
saco-indonesia.com, Bagi masyarakat Indonesia, jeruk nipis jamak digunakan sebagai bahan minuman atau bahan pelengkap dari makanan. Buah ini juga memiliki kandungan asam yang lebih rendah jika dibandingkan dengan lemon.
Selain itu, ternyata jeruk nipis juga mempunyai banyak manfaat untuk kesehatan. inilah manfaat jeruk nipis untuk kesehatan :
Baik untuk diet
Jeruk nipis adalah buah yang rendah akan kalori. Jeruk nipis hanya mengandung 43 kalori secara keseluruhan. Oleh karena itu buah ini juga cocok untuk dikonsumsi sebagai menu diet bagi mereka yang sedang berusaha untuk menurunkan berat badan.
Kandungan flavanoids yang ada di dalam jeruk nipis juga mampu untuk meningkatkan produksi empedu dan cairan pencernaan. Cairan tersebut juga mampu untuk mengeluarkan racun dari dalam tubuh. Selain itu jeruk nipis juga mampu untuk menenangkan perut Anda yang sedang menderita mual, muntah, dan diare.
Kaya akan vitamin C
Vitamin C adalah salah satu vitamin yang sangat penting diperlukan oleh tubuh. Kebutuhan vitamin C pria dewasa yang dianjurkan adalah 90 mg dan wanita dewasa adalah 75 mg setiap hari. Sementara itu kandungan vitamin C di dalam jeruk nipis minimal berjumlah 50 mg.
Kaya akan mineral
Jeruk nipis sangat kaya akan kandungan mineral. Kandungan kalium yang ada di dalam jeruk nipis sekitar 490 mg. Selain kalium, jeruk nipis juga mengandung tembaga, kalsium, besi, dan fosfor.
Dapat digunakan sebagai obat
Jangan lupa untuk selalu menyediakan jeruk nipis di rumah Anda sebab jeruk nipis dapat digunakan sebagai obat darurat untuk penyakit yang ringan. Beberapa peneliti telah menyebutkan bahwa jeruk nipis telah memiliki sifat anti virus dan anti septik.
Si kecil jeruk nipis ternyata juga memiliki beragam manfaat untuk kesehatan. Oleh karena itu selalu sediakan jeruk nipis di rumah Anda sebagai salah satu tanaman herbal yang penting untuk dapat menjaga kesehatan Anda.
Editor : Dian Sukmawati
Ex-C.I.A. Official Rebuts Republican Claims on Benghazi Attack in ‘The Great War of Our Time’
WASHINGTON — The former deputy director of the C.I.A. asserts in a forthcoming book that Republicans, in their eagerness to politicize the killing of the American ambassador to Libya, repeatedly distorted the agency’s analysis of events. But he also argues that the C.I.A. should get out of the business of providing “talking points” for administration officials in national security events that quickly become partisan, as happened after the Benghazi attack in 2012.
The official, Michael J. Morell, dismisses the allegation that the United States military and C.I.A. officers “were ordered to stand down and not come to the rescue of their comrades,” and he says there is “no evidence” to support the charge that “there was a conspiracy between C.I.A. and the White House to spin the Benghazi story in a way that would protect the political interests of the president and Secretary Clinton,” referring to the secretary of state at the time, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
But he also concludes that the White House itself embellished some of the talking points provided by the Central Intelligence Agency and had blocked him from sending an internal study of agency conclusions to Congress.
“I finally did so without asking,” just before leaving government, he writes, and after the White House released internal emails to a committee investigating the State Department’s handling of the issue.
A lengthy congressional investigation remains underway, one that many Republicans hope to use against Mrs. Clinton in the 2016 election cycle.
In parts of the book, “The Great War of Our Time” (Twelve), Mr. Morell praises his C.I.A. colleagues for many successes in stopping terrorist attacks, but he is surprisingly critical of other C.I.A. failings — and those of the National Security Agency.
Soon after Mr. Morell retired in 2013 after 33 years in the agency, President Obama appointed him to a commission reviewing the actions of the National Security Agency after the disclosures of Edward J. Snowden, a former intelligence contractor who released classified documents about the government’s eavesdropping abilities. Mr. Morell writes that he was surprised by what he found.
“You would have thought that of all the government entities on the planet, the one least vulnerable to such grand theft would have been the N.S.A.,” he writes. “But it turned out that the N.S.A. had left itself vulnerable.”
He concludes that most Wall Street firms had better cybersecurity than the N.S.A. had when Mr. Snowden swept information from its systems in 2013. While he said he found himself “chagrined by how well the N.S.A. was doing” compared with the C.I.A. in stepping up its collection of data on intelligence targets, he also sensed that the N.S.A., which specializes in electronic spying, was operating without considering the implications of its methods.
“The N.S.A. had largely been collecting information because it could, not necessarily in all cases because it should,” he says.
Mr. Morell was a career analyst who rose through the ranks of the agency, and he ended up in the No. 2 post. He served as President George W. Bush’s personal intelligence briefer in the first months of his presidency — in those days, he could often be spotted at the Starbucks in Waco, Tex., catching up on his reading — and was with him in the schoolhouse in Florida on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, when the Bush presidency changed in an instant.
Mr. Morell twice took over as acting C.I.A. director, first when Leon E. Panetta was appointed secretary of defense and then when retired Gen. David H. Petraeus resigned over an extramarital affair with his biographer, a relationship that included his handing her classified notes of his time as America’s best-known military commander.
Mr. Morell says he first learned of the affair from Mr. Petraeus only the night before he resigned, and just as the Benghazi events were turning into a political firestorm. While praising Mr. Petraeus, who had told his deputy “I am very lucky” to run the C.I.A., Mr. Morell writes that “the organization did not feel the same way about him.” The former general “created the impression through the tone of his voice and his body language that he did not want people to disagree with him (which was not true in my own interaction with him),” he says.
But it is his account of the Benghazi attacks — and how the C.I.A. was drawn into the debate over whether the Obama White House deliberately distorted its account of the death of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens — that is bound to attract attention, at least partly because of its relevance to the coming presidential election. The initial assessments that the C.I.A. gave to the White House said demonstrations had preceded the attack. By the time analysts reversed their opinion, Susan E. Rice, now the national security adviser, had made a series of statements on Sunday talk shows describing the initial assessment. The controversy and other comments Ms. Rice made derailed Mr. Obama’s plan to appoint her as secretary of state.
The experience prompted Mr. Morell to write that the C.I.A. should stay out of the business of preparing talking points — especially on issues that are being seized upon for “political purposes.” He is critical of the State Department for not beefing up security in Libya for its diplomats, as the C.I.A., he said, did for its employees.
But he concludes that the assault in which the ambassador was killed took place “with little or no advance planning” and “was not well organized.” He says the attackers “did not appear to be looking for Americans to harm. They appeared intent on looting and conducting some vandalism,” setting fires that killed Mr. Stevens and a security official, Sean Smith.
Mr. Morell paints a picture of an agency that was struggling, largely unsuccessfully, to understand dynamics in the Middle East and North Africa when the Arab Spring broke out in late 2011 in Tunisia. The agency’s analysts failed to see the forces of revolution coming — and then failed again, he writes, when they told Mr. Obama that the uprisings would undercut Al Qaeda by showing there was a democratic pathway to change.
“There is no good explanation for our not being able to see the pressures growing to dangerous levels across the region,” he writes. The agency had again relied too heavily “on a handful of strong leaders in the countries of concern to help us understand what was going on in the Arab street,” he says, and those leaders themselves were clueless.
Moreover, an agency that has always overvalued secretly gathered intelligence and undervalued “open source” material “was not doing enough to mine the wealth of information available through social media,” he writes. “We thought and told policy makers that this outburst of popular revolt would damage Al Qaeda by undermining the group’s narrative,” he writes.
Instead, weak governments in Egypt, and the absence of governance from Libya to Yemen, were “a boon to Islamic extremists across both the Middle East and North Africa.”
Mr. Morell is gentle about most of the politicians he dealt with — he expresses admiration for both Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama, though he accuses former Vice President Dick Cheney of deliberately implying a connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq that the C.I.A. had concluded probably did not exist. But when it comes to the events leading up to the Bush administration’s decision to go to war in Iraq, he is critical of his own agency.
Mr. Morell concludes that the Bush White House did not have to twist intelligence on Saddam Hussein’s alleged effort to rekindle the country’s work on weapons of mass destruction.
“The view that hard-liners in the Bush administration forced the intelligence community into its position on W.M.D. is just flat wrong,” he writes. “No one pushed. The analysts were already there and they had been there for years, long before Bush came to office.”
How Some Men Fake an 80-Hour Workweek, and Why It Matters
Imagine an elite professional services firm with a high-performing, workaholic culture. Everyone is expected to turn on a dime to serve a client, travel at a moment’s notice, and be available pretty much every evening and weekend. It can make for a grueling work life, but at the highest levels of accounting, law, investment banking and consulting firms, it is just the way things are.
Except for one dirty little secret: Some of the people ostensibly turning in those 80- or 90-hour workweeks, particularly men, may just be faking it.
Many of them were, at least, at one elite consulting firm studied by Erin Reid, a professor at Boston University’s Questrom School of Business. It’s impossible to know if what she learned at that unidentified consulting firm applies across the world of work more broadly. But her research, published in the academic journal Organization Science, offers a way to understand how the professional world differs between men and women, and some of the ways a hard-charging culture that emphasizes long hours above all can make some companies worse off.
Ms. Reid interviewed more than 100 people in the American offices of a global consulting firm and had access to performance reviews and internal human resources documents. At the firm there was a strong culture around long hours and responding to clients promptly.
“When the client needs me to be somewhere, I just have to be there,” said one of the consultants Ms. Reid interviewed. “And if you can’t be there, it’s probably because you’ve got another client meeting at the same time. You know it’s tough to say I can’t be there because my son had a Cub Scout meeting.”
Some people fully embraced this culture and put in the long hours, and they tended to be top performers. Others openly pushed back against it, insisting upon lighter and more flexible work hours, or less travel; they were punished in their performance reviews.
The third group is most interesting. Some 31 percent of the men and 11 percent of the women whose records Ms. Reid examined managed to achieve the benefits of a more moderate work schedule without explicitly asking for it.
They made an effort to line up clients who were local, reducing the need for travel. When they skipped work to spend time with their children or spouse, they didn’t call attention to it. One team on which several members had small children agreed among themselves to cover for one another so that everyone could have more flexible hours.
A male junior manager described working to have repeat consulting engagements with a company near enough to his home that he could take care of it with day trips. “I try to head out by 5, get home at 5:30, have dinner, play with my daughter,” he said, adding that he generally kept weekend work down to two hours of catching up on email.
Despite the limited hours, he said: “I know what clients are expecting. So I deliver above that.” He received a high performance review and a promotion.
What is fascinating about the firm Ms. Reid studied is that these people, who in her terminology were “passing” as workaholics, received performance reviews that were as strong as their hyper-ambitious colleagues. For people who were good at faking it, there was no real damage done by their lighter workloads.
It calls to mind the episode of “Seinfeld” in which George Costanza leaves his car in the parking lot at Yankee Stadium, where he works, and gets a promotion because his boss sees the car and thinks he is getting to work earlier and staying later than anyone else. (The strategy goes awry for him, and is not recommended for any aspiring partners in a consulting firm.)
A second finding is that women, particularly those with young children, were much more likely to request greater flexibility through more formal means, such as returning from maternity leave with an explicitly reduced schedule. Men who requested a paternity leave seemed to be punished come review time, and so may have felt more need to take time to spend with their families through those unofficial methods.
The result of this is easy to see: Those specifically requesting a lighter workload, who were disproportionately women, suffered in their performance reviews; those who took a lighter workload more discreetly didn’t suffer. The maxim of “ask forgiveness, not permission” seemed to apply.
It would be dangerous to extrapolate too much from a study at one firm, but Ms. Reid said in an interview that since publishing a summary of her research in Harvard Business Review she has heard from people in a variety of industries describing the same dynamic.
High-octane professional service firms are that way for a reason, and no one would doubt that insane hours and lots of travel can be necessary if you’re a lawyer on the verge of a big trial, an accountant right before tax day or an investment banker advising on a huge merger.
But the fact that the consultants who quietly lightened their workload did just as well in their performance reviews as those who were truly working 80 or more hours a week suggests that in normal times, heavy workloads may be more about signaling devotion to a firm than really being more productive. The person working 80 hours isn’t necessarily serving clients any better than the person working 50.
In other words, maybe the real problem isn’t men faking greater devotion to their jobs. Maybe it’s that too many companies reward the wrong things, favoring the illusion of extraordinary effort over actual productivity.