ski vacations and your

Aspen Snowmass Central Reservations – Aspen Snowmass Ski vacation Lodging, air, lift tickets, ski school, transfers, rentals and more Aspen Snowmass Snowmass.com and Aspen Snowmass Central Reservations, your best source for planning your Aspen ski vacations and your Snowmass ski vacations. Arranging your own travel plans and reservations for a ski vacation can be complicated so we specialize in handling every detail for you. We will book your dream ski vacation, providing you with the best possible plans for your ski trip. Matching your every expectation is what we specialize in. Let one of our 60 expert reservations agents help you design and book your dream ski vacation taking care of your every need. Our company is headquartered in Aspen, Colorado so all of our agents at Aspen Snowmass Central Reservations are intimately familiar with each and every property, hotel, home and townhouse in Aspen and Snowmass. Let us help you pick the right one for you. We offer telephone and online reservations for Aspen and Snowmass lodging,hotels, motels, condos, homes, air flights into Aspen, Eagle or Denver, car rentals, ground transfers, Aspen Skiing Company ski lift tickets, ski/snowboard rentals, concierge services and much more. Browse though our site and you will find all of the information you will need to plan your entire Aspen ski vacation or your Snowmass ski vacation. Come ski the Power of Four, Aspen Mountain, Aspen Highlands, Buttermilk and/or Snowmass. You will find weather information, restaurants, maps of Aspen and Snowmass, trail maps and a list of events for the season. Let our agents plan your ski trip. Ski Aspen and Ski Snowmass this winter! Plan A Trip | The Mountain | The Town | Events & Activities | Group Planning AABC 210, Suite AA, Aspen, CO 81611 | 1-800-923-8920 | E-mail Us This web site is designed and maintained by Blue Tent Marketing in conjunction with Aspen Snowmass Central Reservations, Inc. © 1999-2004 Aspen Snowmass Central Reservations, Inc.

European Vacation There's a

Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis - The Region - European Vacation (December 2003) I'm at: Home > Publications > The Region > December 2003 > Article Publications Expand All Collapse All The Region Index by Issue Interviews President's Columns fedgazette Index by Issue Topics Index Annual Report Quarterly Review Community Dividend Banking and Policy Studies Articles Toolbox ( advanced search ) December 2003 European Vacation There's a simple reason Americans work longer hours than Europeans, says economist Ed Prescott. And it isn't what you think Douglas Clement Editor It's no secret that Europeans work less than Americans do. Every Labor Day the media tell us that Europeans have just enjoyed weeks of summer vacation while Americans have been toiling away. These stories often depict Americans as hard-working drones who revere material possessions above all else. Europeans meanwhile bask in the good life of long lunches and months at the beach. There is some truth to the portrayal, at least in terms of hours worked. The International Labor Organization reports that the average American worked 1,815 hours in 2002, well above the comparable figures for France (1,545) and Germany (1,444), for example. (The average South Korean, on the other hand, worked over 2,400 hours.) But if it's widely acknowledged that Americans work more hours than Europeans, it remains a puzzle quite why there's such a large difference. With similar economies and social structures—at least relative to the rest of the world—it would seem that labor patterns should also be alike. Social scientists have been hard-pressed to explain the disparity. Most accounts focus on cultural explanations. The most popular is the notion that Europeans have a fuller appreciation of la dolce vita —the sweet life—the Italian version of the idea that life is to be enjoyed, not endured. Work is a means to an end, not an end in itself. The idea of cultural and religious influences on economic activity isn't new. German sociologist Max Weber wrote The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism nearly a century ago, attributing the rise of capitalist economies to the “Protestant work ethic.” It was an immensely persuasive theory in its time, and derivative explanations have held great sway ever since. “Why do Europeans and Americans differ so much in their attitude toward work and leisure? I can think of two reasons,” opines a recent Time magazine essay. “Broadly speaking, Americans value stuff—SUVs, 7,000-sq.-ft. houses—more than they value time, while for Europeans it's the opposite. Second, ... in the puritanical version of Christianity that has always appealed to Americans, religion comes packaged with the stern message that hard work is good for the soul. Modern Europe has avoided so melancholy a lesson.” “It all comes down to what people feel is important and how they feel about their lives,” argues a September 2003 U.S. News & World Report editorial. “We value more money and more stuff; they value more leisure time. ... We are proud of being busy—it is a virtue; being idle is perceived as a vice.” Economic explanations Economists have always been suspect of such cultural explanations. Standard economic theory assumes that people's preferences are, on average, homogeneous, and that choices depend largely on economic factors. Still, while economists agree that dollars and cents lie behind the work pattern differential, there is little harmony among them as to the right economic explanation. Some economists say work regulations keep Europeans from working longer hours and point favorably to recent European reforms on vacation time. Others argue that greater inequality in the United States motivates workers to try harder to get ahead. Most of these explanations come from the perspective of labor economics and its core belief that social structures and institutions such as unions are the major determinants of labor patterns. But in a recent series of papers and lectures, Edward C. Prescott, senior monetary adviser to the Minneapolis Fed and economist at Arizona State University, looks at the labor supply question through the prism of the growth model—a different perspective altogether—and provides a convincing and remarkably straightforward explanation for the dramatic differences in hours worked. It is an explanation that has far-reaching implications for policymakers—and for anyone else who's ever received a paycheck. According to Prescott, the reason for these large differences in labor supply is not culture. “French, Japanese, and U.S. workers all have similar preferences,” he writes. “The French are not better at enjoying leisure. The Japanese are not compulsive savers.” The reason for the wide range in working hours is, in a word, taxes. Europeans supply less labor because there's a much larger wedge in most European countries between what a worker is paid and what that worker actually gets to keep after taxes are taken out. This tax wedge, argues Prescott, distorts the trade-off people make between consumption and leisure by making consumption more expensive. And since people work, ultimately, to earn money to pay for consumption goods, they'll supply less labor if consumption goods become relatively more expensive. The cheaper alternative: leisure. Hello, Riviera. If the concept seems straightforward, its evolution was anything but. Like most ideas that seem obvious in retrospect, the awareness that taxes distort labor markets dramatically and account for major international differences in work patterns came about indirectly and as a revelation to those who happened upon it. The discovery Prescott's discovery about the role of taxes in labor supply variation began, simply enough, in his classroom at the University of Minnesota, where he taught from 1980 to 2003. “I was making up exercises for my students,” he recalled in a recent interview. “I said, 'use this nice little growth model.'” The “nice little model” he presented to his students is the workhorse of modern macroeconomics; it says, mathematically, that a nation's total output (or gross domestic product, GDP) is dependent on three sources: labor, capital and the efficiency (or productivity) with which it merges them to create economic value. The other key part of this standard theory is, in the jargon of economics, a utility function: a formula representing the notion that households try to maximize their happiness by finding the best possible combination of leisure and consumption, given their resources. Prescott wanted his students to become familiar with this model by looking at how it performed in different nations over time, and how key variables—capital endowments, productivity, labor supply—could account for differences among nations in per capita GDP. “I wanted to try to get across the basic ideas and the importance of productivity,” said Prescott. “And then I thought, let's put a few taxes in.” The intuition was far more significant than Prescott suspected, but that became clear only after looking at the relative contributions of capital, productivity and labor. The data, compiled by the United Nations and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, showed that in the mid-1990s among developed countries—the United States, much of Europe and Japan—relative levels of capital differ little and explain just a small portion of the variation in per capita GDP (see adjacent table). “The capital factor is not an important factor in accounting for differences in incomes across the OECD countries,” writes Prescott in his 2002 Richard T. Ely Lecture to the American Economic Association. “[It] contributes at most 8 percent to the differences in income between any of these countries.” Capital, Labor, Productivity and GDP 1993-96 Country Capital/ Output Ratio (1990) Hours worked per Week per Person 15-64 Productivity: GDP per hour Worked; US=100 GDP per Person 15-64; US=100 Germany 2.7 19.3 99 74 France 2.2 17.5 110 74 Italy 2.6 16.5 90 57 Canada na 22.9 89 79 United Kingdom 2.6 22.8 76 67 Japan 2.5 27.0 74 78 United States 2.3 25.9 100 100 Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Research Department Staff Report 321 and Working Paper 618 . Productivity, on the other hand, is very important, at least for some national differences. Japan and the United States, for example, have similar levels of labor and capital, but per capita GDP in Japan is far below that in the United States because its productivity is less than three-quarters that of the United States. But what of European countries like France, Italy and Germany? Why are their levels of per capita GDP so much lower? All these nations have capital endowments comparable to the United States. Their productivity levels also are similar to U.S. rates, or in the case of France, even higher. The data suggest that the differences in wealth are due almost exclusively to the markedly lower number of hours worked in these European countries. Germany, for instance, had a slightly higher capital endowment than the United States and an equal level of productivity, but just 74 percent of the U.S. per capita GDP. The evident reason: Its workers supplied just over 19 hours of labor per week compared to nearly 26 hours a week per American worker. While many believe that cultural differences lead to fewer hours worked in Europe than in the United States, Prescott doubts it. After all, data from the early 1970s show that the French actually worked more hours per week than did Americans at that time. Has French culture changed radically over the last two decades? Probably not: They still like good wine, aged cheese and, inexplicably, Jerry Lewis. Prescott's hunch was that differences in marginal tax rates might explain the differences in labor supplied and thus account for differences in per capita GDP. Enter the tax wedge “What is important is the price of consumption relative to leisure,” Prescott writes in the lecture he gave in April 2003 as he accepted Northwestern University's prestigious Erwin Plein Nemmers Prize in Economics. “And it is determined by the consumption tax rate and the labor income tax rate.” (See the lecture, “ Why Do Americans Work So Much More Than Europeans? ”) By introducing these taxes into the growth model, and making standard microeconomic assumptions, Prescott derived what he calls “the key equilibrium relation.” 1 It's a mathematical formula for labor supply that says workers will supply labor dependent on, among other things, their preference for consumption now over consumption later (spend or save?), their preference for leisure relative to consumption (play or work?) and the effective tax rate. Holding the first two variables fixed and looking empirically at different national tax rates enables Prescott to see if tax differences can account, fully or partially, for variations in labor hours supplied. Estimating the effective tax rates in these countries was, in itself, a major accounting exercise. Consumption taxes include value-added taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes and property taxes. Labor is subject to both income taxes and Social Security taxes. For each nation under consideration, Prescott and his students crunched the numbers, determined a tax rate, plugged it into the formula along with fixed estimates of the other variables, and derived predictions of labor hours supplied per week per worker. How good were the predictions? Dead-on for Germany and the United Kingdom, a bit low for Canada and the United States, and a bit high for the other countries (see table below). Given measurement inaccuracies, the rough nature of the tax-rate estimates and the difficulty of international comparisons, writes Prescott, the model's predictions were “surprisingly close to the actual.” Tax Rates and Labor Supply 1993-96 Country Tax Rate (percent) Actual Hours Worked per Week per Person 15-64 Predicted Hours Worked per Week per Person 15-64 Difference (Predicted Minus Actual) Germany 59 19.3 19.5 0.2 France 59 17.5 19.5 2.0 Italy 64 16.5 18.8 2.3 Canada 52 22.9 21.3 -1.6 United Kingdom 44 22.8 22.8 0.0 Japan 37 27.0 29.0 2.0 United States 40 25.9 24.6 -1.3 Source: “ Why Do Americans Work So Much More Than Europeans ?” Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Research Department Staff Report 321. Here, notes Prescott, “the important observation is that the low labor supplies in Germany, France and Italy are due to high tax rates. In these countries if someone works more and produces 100 additional euros of output, that individual gets to consume only 40 euros of additional consumption and pays directly or indirectly 60 euros in taxes.” Put in such stark terms, it seems obvious that many Europeans might opt to work less, while Americans and Japanese, taxed more lightly, would be keen to put in extra hours. Confirmation and implications Prescott found further confirmation for his hypothesis when he looked at tax rates and labor supply in the early 1970s (see table below). While his model's predictions of labor hours supplied diverge from the actual in several cases—Italy and Japan, in particular—Prescott observes that “when European and U.S. tax rates were comparable, European and U.S. labor supplies were roughly equal.” Tax Rates and Labor Supply 1970-74 Country Tax Rate (percent) Actual Hours Worked per Week per Person 15-64 Predicted Hours Worked per Week per Person 15-64 Difference (Predicted Minus Actual) Germany 52 24.6 24.6 0.0 France 49 24.4 25.4 1.0 Italy 41 19.2 28.3 9.1 Canada 44 22.2 25.6 3.4 United Kingdom 45 25.9 24.0 -1.9 Japan 25 29.8 35.8 6.0 United States 40 23.5 26.4 2.9 Source: “ Why Do Americans Work So Much More Than Europeans ?” Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Research Department Staff Report 321. As for the outliers, Italy and Japan, Prescott suggests that other factors may be significant. In Italy, cartels may have played a role in depressing labor supply below its predicted value. In Japan, significant measurement errors in actual hours worked could account for the overly high prediction by the model. And what seems another anomaly is very likely an indirect confirmation of the importance of marginal tax rates on labor supply, according to Prescott. In the United States, actual hours worked per person increased by 10 percent from the 1970s to the 1990s, though the marginal tax rate remained at 40 percent. Prescott argues that U.S. tax reforms in the 1980s changed the effective marginal tax faced by married couples—dropping the rate in half for the second earner's income—even though it remained nominally at 40 percent. “In the 1993-96 [period],” he writes, “the marginal income tax on the labor income associated with switching between a one-earner and a two-earner household is only 20 percent, not 40 percent.” The issue warrants more attention, he says, and indeed, his colleagues Larry Jones, Rodolfo Manuelli and Ellen McGrattan have recently released a paper on this exact question. (See “ Wives at Work .”) On the whole, Prescott states, the results show that “people are remarkably similar across countries” and not only for these relatively prosperous and homogeneous nations, but for Chile, Mexico and Argentina, as well, where other economists have found similar relationships. “Apparently, idiosyncratic preference differences average out and result in the [representative] household having almost identical preferences across countries.” The policy implications are enormous for high-tax countries. If France were to lower its effective tax rate from 60 percent to 40 percent, estimates Prescott, its people would work more (taking 6.6 percent less leisure) and—remember their high productivity?—would generate considerably more output. Tax revenues wouldn't diminish, because the 40 percent rate would be levied on a higher base. And overall French “welfare gains,” as economists put it, would increase nearly 20 percent. In the United States, reducing marginal tax rates would have a more modest impact, according to the model: A 10 percent rate reduction would produce a 7 percent welfare gain. But even in the United States, Prescott's findings have huge implications for the viability of the Social Security system. (See “ Shrinking a deadweight loss .”) Foreign affairs In recent months, Prescott has traveled widely, presenting his findings not only to American audiences but to economists and policymakers in London, Berlin, Toulouse, Tokyo and elsewhere overseas. And in fact, says Prescott, Europeans tend to be more receptive than Americans. “The economists there understand that there is a problem,” he said after returning from France in mid-September. “I got some excellent suggestions when I presented the paper, the best so far.” But at all venues, he observes, the common denominator is surprise. Prescott is the first to admit that he, too, thought the results were startling, unexpected. “I find it remarkable that virtually all of the large difference in labor supply between France and the United States is due to differences in tax systems,” he writes in his Ely lecture. “I expected institutional constraints on the operation of labor markets and the nature of the unemployment benefit system to be more important.” Moreover, he concedes that cultural explanations might carry the day in a few settings. “Scandinavians seem to be a little bit different,” he said recently, referring to research by Richard Rogerson, an economist at Arizona State University. “My theory is when one of those Swedes looks at you when you're not working, it's pretty intimidating.” More seriously, he allows that in small, homogeneous cultures, social pressures can be quite strong. But even in large, heterogeneous nations, tax wedges don't always tell the whole story, according to Prescott. “Taxes are not the only reason that the labor factors differ,” says Prescott's Ely lecture. Unemployment benefits and housing subsidies—not taxes—distorted labor mobility in the United Kingdom between the first and second World Wars, contributing significantly to that country's interwar depression. New Deal policies supporting cartels in America's heavy industries distorted wages and employment in the last half of the 1930s, contributing to the depth and duration of the Great Depression in the United States. Similarly, cartels in 1970s Italy may have suppressed employment there. Prescott relies on work by University of California, Los Angeles economists Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian in making these conjectures. Still, while taxes aren't the all-powerful explanatory factor for all nations and eras, Prescott contends that in major developed countries in the time period under consideration, the labor supply impact of tax wedges is a powerful and undeniable fact. Other academics As befits the work of any prominent scholar, Prescott's theory has attracted close academic scrutiny—beyond the initial reaction of surprise—from both adherents and critics. In one recent paper, Peter Lindert, an economist at the University of California, Davis, refers to Prescott's study as dependent upon “a theoretical model heavily laden with assumptions. It is educated, intelligent, plausible fiction—but fiction nonetheless.” On the other hand (as Lindert points out) Prescott's model and findings are cited quite favorably by Nobel Laureate Robert Lucas in his 2003 presidential address to the American Economic Association. Lindert calls for empirical tests. Steven Davis at the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business and Magnus Henrekson of the Stockholm School of Economics oblige with a careful econometric analysis of the impact of labor income and consumption taxes on employment and work activity. In their study of rich countries in the mid-1990s, they find that a 12.8 percentage point difference in tax rates is associated with 122 fewer market work hours per adult per year and nearly a 5 percentage point decrease in employment—population ratios—an indirect affirmation of Prescott's theory. A very different perspective was presented earlier this year in a series of lectures by British economist Richard Layard, co-director of the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics. Layard takes issue with GDP itself as a satisfactory measure of human welfare—or utility, as Jeremy Bentham and subsequent economists have termed it—noting that “happiness has not increased, despite huge increases in living standards.” To summarize a lengthy argument, Layard's idea is that a tax wedge on labor income could actually increase utility by decreasing a sort of pollution: overwork brought on by the inherent human desire to do better than our peers, regardless of our absolute level of income. Keeping up with the Joneses, in other words, leads to overwork, ill health and unhappiness—rivalry distorts the leisure/labor decision. Appropriate public policy should diminish this pollution by taxing it. “In an efficient economy,” Layard writes, “there will be substantial levels of corrective taxation ... 60 percent would not seem inappropriate, and that is in fact the typical level of marginal taxation in Europe—if you allow for direct and indirect taxes.” Prescott responds Prescott's reactions to these ideas vary widely. Sitting in his seventh-floor office at the Minneapolis Fed, he reads through the first pages of Lindert's paper, then drops it on his desk. “It doesn't seem to be coherent,” he says. Davis and Henrekson's study, on the other hand, intrigues him. That might seem predictable given its broad support of Prescott's findings, but Davis and Henrekson employ a technique Prescott generally scorns: statistical regression. “Progress, don't regress,” he says with a smile, quoting the slogan featured prominently on his Internet home page. Regardless of their method, Prescott is drawn to the findings and has invited Davis to Minneapolis to get a closer look at their work. But Prescott's response to Layard's argument—more complete and nuanced—conveys a sense of Prescott himself. He begins by summarizing Layard's case in a phrase: “I'm happy if I have a lot more income—than you,” he says, grinning and quite aware that he does. As to the overwork such rivalry might cause, “that just says there's a consumption externality.” Then he conveys the concept with a story. “I always tried to create a positive externality in Pittsburgh for my neighbors who had these beautiful lawns,” he jokes of his grad school days at Carnegie Mellon University. “By my having a messy lawn, their lawns looked so much better. I mowed it, but I didn't do much else with my lawn. And it gave me utility to see them happier.” He tells the story with a verbal wink, acknowledging silently that his Pittsburgh yard care externality may well have been less than zero. The conspiratorial smile changes to professorial zeal as he begins to dissect Layard's reasoning: “Suppose everybody cares about relative consumption as well as own consumption. You work out the equilibrium, it's not Pareto optimal. Let's deal with the case where everybody enters symmetrically. So it's simple to make the ordering. Well, you can make everybody better off by just putting a tax on consumption so that they work less. That's a very standard model. Now what would be the empirical evidence for and against that?” In under five minutes, Prescott has crystallized an argument, communicated it to a visitor in plain language and personal anecdote, then converted it to the idiom of economics and laid out steps for its confirmation or refutation. It's vintage Prescott: analytically brilliant, unexpectedly funny and several beats ahead of everyone else. That last bit is the essence of a conversation with the economist. When you ask him a question, it sometimes seems that his reply is off-topic; then it dawns on you that Ed Prescott is answering the question you should have asked. A pattern of surprise Prescott's willingness to entertain alternatives, to listen to critics, to incorporate the unexpected is deeply characteristic of his work. That flexibility is, in fact, the paradoxical outcome of a rigid research discipline. In setting model parameters, for instance, or reporting research results, “the investigator has no degrees of freedom,” he says. “You have to tie your hands and if there's a deviation from your predictions, you report it. You can speculate on why, but you've got to be totally honest.” Intellectual honesty also means allowing findings to modify, even subvert initial hypotheses. It happens frequently, says Prescott. Much of the work for which he's best known—theories on time inconsistency, real business cycles, the equity premium and growth theory—has been developed in an ongoing process of research and revelation. “When I work out the implications, I'm quite often surprised: The findings change my views quite dramatically,” he says. “When I did the real business cycles work with Finn Kydland, I was certain that monetary shocks were the reason the economy fluctuated with the business cycles. Our findings were just the opposite. When I did some work with Rajnish Mehra on the equity premium puzzle, I was certain that the reason for the high historical difference in the return on equity relative to debt was just a premium for bearing aggregate, nondiversifiable risk. We found it wasn't.” For time inconsistency and the impact of taxes on labor supply, as well, surprise has been an intrinsic part of the process. Future direction As striking as his labor supply findings are—and though many aspects of it remain unresolved—Prescott senses that the big theoretical questions in economic growth lie elsewhere, and he is now turning his attention to them. “I think I've had my say on labor supply,” he concludes. In his Ely lecture, he lays out three sources of economic growth: capital, labor and productivity. The first two are important in understanding why some nations remain poor while others prosper, but the central question, contends Prescott, is what determines productivity? “Given productivity, our macro models are great,” he says. “But we treat it as exogenous. We've got to have a better understanding of mapping between policies and productivity.” In other words, what can governments do to enhance productivity? Prescott's main candidates are efficient financial markets, competition among producers and trading clubs. And currently, the last is his major focus. “What is a trading club?” he asks rhetorically. “Well, first, free movement of goods between the member states. But it's much, much more than that. ...” Prescott continues at length, with a discourse ranging from Toyota factories in Wales to trade among the U.S. states in the 19th century. He speaks quickly, and as he does there is a sense that each research question he asks leads him to a dozen more, each more interesting than the last. He will travel soon to Warsaw and then Bogotá to explore these ideas with other economists and policymakers. “It's going to be fascinating to see what's happening in Poland,” he remarks. In Colombia, “the president is trying to do some good things there, and we have to go down and help out.” He's not a policymaker himself. “I leave that to other people,” he says. “I'm no good at it. My comparative advantage is working out implications of theory.” And in so doing, it seems there is just one constraint: Even for Ed Prescott, a scholar who understands labor supply dynamics as well as anyone on earth, there are only 24 hours in a day. “Time,” observes the economist, “is the most valuable resource.” 1 The two assumptions: (1) that people decide between leisure and consumption based on their relative prices, at the margin, and (2) that in a competitive market, wages are equal to their marginal product of labor. The “key equilibrium relation” also depends on the share of a nation's output due to capital. Top of document Advanced Search Glossary See also: Shrinking a deadweight loss

London Vacation Work and

King's College London Vacation Work and Internship Fair : Fairs :King's College London Text only Current students Staff Contact Feedback Search You are here: Home > About > /... / > Academic registry > Careers > Events programme > Fairs Fairs must be changed for each item --   Careers Fairs   King's Careers Info Fair   King's Law Fair   King's Vac Work and Internship Fair   King's Part-time Work Fair   Making the most of careers fairs   Representing your organisation at fairs King's College London Vacation Work and Internship Fair Print version To help both students and recruiters, the careers service hosts a fair specifically aimed at vacation work, internships and placements for the Christmas, Easter and Summer vacations. Many students do not have the chance of a work placement as a formal part of their course but they do want to use their time during the vacation as an opportunity to gain invaluable experience (and supplement their finances!). At the same time many organisations approach us each year with vacancies (whether one-offs or formal internship schemes). This event brings these complementary needs together. The 2005 fair will be on Wednesday 2 November from 14:00 to 17:00. Information for visitors Vacation jobs, along part-time work, are a great way to supplement your finances and gain valuable work experience. Previous exhibitors have offered a wide spectrum of vacation opportunities from leisure camps to finance in settings ranging from volunteering to highly structured formal schemes. See our article Making the most of fair . There is no need to book: just turn up on the day. The Fair is open only to students/GradClub members of King's College London and other member institutions of The Careers Group, University of London consortium . Information for exhibitors This is an excellent forum for filling all kinds of schemes whether you have short work experiences placements or longer, formal internships, and whether the opportunities are for paid work or volunteering programmes. Meet hundreds of students keen to make a contribution in the real world of work. If you would like to exhibit at the 2005 Fair please contact Claire Charlton or download the booking form through the link at the bottom of this article. Also, see our Guide for representatives attending a fair. List of 2005 exhibitors The following organisations have so far booked to attend. BUNAC CCUSA Civil Service Fast Stream Programme Coral Cay Conservation Deloitte Development in Action Ernst and Young Frontier Goldman Sachs High Society The Interns' Network JPMorgan King's Work Experience Officer Kiya Survivors Milkround Online Outreach International PricewaterhouseCoopers Powder Byrne International Proworld SEO London Teaching and Projects Abroad Trekforce Expeditions UNICEF India Office Download application form under "applics for offices outside New York" Wesser and Partner Complete list of 2004 exhibitors For illustration here is the list of all exhibitors from 2004 Camp America Civil Service Fast Stream Programme Coral Cay Conservation Cross-Cultural Solutions Ernst and Young Frontier Goldman Sachs International High Society The Hotel Russell IST Plus King's Work Experience Officer Kiya Survivors KPMG LLP Powder Byrne International PricewaterhouseCoopers ProWorld Service Corps Student Action India SEO London Teaching and Projects Abroad Trekforce Expeditions The Wellcome Trust Attached files   Vacwork Booking Form.pdf [PDF | 69 KB] Booking form for Vacation Work and Internships Fair 2005 Postgrad study fair   Essential event for anyone wanting to do further study Quicklinks   Waterloo office Strand office Guy's office Prospective students Current students GradClub members Other King's alumni King's staff Recruiters Talk to an adviser Find vacancies Careers news Events Accessibility | Terms and Conditions | Last Modified 01 November 2005 © 2005 King's College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, England, United Kingdom. Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454

Russia Travel

* GoToRussia.Ru * When you wish to visit Russia :: Information, tips, guides, routes, cities, excursions, etc. Visa To Russia Online Tourist invitations; Business Visa Visit: www.VisaToRussiaOnline.com Call: +7 095 7413870 ABOUT RUSSIA: HISTORY TRAVEL TIPS RUSSIAN EMBASSIES ENTRY Requirements VISA CURRENT PRICES PHRASE BOOK FAQ ABOUT MOSCOW: HISTORY ARRIVING BY PLANE MEETING AT SVO CUSTOMS ARRIVING BY TRAIN METRO FOREIGN EMBASSIES WHAT TO SEE MAPS AND PLANS Travel Tips What to pack. The days of having to bring your own bottled water and toilet paper have gone long time ago, although you may still find them useful in regional cities. Now it is possible to easily find basic food, bottled water and toiletry items in many places around Moscow. However, the following are items some tourists prefer to bring for themselves. 1. Bring your own toiletries and pharmaceuticals. Although there are many stores carrying western medicines, you may not be able to read the Russian or European labels. 2. Comfortable, waterproof and warm, (if winter) boots or shoes. It is frequently wet in Moscow from snow or rain, and you will probably walk a lot. 3. Umbrella. 4. Adapter for small appliances like hair dryers. Russia has the same 220 watt currency as Europe and electrical sockets take round two prong plugs. 5. Travel alarm clock. 6. All phone numbers and addresses you will need. 7. Enough cash for your entire stay. Bring clean, crisp, new bills. 8. Travel money holder/conceiler. Pickpocketing is not uncommon, especially in the center of town and incrowded markets. 9. Photocopy of passport and visa. 10. Warm hat, coat, clothes and gloves in winter. 11. Camera and film, of course. 12. Leave your expensive jewelry at home. You don't need to be conspicuous. 13. Locks for your luggage. Make sure to secure all your baggage with heavy locks. Money Currency: Rouble (Rub) = 100 kopeks. Notes are in denominations of Rub 500, 100, 50, 10. Coins are in denominations of Rub 5, 2 and 1. Currency exchange: The ruble is the only legal tender. It is illegal to pay for goods and services in U.S. dollars. According to the Rusian law foreign currency should only be exchanged at official bureaux. Bureaux de change are numerous and easy to locate. Large shops offer their own exchange facilities. You may see many individuals there who would offer you better exchange rate. Please, be careful and under no circumstances exchange money from them. It is advisable not to change large amount of money at a time unless you really need a lot of Roubles. Exchange rate is unpredictable and may change very fast even during one day. All dollar bills must be recent and clean. The Russians are all concerned about getting stuck with an outdated bill that will no longer be honoured, even though this is also a violation of currency laws. Contact us to get more info on today's best exchange rate quotes. more about money... Credit cards Major European and international credit cards, including American Express, Visa and Diners Club, are accepted in the larger hotels and at foreign currency shops and restaurants. Some ATM'S in Moscow are now accepting EC cards together with your PIN number - if you want to get roubles. Compared to most other possibilities of getting roubles, this is a cheap (compared to credit cards) and time saving (compared to travellers cheques) method. Depending on the Russian bank that maintains the cash machine, you may be charged a 1% - 4% commission fee, on top of what your credit card charges. Travellers Cheques Are a big hassle in Russia. Very few places take them and you pay a premium to cash them. If you're not willing to go all cash, credit cards are much better. AMEX traveler's checks may be cashed at the American Express office at Sadovaya Kudrinskaya 21a in the center of town. Expect to pay a 3% commission for cashing the checks. Selected Russian banks will also cash them for a fee. Banking hours 0900 am - 0500 pm Monday to Friday. Some of bureaux de exchange are open 24 hours. Public Holidays Jan 1 - New Year, Jan 7 - Russian Christmas (Orthodox), Mar 8 - International women’s Day, Apr 15 - Russian Orthodox Easter, May 1-2 - Spring and Labour Day, May 9 - Victory in Europe Day, Jun 12 - Russian Independence Day, Aug 22 - National Flag Day, Nov 7 Constitution Day. Calling home? Calling abroad from ALL Russian hotels is a rip-off. For example, to call USA would cost you about US$ 5 per minute, Australia - US$ 8 per minute. To make sure you pay your phone bill most of the hotels require a deposit of a quite a large amount of money or your credit card information. Without it you won't be able to dial an outside line. There is a solution, however. In our office you can obtain pre-paid phone cards of a few Russian telephone companies (US$ 5, US$ 10, US$ 20, US$ 25 and US$ 50) and call from your hotel or home for as low as 25 cents a minute to the USA and Europe. All you need is a touch-tone phone. Some of the hotels in Moscow and in St.-Petersburg and almost all hotels in all other cities in Russia do not have touch-tone phones. But you still be able to use those cards if before you leave home you buy a bipper (cost about US$ 5 in the USA). With the bipper all you have to do is to dial a number shown on the card and then use the bipper to enter your access code and destination phone number. Please, contact us for more information. To call USA from Moscow for as low as 13.5 cents a minute you can use Net Phone Card. Follow this link to check it out. Or just click on the Net Phone Card banner on our first (entrance) page to go there. You can also use it to call from anywhere to anywhere. Computer equipment The State Customs Committee has stated that there are no restrictions on bringing laptop computers into the Russian Federation for personal use. The software, however, can be inspected upon departure; and some equipment and software have been confiscated because of the data contained in them, or due to software encryption, which is standard in many programs. HIV Testing Requirement Any person applying for a visa for a stay of more than three months must present a certificate showing that the individual is HIV negative. The certificate must contain the applicant's passport data, proposed length of stay in Russia, blood test results for HIV infection, including date of the test, signature of the doctor conducting the test, medical examination results, diagnostic series, and seal of the hospital/medical organization. The certificate must be in both Russian and English and valid for three months from the date of medical examination and blood test. For information concerning entry, exit, and HIV requirements, travelers can contact the Russian Embassy, Consular Division, 1825 Phelps Place, N.W., Washington, D.C., 20008; telephone (202) 939-8918, or the Russian consulates in New York, San Francisco or Seattle. Medical facilites Medical care is usually far below Western standards, with severe shortages of basic medical supplies. Access to the few quality facilities that exist in major cities usually requires cash payment at Western rates upon admission. The U.S. Embassy and consulates maintain lists of such facilities and English-speaking doctors. Many resident Americans travel to the West for virtually all of their medical needs; such travel can be very expensive, if undertaken under emergency conditions. Therefore, travelers may wish to check their insurance coverage and consider supplemental coverage for medical evacuation. Elderly travelers and those with existing health problems may be at particular risk. The cost of a medical evacuation from the Russian Far East can be as high as $50,000. It is helpful to carry a letter, in Russian, from your health care provider, describing the nature of any personal medication that you carry into Russia. Further information on health matters can be obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's international travelers hotline (404) 332-4559, or via the CDC home page on the Internet at http://www.cdc.gov/. Bring with you all prescription drugs. Tap water is not to be drunk without first boiling. A good mosquito repellant is recommended for summer. Areas of instability Travel to Chechnya, North Ossetia, Ingushetia, Dagestan, and the areas surrounding Chechnya is extremely dangerous due to political instability and frequent kidnappings. Two U.S. citizens have disappeared in Chechnya and remain unaccounted for. In addition, public gatherings and demonstrations occur frequently in Russia, particularly in Moscow. Although such demonstrations are usually peaceful, travelers are urged to exercise caution when in areas where large groups are gathered. Passports and visas Carry them with you at all times. When you are out walking and you see some motley looking guys with black leather caps and jackets with dark gray uniforms, these are the police. They listen for English language being spoken and they will love it if they stop you and you are without your passport and visa. If you don't have your visa and passport, they will escort you to the nearest jail and try their best at expropriating whatever funds they think they can get out of you. Usually, the fine (bribe) is $50 and there won't be anything we can do for you to get you out of it. If the cops haul you in and you do have your visa and passport, call us immediately and we will rescue you. Your visas, if registered through us, will be in perfect order. Don't pay them anything if, once again, you have your visa and passport in your possession. Air travel Air travel within Russia is often unreliable, with unpredictable schedules and difficult conditions, including deterioration of the quality of service. Russian based airlines certified to operate internationally meet higher standards than domestic-only air carriers and fly to most domestic destinations. Traffic safety and road condition Inclement weather and lack of routine maintenance of roads and vehicles make road conditions throughout Russia highly variable. Drivers and pedestrians should exercise extreme caution to avoid accidents, which are commonplace. Many accidents involve drunk drivers. Traffic police sometimes stop motorists to extract cash "fines," and bandits occasionally prey on travelers. Crime information Crime against foreigners is a problem, especially in major cities. Pickpocketings, assaults, and robberies can occur frequently and at any time or place. The most vulnerable areas include underground walkways and the subway, overnight trains, train stations, airports, markets, tourist attractions, restaurants, hotel rooms, and residences, even when locked or occupied. Groups of children are known to assault and rob foreigners on city streets or underground walkways. Foreigners who have been drinking alcohol are especially vulnerable to assault and robbery in or around nightclubs or bars, or on their way home. Robberies may occur in taxis shared with strangers. Travelers have found it safer to travel in groups organized by reputable tour agencies. The loss or theft abroad of a U.S. passport should be reported immediately to the local police and the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate. If you receive a replacement for your lost or stolen U.S. passport in Russia, your exit visa must also be replaced, with assistance from your sponsor, so that the passport number written on the visa matches your new passport. This requires a Russian police report. The Department of State's pamphlet "A Safe Trip Abroad" provides useful information on guarding valuables and protecting personal security while traveling abroad. Additional information on the region can be found in the brochure "Tips for Travelers to Russia and the Newly Independent States." Both publications are available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C. 20402. Crime Against Foreign Businesses: Extortion and corruption are common in the business environment. Organized criminal groups target foreign businesses in many cities and have been known to demand protection money under threat of serious violence. Many Western firms hire security services which have improved their overall security, although this is no guarantee. Small businesses are particularly vulnerable. Over the past several years, several American business people have been attacked, kidnapped, and even killed. U.S. citizens are encouraged to report all extortion attempts to the Russian authorities and to inform consular officials at the U.S. Embassy or nearest U.S. consulate.In general, when staying in Moscow avoid walking through dark, unknown, deserted streets in the evening; check your pockets and purses, while walking along the crowded streets, do the same in big stores and market places. The crowded public places (i.e. close to railway terminals, Arbat, etc.) are full of Gypsies (people, mainly women, wearing pictures skirts and shawls), who may tell you your fortune by hand, playing cards, etc. Of course, not all of them are thieves or pickpockets, try to get rid of them as soon as possible. When visiting somebody don't get into lift cabin with persons you don't know. It is also advisable to have a telephone number of your tourist agency or a close friend, whom you may always call in case of need or emergency. Embassy location & registration All American citizens who reside in Russia for three months or longer are encouraged to register at the U.S. Embassy or at one of the U.S. consulates. Americans who will remain for shorter periods may also register and inquire about updated travel and security information. Registration allows for quicker replacement of a lost or stolen passport, as well as contact in case of emergency. The U.S. Embassy is located in Moscow at Novinskiy Bulvar 19/23; phone (7)(095) 252-2451; fax (7) (095) 956-4261. After hours emergencies: phone (7-095) 956-4422. U.S. consulates are located in: St. Petersburg: Ulitsa Furshtadskaya 15; phone (7-812) 275-1701; fax (7-812) 110-7022. After hours emergencies: phone (7-812) 274-8692. Vladivostok: Ulitsa Pushkinskaya 32, phone (7-4232) 268-458 or 300-070; fax (7-4232) 300-091. After hours emergencies: (7) (4232) 471-644 and (7) (4232) 287-290. Yekaterinburg: Ulitsa Gogolya 15a, 4th floor; phone (7-3432) 564-619; fax (7-3432) 564-515. | TOP | HOME | Ask your questions on our discussion board GoToRussia.Ru © 2002-2005 Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy --

Hotel Travel

TELECOM '04: Hotel and Travel -- Hotel and Travel Venetian Hotel and Convention Center 3355 Las Vegas Boulevard South Las Vegas, NV 89109 www.venetian.com Phone: (702) 414-1000 or toll free at (877) 283-6423 The deadline to reserve a room at The Venetian Hotel in the TELECOM 04 room block has passed. We recommend that you still check availability at The Venetian Hotel to make your reservation. For reservations at other properties, one option is Quickbook . Important Information for Confirmed Venetian Reservations: Deposit & Cancellation policy: The hotel requires a first night deposit of suite and tax charges, per suite, to guarantee accommodations. Deposits must be received no later than fourteen (14) days after the reservation is made. The refunding of deposits will only be made when individual suite reservations are cancelled at least fourteen (14) days prior to the scheduled arrival date. Check-in time: 3:00 p.m. Check-out time: 11:00 a.m. Guaranteed reservations will be held until midnight on the reserved date. Transportation Information Airline Discounts United Airlines is the official airline for USTA TELECOM 04 conference attendees. If you or your travel agent call United's toll-free number 1-800-521-4041 to book your reservations, you will receive a 5% discount off the lowest applicable discount fare, including First Class or 10% discount off full fare unrestricted coach fares, purchased 7 days in advance. An additional 5% discount will apply when tickets are purchased at least 30 days in advance of your travel date. Discounts also apply on Shuttle by United and United Express. Call United's specialized Meeting Reservations Center at 1-800-521-4041 to obtain the best fares and schedule information. Make sure you refer to Meeting ID Number 522AG. Dedicated reservations agents are on duty 7 days a week from 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM EST. Car Rental Avis car rental is offering discounts for USTA TELECOM 04 conference attendees. Detailed information can be found by visiting www.avis.com/AvisWeb/html/bridge/assoc/offer/go.html?A544100 ( case sensitive ). Please reference the following Avis Worldwide Discount Code: A544177 to receive the discount. To reserve a car, contact Avis at 1-800-331-1600 and use your Avis Worldwide Discount (AWD) number A544177 . Or reserve online and have your discount number automatically included in your reservation and receive an email confirmation.