A Somerset County doctor yesterday admitted receiving more than $50,000 in kickbacks from a laboratory to which she referred patients.

Padma Siripurapu, 46, of Belle Mead, pleaded guilty to soliciting and receiving money from Orange Community MRI LLC. The laboratory paid her a set amount of cash for every MRI, CAT scan, ultrasound, echocardiogram and DEXA scan she referred.

The announcement from the U.S. Attorney's office came a day after seven officials from Biodiogonstic Laboratory Services LLC in Parsippany also pleaded guilty to bribing physicians, generating more than $100 million in business.

Side note: A hundred million dollars?

As scams go, it's brilliant. The lab makes money. The doctor makes money. And the patient never knows about it; the lab bills Medicare or private insurance companies.

But its impact is devastating, leading to inflated costs and unnecessary tests. Eventually everybody pays for it when their insurance premiums rise the following year.

Siripurapu was the 12th person nabbed in the government's investigation of Orange MRI.

She admitted that she received first $3,600 in cash from a government informant on Nov. 2, 2011 at her doctor's office in Newark in exchange for referrals, then $3,450 in cash on Nov. 17, 2011 in exchange for referrals.

Both the former medical director and former executive director of Orange MRI have agreed to forfeit their corrupt gains, which could reach $2 million, the government said.

NJ Press Media file photo

The Greatest Generation used the G.I. bill to receive grants that would pay for college education, spurring them to create a strong middle class that is talked about today with nostalgia.

The Millennials? Well, they are saddled with so much college debt that instead of buying a house, starting a business, saving for college for their own children, or simply staying current on their bills, they instead are paying interest to their lenders. They may well turn out to be another great generation, but the financial deck is already stacked against it.

Which stinks. At my local coffee shop, one of the employees mentioned that he always wanted to get into journalism, but the profession's low-salary didn't justify the amount of money he would have to borrow for college.

Say what you will about the profession that isn't beloved by the masses, but I still believe we need good journalists. Who knows how many teens and 20-somethings are just like him, driven out of the field not by skills or desire, but by economics?

Anyway, Bankrate.com has a neat study out today. It shows the college degrees that have the best and worst value by looking at the cost of a degree; the profession's median pay; and the time it will take graduates who put 10 percent of their salary on education costs to repay their loans.

Best value:

1. Advertising, marketing and promotions: 5.83 years.

2. Economist: 7.08 years.

3. Civil engineer: 8.5 years.

Worst value:

1. Marriage and family therapist: 34.67 years.

2. Journalist: 31.83 years.

3. Veterinarian: 27.92 years.

Press file photo: Still OK

The U.S. added 175,000 jobs in May, which wasn't enough to prevent the unemployment rate from rising to 7.6 percent from 7.5 percent, the government said today.

The early reaction is that the report isn't terrible, despite the federal government's austerity measures, which started in March and are likely to last through September.

May had stronger job growth than both March and April, and we've gone through a spring slump since the recession ended in 2009. But it would be nice to add more than 200,000 jobs and make a dent in the unemployment rate.

(Any theories out there about why spring has been so gloomy?)

So here we are, now four years since the recession officially ended and the jobless rate has declined only three percentage points since its peak of 10 percent in 2009.

It kind of reminds you of gasoline prices; up like a rocket, down like a feather.

And it's kind of a bummer. Consumer confidence reports have shown we are feeling pretty good about the economy, thanks, no doubt to stabilizing home prices and a surging stock market.

Part of me - you know, the part that actually cares about other people - hopes Congress will end the sequester and put in place a long-term plan using both tax hikes and spending cuts to address the budget deficit. Economists have said the sequester will have a bigger impact over time.

But the reporter in me hopes the sequester stays in place for a few more months as part of economic experiment to see its impact on the private sector. Unless it affects my job. In which case, forget it.

Press file photo: Please don't find anything, please don't find anything.

New Jerseyans have made big financial sacrifices to ensure they will have enough to retire, but still remain more pessimistic than their counterparts nationwide, according to a survey released last week.

Less than half of the state's residents, 47 percent, feel financially comfortable, compared with 51 percent nationwide, a Wells Fargo Advisors survey found.

"It was a little bit surprising to see the level of pessimism around some of these topics," Kyle D. Young, first vice president, investment officer, for Wells Fargo Advisors, said. "But what I found very interesting is that...they are more willing than their counterparts to make the really tough decisions" they need to make.

The survey's results seem to fit a broader pattern. New Jerseyans like everyone else needed to get the debt they accumulated during the housing bubble run-up in the 2000s under control. Unlike everyone else, they had to do it in a state whose costs from property taxes to insurance is high.

It sets the stage for experiences like, well, mine. There I was Saturday morning, one month from making a credit card payment that would finally, mercifully retire the high-interest debt that I have built up the past four years, when I took my car to the shop for my regularly scheduled oil change.

After an oil change, spark plugs, transmission something or other, brake work and tire rotation, I now am three months away from eliminating my high-interest credit card debt.

I think it's karma. The very second you finally feel you can breathe again, along comes an unexpected expense - a plumbing breakdown, a car repair, a root canal, a trip to the vet - and suddenly you find yourself on a Sunday afternoon making chicken salad that can feed you for three days.

Financial planners like Young might suggest it's because I haven't built up enough savings that would help me pay for emergencies.

The Wells Fargo survey found:

*Just 42 percent say they are better off financially now than three years ago compared with 51 percent nationwide.

*Some 43 percent say they cut back on spending to make ends meet; 40 percent say they live paycheck to paycheck; and 39 percent say high expenses prevent them from saving for the future. Those are pretty much in line with the national response.

*One in three are uncomfortable with their debt load, particularly non-retirees. And a quarter of New Jerseyans are living beyond their means.

*Forty-five percent have cut spending to save for retirement, compared with 36 percent nationwide. It's a figure that can go either way. It might show New Jerseyans have to cut back spending because it is so expensive to live here. Or it might show New Jerseyans take retirement more seriously than folks in other states.

What do you think?

APP file photo: Stop scaring us.

The argument that tax hikes that went into effect at the beginning of the year would send the job creators to the Isle of Man and derail the fragile economic recovery appears to be overblown.

Consumer spending during the first quarter of 2013 rose 3.4 percent, the government said today, its highest level since the fourth quarter of 2010.

It was part of a report today that showed the GDP rose 2.4 percent in the first quarter, not the 3 percent we need to cut into the unemployment rate, but better than the .4 percent growth we saw in the fourth quarter.

A quick reminder: The GDP is made up of consumer spending, business spending, and government spending. Consumer spending makes up something like two-thirds of the total. Seventy one point three percent during the first quarter, to be precise.

But it gets kind of tricky since government workers are consumers, too, and if they are furloughed for a day each week, they are likely to spend less.

Democrats aren't off the hook, either. They warned us that the sequester, which began in March, would plunge us back into a recession. But they forgot the government only makes up 17.7 percent of the total economy.

So cutting into an already thin slice of pie isn't likely to be noticeable, particularly if the Federal Reserve is working overtime and the much-bigger private sector continues to expand.

NJ Press Media file photo

President Barack Obama is scheduled to visit Asbury Park today, a rare New Jersey appearance for the chief, who didn't even get five months before the usual second-term scandals distracted from his agenda.

Seems like a good time to address a national issue.

*Apple shifted $74 billion overseas and out of the reach of the IRS from 2009 to 2012? All the while, it is sitting on $145 billion in cash? What a mess.

*An interesting Forbes analysis: Shareholders would love to see Apple put the cash to work - i.e., pay dividends. But most of the money is sitting overseas. To pay dividends, it would need to repatriate the money and bit hit with the U.S. corporate tax. What to do? It is taking on more debt and selling bonds to pay the dividend.

*How about sending Apple the bill to repair the bridge that collapsed on Interstate 5 in Washington?

*The repair is expected to cost $15 million.

*To which, I imagine, Apple would say: Fine, but we're just going to pass the cost onto consumers.

*Ok, let's assume the market is so uncompetitive that companies can increase prices whenever they want. Apple in 2012 sold 125 million iPhones, 58 million iPads, 18 million Macs, and 35 million iPods, according to Techcrunch.com. That's 236 million items.

*How much would Apple have to raise its prices to pay for the bridge? 7 cents.

NJ Press Media file photo of someone taking a survey.

A little more than a third of New Jersey executives said they plan to hire in the Garden State in the next year, a survey released Tuesday said.

It was a sign that the confidence of CEOs in New Jersey as a place to do business was improving, James W. Hughes, a Rutgers economist, said.

"In addition, 36 percent of CEOs participating in the survey expect to increase capital spending here over the next year, continuing a positive upward trend seen in earlier surveys," Hughes said.

The survey was of senior executives from companies headquartered or with deep roots in New Jersey.

New Jersey could use the help. The state's job market has trailed the nation's since the economy began to recover from the recession in 2009.

The economy, however, is beginning to work in our favor, James Marple, an economist with TD Bank, said last week at a meeting hosted by the Monmouth-Ocean Development Council, a local business group.

I wasn't there, but going through his power-point presentation, it looks like he thinks there is lots of upside potential. I'm basing that on the slide that says, "Lots of Upside Potential."

Among the bright spots: Housing, consumer spending, investment and job creation.

Under the slide that says "Weighing on Growth" are the fiscal drag caused by sequestration and tax hikes; and global risks.

Sponsored by Cushman & Wakefield, the Rutgers study of CEOs wasn't as rosy as I expected.

It found:

*16 percent said the current state of the New Jersey economy is good to excellent; 68 percent said it is fair; and 16 said it is poor.

*Nearly half expect the state economic conditions to improve over the next 12 months; 10 percent think it will worsen.

Really CEOs? Ten percent of you think conditions will worsen? What has you worried?

AP file photo

New Jersey employers and colleges soon may be prohibited from requiring workers, students and applicants to hand over their social network log-ins.

The so-called Facebook bill, approved unanimously by the state Assembly on Monday, would carry a $1,000 penalty for the first violation and $2,500 penalty for subsequent violations.

"If we don't draw this line in the sand now, who knows how far this invasion of privacy might be taken," Assemblyman Ruben Ramos Jr., D-Hudson, said.

The bill comes about a year after AP reported some employers were asking applicants for their Facebook passwords, supposedly to get a better idea of what the candidates say privately. A similar proposal in Congress was recently blocked.

Still, it's a reminder to everyone, regardless of the fate of the New Jersey bill, that social media sites are simply a way to brand yourself, no matter your privacy setting.

I'm not that proficient with Facebook, but here are a few tips:

OK: Exhorting your favorite sports team to victory.
Not OK: Threatening to kill the manager.

OK: Photos of your dog.
Not OK: Photos of you feeding your dog from your keg.

OK: Congratulating your Facebook friends on their new baby/car/house/promotion/retirement/graduation/vacation/good night's sleep.
Not OK: Congratulating your Facebook friends on their record-breaking drinking binge/new gauge earring (personal pet peeve)/ release from prison with an invitation to celebrate.

You can do all of that by sending a private text message, or, better yet, picking up the phone and calling them.

Press file photo: Photo illustration of employers replenishing the unemployment trust fund.

A week off = 700 emails. Not sure if that's a lot. Or not a lot. But it took me about two hours to go through them.

Here's what I missed:

*New Jersey employers, scheduled to be hit with a 10 percent surcharge on their unemployment insurance taxes on July 1, may get a break thanks to a bill proposed by state lawmakers.

They are on the hook as part of a three-year plan to rebuild the unemployment trust fund depleted years ago by plundering lawmakers who used the money for other projects.

It forced the state to borrow more than $1 billion from the feds - at the peak of the recession - to keep unemployment claims coming. And it prompted voters to say the unemployment fund can only be used for unemployment claims. How novel.

The loan's balance was $154 million as of May 15, down from $833.6 million a year ago, according to the state Department of Labor and Workforce Development. And at the current pace - and contribution level - the fund should be solvent again in May 2014.

Good enough shape, some lawmakers believe, that employers won't need to dig deeper in July.

*New Jersey's job market got a psychological boost. Its unemployment rate fell from 9 percent in March to 8.7 percent in April, the Labor Department said.

It means I can no longer write: "New Jersey's unemployment rate has been 9 percent or higher for (fill in the number here) months."

The state added 3,300 jobs in April, modest growth and a sign that the construction boom we are all anticipating hasn't happened yet.

*Median home prices in the region that includes Monmouth and Ocean counties fell 8.6 percent in first quarter, according to a report by the National Association of Realtors.

The median price of $267,300 was down from $292,400 the same quarter a year ago.

It runs counter to the anecdotal evidence I've heard about the housing market. Many Realtors have said they are facing an inventory shortage.

So let's put a Sandy-style asterisk next to the report for this quarter. *

NJ Press Media file photo: Slider the mascot is recruited to work for the dark side.

Some New Jersey lawmakers are taking aim at non-compete clauses, the contract employees sign agreeing not to work with a competitor for a set time period when they leave.

Assemblymen Peter J. Barnes III, Joseph V. Egan, and Wayne DeAngelo, all D-Middlesex, introduced a bill earlier this month that would invalidate those agreements signed by workers who are found eligible to collect unemployment benefits.

It takes aim at an issue that drives me up the wall: Employers lay off workers and then tie their hands by restricting the number of companies for which they can work for even a year or two.

It is borderline mean, mainly because the company laid off an employee for any number of reasons, the bottom line of which is that the employee isn't productive enough. Yet it's so concerned about the employee's contributions to a competitor that it won't let him work there?

Kathleen Connelly, a lawyer with Lindabury, McCormick, Estabrook & Cooper, said it isn't that simple. Companies typically have non-compete clauses for executives or salespeople to prevent them from leaving and taking so many company secrets and client lists with them that they could cause significant financial harm.

"Most employers try to draft these to make them reasonable so the court won’t be striking them down," Connelly said. "They sound unfair but by the same token there can be a significant amount of unfairness of a key employer leaving your employee and divert all your business to them."

All of which I understand. A vindictive worker leaves hell bent on showing the former employer who's boss and, Jerry McGuire style, frantically calls his clients to go with him.

But the bill is tailored only to workers who qualify for unemployment benefits, meaning they were let go for no fault of their own. And they have had to search for jobs with the unemployment rate above 9 percent since June 2009.

Their choices already are awfully limited.