Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
I saw "never" used in business writing, and it didn't seem appropriate/right.
Part of it is that I think "never" is too strong a word, and the other part of it is that there are very few scenarios it can validate itself even outside of business writing.

The only form of "never" I'm comfortable with is:
a) when using it with first person opinion
and
b) when the timeline referred is the [grown up and awake] personal past to the moment then.
E.g., "I never meant it that way" or "I have never gone back since then".

Otherwise, it sounds absolute - i.e., a claim to know everything[i].

It may still happen to be used to demonstrate authority and to seek compliance, but then, there better be a high chance of not being proven wrong or the result being denied[ii].

Reason being, such other forms of using "never" can have holes, exceptions, unknown/missed info or a claim to know future, e.g.,

• "Dinosaurs never lived on ice" (counter "you weren't there!"),


• "You never got back to me" (counter: "may be your forget, or didn't check you messages!"),


• "Never do that again" (counter: "except may be when there's a fire?"),


• "I will never give up" (counter: "what if you do sometime?"),


• "We will never stop" (counter: "how can you speak for others?"), etc.

However, the one use of "never" I'm comfortable with also has a issue when it comes to business writing.
As "I" (the first person approach) is discouraged in business writing, it means "never" also doesn't fit in very well into business writing - irrespective of wanting to be authoritative or not.

----------
[i] As an aside, to explain myself as the author of a blog named "Theory of Everything" , to "attempt to connect everything with a theory" is different from "knowing everything".

[ii] However, this is not a very good business tactic, even in high-handed negotiations. Certainly, don't expect it to be a win-win scenario in a business/professional deed. But, I digress.

- Kaleem.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
Question: Will this work http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8082862.stm (viz., Obama's address to Muslims)?
My opinion: It misses two important items, as follows.

1. Democracy is not a medicine that can be served. It is to be a change of mood of people who feel they are ready and want it. Otherwise, you've just welcomed to the world yet another mismanaged, corrupt, and undecisive bureaucracy that's a weight on the world and self-absorbed nationalistic to the extent of not recognizing where they fall in the world order.


2. Mental/Psychological/Educational gap also creates a Wealth/Maturity gap that is a 200 years or more in some cases. So while on one side you have an ill-prepared/ill-funded bureaucracy trying to handle a 95% even more immature populace (and one that fears getting itself voted out for trying anything different than the will of ill-conceived/backward populace) - their freedom creates the kind of world conflict that we are trying to solve today. a) Government atrocities and b) populace moods - both drive them into deeper isolation as well as positioning against the developed/mature cultures of the world. Is this the basic reason why tradition is always being against progress, and vice-versa? Both believe in different truths and one's good is another's bad. Suggestion is not colonization, but more pervasive global education/modernization/commercialization/privatization. That, more than military deployments or food-medicine aid will fix issues than the current band-aid patches we see being served at steep billing.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
Villian celebrities as in: Wrong-doers are celebrated more than (or "as") the do-gooders.

This is the marketing of the news media and fashion media these days.
o The news reports the worst villians with the greatest rankings - as reporting/tracking a "serial killer" or "genocide" as the person responsible for the highest number of people killed.
o Skull, death, evil, deliberate frightful ugliness (i.e., not involuntary scars), piercing, etc., are fashion.

For example:
o OBL is celebrity because he killed 3000 people and still taunts US
o Who was Dr.Nash before Beautiful Mind? Wasn't a household name as in "No one knew!"
Exactly.

Bad is the new good?
If this is the effect of the revolution against the Church and acceptance of diversity (as in diverse viewpoints/actions) - then dog (reverse of "God") save us!
Because Church or not - we collectively become what we believe in as right/just/fair.
- It's not true that anything you do doesn't matter - nor that nothing you do matters.

Ironically, someone else had the same thoughts ...






- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
I had written (here: http://kaleemaziz.com/v-web/b2/index.php?p=545) about VPs and their extra expected dedication/commitment to their company/role/job. The job in itself does not start and end with their authorities and pay, but in terms of "earning" that decisively (i.e., in ways other can see) make the company succeed.

For some VPs, the role starts with "I" rather than "earn it" (through proving to others, and gaining their respect/followership) - talk about babysit baby with ego, or immature morons. (If you come to Silicon Valley and flash your MIT/hardwork, little will happen till you show you made your company succeed. Of course, unless you cheat yourself into the job - which AIG must've given its executives some valuable skills at!)

So goes the story:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/25/opinion/25desantis.html?em=&pagewanted=all

"I never received any pay resulting from the credit default swaps that are now losing so much money."

You sound like there was good money and bad money at AIG, and bad money never touched you. Somehow you've figured out a way to separate milk and water.

"I think your initial decision to honor the contracts was both ethical and financially astute, but it seems to have been politically unwise. It’s now apparent that you either misunderstood the agreements that you had made — tacit or otherwise — with the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, various members of Congress and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo of New York, or were not strong enough to withstand the shifting political winds."

Excuse me, "political winds"?! You are an EVP, you want someone to breakdown "political winds" for you to the level of "pissed off public"?! As an EVP take ownership that agreeing to $1 salary and all bonus was your (only yours) strategic mistake. Blaming Liddy, your education, your parents, the politicians, the public, etc., isn't the issue. As an EVP, you should've been able to pinpoint the reason for your problem within a fraction of a second. That's what you are being paid for as an EVP - i.e., making decisive and as-close-to-correct-as-possible decisions (even when supplied with insufficient or misleading information) with speed and creating a following/alignment to its resolution in such a way that multiple problems are solved by your one move.

"We have worked 12 long months under these contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised. None of us should be cheated of our payments any more than a plumber should be cheated after he has fixed the pipes but a careless electrician causes a fire that burns down the house."

Huh - I want to be your plumber who promises fixing your pipes, works for 12 hours a day for a month, and ends up stopping any water in any faucet in your house. Per your logic, you'll still pay my company because I did some work. Results are the yardstick, mister. In your case, end-to-end results - you did your part of the job (of selling the units) - but the final race hasn't been run, the results are not out that all damage is undone, and/or the product is not complete for use by the consumer. What you are calling "results" or "profits" or "right to pay" is only a portion of the task - yet the task itself is not complete.

"Many of the employees have, in the past six months, turned down job offers from more stable employers, based on A.I.G.’s assurances that the contracts would be honored. They are now angry about having been misled by A.I.G.’s promises and are not inclined to return the money as a favor to you."

This situation you are in has a bigger picture. It is far more than between you and Liddy - this is round two between AIG and the public. After what your company has done to the public, should public feel honored to pay your contract through our funds?!
o Round #1 your company cheated us and didn't care where we ended up laying,
o and then you got dumped by your own team mates,
o and then you tried to jump ship but changed your mind and didn't,
o and in round #2 public screwed your company with you and Liddy in it - gave your company money to spend, but denied you the right to fill your pockets.
In all, for someone from MIT, what went around came around - however, your story's starting point is starting where your pain started. I would want to see how well you did at MIT and what the jack you did making responsible decisions at AIG. If I didn't read that right, you were an EVP, right?!

"So what am I to do? There’s no easy answer. I know that because of hard work I have benefited more than most during the economic boom and have saved enough that my family is unlikely to suffer devastating losses during the current bust. Some might argue that members of my profession have been overpaid, and I wouldn’t disagree."

There you've answered it! World is fine and dandy as long as you've made money through the company and saved up - giving you the luxury to be a snob while and after the job. "Profit sharing" for you must be full of profits, and when it comes to "loss sharing" you should have the luxurious opportunity to jump ship. That's what you call fair. Now, again, you are responsible for making decisions for people around you - and for customers?! With this maturity, how again did you say you got this job?! Makes me wonder if there are more of your kind in AIG - in which case the bail out was a bigger mistake than having trusted you enough to let your company bankrupt so many of the public/corporations.

"On March 16 I received a payment from A.I.G. amounting to $742,006.40, after taxes. In light of the uncertainty over the ultimate taxation and legal status of this payment, the actual amount I donate may be less — in fact, it may end up being far less if the recent House bill raising the tax on the retention payments to 90 percent stands. Once all the money is donated, you will immediately receive a list of all recipients."

Did you think - or have you been in the practice of "thinking" practically/analytically - before you went public with your letter? Here's a befitting response for you:

"As soon as I finish paying the post-medical insurance but nonetheless significant medical bills for my husband's recent surgery, and recalculate our budget, factoring in the 10% involuntary pay cut together with increased state income taxes, I will turn my attention to an extravagant display of empathy for Mr. De Santis' post-tax $742,000 plight. Woe is he. — deranieri, San Diego"

You might say hardships are not a measure of business value as a response to "deranieri" above. I'll tell you, that's exactly my point to you.

If you are not a written-word person, but a picture person, hope you'll take the hint:


- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
Product Manager:

A Product Manager's role is to create sustainable and profitable monetization.

Where
* "sustainable" refers to the following attributes: repeatable, unique differentiated strengths, difficult to copy, and those that add enough value to customer the pain points of customers that they are willing to pay a price to have the product.

For example, your product would not be sustainable:
- if what your product does is easy/simple to do, then the customer would do it themselves rather than pay for your product.
- if it wasn't repeatable, then a charlatan or copycat could make one time profits too by cheating or selling knock-offs.

* "profitable" refers to producing/creating it with far fewer means than the rewards over the entire term of funding; so there's enough to go around for the salaries and benefits of all those involved in the making of the product, for the payment of the materials/tools/space required, for the taxes and for the giving back to the community.

Sustainable profitable monetization implicitly means it is not enough that the Product Manager wins the battles/politics - he must win the war in the market.

In essence, Product Manager has to see that his product is (or will be) profitable to the extent paying for the salaries and benefits of all involved (not to mention his/her salary+benefits+"bonuses"); although he/she doesn't directly manage the employees who make the product, but only aligns them through their managers.

VP:

General's/VP's job is to make his side win, using Foot Soldiers who just want to be on [or, will switch to] whichever side is winning.

Since holding the job title doesn't define the mentality of the person - so it's completely possible the General/VP has the Foot Soldier's mentality to running the company (and switching sides), and some Foot Soldiers having a General's/VP's mentality of riding the tough times through - even if it means till the end.

CEO:

A CEOs role is creating a sustainable and economical/profitable organization using a complex people matching game. The people matching game is explained here: http://kaleemaziz.com/v-web/b2/index.php?p=313. Point being, the CEO needs to match the needs of the financier(s)/VCs/shareholders to make profits, with the needs of workers and managers to get a salary+benefits+bonuses and the needs of customers willing to pay for a product/service that eliminates their inconveniences/pains/struggles.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
Tit-for-tat teaches the perpetrator what if feels like to the victim, but makes the victim the perpetrator - which over a time of such circular disputes puts both parties at equal blame for their pains. They then hate each other without knowing how it all started, what they are fighting/arguing for and upon what event they will forgive and stop. However, if there's no "tit" (victim's matching response) for "tat" (perpetrator's unfair actions), then there's just the "tat" after "tat" pushing the victim lower and lower into pain, suffering and humiliation, while the perpetrator starts to believe he's a force of nature that can do anything to others. That's where fair governance comes in. People of all colors/beliefs/professions come together and stop the bad at the level of "tat" by the perpetrator and put him on notice that his "tat" is going to get him in trouble not just with the victim but pitches him against all. The victim doesn't have to respond with a "tit" in this case as justice was served in a more crushing/deserving way than he as one person could ever have served and silenced the perpetrator's first action, so it doesn't turn into repeated actions.

As a side humor, however, guys would keep on doing "tat" to pretty girls if they keep on getting "tit" from them in response. Well, when it comes to that, there's no simple logic/method/formula.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
Although from e-mail forwards, I liked the following:

The paradox of our time in history is that we have taller buildings but shorter tempers, wider Freeways, but narrower viewpoints. We spend more, but have less, we buy more, but enjoy less. We have bigger houses and smaller families, more conveniences, but less time. We have more degrees but less sense, more knowledge, but less judgment, more experts, yet more problems, more medicine, but less wellness.

We drink too much, smoke too much, spend too recklessly, laugh too little, drive too fast, get too angry, stay up too late, get up too tired, read too little, watch TV too much, and pray too seldom.

We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values. We talk too much, love too seldom, and hate too often.

We've learned how to make a living, but not a life. We've added years to life not life to years. We've been all the way to the moon and back, but have trouble crossing the street to meet a new neighbor. We conquered outer space but not inner space. We've done larger things, but not better things.

We've cleaned up the air, but polluted the soul. We've conquered the atom, but not our prejudice. We write more, but learn less. We plan more, but accomplish less. We've learned to rush, but not to wait. We build more computers to hold more information, to produce more copies than ever, but we communicate less and less.

These are the times of fast foods and slow digestion, big men and small character, steep profits and shallow relationships. These are the days of two incomes but more divorce, fancier houses, but broken homes. These are days of quick trips, disposable diapers, throwaway morality, one night stands, overweight bodies, and pills that do everything from cheer, to quit, to kill. It is a time when there is much in the showroom window and nothing in the stockroom.

- George Carlin

Isn't this what Annie Leonard also points out in her StoryOfStuff.com clip at 15:40 minutes through the video? She shows it with the National Happiness chart, and follows it with the enormously well done impression of people working harder to just switch between popular fashions/fads created by media/marketing of commercial corporations. Look at who is playing who for a fool.

Luxury
The whole idea of "luxury", infact, is built on the glitter of appearance/packaging with no additional real value added to the task/need - and the bragging right to be able to afford it is enough for the seekers of these luxury goods to keep on wanting to earn more to spend on the extra glitter. Of course, they must standout when they do. But others are not being left behind with "affordable luxury" - made cheaper by mass production or false look-alikes. Then people have to work for super-luxury that truly can't be mass produced. Then, in order to take care that their luxury is not contaminated by the commoners' presence, the luxury seekers have to start finding themselves more detached/alone/aloof from normal people. So they may be affording the costliest things, but their attempt to standout results in their inability to mingle and socialize - as they out-fashion almost everyone else out. Instead of sincere relationships, they either have false ones or they need to choose to have none at all.

Put that into an iterative circle like that of Anne Leonard's, and you know where our world is within a few iterations and where it is headed. Our love of machines/money/toys/things supersedes that of our love for man/person/friend/family/human/mankind/people/humanity. Whereas the reality is that these machines/toys/things/money have a strong correlation to the "creator(s) of the thing" i.e., his/her talent/ability/willingness/motivation/happiness. When you take that away, or make the creator's motivation itself as some other machine/toy/thing - you quickly see the bonds between people lost - unless they are through gifts/machines/toys/things that come through them. As a result, people no longer share themselves, they share what they can buy/afford in the store. There's no special touch to giving - and world is quickly getting used to it that there is no one special - except for the one that can afford them the most things they need. This is a key driver to false/pretend relationships based on an underlying pretext/motive. And the belief that money makes the world go round - without the ability to realize that the money will not save them in a desert of machines if there are no people behind them. And this belief that money alone is the supreme thing leads to comments to destroy people of a kind for the actions of one (or to just win lots of money), not realizing that people with such a race/creed/belief-system in reference has more than a right to live, those people basically provide our world (and the person making the racial comment) with a crucial component of the eco-system. That's the "narrow viewpoint" that the author George Carlin is pointing to above. Now do you/we see how the materials/consumption focused economy screws up the lives/views/happiness of its people?!

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
Wikipedia gives a new definition to "for the people, by the people and of the people" to information on the Internet - mainly by notching up on the quality and reliability as needed by an average person. If you think you owe the world back something (i.e., even after having paid the taxes ), suggest you donate to these few folks on doing a good job that touches so many lives positively.

"Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge."

---
If this donation helps you cut down on your donations to your favorite religious church/community, that in my perspective would be an added bonus to the world! In my perspective, not donating to religious organizations would save the world from the other source of (mis-)information.

Again, donating to cancer research, autism research, green energy research, Wikipedia like organizations, etc. alongside your favorite religious church/community is good either way. It'd be better if you'd donate to the former types and avoid the latter types.

But, if you just work and pay your taxes, hey, you are doing enough good just by that. Who am I to say where you use your money? I'll probably say where my government should be using that money - i.e., with my vote and voice.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
The following video tutorial talked about, what the author called, a "Materials Economy".

URL: http://www.storyofstuff.com/


As I've noted (mostly to myself) that the current economics is too heavily a materials-based and labor-based economics. We give fixed prices instead of barter/auction values in the name of convenience and then build currencies on top of currencies (i.e., stocks, bonds, international currencies, metals, etc.) to use the same fixed price predictability. Even our ways to intervene into the economy are more interest rate and money supply based rather than an actual ability to fire up the economy. The availability of resources may not have changed, yet the availability of the money/currency to trade those resources can dry up - causing anywhere from a recession, or a depression to a great depression. In other words, no real famine, flood, earthquake, volcano, or fire ruins the life of millions - money's regulation and availability does.

Most people would respond to that saying "Of course, money is important. It clearly decides life and death as you can buy basic things like food and water with it! Therefore, it's in our nature to grab money by whatever way we can. What's your point?" My point is simply that if there's still trees, fruits, animals, equipment, etc., why should millions die hungry in a depression/recession? If money is like a movie ticket, the ticket is deciding whether you get food/medicine or not for your children - even though you know all the abilities to have it provided to "all" still exist intact? I can understand not getting to view a movie till you show that you paid for it - so someone who made the movie is rewarded/thanked for his efforts to "entertain" you. But in the case of the depression/recession, there are not enough people with movie tickets - as well as the movie makers don't get enough audience. Both get poorer because the audience that wants to see can't afford it, and the movie maker can't afford to give away the movie for free. The poor die, the movie industry collapses - at around the same time, one after the other. I mean that should seem ridiculous - right, the movie maker exists, the movie exists, the audience exists, the audience's intent to go the movie exists, etc., etc., meaning all the ingredients are there, except there aren't enough movie tickets! You can extend the same idea to distributing pizzas with coupons - and not having enough coupons to go around. There are enough hungry people who can't afford the pizza, there are enough pizza makers but they don't get customers, and very few folks have tons of coupons for which they can't eat all the pizzas they can buy. As you can see, the problem is not that there's a drought/famine, flood, fire, earthquake, volcano, farms lost, disease, plague, etc., it is the missing coupon/ticket/money/paper that's causing the pain on a large scale to millions of people!!!

That's why I think current economics is all about materials and labor; and less about values. Once you base an economy on values, these problems go away. Of course, implementing an economy based on values is not simple and without its own problems either.

In any case, this reminds me of Macro Economic class on solving a depression. Creation of jobs and not trying to balance government books was the key. However, one comment made by my professor held me back - and showed how deeply today's economics is about materials/things/objects/stuff/labor than it is about values. She said the leading economist (who is now a legend on solving depressions) believed government should create jobs - it didn't matter if it paid 1/2 of the people to dig a hole and the other 1/2 of the people to fill the hole. It struck me as an economic concept to circulate the money to revive an economy by passing around labor/material rather than thinking about a) the value added to the community and b) the values of the people in it in circulating the money as would be needed in a values-based economy.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
For a bit there, I thought it was just me about the character in a lot of women these days. Note that I'm still on the equality for women track - but I continue to mean equality of opportunity and evaluation/judgement of merit of women just as it is for anyone else. I don't mean them getting to each be a Queen for-free for the sake of the inequality that their predecessor women have had in the past. To further clarify, what I mean through equality of women is their ability to be the same as a man in that profession/role in the society; I do not mean them having to get the upper hand or advantage just because of their "gender" with nothing else better in them. But what I'll be writing below is about a disparity - "individual freedom" being skewed from "equality of women" to "supremacy of women". It is not just to the extent of promoting "feminism", it is going to a fanaticism about it - where spoiled brats are claiming a right to be that way at the cost of social tolerance of "feminine supremacists".

So many women seem to be getting so angry so quickly, and not because they have something going on that makes them so. These women seem to have money, no problems with anything in particular, no children, and an understanding husband - everything that a dream life constitutes - but are pushy, rash, extraordinarily mean and plain crazy. Be in shopping aisles where they'll run you over with their shopping cart if you aren't watching your back, to yelling at their husband/children/parents as if they own the world and the world wasn't delivered to them on time and per the quality that matches their tastes. However, there seems to be no way to help them - they just burn through relationships (even those that care for them) like acid.

I can understand if the woman in question is a Mom with serious problems financially, abusive husband, sick/dying parents, chores with children, tasking job, and are purely in hurry - such that they expect others to operate as fast and as direct as they do. But that's not the trend here - these are yet to be Mom or recent Moms, housewives, financially taken care of by a wealthy husband, everything from their food to the cleaning of aquarium to pet grooming of their pets is done at husband's expense, parents are practically giving them the "Princess treatment" because they don't want her temper to ruin things for them as well as her, and she's only responsible for chasing her pleasures in a big SUV. This all-bills-paid and thoroughly-spoiled scenario is what is making these people so much trouble for the family.

It appears a lot happens for these women the "American way" - from a pink flowery bedroom since childhood to protective parents (most likely her mother) who believed she should have everything. Mind shudders to think what men going after such women are thinking, if not to believe that they are blind - they've not had a sister or a mom they could compare against. But once caught up in such women's web, it must a trap. You can only wish you'll be devoured of your life and spit first, rather than have to be in her relationship any longer.

We are seeing husbands jumping over a cliff (i.e., committing suicide) for not being able to manage such a woman. Yet the society believes husband should be the "door-opening, purse-carrying, seating-her-before-himself, let-the-women-run-the-world while they-themselves-are-the-worker-bees, bring-her-flowers, romantic-date orchestrating, expensive-cruise affording and so on" guys. And when this spoiled-beyond-imagination woman spoils her own husbands' chances of promotion, socializing, etc., she's stabbing her own dollar stream to power her SUV as much as ruining her husband's blood-n-sweat efforts/dreams. But these aggressive women move on - to greener pastures, at their husband's cost.

May be this is the American woman of today. Instead of the hardworking lady sharing and caring of her relationships, or an example Mom/Daughter/Wife for others to follow; we have in the name of individual-freedom an industrialized perfect-consumer who frequents malls but has a worse temper than the one who works two of the three shifts to feed family. The problem is that there's no way to contain this acidic person as they burn through relationships at home, outdoors, in travel, in parties, etc. You'd hope these folks would find themselves a hole and leave others alone; or would be outcast from social circles until they learned to behave better for their own good - but when these are the majority, they find other "independent" or "feminine supremacist fanatics" women that think this is "right" - validating their anger/hate/haste. Before you know it, you don't have any other kind crossing your path - and if you ever do, they'll soon be converted into believing these other women have everything from basics to fashion (and, not to mention, others will work on making her one of theirs).

There still are great women who work hard on their own, earn their respect, are an example relationship-maker, are just an inspiring success, and don't behave in a way where haste-precedes-reason (i.e., stay away from "Princess attitude"). But they are because they are too strong - due to something in them or their past; but definitely not because of the system, instead they are so despite the system. They are the rarely seen exception, not the commonly occurring norm.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
Bias refers to the act of forming the impression about a person/entity first and then evaluating his/her comments or actions. This way you judge the person whether or not he says/does something, and irrespective of how he says/does something. It's an attitude that doesn't allow you to gain a new impression about another person/group, even if their nature/actions are different from the past.

Normal or sane behavior would be to give a person/entity a clean slate, and let their actions and words define their role. That way, if a person changes his/her ways, you are looking at the new person and not using the past to judge them instead of the new change that people are capable of. And a changed person is essentially capable of repairing the harm done due to his/her past, and then do some more good.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
Opium for the masses?
Well, Religion is legalized opium for the masses - highly un-economical yet sadly the way of life.

Unlike Opium consumption, it is not only the "high" feeling. It is all the illegal trafficking, laundering and plundering that takes place in its path that hurts us.

If Opium/Marijuana was legal - only the "high" feeling would be the end result. Religions are already legal in the name of freedom of belief and all set of associated social evils become legal in its name.

For example, the religious people believe in "their people" versus "others". To tell a story, a person close to me asked why I don't pray and seem to detest people of "our belief". I told her, "I don't hate or separate people. My issue with believers is that they call themselves apart from others and don't treat others like they are humans at all. They, not me or people like myself, have a problem with people that believe differently than themselves." To this she replied, "I don't understand why you say that - I believe in religion as well as live/share with people of all kinds. Who asked you to not treat people equal [in our religion]? We have to be friends with all people, but also be religious and pray towards one God. If we aren't religious and don't do our prayers, then what's the difference that sets us apart from infidels?" [Note: The reference to "infidels" is to remind that "our people" will go to Heaven or Hell per our beliefs/deeds, but infidels will burn/rot in Hell for eternity irrespective of their other beliefs/deeds.] So I was wrong - not only do these religious people see themselves as right and others as sore losers who'll burn/rot in hell - they don't even recognize/realize/see that they do this, and that it is wrong/unfair. And the above is just a mild example - and not the only incident in my life that gives me the views I have.

To folks of these faiths, people's pain is based on the faith they are of. If it is a person of a different faith that suffers - they don't sympathize/empathize for them. If it is a person of a shared faith, then they rile/hurt/curse/rally against the pain/injustice suffered. It is a hypocrisy/discrimination based on faith - not based on the merit of the individual in contributing to the society.

Can these people ever be shown their hypocrisy? That it is so narrow-minded that if the same were to be imposed on them they'd cry "foul"! But they don't think of it that way about applying same rules to all, with the intent to treat all as equals and avoid narrow-mindedness or hypocrisy among people of one species (irrespective of the fact that they share the same genes, same blood, same composition, etc). Same rules cannot apply to them and infidels alike, after all they are "different from other kinds", i.e., superior/better.

But it is pointless to force people to leave their religion or putting them in jail or punishing/taxing them for it either. With majority being believers, we'd either have larger civilization in jail than outside or would be asking for the wrath of believers all united against the unbelievers.

Think about it further. If we like to have the freedom albeit to reason and verify, and not be forced to believe in others' theories; they want to have the freedom to believe in their faith of spirituality where reason and verification are given a rest. It would appear peace of mind and alleviation of pain are given a greater agenda than actually solving the problem or being correct. But telling them that mindset and value system is wrong would be trying to mold the world in our way - rather than proving anything to them (since they are not in the mindset to reason/validate logically anyways). It would be just like a businessman seeing the whole world for not being more business savvy, or a military veteran loathing society for not being more military like.

I guess we each drag the society in our direction. The way the "material" universe does it "right" or "wrong" don't have a political correctness to it - there are laws and consequences. The moment you add "people" component to the universe "right" or "wrong" have to be balanced to what people hold dear - even as they pay the price for it and blame their plight on something else.

Education (of Science and Math) that stays the same irrespective of political correctness was hoped would be the cure to ignorance, illiteracy, religion, hypocrisy, and superstition. However, an interesting thing is happening - education teaches what's needed to make a living, and serves today's known concepts. It doesn't make students validate other concepts considered, invalidate the superstitions, ask them to question on aspects that are beyond the immediate task of making a living, etc. While there's not much of a political correctness of massaging/camouflaging/diplomatising scientific findings or the logical approach to deriving them; there's an approach adopted in teaching to not tick off the faith of the faithful, challenge the spirituality of the religious and invite the wrath of the hardcore/orthodox believers. There's a very good reason why - because we want everyone to come to school without being told they are a fool/idiot for where they come from and for what they believe in. Contrary method of telling them just that would keep them out of school and be more acute of a problem to handle - not only are they ignorant/illiterate, they are not even a workforce-enabled crowd. At the least, the students and their parents would start switching from such a teacher to another who'd be more amenable to the majority of their self-agreeing religious community - until the teacher has too few students to be justified to teach. Either way, it is not going to work to call people out and challenge them to their beliefs and to ask them to shed their superstitious beliefs alongside learning new skills/trade/knowledge - either the school or the teacher or the government are going to have a problem at hand till they mend their ways or close themselves on that policy; or offended students/parents will boycott the school in favor of less rigorous coursework e.g., religious schools.

With education ruled out in this fashion to provide any help in the matter - either due to fear of social pressure to be amenable or fear of social boycott to be effective and adopted by majority - we have educated illiterates who know their trade but don't question their beliefs holistically. We have a mix of scientists/physicists/biologists/chemists/architects/technologists that are good at their work - of logically solving very complex problems - but who employ an entirely different value system outside their domain. They call one domain their work and call the other their spiritual need. Often that ends up having a good loyal/intelligent workforce screwing up decisions at an economic level, political level, social level, etc., e.g., by voting for a leader, by voting for a change, by teaching their children the very things they believe in on other matters of life, by approving of others pain and giving it a valid explanation in their value system, by considering human race to not have matured in their eyes to solve problems on other domains where spirituality works, etc.

The ultimate solution is a decision-making support system (DSS) that is objective and holistic in providing people the guiding support they need in every walk of life, and that aligns them with the rest of their social structure holistically. Much like a GPS to everyday decision-making - both at an individual level as well as a group/community level.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
Family want two things they don't understand how it comes to the home:
a) Time, i.e., your free time giving them a good time
b) Money, i.e., means to buy stuff for them, to help them buy stuff for themselves, and to save for their futures

The odd thing is that their Time-want is inversely proportional to their Money-want.

Let's look at that below.

I. Making good money leaves you with little free time
If you make good money, you are a busy man who is expected to perform well or have an edge/knack over others.
The edge/knack either comes through
a) something that is a practiced discipline through the years (i.e., with actually putting a thought to it than just doing things to keep the job) or
b) having a gift in you that you don't know why you got.

Having a gift and being at the right business/company/place to leverage it, without losing it at a desk job you got into for the money, is a lottery. So, in most cases, it has to be the attributes of years of rigor/discipline, concious thought/dedication/engagement/drive, and doing things to add value better than anyone else, that help people deserve/keep good money. But the moment you have put your years/values/age in the profession, since the amount of available time is constant, you have lost it on the family. You may funnel this "rare" money to the family but now you aren't as involved on its values, including the spending of their time and your money. Therefore, family doesn't think earning good money is a great deal - and hence, you get "no thanks; you are just not there for us to listen/understand how we feel - and money doesn't fill it" and "we need you, not your money - and pouring money on us will not fullfill our need nor should it fulfill your guilt".

However, if you make poor money already, you have to spend more time at work or do multiple jobs to get more money to the family.
In either of the situations, you have very little time for family - if you have to give them a better quality of life.
Unless your family is business savvy as well and moves alongside with you by believing in you and not creating high-profile problems for you, they practically need to date you for your time (i.e., setup an appointment in advance and keep up their time bounds).

Now, it's a different matter that family will take for granted what they have through your paycheck, not giving a second thought to where it comes from.
It gets irritating when they make you feel it was their birth right, as if you are the servant running out to fetch them the monies they need.
It gets frustrating when they complain they don't get the free time they need, esp. considering the efficiency of time you need to be reliable versus the inefficient nature of how family works (can't decide on simple grocery items or restaurant selection).

II. Making poor money, and keeping expectations of life style of the family low, leaves you with lots of free time to give to the family
If you make poor money, you can either work harder/longer or study in overtime to try to go up where people earn more and live better. Instead people don't go into this cut-throat rat race over a long period of time to earn slightly more money. And that further limits their experience and opportunities. So the way for these people is to lower their expectations from life (e.g., premium medical, premium private school, etc.) and give more family time, where alternatively they could work harder instead for non-family strangers on already poor paying jobs. They may or may not work as hard on family matters themselves - but if they do, that makes a difference only at the level of cleaner house, alphabet arranged video catalog, vase arrangement, garden, etc.; i.e., family discipline that doesn't translate to pay, but to shared/instilled values/norms/culture of the family.

Net, family with less pay but more time is stuck in an old house with broken toilets, eating in together, public schools or home schooling, etc. and struggle a lot with each other due to
a) limited resources and
b) lack of higher requirement for social manners/maturity as is required in business (although faith-based manners are for the sake of showing to their God, not genuinely for the persons they have to provide appropriate courtesy to) but
c) lot of time to keep it going.

Sidenote on "quality of life" or "life style" as an economic argument:
Now there might be people out there that believe having home food, going to public schools or doing home schooling from parents (i.e., not professional tutors), etc., are wrong stereotypes to be considered as a lower life style. I'm using the "life style" concept as an economic attribute of how many things the family is able to afford, rather than the "life style" as defined by Christian values where bonding with the family, struggling happily, abhoring money and its derivatives, disapproving materialism and hating gays are all "positive" things in comparison. In an economic measure of better life style, it is almost opposite of the religious values - materialism is seen as an ability/willingness to afford/consume that runs the economy, having a different need/orientation/preference from others in the same society is seen as a valid freedom/tolerance to lead your private life per our tastes/whims as long as it doesn't touch others in the society, etc.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
There are heterosexuals that get into marital bonds/vows, but can't keep their heart in it. They feel it's slavery, it's unfair, it's an unwilling drag, they are stuck to the partner, it's a blackmail, it's a way to better benefits, it's one way to solve the children's future, it's worse than being in love, and it's just better than divorce. Heterosexuals are asking for abolition of marriage (and in the process avoiding divorce) - or entirely avoiding marriage (i.e., living together as domestic partners and having children outside of wedlock) unless its the pressure/nagging/happiness of their domestic partner (with no other alternatives/patience anyways to get into another relationship of this kind) has them give in. Society gives you the contract of marriage - but it is not necessarily 100% involvement of the individuals that makes it a working marriage. It is the society's involvement in overseeing/measuring/judging your compliance to your "marriage contract" (alongwith your need to be in line with acceptable social norms) that makes it a working marriage.

On the flip side, if an unmarried couple has already lived like a married couple for years, feared for their love from the will of the rest of the society - but still continued with each other, defended/protected their union during ups/downs, and shared their space/time/wealth/trust - they [to me] are more married than the former kind who have the title/contract of being married. It is definitely a greater form of love than marriage under oath or social contract affords others. Isn't this what our popular love stories are about - two persons loving each other despite their parents' and society's attempts to end their relationship, separate them; or just end them and people like them?!

It is the same thing like being a patriot or a fervent follower. Are you a better person because you have memorized/preached the constitution/holy-book, respect the flag/idol and attend the social gatherings/celebrations? Or are you really into practicing those very values in your character and life, beyond what others can typically do? Loving a flag is not the same as defending a country. Kissing the holy-book is not the same as being respectful to fellow neighbor (irrespective of their race, creed, profession or orientation). Those who were born into the country/religion know the book/motions - but those who choose one on their own volition have really made a choice to belong/accept/make-a-difference.

Same-sex marriage - people worry - break their age-old customs of their society. They also worry that it is not natural, healthy for the couple, healthy for the children, healthy for the society overall (to accept/teach it), etc. But isn't that a reminder to our democratic system: "Welcome to individual freedom/responsibility". You follow your religion/customs under democracy and although it is considered as an opiate for the masses, you have your individual freedom and responsibility in your beliefs/actions under the same law. If your rights to follow your will/beliefs/needs is taken away - you'd have lost your right to be as you want to be. Same-sex marriage is no different - they believe in something, and are taking individual freedom/responsibility as adults for it. No amount of "but it'll do this", "but it'll do that", and "it is associated to this-n-that since the ages", etc., will help - because those same arguments can be leveled regarding your beliefs. As long as your beliefs/actions don't affect me - you are allowed to smoke the opium of your beliefs/actions - whether it is in the form of your religion or the form of your sexual orientation.

If it was upto your God to make same-sex marriages a sin, let's look at why he created people with an orientation as the ones you condemn being negative for the society. Just a thought - are you blaming God or the actions of men in this case? If you are not one with such an orientation - remember your God could've made you that way and you couldn't have helped it - religion/preaching against you or not. Puts a big hole in the whole God argument to solve this problem/issue. If your point is "God created an imperfect world on purpose and is judging people based on yet another dimension - of their own choices" - then let God decide. Unless your assertion is the very claim, know that He didn't send you to judge on others - he can do that himself very fine.

I believe same-sex marriage is lesser of an issue than a) religion (opium of the masses), b) illiteracy/ignorance, c) corruption, d) cigarette (that causes second hand smoke to other friends/family), e) alcohol (drunk driving, abuse, etc.), f) unpreparedness for natural calamities, g) lack of individual freedom/responsibility in various walks of life, etc., etc. This issue is a ruse, to take our efforts into an unnecessary topic, and damage our ability to concentrate on issues that indeed matter.

See also: The relationship between Religion, Illiteracy and Ignorance; and why Literacy/Education is not a cure for Religion and Ignorance.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
The mousepad I have been using for a few years says some profound things:



Sources on the internet:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3233/2434474032_f0fb1a45e0_o.jpg
or
http://chrisrussell.net/images/HP-rules-of-the-garage.pdf

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
This space, thoughts and the couple of moments it takes you to read it are dedicated to sanely thinking about the insanity of drunk driving. Moral is that drunk driving is not a choice - it's not only a way of choosing to committing suicide, it could involve you in the homicide of an innocent stranger.

Went to a party Mom

I went to a party,
And remembered what you said.
You told me not to drink, Mom,
so I had a sprite instead.

I felt proud of myself,
The way you said I would,
that I didn't drink and drive,
though some friends said I should.

I made a healthy choice,
And your advice to me was right.
The party finally ended,
and the kids drove out of sight.

I got into my car,
Sure to get home in one piece.
I never knew what was coming, Mom,
something I expected least.

Now I'm lying on the pavement,
And I hear the policeman say,
the kid that caused this wreck was drunk,
Mom, his voice seems far away.

My own blood's all around me,
As I try hard not to cry.
I can hear the paramedic say,
this girl is going to die.

I'm sure the guy had no idea,
While he was flying high.
Because he chose to drink and drive,
now I would have to die.

So why do people do it, Mom
Knowing that it ruins lives?
And now the pain is cutting me,
like a hundred stabbing knives.

Tell sister not to be afraid, Mom
Tell daddy to be brave.
And when I go to heaven,
put 'Mommy's Girl' on my grave.

Someone should have taught him,
That it's wrong to drink and drive.
Maybe if his parents had,
I'd still be alive.

My breath is getting shorter,
Mom I'm getting really scared
These are my final moments,
and I'm so unprepared.

I wish that you could hold me Mom,
As I lie here and die.
I wish that I could say, 'I love you, Mom!'
So I love you and good-bye.

- MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers)

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
The following excerpt from a forwarded e-mail sounds like a cool ice-breaker and conversion maker within the family ...

What's Hot, What's Not?

As our kids have grown older, their interests have extended beyond baby dolls and toy trains to activities that take them further from home, such as soccer, school clubs, art, and music. We believe that having downtime is important for kids, so we try not to over-book their schedules. We stick to a "1 + 1" routine -- one sport or activity and one music lesson at a time for each child.

Even with these guidelines in place, sometimes we find the family calendar gets to be more jam-packed than we'd like. This past spring, we had a few particularly intense weeks when soccer season, jazz band competitions, and law school finals created a Bermuda Triangle into which all of our family time seemed to disappear.

One Sunday morning on the way to church, I overheard the kids talking about a game they called "What's Hot and What's Not." They explained that it was something their youth leader had them do as a way of checking in with the Sunday school class. The game was simple: each child told the group one good thing and one not-so-good thing from his or her week.

As Sabrina and Jake negotiated which of them would claim our baby cousin Amber's successful checkup after her double lung transplant as their "What's Hot" item for the week, I realized how seriously they took this conversation game. So, one Friday night after a particularly busy week, we went out for Mexican food, and I borrowed the youth leader's idea.

Instead of just munching on chips while we waited for dinner to arrive, I asked everyone in the family to play a round of "What's Hot and What's Not."
We went around the table and shared the highlights and low points from our weeks.

As we each took a turn, I noticed how much thought each family member put into the responses and how much more detailed our conversation was than it would have been had I simply asked "How was school today?" Instead of answers like "Fine," we got to hear about an argument two of Jake's friends had and how he felt like he was in the middle. Sabrina told us about how nervous she was about having to memorize and recite a 150-line poem.

Each time we've returned to this game, we've enjoyed the same good results. "What's Hot and What's Not" is a communication game that's easy to find time for in the family schedule, too. We've played it in restaurants, in the car, and just sitting around at home. And, when our schedules rev up into high gear, we find that it's a great way for our family to reconnect.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
The discussions at the links below got me thinking for this blog post:
http://www.linkedin.com/answers/MGM_ODV/228204-5071709?trk=ape_q080512i_9
http://www.becominggreat.com/

Overall Attitudes
Leadership is done seeking a challenge in life.
Manager is one who does it for pay.

Leadership inspires/mentors and motivates the people.
Manager is one who delegates and micro-manages the task/time.

Leadership gives confidence to people that individually each of them are [and can continue to be] greater than they already are.
Manager is one who sees to it that their people are available, on the job and have no hurdles in getting the tasks assigned to them done.

Leadership provides a reason for the team to be united and together in their variety of roles.
Manager is one who uses divide and rule to keep the team members as individuals that follow a set process each, even if it intersects with other individuals within the team or other teams within the same organization.

Leadership is the attitude to develop win-win relationships, and to convert win-loss relationships through educating or placement of people.
Manager is one who has the attitude to execute, delegate and regulate the company motto while deeply believing in profit/non-profit end-goal of the company.

Direction of Servitude
Leadership is in being engaged in servitude of the greater society/community/organization - i.e., volunteering and leading volunteers to reduce the pains/challenges of society.
Managers are servants of their boss(es) - who in turn boss their team and tell what is to be done.

Leaders want to progress the society, civilization, organization, race, etc., to the next level at each stage - so their people in general can enjoy greater pleasures in their lives.
Manager want to progress the company so they can continue to progress their career, feed/clothe/shelter their family and engage in greater monetary gratifications.

Leadership is in the trait that cares about the welfare of its people and the larger community.
Manager is one who does the job as applicable to the organization hired in, and complies to caring for the welfare of the team only as stipulated by corporate policies.

Leadership is in concerning oneself about mentoring and helping people grow.
Manager is one who concerns about complying with the company goals/targets within the stipulated criteria, motivated usually by their personal growth. (Often manager doesn't understand how entwined their growth is with the growth of the people under them!)

Source of Authority
Leadership is getting people to agree, obey, follow and trust in the leader's decision, without having the required power or authority.
Manager is one who typically has direct or indirect authority to get the work done - based on the title, not necessarily the personality.

Leaders rule because people want them to.
Managers rule because their boss allow them to.

Purpose/Cause
Leadership is in having a deep rooted and passionate cause/purpose - monetary or not - that is common with the larger society.
Manager is one who is engaged in enabling a business succeed, and in himself growing through the efforts/results of the team.

A good leader evolves civilization and leaves an impact for generations.
A good manager creates a great running operation and optionally a happy team that is willing to follow/trust his directives anywhere and anytime.

Breadth of Vision/Reach
Leaders have a vision for their people to flourish.
Managers have a vision for their organization to profit, save, and compete better.

To be a leader, you already are a good manager - of people, time, finances, politics, etc.
To be a manager, it is not necessary for you to be a leader - for instance, you could just be managing time or materials for a bunch of other people.

Great leaders shift economics.
Great managers create large scale teams/organizations, complex operations and advanced machinery.

Summary
Leaders tend to achieve everything a manager wants and get the goodwill of their following.
Managers get to keep the job/position or fulfill their own dreams/aspirations for themselves.

Great managers are actually able leaders.
Great leaders are a rarity.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
In sparring or combat, it is unrealistic to hope for one perfect blow to the opponent that will take him off-guard and bring him down. A trained opponent is going to anticipate the move and come up with his own response, or improvisation. In other words, no one goes down without putting up a fight - and it is unrealistic to hope they will.

To hope for a simple victory over others in a one off battle that gives you the final decision right away is like buying a lottery ticket. Hundreds or thousands of people each hoping to win, but all don't necessarily win. And the chances of one to make millions in one event is disproportionately lucky. Similarily, hoping for an one event or strategy that results in huge success over equally or more trained opponents is based on a hope/faith for a disproportionate luck. (If disproportionate luck were a phenomenon, or a gift being handed out, the key question to ask would be: "Why you and why not the opponent?".)

Most events of reaching a higher/highest level are a winding and uncertain pathway where you win some and lose some - but keep going on it partly based on the training, partly on the instincts/gut/irrationality/craziness and partly on the luck. But it is certainly not a medal for any one act - instead it is a reward for continuous ongoing work; often ardous work that was not celebrated as any heroship by itself until an uncanny victory/success came off it.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
In being able to successfully lead and influence others, you can't really reason with them about the correctness of your detailed analysis/derivation - it often comes down to vibing with them at their level or by having the necessary respect/trust/authority that you are righter than they can ever be.

You can't make them understand - you can only make them like you and, hence, listen to you long enough for them to ever take that step to change/align themselves in your direction. This is the alignment leadership brings - by helping people be like them by inspiration (aka., touching of their respective hearts).

Authority (through a recognized title - of being at a particular higher level) plays an interesting role. If authority comes from a rigorously tested and verified proof of capability, people inadvertently have given you the right to decide on their behalf and use some of them to follow your directions to the complete end. In this case, they don't even have to like you - the fact that you can order them around (presumably for their own good) is good enough - with an occasional peer challenging/opposing your approach. Due to this, some leadership experts have said that their people don't necessarily like them or agree with their decision-making style - but they follow anyways because your title enables you to control others' salary/place/position (aka., livelihood). Whether they like you as a person or not, they can either follow you or choose to leave (and immediately risk their stability in the process). It is assumed that you are yourself in check because of the oath/values you profess - or because your peers/superiors create the checks-n-balances for you (not very different from how you do that for your subordinates - thereby, making you follow your superiors for the very same reasons that your subordinates follow you).

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
The whole world is divided distinctly into how they think/process information.

1. Cherry Picking: Few events/incidents/facts define the person's thoughts.
2. Statistical Analysis: A rigorous study of a pattern of events, even beyond getting biased by his own experiences (infact to the extent of considering himself a single data point), define his rational.

The first kind are the "identity galore" of all the foolishness abound in this world. They know their feelings and react on it as if theirs is the first experience and first right. They think of no one else and consider thinking of others' (e.g., care) as a weak trait if you want to move forward without being slowed down for others. Moreover, they believe so steadfast in a small set of experiences (e.g., one man walking on water, one man being swallowed by a fish to emerge again, one man being made of steel as well as being able to fly at the same time, one person being born without a male's involvement, one man's sacrifice in a war counting as heroism many times over that of millions of others, one man's suffering relating to the absolving of entire humanity whereas many others went down like him, one person being able to split the moon by raising the index finger, one animal being a divine source, etc.) that they see rest of the world in terms of those beliefs. If they question those beliefs, they have scripted answers that convince them even more to those pre-meditated questions meant to strengthen their resolve. It is not impossible that one of these unique traits are possible - what I am pointing about is the human interpretation of generalizing upon that event as being possible and then moving forward to believing a host of other things as being possible, whereas they aren't (e.g., child sacrifice, dominating over the other sex, extreme punishment based on very silly unfounded laws, etc.). When one event that was "cherry picked" justifies general experience, people's scope to believe in a repeated message increases. The "connections" they make are based on stories of "cherry picking" and start deviating more and more from verifiable reality. Their emotions and their "cherry picked" (often by others) thinking/processing defines their value system, and that kind of existence among others screws it up for others who'll inadvertently be affected by their incorrect priorities to life/money/relationships.

The statistical analysis kind of person looks at a bunch of experiences, collects them in a systematic set, processes them to analytical/logical conclusions. Sometimes they exclude their emotions in order to reach a coherent result - either statistically or in analysing/deriving a logical set of [mathematical] connections/relationships (e.g., Earth being a round globe/sphere, gravity being a force between masses, Sun being center of solar system, time being a dimension that stays constant while length and mass can vary at high speeds, there being a relationship between progeny and siblings through genetic material, etc.).

Within those who think/process in terms of rigorous statistical analysis there's yet another huge divide between those who make a difference and those who don't.

1. Connections with respect to causality: These people use superior analytical and logical skills to link events and their causes. They use provable and verifiable generalizations (aka., a theory that fits the domain/universe) to assign causality - and are very careful in assigning whether an event caused a consequence or whether the event itself was the symptom of consequence of something more profound/abstract.
2. Reliance on accidental discovery of connections, if ever: These people don't rely on their individual/collective intelligence for "connections/relationships" between events/consequences, instead use data to find its own connections. They use advanced statistical tools to process data and rely on the tools (or statistical theories) to define the facts/consequences of the domain/universe.

I believe that statistics is a tool of aggregation, but by its very nature is a tool to de-personalize (aka., generalize) events to abstract numbers. The numbers then become an approximate representation of actuality or the depth/profoundness of the event. For example, a statistical growth/shrinking of GDP may be a feelingless number, but its effect may be profound on the psychology of people in it. Similarly, an earthquake magnitude may be a number that tells nothing if not for the appreciation of the effects/consequences. So on so forth, we can list tempratures, jolts, explosions, rocking of a sea-borne ship/cruise, etc., etc. Statistics are dry numbers aggregated to give a dashboard view but removed from the depth of importance/pain. The ability to connect the two: the aggregate and its consequence is an important skill (e.g., in terms of a leader's decision-making). The ability to be unemotional about the numbers is important in rigor towards collecting the data and processing the data unbiased, but it is counter to the ability to decide upon it. I think the later kind don't use gut-feeling ever - and typically ask "Where's the data?". However, the former kind run the risk of using their individual gut rather than a collective input of rigorously working team mates. But how common is it to find a collection of folks who all work rigorously and debate in peaceful disagreement? For that reason, the gut of one individual stands out among the disagreement of the divided many - often times in a slightly forceful "down-the-throat" manner for others. Is it necessary? It is not, if all were capable of understanding reason and applying a rigorous discipline to analyzing "connections" in a statistical fashion - rather than analyzing "events" alone in a statistical fashion.

Theoretical reduction or derivation is a powerful tool, but till it can define human intellect or value system as a mathematical function (or [self-]balancing equation), theory alone cannot solve the problems humanity faces. What I mean by that is that current theory is limited to inanimate things, and statistics is used as a poor substitute/approximation to get an aggregate out of complex intelligent/animate beings. [Rigorous/compex] theory that is powerful enough to relate/quantify people feelings/intellect/values into reduceable/derivable mathematical function (or [self-]balancing equations), in conjunction with a rigorous implementation that follows its people's changes of values/moods/preferences/priorities, alone can measure its people, events around them, situations those are creating mutually and then provide a GPS-like [alive] solutions that enable decision making that is supremely intelligent, sharing and collaborative at an optimum level.

Does statistical analysis truly draw out the picture of its people? No, not today. Voting is a close mechanism, but we vote for people and then let them make decisions for us - we don't vote on every need/value/preference. We accept that we don't know the right way to decide, and that somehow the person we vote will be able to do it for all of us with enough information/power/visibility. It is great for that person elected - but it is not optimum fulfillment of individual desires/wants/needs/preferences - and hence the complaints about the leaders.

Same thing goes about the education of these people to the wants of others that are in direct contrast to the preference they voted for - the fact that such an opposite preference exists is a ridiculous/crazy/unrealistic option/thought for most people. In essence, once the leaders come in place, they create a level of abstraction - for people to not think by themselves about everything everyone is concerned with in their lives. While single leadership gives a single direction/pathway, based heavily on individual preferences of the then leadership, it also creates a level of dumbing of people of the issues concerned. Well, people may live/work better due to that lack of responsibility on them - and leaders may screw up once, but learn in increments from their experiences - but there's a better way possible: one of using a system that knows its people so neither the people nor the leaders need to sweat/screw-up so much, and in net end up living even better lives than the leader-follower abstraction has offered us.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
A thought from a group I subscribe to:

A crash course in Time Management

If you want to make maximum use of your time, try the CRASH course in time management:

Consider
Release
Arrange
Schedule
Hold

Briefly, here's what the CRASH course entails.

Consider what it is you really want to accomplish in life. Determine what is really important and what is absolutely necessary.

Release everything that is trivial, unnecessary or relatively unimportant. You could do this by eliminating them or delegating them.

Arrange the remaining activities in order of priority based on their impact on your personal and organizational goals.

Schedule time for these important activities in your planner. Make appointments with yourself to actually work on them. The most important ones get scheduled earliest in your planner.

Hold to that schedule. Don't be so quick to give up the time to others. Have as much respect for your own time as you have for others'. Say 'no' more often.

The CRASH course is a way to get the important things done at the expense of the unimportant. It recognizes that we can't do everything, nor be all things to all people. There's always too much to be done in the limited time we have available. It forces us to consider what our goals are, and to realize that to accomplish these goals we must commit ourselves to spend time on them -- sometimes at the expense of things we assumed were necessary. It recognizes that a "not to do" list is as important as a "to do" list. It involves getting off mailing lists, committees and activities that do nothing to further our personal or organizational goals. In a way, it's a zero-based time management program where we get back to the basics, and shake free of all the superfluous activities we got involved in over the years.

Many of us are "activity packrats". The CRASH program recognizes this and asks us to peel away the "trivial many" and the time-consuming habits of a lifetime, leaving the meaningful activities listed in order of importance. There is always time for the things that are important in life; but we have to make room for them. Scheduling tasks and activities directly into our planner, just as we would schedule an appointment with a doctor, business associate or friend, will provide the time to actually do them. Listing what we want to do is not good enough. A "to do" list is simply a wish list; a scheduled block of time is a commitment.

The most difficult part of the CRASH program is actually holding to those commitments. A lifetime of allowing other peoples' requests to take precedence over our own wants and needs is not an easy habit to break. We must realize that our time is as valuable as the next person's. It's our time. And we are the ones responsible for its use.

If you sometimes feel like you are spinning your wheels and not accomplishing anything of real significance, take the CRASH course in time management. Consider. Release. Arrange. Schedule. Hold.

Always remember: DO NOT CONFUSE ACTIVITY WITH PROGRESS.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
Here's one about bragging ...

An American, a Cuban, a Scotsman and an Indian Computer Programmer, were on a cruise ship. As they were standing on the open deck, watching the waves and chatting, each one started showing off.

The Cuban took out an expensive Cuban cigar, lit it, took just one puff and tossed it into the sea. The other guys were flabbergasted. They asked him why he had to throw away such an expensive thing. The Cuban replied, "Where I come from, we have plenty of it. So, it is no big deal."

Not to be outdone, the Scotsman pulled out a new bottle of expensive Scotch whisky, opened it, took just one sip and threw the bottle into the sea. He simply looked at the others and said, "It is no big deal. We have plenty of that stuff where I come from."

When others looked at the American, he grabbed the Indian Programmer and threw him into the sea.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181
It seems to be a bit of both, but definitely both academics and practice are off the mark from what could be stated as verifiable reality, or reality itself. People populate the practical world, and people haven't been known for rigor enmasse. Academicians analyze and over-analyze the "truths" of the domain and have conditions upon conditions they can map to a real situation -- but do not have a complete map of the "people" in a corporation, community, or government. Both may be right in their domains and may keep things moving in the right direction, but both definitely miss the reality-check of the other.

Value Systems, on the other hand, deals with people as a function of verifiable reality, or observable reality itself. It is an academic construct that can provide a definition of any situation, no matter how many or how diverse people (or groups/communities) are involved in the equation. Dependencies among people are mapped as the primary function, before any economic valuation is done. It is practical enough to measure the reality, including the deviation of its people from the ideal/verifiable realities -- hence most practical and rigorous at the same time.

- Kaleem Aziz.

Warning: array_merge() [function.array-merge]: Argument #2 is not an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1175

Warning: array_unique() [function.array-unique]: The argument should be an array in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1176

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /hermes/bosweb/web076/b760/ipw.kaleemaz/public_html/v-web/b2/b2-include/b2template.functions.php on line 1181

One day Johnnie, an inquisitive young kid, goes up to his mother and asks:"Mom, how old are you?"
Mom: "You don't go around asking those kinds of personal questions to women."

Johnnie: "Can I know how much you weigh?"
Mom: "That's one more question you don't go around asking women. Why don't you start by telling me why you want to know."

Johnnie: "For no particular reason, Mom. Can you tell me why Dad left us?"
Mom: "You're too young to understand that too. I'll tell you when you're older."

So Johnnie goes back to school and tells his friend: "My mom doesn't want to tell me how old she is or what she weighs. She doesn't answer any of my questions."
His friend replies: "You should go into her purse and look at her driver's license. All your questions will be answered."

Johnnie goes back home, finds his mom's purse and looks at her driver's license.
Then he goes to his mom and says, "Mom, you're 39 years old."
Mom: "Yeah that's right I am."

Johnnie: "And you weigh 55 kg."
Mom: "Yup that's right."

Johnnie: "One last thing. I know why dad left us."
Mom: "Oh really, why?"

"Because you got an F in sex."

- Kaleem Aziz.