Archive for the ‘health’ Category

 

 

 

 

Louisiana_race.jpg

FILE: Undated: State Sen. Neil Riser, left, and Vance McAllister in photos provided by their campaigns, in Louisiana.

Vance McAllister, a political newcomer with the backing of the popular “Duck Dynasty” TV family, was elected as Louisiana’s newest member of Congress Saturday night.

According to the Louisiana Secretary of State’s website, McAllister led establishment candidate Neil Riser 59.7 percent to 40.3 percent — a difference of over 17,500 votes — with 976 of a possible 981 precincts reporting.

McAllister advanced to this weekend’s election to face off against Riser after an October contest with more than a dozen other candidates from both political parties — in what is known as a “jungle primary.”

The seat in Louisiana’s 5th Congressional District was left open when GOP Rep. Rodney Alexander resigned this summer to take a Cabinet post in GOP Gov. Bobby Jindal’s administration.

The largely rural district along the Mississippi River delta is dotted with farmland and plagued by poverty. The 5th District covers all or part of 24 parishes, from northeast and central Louisiana into southeastern parishes bordering Mississippi.

In last month’s election, Riser finished ahead of McAllister, taking 33 percent of the vote compared to 18 percent. But neither got the 50 percent needed to be declared the outright winner.

Many GOP races since 2010 have in some form been a Tea Party-vs.-establishment candidate showdown.

However, Riser doubled as both the establishment candidate and Tea Party favorite, promoting his experience but promising strident opposition to President Obama.

McAllister, meanwhile, embraced his outsider status, complete with an endorsement from his close friend Phil Robertson, the patriarch of television’s hit series “Duck Dynasty.” McAllister ran as the more measured pragmatist, criticizing Washington gridlock and hyper-partisanship, particularly on Obama’s health care law.

“Plain and simple, this was Riser’s election to lose. Riser was the favorite going into the evening. He had the dollars. He had the endorsement of the Republican establishment. He had a strong showing in the primary. Yet, he lost it,” Joshua Stockley, a political science professor at the University of Louisiana at Monroe, told the Associated Press.

An ally of Jindal, Riser had his campaign up and running almost immediately after Alexander announced his resignation in September. The timing prompted cries of favoritism, though Jindal, Alexander and Riser deny any collusion.

Riser touted his decades-long experience as a businessman in the funeral industry while arguing his insider experience has led to significant legislative accomplishments such as helping get a state constitutional amendment passed that strengthened gun rights.

“I see a very clear distinction in the fact that I’ve made the votes,” Riser said. “These aren’t just talking points for me.”

He was endorsed by the Tea Party of Louisiana and FreedomWorks, a Tea Party-aligned national political action group.

Conservative activists said it’s McAllister, who’s never held public office and noted during the campaign that he’d never even visited Washington, that they worry would be the go-along-to-get-along congressman who isn’t conservative enough.

McAllister, who spent at least $800,000 of his own money on his campaign, according to the Federal Election Comission, countered eagerly with his newcomer status.

“I am not part of the establishment; I’m just part of the district,” he said.

When Robertson endorsed his friend, he explained that McAllister has “the least political experience.”

Despite that profile, McAllister didn’t push the “blow the whole place up” mantra that some GOP primary candidates have offered in similar conservative enclaves around the country.

While he is critical of the atmosphere in Washington, he doesn’t blame it exclusively on Obama. He also points a finger at House Republicans’ 40-plus votes to repeal Obama’s health insurance overhaul.

“I will vote to repeal it if there’s a vote right now today,” he said in a recent debate.

“But the truth of the matter is you stand on a platform and pander for votes on something that can’t be repealed,” he told Riser.

McAllister says Republicans should show the president respect and that the best course on health care is to work on improving Obama’s signature law since he was re-elected and Democrats still control the Senate.

Both candidates described themselves as conservatives – opposing abortion, favoring strong gun rights and criticizing Obama’s policies generally. Both criticize the levels of federal spending and debt.

“I don’t think there’s a lot of difference in the policy, per se, because we’re both true conservatives both fiscally and socially,” McAllister said.

McAllister will take office in time to vote on the next round of budget resolutions in January and, almost certainly, a vote soon after on whether to raise the nation’s borrowing limit. Those votes were set up by an October deal to end a partial government shutdown driven by GOP opposition to the health care law.

Riser said he opposes efforts to raise the debt ceiling, saying spending should be cut instead. McAllister wasn’t so absolute. He conceded he’d be willing to raise the debt ceiling if the increase was coupled with federal spending cuts and a long-term deficit reduction plan.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/11/17/louisiana-voters-pick-between-two-republicans-to-fill-open-congressional-seat/

Advertisements


Fewer than 50,000 Americans have thus far bought a health-care plan on the problem-plagued ObamaCare website according to an insurance industry report, representing only a fraction of the half-million enrollees the administration apparently wanted the first month.

The number was reported first Monday by The Wall Street and confirmed by Fox News, which was told the final reporting day was Nov. 3.

The Department of Health and Human Services issued a prompt response, saying officials could not confirm the numbers.

“We have always anticipated that initial enrollment numbers would be low and increase over time,” said agency spokeswoman Joanne Peters. “And, as we have said, the problems with the website will cause the numbers to be lower than initially anticipated.”

Healthcare.gov went live Oct. 1 and was immediately plagued with such problems as slow response time, volume-induced crashes and supplying incorrect information.

Official have since called in private technical experts and have taken the site off line in non-peak hours to perform maintenance and improve the situation.

The federal site handles insurance enrollment for 36 states without their own sites.

The administration has set a goal of signing up seven million Americans for insurance by next March, when open enrollment ends.

The Journal reported the number of enrollees thus far could be as low as 40,000 and  that the administration’s goal of 500,000 enrollees in October is based on an internal memo cited last week by Michigan Republican Rep. Dave Camp.

The top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch said in a statement the low numbers are not surprising because of the website’s problems.

“Whether it’s higher costs, fewer choices or simply website glitches, it’s becoming more clear with each passing day that this law isn’t ready for prime time and should be delayed,” Hatch said.

End of last month the head of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO),Graziano da Silvatold participants at the Global Green Growth Forum (3GF) in Copenhagen that every year an estimated one-third of all food produced for human consumption is lost or wasted – around 1.3 billion tons. This costs around $750 billion per annum.

According to da Silva this would equal additional food to feed 2 billion people! This is unbelievable, isn´t it?

Reality, however, is that per capita food waste is around 100 kilograms in Europe and North America per year. At the same time FAO estimates that nearly 870 million people of the 7.1 billion people in the world, or one in eight, were suffering from chronic undernourishment in 2010-2012. Almost all the hungry people, 852 million, live in developing countries, representing 15 percent of the population of developing counties. There are 16 million people undernourished in developed countries. In general children are the most visible victims of undernutrition. Poor nutrition plays a role in at least half of the 10.9 million child deaths each year-five million deaths! Undernutrition magnifies the effect of every disease, including measles and malaria.

Conclusion: The world produces enough food to feed everyone. At least in theory!

World agriculture produces 17 percent more calories per person today than it did 30 years ago, despite a 70 percent population increase. This is enough to provide everyone in the world with at least 2,720 kilocalories (kcal) per person per day according to FAO. The principal problem is that many people in the world do not have sufficient land to grow, or income to purchase, enough food.

Possible Actions

1. Fighting Food Loss In A Holistic Manner

FAO noted that most food loss takes place in post-production, harvesting, transportation and storage. In developing countries, food waste is mainly related to inadequate infrastructure, while in more developed countries it is largely a problem in the marketing and consumption stages. Consequently investments in developing countries are needed in areas such as infrastructure, roads, and cold chains. Also improvement is needed in delivering more and better know-how to farmers on how to properly grow and market their products. In developed countries one priority should be to educate both companies and consumers to apply more responsible consumption patterns.

Fighting food loss and waste is clearly one area in which a strong partnership between governments and various organizations (companies, NGOs) is needed. Developing a global protocol can help provide clear measurements and indicators on which guidance on how to reduce food loss and waste can be based. FAO is working on such a protocal.

2. Stimulating Responsible Economic Growth

Besides climate change, political conflicts and certain political systems, poverty is the main cause of hunger. As a result economic growth plays a key role in reducing undernourishmnet. It is most effective in reducing poverty and hunger when it increases employment and income-earning opportunities that the poor can take advantage of. Sustainable agricultural growth is often effective in reaching the poor because most of the poor and hungry live in rural areas and depend on agriculture for a significant part of their livelihoods. However, growth will not necessarily result in better nutrition for all. Policies and programmes are required that will ensure “nutrition-sensitive” growth include supporting increased dietary diversity, improving access to safe drinking water, sanitation and health services and educating consumers regarding adequate nutrition and child care practices.

Economic growth takes time to reach the poor, and may not reach the poorest of the poor. Therefore, social protection is crucial for eliminating hunger as rapidly as possible. Furthermore, when properly structured, social protection also promotes economic growth by building human capital and helping farmers manage risk so that they can adopt improved technologies. Finally, rapid progress in reducing hunger requires government action to provide key public goods and services within a governance system based on transparency, participation, accountability, rule of law and human rights.

3. Behaving And Acting Responsible Ourselves

Firstly, and most importanly, all of us can and should adjust their consumption behavior, i.e. thinking at least twice when shopping (what is really needed, who will consume it, by when should it be consumed, etc.) and before throwing anything away. We should act as role models and should try to positively influence our environment, our families, friends, colleagues, and others we´re inter-acting with. No need to blame others, if we´re not doing what we should be doing.

Have you ever heard of The Food Recovery Network in the US? It´s an organization which unites students at colleges and universities across America to fight food waste and hunger by recovering surplus perishable food from their college campuses and surrounding communities that would otherwise go to waste and donating it to people in need. Founded in September of 2011, it has since expanded to reach 23 college campuses and recovered over 160,000 pounds (72.75 metric tons) of food that would otherwise have been wasted.

Very similar, and much more known, is the Food banking system which exist in many countries in the world. Food banks acquire donated food, much of which would otherwise be wasted, from farms, manufacturers, distributors, retail stores, consumers, and other sources, and make it available to those in need through a network of community agencies. These agencies include school feeding programs, food pantries, soup kitchens, AIDS and TB hospices, substance abuse clinics, after-school programs, and other nonprofit programs that provide food to the hungry.

Have you ever supported your local food bank or any similar institution?

Finally, and from a company perspective, the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility is not new. Still, there is significant room for many more organizations getting involved, donating money, providing know-how, and “ walking their talk“ in regards of being serious about helping our society and our planet. In other words: How many companies do you know which have teamed up with organizations such as the SAVE FOOD project, WRAP (Waste and Resources Action Programme), Think-Eat-Save, or with any other programe targeted to change wasteful practices, to fight hunger, and to promote responsible consumption habits?

What do you think? Looking forward to receiving your feedback. Join the discussion!

*****

Andreas von der Heydt is the Country Manager of Amazon BuyVIP in Germany. Before that he hold senior management positions at L’Oréal. He´s a leadership expert, management coach and NLP master. He also founded Consumer Goods Club. Andreas worked and lived in Europe, the U.S. and Asia.

Source:http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20131107110059-175081329-what-a-shame-one-third-of-food-is-wasted?trk=tod-posts-recentPosts-psum

You heard it here first: the billionaire behind Starbucks SBUX -1.2% is watching his caffeine intake. Howard Schultz, CEO of the java giant, won’t drink coffee after 5pm.

He’s more of a tea man these days, having taken a liking to the Maharaja Chai Oolong blend sold at Teavana, the mainly mall-based tea retailer Starbucks bought for $620 million last November.

On Wednesday, Schultz sipped a $4.95 cup of his new favorite at the first ever Teavana tea bar, which opens Thursday morning in New York City. Next up: a Seattle outpost, opening just before Thanksgiving.

Schultz says to expect 1,000 such tea bars — complete with zen decor, grey walls and dim lighting — in the next five years as Teavana aims to do for tea what its parent company has done for coffee.

The location of the first Teavana Fine Teas + Tea Bar couldn’t be more perfect: on Manhattan’s super-wealthy Upper East Side at 85th St and Madison Ave, steps from a branch of cult yoga outfitters Lululemon (“you’ve got to give us some credit,” Schultz said laughingly of the canny real estate grab) and blocks from Central Park.

Starbucks will slowly add tea bars to its 300 or so existing Teavana stores, which until now sold loose-leaf tea (two ounces of the Silver Needle blend goes for $17.98, for instance) plus gifts and accessories like ceramic teapots and stainless steel infusers. As well as drinks like Matcha Lattes, the new tea bars will sell food to appeal to a health-conscious customer (an egg-white frittata is $5.95).

Schultz is angling for a piece of a hot and iced tea market worth $90 billion worldwide, according to recent Euromonitor data, with Starbucks-saturated countries like Japan, China, Canada and the U.K. leading the trend. Globally, tea is the second-most consumed beverage besides water. While Americans still consume coffee at a far greater rate than tea, their taste for leaves versus beans is growing. Data from the Tea Association USA says America’s interest in tea has grown by 16% over the past five years.

Schultz isn’t concerned about cannibalizing his current business, however, noting that caffeine junkies who jones for a Starbucks to start their day are unlikely to be big tea drinkers. To that end, there’s no Starbucks branding in this first Teavana bar, nor will there be. There’s no coffee on offer, and the drinks are sold as either 12- or 16-ounce servings rather than “tall” or “grande”.

“Don’t you think that’s the right choice?” asks Schultz, gesturing around the chai-scented room, its back wall home to a stenciled quotation mentioning “alchemy”, “wisdom” and “a tea journey.” Teavana’s zen branding extends to its logo: a yogi, cross-legged, holding a mug of tea.

Analysts aren’t convinced Starbucks can do for tea what the company has done for coffee since its 1971 debut, but they’ll be watching closely. “This is Starbucks trying to make a boring category — tea — interesting,” said Brian Sozzi, CEO of Belus Capital Advisors.

“I don’t believe Teavana will ever grow into what the Starbucks brand has become for one simple reason: tea lacks the major caffeine count,” he added. “That sounds silly, but the bottom line is that in this day and age of frantic tech-driven lifestyles, people want to run on 100 mg of caffeine, and they will trade taste to make that happen.”

Wedbush Securities analyst Nick Setyan is slightly more bullish on Starbucks’ big move. “If anyone can create a demand for a product, it’s Starbucks,” he said, noting that tea has higher gross margins than coffee.

Schultz still has a way to go if he’s going to sell New Yorkers on tea, as he learned on Wednesday, when he was asked whether Teavana’s tea is kosher. “It will be. It hasn’t been certified,” he said. “No rabbi has come in to bless it yet!”

By Adam Pasick @adampasick October 10, 2013

Whistle while you learn. Reuters/Stringer

Updated with comment and detail from Foxconn.

+

 

Foxconn believes that students are the future, at least judging by its deal with China’s Xi’an Institute of Technology to expose more than 1,000 of them to the educational experience of working on an assembly line (link in Chinese) for Sony’s forthcoming Playstation 4.

+

 

Engineering students from Xi’an Institute of Technology were told that if they didn’t participate in the internship program, they wouldn’t receive six course credits, effectively making it impossible for them to graduate, according to Hong Kong’s Oriental Daily and the Chinese site Tencent Games, as translated by Games in Asia.

+

 

Foxconn told Quartz that after an internal investigation it determined that the XIT students at its Yantai factory complex were assigned to night shifts and overtime, in violation of the company’s policies. “Immediate actions have been taken to bring that campus into full compliance with our code and policies,” the company said in a statement, including “reinforcing the policies of no overtime and no night shifts for student interns, even though such work is voluntary, and reminding all interns of their rights to terminate their participation in the program at any time.”

+

 

Foxconn maintains similar internship programs “at many locations” in China, the company added, to provide students “with the opportunity to gain practical work experience and on-the-job training that will support their efforts to find employment following their graduation.” Sony did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

+

 

Even if the students are only working day shifts, the educational value of the internship sounds dubious. Students perform the same hours and work as paid Foxconn workers—gluing together parts, applying stickers, and boxing up cords. Foxconn says they also earn the same salary as entry-level workers.

+

 

Foxconn has struggled with China’s shrinking labor force, and founder Terry Gou acknowledged this weekend that finding enough workers to fill his factories was becoming a major headache.

+

 

“The young generation don’t want to work in factories, they want to work in services or the internet or another more easy and relaxed job,” he told the Financial Times. “Many workers are moving to the services sector and, in the manufacturing sector, total demand [for workers] is now more than supply.”

+

 

Enlisting interns has become a go-to move for China’s largest private employer, which employs more than 1 million people. Foxconn, also known as Hon Hai Precision Industries, was previously criticized for a similar deal in which students from the Huaiyin Institute of Technology were pressed into working on the iPhone 5 assembly line. Foxconn countered then, as now, that the students were “free to leave at any time.”

There are times when you want other people to act or think a certain way – namely, the way you think and act. There’s an art to persuasion that begins with a few simple rules. The first comes from Benjamin Franklin: “A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.” This would seem like a basic truth, but it gets ignored all the time. Think back on the times when someone persuaded you to go along with something that you didn’t really believe in. Years can pass, and still you will be skeptical or resentful about being persuaded against your will.

There is really only one secret to changing other people’s minds, but it’s a big one: Follow practical psychology. If you heed this advice, you will get better at persuading and influencing people over the years. On the other hand, if you ignore or sidestep psychology, you will find yourself with less and less influence as time passes. Here are five ways to put practical psychology to work that you may have overlooked or not known about. Each way comes with a tactic you definitely shouldn’t try, since it’s proven not to work.

1. Be sincere and truthful. Don’t be manipulative.

2. Appeal to what someone else already believes. Don’t impose your own belief system.

3. Be aware of the other person’s blind spots. Don’t assume they are open-minded.

4. In general, persuade through reason, not emotion. Don’t assume that emotions aren’t in play, however.

5. Make the other person feel right. Don’t make them feel wrong.

These are all effective ways to change someone else’s mind, but the tricky part is that if any one of them goes wrong, the others won’t be of much use. If you’re a woman applying for a job and the interviewer is dead set on hiring a man, nothing else will matter – blind spots, prejudice, and ingrained biases are among the hardest things to overcome. On the other hand, a really skillful use of practical psychology might get you the job, especially if you can make him feel right about his decision.

Let’s consider each of the five points a bit further.

1. Be sincere and truthful. Don’t be manipulative.

You can’t sell other people on something you don’t actually believe in. That’s why infomercials on late-night television do everything they can to persuade you of their honesty. Testimonials, authority figures, before and after photos, and research data are called upon to make the viewer believe that they aren’t simply watching a commercial, even though they are. We shut out commercials instinctively because we know from experience that they are manipulative and insincere. We also put up our guard when a salesman says, “I really believe in this product.” The upshot is that you shouldn’t try to be a master manipulator. It only works on weak-willed people, and in the end they are fickle allies. Rely on your listener’s natural ability to detect sincerity.

2. Appeal to what someone else already believes. Don’t impose your own belief system.

People identify with their beliefs. If you’ve ever slammed the door when someone tries to offer you a religious pamphlet, or had the door slammed in your face when you went canvassing for a political party, the truth of this point will be obvious. In a different world beliefs would be flexible and open to change, but that world isn’t at hand. So you need to know what someone else really, truly believes. With that knowledge at hand, you can align yourself with their beliefs. Without that knowledge, you are throwing darts at a brick wall. If you try instead to impose your own beliefs, the other person will feel that you are making him wrong, and immediate shutdown follows.

3. Be aware of the other person’s blind spots. Don’t assume they are open-minded.

A blind spot is a fixed opinion that is so strong, the person shuts out any input to the contrary. It’s the supreme example of rigid thinking. If you are self-aware, you know that you have your own blind spots – there are certain things you simply can’t stand or that bring out your most stubborn reactions. There are also positive blind spots, as when a mother feels that her beloved child can do no wrong. No one announces their blind spots, so you have to feel them out. Is the other person balking, contradicting you, trying to change the subject, crossing his arms over his chest? Look for sure signs of resistance, and you will generally be hitting close to another person’s blind spots. It seems discouraging that almost no one has an open mind, but it’s a fact of practical psychology that must be considered. Your task is to avoid sensitive topics and to appeal to the part of your listener that wants to agree with you.

4. In general, persuade through reason, not emotion. Don’t assume that emotions aren’t in play, however.

One of the most confusing aspects of persuasion has to do with being reasonable. Everyone thinks they are, and decision-making is supposed to be rational. Yet psychological research has shown time and again that emotions cannot be separated from the choices we make. Therefore, should you appeal to someone else’s emotions? Unless you have a personal relationship, the answer is generally no. You risk insulting their intelligence or coming off as being manipulative. To be persuasive, you must argue rationally while always monitoring the emotional atmosphere. (It’s worth noting too that competitive personalities regard a show of emotion as a sign of weakness – with them, you must muster all the rational reasons you can.) Some people can be persuaded by a show of emotion, but if you look a bit deeper, they either wanted to be persuaded or agreed with you in the first place – think of the cheers at political rallies for a speech that would be greeted coldly if it was delivered to the other political party.

5. Make the other person feel right. Don’t make them feel wrong.

This point might win the prize for what gets ignored most often. Anytime you bully somebody, lord it over them, use your position of authority, or act superior, you are making that person feel wrong. We all feel wrong when we are judged against. We feel right when we are accepted, understood, appreciated, and approved of. (I’ve met at least one hugely successful executive who built his entire career on making other people feel that they were the most important person in the room.) If you make someone else feel accepted, you have established a genuine bond, at which point they will lower their defenses. If you push someone away instead by making them feel wrong, their defenses will turn twice as strong.
These five points are really just elaborations on Ben Franklin’s aphorism, but they are worth learning and testing out if you want to be successful at getting others to change their minds.

Social Networks and The Global Brain | The RABBIT HOLE with Deepak Chopra

Courtesy of YouTube/The Chopra Well

Aspiration is the greatest ally anyone can have in their rise to success. It gives “you” a reason to move forward despite obstacles and setbacks. But why put “you” in quotation marks? Because there is more than one you to consider. Human beings have divided natures. As pointed out by Plato two millennia ago when he compared the soul to a chariot being pulled upward by a white horse and downward by a black horse. Depending on which horse you encourage, your personal fate is in your hands.

Setting aside a loaded word like soul, everyone has a choice to write their own story. In fact, every decision you make represents a stroke of the pen, so to speak, leading the main character – “you” – to the next stage of the narrative. “You” therefore is a creation. No one has a fixed identity, one bestowed at birth or in early childhood. Each person is open to revision as their story unfolds.

When you step back and ask “Who am I?” the author is looking at his creation. The process of building a self is a creative act. Even if you blame the outside world for your problems, even if you bemoan your bad luck or wish you had a missing X factor to improve your lot (more money, better parents, an Ivy League diploma), these thoughts also become part of your story. Mysteriously, the self is self-created. No one is exempt from this truth.

Which leads us back to aspirations. The “you” that has the greatest chance for success is driven by higher aspirations. The “you” that has no aspirations is very likely to fall short. Look at the difference between them:

Aspirational “You”

– is curious, open-minded, and eager for new experiences

– finds motivation from within

– wants to be self-sufficient

– speaks his own truth

– has inspiring role models

– feels attached to a higher purpose

“You” without aspirations

– looks out for number one and therefore feels insecure

– fears loss and is greedy for gain

– measures itself by external rewards (money, possessions, status, power)

– is reluctant to trust

– takes a defensive and self-protective stance

– has no higher values except self-interest

Even though I’ve described the aspirational “you” as more desirable than the “you” without aspirations, there’s a great deal of social pressure to think the opposite. In a “greed is good” ethos, the value of self-interest gets promoted in two ways. First, it’s supposedly the stance of winners, defined as overachieving, ruthless competitors. Second, if you don’t defend your self-interest, nobody else will. Does anyone want to be idealistic, soft, compliant, and non-competitive?

If you answer no, you are letting externals define your attitude, because there is nothing softabout having aspirations (consult the biographies of Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King), and keeping true to your aspirations is the opposite of being compliant. Defining the game as an either-or between winning and losing betrays the complexity of the life stories we all write every day. Moments of winning catch the spotlight. Outside the spotlight are years and decades of challenges, the main challenge being how to build a self that stands for who “you” really are.

In my own experience – and as a teacher of leadership skills – the most successful people are aspirational. They define their success in inner terms. They refuse to be bad actors in both senses of the word – bad at acting the roles assigned to them and bad in their personal behavior. In a society propelled by advertising, mass media, competition, and dynamic change, the temptation to run with the pack is strong, and the pack is always running for external rewards. And the pack gives you an easy identity as “one of us.” For all that, your life story has only one author, and its main character only one source. A “you” without aspirations will never be worthy of the possibilities that are hidden within.

Wellbeing and Visionary Leadership: Deepak Chopra in Mexico

Courtesy of YouTube/The Chopra Well