Podcasts about ngo

In the latest episode of The Charity Charge Show, hosts Matt and Grayson sit down with Dana Yaari, Emergency Response Team Lead for the monday.com Foundation. Dana shares her unconventional journey from investment banking to humanitarian work and how she now helps frontline aid organizations operate faster, smarter, and more collaboratively during times of crisis.At the heart of monday.com's humanitarian efforts is a simple but powerful mission: helping aid organizations respond faster and more effectively.The Emergency Response Team (ERT) provides pro bono support to nonprofits and humanitarian agencies, creating custom workflows and digital tools that streamline everything from:Needs assessments in the field, with real-time dashboards for decision-makingAid distribution systems to track inventory and deliveriesVolunteer coordination tools to safely onboard, assign, and manage large numbers of community helpersBy transforming processes that once relied on spreadsheets, emails, or WhatsApp, monday.com enables frontline responders to operate with clarity and efficiency, even amid chaos. About Charity Charge:Charity Charge is a financial technology company serving the nonprofit sector. From the Charity Charge Nonprofit Credit Card to bookkeeping, gift card disbursements, and state compliance, we help mission-driven organizations streamline operations and stay financially strong. Learn more at charitycharge.com.

It sounds almost ridiculous to say this, but when people talk about wars or floods or wildfires or drought, they often neglect the fact that roughly half of the victims are children. Yet, the officials who dispense aid usually treat the kids as statistics and ignore their special needs. For instance, consider that children's brains are still developing - so if they're malnourished or sick or stressed, even temporarily, it can damage them for the rest of their lives. Sweta Shah is trying through her work with the Brookings Institution and her NGO, ChildArise, to help children in crisis around the world - including in America. And here's one of her strategies: get children themselves to talk about their needs!

Send us a textFrancisco Morales is a distinguished healing artist with deep roots in the martial arts, yoga, and Thai massage disciplines. Originally from Peru, he spent his formative years along the Peruvian coast before moving to Washington D.C. at eight. Francisco has lived and trained worldwide, amassing a wealth of experience in various healing arts, such as capoeira, jiu-jitsu, acro yoga, and more. He pioneered Synergy Yoga, a collaborative movement melding elements of therapeutic partner yoga, Thai massage, and circular movement arts. Francisco is also heavily involved in community and youth empowerment through his NGO, Synergy Rising, working to maintain cultural arts and traditions in Peru and beyond.Visit him at https://synergy.yoga/Key Takeaways:Francisco Morales embodies a deep connection to Peru's landscapes and culture, significantly shaping his journey in healing arts.Through Synergy Yoga and Synergy Rising NGO, Francisco emphasizes community, integration of traditional arts, and youth empowerment, particularly in Peru.His insights into the synergy between yoga, martial arts, and healing touch underscore the essential role of intention, movement, and breath.Francisco's mentoring initiatives aim to preserve cultural heritage and provide pathways for youth, fostering personal growth and economic opportunity.The importance of maintaining mental health, groundedness, and the distinct connection between nature, community, and individual well-being are focal points in Francisco's philosophy.Thanks for listening to this episode. Check out:

Mobile Creches since 1969, has been working to ensure that children of migrant and construction workers receive the care, nutrition, and early learning they need in order to thrive. They have worked to create an environment that promotes women empowerment, family wellbeing, healthy children and inclusive national growth.In the fifth and final episode of our series in association with Mobile Creches, Niharika Nanda is in conversation with Chavi Vohra, Executive Director, Mobile Creches, Pradeep Kumar, Founder Secretary, Nipun, a NGO partner for Mobile Creches and Maimul Ansari, a creche worker. The conversation will explore Mobile Creches' work in the tribal regions of India, and how quality care can give children the agency to grow into adults who will prove to be strong pillars for a Viksit Bharat.Hosted and produced by Niharika NandaEdited and mixed by Suresh PawarLinks to the previous episodes in the series:Episode 1Episode 2Episode 3Episode 4

In this episode of The Charity Charge Show, Stephen Garten and co-host Grayson Harris talk with Krista Lamp, Senior Director of Nonprofit Communications at GoFundMe, about how technology, storytelling, and strategic engagement can help nonprofits raise more funds and connect with supporters.Krista shares how the transition of Classy into GoFundMe Pro combines the best of both platforms—offering robust fundraising tools with the global reach of GoFundMe's donor network. The discussion covers recurring giving, community engagement, and how nonprofits can claim their free GoFundMe pages to boost visibility.What is GoFundMe Pro?GoFundMe Pro is a complete fundraising platform designed to help nonprofits grow their support base and achieve their fundraising goals. From customizable campaigns to peer-to-peer events and corporate giving integrations, the platform enables organizations to meet supporters where they are and inspire more contributions.Key Platform Features:Recurring Giving: Encourage consistent monthly support.Branded Donation Forms: Keep your campaigns visually consistent and mobile-friendly.Peer-to-Peer Fundraising: Empower supporters to fundraise on your behalf.Comprehensive Dashboard: View giving history, track campaign progress, and analyze trends.Krista noted that 92% of contributions on GoFundMe come from first-time supporters, making it a powerful tool for nonprofits looking to reach new audiences. 

Show SummaryOn today's episode, we feature a conversation with conversation with Lydia Owiti -Otienoh, a Kenyan-Born lawyer, project management and international development consultant, and the Founder & CEO of the Foreign‐Born Military Spouse Network (FMSN).  Provide FeedbackAs a dedicated member of the audience, we would like to hear from you about the show. Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts about the show in this short feedback survey. By doing so, you will be entered to receive a signed copy of one of our host's three books on military and veteran mental health. About Today's GuestLydiah Owiti is a Kenyan‐born lawyer, project management and international development consultant, and the Founder & CEO of the Foreign‐Born Military Spouse Network (FMSN).Confronting the hurdles of new cultures, unrecognized credentials, and limited job opportunities as a foreign‐born military spouse, Lydiah carried out a research to understand better and learn how best to support, she launched a peer support group, now having over 6,000 foreign-born military spouses, and the Foreign‐Born Military Spouse Playbook, a comprehensive guide to navigating military life, American culture, career readiness, immigration, among other things.Drawing on her personal experience, policy expertise and immigrant‐focused work, she now leads FMSN in outreach, advocacy, and empowerment, including shaping inclusive employment solutions and resource pathways for foreign‐born spouses.She is now part of President George W. Bush's Stand to Veteran Leadership Program (2025 cohort). The program is aimed at leaders from across the nation, including civilians, veterans, military spouses, and active military, who are addressing the most challenging issues facing the military-connected community.Links Mentioned During the EpisodeForeign Born Military Spouse Network Web siteForeign Born Military Spouse Network on FacebookPsychArmor Resource of the WeekThis week's PsychArmor Resource of the Week is the PsychArmor course Interviewing and Telling Your Story for Military Spouses. Taking the time to recollect your own story will help you to figure out the best way to position yourself with a potential employer and be able to edit it down to your ‘elevator pitch.'You can find the resource here:  https://learn.psycharmor.org/courses/Interviewing-and-Telling-Your-Story-for-Military-Spouses Episode Partner: Are you an organization that engages with or supports the military affiliated community? Would you like to partner with an engaged and dynamic audience of like-minded professionals? Reach out to Inquire about Partnership Opportunities Contact Us and Join Us on Social Media Email PsychArmorPsychArmor on TwitterPsychArmor on FacebookPsychArmor on YouTubePsychArmor on LinkedInPsychArmor on InstagramTheme MusicOur theme music Don't Kill the Messenger was written and performed by Navy Veteran Jerry Maniscalco, in cooperation with Operation Encore, a non profit committed to supporting singer/songwriter and musicians across the military and Veteran communities.Producer and Host Duane France is a retired Army Noncommissioned Officer, combat veteran, and clinical mental health counselor for service members, veterans, and their families.  You can find more about the work that he is doing at www.veteranmentalhealth.com  

“An island that has a really strong and healthy ecosystem will be more resilient because it that complete and comprehensive defense system.” Austin and Tommy are a brother pair who work for Island Conservation, an international NGO that works with islands communities to restore entire island ecosystems. They share their story as field biologists working around the world, across islands in the Pacific, what their jobs look like, and the skills and advice you need to do the same.Learn more about Island Conservation:IG: https://www.instagram.com/islandconservation/Website: https://www.islandconservation.orgJoin Futureswell!

This week: Israel announced plans to occupy Gaza City. An NGO has called US-backed aid distribution sites in Gaza "orchestrated killing". Lebanon's government says it will disarm Hezbollah by the end of the year. It is day 674 of the war in Gaza, where at least 61,369 Palestinians have been killed. In this episode: Ibrahim al Khalili, Al Jazeera Correspondent Behdad Mahichi, Al Jazeera Producer Zeina Khodr, (@ZeinakhodrAlJaz) Al Jazeera Correspondent Episode credits: This episode was produced and mixed by David Enders. Our sound designer is Alex Roldan. Our lead of audience development and engagement is Aya Elmileik and Munera AlDosari is our engagement producer. Alexandra Locke is The Take’s executive producer. Ney Alvarez is Al Jazeera's head of audio. Connect with us: @AJEPodcasts on Instagram, X, Facebook, Threads and YouTube

VOV1 - Bộ trưởng Ngoại giao Trung Quốc và Bộ trưởng Ngoại giao Thái Lan sẽ đồng chủ trì Hội nghị Bộ trưởng Ngoại giao Mekong - Lan Thương (MLC) lần thứ 10 tại tỉnh Vân Nam, Trung Quốc vào ngày 15/8/2025.

Nghe trọn nội dung sách nói Kiếp Sau trên ứng dụng Voiz FM: https://voiz.vn/play/6683/Kiếp Sau được tạp chí Paris Match ca ngợi như một Romeo và Juliet thời hiện đại. Câu chuyện xoay quanh Jonathan – nhà phê bình hội họa say mê tác phẩm của Vladimir Radskin và Clara – chủ phòng tranh tại London, người thừa kế biệt thự nơi Radskin từng sống. Họ bị kết nối bởi bức tranh Thiếu Nữ Áo Đỏ và dần khám phá những bí ẩn về thân phận, tình yêu định mệnh kéo dài qua nhiều kiếp.Marc Levy đặt tình yêu của Jonathan và Clara trước giới hạn cuối cùng – cái chết, để khẳng định sự bất lực của thời gian trước một tình yêu bất tử. Lối viết giàu cảm xúc, kết hợp giữa tâm linh, trinh thám và lãng mạn, khiến Kiếp Sau cuốn hút người đọc.Với tác phẩm này, Marc Levy tiếp tục khẳng định sức hút của mình tại Pháp và trên toàn thế giới. Kiếp Sau không chỉ là câu chuyện tình yêu mãnh liệt mà còn gợi nhắc những mơ mộng lãng quên – rằng tình yêu chân thật có thể vượt qua mọi ranh giới, kể cả cái chết.Tại ứng dụng sách nói Voiz FM, sách nói Kiếp Sau được đầu tư chất lượng âm thanh và thu âm chuyên nghiệp, tốt nhất để mang lại trải nghiệm nghe tuyệt vời cho bạn.---Về Voiz FM: Voiz FM là ứng dụng sách nói podcast ra mắt thị trường công nghệ từ năm 2019. Với gần 2000 tựa sách độc quyền, Voiz FM hiện đang là nền tảng sách nói podcast bản quyền hàng đầu Việt Nam. Bạn có thể trải nghiệm miễn phí đa dạng nội dung tại Voiz FM từ sách nói, podcast đến truyện nói, sách tóm tắt và nội dung dành cho thiếu nhi.---Voiz FM website: https://voiz.vn/ Theo dõi Facebook Voiz FM: https://www.facebook.com/VoizFM Tham khảo thêm các bài viết review, tổng hợp, gợi ý sách để lựa chọn sách nói dễ dàng hơn tại trang Blog Voiz FM: http://blog.voiz.vn/---Cảm ơn bạn đã ủng hộ Voiz FM. Nếu bạn yêu thích sách nói Kiếp Sau và các nội dung sách nói podcast khác, hãy đăng ký kênh để nhận thông báo về những nội dung mới nhất của Voiz FM channel nhé. Ngoài ra, bạn có thể nghe BẢN FULL ĐỘC QUYỀN hàng chục ngàn nội dung chất lượng cao khác tại ứng dụng Voiz FM.Tải ứng dụng Voiz FM: voiz.vn/download#voizfm #sáchnói #podcast #sáchnóiKiếpSau #MarcLevy

01:06:43 – Faith-Focused Entities Under TrumpDiscussion of Trump's authorization of political endorsements from the pulpit and creation of faith-based offices in government. 01:14:08 – Religious Liberty CommissionDetails on Trump's religious liberty commission, evangelical ambassadors to Israel, and the theological-political implications for Zionist Christians. 01:35:50 – Eugenics & Genome EditingCriticism of well-funded advocates pushing heritable genome editing without ethical safeguards. 01:45:17 – Runaway Texas DemocratsCoverage of Texas Democratic legislators fleeing the state to block legislation and the FBI's involvement in tracking them. 01:55:34 – Immigration, Census & Political PowerAnalysis of illegal immigration numbers, census counting methods, and the political strategy behind population shifts. 02:20:45 – Dershowitz vs. Pierogi VendorAlan Dershowitz becomes the center of a bizarre public spat after claiming a pierogi vendor denied him service due to his political stance on Israel. The story escalates as he hands out flyers accusing the vendor of antisemitism, with the host ridiculing the pettiness and self-importance on display. 02:33:41 – Clinton Subpoena SpeculationDiscussion turns to the possibility of Bill and Hillary Clinton facing jail time if they refuse to comply with an Epstein-related subpoena. The host frames this as a rare moment where political elites could be held to the same legal standards as ordinary citizens—though with skepticism about whether it will actually happen. 02:44:16 – Trump's Maxwell DilemmaA brief but pointed reflection on the political and personal complications for Donald Trump in dealing with the Maxwell case. The host questions whether her situation could become a liability or a bargaining chip in wider political maneuvering. 03:03:09 – Blacklisted for Criticizing Trump & MuskCelente says he's been dropped from former platforms like Alex Jones' show because he refuses to “suck up” to Trump or Elon Musk. 03:07:54 – Gaza Takeover Plan ExposedCelente denounces the planned takeover of Gaza, calling Israeli settlers “invaders” in violation of international law. 03:34:10 – U.S. Overthrow of Ukraine's GovernmentA deep dive into how the U.S. helped oust Ukraine's elected leader in 2014, including $5 billion in NGO funding and Cold War-era meddling. 03:51:13 – Gold Prices and Economic InequalityAnalysis of how falling interest rates boost gold prices, coupled with criticism of Trump's tax policies favoring the wealthy. Follow the show on Kick and watch live every weekday 9:00am EST – 12:00pm EST https://kick.com/davidknightshow Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code KNIGHTFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

01:06:43 – Faith-Focused Entities Under TrumpDiscussion of Trump's authorization of political endorsements from the pulpit and creation of faith-based offices in government. 01:14:08 – Religious Liberty CommissionDetails on Trump's religious liberty commission, evangelical ambassadors to Israel, and the theological-political implications for Zionist Christians. 01:35:50 – Eugenics & Genome EditingCriticism of well-funded advocates pushing heritable genome editing without ethical safeguards. 01:45:17 – Runaway Texas DemocratsCoverage of Texas Democratic legislators fleeing the state to block legislation and the FBI's involvement in tracking them. 01:55:34 – Immigration, Census & Political PowerAnalysis of illegal immigration numbers, census counting methods, and the political strategy behind population shifts. 02:20:45 – Dershowitz vs. Pierogi VendorAlan Dershowitz becomes the center of a bizarre public spat after claiming a pierogi vendor denied him service due to his political stance on Israel. The story escalates as he hands out flyers accusing the vendor of antisemitism, with the host ridiculing the pettiness and self-importance on display. 02:33:41 – Clinton Subpoena SpeculationDiscussion turns to the possibility of Bill and Hillary Clinton facing jail time if they refuse to comply with an Epstein-related subpoena. The host frames this as a rare moment where political elites could be held to the same legal standards as ordinary citizens—though with skepticism about whether it will actually happen. 02:44:16 – Trump's Maxwell DilemmaA brief but pointed reflection on the political and personal complications for Donald Trump in dealing with the Maxwell case. The host questions whether her situation could become a liability or a bargaining chip in wider political maneuvering. 03:03:09 – Blacklisted for Criticizing Trump & MuskCelente says he's been dropped from former platforms like Alex Jones' show because he refuses to “suck up” to Trump or Elon Musk. 03:07:54 – Gaza Takeover Plan ExposedCelente denounces the planned takeover of Gaza, calling Israeli settlers “invaders” in violation of international law. 03:34:10 – U.S. Overthrow of Ukraine's GovernmentA deep dive into how the U.S. helped oust Ukraine's elected leader in 2014, including $5 billion in NGO funding and Cold War-era meddling. 03:51:13 – Gold Prices and Economic InequalityAnalysis of how falling interest rates boost gold prices, coupled with criticism of Trump's tax policies favoring the wealthy. Follow the show on Kick and watch live every weekday 9:00am EST – 12:00pm EST https://kick.com/davidknightshow Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code KNIGHTFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-real-david-knight-show--5282736/support.

Trong tạp chí Văn hóa Nghệ thuật số đầu này, mời quý thính giả cùng Ngọc Bích khám phá những chiếc Kimono của Nhật đang được trưng bày tại Viện bảo tàng nghệ thuật quốc gia Victoria, thường được gọi là NGV.

Dhruv Agrawal is CEO and president of Aether Biomedical. Discover Dhruv's unique journey from studying medicine in New Delhi to creating life-changing bionic limbs. Under his leadership, Aether Biomedical has achieved significant milestones, including CE certification and FDA registration for its Zeus V1 bionic limb. Dhruv shares his personal story of transitioning from medical school to MedTech innovation, the obstacles faced and lessons learned as a young entrepreneur, and the hope and inspiration of seeing Aether's prosthetics transform lives, especially in war-torn regions.   Guest links: https://www.aetherbiomedical.com | https://www.linkedin.com/company/aether-biomedical | https://www.instagram.com/aether_biomedical/  Charity supported: ASPCA Interested in being a guest on the show or have feedback to share? Email us at theleadingdifference@velentium.com.  PRODUCTION CREDITS Host & Editor: Lindsey Dinneen Producer: Velentium Medical   EPISODE TRANSCRIPT Episode 061 - Dhruv Agrawal Dhruv Agrawal [00:00:00] Lindsey Dinneen: Hi, I'm Lindsey and I'm talking with MedTech industry leaders on how they change lives for a better world. [00:00:09] Diane Bouis: The inventions and technologies are fascinating and so are the people who work with them. [00:00:15] Frank Jaskulke: There was a period of time where I realized, fundamentally, my job was to go hang out with really smart people that are saving lives and then do work that would help them save more lives. [00:00:28] Diane Bouis: I got into the business to save lives and it is incredibly motivating to work with people who are in that same business, saving or improving lives. [00:00:38] Duane Mancini: What better industry than where I get to wake up every day and just save people's lives. [00:00:42] Lindsey Dinneen: These are extraordinary people doing extraordinary work, and this is The Leading Difference. Hello, and welcome back to another episode of The Leading Difference podcast. I'm your host, Lindsey, and today I'm excited to introduce you to my guest, Dhruv Agrawal. Dhruv is the CEO and president of the management board of Aither Biomedical. He studied medicine in New Delhi before dropping out to pursue a bachelor's in business management. He also has a postgraduate diploma in Medical Device Development Regulatory Affairs from University of California Irvine, and a Master's in Data Science from the University of London. Under his leadership, Aither Biomedical has achieved CE certification and FDA registration for the Zeus V1 bionic limb, and established distribution across nine European countries, the US, and India. Additionally, Aither has raised over 12.5 million US dollars in private capital from leading VCs and has been a part of multiple European grants and research programs for an additional 6.5 million US dollars in non-dilutive capital. All right. Well, thank you so much for being here. Welcome to the show. I'm so excited to speak with you today. [00:01:49] Dhruv Agrawal: it's a pleasure to be here, Lindsey. Thank you so much for inviting me. [00:01:52] Lindsey Dinneen: Of course, of course. Well, I would love, if you wouldn't mind just starting by sharing a little bit about yourself and your background and what led you to Med Tech. [00:02:02] Dhruv Agrawal: Yeah, absolutely. So I'm Dhruv Agrawal. I'm the CEO of Aither Biomedical. We are a company based out of Poznan in Poland, so on the western part of Poland. It's a little bit chilly here. As a company, we are a team of about 55 people right now, currently present in the US, Europe, Middle East, as well as India. And we focus on making bionic hands for upper limb amputees. [00:02:25] Lindsey Dinneen: Amazing. Yes. So I wanna get into everything amazing that your company does, but going back for just a little bit, in your own personal history, can you share a little bit about maybe growing up and what experiences led you to think, "Hey, in the future, maybe I wanna do X, Y, and Z." [00:02:43] Dhruv Agrawal: Mm-hmm. So first of all, entrepreneurship was never a plan for me. I didn't even knew that there was a thing called an entrepreneur until I was easily into high school. Both my parents are doctors. My dad's a pediatrician, mom's a gynecologist, and as it happens in India, if your parents are doctors, you kind of know that you have to become a doctor as well. So I went to the coaching classes to pre, to prepare for medical entrance examinations. I actually met my co-founder there about 10 years ago. We both got into medical school. I was generally comfortable with medicine, you know, growing up in a hospital with doctor parents around. So I was generally comfortable in a clinical setting, but I realized that I was much more interested in the technological aspect of medicine rather than the clinical aspect of it. And that was when I was getting into the second year of my university. And luckily my dad, for my 18th birthday, bought me a 3D printer, like a very simple 3D printer from China as my 18th birthday gift. 'cause I was really wanting to get into that world. And that's where the story begins. So even till today, my dad jokingly says that that's the worst gift he has ever bought for me, because that made me drop out of medical school. [00:03:57] Lindsey Dinneen: Oh no. Okay, so you were given this gift and you started, I imagine, tinkering with it, learning how to use it. So tell me about that. [00:04:06] Dhruv Agrawal: Yeah, the thing with my co-founder as well, even though we went to the same medical university, we were not really friends in the first year. We were just colleagues. But when I got this 3D printer, it was like one of those things that you assemble, you get a kit and you assemble. And I was asking around people in my university and they were like, "Come on, what are you doing? Like, I don't wanna come to your apartment to assemble a 3D printer." And my co-founder was the first one who said yes to coming down and assembling that printer with me. So that's how our friendship essentially started in the university, even though we had known each other for three years by that point. And then we started, of course, by very basic things like printing mobile phone covers and key chains and we were just in awe with the fact that I have something in my room, in a studio apartment, where I can just build physical things, right? And this was back in 2018, so 3D printer was not such a consumer product where, you know, if it was of course used in industry, but it was not something that you would imagine having at your home, at least not in India. And then we actually found out that there's a society called Enable, which is an NGO that makes very simple basic prosthetic designs for kids. So we started by printing those and started going to some amputee clinics around and trialing that out with patients, just purely out of technical curiosity. We didn't really had a draw towards amputation, so to speak. We were more driven by the technical curiosity of, you know, it sounds interesting to make a prostatic hand. So that was the beginning. And then slowly, slowly things happened very organically that we went from wanting to 3D print basic things to starting a biomedical innovation club in our university, to incorporating a company in India, then to coming all the way over to Poland and now having 55 people. [00:05:49] Lindsey Dinneen: Holy cow. That's an amazing story. Thank you for sharing about that. So, okay, so, so you started off with this curiosity, like, "Hey, let's see what we could do with this printer and, and how we can make it work for people." And I love that your initial pull with it was to actually provide something that does help people. So that's obviously a core value, something that you hold very dear. So can you speak a little bit more, did you have sort of any personal experience or within your family or what led you to say, "You know what, hey, I've got this really cool tool at my disposal. Let me start using it by actually doing something that helps others." [00:06:27] Dhruv Agrawal: I mean, the honest answer, I would love to say I had some personal experience, but the honest answer is no, not, not really. I don't have one of those stories where I can tell you that, like I met an amputee 15 years ago, 20 years ago, and have had that motivation for that time. It was just pure technical curiosity to begin with. But of course, as we started building basic devices and giving it out to people and seeing the response of what a very simple, you know, $50 thing can do for a person who's missing a limb in an impoverished family in a village in India, that's a very powerful thing. So at that point, we realized that we started getting more and more close to upper limb amputation as a field, as a clinical specialty within itself. Of course, both me and my co-founder coming from medical school growing up in family of medicals, we've always had it in our heart to work in the clinical side of things. We've always liked working around, helping people get healthier and better. But amputation specifically was an area that we were very lucky that we found as an area of interest that developed within the both of us. [00:07:31] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah, of course. Okay, so, so you started printing these limbs, and then you realized, "Oh my goodness, there's such a need for this. There's so much opportunity here to really help people." So, so tell me a little bit about the evolution over time of how you have made it better and better, more technologically advanced, more ergonomic, all the things that go into that. Can you speak a little bit to that learning curve and process? [00:07:56] Dhruv Agrawal: Mm-hmm. Yeah, it was a very long learning curve because not only did, me and my co-founder had zero background in business. We were 18-year-old, 19-year-old kids, right? We were just teenagers and we really had no idea what we wanted to do. And not only that, we also were not engineers, so we didn't have any engineering experience or expertise either. So everything that we did in the very beginning, at least, was self-taught. I just knew I had an inclination towards electronics and programming. My co-founder was much more towards mechanical CAD design and things like that. So we started learning these courses for free on edX and Coursera and all these, you know, MOOC platforms. And that's how we built up the very first prototype of the product by getting some small grants here and there in India. Of course, the situation is very different right now. We have R&D team of 30 people, very experienced, a few PhDs here and there. So I don't really design anymore in my day-to-day life, but that's how we started. And same was the side of the journey of coming from India to Poland. Again, that was not something that was planned at all. We had no experience in business. We had no experience in raising funding or raising money and things like that. We just learned on the go, applied to over a hundred different programs 'cause most of the investors said no to us back then in 2018 to funding 'cause why would they say yes? And we looked at like, "Okay, can we get some grants and things like that?" Applied to over a hundred programs. Luckily got selected in this program in Poland, which was like a $50,000 program back in 2018 and decided, "Yeah, let's try that place out." And came to Poland. I literally came with a backpack with stuff for two months 'cause there was a plan, come for the grant, stay for two months, go back to my family in India, and it's been seven years since then. [00:09:44] Lindsey Dinneen: Oh, there you go. Oh my goodness. That's great. So Poland, and you get along it sounds like just fine. Excellent. Excellent. Okay, so, I really appreciate you sharing about, especially, you were both so young and but so eager. It sounds like just, "Yes, let's learn, let's develop the skills that we need to along the way." I would imagine though, coming into it, perhaps that young and not having as much business experience, or, or any really in, in the past, I-- something that I really admired when I was kind of looking through your LinkedIn profile was when you post, a lot of times you share stories about areas that, that may be considered I, I guess mistakes or stumbling blocks or things that, that you've overcome on your path. And I would love if you would share maybe just a couple of things that come to mind, as an early founder, because your story is amazing and unique, but there are lots of other founders too who find themselves in similar situations where they're like, "Whoof, I've got this great idea. I know what I want, but here's maybe what I should look out for to avoid." could you share a little bit about that? [00:10:49] Dhruv Agrawal: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, the first thing is mistakes are unavoidable, right? it doesn't matter whether you're coming from a background of a medical school dropout, or if you have 10, 15, 20 years of corporate experience and things like that. 'Cause I do find myself thinking a lot about, you know, wouldn't it have been better if I would've graduated and then did a MBA and then started a company? Yes, it might have been better, but the things that I deal with in my day-to-day life in the startup, I don't think this is taught anywhere. So the first and foremost thing, which is of importance, is that mistakes are unavoidable. It's okay to make mistakes. The biggest learning that I have is mistakes are unavoidable, but it's up to you to be decisive enough to pivot as quickly as possible. So don't look back at the mistakes that we have made, because one of the worst things that we have done in this company, or where we have failed the most, or where we have seen that like, "Ah, this is where we could have done things better," are not about making a wrong decision. They were just about being indecisive and being in a dilemma for a long, long time. It would've been far better if we would've made certain decisions quickly, gotten feedback and quickly pivoted, instead of just being in a dilemma and trying to balance two sides for a long time period. An example of that would be when we launched the first version of our product into the market, we realized that we had made some errors from the point of view of what should be the feature set in this product. And so, for example, the product was available only in a medium size hand in terms of the dimensions, but majority of the market is for a small size hand. So at that point we couldn't really just miniaturize things because there's a physical limitation. So at that point we had to make a decision of do we scrap this thing completely and build a new hand from scratch that starts with a small hand and then has a medium sized option as a grow up? Or do we continue to work on the medium sized hand, and then launch a small sized hand separately? Finally, we decided to do the second option. But looking back again, I, I don't think it would've been better or worse either way. I think both of these options are fair. It's just the fact that we spent over nine months going back and forth between, "Okay, let's continue putting our efforts in energy into the medium sized that we have right now" versus, "Okay, this month we are now suddenly feeling, ah, that's not gonna work out. Let's start building the second version." So that dilemma of indecision is probably the worst thing that you can do. Just make a decision, own up to it, move on. If it works out, great, if it not, if it doesn't work out, you're gonna have learnings and you'll be stronger at the end of the day. So that's, I would be an I would say would be an example of one of the key errors that we made. [00:13:23] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. Well, thank you for being willing to share that, and that's such valuable advice and feedback. And so, as you recognize this and go, "Okay, so that didn't work as planned, or in the way that I would prefer," what did you end up deciding? How do you go now, moving forward, when you are in a position of "I have a major decision to make. I feel like both options have value and merit." How do you end up deciding, "Okay, I I'm not gonna leave this just in this hazy middle ground, I'm gonna make a decision." How do you go about that now differently? [00:13:54] Dhruv Agrawal: I think the first and foremost thing that entrepreneurs, or anybody who wants to build a new product, or anybody who just wants to build something new, is be very, very, very honest with yourself about, "Am I solving a real problem?" As founders, as creators, as developers, it is so easy to go into that mindset of you find a problem that you can relate to or you somehow think that this is a real problem. It doesn't matter what feedback you're going to get. You're going to convert that feedback, or create a narrative or story from that feedback, that is going to align with the impression that you have built in your own head about what the real problem is. So one thing that we really do right now is just focus on problem market fit at the very early stages of launching a new software, building a new product, building the next version of the hand, or whatever else we do is really try to question, "Are we solving a real problem?" And in a completely unbiased manner, "Do people agree with me that I am solving a real problem?" So that's what I would say would be a primary thing that we do differently right now. Of course at this point, we start getting users involved much earlier into our development process. That is something that we did not do in the past, and hence the surprise that we got at that point. So we start involving users, different stakeholders, and things like that much earlier, but at the same time, I would say that it's not to say that I would penalize myself for the historical decisions that I took. We did the best that we could potentially with the resources that were available at that point. Now we have much more resources so we can do all these things. So don't feel pressured to do everything on day one. You know, start with something, move forward and build that maturity as you grow. [00:15:38] Lindsey Dinneen: Oh, I love that. That's excellent advice. Thank you for sharing. Yeah, so you know that's a great segue and I love the fact that you were talking about the end user and the importance. And it's so funny because of course, ultimately your goal is to help these end users and improve their quality of life and whatnot. But to your point, it does get easy to get so bogged down in the details of what you're creating and innovating that perhaps you forget sort of the bigger picture at times. So, speaking of these end users, can you share any stories that might stand out to you as really reinforcing to you that, "Hey, gosh, I am in the right industry, doing the right thing at the right time." [00:16:17] Dhruv Agrawal: Yeah, no, absolutely. So we have had many phenomenal end users that have reiterated our belief in the product that we are building, the problems that we are solving, the company, and the organization that we are building as a whole. I mean, generally speaking, patients change their devices every three to five years, and that's really our entry point of getting a device into the hands of the patients. But even with those, a patient is using another prosthetic device, they start using ours, they will see a step change in the functionality, and that's always empowering. But the most interesting stories are where we have really seen patients who, for example, congenital amputees tried a prosthetic device 10 years ago, 15 years ago, and then made a decision to live their life without any prosthetic device. So got used to a life for 15, 20, 25 years of living a life without a prosthetic device, just with an amputated limb or a limb difference. And then, we come in with our product, they see it, they use it, and they are ready to adopt that again. And that's a much powerful validation for us because somebody who has used a device, looked at all the advancements over the last two decades, decided actively decided to not use any of those advancements, and looks at our product and says, "Ah, this really solves the problems that I was waiting for someone to solve for the last two decades." Like we had this situation with a very famous Polish guy, Marek Kamiński, who is the youngest Polish person to go to both poles, North Pole and the South Pole, and he's a bilateral amputee on legs and he has a unilateral amputation to one arm. He has not used a prosthetic device in, I think 15 or 20 years, something like that. So for a very long timeframe. He met with an ambassador of ours and was finally convinced after 15 long years to give another try. And we fitted him over three months ago and he's been performing phenomenally with the device and he's so happy with that. So those are the moments that really give us more confidence or give us a boost of confidence in the product that we are building and the company that we are building. [00:18:19] Lindsey Dinneen: That's incredible. Wow. What a story. Yeah, and I love hearing those kinds of stories and that just to reinforce, " Hey, you really are making a difference." And I'm sure that helps on the days that are a little bit harder, a little trickier, you know, it helps to have that to hold onto, so you know your impact goes so far beyond even the places that you've mentioned before. I was reading about how you've worked with the Open Dialogue Foundation and there's been some work in Ukraine, and I'm wondering if you could share a little bit about perhaps that collaboration, and or some of the other exciting collaborations you have going on with these amazing organizations all over the world. [00:18:54] Dhruv Agrawal: Absolutely. I mean, the work that we do in Ukraine is something which is very close to our heart and what you just mentioned a moment ago, it's exactly that type of work that keeps us going on the hardest of days. I have so many amazing stories from the patients who have been fitted with our device 'cause at this point in the last year or so, we have already fitted over a hundred patients with our bionic hands in Ukraine. We primarily work with Superhumans, which is NGO based out of Kyiv, a great place, really the mecca for prosthetics at this point, I would say. They're doing a phenomenal job of getting these patients in, rehabilitating them, fitting them with our device and then training them on how to use the device. In fact, even supporting them in the post rehabilitation, acquainting them to back to the real world as well. And we send teams of doctors from the US, from Poland, to Ukraine to actually fit these devices to patients. And we have had a lot of success stories come out of it. We have people who have amputations, even at the level of shoulder who are amputated all the way up to the shoulder or four quarter amputation, and they are successfully able to live a independent life with our device. I think the best story that I've had, or the part that really made me tear up, was when one of the soldiers got fitted with our device and his really, really big wish was to be able to do the first, to dance with his wife, with both hands. And I got to see that and it was, it was the most amazing feeling ever. [00:20:20] Lindsey Dinneen: Oh my goodness. Yes. I don't know how you couldn't just have the waterfall start with that kind of story. That's incredible. Thank you for sharing about that. So, as you look toward the company's future and your own, what are you excited about moving forward? [00:20:34] Dhruv Agrawal: I mean, we are currently in the process of getting a new version of our hand in the market, which has all the learnings of the last four years or so. So we are definitely really excited about that. You have to keep in mind when we launched the first product, we didn't even have enough money to-- because prosthetics are expensive-- so we didn't really have had enough money to buy our competitor devices, or the devices from the past to look around to see, touch, feel, how they are built. Everything that we built was purely out of our imagination and based on what we could find on the internet. And, you know, go visit a doctor who fits these devices, have that 10, 15 minutes to look around that device, and so on and so on. I mean, four years later, now we have the experience of fitting close to seven, 800 patients with our device. All that feedback that has gone into the next version product that we are gonna be building. So very excited about that. We continue to develop the software platform, so we are not just a company that is focused on providing a device to the patient, but we provide an entire software platform that's like a digital twin for the patient. So it supports the patients throughout their end-to-end journey. Because it's not just about giving a device to the patient, but it's all about can we improve their quality of life? Can the patient pick up a glass of water? Can he tie his shoelaces? Can he water a plant? Can he do the activities that he really wants to do? And from that perspective, the software platform that we continue to build focuses on things like adherence, occupational therapy, physical therapy, monitoring of the usage of the device. Because the thing in prosthetics industry is, the day you give the device to the patient is not the day you have won the battle. That's the day the battle actually begins, 'cause now it's all about making sure that you deliver on the promise of helping him get better quality of life. [00:22:20] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. Yeah. I'm sure that's an exciting challenge, but it's a continually evolving challenge too. And there's probably variations, I would imagine, on people embracing the technology a little bit differently and how you handle all that. Yeah. Excellent. Well that is a very exciting future and it's so much fun to hear about, and you know, you've had a great career so far. I'm sure it's wildly different than what you may have imagined as a kid. But what a cool gift that you're bringing to the world. You've been recognized quite a bit. You're 30 under 30 for Europe, and you've been involved in lots of different cool organizations. You've been a TEDx speaker. What are some of those moments like, have they been surreal? Is it just like, "Oh, thank you." Just confirmation that, hey, you are on the right tracker. What are those kinds of moments like for you? [00:23:08] Dhruv Agrawal: I mean, definitely the first round of funding that we raised in Poland was was a huge check mark for us, because it's that moment at which you realize, "Ah, somebody wants to give me money and somebody wants to give me a quarter of a million dollars." I've never seen that much money together on a single bank account or in any way, shape or form, right? I come from a normal middle class family. We don't have that. So, that was definitely the first micro checkpoint, let's say. I mean, both the things that you mentioned, the TEDx thing, the Forbes 30 Under 30 thing, coming from a background in India where these things are really important, although they're not so important for me as a person, but they're much more important for some reason to my parents and to society. It is a different place. We put a lot of emphasis on these types of things. So from six, seven years ago, looking at these lists coming out or looking at, "Oh, this cool guy spoke on a TEDx talk, sending him an email about, 'Do you want to be an advisor in my company? I'll give you 5% shares,'" and so on and so on, to actually doing those things by yourself, that's definitely pretty well as well. But again, at the end of the day, there is nothing better than seeing a new patient get fitted with the hand, seeing the reaction of their family members. They have a daughter, they have a son who they hold their hand for the first time. They hug their wife. I mean, just, just being around amputees and patients who use your device, something that you built and that helps them get better at their daily life, that's, I would say, the most rewarding thing ever. [00:24:39] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah, of course. That's, that's wonderful. Yeah. So, oh my goodness, this is so great and very inspirational, but pivoting the conversation a little bit just for fun. Imagine that you were to be offered a million dollars-- speaking of those wonderful sums of money-- to teach a masterclass on anything you want. It can be something within your industry, but doesn't have to be, what would you choose to teach? [00:25:03] Dhruv Agrawal: I have two topics in mind. One is I would probably teach a masterclass on pitching, especially for first time founders. I think that is something which I'm good at, and we have obviously raised a pretty decent amount of capital up 'till now. So that would be the one thing that I would say. So kind of a combination of pitching and starting a startup for the first time, especially in the field of hardware, medical devices, things like that. And the second thing that I would really like to talk about is just probably trying to put my thoughts together and making a masterclass on how to never give up, because I think that that's a very underrated quality. But that's a very important quality. There have been complex times in the history of our company where we have felt that like, "Ah, this might be it." But it's all about what you do in those moments and how you go beyond those. I think it's all about that. [00:25:47] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah, absolutely. And how do you wish to be remembered after you leave this world? [00:25:53] Dhruv Agrawal: Just as a positive change maker. I really would like all these patients that we are helping and giving these devices to. I, I just want to be a small part of their lives. Just as I was part of the life of the veteran who got married, I, I just wanna ha have those small moments club together amongst these different individuals that we are privileged to work with. [00:26:13] Lindsey Dinneen: Hmm. Yes, of course. Wonderful. And then final question, what is one thing that makes you smile every time you see or think about it? [00:26:22] Dhruv Agrawal: Oh, that's very simple. Patients getting fitted with our device. Today we see a patient getting fitted with our device, and that smile on their face and things like that. And, you know, that's even much bigger, much more interesting in Ukraine because many times when you go to these hospitals, and when I go to these hospitals in Ukraine, you have to understand that these people have gone through a lot. These soldiers who are putting their body on the line for their country. There, of course, there's a certain sort of low morale that they have when they're amputated and when they're in these hospitals and things like that where they don't really think that there is ever a possibility for them to regain something back. And you go in there and you show them a bionic hand, and they're not sure if this thing works, and you put the electrodes on them and they open the hand or close it for the first time, and then you suddenly see those expressions change from like, "Ah, what has happened to me?" to, "Oh, what can I achieve?" That is also an amazing feeling. [00:27:16] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. Oh, I love that. What an amazing gift to be able to help somebody bridge that gap and witness it. How cool is that? Oh, well, I think this is incredible. I am so grateful for you and your co-founder for starting this company and just being able to give so many people hope and new life, really, just a new way of experiencing life. So thank you for all of the incredible work you're doing. I'm so excited to continue to follow your work, support your work, as I'm sure all of our listeners are as well. So, gosh, I just really appreciate you sharing all of your advice and stories and wisdom with us. So thanks again so much for being here. [00:27:55] Dhruv Agrawal: Of course, Lindsey, thank so much for having me. [00:27:56] Lindsey Dinneen: Of course, of course. And we are honored to be making a donation on your behalf as a thank you for your time today to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which is dedicated to preventing animal cruelty in the United States. We really appreciate you choosing that organization to support and thank you just again, so very much for your time here today. I just wish you continued success as you work to change lives for a better world. And thank you also so much to our listeners, and if you're feeling as inspired as I am right now, I'd love it if you share this episode with a colleague or two and we'll catch you next time. [00:28:43] Ben Trombold: The Leading Difference is brought to you by Velentium. Velentium is a full-service CDMO with 100% in-house capability to design, develop, and manufacture medical devices from class two wearables to class three active implantable medical devices. Velentium specializes in active implantables, leads, programmers, and accessories across a wide range of indications, such as neuromodulation, deep brain stimulation, cardiac management, and diabetes management. Velentium's core competencies include electrical, firmware, and mechanical design, mobile apps, embedded cybersecurity, human factors and usability, automated test systems, systems engineering, and contract manufacturing. Velentium works with clients worldwide, from startups seeking funding to established Fortune 100 companies. Visit velentium.com to explore your next step in medical device development.

“The worst-case scenario of famine is currently playing out in the Gaza Strip.” That was the conclusion of a July 29 report by the leading global authority on food security, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC). The report found that more than one in three people in Gaza (39 percent) are now going days at a time without eating. More than 500,000 people—nearly a quarter of the population—are enduring famine-like conditions. Malnutrition rates are skyrocketing, and deaths from acute malnutrition are mounting. This is the direct result of Israel's policy of preventing sufficient food from entering Gaza. Now, as images of emaciated children flash across screens around the world, will that be enough to generate the political will in Israel, the United States, and Europe to change course? Alternatively, how much worse can this get? Joining me to discuss the ongoing famine and humanitarian crisis is Tjada D'Oyen McKenna, the CEO of Mercy Corps, a major international humanitarian NGO with ongoing operations in Gaza. She explains why famine has taken hold, what can be done to immediately end it, and why this crisis is very much at a tipping point. Support our humanitarian journalism with a paid subscription: https://www.globaldispatches.org/

Ambassador Karl Hofmann has a 30 year career in global development, first as a career diplomat including US Ambassador for Togo and followed by 2 decades as President of NGO giant PSI. He now serves as CEO to HealthX Partners. We delve into how simply drinking water in many countries could be a death sentence and also why the west should care. We also discuss the state of affairs following the abolishment of USAID and its deadly effect on the world's population.

In this episode, Paul Moody interviews Clare Brook, a veteran of 24 years in sustainable finance who now leads Blue Marine Foundation. In their conversation Clare reflects on her journey from managing ESG funds and co-founding an investment firm to running an NGO dedicated to protecting the blue planet.   Clare and Paul dive into innovative ways finance can accelerate marine conservation. They discuss cutting-edge mechanisms like blue bonds and debt-for-nature swaps that can funnel significant funding to ocean protection in countries that need it most . Clare also introduces the idea of biodiversity credits, a new tool for valuing restored ecosystems and attracting investment into projects from seagrass meadows to coral reefs . She explains how blending public, private, and philanthropic capital can help scale these solutions, even as she acknowledges the challenges of aligning investor expectations with conservation realities.    Finally, Clare leaves listeners with an urgent yet hopeful call to action: finance professionals have a pivotal opportunity to drive meaningful impact in this space. Whether it's backing transformative marine projects or simply using their influence to raise awareness.

Good afternoon, I'm _____ with today's episode of EZ News. Tai-Ex opening The Tai-Ex opened up 270-points this morning from yesterday's close, at 23,717 on turnover of $12.2-billion N-T. The market fell sharply on Wednesday - as semiconductor stocks tumbled after U-S President Donald Trump announced that he will announce new tariffs on chips within the next week or so. NGO says migrant workers facing fraud but reluctant to report it The TransAsia Sisters Association says migrant workers in Taiwan are facing many types of fraud - but the cases are going underreported because of language barriers and other factors. According to the association, it has identified several potential problems in the effort to fight scams against migrants through interviews over the past year with mainly migrant workers and a small proportion (部分) of foreign spouses. The association says around 30-per cent of interviewees had experienced financial fraud, but that only a third of them reported their cases to authorities. The group is attributing the reluctance to report fraud cases to police to a lack of readily available multilingual services at police stations. The Workforce Development Agency says migrant workers can use the 1955 hotline, which provides multilingual services, to help them identify potential fraud schemes .. .. and the hotline can contact third parties on behalf of workers to verify suspicious situations and report cases to local labor authorities. Trump says 100% tariff coming on some imported semiconductors US President Donald Trump says he will impose a 100% tariff on imports of semiconductors. But he said he would exempt companies making their chips in the US… or are in the process of (的過程中) building chip fabrication facilities in the country. Toni Waterman has more. UN Report on Taliban Weaponizing Law Against Women and Girls The independent U.N. investigator on human rights in Afghanistan says its Taliban rulers have “weaponized” the legal and judicial system to oppress women and girls in what amounts to “crimes against humanity." Richard Bennett said in a report to the U.N. General Assembly circulated Wednesday that after seizing power in 2021 the Taliban suspended the 2004 constitution and specific laws protecting the rights of women and girls. These include a landmark law that criminalized 22 forms of violence against women, including rape and child and forced marriage. The Taliban defend their approach to justice by claiming they are implementing Islamic sharia law, but Islamic scholars and others have said their interpretation is unparalleled (無與倫比的) in other Muslim-majority countries and does not adhere to Islamic teachings. Bennett urged all countries to support efforts to bring Afghanistan before the International Court of Justice, the U.N.'s highest tribunal. Barbary Lion Cubs Born at Czech Zoo Four Barbary lion cubs have been born in a Czech zoo. The birth marks a significant boost for the rare species, which is extinct (滅絕的) in the wild. The three females and one male were seen playing at Dvur Kralove Safari Park on Wednesday. Soon, the cubs will be sent to other zoos as part of an international program to ensure (確保) their survival. Zoo officials say that while reintroducing the Barbary lion into its natural habitat is considered, it remains a distant goal. The Barbary lion once roamed northern Africa but was wiped out due to human activities. That was the I.C.R.T. EZ News, I'm _____. -- Hosting provided by SoundOn

 About Layma MurtazaLayma Murtaza is the Vice President of Business Development and a board member at ASEEL, a global tech platform blending ethical e-commerce with decentralized humanitarian aid. An Afghan-American with over a decade of experience in international development, Layma has worked across regions including Afghanistan, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Turkey, and the United States. Her work spans refugee resettlement, civil society building, and tech-enabled aid delivery. A tireless advocate for dignity-first aid models, Layma is redefining how technology can serve humanity in its most fragile contexts.About this EpisodeIn this powerful episode of The Matrix Green Pill Podcast, host Hilmarie Hutchison welcomes Layma Murtaza for a conversation about innovation, impact, and the future of humanitarian aid. From growing up in a refugee community in California to leading global efforts in conflict zones, Layma shares her deeply personal and professional journey.Layma opens up about how her early experiences shaped her views on leadership, her transition from politics to humanitarian work, and the pivotal role of ASEEL—a platform connecting artisans in conflict-affected regions with global markets while also enabling life-saving aid delivery through tech-powered networks.The discussion touches on key issues such as ethical sourcing, decentralized aid, working in fragile environments, and the unique challenges of scaling tech for good. Layma also talks about ASEEL's impact initiatives, including the Welcome Returnees Kit and the Atalan Heroes Network, and how they've reached over half a million people in underserved communities.Her “Green Pill” moment—a personal story of transformation following the passing of her grandfather—illuminates her life mission: to uplift those whose voices are often unheard.This episode is a must-listen for changemakers, tech-for-good innovators, and anyone passionate about empowering communities with purpose, technology, and heart.Quotes1:52 - I think I always had a thirst for history, the world, the social treasures that each culture has that I felt was hidden because of the lack of access to platforms. 4:14 - I think first my family upbringing being from a refugee community in Fremont, California actually shaped a lot of the knowledge and like the needs of the community because they were very visible and there was a lack of leadership4:37 - A youth is not really given a platform for leadership so we really didn't trust ourselves as young leaders 5:16 - Customer service and understanding of client needs and ensuring that, like listening to my community about their priorities and concerns, became the kind of groundwork for my international development and humanitarian experience.6:00 - When you understand the people that you want to serve whether it's a client, whether it's community, whether it's someone who is directly involved you can co-design the direction of how you want to positively impact their lives. And this is the ultimate goal when you're driven by sustainable change. 6:32 - You gain the ability to support ways to gain consensus, because you can pull all their pain points in and then talk to them about what they want to see that changed. So that's kind of how I've seen my role in the leadership space and what grounds me within that.8:37 - Our local volunteers, who we call the Atalan Network, are also our heroes, deliver the aid, making sure it gets to the right people and fast, so anyone can access the platform, whether you're an artisan, a donor, an NGO or just someone who wants to maThe Matrix Green Pill Podcast: https://thematrixgreenpill.com/Please review us: https://g.page/r/CS8IW35GvlraEAI/review

In a recent episode of The Charity Charge Show, guest host Grayson Harris sat down with Angela Blake, Senior Product Manager at GiveWP, to explore the future of nonprofit fundraising tools. With a background in WordPress product development and a passion for empowering mission-driven organizations, Angela shared how GiveWP is shaping the way nonprofits build communities, manage donors, and scale their impact—all from within their WordPress website.Whether you're a local food pantry or a national nonprofit network, this episode is packed with actionable insights on leveraging technology to fundraise smarter, build recurring revenue, and deepen donor relationships.TakeawaysAngela transitioned from GoDaddy to GiveWP to support nonprofits.GiveWP offers a comprehensive suite of fundraising tools for nonprofits.Customization options in GiveWP enhance donor engagement.Nonprofits are increasingly relying on community support for funding.GiveWP integrates with various external systems for donor management.The onboarding process for nonprofits is user-friendly and supportive.Large organizations need interconnected systems for data management.GiveWP supports multiple languages and currencies for global reach.Recurring donations are vital for nonprofit financial health.Effective communication is key to building community support.About Charity Charge:Charity Charge is a financial technology company serving the nonprofit sector. From the Charity Charge Nonprofit Credit Card to bookkeeping, gift card disbursements, and state compliance, we help mission-driven organizations streamline operations and stay financially strong. Learn more at charitycharge.com.

Abhay delves into the transformative journey of Shweta Katti, the Director of Education at KRANTI. Discover how KRANTI empowers daughters of sex workers from India's red light districts, turning adversity into strength and resilience. Shweta shares her inspiring journey from growing up in a red light district to empowering girls from similar backgrounds. She discusses the contrasts of love and trauma within her community, the importance of building trust and safety, and the evolution of self-trust. Shweta shares her personal story of enduring generational trauma and abuse to become the first woman from an Indian red-light area to study abroad.  She emphasizes the need to challenge toxic masculinity and highlights the role of community in healing and support, and also shares insights on Kranti's  mission to create agents of social change - a testament to the power of community, empathy, and unwavering hope.(0:00 - 3:17) Introduction(3:17) Part 1 - responsibility, contrasts and difficulties(18:23) Part 2 - empathy to build empowerment, evolving reflections, changing stereotypes(37:24) Part 3 - building allyship and stopping toxic masculinity, therapy, building trust(49:27 ConclusionKRANTI is an organization in India dedicated to empowering girls from red-light districts to become agents of social change. Kranti currently supports 50+ girls & young women who are survivors of trafficking or daughters of sex workers. Read a recent blog post titled "The Brothel is My Temple" written by Shweta here.Please consider supporting KRANTI through volunteering or donating in kind, at kranti-india.org/join

Show SummaryOn today's episode, we feature a conversation with Army combat veteran Anthnoy Larson, founder and president of MO Vets Outdoors, a nonprofit organization based in Missouri dedicated to helping veterans reconnect with nature through outdoor activities like hunting, fishing, and camping. Provide FeedbackAs a dedicated member of the audience, we would like to hear from you about the show. Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts about the show in this short feedback survey. By doing so, you will be entered to receive a signed copy of one of our host's three books on military and veteran mental health. About Today's GuestAnthony Larson is a U.S. military veteran and the founder and president of MO Vets Outdoors, a nonprofit organization based in Missouri dedicated to helping veterans reconnect with nature through outdoor activities like hunting, fishing, and camping. Established in 2018, MO Vets Outdoors aims to provide veterans with opportunities to heal, build camaraderie, and find peace in the outdoors. Under Larson's leadership, MO Vets Outdoors has grown into a vital resource for Missouri veterans, offering a range of programs and events designed to support their well-being and foster a sense of community.Links Mentioned During the EpisodeMO Vets Outdoors Facebook GroupMO Vets Outdoors Web sitePsychArmor Resource of the WeekThis week's PsychArmor Resource of the Week is the Behind the Mission Podcast Episode 157 with John Langford talking about Project Healing Waters. John is a Marine Corps veteran and Chief Executive Officer of Project Healing Waters. Project Healing Waters helps active military service personnel and Veterans in need through a dedicated, developed curriculum of fly fishing, fly casting, fly tying, and fly rod building. You can find the resource here:  https://psycharmor.org/podcast/john-langford Episode Partner: Are you an organization that engages with or supports the military affiliated community? Would you like to partner with an engaged and dynamic audience of like-minded professionals? Reach out to Inquire about Partnership Opportunities Contact Us and Join Us on Social Media Email PsychArmorPsychArmor on TwitterPsychArmor on FacebookPsychArmor on YouTubePsychArmor on LinkedInPsychArmor on InstagramTheme MusicOur theme music Don't Kill the Messenger was written and performed by Navy Veteran Jerry Maniscalco, in cooperation with Operation Encore, a non profit committed to supporting singer/songwriter and musicians across the military and Veteran communities.Producer and Host Duane France is a retired Army Noncommissioned Officer, combat veteran, and clinical mental health counselor for service members, veterans, and their families.  You can find more about the work that he is doing at www.veteranmentalhealth.com  

Lễ hội Garma ở vùng Đông Bắc hẻo lánh của Arnhem Land, Lãnh thổ Bắc Úc, vừa khép lại. Được sáng lập vào năm 1999 bởi Quỹ Yothu Yindi, Garma đã trở thành một diễn đàn quan trọng thúc đẩy đối thoại giữa người bản địa Úc và cộng đồng phi bản địa. Ngoài các vấn đề chính trị, lễ hội năm nay còn là dịp để tôn vinh âm nhạc, vũ điệu và sự giao lưu văn hóa.

In today's episode, we dive into stories of malicious compliance and managerial incompetence at its finest. First, we follow a whistleblower fired for using "unorthodox" but highly successful methods, who gets the last laugh as the NGO collapses after their departure. Then, we explore how bad metrics can backfire when a veteran railroad employee learns to game the system. And finally, a home business owner teaches a lesson in phone etiquette to an entitled doctor with one digit too-close for comfort. Karma, served cold and delightfully petty.

** Do you have a goal you'd love to achieve and need help reaching it? Are you feeling overwhelmed by the challenges you face? Contact me for a free 30 minute discovery chat to see if she is the coach to help you. Drop me a mail: https://www.loisstrachan.com/contact-lois/ In this episode, Lois chats with Sayyida Victoria, The Blind Butterfly. Sayyida is a woman of many talents. she works as the manager of education and training at the Lighthouse in Housten, Texas. She is the founder of the Blind Professionals Network, an NGO focusing on improving the employability of those who are blind and partially blind. She is co-host of the Blind Table Talk podcast. And she is a mom to five children. During the conversation, Sayyida talks of how she became blind, what it was like being a blind mom to her five children, the importance of education and advocacy both within and beyond the blindness sector, and the eternal question of whether or not it is okay to ask for help as an empowered, independent person with a disability. Reach out to Sayyida: Blind Professionals Network Website: blindpronet.org Blind Table Talk Website: blindtabletalk.com Email: bviempowered@outlook.com Email: blindbutterfly@icloud.com Image description: A woman with shoulder-length black hair smiling gently at the camera. She is wearing a light purple shirt over a black top and a delicate chain necklace. The lighting is soft and emphasises her face. I'd love to hear from you – contact me at Web: https://www.loisstrachan.com/ LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/lstrachan Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/loisstrachanspeaker This episode edited by Craig Strachan using Hindenburg PRO – find out more on Hindenburg.com Credits and music by Charlie Dyasi.

家の中で眠ることを許されなかった。「敵兵の息子」と呼ばれ、いじめられた……。ルワンダで「ジェノサイドの子」として生まれた人々の苦悩は30年を経ても深刻です。NGOによると、ジェノサイドの際に25万人がレイプに遭い、3千人以上の子どもが生まれています。 ※2025年7月31日に収録しました。前後編の前編で、続きは8月7日に配信します。 【関連記事】ルワンダ虐殺30年　性暴力で生まれた子どもたち　繰り返す「呪い」https://www.asahi.com/articles/ASS482VSXS48UHBI008M.html?iref=omny 戦時下の性暴力なくすには　敵か味方かの2択ではない発想に転換をhttps://www.asahi.com/articles/ASS345H86S2VUPQJ00D.html?iref=omny 性暴力が「戦争の兵器」に　血の流れた街で、女性たちに起きたことhttps://www.asahi.com/articles/ASS384F1WS2CUHBI01M.html?iref=omny 【出演・スタッフ】MC　山下知子（デジタル企画報道部・編集委員） https://buff.ly/Hu26skk 神田大介 https://bit.ly/4k4ZKwA 音源編集　杢田光 【朝ポキ情報】アプリで記者と対話 http://t.asahi.com/won1 交流はdiscord https://bit.ly/asapoki_discord おたよりフォーム https://bit.ly/asapoki_otayori 朝ポキTV https://www.youtube.com/@asapoki_official メルマガ https://bit.ly/asapoki_newsletter 広告ご検討の企業様は http://t.asahi.com/asapokiguide 番組検索ツール https://bit.ly/asapoki_cast 最新情報はX https://bit.ly/asapoki_twitter 番組カレンダー https://bit.ly/asapki_calendar 全話あります公式サイト https://bit.ly/asapoki_lp See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Show Notes: Gregory Mose, an English major, currently lives in Aix-en-Provence where he is the director of international relations and professor of International Law at a small American University program called the American College of the Mediterranean.  When he graduated, his parents wanted him to go to Law School, but Greg wanted to travel. He was offered a teaching fellow position at Athens College in Greece, and he fell in love with the place and the experience. He returned to the US and law school at Duke where he met his wife.   Working for United Nations Greg's interest in international public international law led him to work for the UN during Yugoslavia's war crimes tribunal research project. He secured a two-year contract with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees in Conakry, Guinea, which was a paranoid, isolated place. He worked with refugees there for two years, traveling through Mali, Timbuktu, Dakar, Freetown, Abidjan, and upcountry Guinea. During this time, he helped resettle some people to the United States. Greg's experience in Conakry was both powerful and passionate. He helped resettle some people to the United States who wouldn't be able to be resettled today. However, he returned home underweight and suffering from malaria and PTSD. A Career Changes: Director of International Relations - Stay-at-home Dad Greg joined his fiance in London. After a period of recovery, Greg secured a job in corporate law at an international firm in London. He worked on IPOs and was hired as a young US lawyer in securities practices. After three years, he moved to a London-based firm, Freshfields, Brookhouse, Deringer.  Greg and his wife had their son in 2002 and decided to raise their son themselves rather than handing him over to a nanny. He decided to leave his job to write a novel and raise their son while his wife worked at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. They considered downsizing and moving to the English countryside or getting more remote to facilitate a change in lifestyle. However, after spending time in the South West of France, they decided to do something radical and bought a medieval farmhouse and land in the South West of France, near a village called Montcabrier.  Village Life in Wine Country Greg describes their experience living in a wine region called the Lot, near the Dordogne, in the southwest. The village had about 30 full-time residents, but most people  lived in farmhouses outside the village. The village had a two-room schoolhouse, a bakery, and a mayor's office. Greg and his family rented out renovated three holiday cottages in summers to families with small children. They built a playground, swimming pool, and a beautiful field on their property. Greg also shares his experiences with their neighbors. He also learned how to use a chainsaw and finished his novel, Stunt Road. However, as their son grew older, they decided they needed a bigger centre with more activities and schools. They moved to Aix-en-Provence. Working in Education Greg didn't know what he was going to do there, but they enrolled their son in the International School where he was hired to teach a critical thinking course called Theory of Knowledge at the International Baccalaureate program. He became a high school teacher for 10 years and realized his love for teaching, and eventually wanted to teach at university. He decided to pursue a PhD program at French universities, which were affordable. The tuition for a PhD was about $500 a year.  Greg mentions the benefits of social programs in France. He eventually became a full-time professor at the American College in Aix and runs a master's program in international relations. Integration with French Culture Greg's life is different from what people think it is like living in Southern France. He finds it challenging to integrate into the country. In the rural areas, French culture is radically different, with people being warm but also private. Weekends are spent with family, and they do not easily invite people into their homes. However, he finds warmth in the greetings and the respect shown to others. This reinforces a tradition of treating each other as equals and respect. He also talks about how his students from abroad adjust to French culture.  Back to London and Recovery Greg thinks back to 1998 when he  arrived in North London with his fiance and was unemployed. He had been working at UNHCR, which provided decent pay. However, he was always physically cold and underweight due to his previous experiences with malaria and the constant heat in the tropical climate. He was exhausted from the work and the influx of refugees during the renewed violence in Freetown. One of his bouts of malaria occurred while doing a refugee census in the forest region. He spent three days in a room full of bugs and had limited access to food. He talks about how he broke down and found it was cathartic for him. He talks about a particularly difficult time, and how he teaches a course on armed conflict, linking it to genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and refugees. Large glass He often shares anecdotes from his time there, but admits that sometimes he struggles to get through them. Influential Harvard Professors and Courses Greg mentions his first year English course with Helen Vendler. He recalls a kind act of kindness from her. He also mentions professor Burriss Young, who was the Associate Dean of freshmen at the time and lived in Mass Hall. Burriss was an archeologist, and he invited students to tea in his apartment filled with archeological artifacts. This made his first year at Harvard a magical experience. Greg, coming from LA, idealized Harvard. He had a wonderful time in Cabot House, and Greg believes that these experiences will be a lasting memory for him.  Timestamps: 04:44: Early Career and UN Experience 09:31: Transition to Corporate Law and Family Life  22:55: Return to Education and Teaching Career  30:10: Life in Southern France and Cultural Adjustments  40:37: Personal Reflections and Professional Growth  45:02: Memorable Experiences and Influences from Harvard    Links: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gregorymose/ Stunt Road, by Gregory Mose: https://amzn.to/46Orq4X The American College of the Mediterranean: https://www.acmfrance.org/ Greg's Blog: https://quercychronicles.wordpress.com/ Featured Non-profit: The featured non-profit of this week's episode is recommended by Keith Quinn who reports: “Hi. This is Keith Quinn, class of 1992 the featured non-profit of this episode of The 92 Report is water.org. Water.org. Is a global NGO working to bring water and sanitation to the world. The water crisis is a global crisis where 2.2 billion people lack access to safe water, and 3.5 billion people lack access to a safe toilet. I've served on the board of water.org for over 15 years, doing rewarding work, along with two other class of 1992 alums, my fellow board member, Larry Tans, and water.org co-founder, Matt Damon, and I'm proud to say that to date, water.org has changed 76 million lives with water and sanitation. You can learn more about their work@water.org and now here's Will Bachman with this week's episode.”   To learn more about their work, visit: water.org.   

Trong 6 tháng đầu năm 2025, Việt Nam đón hơn 10,6 triệu lượt du khách quốc tế, tăng 20,7% so với cùng kỳ năm 2024, tổng thu từ du lịch ước tính đạt 518 nghìn tỉ đồng (1). Việt Nam tích cực xây dựng hình ảnh với thế giới vì du lịch quốc tế là nguồn đóng góp trực tiếp quan trọng cho GDP, được kỳ vọng 6-8% năm 2025 với 980-1.050 tỉ đồng doanh thu. Bộ Văn Hóa Thể Thao và Du Lịch tổ chức nhiều hoạt động quảng bá du lịch Việt Nam tại nhiều hội chợ du lịch quốc tế và các nước châu Âu như Ý, Thụy Sĩ, Ba Lan, Séc, Đức, đặc biệt là tại Pháp thông qua các sự kiện điện ảnh lớn như Liên hoan phim Cannes 2025 và các hoạt động bên lề, quảng bá, xúc tiến du lịch tại Hội nghị thượng đỉnh Diễn đàn Đối tác vì tăng trưởng xanh và mục tiêu toàn cầu 2030 (P4G) lần thứ 4, giới thiệu Nhã nhạc cung đình Huế tại Quảng trường Trocadéro (Esplanade de Trocadéro), Paris tối 11/05… Tuy nhiên, chính những chuyến công du Việt Nam của các nhà lãnh đạo các nước lớn trên thế giới chính là một cách quảng cáo hữu hiệu cho du lịch Việt Nam. Ví dụ hình ảnh chuyến công du Hà Nội ngày 25-27/05/2025 của tổng thống Emmanuel Macron được truyền thông Pháp liên tục đưa tin. Đất nước thanh bình, an toàn Hình ảnh ông Macron cũng phu nhân thong dong đi dạo Hồ Gươm ngay trong đêm khi vừa mới đến Hà Nội được bình luận nhiều. Và đây cũng là cách “quảng bá hình ảnh của Việt Nam ra thế giới”, theo cảm nhận của bà Nguyễn Thị Lan chia sẻ với RFI Tiếng Việt khi đang cùng bạn chụp ảnh ở Hồ Gươm : “Tôi thấy những cuộc đi dạo phố Hà Nội của tổng thống Pháp rất ý nghĩa. Người ta là tổng thống nhưng hòa đồng với người dân Việt Nam, điều đó chứng tỏ người dân rất thân thiện. Cho nên, qua đó cũng quảng bá được hình ảnh người Việt Nam thân thiện, các di tích, danh lam thắng cảnh của Việt Nam sẽ được thế giới biết đến”. Anh Tiến, ngồi cùng nhóm bạn trong một quán cà phê đối diện Nhà Thờ Lớn, nơi tổng thống Pháp và phu nhân đến thăm hôm trước, chia sẻ : “Nhìn chung, mọi người đều có tâm trạng phấn khởi. Đối với một người dân Việt Nam như tôi, tôi cũng cảm thấy là có một chút gì đấy rất là hãnh diện, rất tự hào. Mình tự hào vì đất nước mình là một đất nước nhỏ, mình phát triển sau người ta cả một quãng rất là dài, còn người ta ở một nước phát triển hơn mà người ta sang và cảm nhận được cuộc sống của người Việt Nam, thì chắc người ta cũng rất ngưỡng mộ đấy. Chứ nếu mình mà là nước lớn thì chuyện lại khác. Đúng không?” “Việt Nam” cũng trở thành từ khóa được tìm kiếm nhiều sau khi xảy ra “sự cố” lúc mở cửa máy bay và bị đồn thổi là “tổng thống bị vợ tát”. Một yếu tố khác là tổng thống Macron phát biểu với báo chí, truyền thông chiều 26/05 ngay ngoài đường, đằng sau là một dãy xe máy. Tiếp theo là hình ảnh tổng thống và phu nhân được người dân Hà Nội đến chào và tặng quà khi rời khỏi nhà hàng Madame Hiền ở phố Hàng Bè. Anh Tiến cho rằng “phải cảm thấy thoái mái, cảm thấy đất nước thanh bình mà họ yên tâm” hòa vào đám đông. “Những hình ảnh đó mà được quảng bá lên thì khách du lịch nhìn vào đấy, người ta sẽ sang Việt Nam nhiều hơn. Mức độ tin tưởng hoặc là những phong cảnh của Việt Nam đẹp, cuộc sống rất là thanh bình, cho nên sẽ thu hút. Bởi vì bản thân tổng thống các nước đi sang Việt Nam, có cần phải có vệ sĩ đi đâu, không cần mà, người ta đi lại bình thường cũng như những người dân bình thường thôi mà. Người dân Việt Nam cũng rất là mến khách, điều đó ai cũng biết. Còn phong cảnh thì được ưu ái rất nhiều”. Nhiều công trình văn hóa, di tích lịch sử tại Hà Nội được đưa vào lịch trình tham quan và làm việc của tổng thống Pháp, như Phủ chủ tịch, lăng chủ tịch Hồ Chí Minh, Văn Miếu Quốc Tử Giám, Bảo tàng Mỹ thuật, Nhà thờ lớn, khu phố cổ, Hồ Gươm… Những công trình này mang phong cách kiến trúc đa dạng, từ truyền thống đến Đông Dương và hiện đại. Định vị thương hiệu du lịch qua ẩm thực Song song với việc đề cao di sản kiến trúc, danh lam thắng cảnh, Việt Nam cũng muốn “định vị thương hiệu du lịch qua ẩm thực”, theo báo Nhân Dân và “lan tỏa tinh hoa ẩm thực Việt Nam ra thế giới thông qua ngoại giao”. Tạp chí Thông tin & Truyền Thông viết : “Hình ảnh các nguyên thủ, lãnh đạo cấp cao các nước hay doanh nhân nước ngoài đi dạo, thưởng thức các món ăn đường phố tại Việt Nam dường như đã không còn quá xa lạ và dần trở thành một “đặc sản” để Việt Nam thông qua đó quảng bá ẩm thực, văn hóa, con người nước Nam với bạn bè quốc tế”. Tổng thống Barack Obama đi ăn bún chả, nhà sáng lập kiêm chủ tịch và giám đốc điều hành (CEO) Nvidia Hoàng Nhân Huân (Jensen Huang) đi uống bia ở phố Tạ Hiện, thủ tướng Úc Anthony Albanese uống bia, ăn bánh mì, CEO Apple Tim Cook uống cà phê trứng… Tổng thống Pháp Emmanuel Macron ăn nem rán, bún riêu tại nhà hàng Madame Hiền, nổi tiếng món dân dã Việt Nam nhưng do bếp trưởng người Pháp Didier Corlou điều hành. Chị Nguyễn Hoàng Yến, quản lý Nhà hàng Madame Hiền, giải thích với RFI Tiếng Việt là khi được biết là tổng thống Pháp sẽ đến ăn trưa làm việc với giới hoạt động văn hóa, nghệ thuật, bếp trưởng Didier Corlou “đã đưa ra một số thực đơn để họ thử và chọn, sau đó để điều chỉnh theo đúng gu”. “Nhà hàng Madame Hiền nổi tiếng về ẩm thực Việt Nam nhưng lại do bếp trưởng là người Pháp cho nên dùng toàn bộ sản phẩm thuần Việt và dùng các gia vị, rau thơm của Việt Nam. Thực đơn gửi đến đoàn của tổng thống Pháp gồm có nem rán, nem cuốn, có món bún riêu. Dù là những món ăn truyền thống nhưng hơi có phong cách của bếp trưởng. Điểm mạnh của ẩm thực Việt Nam nói chung và của Hà Nội nói riêng, theo tôi, đó là nhờ gia vị và “mùa nào thức đấy”, đặc biệt là rau thơm, rau củ quả đều tươi. Đấy cũng là điểm khiến bếp trưởng của nhà hàng Madame Hiền gắn bó với Việt Nam và quyết định mở nhà hàng về món ăn Việt Nam”. Kết hợp di sản kiến trúc với ẩm thực Ngoài ra, địa điểm cũng là thế mạnh của nhà hàng. Được xây từ năm 1928 theo thiết kế của kiến trúc người Pháp Lagisquet, căn biệt thự cổ vẫn giữ nguyên vẹn vẻ đẹp cổ kính theo kiến trúc Đông Dương. Theo chia sẻ của chị Hoàng Yến, đây là một trong năm biệt thự Pháp cổ được một thương gia người Pháp cải tạo, khai thác kinh doanh nhà hàng từ lâu. Những nét kiến trúc đặc trưng được bảo tồn cẩn thận để quảng bá tới du khách quốc tế khi đến Việt Nam. “Nhà hàng chọn khu biệt thự Pháp cổ, thường có quang cảnh và không gian mở để cho thực khách thưởng thức và có bầu không khí ấm cúng. Về không gian, nội thất, nhà hàng thử sử dụng như trong một gia đình Việt Nam, ấm cúng, không phải vào một nhà hàng sang trọng mà là vào một nhà hàng của gia đình Việt Nam. Món ăn bình dân nhưng vì bếp trưởng của nhà hàng từng làm trong khách sạn Métropole gần 20 năm, nên anh ấy sử dụng gia vị và rau thơm Việt Nam, nhưng thêm chút hương vị Pháp vào đó”. Thành phố Hà Nội đã lập danh sách những tòa biệt thự Pháp cổ còn lại ở Hà Nội, trong đó có rất nhiều công trình quan trọng sẽ được trùng tu để tạo thêm giá trị về kiến trúc, di sản, văn hóa. Theo Cơ quan hỗ trợ hợp tác quốc tế vùng Paris tại Việt Nam - PRX-Vietnam, hiện nhà tư vấn về bảo tồn di sản cho thành phố Hà Nội, nhiều biệt thự cổ sẽ được trùng tu để tạo thêm công năng mới như khách sạn, nhà hàng, quán cà phê, không gian triển lãm… Thực tế cần đúng với hình ảnh được quảng bá Tuy nhiên, đôi khi hình ảnh một Việt Nam thơ mộng bị phá vỡ bởi những thực tế kém hào nhoáng hơn. Trong bài “Điểm đến Việt Nam : những bất ngờ trong chuyến du lịch lớn đầu tiên đến châu Á” được đăng trên nhật báo Pháp Le Figaro ngày 14/07/2025, hai du khách trẻ người Pháp chia sẻ trải nghiệm, ngỡ ngàng cũng có và thất vọng cũng có : nắng nóng khắc nghiệt, ô nhiễm đô thị, và thậm chí là tình trạng quá tải ở một số địa điểm mang tính biểu tượng như Vịnh Hạ Long. Giao thông ở Hà Nội, đặc biệt là phố đường tàu, được coi là điểm đặc biệt nhưng nhanh chóng trở nên ngột ngạt, ồn ào, vì còi xe liên tục cùng với ô nhiễm không khí, khiến Agathe thấy hài lòng vì được đến với thiên nhiên Ninh Bình sau ba ngày ở Hà Nội. Tháng 07/2025, Việt Nam được tạp chí Time Out chọn là điểm du lịch kinh tế nhất và phong phú nhất ở Đông Nam Á. Ngoài giá vé máy bay thiếu cạnh tranh so với một số nước trong khu vực như Thái Lan, Singapore, chi phí ở Việt Nam không quá đắt, khuyến khích giới trẻ “xách ba lô lên và đi”. Ngoài ra, còn phải kể đến chính sách miễn thị thực. Việt Nam ký các hiệp định miễn thị thực song phương với nhiều quốc gia và đơn phương miễn thị thực cho công dân 13 nước (2), chủ yếu là các nước châu Âu, thời hạn tạm trú được nâng lên thành 45 ngày. Biện pháp có hiệu lực đến hết ngày 14/03/2028 và sẽ được xem xét gia hạn theo quy định của pháp luật Việt Nam. Trong 6 tháng đầu năm 2025, Bộ Văn Hóa, Thể Thao và Du Lịch đã xây dựng và triển khai Chương trình kích cầu phát triển du lịch năm 2025. Tuy nhiên, theo Báo Tuyên Quang ngày 28/07 (3), các nhà quản lý du lịch đều ý thức được rằng “để duy trì đà tăng trưởng và nâng cao chất lượng du lịch, Việt Nam cần tiếp tục đầu tư vào cơ sở hạ tầng, phát triển sản phẩm du lịch độc đáo, bền vững và đặc biệt là nâng cao chất lượng nguồn nhân lực”. (1) Theo báo cáo ngày 24/07/2025 của bộ Văn hóa, Thể Thao và Du lịch. (2) Đức, Pháp, Ý, Tây Ban Nha, Đan Mạch, Thụy Điển, Na Uy, Phần Lan, Anh và Bắc Ireland, Nga, Belarus, Nhật Bản, Hàn Quốc.  (3) Báo Tuyên Quang, "Hơn 10 triệu lượt khách du lịch quốc tế đến Việt Nam trong 6 tháng đầu năm 2025".

VOV1 - Ngày 3/8, Bộ trưởng Ngoại giao Séc cho biết, nước này kiên quyết phản đối lời kêu gọi của Bộ trưởng An ninh Quốc gia Israel về việc tái chiếm Gaza và khuyến khích người Palestine di cư.

Rogier van Bemmel, Ad Verbrugge en Maurice de Hond bespreken het nieuws van de week.--Meer over de Zomerschool Geopolitiek: https://www.nyenrode.nl/opleidingen/p/strategisch-denken-in-een-onrustige-wereldSteun DNW en word patroon op http://www.petjeaf.com/denieuwewereld.Liever direct overmaken? Maak dan uw gift over naar NL61 RABO 0357 5828 61 t.n.v. Stichting De Nieuwe Wereld. Crypto's doneren kan via https://commerce.coinbase.com/pay/79870e0f-f817-463e-bde7-a5a8cb08c09f-- Bronnen en links bij deze uitzending: - Maurice over de Deventer Moordzaak: https://maurice.nl/2025/07/30/weer-voor-de-rechter-inzake-de-deventer-moordzaak/- Maurice de Hond bij DwarsNieuws: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqeHv76dN9c- 'De schoft van de Deventer moordzaak': https://www.oordeelzelf.com/- Verkiezingsprogramma VVD: https://www.vvd.nl/nieuws/definitief-verkiezingsprogramma/- Robbert Dijkgraaf over het oneindige bij De Wereld Draait door: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hINx5VMVy2k--00:00 Introductie1:31 Maurice de Hond en de Deventer moordzaak14:20 Zomerschool15:10 Zwaar gemoed23:56 Verkiezingen, ondergang van Europa, FvD45:00 Financiën, Oekraïne en Rusland49:50 EU-deal met VS57:02 Boekdrukkunst en de transistor1:02:08 Sydney Sweeney, schoonheid en ressentiment1:21:31 Israël en Gaza1:43:03 Schaal, de goede oorlog1:47:29 NGO's, verbod op Youtube, Russiagate, media--De Nieuwe Wereld TV is een platform dat mensen uit verschillende disciplines bij elkaar brengt om na te denken over grote veranderingen die op komst zijn door een combinatie van snelle technologische ontwikkelingen en globalisering. Het is een initiatief van filosoof Ad Verbrugge in samenwerking met anchors Jelle van Baardewijk en Marlies Dekkers. De Nieuwe Wereld TV wordt gemaakt in samenwerking met de Filosofische School Nederland. Onze website: https://denieuwewereld.tv/ DNW heeft ook een Substack. Meld je hier aan: https://denieuwewereld.substack.com/

- Tổng Bí thư Tô Lâm dự gặp mặt các đại biểu các Bộ Quốc phòng, Công an và Ngoại giao nhân kỷ niệm 80 năm Ngày truyền thống Công an nhân dân, 80 năm thành lập ngành Ngoại giao, và dự chương trình nghệ thuật “80 năm – Bản hùng ca vang mãi”.- Chủ tịch nước Lương Cường gửi thông điệp chúc mừng nhân kỷ niệm 80 năm thành lập Liên hợp quốc.- Các tỉnh miền núi phía Bắc tiếp tục hỗ trợ nhân dân khắc phục hậu quả do mưa lũ.- Tổng thống Nga Vladimir Putin cảnh báo về sự “kỳ vọng quá mức” đối với các cuộc đàm phán hòa bình giữa Nga và Ucraina.- Từ hôm nay, Liên minh châu Âu bắt đầu áp dụng các quy định đầu tiên trong Đạo luật Trí tuệ nhân tạo đối với các mô hình AI đa năng.

War, Propaganda, and the Spectacle of SufferingThe war in Gaza is not only fought with drones, tunnels, and rockets; it is fought with cameras. It is fought through livestreams, tweets, and NGO reports. This is no longer HUMINT in the traditional sense. HUMINT—human intelligence—once belonged to the world of spooks, agents, secrets, and whispers. Today, human intelligence is filmed on smartphones, edited for emotional punch, and consumed by millions. It's no longer intelligence; it's entertainment. It has become HUMENT—human entertainment—where suffering itself is curated, packaged, and broadcast.The NGOs, aid workers, and reporters on the ground claim neutrality, but in this war there is no neutral. They are soft spooks, narrative operatives shaping perception rather than just gathering facts. Their images and testimonies are intelligence with emotional payloads, designed to move hearts as much as inform minds. Their cameras don't just document—they weaponize.And in the feed economy, atrocity is a product. The crying child, the drone shot over rubble, the weeping mother—these are not just moments; they are content, scored with violins, cut to viral lengths, consumed by a global audience that toggles between outrage and voyeurism. War becomes a show. Horror becomes a series. The old Broadway line rings bitterly true: “Give ‘em the old razzle dazzle, and they'll never catch wise.” Every side knows this. Every side plays it. Gaza is not just a battlefield—it is a broadcast.Meanwhile, famine in Gaza isn't incidental—it's strategic. Hunger has always been a weapon of war, from medieval sieges to modern blockades. Cut off resources, break morale, force surrender. Israel denies the worst accusations but uses siege tactics knowingly. Hamas, in turn, thrives on the imagery of starvation, using suffering as both shield and symbol. Civilians are crushed in the middle. The world argues over semantics—“unconditional ceasefire” versus “unconditional surrender”—but the bombs keep falling. Mercy, in war, only comes after surrender.Think of it as the classic trope: two knights fight under the king's gaze. One is wounded, knocked down, but refuses to yield. The king cannot spare a knight who will not ask for mercy. Mercy only follows surrender. Germany and Japan survived because they surrendered unconditionally. Gaza, like the Black Knight in Monty Python, fights on even as it's hacked to pieces, shouting defiance through the blood. Heroic, perhaps, but suicidal.And Gaza stands alone. The Arab world mouths support but offers no jets, no armies. Egypt seals its borders. Jordan stays quiet. The Gulf states normalize ties with Israel. Iran uses Gaza as leverage, not liberation. Two billion Muslims, half a billion Arabs, and no cavalry comes. The West tweets, marches, and protests, but it bets on Israel. Gaza bleeds. The cameras roll.This is the grim reality: wars end when one side surrenders. Gaza hasn't surrendered. Israel won't stop. The world won't intervene. The suffering continues, endlessly looped, endlessly consumed. In this war, truth is secondary to narrative. Human pain is no longer just experienced; it's performed, shared, and monetized.HUMINT has collapsed into HUMENT. Intelligence has become entertainment. Horror has become spectacle. The curtain rises daily. The violins swell. The thumb hovers in the air. And the show goes on.

Dr. Jo is a bereaved mother and the founder of the MISS Foundation, an international NGO that serves families whose children have died, and the Selah Carefarm, a sustainable restorative community that provides aid to anyone suffering traumatic grief. She is also a Professor and Senior Scholar at Arizona State University, where she spearheads the Graduate Certificate in Trauma and Bereavement. Her best selling book, Bearing the Unbearable has helped revolutionize the way our culture thinks, and feels, about grief. She works with and counsels families from all around the world who have experienced catastrophic deaths. In this conversation, we explore: — How grief and love are two sides of the same coin — The happiness cult and the harmful effects of living in a culture that avoids pain — How best to help someone who is grieving and things to avoid — Rituals for integrating grief in a holistic way and honouring the person who has passed. And more. You can learn more about Dr Jo's work at missfoundation.org. --- Dr. Joanne Cacciatore is a bereaved mother and the founder of the MISS Foundation, an international NGO that serves families whose children have died, and the Selah Carefarm, a sustainable restorative community that provides aid to anyone suffering traumatic grief. She is also a Professor and Senior Scholar in the Wrigley Institute of Sustainability at Arizona State University, spearheading the Graduate Certificate in Trauma and Bereavement. Her best selling book, Bearing the Unbearable: Love, Loss, and the Heartbreaking Path of Grief, is a national award winning best seller that has helped revolutionize the way our culture thinks, and feels, about grief. She works with and counsels families from all around the world who have experienced catastrophic deaths. She served on Oprah and Prince Harry's Mental Health Advisory Board for several years and was featured in their docuseries ‘The Me You Can't See.” Dr. Jo, believing that current practices around food production are a social, ethical, and environmental justice issue, is a vegan and hasn't eaten meat since 1972. She also teaches meditation, mindfulness, and compassion and ahimsa practices to students and clients from around the world. If you're a provider seeking supervision or consultation, For more information on Dr. Jo visit her website. --- Interview Links: — Dr Jo's website - https://www.centerforlossandtrauma.com/ 3 Books Dr Joanne Cacciatore Recommends Every Therapist Should Read: — Attachment in Psychotherapy - David Wallin - https://amzn.to/3Rp8stp — Attachment-Informed Grief Therapy: The Clinician's Guide to Foundations and Applications (Series in Death, Dying, and Bereavement) - Phyllis S. Kosminsky - https://amzn.to/3UPAgI8 — Bearing the Unbearable - Dr Joanne Cacciatore - https://amzn.to/3R27bbv

We've covered the US Agency for International Development, or USAID, pretty consistently on Statecraft, since our first interview on PEPFAR, the flagship anti-AIDS program, in 2023. When DOGE came to USAID, I was extremely critical of the cuts to lifesaving aid, and the abrupt, pointlessly harmful ways in which they were enacted. In March, I wrote, “The DOGE team has axed the most effective and efficient programs at USAID, and forced out the chief economist, who was brought in to oversee a more aggressive push toward efficiency.”Today, we're talking to that forced-out chief economist, Dean Karlan. Dean spent two and a half years at the helm of the first-ever Office of the Chief Economist at USAID. In that role, he tried to help USAID get better value from its foreign aid spending. His office shifted $1.7 billion of spending towards programs with stronger evidence of effectiveness. He explains how he achieved this, building a start-up within a massive bureaucracy. I should note that Dean is one of the titans of development economics, leading some of the most important initiatives in the field (I won't list them, but see here for details), and I think there's a plausible case he deserves a Nobel.Throughout this conversation, Dean makes a point much better than I could: the status quo at USAID needed a lot of improvement. The same political mechanisms that get foreign aid funded by Congress also created major vulnerabilities for foreign aid, vulnerabilities that DOGE seized on. Dean believes foreign aid is hugely valuable, a good thing for us to spend our time, money, and resources on. But there's a lot USAID could do differently to make its marginal dollar spent more efficient.DOGE could have made USAID much more accountable and efficient by listening to people like Dean, and reformers of foreign aid should think carefully about Dean's criticisms of USAID, and his points for how to make foreign aid not just resilient but politically popular in the long term.We discuss* What does the Chief Economist do?* Why does 170% percent of USAID funds come already earmarked by Congress?* Why is evaluating program effectiveness institutionally difficult?* Why don't we just do cash transfers for everything?* Why institutions like USAID have trouble prioritizing* Should USAID get rid of gender/environment/fairness in procurement rules?* Did it rely too much on a small group of contractors?* What's changed in development economics over the last 20 years?* Should USAID spend more on governance and less on other forms of aid? * How DOGE killed USAID — and how to bring it back better* Is depoliticizing foreign aid even possible?* Did USAID build “soft power” for the United States?This is a long conversation: you can jump to a specific section with the index above. If you just want to hear about Dean's experience with DOGE, you can click here or go to the 45-minute mark in the audio. And if you want my abbreviated summary of the conversation, see these two Twitter threads. But I think the full conversation is enlightening, especially if you want to understand the American foreign aid system. Thanks to Harry Fletcher-Wood for his judicious edits.Our past coverage of USAIDDean, I'm curious about the limits of your authority. What can the Chief Economist of USAID do? What can they make people do?There had never been an Office of the Chief Economist before. In a sense, I was running a startup, within a 13,000-employee agency that had fairly baked-in, decentralized processes for doing things.Congress would say, "This is how much to spend on this sector and these countries." What you actually fund was decided by missions in the individual countries. It was exciting to have that purview across the world and across many areas, not just economic development, but also education, social protection, agriculture. But the reality is, we were running a consulting unit within USAID, trying to advise others on how to use evidence more effectively in order to maximize impact for every dollar spent.We were able to make some institutional changes, focused on basically a two-pronged strategy. One, what are the institutional enablers — the rules and the processes for how things get done — that are changeable? And two, let's get our hands dirty working with the budget holders who say, "I would love to use the evidence that's out there, please help guide us to be more effective with what we're doing."There were a lot of willing and eager people within USAID. We did not lack support to make that happen. We never would've achieved anything, had there not been an eager workforce who heard our mission and knocked on our door to say, "Please come help us do that."What do you mean when you say USAID has decentralized processes for doing things?Earmarks and directives come down from Congress. [Some are] about sector: $1 billion dollars to spend on primary school education to improve children's learning outcomes, for instance. The President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) [See our interview with former PEPFAR lead Mark Dybul] is one of the biggest earmarks to spend money specifically on specific diseases. Then there's directives that come down about how to allocate across countries.Those are two conversations I have very little engagement on, because some of that comes from Congress. It's a very complicated, intertwined set of constraints that are then adhered to and allocated to the different countries. Then what ends up happening is — this is the decentralized part — you might be a Foreign Service Officer (FSO) working in a country, your focus is education, and you're given a budget for that year from the earmark for education and told, "Go spend $80 million on a new award in education." You're working to figure out, “How should we spend that?” There might be some technical support from headquarters, but ultimately, you're responsible for making those decisions. Part of our role was to help guide those FSOs towards programs that had more evidence of effectiveness.Could you talk more about these earmarks? There's a popular perception that USAID decides what it wants to fund. But these big categories of humanitarian aid, or health, or governance, are all decided in Congress. Often it's specific congressmen or congresswomen who really want particular pet projects to be funded.That's right. And the number that I heard is that something in the ballpark of 150-170% of USAID funds were earmarked. That might sound horrible, but it's not.How is that possible?Congress double-dips, in a sense: we have two different demands. You must spend money on these two things. If the same dollar can satisfy both, that was completely legitimate. There was no hiding of that fact. It's all public record, and it all comes from congressional acts that create these earmarks. There's nothing hidden underneath the hood.Will you give me examples of double earmarking in practice? What kinds of goals could you satisfy with the same dollar?There's an earmark for Development Innovation Ventures (DIV) to do research, and an earmark for education. If DIV is going to fund an evaluation of something in the education space, there's a possibility that that can satisfy a dual earmark requirement. That's the kind of thing that would happen. One is an earmark for a process: “Do really careful, rigorous evaluations of interventions, so that we learn more about what works and what doesn't." And another is, "Here's money that has to be spent on education." That would be an example of a double dip on an earmark.And within those categories, the job of Chief Economist was to help USAID optimize the funding? If you're spending $2 billion on education, “Let's be as effective with that money as possible.”That's exactly right. We had two teams, Evidence Use and Evidence Generation. It was exactly what it sounds like. If there was an earmark for $1 billion dollars on education, the Evidence Use team worked to do systematic analysis: “What is the best evidence out there for what works for education for primary school learning outcomes?” Then, “How can we map that evidence to the kinds of things that USAID funds? What are the kinds of questions that need to be figured out?”It's not a cookie-cutter answer. A systematic review doesn't say, "Here's the intervention. Now just roll it out everywhere." We had to work with the missions — with people who know the local area — to understand, “What is the local context? How do you appropriately adapt this program in a procurement and contextualize it to that country, so that you can hire people to use that evidence?”Our Evidence Generation team was trying to identify knowledge gaps where the agency could lead in producing more knowledge about what works and what doesn't. If there was something innovative that USAID was funding, we were huge advocates of, "Great, let's contribute to the global public good of knowledge, so that we can learn more in the future about what to do, and so others can learn from us. So let's do good, careful evaluations."Being able to demonstrate what good came of an intervention also serves the purpose of accountability. But I've never been a fan of doing really rigorous evaluations just for the sake of accountability. It could discourage innovation and risk-taking, because if you fail, you'd be seen as a failure, rather than as a win for learning that an idea people thought was reasonable didn't turn out to work. It also probably leads to overspending on research, rather than doing programs. If you're doing something just for accountability purposes, you're better off with audits. "Did you actually deliver the program that you said you would deliver, or not?"Awards over $100 million dollars did go through the front office of USAID for approval. We added a process — it was actually a revamped old process — where they stopped off in my office. We were able to provide guidance on the cost-effectiveness of proposals that would then be factored into the decision on whether to proceed. When I was first trying to understand Project 2025, because we saw that as a blueprint for what changes to expect, one of the changes they proposed was actually that process. I remember thinking to myself, "We just did that. Hopefully this change that they had in mind when they wrote that was what we actually put in place." But I thought of it as a healthy process that had an impact, not just on that one award, but also in helping set an example for smaller awards of, “This is how to be more evidence-based in what you're doing.”[Further reading: Here's a position paper Karlan's office at USAID put out in 2024 on how USAID should evaluate cost-effectiveness.]You've also argued that USAID should take into account more research that has already been done on global development and humanitarian aid. Your ideal wouldn't be for USAID to do really rigorous research on every single thing it does. You can get a lot better just by incorporating things that other people have learned.That's absolutely right. I can say this as a researcher: to no one's surprise, it's more bureaucratic to work with the government as a research funder than it is to work with foundations and nimble NGOs. If I want to evaluate a particular program, and you give me a choice of who the funder should be, the only reason I would choose government is if it had a faster on-ramp to policy by being inside.The people who are setting policy should not be putting more weight on evidence that they paid for. In fact, one of the slogans that I often used at USAID is, "Evidence doesn't care who pays for it." We shouldn't be, as an agency, putting more weight on the things that we evaluated vs. things that others evaluated without us, and that we can learn from, mimic, replicate, and scale.We — and the we here is everyone, researchers and policymakers — put too much weight on individual studies, in a horrible way. The first to publish on something gets more accolades than the second, third and fourth. That's not healthy when it comes to policy. If we put too much weight on our own evidence, we end up putting too much weight on individual studies we happen to do. That's not healthy either.That was one of the big pieces of culture change that we tried to push internally at USAID. We had this one slide that we used repeatedly that showed the plethora of evidence out there in the world compared to 20 years ago. A lot more studies are now usable. You can aggregate that evidence and form much better policies.You had political support to innovate that not everybody going into government has. On the other hand, USAID is a big, bureaucratic entity. There are all kinds of cross-pressures against being super-effective per dollar spent. In doing culture change, what kinds of roadblocks did you run into internally?We had a lot of support and political cover, in the sense that the political appointees — I was not a political appointee — were huge fans. But political appointees under Republicans have also been huge fans of what we were doing. Disagreements are more about what to do and what causes to choose. But the basic idea of being effective with your dollars to push your policy agenda is something that cuts across both sides.In the days leading up to the inauguration, we were expecting to continue the work we were doing. Being more cost-effective was something some of the people who were coming in were huge advocates for. They did make progress under Trump I in pushing USAID in that direction. We saw ourselves as able to help further that goal. Obviously, that's not the way it played out, but there isn't really anything political about being more cost-effective.We'll come back to that, but I do want to talk about the 2.5 years you spent in the Biden administration. USAID is full of people with all kinds of incentives, including some folks who were fully on board and supportive. What kinds of challenges did you have in trying to change the culture to be more focused on evidence and effectiveness?There was a fairly large contingent of people who welcomed us, were eager, understood the space that we were coming from and the things that we wanted, and greeted us with open arms. There's no way we would've accomplished what we accomplished without that. We had a bean counter within the Office of the Chief Economist of moving about $1.7 billion towards programs that were more effective or had strong evaluations. That would've been $0 had there not been some individuals who were already eager and just didn't have the path for doing it.People can see economists as people who are going to come in negative and a bit dismal — the dismal science, so to speak. I got into economics for a positive reason. We tried as often as possible to show that with an economic lens, we can help people achieve their goals better, period. We would say repeatedly to people, "We're not here to actually make the difficult choices: to say whether health, education, or food security is the better use of money. We're here to accept your goal and help you achieve more of it for your dollar spent.” We always send a very disarming message: we're there simply to help people achieve their goals and to illuminate the trade-offs that naturally exist.Within USAID, you have a consensus-type organization. When you have 10 people sitting around a room trying to decide how to spend money towards a common goal, if you don't crystallize the trade-offs between the various ideas being put forward, you end up seeing a consensus built: that everybody gets a piece of the pie. Our way of trying to shift the culture is to take those moments and say, "Wait a second. All 10 might be good ideas relative to doing nothing, but they can't all be good relative to each other. We all share a common goal, so let's be clear about the trade-offs between these different programs. Let's identify the ones that are actually getting you the most bang for your buck."Can you give me an example of what those trade-offs might be in a given sector?Sure. Let's take social protection, what we would call the Humanitarian Nexus development space. It might be working in a refugee area — not dealing with the immediate crisis, but one, two, five, or ten years later — trying to help bring the refugees into a more stable environment and into economic activities. Sometimes, you would see some cash or food provided to households. The programs would all have the common goal of helping to build a sustainable livelihood for households, so that they can be more integrated into the local economy. There might be programs providing water, financial instruments like savings vehicles, and supporting vocational education. It'd be a myriad of things, all on this focused goal of income-generating activity for the households to make them more stable in the long run.Often, those kinds of programs doing 10 different things did not actually lead to an observable impact over five years. But a more focused approach has gone through evaluations: cash transfers. That's a good example where “reducing” doesn't always mean reduce your programs just to one thing, but there is this default option of starting with a base case: “What does a cash transfer generate?"And to clarify for people who don't follow development economics, the cash transfer is just, “What if we gave people money?”Sometimes it is just that. Sometimes it's thinking strategically, “Maybe we should do it as a lump sum so that it goes into investments. Maybe we should do it with a planning exercise to make those investments.” Let's just call it “cash-plus,” or “cash-with-a-little-plus,” then variations of that nature. There's a different model, maybe call it, “cash-plus-plus,” called the graduation model. That has gone through about 30 randomized trials, showing pretty striking impacts on long-run income-generating activity for households. At its core is a cash transfer, usually along with some training about income-generating activity — ideally one that is producing and exporting in some way, even a local export to the capital — and access to some form of savings. In some cases, that's an informal savings group, with a community that comes and saves together. In some cases, it's mobile money that's the core. It's a much simpler program, and it's easier to do it at scale. It has generated considerable, measured, repeatedly positive impacts, but not always. There's a lot more that needs to be learned about how to do it more effectively.[Further reading: Here's another position paper from Karlan's team at USAID on benchmarking against cash transfers.]One of your recurring refrains is, “If we're not sure that these other ideas have an impact, let's benchmark: would a cash-transfer model likely give us more bang for our buck than this panoply of other programs that we're trying to run?”The idea of having a benchmark is a great approach in general. You should always be able to beat X. X might be different in different contexts. In a lot of cases, cash is the right benchmark.Go back to education. What's your benchmark for improving learning outcomes for a primary school? Cash transfer is not the right benchmark. The evidence that cash transfers will single-handedly move the needle on learning outcomes is not that strong. On the other hand, a couple of different programs — one called Teaching at the Right Level, another called structured pedagogy — have proven repeatedly to generate very strong impacts at a fairly modest cost. In education, those should be the benchmark. If you want to innovate, great, innovate. But your goal is to beat those. If you can beat them consistently, you become the benchmark. That's a great process for the long run. It's very much part of our thinking about what the future of foreign aid should look like: to be structured around that benchmark.Let's go back to those roundtables you described, where you're trying to figure out what the intervention should be for a group of refugees in a foreign country. What were the responses when you'd say, “Look, if we're all pulling in the same direction, we have to toss out the three worst ideas”?One of the challenges is the psychology of ethics. There's probably a word for this, but one of the objections we would often get was about the scale of a program for an individual. Someone would argue, "But this won't work unless you do this one extra thing." That extra thing might be providing water to the household, along with a cash transfer for income-generating activity, financial support, and bank accounts. Another objection would be that, "You also have to provide consumption and food up to a certain level."These are things that individually might be good, relative to nothing, or maybe even relative to other water approaches or cash transfers. But if you're focused on whether to satisfy the household's food needs, or provide half of what's needed — if all you're thinking about is the trade-off between full and half — you immediately jump to this idea that, "No, we have to go full. That's what's needed to help this household." But if you go to half, you can help more people. There's an actual trade-off: 10,000 people will receive nothing because you're giving more to the people in your program.The same is true for nutritional supplements. Should you provide 2,000 calories a day, or 1,000 calories a day to more people? It's a very difficult conversation on the psychology of ethics. There's this idea that people in a program are sacrosanct, and you must do everything you can for them. But that ignores all the people who are not being reached at all.I would find myself in conversations where that's exactly the way I would try to put it. I would say, "Okay, wait, we have the 2,000,000 people that are eligible for this program in this context. Our program is only going to reach 250,000. That's the reality. Now, let's talk about how many people we're willing to leave untouched and unhelped whatsoever." That was, at least to me, the right way to frame this question. Do you go very intense for fewer people or broader support for more people?Did that help these roundtables reach consensus, or at least have a better sense of what things are trading off against each other?I definitely saw movement for some. I wouldn't say it was uniform, and these are difficult conversations. But there was a lot of appetite for this recognition that, as big as USAID was, it was still small, relative to the problems being approached. There were a lot of people in any given crisis who were being left unhelped. The minute you're able to help people focus more on those big numbers, as daunting as they are, I would see more openness to looking at the evidence to figure out how to do the most good with the resources we have?” We must recognize these inherent trade-offs, whether we like it or not.Back in 2023, you talked to Dylan Matthews at Vox — it's a great interview — about how it's hard to push people to measure cost-effectiveness, when it means adding another step to a big, complicated bureaucratic process of getting aid out the door. You said,"There are also bandwidth issues. There's a lot of competing demands. Some of these demands relate to important issues on gender environment, fairness in the procurement process. These add steps to the process that need to be adhered to. What you end up with is a lot of overworked people. And then you're saying, ‘Here's one more thing to do.'”Looking back, what do you think of those demands on, say, fairness in the procurement process?Given that we're going to be facing a new environment, there probably are some steps in the process that — hopefully, when things are put back in place in some form — someone can be thinking more carefully about. It's easier to put in a cleaner process that avoids some of these hiccups when you start with a blank slate.Having said that, it's also going to be fewer people to dole out less money. There's definitely a challenge that we're going to be facing as a country, to push out money in an effective way with many fewer people for oversight. I don't think it would be accurate to say we achieved this goal yet, but my goal was to make it so that adding cost-effectiveness was actually a negative-cost addition to the process. [We wanted] to do it in a way that successfully recognized that it wasn't a cookie-cutter solution from up top for every country. But [our goal was that] the work to contextualize in a country actually simplified the process for whoever's putting together the procurement docs and deciding what to put in them. I stand by that belief that if it's done well, we can make this a negative-cost process change.I just want to push a little bit. Would you be supportive of a USAID procurement and contracting process that stripped out a bunch of these requirements about gender, environment, or fairness in contracting? Would that make USAID a more effective institution?Some of those types of things did serve an important purpose for some areas and not others. The tricky thing is, how do you set up a process to decide when to do it, when not? There's definitely cases where you would see an environmental review of something that really had absolutely nothing to do with the environment. It was just a cog in the process, but you have to have a process for deciding the process. I don't know enough about the legislation that was put in place on each of these to say, “Was there a better way of deciding when to do them, when not to do them?” That is not something that I was involved in in a direct way. "Let's think about redoing how we introduce gender in our procurement process" was never put on the table.On gender, there's a fair amount of evidence in different contexts that says the way of dealing with a gender inequity is not to just take the same old program and say, "We're now going to do this for women." You need to understand something more about the local context. If all you do is take programs and say, "Add a gender component," you end up with a lot of false attribution, and you don't end up being effective at the very thing that the person [leading the program] cares to do.In that Vox interview, your host says, "USAID relies heavily on a small number of well-connected contractors to deliver most aid, while other groups are often deterred from even applying by the process's complexity." He goes on to say that the use of rigorous evaluation methods like randomized controlled trials is the exception, not the norm.On Statecraft, we talked to Kyle Newkirk, who ran USAID procurement in Afghanistan in the late 2000s, about the small set of well-connected contractors that took most of the contracts in Afghanistan. Often, there was very little oversight from USAID, either because it was hard to get out to those locations in a war-torn environment, or because the system of accountability wasn't built there. Did you talk to people about lessons learned from USAID operating in Afghanistan?No. I mean, only to the following extent: The lesson learned there, as I understand it, wasn't so much about the choice on what intervention to fund, it was procurement: the local politics and engagement with the governments or lack thereof. And dealing with the challenge of doing work in a context like that, where there's more risk of fraud and issues of that nature.Our emphasis was about the design of programs to say, “What are you actually going to try to fund?” Dealing with whether there's fraud in the execution would fall more under the Inspector General and other units. That's not an area that we engaged in when we would do evaluation.This actually gets to a key difference between impact evaluations and accountability. It's one of the areas where we see a lot of loosey-goosey language in the media reporting and Twitter. My office focused on impact evaluation. What changed in the world because of this intervention, that wouldn't otherwise have changed? By “change in the world,” we are making a causal statement. That's setting up things like randomized controlled trials to find out, “What was the impact of this program?” It does provide some accountability, but it really should be done to look forward, in order to know, “Does this help achieve the goals we have in mind?” If so, let's learn that, and replicate it, scale it, do it again.If you're going to deliver books to schools, medicine to health clinics, or cash to people, and you're concerned about fraud, then you need to audit that process and see, “Did the books get to the schools, the medicine to the people, the cash to the people?” You don't need to ask, "Did the medicine solve the disease?" There's been studies already. There's a reason that medicine was being prescribed. Once it's proven to be an effective drug, you don't run randomized trials for decades to learn what you already know. If it's the prescribed drug, you just prescribe the drug, and do accountability exercises to make sure that the drugs are getting into the right hands and there isn't theft or corruption along the way.I think it's a very intuitive thing. There's a confusion that often takes place in social science, in economic or education interventions. They somehow forget that once we know that a certain program generates a certain positive impact, we no longer need to track continuously to find out what happens. Instead, we just need to do accountability to make sure that the program is being delivered as it was designed, tested, and shown to work.There are all these criticisms — from the waste, fraud, and corruption perspective — of USAID working with a couple of big contractors. USAID works largely through these big development organizations like Chemonics. Would USAID dollars be more effective if it worked through a larger base of contractors?I don't think we know. There's probably a few different operating models that can deliver the same basic intervention. We need to focus on, ”What actually are we doing on the ground? What is it that we want the recipients of the program to receive, hear, or do?” and then think backwards from there: "Who's the right implementer for this?" If there's an implementer who is much more expensive for delivering the same product, let's find someone who's more cost-effective.It's helpful to break cost-effective programming into two things: the intervention itself and what benefits it accrues, and the cost for delivering that. Sometimes the improvement is not about the intervention, it's about the delivery model. Maybe that's what you're saying: “These players were too few, too large, and they had a grab on the market, so that they were able to charge too much money to deliver something that others were equally able to do at lower cost." If that's the case, that says, "We should reform our procurement process,” because the reason you would see that happen is they were really good at complying with requirements that came at USAID from Congress. You had an overworked workforce [within USAID] that had to comply with all these requirements. If you had a bid between two groups, one of which repeatedly delivered on the paperwork to get a good performance evaluation, and a new group that doesn't have that track record, who are you going to choose? That's how we ended up where we are.My understanding of the history is that it comes from a push from Republicans in the ‘80s, from [Senator] Jesse Helms, to outsource USAID efforts to contractors. So this is not a left-leaning thing. I wouldn't say it is right-leaning either. It was just a decision made decades ago. You combine that with the bureaucratic requirements of working with USAID, and you end up with a few firms and nonprofits skilled at dealing with it.It's definitely my impression that at various points in American history, different partisans are calling for insourcing or for outsourcing. But definitely, I think you're right that the NGO cluster around USAID does spring up out of a Republican push in the eighties.We talked to John Kamensky recently, who was on Al Gore's predecessor to DOGE in the ‘90s.I listened to this, yeah.I'm glad to hear it! I'm thinking of it because they also pushed to cut the workforce in the mid-90s and outsource federal functions.Earlier, you mentioned a slide that showed what we've learned in the field of development economics over the past 20 years. Will you narrate that slide for me?Let me do two slides for you. The slide that I was picturing was a count of randomized controlled trials in development that shows a fairly exponential growth. The movement started in the mid-to-late 1990s, but really took off in the 2000s. Even just in the past 10 years, it's seen a considerable increase. There's about 4-5,000 randomized controlled trials evaluating various programs of the kind USAID funds.That doesn't tell you the substance of what was learned. Here's an example of substance, which is cash transfers: probably the most studied intervention out there. We have a meta-analysis that counted 115 studies. That's where you start having a preponderance of evidence to be able to say something concrete. There's some variation: you get different results in different places; targeting and ways of doing it vary. A good systematic analysis can help tease out what we can say, not just about the effect of cash, but also how to do it and what to expect, depending on how it's done. Fifteen years ago, when we saw the first few come out, you just had, "Oh, that's interesting. But it's a couple of studies, how do you form policy around that?” With 115, we can say so much more.What else have we learned about development that USAID operators in the year 2000 would not have been able to act upon?Think about the development process in two steps. One is choosing good interventions; the other is implementing them well. The study of implementation is historically underdone. The challenge that we face — this is an area I was hoping USAID could make inroads on — was, studying a new intervention might be of high reward from an academic perspective. But it's a lot less interesting to an academic to do much more granular work to say, "That was an interesting program that created these groups [of aid recipients]; now let's do some further knock-on research to find out whether those groups should be made of four, six, or ten people.” It's going to have a lower reward for the researcher, but it's incredibly important.It's equivalent to the color of the envelope in direct marketing. You might run tests — if this were old-style direct marketing — as to whether the envelope should be blue or red. You might find that blue works better. Great, but that's not interesting to an academic. But if you run 50 of these, on a myriad of topics about how to implement better, you end up with a collection of knowledge that is moving the needle on how to achieve more impact per dollar.That collection is not just important for policy: it also helps us learn more about the development process and the bottlenecks for implementing good programs. As we're seeing more digital platforms and data being used, [refining implementation] is more possible compared to 20 years ago, where most of the research was at the intervention level: does this intervention work? That's an exciting transition. It's also a path to seeing how foreign aid can help in individual contexts, [as we] work with local governments to integrate evidence into their operations and be more efficient with their own resources.There's an argument I've seen a lot recently: we under-invest in governance relative to other foreign aid goals. If we care about economic growth and humanitarian outcomes, we should spend a lot more on supporting local governance. What do you make of that claim?I agree with it actually, but there's a big difference between recognizing the problem and seeing what the tool is to address it. It's one thing to say, “Politics matters, institutions matter.” There's lots of evidence to support that, including the recent Nobel Prize. It's another beast to say, “This particular intervention will improve institutions and governance.”The challenge is, “What do we do about this? What is working to improve this? What is resilient to the political process?” The minute you get into those kinds of questions, it's the other end of the spectrum from a cash transfer. A cash transfer has a kind of universality: Not to say you're going to get the same impact everywhere, but it's a bit easier to think about the design of a program. You have fewer parameters to decide. When you think about efforts to improve governance, you need bespoke thinking in every single place.As you point out, it's something of a meme to say “institutions matter” and to leave it at that, but the devil is in all of those details.In my younger years — I feel old saying that — I used to do a lot of work on financial inclusion, and financial literacy was always my go-to example. On a household level, it's really easy to show a correlation: people who are more financially literate make better financial decisions and have more wealth, etc. It's much harder to say, “How do you move the needle on financial literacy in a way that actually helps people make better decisions, absorb shocks better, build investment better, save better?” It's easy to show that the correlation is there. It's much harder to say this program, here, will actually move the needle. That same exact problem is much more complicated when thinking about governance and institutions.Let's talk about USAID as it stands today. You left USAID when it became clear to you that a lot of the work you were doing was not of interest to the people now running it. How did the agency end up so disconnected from a political base of support? There's still plenty of people who support USAID and would like it to be reinstated, but it was at least vulnerable enough to be tipped over by DOGE in a matter of weeks. How did that happen?I don't know that I would agree with the premise. I'm not sure that public support of foreign aid actually changed, I'd be curious to see that. I think aid has always been misunderstood. There are public opinion polls that show people thought 25% of the US budget was spent on foreign aid. One said, "What, do you think it should be?" People said 10%. The right answer is about 0.6%. You could say fine, people are bad at statistics, but those numbers are pretty dauntingly off. I don't know that that's changed. I heard numbers like that years ago.I think there was a vulnerability to an effort that doesn't create a visible impact to people's lives in America, the way that Social Security, Medicare, and roads do. Foreign aid just doesn't have that luxury. I think it's always been vulnerable. It has always had some bipartisan support, because of the understanding of the bigger picture and the soft power that's gained from it. And the recognition that we are a nation built on the idea of generosity and being good to others. That was always there, but it required Congress to step in and say, "Let's go spend this money on foreign aid." I don't think that changed. What changed was that you ended up with an administration that just did not share those values.There's this issue in foreign aid: Congress picks its priorities, but those priorities are not a ranked list of what Congress cares about. It's the combination of different interests and pressures in Congress that generates the list of things USAID is going to fund.You could say doing it that way is necessary to build buy-in from a bunch of different political interests for the work of foreign aid. On the other hand, maybe the emergent list from that process is not the things that are most important to fund. And clearly, that congressional buy-in wasn't enough to protect USAID from DOGE or from other political pressures.How should people who care about foreign aid reason about building a version of USAID that's more effective and less vulnerable at the same time?Fair question. Look, I have thoughts, but by no means do I think of myself as the most knowledgeable person to say, here's the answer in the way forward. One reality is, even if Congress did object, they didn't have a mechanism in place to actually object. They can control the power of the purse the next round, but we're probably going to be facing a constitutional crisis over the Impoundment Act, to see if the executive branch can impound money that Congress spent. We'll see how this plays out. Aside from taking that to court, all Congress could do was complain.I would like what comes back to have two things done that will help, but they don't make foreign aid immune. One is to be more evidence-based, because then attacks on being ineffective are less strong. But the reality is, some of the attacks on its “effectiveness,” and the examples used, had nothing to do with poorly-chosen interventions. There was a slipperiness of language, calling something that they don't like “fraud” and “waste” because they didn't like its purpose. That is very different than saying, “We actually agreed on the purpose of something, but then you implemented it in such a bad way that there was fraud and waste.” There were really no examples given of that second part. So I don't know that being more evidence-based will actually protect it, given that that wasn't the way it was really genuinely taken down.The second is some boundaries. There is a core set of activities that have bipartisan support. How do we structure a foreign aid that is just focused on that? We need to find a way to put the things that are more controversial — whether it's the left or right that wants it — in a separate bucket. Let the team that wins the election turn that off and on as they wish, without adulterating the core part that has bipartisan support. That's the key question: can we set up a process that partitions those, so that they don't have that vulnerability? [I wrote about this problem earlier this year.]My counter-example is PEPFAR, which had a broad base of bipartisan support. PEPFAR consistently got long-term reauthorizations from Congress, I think precisely because of the dynamic you're talking about: It was a focused, specific intervention that folks all over the political spectrum could get behind and save lives. But in government programs, if something has a big base of support, you have an incentive to stuff your pet partisan issues in there, for the same reason that “must-pass” bills get stuffed with everybody's little thing. [In 2024, before DOGE, PEPFAR's original Republican co-sponsor came out against a long-term reauthorization, on the grounds that the Biden administration was using the program to promote abortion. Congress reauthorized PEPFAR for only one year, and that reauthorization lapsed in 2025.]You want to carve out the things that are truly bipartisan. But does that idea have a timer attached? What if, on a long enough timeline, everything becomes politicized?There are economic theorems about the nature of a repeated game. You can get many different equilibria in the long run. I'd like to think there's a world in which that is the answer. But we have seen an erosion of other things, like the filibuster regarding judges. Each team makes a little move in some direction, and then you change the equilibrium. We always have that risk. The goal is, how can you establish something where that doesn't happen?It might be that what's happened is helpful, in an unintended way, to build equilibrium in the future that keeps things focused on the bipartisan aspect. Whether it's the left or the right that wants to do something that they know the other side will object to, they hold back and say, "Maybe we shouldn't do that. Because when we do, the whole thing gets blown up."Let's imagine you're back at USAID a couple of years from now, with a broader latitude to organize our foreign aid apparatus around impact and effectiveness. What other things might we want to do — beyond measuring programs and keeping trade-offs in mind — if we really wanted to focus on effectiveness? Would we do fewer interventions and do them at larger scale?I think we would do fewer things simpler and bigger, but I also think we need to recognize that even at our biggest, we were tiny compared to the budget of the local government. If we can do more to use our money to help them be more effective with their money, that's the biggest win to go for. That starts looking a lot like things Mark Green was putting in place [as administrator of USAID] under Trump I, under the Journey to Self-Reliance [a reorganization of USAID to help countries address development challenges themselves].Sometimes that's done in the context of, "Let's do that for five or ten years, and then we can stop giving aid to that country." That was the way the Millennium Challenge Corporation talked about their country selection initially. Eventually, they stopped doing that, because they realized that that was never happening. I think that's okay. As much as we might help make some changes, even if we succeed in helping the poorest country in the world use their resources better, they're still going to be poor. We're still going to be rich. There's still maybe going to be the poorest, because if we do that in the 10 poorest countries and they all move up, maybe the 11th becomes the poorest, and then we can work there. I don't think getting off of aid is necessarily the objective.But if that was clearly the right answer, that's a huge win if we've done that by helping to prove the institutions and governance of that country so that it is rolling out better policies, helping its people better, and collecting their own tax revenue. If we can have an eye on that, then that's a huge win for foreign aid in general.How are we supposed to be measuring the impact of soft power? I think that's a term that's not now much in vogue in DC.There's no one answer to how to measure soft power. It's described as the influence that we gain in the world in terms of geopolitics, everything from treaties and the United Nations to access to markets; trade policy, labor policy. The basic idea of soft power manifests itself in all those different ways.It's a more extreme version of the challenge of measuring the impact of cash transfers. You want to measure the impact of a pill that is intended to deal with disease: you measure the disease, and you have a direct measure. You want to measure the impact of cash: you have to measure a lot of different things, because you don't know how people are going to use the cash. Soft power is even further down the spectrum: you don't know exactly how aid is helping build our partnership with a country's people and leaders. How is that going to manifest itself in the future? That becomes that much harder to do.Having said that, there's academic studies that document everything from attitudes about America to votes at the United Nations that follow aid, and things of that nature. But it's not like there's one core set: that's part of what makes it a challenge.I will put my cards on the table here: I have been skeptical of the idea that USAID is a really valuable tool for American soft power, for maintaining American hegemony, etc. It seems much easier to defend USAID by simply saying that it does excellent humanitarian work, and that's valuable. The national security argument for USAID seems harder to substantiate.I think we agree on this. You have such a wide set of things to look at, it's not hard to imagine a bias from a researcher might lead to selection of outcomes, and of the context. It's not a well-defined enough concept to be able to say, "It worked 20% of the time, and it did not in these, and the net average…" Average over what? Even though there's good case studies that show various paths where it has mattered, there's case studies that show it doesn't.I also get nervous about an entire system that's built around [attempts to measure soft power]. It turns foreign aid into too much of a transactional process, instead of a relationship that is built on the Golden Rule, “There's people in this country that we can actually help.” Sure, there's this hope that it'll help further our national interests. But if they're suffering from drought and famine, and we can provide support and save some lives, or we can do longer term developments and save tomorrow's lives, we ought to do that. That is a good thing for our country to do.Yet the conversation does often come back to this question of soft power. The problem with transactional is you get exactly what you contract on: nothing more, nothing less. There's too many unknowns here, when we're dealing with country-level interactions, and engagements between countries. It needs to be about relationships, and that means supporting even if there isn't a contract that itemizes the exact quid pro quo we are getting for something.I want to talk about what you observed in the administration change and the DOGE-ing of USAID. I think plenty of observers looked at this in the beginning and thought, “It's high time that a lot of these institutions were cleaned up and that someone took a hard look at how we spend money there.”There was not really any looking at any of the impact of anything. That was never in the cards. There was a 90-day review that was supposed to be done, but there were no questions asked, there was no data being collected. There was nothing whatsoever being looked at that had anything to do with, “Was this award actually accomplishing what it set out to accomplish?” There was no process in which they made those kinds of evaluations on what's actually working.You can see this very clearly when you think about what their bean counter was at DOGE: the spending that they cut. It's like me saying, "I'm going to do something beneficial for my household by stopping all expenditures on food." But we were getting something for that. Maybe we could have bought more cheaply, switched grocery stores, made a change there that got us the same food for less money. That would be a positive change. But you can't cut all your food expenditures, call that a saving, and then not have anything to eat. That's just bad math, bad economics.But that's exactly what they were doing. Throughout the entire government, that bean counter never once said, “benefits foregone.” It was always just “lowered spending.” Some of that probably did actually have a net loss, maybe it was $100 million spent on something that only created $10 million of benefits to Americans. That's a $90 million gain. But it was recorded as $100 million. And the point is, they never once looked at what benefits were being generated from the spending. What was being asked, within USAID, had nothing to do with what was actually being accomplished by any of the money that was being spent. It was never even asked.How do you think about risky bets in a place like USAID? It would be nice for USAID to take lots of high-risk, high-reward bets, and to be willing to spend money that will be “wasted” in the pursuit of high-impact interventions. But that approach is hard for government programs, politically, because the misses are much more salient than the successes.This is a very real issue. I saw this the very first time I did any sort of briefing with Congress when I was Chief Economist. The question came at me, "Why doesn't USAID show us more failures?" I remember thinking to myself, "Are you willing to promise that when they show the failure, you won't punish them for the failure — that you'll reward them for documenting and learning from the failure and not doing it again?" That's a very difficult nut to crack.There's an important distinction to make. You can have a portfolio of evidence generation, some things work and some don't, that can collectively contribute towards knowledge and scaling of effective programs. USAID actually had something like this called Development Innovation Ventures (DIV), and was in an earmark from Congress. It was so good that they raised money from the effective altruist community to further augment their pot of money. This was strong because a lot of it was not evaluating USAID interventions. It was just funding a portfolio of evidence generation about what works, implemented by other parties. The failures aren't as devastating, because you're showing a failure of some other party: it wasn't USAID money paying for an intervention. That was a strong model for how USAID can take on some risks and do some evidence generation that is immune to the issue you just described.If you're going to do evaluations of USAID money, the issue is very real. My overly simplistic view is that a lot of what USAID does should not be getting a highly rigorous impact evaluation. USAID should be rolling out, simple and at scale, things that have already been shown elsewhere. Let the innovation take place pre-USAID, funded elsewhere, maybe by DIV. Let smaller and more nimble nonprofits be the innovators and the documenters of what works. Then, USAID can adopt the things that are more effective and be more immune to this issue.So yeah, there is a world that is not first-best where USAID does the things that have strong evidence already. When it comes to actual innovation, where we do need to take risks that things won't work, let that be done in a way that may be supported by USAID, but partitioned away.I'm looking at a chart of USAID program funding in Fiscal Year 2022: the three big buckets are humanitarian, health, and governance, all on the order of $10–12 billion. Way down at the bottom, there's $500 million for “economic growth.” What's in that bucket that USAID funds, and should that piece of the pie chart be larger?I do think that should be larger, but it depends on how you define it. I don't say that just because I'm an economist. It goes back to the comment earlier about things that we can do to help improve local governance, and how they're using their resources. The kinds of things that might be funded would be efforts to work with local government to improve their ability to collect taxes. Or to set up efficient regulations for the banking industry, so it can grow and provide access to credit and savings. These are things that can help move the needle on macroeconomic outcomes. With that, you have more resources. That helps health and education, you have these downstream impacts. As you pointed out, the earmark on that was tiny. It did not have quite the same heartstring tug. But the logical link is huge and strong: if you strengthen the local government's financial stability, the benefits very much accrue to the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Education, and the Ministry of Social Protection, etc.Fighting your way out of poverty through growth is unambiguously good. You can look at many countries around the world that have grown economically, and through that, reduced poverty. But it's one thing to say that growth will alleviate poverty. It's another to say, "Here's aid money that will trigger growth." If we knew how to do that, we would've done it long ago, in a snap.Last question. Let's say it's a clean slate at USAID in a couple years, and you have wide latitude to do things your way. I want the Dean Karlan vision for the future of USAID.It needs to have, at the high level, a recognition that the Golden Rule is an important principle that guides our thinking on foreign aid and that we want to do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Being generous as a people is something that we pride ourselves in, our nation represents us as people, so we shouldn't be in any way shy to use foreign aid to further that aspiration of being a generous nation.The actual way of delivering aid, I would say, three things. Simpler. Let's focus on the evidence of what works, but recognize the boundaries of that evidence and how to contextualize it. There is a strong need to understand what it means to be simpler, and how to identify what that means in specific countries and contexts.The second is about leveraging local government, and working more to recognize that, as big as we may be, we're still going to be tiny relative to local government. If we can do more to improve how local government is using its resources, we've won.The third is about finding common ground. There's a lot. That's one of the reasons why I've started working on a consortium with Republicans and Democrats. The things I care about are generally non-partisan. The goal is to take the aspirations that foreign aid has — about improving health, education, economic outcomes, food security, agricultural productivity, jobs, trade, whatever the case is — and how do we use the evidence that's out there to move the needle as much as we can towards those goals? A lot of topics have common ground. How do we set up a foreign aid system that stays true to the common ground? I'd like to think it's not that hard. That's what I think would be great to see happen. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub

The Human Library is a groundbreaking initiative founded in Copenhagen in 2000, where instead of borrowing books, visitors "borrow" people — volunteers who share their personal stories and experiences to challenge prejudice and foster understanding.In this episode, founder Ronni Abergel shares the origins of the project, its global expansion to over 80 countries, and the careful process of selecting and supporting "books" to ensure a safe, respectful environment for both storytellers and readers.The episode delves into the transformative power of these encounters, both for the volunteers and the public, and discusses the challenges of maintaining the project in a changing social and corporate landscape. This is the extraordinary story of an ongoing mission to break down barriers, one conversation at a time.Find out more about the Human Library at https://humanlibrary.org/.Visit www.archipelagoaudio.com for more information.

Read the full transcript here. Is AI that's both superintelligent and aligned even possible? Does increased intelligence necessarily entail decreased controllability? What's the difference between "safe" and "under control"? There seems to be a fundamental tension between autonomy and control, so is it conceivable that we could create superintelligent AIs that are both autonomous enough to do things that matter and also controllable enough for us to manage them? Is general intelligence needed for anything that matters? What kinds of regulations on AI might help to ensure a safe future? Should we stop working towards superintelligent AI completely? How hard would it be to implement a global ban on superintelligent AI development? What might good epistemic infrastructure look like? What's the right way to think about entropy? What kinds of questions are prediction markets best suited to answer? How can we move from having good predictions to making good decisions? Are we living in a simulation? Is it a good idea to make AI models open-source?Anthony Aguirre is the Executive Director of the Future of Life Institute, an NGO examining the implications of transformative technologies, particularly AI. He is also the Faggin Professor of the Physics of Information at UC Santa Cruz, where his research spans foundational physics to AI policy. Aguirre co-founded Metaculus, a platform leveraging collective intelligence to forecast science and technology developments, and the Foundational Questions Institute, supporting fundamental physics research. Aguirre did his PhD at Harvard University and Postdoctoral work as a member at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. Learn more about him at his website, anthony-aguirre.com; follow him on X / Twitter at @anthonynaguirre, or email him at contact@futureoflife.org.Further readingKeep The Future HumanThe Future of Life Institute"Unification of observational entropy with maximum entropy principles" by Joseph Schindler, Philipp Strasberg, Niklas Galke, Andreas Winter, and Michael G. Jabbour StaffSpencer Greenberg — Host / DirectorJosh Castle — ProducerRyan Kessler — Audio EngineerUri Bram — FactotumWeAmplify — TranscriptionistsIgor Scaldini — Marketing ConsultantMusicBroke for FreeJosh WoodwardLee RosevereQuiet Music for Tiny Robotswowamusiczapsplat.comAffiliatesClearer ThinkingGuidedTrackMind EasePositlyUpLift[Read more]

Welcome back to another episode of At the Cap Table, your trusted inside track on the people, ideas, and power dynamics shaping the future of European venture.This week, Savs sits down with Hannah Leach, Partner at Antler UK and Co-Founder of VentureESG, for a candid conversation about doing VC differently—from day-one investing and values-led portfolios to walking away from a fund that could have been.They dive into the rise of “residency models” over accelerators, why ESG is often misunderstood (even by the pros), and how real co-founder chemistry can't be faked. Hannah also opens up about why Fund II didn't happen at Houghton Street Ventures, what she's learned about partnership dynamics, and what kind of founders actually thrive under pressure.Whether you're building from zero, navigating the future of VC, or just wrestling with what it means to do this job with intention—this one's for you.Here's what's covered:01:50 | How an NGO office in Mumbai sparked a decade-long obsession with founders04:20 | VentureESG: the accidental nonprofit now guiding 700+ VCs and LPs11:30 | Houghton Street Ventures: the thesis, the traction, and the hard call not to raise Fund II18:00 | Why working with the right people trumps firm strategy20:00 | Antler's “day one” model and what a residency really offers founders23:00 | Week 3 in the Antler cohort: when teams form — and sometimes fall apart25:30 | What actually matters in early-stage teams (hint: not the idea)28:00 | Standard terms, 10-week pressure, and founder selection inside Antler30:00 | Project Europe, collaboration culture, and why VC needs more team sports33:00 | Europe's strength in AI, climate, and thoughtful founders34:30 | Luck, wonky careers, and why no door is ever really closed

By Scotty Reid | Black Talk Radio News A Breaking Points segment claimed U.S. mainstream media and establishment politicians only recently began broadcasting graphic images of famine in Gaza. While that holds, it overlooks earlier warnings and vital grassroots documentation. Cindy McCain: Leading the Alarm from 2023 As Executive Director of the UN World Food Programme since March 2023, Cindy McCain, widow of Sen. John McCain, consistently warned the world about looming famine in Gaza. By November 2023, she was predicting widespread starvation—and by May 2024, declared that northern Gaza was in full-blown famine, calling for humanitarian corridors and massive aid scale-up. TikTok: Visual Evidence when Other Platforms Shut It Down While platforms like Facebook and Instagram suppressed pro‑Palestinian content, Israel, AIPAC, the US Congress, and Donald Trump lobbied and got a law passed to ban TikTok explictly because of real images coming out of Gaza but despite this, the platform remained a channel where Palestinians and journalists could upload live footage of the mass starvation—unfiltered and uncensored. These viral videos reached global audiences long before mainstream outlets aired similar imagery. Tweets: Politicians Begin Commenting — Only in Mid‑2025 Hillary Clinton (X/Twitter — July 2025) “Aid organizations report that thousands of children in Gaza are at risk of starvation while trucks full of food sit waiting across the border.” This tweet appears to be her first public statement on Gaza since 2023, and it specifically called out stalled aid. Barack Obama (X/Twitter — July 28, 2025) “While a lasting resolution to the crisis in Gaza must involve a return of all hostages and a cessation of Israel's military operations… these articles underscore the immediate need for action to prevent the travesty of innocent people dying of preventable starvation. Aid must be permitted to reach people in Gaza. There is no justification for keeping food and water away from civilian families.” This marked his first public engagement on starvation in Gaza. Cory Booker (Statement — circa July 25, 2025) “Witnessing the catastrophic hunger and suffering of civilians… in Gaza has been heartbreaking. … It is our collective moral duty to ensure that humanitarian relief reaches those who need it most urgently.” His first publicly documented comment in six months; he notably did not name Israel explicitly. Amy Klobuchar (Photo-op & subsequent post — July 2025) • On July 9, she appeared in a smiling photo-op with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, indicted by the ICC, alongside other U.S. senators including Cory Booker. • Days later, she issued her first public statement on Gaza starvation, calling the humanitarian crisis “unacceptable” and urged urgent aid in response to NGO warnings. ✅ Fact-Check Summary Table The Bigger Picture • TikTok's citizen content—posted and viewed globally—helped fuel broader awareness when corporate platforms muted or removed sensitive imagery. • Cindy McCain and global humanitarian agencies were sounding alarms well before U.S. politicians spoke publicly. • U.S. lawmakers and cable news editors held back graphic images and messages until public pressure and viral documentation forced wider exposure. • Politicians whose campaign funding benefited from AIPAC-aligned electorates remained silent until months into the crisis—raising concerns about ideological complicity beyond mere omission. Conclusion By mid-2025, establishment voices finally echoed what humanitarian agencies and Palestinian journalists had been documenting since 2023. But the visuals and urgency that pressed the world into broader awareness came through TikTok, not state newsrooms. The delayed public commentary from Democrat's questionable leadership is not a case of them expressing real-time ethics and this appears more like reactive optics—born of the undeniab...

CA congressman Kevin Kiley asks the DOJ to find the $100M raised for LA fire victims that never made it to LA fire victims. Did Gavin Newsom and his wife create an NGO to siphon money away from fire victims? "Anonymous" dives into open borders being anything BUT compassionate as we go back to 2019 to remind you for HOW LONG the Russia collusion scam has been smokescreening for democrat corruption. A "news mashup" ends the show with a reminder that there's no way you hate the media enough.

Meet Dr. Missy Lahren an environmental lawyer and activist for the past three decades.  She now proudly refers to herself and her colleagues as “Earth Lawyers.”  All of her education and training in law, philosophy and science has prepared her for the important work she is doing to protect the environment.  She is currently chair of the board of an NGO called The Earth Law Center based in Durango, Colorado.   Missy is determined to do what she can to defend nature.  She brings insight and passion to her mission!

Send us a textAt 23 years old, I've learned that the path to generational wealth, happiness, and financial independence is never a straight line. In this powerful episode of the Walk 2 Wealth Podcast, I sit down with Ngo Okafor—a two-time Golden Gloves boxing champion, fitness entrepreneur, and founder of 28 Days Greater.But Ngo's journey didn't start with a six-pack and success. He grew up a sickly child in Nigeria, battling asthma and a rigid family belief that education—not entrepreneurship—was the only way out. By 15, he was in college. By 18, he realized something vital: he wasn't fulfilled.From corporate layoffs to modeling rejections to building a one-of-a-kind gym in the heart of NYC, Ngo shares the raw truth behind chasing fulfillment, finding your purpose, and building a life that feels as good as it looks.We talk about:How to pivot when life derails your planTurning rejection into redirectionThe mindset shift that separates the dreamers from the doersWhat it really takes to build wealth in your 20sWhy the pursuit of happiness is your ultimate ROIThis episode is a masterclass in resilience, identity, and finding meaning beyond money.Support the showHOW TO SUPPORT THE WALK 2 WEALTH PODCAST: 1. Subscribe, Rate, & Review us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or your favorite podcast platform. 2. Share Episodes with your family, friends, and co-workers.3. Whether you're just starting your business or your business is established, ChatGPT can help you take your business to the next level. Get Instant Access To My List of Top 10 ChatGPT Prompts To Save You Time, Energy, & Money: HTTPS://WWW.STOPANDSTARE.MEDIA/AI

This week on Hafta, Newslaundry's Abhinandan Sekhri, Anand Vardhan, Raman Kirpal, and Jayashree Arunachalam are joined by MK Venu, Founding Editor of The Wire, and award-winning investigative journalist and author Josy Joseph.The panel begins with a discussion on the recently signed “historic” India-UK free trade agreement. Venu argues that the BJP's intention behind this FTA is to have a “fresh start” in global trade negotiations: “In the last 11 years of the Modi government, the narrative they built, led by Piyush Goyal, is that all the FTAs signed by the UPA government were bad for India, that they were being used as a conduit for Chinese goods.”The conversation then shifts to Jagdeep Dhankhar's resignation as vice president. Abhinandan asks who will oversee the Rajya Sabha “with the parliament session already happening, and all sorts of noise and protests”.Explaining the legal framework, Anand says, “Article 67 says that till the next vice president is appointed, he will have to continue. But he has made it clear that he will not be attending the House.” Venu draws a pattern of abrupt and unexplained resignations among the Indian political and bureaucratic elite: “There is a striking parallel in the manner in which Dhankhar, CBI chief (former Director) Alok Verma, and (former Election Commissioner) Arun Goel abruptly left. What is it that drives leadership in the Modi-Shah regime? There's intrigue, there's cloak and dagger, there's paranoia. Paranoia accompanied by complete power. It's a paradox.”Commenting on media speculation around Dhankhar's resignation, Anand says, “Journalists and public and social media commentators cannot say the simple thing that ‘we don't know'.” Jayashree adds, “It doesn't matter if there is any value to these theories. What matters is that you have a story, a source, the source has said something outlandish, and that is your headline.”The panel then shifts to the Bombay High Court's recent verdict on the 2006 Mumbai blasts. Raman explains: “It's a 576-page judgement talking about how the police have manufactured evidence in very great detail…This particular judgement has put a huge question mark on this state-specific law MCOCA.”Drawing from his decades of experience reporting on intelligence and security, Josy says: “One of the things that has always struck me was the impunity with which our police and investigative agencies are able to do pure malicious things and get away because there is no prosecution for malpractices.”Josy also sheds light on the complexities of police functioning and the political pressures that often influence investigations. “I think in India today, the most difficult job is not being a journalist or not being an NGO worker. I think the most difficult job is to be an honest government official.”Timecodes00:00:00 – Introductions and announcements00:05:50 – Headlines 00:14:20-FTA Deal between UK & India / VP's resignation00:47:55- MK Venu's recommendations00:54:02 - Bombay Blast acquittal by the HC01:21:30 - Josy's Recommendation01:27:33- Letters01:43:40- RecommendationsCheck out previous Hafta recommendations, references, songs and letters.Produced and recorded by Amit Pandey, Ashish Anand and Anil Kumar. Research assistance by Vibha Rajeev. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode of the Charity Charge Show, Stephen Garten interviews Shilpa Alva, founder and executive director of Surge for Water. Shilpa shares her journey of founding the nonprofit, inspired by her childhood experiences in India. Surge for Water focuses on providing comprehensive water solutions, emphasizing community ownership and women's leadership.Shilpa discusses the organization's impact, growth strategies, and the importance of diversifying revenue sources. She also reflects on her transition from the corporate world to running Surge full-time, highlighting the challenges and rewards of nonprofit leadership.TakeawaysSurge for Water focuses on Water Plus: water, sanitation, hygiene, and menstrual health.Shilpa's childhood experiences in India inspired her to address water inequity.Community ownership is essential for sustainable solutions.Women's leadership is prioritized in Surge's approach.The organization has impacted nearly 800,000 people through various projects.Surge is moving towards a model of enterprise to sustain its initiatives.Diversifying revenue sources is crucial for nonprofit growth.Building a strong team and board is vital for organizational success.Shilpa emphasizes the importance of planning before transitioning to full-time nonprofit work.The fear of leaving a stable job can be overcome with careful planning and passion.About Charity Charge:Charity Charge is a financial technology company serving the nonprofit sector. From the Charity Charge Nonprofit Credit Card to bookkeeping, gift card disbursements, and state compliance, we help mission-driven organizations streamline operations and stay financially strong. Learn more at charitycharge.com.

Show SummaryOn today's episode, feature a conversation Maryalice Morro, a Navy Veteran, Healthcare professional, and former Hospital Administrator for both the Navy and the Department of Veterans Affairs.  Provide FeedbackAs a dedicated member of the audience, we would like to hear from you about the show. Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts about the show in this short feedback survey. By doing so, you will be entered to receive a signed copy of one of our host's three books on military and veteran mental health. About Today's GuestMaryalice Morro combines her energy and relentless enthusiasm to motivate and build high-performing teams. She is a visionary leader recognized for strategic planning, innovation, financial stewardship and talent management. She delivers quality outcomes while meeting project and financial goals. She recognizes the strengths in others and inspires them to achieve and surpass their goals by mentoring, supporting and creating the vision for their success.Maryalice is currently a consultant and works with aspiring leaders through formal and informal coaching and mentoring. She is an adjunct faculty for the Citadel's undergraduate nursing program, and several of Villanova University's certificate programs. She is the Program Coordinator for the Anne W. McNulty Institute's Women's Leadership Development Certificate Program and led the multidisciplinary team in creating this program. She serves as teaching faculty for University of Pennsylvania's Doctor of Nursing Practice, Executive Leadership track.Previously, Maryalice spent 35 years in government, with 29 years on active duty in the United States Navy, serving around the world in support of peacetime, humanitarian, and wartime missions. She was the Commanding Officer (CEO) of the Pensacola Naval Hospital and Chief of Staff for Navy Medicine East, serving 15 medical commands in the United States and abroad. She was appointed to the Senior Executive Service and was selected to serve as Director (CEO) for the Carl Vinson VA Medical Center in Dublin, GA, transforming an underperforming medical center into a vibrant healthcare center to meet the veterans' 21st century needs.Maryalice holds a Doctor of Nursing Practice degree from Villanova University, MSN from the Catholic University of America, MS from the Industrial College of the Armed Forces and BSN from Villanova University. She is Board Certified by AACN as a Nurse Executive – Advanced.Links Mentioned During the EpisodeMaryalice Morro on LinkedInVillanova University Women's Leadership Development CertificatePsychArmor Resource of the WeekThis week's PsychArmor Resource of the Week is the PsychArmor Course Myths and Facts of Military Leaders. This course identifies four of the most popular myths about military leaders and how they don't align with the reality of working alongside Veterans and Service members. You can find the resource here:  https://learn.psycharmor.org/courses/The-Myths-and-Facts-of-Military-Leaders Episode Partner: Are you an organization that engages with or supports the military affiliated community? Would you like to partner with an engaged and dynamic audience of like-minded professionals? Reach out to Inquire about Partnership Opportunities Contact Us and Join Us on Social Media Email PsychArmorPsychArmor on TwitterPsychArmor on FacebookPsychArmor on YouTubePsychArmor on LinkedInPsychArmor on InstagramTheme MusicOur theme music Don't Kill the Messenger was written and performed by Navy Veteran Jerry Maniscalco, in cooperation with Operation Encore, a non profit committed to supporting singer/songwriter and musicians across the military and Veteran communities.Producer and Host Duane France is a retired Army Noncommissioned Officer, combat veteran, and clinical mental health counselor for service members, veterans, and their families.  You can find more about the work that he is doing at www.veteranmentalhealth.com  

Hello! As you know well, we're not the news. The news is generally bad, and we prefer to not be bad news. So, it's a funny thing for us to release an episode about politics.In this edition of Hyphaedelity, our interlocutor Adam Davis (EIP, FE5.6) and his guest Tim Male (EPIC) discuss going from working at an environmental NGO to within the White House, the role of executive orders, the state of environmental regulation, effecting change, the voting age, and much more (from a vantage point of January 30, 2025).— — —Want to get Hyphaedelity (and all other episodes of Future Ecologies) early, plus bonus content, merch, community discord access* and more? Join our Patreon, and support ad-free, independent podcasting.*Where you'll find lots of impassioned conversation about this episode.

Pia Mailhot-Leichter is a creative partner, best selling author, certified coach, and founder. Her path has been anything but ordinary: a recovering nomad, she's reported as a journalist in Sri Lanka, graduated summa cum laude from NYU, and worked as an award-winning creative director for some of the biggest brands in the world. Now, as the founder of Kollektiv Studio, she's uniquely positioned to help people create their wild ventures. Pia Mailhot-Leichter Vroom Vroom Veer Summary Finding Joy in Creative Work Jeffery and Pia discussed Pia's work as a fractional creative director and creative coach in Copenhagen, where she collaborates with "unconventional dreamers" to bring their visions to life. Pia emphasized the importance of finding joy and purpose in one's work, citing the finite nature of life and the opportunity to create each day anew. They agreed on the value of maintaining optimism and finding joy in life's journey, with Jeffery referencing Jack Cornfield's perspective on the duty to be joyful. Pia's International Career Journey Pia shared her background, including growing up in New York City and her extensive travel experiences across various countries. She discussed her education, including studying English at Hunter College and pursuing a master's in international relations at NYU. Pia described her career path, which included working as a journalist in Sri Lanka and later doing communications work for the UNDP and an NGO called Plan International. Overcoming Adversity for Academic Success Pia shared her personal journey, including being kicked out of her house at 17 and struggling financially while attending college. Despite these challenges, she worked hard to achieve academic success, earning multiple cum laude degrees. After completing her master's, Pia took a contract role at the United Nations Development Program in New York City, though the salary was not sufficient to cover her living expenses. Cross-Cultural Work Experiences Discussed Jeffery and Pia discussed their experiences working in Bahrain and Qatar. Pia shared her disappointment at having to sell ad space for an economic documentary in Bahrain instead of pursuing her original goal of making a positive impact through transitional justice work. She realized later that the experience taught her valuable skills in sales and confidence in pitching to high-level executives. Jeffery, who served in the military, noted that frequent relocations and job changes helped him develop problem-solving skills, an attribute that was appreciated by his bosses. Embracing Change and Personal Growth Pia and Jeffery discussed the challenges and opportunities that come with change and new experiences. Pia shared her experience of choosing to stay in Copenhagen after a divorce, rather than moving to Paris, after her therapist encouraged her to consider developing a deeper relationship with herself in that place. They explored how moving can sometimes be a way to avoid dealing with personal issues, comparing it to the temporary nature of military assignments. The conversation concluded with Pia emphasizing the importance of making conscious choices about moving, rather than acting on impulse, as a way to gain empowerment and freedom. Life Changes and Lifestyle Reimagining Jeffery shared his experience of moving from Los Angeles to Las Vegas after 13 years, driven by a desire for change and the appeal of lower living costs. Pia discussed her own considerations for reimagining her life, particularly given her family commitments, and explored the possibility of designing a lifestyle that balances current and future desires. They both reflected on the importance of making conscious choices and the uncertainty of knowing where they might eventually settle, with Jeffery mentioning the potential of using his Vegas home as a base while exploring other locations temporarily. Japan Experiences and Climate Adaptations

Sam Anthony joins us for a great chat about the state of the news and how YourNews is poised to scale up massively for local and global news stories and much more.   We chat about searching for your local news by zip code and how this is a great opportunity for many independent unemployed journalists, especially with the death of mainstream media. We are the media now. We also chat about NGO's, Canadian news, headline manufacturing, radio going out of business, the platform and providing the opportunity, info aggregation, and equity crowd funding.   In the second half we talk about X, cross pollination, the changing landscape, free speech, woke infiltration, and then we switch gears to talk about the whole Epstein thing and Trump, the grand jury theory, buying votes, the collapse of 2007, the Fed, Atlas Shrugged and much more.   Sam Anthony is the founder and CEO of YourNews.com, a rapidly growing, censorship-resistant citizen journalism platform. With over two decades of experience in online media, Sam has been instrumental in designing and implementing technology that empowers thousands of journalists to transition into the digital realm. YourNews.com operates in every U.S. ZIP code, offering hyper-local news and reviving the grassroots journalism approach of the pre-1990s era. The platform allows citizen journalists to report authentic, community-driven stories, providing a stark contrast to centralized corporate media.   To gain access to the second half of show and our Plus feed for audio and podcast please clink the link http://www.grimericaoutlawed.ca/support.   For second half of video (when applicable and audio) go to our Substack and Subscribe. https://grimericaoutlawed.substack.com/ or to our Locals  https://grimericaoutlawed.locals.com/ or Rokfin www.Rokfin.com/Grimerica Patreon https://www.patreon.com/grimericaoutlawed   Support the show directly: https://grimericacbd.com/ CBD / THC Tinctures and Gummies https://grimerica.ca/support-2/ Eh-List Podcast and site: https://eh-list.ca/ Eh-List YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheEh-List Our Adultbrain Audiobook Podcast and Website: www.adultbrain.ca Our Audiobook Youtube Channel:  https://www.youtube.com/@adultbrainaudiobookpublishing/videos Darren's book www.acanadianshame.ca Check out our next trip/conference/meetup - Contact at the Cabin www.contactatthecabin.com Other affiliated shows: www.grimerica.ca The OG Grimerica Show www.Rokfin.com/Grimerica Our channel on free speech Rokfin Join the chat / hangout with a bunch of fellow Grimericans  Https://t.me.grimerica https://www.guilded.gg/chat/b7af7266-771d-427f-978c-872a7962a6c2?messageId=c1e1c7cd-c6e9-4eaf-abc9-e6ec0be89ff3   Leave a review on iTunes and/or Stitcher: https://itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/grimerica-outlawed http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/grimerica-outlawed Sign up for our newsletter http://www.grimerica.ca/news SPAM Graham = and send him your synchronicities, feedback, strange experiences and psychedelic trip reports!! graham@grimerica.com InstaGRAM https://www.instagram.com/the_grimerica_show_podcast/  Purchase swag, with partial proceeds donated to the show www.grimerica.ca/swag Send us a postcard or letter http://www.grimerica.ca/contact/ ART - Napolean Duheme's site http://www.lostbreadcomic.com/  MUSIC Tru Northperception, Felix's Site sirfelix.bandcamp.com 

Andrew Tate tweets out a video that begs further investigation and what is going on with the MAGA movement? 00:00 - Start. 00:57 - What happened to MAGA? 11:06 - Pastors can now stump for politicians. 27:24 - The Never-Trumpers now supporting Trump. 34:02 - Andrew Tate says his accuser was paid by an NGO. 39:55 - Trailer for my convo with Nick Fuentes. 42:03 - Comments. Gno Land Learn more at http://gno.land/candace Tax Network USA Call 1 (800)-958-1000 for a private, free consultation, or visit http://www.TNUSA.com/Candace Nimi Skincare Create your custom skincare bundle for additional savings today! Use code CANDACE5 at https://www.nimiskincare.com/pages/candace Candace Official Website: https://candaceowens.com Candace Merch: https://shop.candaceowens.com Candace on Apple Podcasts: https://t.co/Pp5VZiLXbq Candace on Spotify: https://t.co/16pMuADXuT Candace on Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/RealCandaceO Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices