Mortality scores are increasingly an issue for many health care organizations across the country. Obviously, the pandemic had a major role in affecting these scores, but the truth is this was an issue before the pandemic and only rose to attention of the public and regulators from it. Despite the obvious reasons organizations need to address their mortality scores as a key quality indicator, these scores also are a major influence in national quality scores and reputation. Organizations can also use good scores as leverage in negotiations with payers. In earlier episodes, we addressed this issue with a data scientist and a documentation specialist. In this series, a physician executive gives his perspective. Guest speaker: Aman Sabharwal, MD, MHA, CPHM Executive Principal Operations and Quality Vizient Moderator: Tomas Villanueva, DO, MBA, FACPE, SFHM Principal Clinical Operations and Quality Vizient Show Notes: [01:32] Importance of mortality scores [02:50] Putting the pandemic aside [03:09] Mortality weighs heavily in rankings [04:08] Mortality scores and payers [04:30] The O/E Ratio [06:11] Four workstreams to address mortality [08:33] One single thing an organization can do to improve ranking Links | Resources: To contact Modern Practice: email@example.com Aman Sabharwal's contact email: firstname.lastname@example.org Selected Best Practices and Suggestions for Improvement – Mortality (AHRQ) Click here Variation in US Hospital Mortality Rates for Patients Admitted With COVID-19 During the First 6 Months of the Pandemic (JAMA Internal Medicine) Click here Subscribe Today! Apple Podcasts Spotify Android Google Podcasts Stitcher RSS Feed
131: Banana Putting is an effective system that can forever change the way you look at putting and putting performance. In Part 1 of our conversation, the developer Paul Hobart reviews this simple 5 step simple system that claims to knock 5-10 putts per round. His website is no longer active, but the book “Banana Putting” is available on Amazon.
Joining the podcast to talk about the season that was, and the offseason to come, for the Cincinnati Reds is Wick Terrell from the Red Reporter. Jeff and Wick take one final glimpse at how 2021 will be remembered for Reds fans. They then look to the offseason and each give a bold prediction for something that will take place. *FOLLOW* the podcast on your favorite app and on Twitter and Instagram @lockedonreds Also follow @jefffcarr on Twitter and @carrjefff on Instagram Call or text (513) 549-0159 Support Us By Supporting Our Sponsors! Built Bar Built Bar is a protein bar that tastes like a candy bar. Go to builtbar.com and use promo code “LOCKED15,” and you'll get 15% off your next order. BetOnline AG There is only 1 place that has you covered and 1 place we trust. Betonline.ag! Sign up today for a free account at betonline.ag and use that promocode: LOCKEDON for your 50% welcome bonus. Rock Auto Amazing selection. Reliably low prices. All the parts your car will ever need. Visit RockAuto.com and tell them Locked On sent you. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Putting the boot in while they are down, could Melbourne have the Formula 1 Grand Prix taken away from them. #Comedy #Moonman See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Prof. Seamus O'Reilly, Consultant Medical Oncologist: Cork University, Mercy University, and South Infirmary-Victoria, Hospitals, Cork and Kerry based GP Dr. Gary Stack discus how covid is affecting the services they provide.
''Rule of law'' is the generally accepted description for how well a political system conforms to formal rules - rather than functioning through the whims of the most powerful social or political agents. For a society to be described as one functioning under rule of law - there must be rules and those rules must be equally applied to everyone in the society. Let us call this Letter of the Law. These rules are usually expressed through the constitution of a country and enforced through the courts. But simply having rules and enforcing them does not suffice in the making of the rule of law - and it is an incomplete (however accurate) conception of it. Some rules can be drafted in bad faith or with the express purpose of protecting the interest of the political elites responsible for governance. This is why many scholars have argued that the rule of law can only be said to exist in a state that functions under rules designed to protect the civil liberties (individual rights, freedom of speech, freedom of association, etc.) of the people living within its territory. Let us call this the Character or Spirit of the Law. The character of the law understood as the fulfilment of constitutionally-guaranteed civil liberties is the most common standard by which governance is judged to conform or deviate from the rule of law. For example, countries that routinely violate the rights of citizens in whatever form cannot be said to be governed by the rule of law, even if it has a written constitution. Consideration of the character of the law is the context to understanding the work of my guest on this episode, Paul Gowder.He is a professor of law at NorthWestern university with a broad research interest and expertise. Paul departs from this common derivation of the character of the law as rooted in liberty - and argued that for the rule of law to be broadly applicable in different societies (not dependent on the political institutions and ethical ideals of any specific society) with varying cultures and traditions of governance, it must be rooted in Equality. To understand Paul's argument, I will briefly state two important aspects that set the tone for our conversation - this should not be taken as an exhaustive summary of his work and I encourage you to check out his website and book. The first is that the rule of law as a principle regulates the actions of the state (government), and it is not to be conflated with other rules that regulate the actions of citizens. This is such an important point because one of the most egregious expressions of the law is when a government uses it to oppress citizens. Secondly, Paul outlines three components of the rule of law based on equality as 1) regularity - the government can only use coercion when it is acting in ''good faith'' and under ''reasonable interpretation'' of rules that already exist and are specific to the circumstances. 2) publicity - the law has to be accessible to everyone without barriers (''officials have a responsibility to explain their application of the law, ...failure to do so commits hubris and terror against the public"). 3) generality - the law must be equally applicable to all. Putting all these elements together gives us a rule of law regime where everyone is equal before the law, and the state does not wantonly abuse citizens or single out particular groups for systematic abuse.I enjoyed this conversation very much, and I want to thank Paul for talking to me. Thank you guys too for always listening, and for the other ways you support this project.TRANSCRIPTTobi; I greatly enjoyed your work on the rule of law. I've read your papers, I've read your book, and I like it very much. I think it's a great public service if I can say that because for a lot of time, I am interested in economic development and that is mostly the issue that this podcast talks about. And what you see in that particular conversation is there hasn't really been that much compatibility between the question of the rule of law or the laws that should regulate the actions of the state, and its strategy for economic development. Most of the time, you often see even some justification, I should say, to trample on rights in as much as you get development, you get high-income growth for it. And what I found in your work is, this does not have to be so. So what was your eureka moment in coming up with your concept, we are going to unpack a lot of the details very soon, but what motivated you to write this work or to embark on this project?Paul; Yeah, I think for me, part of the issue that really drives a lot of how I think about the rule of law and you know, reasons behind some of this work is really a difference between the way that those of us who think about human freedom and human equality, right? I think of it as philosophers, right. So they're philosophers and philosophers think about the ability of people to live autonomous lives, to sort of stand tall against their government, to live lives of respect, and freedom and equality. And that's one conversation. And so we see people, like, you know, Ronald Dworkin, thinking about what the rule of law can deliver to human beings in that sense. And then, you know, there's this entire development community, you know, the World Bank, lots of the US foreign policy, all of the rest of those groups of people and groups of ideas, talk about the rule of law a lot and work to measure the rule of law and invest immense amounts of money in promoting what they call the rule of law across the world. But mostly, it seems to be protecting property rights for multinational investment. And I mean, that makes some kind of sense, if you think that what the rule of law is for is economic development, is increasing the GDP of a country and integrating it into favourable international networks of trade. But if you think that it's about human flourishing, then you get a completely different idea of what the rule of law can be, and should be. And so this sort of really striking disjuncture between the two conversations has driven a lot of my work, especially recently, and especially reflecting even on the United States, I think that we can see how domestic rule of law struggles - which we absolutely have, I mean, look at the Trump administration, frankly, as revolving around this conflict between focusing on economics and focusing on human rights and human wellbeing.Tobi; It's interesting the polarization you're talking about. And one way that I also see it play out is [that] analyst or other stakeholders who participate in the process of nation-building in Africa, in Nigeria… a lot of us that care about development and would like to see our countries grow and develop and become rich, are often at opposite ends with other people in the civil society who are advocating for human rights, who are advocating for gender equality, who are advocating for so many other social justice issues. And it always seems like there's no meeting ground, you know, between those set of views, and I believe it does not have to be so. So one thing I'm going to draw you into quite early is one of the distinctions you made in so many of your papers and even your book is the difference between the conception of the rule of law that you are proposing versus the generally accepted notion of the rule of law based on individual liberty in the classical liberal tradition. I also think that's part of the problem, because talking about individual liberty comes with this heavy ideological connotation, and giving so many things that have happened in Africa with colonialism and so many other things, nobody wants any of that, you know. So you are proposing a conception of the rule of law that is based on equality. Tell me, how does that contrast with this popularly accepted notion of the rule of law [which is] based on individual liberty?Paul; So I think the way to think about it is to start with the notion of the long term stability of a rule of law system. And so here is one thing that I propose as a fact about legal orders. Ultimately, any kind of stable legal order that can control the powerful, that is, that can say to a top-level political leader, or a powerful multinational corporation, or whomever, no, you can't do this, this violates the law and make that statement stick depends on widespread collective mobilization, if only as a threat, right. And so it's kind of an analytic proposition about the nature of power, right? If you've got a top-level political leader who's in command of an army, and they want to do something illegal, it's going to require very broad-based opposition, and hence very broad-based commitment to the idea of leaders that follow the law in order to prevent the person in charge of an army from just casually violating it whenever they want. Okay, accept that as true, what follows from that? Well, what follows from that is that the legal system has to actually be compatible with the basic interests of all. And what that tends to mean and I think this is true, both historically, and theoretically, is leaving aside the philosophical conceptual difference between liberty and equality, which I'm not sure is really all that important. Like I think, ultimately, liberty and equality as moral ideas tend to blur together when you really unpack them. But practically speaking, any stable legal order that can control the powerful has to be compatible with the interests of a broad-based group of the human beings who participate in that legal order. And what that entails is favouring a way of thinking about the rule of law that focuses on being able to recruit the interests of even the worst off. In other words, one that's focused on equality, one that's focused on protecting the interests of the less powerful rather than a laissez-faire libertarian conception of the rule of law that tends to be historically speaking, compatible with substantial amounts of economic inequality, hyper-focus on ideas - like property rights, that support the long-standing interests of those who happen to be at the top of the economy, often against the interests of those that happened to be at the bottom of the economy, right. That's simply not a legal order that is sustainable in the long run. Lately, I've been thinking a lot about the way that this has played out in [the] United States history, in particular. I might have a book that's coming out in December that focuses on a historical account of the development of the rule of law, particularly in the United States. I mean, it's my own country. And so at some point, I had to get talked into writing that book. And we can see that in our history right at the get-go, you know, in the United States, at the very beginning, the rule of law dialogue tended to be focused on protecting the interests of wealthy elite property holders. And this actually played a major part, for example, in the United States' most grievous struggle, namely the struggle over slavery, because slaveholders really relied on this conception of the Rule of Law focusing on individual freedom and property rights to insist on a right to keep holding slaves against the more egalitarian idea that “hey, wait a minute, the enslaved have a right to be participants in the legal system as well.” And so we can see these two different conceptions of legality breaking the United States and breaking the idea of legal order in the United States right at the get-go. And we see this in country after country after country. You know, another example is Pinochet's Chile, which was the victim of [the] United States' economics focused rule of law promotion efforts that favoured the interests of property holders under this libertarian conception over the interests of ordinary citizens, democracy and mass interests. In other words, over the egalitarian conception, and again, you know, devolved into authoritarianism and chaos.Tobi; Yeah, nice bit of history there, but dialling all the way, if you'll indulge me... dialling all the way to the present, or maybe the recent past, of course; where I see another relevance and tension is development, and its geopolitical significance and the modernization projects that a lot of developed countries have done in so many poor and violent nations, you know, around the world. I mean, at the time when Africa decolonized, you know, a lot of the countries gravitated towards the communist bloc, socialism [and] that process was shunted, failed, you know, there was a wave of military coups all over the continent, and it was a really dark period.But what you see is that a lot of these countries, Nigeria, for example, democratized in 1999, a lot of other countries either before then or after followed suit. And what you see is, almost all of them go for American-style federal system, and American-style constitutional democracy, you know. And how that tradition evolved... I mean, there's a lot you can explain and unpack here... how that tradition evolved, we are told is the law has a responsibility to treat people as individuals. But you also find that these are societies where group identities are very, very strong, you know, and what you get are constitutions that are weakly enforced, impractical, and a society that is perpetually in struggle. I mean, you have a constitution, you have rules, and you have a government that openly disregards them, because the constitutional tradition is so divorced from how a lot of our societies evolve. And what I see you doing in your work is that if we divorce the rule of law from the ideal society, you know [like] some societies that we look up to, then we can come up with a set of practical propositions that the rule of law should fulfil, so walk me through how you resolve these tensions and your propositions?Paul; Well, so it's exactly what you just said, right? I mean, we have to focus on actual existing societies and the actual way that people organize their lives, right. And so here's the issue is, just like I said a minute ago, the rule of law fundamentally depends on people. And when I say people, I don't just mean elites. I don't just mean the wealthy, I don't just mean the people in charge of armies, and the people in charge of courthouses, right? Like the rule of law depends, number one, on people acting collectively to hold the powerful to the law. And number two, on people using the institutions that we say are associated with the rule of law. And so just as you describe, one sort of really common failure condition for international rule of law development efforts - and I don't think that this is a matter of sort of recipient countries admiring countries like the US, I think this is a matter of international organizations and countries like the US having in their heads a model of what the law looks like and sort of pressing it on recipient countries.But you know, when you build institutions that don't really resemble how the people in a country actually organize their social, political and legal lives, you shouldn't be surprised when nobody uses them. You shouldn't be surprised when they're ineffective. But I mean, I think that it's been fairly compared to a kind of second-generation colonialism in that sense where countries like the US and like Germany, attempt to export their legal institutions to other countries, without attending to the ways that the people in those countries already have social and legal resources to run their lives. And so I'll give you an example that's interesting from Afghanistan. So in Afghanistan, sort of post the 2000s invasion, and so forth, some researchers, mostly affiliated with the Carnegie Institution, found that the really effective rule of law innovations, the really effective interventions were ones that relied on existing social groups and existing structures of traditional authority. And so, you know, you could build a courthouse and like, ask a formal centralized state to do something, maybe it would work, maybe it wouldn't, maybe people would use it, maybe they wouldn't. But if you took local community leaders, local religious leaders, gave them training, and how to use the social capital they already have to help do things like adjudicate disputes, well, those would actually be effective, because they fit into the existing social organization that already exists. So I'll give you another example. I have a student who... I had… I just graduated an S.J.D student from Uganda who wrote a dissertation on corruption in Uganda. And one of the things that he advocated for I think, really sensibly was, “ okay, we've got this centralized government, but we've also got all of these traditional kingdoms, and the traditional kingdoms, they're actually a lot more legitimate in the sociological sense than the centralized government.People trust the traditional kingdoms, people rely on the traditional kingdoms for services, for integrating themselves into their society. And so one useful way of thinking about anti-corruption reforms is to try and empower the traditional kingdoms that already have legitimacy so that they can check the centralized government. And so that kind of work, I think, is where we have real potential to do global rule of law development without just creating carbon copies of the United States. Tobi; The process you describe, I will say, as promising as it may sound, what I want to ask you is how then do you ensure that a lot of these traditional institutions that can be empowered to provide reasonable checks to the power of the central government also fulfil the conditions of equality in their relation to the general public? Because even historically, a lot of these institutions are quite hierarchical...Paul; Oh, yeah... and I think in particular, women's rights are a big problem.Tobi; Yeah, yeah and there's a lot of abuses that go on locally, even within those communities, you know. We have traditional monarchies who exercise blanket rights over land ownership, over people's wives, over so many things, you know, so how then does this condition of equality transmit across the system?Paul; Yeah, no, I think that's the really hard question. I tell you right now that part of the answer is that those are not end-state processes. By this I mean that any realistic conception of how we can actually build effective rule of law institutions, but also genuinely incorporate everyone's interests in a society is going to accept that there's going to be a kind of dynamic tension between institutions.You know, sometimes we're going to have to use the centralized state to check traditional institutions. Sometimes we're going to have to use traditional institutions to check the centralized state. Elinor Ostrom, Nobel Prize-winning political scientist and her sort of the Bloomington School of Political Economy, emphasized for many years this idea that they called Polycentrism. That is the idea that multiple, overlapping governance organizations that are sort of forced to negotiate with one another, and forced to learn from one another, and really integrate with one another in this sort of complex tension-filled kind of way, actually turns out to be a really effective method of achieving what we might call good governance. And part of the reason is because they give a lot of different people, in different levels of [the] organization, ways to challenge one another, ways to demand inclusion in this decision, and let somebody else handle that decision, and participate jointly in this other decision. And so I think that neither the centralized state alone, nor traditional institutions alone is going to be able to achieve these goals. But I think efforts to integrate them have some promise. And India has done a lot of work, you know, sort of mixed record of success, perhaps, but has done a lot of work in these lines. I think, for example, of many of the ways that India has tried to promote the growth of Panchayats, of local councils in decision making, including in law enforcement, but at the same time, has tried to do things like promote an even mandate, the inclusion of women, the inclusion of Scheduled Castes, you know, the inclusion of the traditionally subordinated in these decision making processes. And as I said, they haven't had complete success. But it's an example of a way that the centralized state can both support traditional institutions while pushing those institutions to be more egalitarian.Tobi; Let's delve into the three conditions that you identified in your work, which any rule of law state should fulfil. And that is regularity, publicity, and generality. Kindly unpack those three for me.Paul; Absolutely. So regularity is...we can think of it as just the basic rule of law idea, right? Like the government obeys the law. And so if you think about this notion of regularity, it's... do we have a situation where the powerful are actually bound by legal rules? Or do we have a situation where, you know, they just do whatever they want? And so I'd say that, you know, there's no state that even counts as a rule of law state in the basic level without satisfying that condition, at least to some reasonable degree. The idea of publicity really draws on a lot of what I've already been saying about the recruitment of broad participation in the law. That is, when I say publicity, what I mean is that in addition to just officials being bound by the law, ordinary people have to be able to make use of the law in at least two senses. One, they have to be able to make use of the law to defend themselves. I call this the individualistic side of publicity, right? Like if some police officer wants to lock you up, the decision on whether or not you violated the law has to respond to your advocacy, and your ability to defend yourself in some sense. And then there's also the collective side of this idea of publicity, which is that the community as a whole has to be able to collectively enforce the boundaries of the legal system. And you know, we'd talk a lot more about that, I think that's really the most important idea. And then the third idea of generality is really the heart of the egalitarian idea that we've been talking about, which is that the law has to actually treat people as equals. And one thing that I think is really important about the way that I think about these three principles is that they're actually really tightly integrated. By tightly integrated, I mean you're only going to get in real-world states, regularity (that is, officials bound by the law) if you have publicity (that is, if you have people who aren't officials who actually can participate in the legal system and can hold officials to the law). We need the people to hold the officials in line. You're only going to get publicity if you have generality. That is, the people are only going to be motivated to use the legal system and to defend the legal system if the legal system actually treats them as equals. And so you really need publicity to have stable regularity, you really need generality to have stable publicity.Tobi; Speaking of regularity, when you say what constrains the coercive power of the state is when it is authorised by good faith and reasonable interpretation of pre-existing reasonably specific rules. That sounds very specific. And it's also Scalonian in a way, but a lot of people might quibble a bit about what is reasonable, you know, it sounds vague, right? So how would you condition or define reasonable in this sense, and I know you talked about hubris when you were talking about publicity. But is there a minimum level of responsibility for reasonability on the part of the citizen in relation to a state?Paul; That's, in a lot of ways, the really hard philosophical question, because one of the things that we know about law is that it is inherently filled with disagreement, right? Like our experience of the legal system and of every state that actually has something like the rule of law is that people radically disagree about the legal propriety of actions of the government. And so in some sense, this idea of reasonableness is kind of a cop-out. But it's a cop-out that is absolutely necessary, because there's no, you know, what [Thomas] Nagel called a view from nowhere. There's no view from nowhere from which we can evaluate whether or not on a day to day basis, officials are actually complying with the law in some kind of correct sense. But again, I think, you know, as you said, to some extent, that implies that some of the responsibility for evaluating this reasonableness criterion falls down to day to day politics, falls down to the judgment of ordinary citizens. Like, my conception of the rule of law is kind of sneakily a deeply democratic conception, because it recognizes given the existence of uncertainty as to what the law actually requires of officials both on a case by case basis. And, broadly speaking, the only way that we're ever going to be able to say, Well, you know, officials are more or less operating within a reasonable conception of what their legal responsibilities are, is if we empower the public at large to make these judgments. If we have institutions like here in the US, our jury trials, if we have an underlying backstop of civil society and politics, that is actively scrutinizing and questioning official action.Tobi; So speaking of publicity, which is my favorite...I have to say...Paul; Mine too. You could probably tell. Tobi; Because I think that therein lies the power of the state to get away with abusive use of its legitimacy, or its power, so to speak. When you say that officials have a responsibility to explain their application of the law, and a failure to do so commits hubris and terror against the public. So those two situations - hubris and terror, can you explain those to me a bit?Paul; Yeah. So these are really, sort of, moral philosophy ideas at heart, particularly hubris. The idea is there's a big difference, even if I have authority over you, between my exercising that authority in the form of commands and my exercising that authority in the form of a conversation that appeals to your reasoning capacity, right. So these days, I'm thinking about it in part with reference to... I'm going to go very philosophical with you here... but in reference to Kant's humanity formulation of the categorical imperative, sorry. But that is a sense in which if I'm making decisions about your conduct, and your life and, you know, affecting your fundamental interests, that when I express the reasons to you for those decisions, and when I genuinely listen to the reasons that you offer, and genuinely take those into account in my decision making process, I'm showing a kind of respect for you, which is consistent with the idea of a society of equals.As opposed to just hi, I'm wiser than you, and so my decision is, you know, you go this way, you violated the law, right? Are we a military commander? Or are we a judge? Both the military commander and the judge exercise authority, but they do so in very different ways. One is hierarchical, the other I would contend is not.Tobi; Still talking about publicity here, and why I love it so much is one important, should I say… a distinction you made quite early in your book is that the rule of law regulates the action of the state, in relation to its citizens.Paul; Yes.Tobi; Often and I would count myself among people who have been confused by that point as saying that the rule of law regulates the action of the society in general. I have never thought to make that distinction. And it's important because often you see that maybe when dealing with civil disobedience, or some kind of action that the government finds disruptive to its interests, or its preferences, the rule of law is often invoked as a way for governments to use sometimes without discretion, its enforcement powers, you know.So please explain further this distinction between the rule of law regulating the state-citizen relation versus the general law and order in the society. I mean, you get this from Trump, you get this from so many other people who say, Oh, we are a law and order society, I'm a rule of law candidate.Paul; Oh, yeah.Tobi; You cannot do this, you cannot do that. We cannot encourage the breakdown of law and order in the society. So, explain this difference to me.Paul; Absolutely, then this is probably the most controversial part of my account of the rule of law. I think everybody disagrees with this. I sort of want to start by talking about how I got to this view. And I think I really got to this view by reflecting on the civil rights movement in the United States in particular, right. Because, you know, what we would so often see, just as you say about all of these other contexts, is we would see officials, we would see judges - I mean, there are, you know, Supreme Court cases where supreme court justices that are normally relatively liberal and sympathetic, like, you know, Justice Hugo Black scolding Martin Luther King for engaging in civil disobedience on the idea that it threatens the rule of law. It turns out, and this is something that I go into in the book that's coming out in December... it turns out that King actually had a sophisticated theory of when it was appropriate to engage in civil disobedience and when it wasn't. But for me, reflecting on that conflict in particular, and reflecting on the fact that the same people who were scolding peaceful lunch-counter-sit-ins for threatening the rule of law and, you know, causing society to descend into chaos and undermining property rights and all the rest of that nonsense, were also standing by and watching as southern governors sent police in to beat and gas and fire hose and set dogs on peaceful protests in this sort of completely new set of like, totally unbounded explosions of state violence. And so it seems to me sort of intuitively, like these can't be the same problem, right, like ordinary citizens, doing sit-ins, even if they're illegal, even if we might have some reason to criticize them, it can't be the same reason that we have to criticize Bull Connor for having the cops beat people. And part of the reason that that's the case, and this is what I call the Hobbesian property in the introduction to the rule of law in the real world...part of the reason is just the reality of what states are, right? Like, protesters don't have tanks and police dogs, and fire hoses, right? Protesters typically don't have armies. If they do, then we're in a civil war situation, not a rule of law situation, the state does have all of those things. And so one of the features of the state that makes it the most appropriate site for this talk about the rule of law is this the state has, I mean, most modern states have, at least on a case by case basis, overwhelming power. And so we have distinct moral reasons to control overwhelming power than we do to control a little bit of legal disobedience, right, like overwhelming power is overwhelming. It's something that has a different moral importance for its control. Then the second idea is at the same time what I call the [...] property... is the state makes claims about its use of power, right? Like ordinary people, when they obey the law or violate the law, they don't necessarily do so with reference to a set of ideas that they're propagating about their relationship to other people. Whereas when modern states send troops in to beat people up, in a way what they're doing is they're saying that they're doing so in all of our names, right, particularly, but not exclusively in democratic governments. There's a way in which the state represents itself as acting on behalf of the political community at large. And so it makes sense to have a distinctive normative principle to regulate that kind of power.Tobi; I know you sort of sidestepped this in the book, and maybe it doesn't really fit with your overall argument. But I'm going to push you on that topic a bit. So how does the rule of law state as a matter of institutional design then handles... I know you said that there are separate principles that can be developed for guiding citizen actions, you know...Paul; Yes. Tobi; I mean, let's be clear that you are not saying that people are free to act however they want.Paul; I'm not advocating anarchy.Tobi; Exactly. So how does the rule of law state then handle citizens disagreements or conflicting interests around issues of social order? And I'll give you an example. I mentioned right at the beginning of our conversation what happened in Nigeria in October 2020. There's a unit of the police force that was created to handle violent crimes. Needless to say that they went way beyond their remit and became a very notoriously abusive unit of the police force. Picking up people randomly, lock them up, extort them for money. And there was a situation where a young man was murdered, and his car stolen by this same unit of the police force and young people all over the country, from Lagos to Port Harcourt to Abuja, everywhere, felt we've had enough, right, and everybody came out in protest. It was very, very peaceful, I'd say, until other interests, you know, infiltrated that action. Paul; Right. Tobi; But what I noticed quite early in that process was that even within the spirits of that protests, there were disagreements between citizens - protesters blocking roads, you know, versus people who feel well, your protest should not stop me from going to work, you know, and so many other actions by the protesters that other people with, maybe not conflicting interests, but who have other opinions about strategy or process feel well, this is not right. This is not how to do this. This is not how you do this, you know, and I see that that sort of provided the loophole, I should say, for the government to then move in and take a ruthlessly violent action. You know, there was a popular tollgate in Lagos in the richest neighbourhood in Lagos that was blocked for 10 days by the protesters. And I mean, after this, the army basically moved in and shot people to death. Today, you still see people who would say, Oh, well, that's tragic. But should these people have been blocking other people from going about their daily business? So how does the rule of law regulate issues of social order vis-a-vis conflict of interest?Paul; So I think this is actually a point in favour of my stark distinction between state action and social action as appropriate for thinking about the rule of law. Because when you say that the state used...what I still fundamentally think of as like minor civil disobedience...so, like blocking some roads, big deal! Protesters block roads all the time, right, like protesters have blocked roads throughout human history, you know, like, sometimes it goes big, right? Like they love blocking roads in the French Revolution. But oftentimes, it's just blocking... so I blocked roads.I participated in, you know, some protests in the early 2000s. I participated in blocking roads in DC, right, like, fundamentally "big deal!" is the answer that the state ought to give. And so by saying to each other and to the government, when we talk about the rule of law, we mean, the state's power has to be controlled by the law, I think that gives us a language to say... even though people are engaging in illegal things, the state still has to follow legal process in dealing with it, right.The state still has to use only the level of force allowed by the law to arrest people. The state can't just send in the army to shoot people. And the principle that we appeal to is this principle of the rule of law. Yeah, maintaining the distinction between lawbreaking by ordinary people and law-breaking by the state helps us understand why the state shouldn't be allowed to just send in troops whenever people engage in a little bit of minor lawbreaking and protests.Tobi; So how does the law... I mean, we are entering a bit of a different territory, how does the law in your conception handles what... well, maybe these are fancy definitions, but what some people will call extraordinary circumstances. Like protests with political interests? Maybe protesters that are funded and motivated to unseat an incumbent government? Or in terrorism, you know, where you often have situations where there are no laws on paper to deal with these sort of extraordinary situations, you know, and they can be extremely violent, they can be extremely strange, they're usually things that so many societies are not equipped to handle. So how should the rule of law regulate the action of the state in such extraordinary circumstances?Paul; Yeah, so this is the deep problem of the rule of law, you know, this is why people still read Carl Schmitt, right, because Carl Schmitt's whole account of executive power basically is, hey, wait a minute emergencies happen, and when emergencies happen, liberal legal ideas like the rule of law dropout, and so fundamentally, you just have like raw sovereignty. And that means that the state just kind of does what it must. Right. So here's what I feel about Schmitt. One is, maybe sometimes that's true, right? And again, I think about the US context, because I'm an American and you know, I have my own history, right? And so in the US context, I think, again, about, Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War, right.Like Abraham Lincoln broke all kinds of laws in the Civil War. Like today, we'd call some of the things that he did basically assuming dictatorial power in some respects. I mean, he did that in the greatest emergency that the country had ever faced and has ever faced since then. And he did it in a civil war. And sometimes that happens, and I think practically speaking, legal institutions have a habit of not standing in the way in truly dire situations like that. But, and here's why I want to push back against Carl Schmitt... but what a legal order can then do is after the emergency has passed...number one, the legal order can be a source of pressure for demanding and accounting of when the emergency has passed, right. And so again, I think of the United States War on Terror, you know, we still have people in United States' custody imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay.September 11 2001, was almost 20 years ago. It's actually 20 years ago and a month, and we still have people locked up in Guantanamo Bay. That's insane. That's completely unjustifiable. And one of the jobs of the legal system is to pressure the executive to say, okay, buddy, is the emergency over yet? No, really, we think that the emergency is over yet. I want reasons, right, publicity again, I want an explanation from you of why you think the emergency is still ongoing. And the legal system can force the executive to be accountable for the claim that the emergency is still ongoing. That's number one. Number two is that law tends to be really good at retroactively, sort of, retrofitting things into legal order, right. And so again, I think about the Civil War. You know, after the US Civil War, lots of civil wars, sorry. American-centric person trying to fight against it. But after the US Civil War, you know, the courts took a pause. And then we have a lot of cases where they took a lot of the things that Lincoln did, they said, okay, some of them at least were illegal, some of them were legal, but only under very specific circumstances. And so they actually built legal doctrine that took into account the emergency that Lincoln faced, and then later wars, such as in the Second World War, the courts took the lessons from the experience in the American Civil War, and used that to impose more constraints. So to bring it about that the emergency actions that Franklin Roosevelt took in the Second World War weren't completely sui generis, sort of like right acts of sovereignty, but were regulated by legal rules created during the Civil War, and after the Civil War. And again, they weren't perfect, right? You know, during the Second World War, the United States interned Japanese Americans, you know, again, sort of completely lawless, completely unjustifiable, but you know, it's an ongoing process. The point is that the legal system is always... the law is always reactive in emergencies. But the reactive character of the law can nonetheless be used as a way to control and channel sovereign power, even in these sort of Schmittian emergency situations.Tobi; So two related questions, your work is interdisciplinary, because you try to blend a lot of social science into legal philosophy. But speaking of legal order and your primary profession, I mean.. for the sake of the audience parties into a lot of other cool stuff, I'm going to be putting up his website in the show notes. But speaking of legal order, and the legal profession, why is so much of the legal profession fascinated with what I would say the rule by law, as opposed to the rule of law. A lot of what you get from lawyers, even some law professors in some situations is [that] the law is the law, and you have to obey it. And even if you are going to question it, however unjustified it may seem, you still have to follow some processes that maybe for ordinary citizens are not so accessible or extremely costly, you know, which I think violate regularity, right, the way you talk about it retrospective legislation, and so many other things. So why is the legal profession so fascinated with the law, as opposed to justification for the law?Paul; Yeah, I think that question kind of answers itself, right. It's unfortunate... I mean, it's sort of natural but it's unfortunate that the people who most influence our dialogue about the way that we, you know, live in [the] society together with a state, namely by organizing ourselves with law happen to be people who are the specialists who find it easiest, right? And so I think the simple answer is right on this one, at least in countries like the United States, I'm not sure how true this is in other countries. But in the United States, the domination of legal discourse by lawyers necessarily means that the sort of real practical, real-world ways in which ordinary people find interacting with anything legal to be difficult, oppressive, or both just aren't in view, right? This is hard for them to understand.But I think in the US, one of the distortions that we've had is that we have an extremely hierarchical legal profession, right. So we have very elite law schools, and those very elite law schools - one of which I teach at - tend to predominantly produce lawyers who primarily work for wealthy corporations and sort of secondarily work for the government. Those lawyers tend to be the ones that end up at the top of the judiciary, that end up in influential positions in academia, that end up, you know, in Congress. The lawyers that, you know, see poor people, see people of subordinated minority groups and see the very different kinds of interactions with the legal system that people who are worse off have, that see the way that the law presents itself, not as a thing that you can use autonomously to structure your own life. But as a kind of external imposition, that sort of shows up and occasionally inflicts harm on you. Those lawyers aren't the ones who end up in our corridors of power. And it's very unfortunate, it's a consequence of the hierarchical nature of, at least in the US, our legal profession. And I suspect it's similar in these other countries as well.Tobi; In your opinion, what's the... dare I say the sacrosanct and objective - those are rigid conditions sorry - expression of the rule of law? The current general conception of the rule accedes to the primacy of the Constitution, right. I've often found that problematic because in some countries you find constitutional provisions that are egregious, and in other cases, you find lawyers going into court to challenge certain actions that they deem unjust, or that are truly unjust on the basis of the same constitution. Right. So what do you think is the most practical expression of the rule of law? Is it written laws? Is it the opinion of the judges? Is it how officials hold themselves accountable? What's the answer?Paul; So I think I'm gonna like sort of twist this a little bit and interpret that question is like, how do you know the extent to which the rule of law exists in a particular place? And my answer is, can ordinary people look officials in the eye, right, you know... if you're walking down the street, and you see a police officer, you know, are you afraid? Or can you walk past them and confidently know you're doing nothing wrong so there's nothing really effectively but they can do to you, right? If you're called in to deal with some kind of bureaucratic problem, like the tax office, can you trust that you exist in a relationship of respect? You know, can you trust that when you show them, actually here are my receipts, I really did have that expense, that that's going to be taken seriously? You know, if people, everybody, feels like they can stand tall, and look government officials in the eye, then to that extent, I think that the rule of law exists in a society.Tobi; Final question, what's the coolest idea you're working on right now?Paul; Oh, gosh. So like I said, I've got two books under contract right now. The first book is a history/theoretical constitutional law account of the development and existing state of the rule of law in the United States. The second book, which I'm more excited about, because it's the one that I plan to write this year, but it's also a lot harder, is I'm trying to take some of the governance design ideas that we see from the notion of rule of law development, and others such as governance development things and apply them to Private Internet platforms, right? Like, basically to Facebook. Um, I was actually involved in some of the work, not at a super high level, but I was involved in some of the work in designing or doing the research for designing Facebook's oversight board. And I'm kind of trying to expand on some of those ideas and think about, you know, if we really believe that private companies, especially in these internet platforms are doing governance right now, can we take lessons from how the rest of the world and how actual governments and actual states have developed techniques of governing behaviour in highly networked, large scale super-diverse environments and use those lessons in the private context? Maybe we can maybe we can't I'm not sure yet. Hopefully, by the time I finish the book, I'll know.Tobi; That's interesting. And I'll ask you this, a similar, I'll say a related situation is currently happening in Nigeria right now, where the President's Twitter handle or username, tweeted something that sounded like a thinly veiled threat to a particular ethnic group. And lots of people who disagreed with that tweet reported the tweet, and Twitter ended up deleting the tweet in question, which high-level officials in Nigeria found extremely offensive, and going as far as to assert their sovereign rights over Twitter and say, well, it may be your platform, but it is our country and we are banning you. How would you adjudicate such a situation? I mean, there's the question of banning Donald Trump from the platform and so many other things that have come up.Paul; Yeah, I mean, it's hard, right? So there are no easy answers to these kinds of problems. I think, ultimately, what we have to do is we have to build more legitimate ways to make these decisions. I mean, here are two things that we cannot do, right?Number one is we can't just let government officials, especially when, you know, as with the Donald Trump example, and so many others, the government officials are the ones who are engaging in the terrible conduct make these decisions. Number two is we also just can't let a bunch of people sitting in the Bay Area in California make those decisions. Like, ultimately, this is on, you know, property in some abstracted sense of like the shareholders of these companies. But we cannot simply allow a bunch of people in San Francisco, in Menlo Park, and you know, Cupertino and Mountain View, and all of those other little tech industry cities that have no understanding of local context to make the final decisions here. And so what we need to do is we need to build more robust institutions to include both global and local and affected countries, grassroots participation, in making these decisions. And I'm trying to sort of sketch out what the design for those might look like. But, you know, talk to me in about a year. And hopefully, I'll have a book for you that will actually have a sketch.Tobi; You bet I'm going to hold you to that. So, a year from now. So still on the question of ideas, because the show is about ideas. What's the one idea you'd like to see spread everywhere?Paul; Oh, gosh, you should have warned me in advance... that... I'm going to go back to what I said at the very beginning about the rule of law. Like I think that the rule of law depends on people, right? Like there is no such thing as the rule of law without a society and a legal system that genuinely is equal and advantageous to ordinary people enough to be the kind of thing that people actually support. Like ordinary people... if you cannot recruit the support of ordinary people for your legal political and social system, you cannot have the rule of law. That's true whether you're a developing country, that's true whether you're the United States, right. Like I think, you know, part of the reason that we got Donald Trump in the United States, I think, is because our legal system and with it our economy, and all the rest are so unequal in this country, that ordinary voters in the United States didn't see any reason to preserve it. Right and so when this lunatic and I mean, I'm just going to be quite frank here and say Donald Trump is a complete lunatic, right... when this lunatic is running for office who shows total disregard for existing institutions, like complete willingness to casually break the law. An electorate that actually was full of people who felt (themselves) treated respectfully and protected and supported by our legal and political institutions would have sent that guy packing in a heartbeat. But because the American people don't have that experience right now, I think that's what made us vulnerable to somebody like Donald Trump.Tobi; Thank you so much, Paul. It's been so fascinating talking to you.Paul; Thank you. This has been a lot of fun. Yeah, I'm happy to come back in a year when I've got the platform thing done.Tobi; Yeah, I'm so looking forward to that. This is a public episode. Get access to private episodes at www.ideasuntrapped.com/subscribe
In the United States, 85% of the population resides within 10 miles of a CVS Pharmacy. Through continued growth and expansion since its founding as a health and beauty products retailer in the early 1960s, CVS Health has now become America's largest health services company. That expansion accelerated over the last two decades through acquisitions of companies like MinuteClinic, Caremark and Aetna that embedded CVS even more deeply into the U.S. healthcare system and communities across the country. Josh Flum has played key roles in CVS Health's transformation and healthcare strategy for nearly 20 years. After Yale Law School and a few years as a white-collar criminal defense attorney in Washington, DC, Josh decided on a career change and landed a job at Boston Consulting Group where he first crossed paths with CVS. In this episode of Healthcare is Hard, Josh tells Keith Figlioli about one project at BCG where he was begrudgingly selected to spend two weeks virtually living at CVS pharmacies learning everything there is to know about how they operate. That assignment proved invaluable for the rest of Josh's career. Since joining CVS in 2004, he has held several senior roles including leading pharmacy operations and overseeing Enterprise Product Innovation and Development teams. He also co-founded and leads CVS Health Ventures, and is currently CVS Health's Chief Strategy & Business Development Officer.Josh and Keith covered several pressing topics during this Healthcare is Hard interview including: The next evolution in pharmacy. Josh talks about fundamental shifts in the pharmacy business that have occurred in his career and what he thinks is in store for the future. While the deeply personal connection between people, families and pharmacists has always persisted – and will be integral for the future – the pharmacy business has moved from being about medication fulfilment, to clinical pharmacy care including medication adherence, to other aspects of medical care such as testing and immunizations. Josh says the future will be about pharmacists practicing at the top of their license and balancing clinical care interventions with new technology and the consumer relationships that pharmacists have always maintained.The retail threat. Keith posed the same question to Josh that he asked Walgreen's CMO on last month's Healthcare is Hard episode: how should incumbent healthcare delivery players think about the emerging role of retailers? To Josh, it comes down to how a company fits into three trends: patient as consumer; care in community, home and virtual settings; and technology. Josh says CVS feels very well positioned to play a big role in the future of healthcare as these trends continue to evolve, while recognizing that the company still has much more to do and will need to work in partnership with the broader healthcare system to make the kind of change that is necessary.The flip side of innovation. Through his role at CVS Health Ventures, Josh sees many of the exciting developments that are going to make care easier and more ubiquitous, but sometimes wonders if the pace of advancement could overwhelm consumers. Putting himself in the consumer's shoes, he says it's all about trust. He believes consumers will turn to the people and organizations they know and trust to help navigate new experiences – organizations like CVS Health. For its part in the innovation ecosystem, Josh says CVS Health Ventures is currently focusing on investment themes including care delivery, consumer centric healthcare, whole person care and disruptive tech enablement that crosses all these domains.To hear Josh and Keith talk about these topics and more, listen to this episode of Healthcare is Hard.
It's always fun to have the experts on Dirt Talk - not only do co-hosts Aaron Witt and Alex Horton learn about the guest, they learn an extraordinary amount in general. And on episode 90 of Dirt Talk, the guys definitely learn tons from Johnathan More. Johnathan is the Chairperson & CEO of Starr Peak Mining Ltd, a Canadian-based company focused on exploratory mining and land acquisition. Johnathan also now lives in Aaron's hometown (Scottsdale, AZ) and sends one of his kids to Aaron's old school. Aaron and Johnathan get into the nitty-gritty of acquiring land in order to start drilling, why there are so many mining companies in Canada, and what the land development process looks like to start a mine. Thanks to Johnathan More and Starr Peak Mining Ltd! To connect with other people who listen to this show, use and search for the hashtag #betterdirtworld and join in on the conversation. If you have questions/comments/concerns, reach out to DirtTalk@buildwitt.com. Stay Dirty!
Putting a nice, tidy bow on the Tampa Bay Buccaneers win over the Philadelphia Eagles, we are joined by 10 Tampa Bay's Evan Closky to get his thoughts on the Thursday Night game in week six. The defense stepped up as much as they could and Defensive Coordinator Todd Bowles deserves a lot of credit for the way this defense has been playing given all the injury issues that side of the ball has been dealing with. Leonard Fournette - and whichever iteration of "Lenny" you want to give him - has been playing on another level over the past few weeks. In the most recent three game stretch, Fournette is third in the NFL in all-purpose yards, making him an indispensable part of the offensive game plan. Not only did he take full control of the starting - or lead - running back job, but he's playing himself right into a big contract in the off-season. Does that mean this year is the last we will see of Leonard Fournette in a Buccaneers uniform or will Jason Licht and Mike Greenberg be able to work some more magic and keep "Regular Season Lenny" in Tampa for 2022 and beyond? Also, where does this leave Ronald Jones? RoJo was the lead dog in 2020 and it was Fournette that had a sit down moment with Bruce Arians telling him to get on board or get out. Have the roles fully reversed in 2021? Jones is currently getting between four and six carries a game and Fournette's play has also rendered Gio Bernard somewhat irrelevant for the offense. Is RoJo giving up on his role on this team? Or is he still playing with the team first mentality, knowing his number could be called to carry the load at any given moment? As the Bucs prepare to take on the Chicago Bears, all eyes are going to be on rookie quarterback Justin Fields. Fields has not been overly impressive, but at this stage it's hard to tell if that's because of Fields or if head coach Matt Nagy is hurting the offensive growth. Star receiver Allen Robinson has been a ghost all season as Fields tends to look towards Darnell Mooney more often than not. Is a matchup against the battered Bucs secondary a chance for Robinson to get back on track? Or will the Buccaneers defense step up again? As Evan gives his bold predictions for the game, last week seems to have sparked the thought that "Sack Barrett" is on the cusp of coming back. The Buccaneers haven't had more than four sacks in a game this season, but Barrett was giving Jalen Hurts fits last week in Philadelphia. Now, he has the opportunity to do the same to a rookie quarterback inside Raymond James Stadium - which could signal the return of the Bucs' sack master. o Pre-Order or Get Your Copy of "A Season In The Sun" Starting October 19th: https://bit.ly/2Z679aG o Follow & Subscribe to the Locked On Bucs Podcast on these platforms… Apple: https://apple.co/3iOePFk Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3BwlScY Audacy: https://bit.ly/3FAcIhV Google: https://bit.ly/2X0IEdS Megaphone: https://bit.ly/3uZOcSo o Follow Locked On Podcast Network on Twitter: https://twitter.com/LockedOnNetwork Check out all of our NFL Coverage: linktr.ee/lockedonnfl Follow James on Twitter: https://twitter.com/JYarcho_BUCS Follow David on Twitter: https://twitter.com/DHarrison82 o Support Us By Supporting Our Sponsors! Built Bar Built Bar is a protein bar that tastes like a candy bar. Go to builtbar.com and use promo code “LOCKED15,” and you'll get 15% off your next order. BetOnline AG There is only 1 place that has you covered and 1 place we trust. Betonline.ag! Sign up today for a free account at betonline.ag and use that promocode: LOCKEDON for your 50% welcome bonus. Rock Auto Amazing selection. Reliably low prices. All the parts your car will ever need. Visit RockAuto.com and tell them Locked On sent you. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Old Testament: Jeremiah 1 Jeremiah 1 (Listen) 1 The words of Jeremiah, the son of Hilkiah, one of the priests who were in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin, 2 to whom the word of the LORD came in the days of Josiah the son of Amon, king of Judah, in the thirteenth year of his reign. 3 It came also in the days of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, and until the end of the eleventh year of Zedekiah, the son of Josiah, king of Judah, until the captivity of Jerusalem in the fifth month. The Call of Jeremiah 4 Now the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.” 6 Then I said, “Ah, Lord GOD! Behold, I do not know how to speak, for I am only a youth.” 7 But the LORD said to me, “Do not say, ‘I am only a youth'; for to all to whom I send you, you shall go, and whatever I command you, you shall speak.8 Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you to deliver you, declares the LORD.” 9 Then the LORD put out his hand and touched my mouth. And the LORD said to me, “Behold, I have put my words in your mouth.10 See, I have set you this day over nations and over kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant.” 11 And the word of the LORD came to me, saying, “Jeremiah, what do you see?” And I said, “I see an almond1 branch.” 12 Then the LORD said to me, “You have seen well, for I am watching over my word to perform it.” 13 The word of the LORD came to me a second time, saying, “What do you see?” And I said, “I see a boiling pot, facing away from the north.” 14 Then the LORD said to me, “Out of the north disaster2 shall be let loose upon all the inhabitants of the land. 15 For behold, I am calling all the tribes of the kingdoms of the north, declares the LORD, and they shall come, and every one shall set his throne at the entrance of the gates of Jerusalem, against all its walls all around and against all the cities of Judah. 16 And I will declare my judgments against them, for all their evil in forsaking me. They have made offerings to other gods and worshiped the works of their own hands. 17 But you, dress yourself for work;3 arise, and say to them everything that I command you. Do not be dismayed by them, lest I dismay you before them. 18 And I, behold, I make you this day a fortified city, an iron pillar, and bronze walls, against the whole land, against the kings of Judah, its officials, its priests, and the people of the land. 19 They will fight against you, but they shall not prevail against you, for I am with you, declares the LORD, to deliver you.” Footnotes  1:11 Almond sounds like the Hebrew for watching (compare verse 12)  1:14 The Hebrew word can mean evil, harm, or disaster, depending on the context; so throughout Jeremiah  1:17 Hebrew gird up your loins (ESV) Psalm: Psalm 103 Psalm 103 (Listen) Bless the Lord, O My Soul Of David. 103 Bless the LORD, O my soul, and all that is within me, bless his holy name!2 Bless the LORD, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits,3 who forgives all your iniquity, who heals all your diseases,4 who redeems your life from the pit, who crowns you with steadfast love and mercy,5 who satisfies you with good so that your youth is renewed like the eagle's. 6 The LORD works righteousness and justice for all who are oppressed.7 He made known his ways to Moses, his acts to the people of Israel.8 The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love.9 He will not always chide, nor will he keep his anger forever.10 He does not deal with us according to our sins, nor repay us according to our iniquities.11 For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him;12 as far as the east is from the west, so far does he remove our transgressions from us.13 As a father shows compassion to his children, so the LORD shows compassion to those who fear him.14 For he knows our frame;1 he remembers that we are dust. 15 As for man, his days are like grass; he flourishes like a flower of the field;16 for the wind passes over it, and it is gone, and its place knows it no more.17 But the steadfast love of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear him, and his righteousness to children's children,18 to those who keep his covenant and remember to do his commandments.19 The LORD has established his throne in the heavens, and his kingdom rules over all. 20 Bless the LORD, O you his angels, you mighty ones who do his word, obeying the voice of his word!21 Bless the LORD, all his hosts, his ministers, who do his will!22 Bless the LORD, all his works, in all places of his dominion. Bless the LORD, O my soul! Footnotes  103:14 Or knows how we are formed (ESV) New Testament: Acts 28 Acts 28 (Listen) Paul on Malta 28 After we were brought safely through, we then learned that the island was called Malta. 2 The native people1 showed us unusual kindness, for they kindled a fire and welcomed us all, because it had begun to rain and was cold. 3 When Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks and put them on the fire, a viper came out because of the heat and fastened on his hand. 4 When the native people saw the creature hanging from his hand, they said to one another, “No doubt this man is a murderer. Though he has escaped from the sea, Justice2 has not allowed him to live.” 5 He, however, shook off the creature into the fire and suffered no harm. 6 They were waiting for him to swell up or suddenly fall down dead. But when they had waited a long time and saw no misfortune come to him, they changed their minds and said that he was a god. 7 Now in the neighborhood of that place were lands belonging to the chief man of the island, named Publius, who received us and entertained us hospitably for three days. 8 It happened that the father of Publius lay sick with fever and dysentery. And Paul visited him and prayed, and putting his hands on him, healed him. 9 And when this had taken place, the rest of the people on the island who had diseases also came and were cured. 10 They also honored us greatly,3 and when we were about to sail, they put on board whatever we needed. Paul Arrives at Rome 11 After three months we set sail in a ship that had wintered in the island, a ship of Alexandria, with the twin gods4 as a figurehead. 12 Putting in at Syracuse, we stayed there for three days. 13 And from there we made a circuit and arrived at Rhegium. And after one day a south wind sprang up, and on the second day we came to Puteoli. 14 There we found brothers5 and were invited to stay with them for seven days. And so we came to Rome. 15 And the brothers there, when they heard about us, came as far as the Forum of Appius and Three Taverns to meet us. On seeing them, Paul thanked God and took courage. 16 And when we came into Rome, Paul was allowed to stay by himself, with the soldier who guarded him. Paul in Rome 17 After three days he called together the local leaders of the Jews, and when they had gathered, he said to them, “Brothers, though I had done nothing against our people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans. 18 When they had examined me, they wished to set me at liberty, because there was no reason for the death penalty in my case. 19 But because the Jews objected, I was compelled to appeal to Caesar—though I had no charge to bring against my nation. 20 For this reason, therefore, I have asked to see you and speak with you, since it is because of the hope of Israel that I am wearing this chain.” 21 And they said to him, “We have received no letters from Judea about you, and none of the brothers coming here has reported or spoken any evil about you. 22 But we desire to hear from you what your views are, for with regard to this sect we know that everywhere it is spoken against.” 23 When they had appointed a day for him, they came to him at his lodging in greater numbers. From morning till evening he expounded to them, testifying to the kingdom of God and trying to convince them about Jesus both from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets. 24 And some were convinced by what he said, but others disbelieved. 25 And disagreeing among themselves, they departed after Paul had made one statement: “The Holy Spirit was right in saying to your fathers through Isaiah the prophet: 26 “‘Go to this people, and say, “You will indeed hear but never understand, and you will indeed see but never perceive.”27 For this people's heart has grown dull, and with their ears they can barely hear, and their eyes they have closed; lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and turn, and I would heal them.' 28 Therefore let it be known to you that this salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles; they will listen.”6 30 He lived there two whole years at his own expense,7 and welcomed all who came to him, 31 proclaiming the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness and without hindrance. Footnotes  28:2 Greek barbaroi (that is, non–Greek speakers); also verse 4  28:4 Or justice  28:10 Greek honored us with many honors  28:11 That is, the Greek gods Castor and Pollux  28:14 Or brothers and sisters; also verses 15, 21  28:28 Some manuscripts add verse 29: And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, having much dispute among themselves  28:30 Or in his own hired dwelling (ESV)
What do you do when your best friend of five years stops putting effort into your friendship? Do you keep trying to make it work or let them go?That's what one of our listeners is currently questioning. Listen... See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. Become a member at https://plus.acast.com/s/the-bert-show.
Jessica Buck is the Founder and Owner of TJR Investments, LLC. A problem-solver by nature, Jessica has invested in single-family homes and multifamily, initially passively and currently as a partner in a GP team. She has a passion for assisting others and ensures her investments improve the life of residents and communities alike. Jessica is a senior legal administrator in the U.S. Army and leverages her strong background in financial management, building strong relationships, leadership, and acquisitions to source and acquire multifamily investments that will yield strong returns for her investors. [00:01 - 04:14] Juggling Army and RELet's get to know Jessica BuckJessica shares her journey to real estateDoing a house hack[04:15 - 25:22] Mastering Your ConnectionsWhy Jessica chose multifamilyGetting into a mastermind, Apartment Investing SecretsJessica's Story as a General Partner18 Years in the Military, Learning to NetworkMoving around and living in 8 countriesTips on Out-of-State InvestingHow to Find the Best PartnersJessica talks about trust and connection[25:23 - 36:41] THE FINAL FOURWhat's the worst job that you ever had?Working in an auto body shopWhat's a book you've read that has given you a paradigm shift?Rich Dad Poor DadWhat is a skill or talent that you would like to learn?Dance betterWhat does success mean to you?Financial and time freedom“Creating a legacy for my children.”Putting actions behind your wordsConnect with Jessica. Links available belowTweetable Quotes:“Just understanding the market has been definitely helpful.” - Jessica Buck“You definitely have to trust the people that you work with.” - Jessica BuckConnect with Jessica through email@example.com, LinkedIn, or 978-440-0738 and find freedom through mastering your networks.LEAVE A 5-STAR REVIEW by clicking this link. WHERE CAN I LEARN MORE?Be sure to follow me on the below platforms:Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify, Google, or Stitcher.LinkedInYoutubeExclusive Facebook Groupwww.yonahweiss.comNone of this could be possible without the awesome team at Buzzsprout. They make it easy to get your show listed on every major podcast platform.Support the show (https://www.buymeacoffee.com/weissadvice)
Angela Smith is the Head of School at The Bridge Way School, Philadelphia's first recovery high school. Kristen Harootunian is a Bridge Way School alumni and public speaker in active recovery. In this episode, we discuss the challenges young people face when overcoming addiction, the impact of recovery resources in high schools, and how The Bridge Way School creates a learning environment that helps students succeed in their recovery journey. For more information on The Bridge Way School, visit www.thebridgewayschool.org. Hosted by Heather Major, Executive Director, Independence Blue Cross Foundation. Recovery is possible, and help is available. Please visit our website for more information, resources and inspiration: www.ibxfoundation.org/SYK TM 2021 Someone You Know®. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimers This podcast contains opinionated content and may not reflect the opinions of any organizations this podcast is affiliated with. This podcast discusses opioid use, opioid treatment, and physical and psychological trauma, which may be triggering for some listeners. Listener discretion is advised. This podcast is solely for informational purposes. Listeners are advised to do their own diligence when it comes to making decisions that may affect their health. Patients in need of medical advice should consult their personal health care provider. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. It is not a substitute for professional care by a doctor or other qualified medical professional.
Dave Scatchard, former NHL hockey star and author of the bestselling book The Comeback: My Journey Through Heaven and Hell, joins our show in this special episode of the Elite Man Podcast! In today's episode Dave talks about his unbelievable comeback in life after nearly being killed on the hockey rink and then facing years of major and suicidal depression. He breaks down his long and arduous journey back from the brink of death and what it took him to recover his body and his spirit. If you're wondering how to never give up on yourself and always keep fighting to make your own come back, check this episode out now! *Download this episode now and subscribe to our channel to get more of these amazing interviews! In our episode we go over: • Dave's 14-year career in the NHL • The moment Dave's life completely changed • Putting on so many masks and shields for so many years • Becoming suicidally depressed • Feeling like it was all over and not wanting to go on • How Dave slowly began the journey of pulling himself out of hell • The multiple doctors and mainstream medical advice that failed him • The alternative medicine that helped Dave finally heal • Letting go of all your walls and facades • Dave's work with Tony Robbins and what Tony told him • Dave's calling to help other people • His amazing near-death experience • Asking God if he could get another chance at life • What heaven was like and how incredibly loved he felt after dying • Finding his mission in life and answering to a higher calling Check out Dave on: Website: allstarcoaching.com Book: amazon.com/the-Comeback Instagram: instagram.com/davescatchard Sponsors: * Follow Justin on Instagram now for daily content not found anywhere else! *Check out Justin's new book ELITE MIND at EliteMindBook.com. *Join our email list at EliteManMagazine.com/newsletter now! *Order our incredible activated B-50 Complex at EliteLifeNutrition.com.
As the "Seller's Market" of 2021 continues, it begs the question of how we got here in the first place, and where will the market go from here? Deals are in huge demand, often intense bidding wars, and the average rent in the country continues to grow month over month. Listen in to learn why the supply has become so tight and where the market is heading in the next 18 to 24 months, in my opinion. Key Takeaway: When the market is hot in demand, be prepared to evaluate more deals than an "average year". Putting in the time to view more assets then normal will increase your likelihood of winning a deal. Are you REady2Scale? Learn more about growing your wealth, strengthening your portfolio, and scaling to the next level at www.bluelake-capital.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Just straight violated myself in the first 5 minutes. On top of that, I talk about the Home Alone reboot and how angry it makes me, Halloween Costumes, the terrible truth I learned about runners, and much more. My Socials Podcast's Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kickinitwithkoz My Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/anthonykoz_ My YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/anthonykoz MY Twitter: https://twitter.com/anthonykoz_ Sponsors: Get 10% off your first month of therapy at BetterHelp.com/KOZ Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
Debbie Muno of Genos International brings her 25 years of assessment experience and shares her tips to retain team members, making average uncomfortable! 1:17 What can we do about the staff we have today? How do we engage them more? 2:26 The last couple of years have really been a steak in the ground to make life changing decisions. 2:53 What is important in their lives? and how the world of work fits into what is important in their lives. 3:01 Friends that are energized and engaged, has to do with their work and has to do with how they are treated in the workplace. 3:36 Those who do not feel connected are making changes. 3:47 The world of work will never be the same. 5:08 People want to be valued and appreciated and empowered to get their work done. 6:31 It is all about how connected I feel, do I feel appreciated? do I feel valued? and am I engaged in my organization? 8:38 People feel empowered by being able to make choices. 9:19 75% of people leave their job because of their boss. 10:20 We never forget how people make us feel. 12:36 We don't realize the tiny incremental shifts can create massive outcomes. 16:23 If I was totally present in a conversation what difference would it make? 18:16 Putting your phones down as soon as you get into conversation. 20:42 Top performers do their job and carry the weight of low performers and they don't get the acknowledgment. 24:54 Organizations are realizing programs are needed to help enhance well-being and enhance people's ability to become more mindful. 27:09 It is critical to be present and mindful Contact Debbie directly at firstname.lastname@example.org or at https://www.genosnorthamerica.com
This episode mentions sexual assault, which could be triggering to some listeners. Tarana Burke coined the phrase “me too” to help young Black girls in Selma, Alabam talk about sexual assault over a decade ago. But when #MeToo went viral overnight in 2017, Tarana had to figure out how to share her life's work and its resources with a broader audience. Today, Tarana's facing new challenges: how to offer sexual assault survivors the resources they need over the internet, and learning to balance her own needs alongside her work. In this episode, Tarana talks about: How “me too” began How she keeps going when personal and professional overlap How she approaches burnout and recovery Why rest is important for work Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
This week's guest is nothing short of amazing. Dayna Bolden is a full-time Lifestyle, Beauty Blogger, Public Speaker, and Entrepreneur based in Atlanta, Georgia. We discuss putting yourself first and being a change agent for wellness in your life. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
We think too small!God has a plan for your life.It's a big plan!Listen and be blown away by what He plans for you.By the way, I wrote a book that has helped a lot of people to discover their purpose: “Life Manual 101: How To Make Your Dreams Come True”You can grab it at....PS. I don't earn from any of my boos.100% of author royalties are donated to the mission.Support the show (https://www.facebook.com/becomesupporter/67936175235/)
I was recently really moved by a voice mail left by a long term listener and it sparked my passion for this episode. Are you withholding sex from your partner? Is it obligatory and something you barely care to do only when pressed or on holidays? My hope is this episode inspires you to rethink that. Links: Learn all about extended orgasms: Click Here To Learn About And See Extended Orgasms! Thank you for supporting my affiliates who help keep this show FREE: CBD Sex Oil (I HIGHLY recommend this!) https://www.foriawellness.com/collections/sexual-wellness?irclickid=QMiwT4xL-xyIT2wUaUwrVVf2UkBVpvw27TZV3M0&utm_content=2835234&irgwc=1&utm_medium=Affiliates&utm_source=Impact&utm_campaign=The%20Curious%20Girl%20Diaries- (Click Here For A Bestie Discount!) Taste Vita (Taste better for your partner!) https://tastevitainc.com/?afmc=7d&utm_campaign=7d&utm_source=leaddyno&utm_medium=affiliate (Click Here For A Bestie Discount!) SEX HACKS from the world's best: https://kennethplay.com/curiousgirl (https://kennethplay.com/curiousgirl) Coupon Code for 30% off Kennth's courses enter: CURIOUSGIRL Support this podcast
Thank you for joining us on Breakfast With Champions! Today we hear from Glenn Lundy, the founder of Breakfast With Champions, #RiseAndGrind and 800% Club. Lundy believes if you can change the way people start their day, it'll make a massive impact in their life, working and motivating to create the best versions of people, 23 year automotive leader!
One of my favorite quotes is by the late, great Steve Jobs who said 'You can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future.' This quote is a summation of my life experience. On this episode, I discuss how intentionally putting yourself in a position to be successful can open up doors of opportunity that you couldn't have prescribed in advance, and how putting in generous, thoughtful, and disciplined work creates an environment ripe for your success. Follow Will Lucas on Instagram at @willlucas Learn more about other Black tech disruptors and innovators at AfroTech.com Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
In this episode, Kate and Lance continue their journey through spooky stories with a wonderful spin on Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. Or at least a version shared through the lens of Mel Brooks, Today the Nerdagram team explore Young Frankenstein.
Steph talks about binging a few Things Worth Learning podcast episodes and particularly enjoyed an episode that featured one of thoughtbot's design directors, Sameera Kapila. Sam shared her expertise about management and inclusion, and Steph shares her favorite parts. Chris shares the story of a surprising error and the resulting journey through database transactions and Sidekiq that eventually resolved the issue. He also shares some follow up on the broken build and the merging process changes they introduced (spoiler, the process changes have been rolled back). Leading Inclusively, with Sameera Kapila - Things Worth Learning Podcast (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiV6_3pZFc0) How to Skim a Pull Request (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/a-smelly-list) Isolator (https://github.com/palkan/isolator) aftercommiteverywhere (https://github.com/Envek/after_commit_everywhere) timefora_boolean (https://github.com/calebhearth/time_for_a_boolean) Transcript: STEPH: Oh man, I'm about to stop eating my pop-tart. I'll put it away. It's within distance. I'm going to eat it. CHRIS: Your high-fat content unfrosted pop-tart. STEPH: You know, surprise Sunday twist: it has icing on it. CHRIS: Steph, who even are you? STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: There are a few canonical anchor facts that one knows about other people, and when one of those... STEPH: I like to keep everyone, including myself, on their toes. CHRIS: Or you've just secretly accepted that the icing adds another textural flavor adventure component. It's just better with icing. STEPH: All right, all right, all right. There's a complicated answer to this. And the complicated [chuckles] answer to this is that the more organic ingredients that I recognize when reading about pop-tarts are by a particular company, and they all have frosting on them. And the more generic pop-tarts that don't have frosting on them, I don't know how to pronounce a lot of those ingredients. So I'm like, no, but okay, I still eat them. But I prefer the ingredients I can pronounce. So I either go with the ingredients I can't pronounce or have a little bit of frosting on my pop-tart. And I'm going with the non-cancer route for today. CHRIS: For today, in this moment, and accepting the frosting. Okay, all right. Well, that is complicated. [laughs] It's tricky out there. Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Steph, what's new in your world? STEPH: Hey, Chris. So the weather, I'm going to talk about the weather for a little bit. [chuckles] It's been almost non-stop rain for the past several days, which is fine. I'm sure it's great for plant life. But it's really hard on my dog Utah because then we can't go outside for our normal walks and playtime. Although he is my four-legged water baby because he absolutely loves water, and puddles, and playing in the rain. So he's very fine with going outside and playing for a long time. But then I have to essentially give him a full-on bath before I want to bring him back in. So not wanting to have to give him a bath each time, in the spirit of improvising, we started finding more indoor games to play. And I've started teaching him to play hide and seek. And he's not great at it mainly because he will only stay until I'm out of eyesight, and then he will come and find me. And so I have to be really, really fast at finding a hiding spot to like dash around a corner or hide behind the door. But I think he enjoys it because he will find me and then he seems very excited. And we go back, and we play again. And so I just have to work on teaching him to wait a bit longer so I can find better hiding spots. CHRIS: When you said that, at first, I was like, how did you teach him to hide? But I realize he's only playing the seek part of the game, and you're only playing the hide part of the game. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: I'm just so used to you exchange roles back and forth. First, you hide, then you seek, and then you switch it up. That would be a lot to get your dog to be like, now I'm going to secretly hide. STEPH: [laughs] I'd be very impressed. Yes, we have very distinct roles in this game. I am the one that always counts and hides. But he's a very good seeker. So that's been fun. We just got to work on getting a little better at it. But on a more tech-related note, one of the design directors at thoughtbot, Sameera Kapila, who also goes by Sam, was a guest on the podcast Things Worth Learning, which is hosted by Matt Stauffer. And Matt is also the host of The Five-Minute Geek Show and The Laravel Podcast. And in the show Things Worth Learning, Matt meets with individuals that are excited to share something that they're deeply passionate about; maybe it's tech, maybe it's not. And I've binged a couple of those episodes. And I really like how you can choose between the podcast format or the YouTube format. So then you can really watch the conversation unfold, which I know you and I a couple of times have thought it would be fun if people could see us because there are so many facial emotions and gestures that go along with conversations. So it was really delightful. And speaking of delightful, Sam shared her expertise about management and inclusion. And I definitely recommend listening to the episode because I can't share everything that Sam shared. But a couple of the topics that Sam mentioned that I really enjoyed and would love to chat about, so the first one is about helping someone, in this case, someone that you manage that comes to you with a concern. So there's often a presumption that just because someone comes to you with a concern or an issue that they've experienced at work, that they're the ones that will also want to work to address that concern, and that's often not true. It can be true; maybe that person wants to be involved. But they're often coming to you in the leadership or management role to say, "Hey, I've had this issue," and they really want help with that instead of walking away with homework for it. Because then that trains people to essentially be in this mindset of well, if I bring up this concern, then I'm going to be the one that has to address it, even if I'm the one that's most negatively impacted by this. And addressing this concern could be actively harmful to me. And she shared a really great real-world example from her own experience where her and another co-worker had noticed a concern about the hiring process. And her and that co-worker got together, and they talked about the concerns. They even rehearsed for the meeting because they were trained by the tech industry to say, "Hey, if you bring up a concern, you're going to be responsible for addressing and then resolving that concern." And so they had that meeting with the person in leadership. And they were pretty nervous about how it was going to go. And that person in leadership said to them, "Thank you both so much for sharing that. That must have been such a burden. And this is my responsibility to fix. And here are what my next steps are." And that was amazing because it allowed Sam and the other person to go back to client work. And they also received follow-up conversations about how that issue was being addressed. So there was even that feedback loop as to how things were going to change. And I have a personal example that...I really resonated with the example that Sam provided because I remember there are different teams that I've been a part of, where often I was one of the few women engineers on the team. And so we often have conversations about how do we get more women engineers into the company? And they're wonderful conversations. But there's a part of me that always felt resentful about, like, why am I here? Why am I the one fixing this? I understand I have some more insight and expertise, and experience in this area. But I was also frustrated by the fact that I was the one that was in that meeting often with other women, and it felt like our responsibility to fix this. And I used to feel bad about feeling resentful towards that. Because I was like, shouldn't I want to help other people? And I do. But Sam's example really helped remind me and clarify that yes, just because there's a concern doesn't necessarily mean you should be the one to address it. And it really takes everybody involved, or it takes leadership to step up and address that concern. CHRIS: Oh, that's really interesting the way Sam is framing that and describing the situation of not having any problem that you bring in be now your work to solve. Like, oh, I found the issue, and now we've got to go do this. But the idea that you can bring something to light and then be able to walk away from it. And the particular thing that you were saying that if your interaction is always that when you reference something when you bring in a concern that then your manager works with you to figure out how you can solve it, then you get this mental block of like, well, do I even want to say anything? Because I don't want to try and deal with big, amorphous unclear issues. So maybe I just won't even say anything. And so this as a way to make sure that there's room for all of the conversation is a really interesting framing that I hadn't really thought about, frankly, but it's very interesting. I haven't seen this interview either. So I'm definitely excited to give this a look because Sam is wonderful. And the topic that you're describing here sounds fantastic as well. STEPH: Yeah. There was an important moment for me where...one of my managers is Matt Sumner, who's been on the show. And when Matt was my manager, at one point, we were having a one on one, and we would often go for walks for our one on one. And I mentioned something about "I have this concern, or I have this problem, but I don't really know how to fix it. So I'm not sure I'm ready to talk about it." And Matt, in his delightful way, was like, "We can still talk about it. You don't have to have an answer or a solution." I'm like, "Yeah, but I feel like I should be able to fix it. Like, if you have a concern, or if you have something that you want to gripe about, then you should come to the table with solutions for it." And Matt was like, "No, you don't need to do that at all. We can totally gripe about stuff or talk about concerns and then either figure out the solutions together or go to other people for ideas." And that was really important to me because, like you'd mentioned, otherwise, it felt like this mental block where then it feels like you can't air out some of the things that you're worried about or have concerns about because then you think you're the only one responsible. And you may not be able to come up with the best solution. You may need other people to then help you strategize and come up with ideas. And I just love, love, love that part of Sam's discussion. And oh, there was one other part about the conversation. Well, there are lots of parts that were amazing. But another one in particular that blew my mind is about Comic Sans, the font, the font that everyone loves to hate. [chuckles] And I learned that it's one of the most legible fonts for kids. And it's one of the more accessible fonts for people with dyslexia. And it's actually recommended...I think there are still more academic studies that need to be done to really classify fonts that are best for people that have dyslexia. But Comic Sans is recommended by The British Dyslexia Association and the Dyslexia Association of Ireland. And there are some other really great posts that talk about the benefits of using a font like Comic Sans because the typeface has long ascenders and descenders and generous letter spacing and asymmetrical lowercase b and d to then help distinguish those letters. And I just thought that was so cool. This font that everybody wants to rip apart because it seems whimsical, unprofessional gets overused. There are lots of reasons, I suppose. [laughs] But there's a really big benefit to it, and it can help others. And I just found that very whimsical in itself. CHRIS: I love the idea that there are multiple levels of knowing about Comic Sans. First, you're just like, I don't even know the name, but it's that comic book-looking font. And then obviously, the next step is to be like Comic Sans? How could you ever use that? It's an atrocity. And then it's like, but actually, Comic Sans has some things going for it. And it is a really interesting consideration and something that you wouldn't necessarily think of. But then once you learn it, you're like, okay. Man, I wonder how many other things in the world have this interesting shape to them? Hmm. STEPH: Do you know the history behind Comic Sans? CHRIS: I do not. STEPH: I read about it fairly recently, but I'm probably going to botch some of the details. But I believe it was designed or created by Vincent Connare. And it was created for Microsoft. And Vincent was working on a project where I think there was a dog that was essentially going to have these bubbles that would then show you different parts of the application and walk you through the different features. And the dog had a very comic book feel to the character. And so then Vincent designed a font to go along with that comic book character, this dog and came up with Comic Sans. I don't think the dog actually launched with that particular font. But since the font was still developed, it was released as part of the available fonts. And there we go, there is the birth of Comic Sans. And then it just received so much love and ire all throughout history. [chuckles] CHRIS: There's something that you said there that I want to loop back on when you were talking about chatting with Matt Sumner and saying, "Here's this thing, but I don't know how to solve it. So I don't even want to bring it up." I really liked the framing that you gave and the fact that Matt was like, "No, no, we can still talk about it. We can at least explore this thing, have a conversation." I think that's really wonderful. There's a very similar thing that I experience a lot when doing code review, particularly when I'm in more of a leadership role within a team, which is I often want to highlight something that feels a little bit off to me in the code, but I may not have a specific solution. Like, I may see a variable name, or I may see a controller action that feels like it's the wrong shape or something. And I'll often name it but explicitly say, "I actually don't have a better idea here. So feel free to continue on with this, but I want to name it. So in case that sparks something in you, if you were also feeling some incongruousness, maybe it's worth you spending another minute to think about it, but I want to make sure my comment isn't blocking or otherwise making you feel uncomfortable." If I just come to you and I'm like, "This feels wrong," and that's all I say, that to me is unacceptable code review. Because now I want all of my code review feedback to be very actionable, it's either here's the thing that I feel strongly I think we should definitely change this. If you disagree, let's have a conversation. But yeah, this one definitely needs to change. Here's the thing that, like, I don't know, maybe we could break this into two lines and split it up. But if you don't like that, that's fine. Do whatever. And so then it's I've given the person my thoughts but given them clarity and a free rein to do whatever they want with that information. And then there are ones where I'm like, I don't even know what I think we should do here, but I think something. But if you don't have any ideas...like, I don't have any ideas specifically. If you don't have any ideas, it's fine. We'll continue on with this and maybe revisit it down the road. But I want to make sure each of those different tiers is actionable for the other person, and I'm not just giving them homework or something to be sad about because that would be bad code review. STEPH: I'm just imagining a PR comment that says, "I don't know what we should do here. But I don't think this is it," [laughs] and that just creating sadness. That's so interesting to me because I have flip-flopped with that opinion in regards to there are times that I very much resonate and do what you just said where I will point out to someone where I'm like, "I'm not sure why, but I just have concerns about this. And I don't know if you also ran into anything that was weird about this and would like to talk about it. I don't have any really great ideas, so I think this is good for now. And we should keep moving forward, so we're not blocked on it," but just wanted to, as you mentioned, highlight it in case it sparks something for the other person or for someone else that's reviewing the code. And then there are other times where I'll look at something, and I'm like, "Yeah, it's not great. There's something that feels brittle or potentially maybe hard to maintain or things like that. But I don't have a better idea." And I don't comment on it because I'm like, I don't want to distract that person or block them. And I do think it's good enough, and I don't have anything to add to the conversation, so I just leave it out. So it's interesting to me where is that line of when I feel like it's important enough to comment to then potentially spark some conversation versus just letting it go so then I don't add any distraction to their work? CHRIS: I think it's when the spidey-sense gets past 47%. It's a very specific number. I do the same thing where there's something, and I'm like, you know what? I can't even clearly express what about this makes me feel something off, and so I won't even comment on it, and I agree. And then there are things that trip past some magical line in the sand. And I'm like, you know what? I think I'm going to say something here, but I don't even have a recommendation. And then there's a whole spectrum of the nature of code review and, again, 47% being the specific number. STEPH: There's actually a thoughtbot blog post that correlates nicely to that concept of spidey sense. It's written by Mike Burns, and it's titled How to Skim a Pull Request. But essentially, grabbing from one of the lines here is where Mike presents an unexplained, incomplete, and arbitrarily grouped list of keywords that will cause us thoughtboters to read your code with more care and suspicion. [laughs] That feels perfectly aligned with that idea of spidey sense, spidey-sense 101. I'll be sure to include a link in the show notes. Or, you know, 40%. CHRIS: I think it was 47%. It's a very precise number. [chuckles] STEPH: Very precise nonsensical number. Got it. [laughs] CHRIS: If I'm making up fake statistics, I'm not going to have them round to an even 10. [laughter] STEPH: Makes it seem more legit somehow. CHRIS: Exactly. STEPH: But that's really the novelties that I wanted to chat about. Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is leading-edge application performance monitoring that's designed to help Rails developers quickly find and fix performance issues without having to deal with the headache or overhead of enterprise platform feature bloat. With a developer-centric UI and tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code, you can quickly pinpoint and resolve those performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, memory bloat, and much more. Scout's real-time alerting and weekly digest emails let you rest easy knowing Scout's on watch and resolving performance issues before your customers ever see them. Scout has also launched its new error monitoring feature add-on for Python applications. Now you can connect your error reporting and application monitoring data on one platform. See for yourself why developers call Scout their best friend and try our error monitoring and APM free for 14 days; no credit card needed. And as an added-on bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. Learn more at scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. STEPH: What's new in your world? CHRIS: I have some follow up on a recent topic that we talked about. So we had a kerfuffle which I described where we had a branch that got merged and the rebase some stuff got out of hand. And so we introduced some process, the protected branch configuration within GitHub that required the branches to be up-to-date before they can be merged and CI to be passing. And everybody was happy. It was like, this is great. Turns out it was never turned on. That's actually the day I was like, man; this is really straightforward. There's been no annoyance here. And then I got to the point where it was like; this seems weird because we just merged a lot of things in rapid succession. I went and checked, and it turns out what I thought was the name of the branch protection rule in GitHub's UI is, in fact, a regular expression pattern. It might not be a full regular expression but like a wildcard pattern for the branch name to match to, and so it's specific. I created this rule, and in small, gray text underneath, it said, "This applies to zero branches." I missed that the first time but then the second time going back, I was like, oh, I actually wanted it to apply to more than zero branches. So I went back in and changed that. It's a great example of very subtle UI that just slipped past me. STEPH: I was going to say in your defense, the very subtle gray font to say, "This applies to zero," feels tricky. CHRIS: That...also, going through the work of creating this thing and if that results in zero branches that would match, maybe that's the thing to emphasize on creation. I would love that. Because in my case, I was trying very specifically to target an existing branch. There is the ability to say, "Oh, any bugfix-* named branch," if you're using branch naming strategies like that, you can use this for that sort of thing. So it may be that currently, there are no branches with that name. But in my case, I was just like, please, main, anytime anything is happening on main, that is what we want to do. I just needed to put the word main there. But anyway, once I actually turned it on, insufferable, absolutely not, cannot survive in this world. We have a relatively small team. There are three of us, and not everyone is even full-time, and my time is pulled in a lot of different directions. So I'm actually not pushing as much code as I might otherwise. Even with that, nope, absolutely not. Our CI is like; I don't know, five-ish minutes per run. Turns out, especially Monday mornings, we have a volley of things that will have been reviewed and trickled in through Friday afternoon. And then there's a bunch of work we want to land Monday morning. And then, just at any point, it turns out, yes, this was untenable. So we have turned it off. I would like to revisit this down the road and introduce the MergeQueue functionality, so the idea of being able to say, "Yeah, you just name when you want something to go in, and then the system will manage the annoying finicky work there." But for now, I had to give up on my dream of everything running on CI, on a feature branch, before it gets merged. STEPH: Ooph, that phrase, "I had to give up on my dream," that breaks my heart for you. [laughs] CHRIS: I may be going a little bit fanciful with my language but, like, a little. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: I liked this thing. I want to exist in that world. But it is not feasible given the current state of the world. And that will only get worse over time, is my expectation. So I get to revisit this when I have the time to more thoroughly figure a thing out. But for now, I don't know, merge whatever; it will be fun. STEPH: There's a small part of me that feels a little reassured that it was a terrible time, although I hate that it was a terrible time. But I have felt that pain on so many other projects where I am constantly waiting, and I'm constantly checking to be like, can I merge? Can I merge? Can I merge? And then I can merge, but then someone beats me to it. And I'm like, oh, then I got to restart. And I got to wait, and I'm constantly checking. So that feels like it helps validate my experience. [chuckles] I am excited for that MergeQueue. I would be super excited to try that out and hear about how it goes just because that seems more like the dream where you can just say, hey, I want this PR to go whenever it can go. Just take care of it. I want it to be rebased, whatever the flow is, and have it be merged, so I don't ever have to check on it again. CHRIS: But once we configured this, there was a new thing that appeared in the GitHub UI, which was auto-merge. And so that was a button where I could say like, "Hey, merge this whenever CI passes," which was a nice upgrade, but it didn't have the additional logic of and rebase as necessary. Or the more subtle logic of like, you don't actually want to rebase where you have five different branches that are all trying to merge, and they keep rebasing. You want to have the idea of a queue, and so you get in line. And you rebase when it's your turn, and then you run the CI. And you try and be as smart as possible about that. If anyone at GitHub is listening, I would love if you all threw this into your platform, and then you could ping Slack if anything went wrong. But otherwise, there are, like I said, existing tools. At some point, I will probably, I don't know, over a long weekend or something like that, sit down with a large cup of coffee and explore these. But today is not that day. STEPH: I'm excited to hear about that day. CHRIS: So that is a tale of woe and sadness. But luckily, I get to balance it out with a tale of happiness and good outcomes. So that's good. The happiness and good outcome story does start with trouble, as they always do. So we had a bug that occurred in the application where something was supposed to have happened. And then there was an email that needed to go out to tell the user that this thing had happened. And the bug popped up within AppSignal and said something was nil that shouldn't have been nil. Particularly, we're using a gem called Time For a Boolean, which is by Caleb Hearth. And he's a former thoughtboter and maintains this wonderful gem that instead of having a Boolean for like, is this thing approved, or is it paid? Or is it processed? You use a timestamp. And then this gem gives you nice Boolean-like methods on top of that timestamp. Because it turns out, very often just having the Boolean of like, this was paid, it turns out you really want to know when it was paid. That would be a really useful piece of information. And so, while you're still in Postgres land, it's nice to be able to reach for this and have the affordances of the Boolean-like interface but also have the timestamp where available. So anyway, the email was trying to process but that timestamp...let's pretend that it was paid as the one that matters here so paid at was nil, which was very concerning. Because this was the email that's like, hey, that thing was processed. Or let's say it was processed, actually, because that's closer to what it was. Hey, this thing was processed, and here's an email notification to tell you that. But the process timestamp was nil. I was like, oh no. Oh no. And so when I saw this pop up, I was like, this is very bad. Everything is very bad. Oh goodness. Turns out what had happened was...because I very quickly chased after this, looked in the background job queue, looked in Sidekiq's UI, and the job was gone. So it had been processed. I was like, wait a minute, how? How did this fix itself? Like, that's not the kind of bug that resolves itself, except, in this case, it was. This was an interaction that I'd run into many times before. Sidekiq was immediately processing the job. But the job was being enqueued from within the context of a database transaction. And the database transaction had not been committed yet. But Sidekiq was already off to the races trying to process. So the record that was being worked on, the database record, had local changes within the context of that transaction, but that hadn't been committed. Sidekiq then reads that record from the database, but it's now out of sync because that tiny bit of Sidekiq is apparently very fast off to the races immediately. And so there's just this tiny little bit of time that can occur. And this is also a fun one where this isn't going to happen every time. It's only going to happen sometimes. Like, if the queue had a couple of other things in it, Sidekiq probably would have not gotten to this until the database transaction had fully closed. So the failure mode here is super annoying. But the solution is pretty easy. You just have to make sure that you enqueue outside of the database transaction. But I'm going to be honest, that's difficult to always do right. STEPH: That's a gnarly bug or something to investigate that I don't think I have run into before. Could you talk a little bit more about enqueueing the job outside the database transaction? CHRIS: Sure. And I think I've talked about this on a previous episode a while back because I have run into this one a few times. But I think it is sufficiently rare; like, you need almost a perfect storm because the database transaction is going to close very quickly. Sidekiq needs to be all that much more speedy in picking up the job in order for this to happen. But basically, the idea is within some processing logic that we have in our system; we find a record, we do some work. And then we need to update that record to assign this timestamp or whatever it is. And then we also want to inform the user, so we're going to enqueue a job to send the email notification. But for all of the database work, we are wrapping it in a transaction because we want it to either succeed or fail atomically. So there are three different records that we need to update. We want all of them to be updated or none of them to be updated. So, therefore, we wrap it in a transaction. And the way we had written, this was to also enqueue the job from within the transaction. That wasn't something we were actively intentionally doing because those are different systems. It doesn't really mean anything. But we were still within the block of ApplicationRecord.transaction do. We're now inside of that block. We're doing all of the record updates. And then the last piece of work that we want to think about is enqueueing the job to send the email. The problem is if we're still within that database transaction if it's yet to be committed, then when Sidekiq picks up that job to run it, it will see the prior state of the world. And it's only if the Sidekiq job waits a little bit that then the database transaction will have been committed. The record is now updated and available to be read by Sidekiq in the correct updated state. And so there's this tiny little bit of inconsistency that can happen. It's basically because Sidekiq is going out to Redis, which is a distinct system. It doesn't have any knowledge of the database transaction at play. That's why I sometimes consider using a Postgres-backed background job system because then actually the job can be as part of the database transaction. STEPH: Cool. That's helpful. That makes a lot of sense the way you explained the whole you're actually enqueueing the job from inside that transaction. I'm curious, that prompts another question. In the case where you mentioned you're using a transaction because you want to make sure that if something fails to update so, everything gets updated together, in the event that something does fail to update because you were previously enqueueing that job from the transaction, does that mean that the update could have failed but that email would still have gone out? CHRIS: That does not. And the reason for that is because we're within dry-monad world. And so dry-monad will implicitly capture the ActiveRecord rollback, which I think is an exception that gets raised or somehow...But basically, if that database transaction fails for any reason and ends up getting rolled back, then dry-monads will not continue processing through the rest of the sequential operation. And so, therefore, even if we move the enqueuing of the email outside of the database transaction, the sequential nature of that processing and the dry-monad stuff that we have in play will handle that. And I think that would more generally be true because I think Rails raises an exception on rollback. Not certain there. But I know in our case, we're fine on that. And we have actually explicitly checked7 for that sort of thing. STEPH: So I meant a slightly different question because that makes sense to me everything that you just said where if it's outside of the transaction, then that sequential order won't fire because of that ActiveRecord migration error. But when you have the enqueuing inside of the transaction because then that's going to be inside of the sequential order, maybe before the rollback error gets raised. Does that make sense? CHRIS: Yes. I think what you're asking is basically like, do we make sure to not send the job if the rest of the stuff didn't succeed? STEPH: I'm just wondering from a transaction perspective, actually. If you have a transaction wrapped block and then you have in there, like, update this record, send email, end block, let's say update...well, I guess it's going raise because you've got probably like an update bank. Okay, so then yeah, you won't get to the next line. Got it. Got it. Got it. I just had to walk myself through that because I forgot that you probably...I have to visualize [laughs] as to what that code probably looks like. All right, that answered my question. CHRIS: Okay. So back up to the top level then, this is the problem that we have. And looking through the codebase, we actually have it in a bunch of different places. So the solution in any one of those cases is to just take the line of code where we're saying enqueue UserMailer.deliver_later take that line of code, move it outside of the database transaction, and make sure it only happens if the database transaction succeeds. That's very easy to do in one case. But my concern was this is a very easy failure mode to end up in. And this is a very easy incorrect version of the code to write. As far as I can tell, we never want to write the code where this is happening inside of the transaction because it has this failure mode. But how do we enforce that? That was the thing that came to mind. So I immediately did a quick look of like, is there a RuboCop thing I can do here or something? And I actually found something even more specific, which was so exciting to find. It's a gem called Isolator. And its job is to detect non-atomic interactions within database transactions. And so it's fantastic. I was like, wait, really? Is this going to do the thing? And so I just installed the gem, configured it where I wanted, and then ran the test suite. And it showed me every place throughout the app right now where we were doing this pattern of behavior like enqueueing work from within a database transaction, which was great. STEPH: Ooh, that's really nifty. I kind of want to install that and just run it on my current client's codebase and see what I find. CHRIS: This feels like something like strong migrations where it's like, yeah, this is great. I kind of want to have this as part of my core toolset now. This one feels even perhaps slightly more so because sometimes I look at strong migrations, and I'm like, no, no, no, strong migrations, I get why you would say that, but for reasons, this is actually fine. And they have configurations within it to say, like, no, this is okay. Isolator feels like it's always telling me something I want to know. So this, very quickly, I'm like, I think this might be part of my toolset moving forward on every single app forever. And actually, there's another gem that I used. It's made by the same team. So this is from the folks over at Evil Martians, which is another Rails consultancy out there in the world. And the Isolator gem is one thing that they've produced. And then I think the same author of it who is an Evil Martian's employee created the aftercommiteverywhere gem. So aftercommit is one of Rails' ActiveRecord callbacks. But in this case, it allows you to use it everywhere, as the name implies. And so rather than actually having to take that line of code out of the database transaction block, which is naturally where we would write it because that's how we think about the code and how we want to express it, you can just use this aftercommit method, wrap the call in that, so it's after_commit, and then a block. So either braces or do..end. That enqueueing of the email now just gets wrapped in that. And so what that does is it says, "Defer this until after the transaction commits. If the transaction does not commit, if we roll it back, then don't run it." And what was nice is the actual code change when I finally submitted all of this was add the gem to the gem file. And then everywhere that we're doing the wrong thing, which running the test suite told me, I just went in, and I wrapped that line in after_commit and a block. And it was such a nice, clean...like, I didn't have to move the code around or actually shift the lines, which was my first attempt at this. I was able to just annotate each of those lines and say, "You're special, you're special, you're special," And then I'm done. And again, the first gem told me every case where I needed to do that. It's like, well, this is a wonderful little outcome here. STEPH: That's really nice, yeah, how you can make the changes and then, like you said, re-run the test or re-run that gem, and it lets you know what else still needs to be updated. I'm intrigued where you mentioned you didn't have to move any lines, though. Maybe I just need to look at the gem and see it, but I'm still envisioning that you have your transaction do block. And then you're doing some things; you're updating records, and then you have your end. And then after that, it's when you want to enqueue the email. And with this after_commit, you actually added that method call inside of the transaction but then wrapped the call to Sidekiq to send the email inside of that block. CHRIS: Correct. Yeah. So it's basically like saying, "Here's almost an anonymous function." If you think about a Ruby block in that nomenclature, you're saying, like, here's some work to do when and if the transaction succeeds. And so it meant that I was able to keep the code in the way that we as humans would talk about it but deal with the murky details, and edge cases of database transactions, and Sidekiq, and whatnot. Sort of just handle it by saying like...it almost feels like an annotation or a decoration or something like that. But it was this, in my mind, almost like a perfect melding of I don't want to think about this. Oh, cool. Okay, here's a quick, easy way to deal with it but to not have to fundamentally change how I write the code. STEPH: Interesting. So I like all the things you're saying. I'll be honest, I'm not totally sold, and I'm trying to think of why. I think the benefits...one, as you mentioned, it's something you don't have to think about or at least signals to others that hey, maybe you should think about this to the extent that you use after_commit. And so that way, you don't have these asynchronous events taking place inside the transaction. So I like that visibility and communication to the rest of the team. Putting it inside of the transaction feels interesting. I don't know why; I feel a little weird about this. [laughs] I'm bringing my true self. CHRIS: That's fair. So if we're being honest, I solved this first by finding the Isolator gem. Well, I solved it first by just doing it manually. I went through the app, and I found all the places. And I was like, you know what? I'm worried that the next person authoring code like this, it's so easy to fall into this trap. Like, this is such a subtle little thing that our brains are not thinking about. And so I had first fixed it, and so I had a diff that involved moving lots of lines of code, every instance of this moved from being in the database transaction out of it. And that was fine. I was fine with that as a solution. But it was a little bit noisy because I was moving a bunch of lines. So then I brought in the Isolator gem. I actually reset that, and I went back to before I had made the fix, ran the test just to make sure Isolator was actually finding every instance. They did; that was great. So I was like, all right, cool. This is better because now I have this thing that will tell anyone when this happens. So I'm very happy about that. Because frankly, this is some hard-earned knowledge that I had to read Sidekiq and remember how database transactions work and convince myself of what was going on here and finally come to what I believe the solution is. And now Isolator is just like, cool, that's encapsulated. And it gives a very nice failure message in the test suite. So it's like, excellent. I really like this. But still looking at it, the diff, the amount of code that I had to change, it's like, well, naturally, this is how we want to write this code, but for reasons, we can't. And it's appeasing the computer more than it's appeasing the reader or the author of the code. And so then I happen to be reading through the Isolator gem's README, and they mention the aftercommiteverywhere gem. And I was like, oh, that's interesting. So one more time, I reset. And then I really tried fixing it with after_commit. And the look of the diff there felt nice to me because the lines got a little more on them, but they didn't move. And so it's like, this is how we naturally would have authored it, and now it works correctly. And I liked that. But I understand your hesitation because you're like, but the thing is, it's wrong. And so you've made the wrong not wrong anymore, but you didn't...and so I get your hesitation. I still like the fancy version. STEPH: Yeah, I think you just helped me figure out my grumpiness with it or why I'm not totally sold on it. And it was in regards to adding a dependency to avoid a noisy diff is the oversimplified version that I was processing or the reason that I was a bit grumpy about adding this other gem for that. But then you also just brought a lot of other really good reasons. One thing that you said that I do really like is adding tools that help us author code in a more natural style, the way that we want to highlight this process, and how this application does work, and how this business logic flows. So given in that light, that makes me feel better about it. But yeah, I think that was my initial grumpiness. I was like, it'll be a noisy diff. It's okay. CHRIS: I think I definitely share your hesitation, or you're like, hmm, that's an interesting reason to bring more code into the application. But at the same time, I think the counterpoint that comes to mind for me is we're using Ruby because of its expressiveness; at least, that's why I'm using Ruby. I really want the code that I write to be as close as possible to the thing that I would say to another human about like, oh okay, when a user signs up for the application, we need to create a record in our system, and then we need to send them an email. And then we need to do this other thing. And so, the closer that our code is to those words that I would use to describe to another human, the happier I am. And I will put in some pretty significant effort to hold that line as long as the code can also be correct. And so, the Isolator gem here does a great job of enforcing that correctness. And then after_commit allows me to still maintain that expressiveness and not have to think about the murky details as much or not have to reshape my code to match the murky realities of different persistence engines. But I do agree. I think it's a good thing to look at and ask, like, is it worth it? Are you sure? And in this case, I will say, "Yeah, I think so," but with that amount of certainty in my voice, [chuckles] which is not a ton. STEPH: I think this is going back to my days of working with dependency bot PRs where every time there was an upgrade for a gem, I always ask, what do you do here? [chuckles] Do we need to upgrade you? Can we just remove you from the codebase? So I'm fairly...I don't know, resistant is a strong word. I'm skeptical of when we're adding stuff in, and I just want to question the value that it's adding. But I want to circle back to something that you said, and that is hard-earned knowledge. And that part I understand so much where when you have gone through a fair amount of work to uncover an issue, and then you want to make sure that others don't have to go through that. This is a really nice way to highlight; hey, there's something that's tricky about computers and software here, and we need to watch out for that. And I want to help you lookout for that. Versus this is just inherit information where this needs to happen outside or after that transaction. And so that makes a really nice entry point where someone can look to say, "Why did we add this gem?" And then there's a commit message that goes with it that explains this is why we use this after_commit gem because we're specifically looking to avoid this type of bug. And I love that. CHRIS: Yeah, I think more lines of git commit message than diff on this one. So yeah, I wrote a short novel describing all of the features, describing the different pieces that are coming together. And then it's actually a +28 -6 diff. So it's a very small code change. But yeah, lots of story captured there. STEPH: And if you had just moved the lines, you could still have that commit message. But it's not likely that someone's going to look up that git commit change or that message that went along with it because they're not going to know to blame that one. But if they look at that particular edition of after_commit, they're more likely to find that historical context. So long story short, I think you have walked me through my initial grumpiness and provided some really good ways to avoid that really tricky failure mode for other developers. CHRIS: Well, thank you. I'm getting Steph's seal of approval starting from grumpy places. [laughs] I feel good. All right. STEPH: I'll have some special Stephanie's approval stickers designed and printed for you. CHRIS: I hope you're not joking because I very much want a yellow heart that says, "Steph-approved." STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: And I can put it on PRs, and I can put it on the wall. [laughs] STEPH: Well, now I have to find a sticker designer and make a...well, it's just a yellow heart. I can probably handle this. I'm going to use Comic Sans. That will be the approved part. [laughs] Yellow hearts and Comic Sans for everybody. CHRIS: Well, with that absolutely fantastic call back to earlier parts of the episode, shall we wrap up? STEPH: Let's wrap up. CHRIS: The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review in iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey STEPH: Or you can reach us at email@example.com via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeee! Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.
- Putting more stock into the 1st half or the 2nd half from KC? - Momentum builder? - Hey, we play defense now! - Shake up of the AFC hierarchy - Nick's Notable Notes See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Adam and the other Saints in Oklahoma and Kansas were blessed to have a visit from Elder and Sister Uchtdorf along with President and Sister Nelson. And Adam gives a breakdown of his favorite points from their talks including topics like humanizing villains, receiving personal revelation, becoming more childlike in our faith, and more.
GUEST'S BIO Mike Reilly is an STR Operator based in North Carolina. Over the past 14 months, Mike has been able to build a portfolio of 6 rental units (4 STRs) which are netting him and his wife $12,000/month! Mike started his journey into short-term rentals with the goal of replacing his income so he could take back control of his time and spend it with those who matter most to him. HIGHLIGHTS OF THE EPISODE 01:00 Exclusive content from the STR Secrets Facebook group 01:49 Join the STR Secrets Facebook group - https://www.facebook.com/groups/STRentalsecrets 01:52 Subscribe to Short Term Rental Secrets on Youtube 02:23 Text RESOURCES to (978) 242-0001 04:14 Finding co-hosting leads 04:23 Doing your homework regarding property management 06:07 3 different ways to generate co-hosting leads 07:00 Working with your local network 08:06 How to expand your network 12:22 Cold outreach 13:51 Building your brand and your presence 14:49 How Mike built his brand and presence 16:12 Working your teams to generate leads 16:27 Mike Reilly shared how he found his co-hosting opportunities 20:16 Putting yourself out there 22:25 Mike talks about Grant Cardone from Undercover Billionaire 27:04 Tips on how you can build your presence NOTABLE QUOTES "Don't let that fear stop you." - Mike Reilly "If there's a will, there's a way." - Mike Sjogren "You have to be okay putting yourself out there." - Mike Sjogren "Be okay with getting some rejection, it's okay." - Mike Sjogren CONNECT WITH THE GUEST Mike Reilly: Instagram | Clubhouse CONNECT WITH THE HOSTS Michael Sjogren: Short Term Rental Secrets Facebook Group | Clubhouse | Instagram | Youtube | Facebook Page | Linkedin https://linktr.ee/the_airbnbguy Emanuele Pani: Clubhouse | Instagram | Facebook | Linkedin FREE MASTERCLASS TRAINING - https://www.strsecrets.com/masterclass
This week's episode features Nicole Cruz, a registered dietitian who specializes in helping families eat together with less stress and more joy. She gave us the basics of Division of Responsibility in feeding, a crash course in intuitive eating for the whole family, and some big thoughts on growth percentiles. You can find her Facebook group at https://www.facebook.com/groups/joyfuleatingforyourfamily/ (Joyful Eating for Your Family) or on Instagram @NicoleCruzRD
Bestselling authors Mary Buffett and David Clark examine seventeen companies that Warren Buffett has bought for himself and for his holding company, Berkshire Hathaway, as durable investments and explain why these companies are once again selling at prices that offer great long-term growth prospects. Warren Buffett has always believed that the time to buy stocks is when nobody else wants them. Even some of the most amazing businesses—those with a durable competitive advantage—are trading at prices and price-to-earnings ratios that offer investors serious long-term moneymaking opportunities. Pessimism about the banking situation in Europe and unemployment in America have created the perfect storm to bring stock prices down and present value-oriented investors some great possibilities. In Warren Buffett's world, as stock prices decrease, the prospects for investment increase. Putting a number on those prospects tells Warren whether or not the stock is an attractive buy. The Warren Buffett Stock Portfolio explains how to do just that—how to value companies and conservatively estimate the kind of future return that an investment is offering at its current market price. Mary Buffett and David Clark look at stocks in Warren's portfolio as the basis for their analysis. After a brief history of Warren's investment strategy, Buffett and Clark explain how to interpret a company's per-share earnings and per-share book-value histories to quickly identify which companies have a durable competitive advantage and to project the compounding annual rate of return that an investment offers. The authors provide case studies and evaluations of seventeen companies in Warren Buffett's portfolio. The Warren Buffett Stock Portfolio is a valuable companion to the other books in Buffett and Clark's successful series—Buffettology, The Buffettology Workbook, The New Buffettology, The Tao of Warren Buffett, Warren Buffett and the Interpretation of Financial Statements, Warren Buffett's Management Secrets, and Warren Buffett and the Art of Stock Arbitrage
Listen to how ordinary people built extraordinary wealth - and how you can too. You'll learn how millionaires live on less than they make, avoid debt, invest, are disciplined and responsible! Featuring hosts from the Ramsey Network: Dave Ramsey, Ken Coleman, Christy Wright, Rachel Cruze, John Delony, and George Kamel.
CJ gives a breakdown of the importance of putting yourself first in life. Here Are My Platforms E-Mail: Cjwilkins89@gmail.com Podcast: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-be-a-man-podcast/id1422487024?mt=2&uo=4 Instagram: &mrcjwilkins Cash App: $ChrisWilkins1989 Twitter: @CWILK1989 --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/christopolis-tha-great/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/christopolis-tha-great/support
Hello everyone! Saying this year is difficult is an understatement. Administrators, teachers, students and parents are all trying to figure out how to balance their lives within constant disruption and uncertainty. For many, this problem is causing mental health concerns and quality of life struggles. In hopes that we can shed some light—and the importance of—managing mental health, I have brought on Monika, otherwise known as @thecheerteacher on Instagram, to discuss her path through mental health struggles, how she got out of her dark time, and how she is helping her students manage their own mental health for the better. In this episode we touch on: Teaching in a variety of grades The beginning of her work with a mental health focus in the classroom Monika's descent into hating her job because of putting on a "happy face" and her way out of this dark place Managing time to support student mental needs Modeling how to handle difficult emotions You do not want to miss this one! This episode is sponsored by Heinemann—the leading publisher of professional books and resources for educators—and their new classroom resource, Math by the Book by Sue O'Connell and colleagues. Math is everywhere—even in great children's books! Teachers and students love a good story. But those stories can also help elementary students make sense of important mathematical concepts. Math by the Book shows teachers how to use high-quality children's books to teach grade-specific math skills and content. You'll find activities, investigations, and teaching strategies…all paired with lists of carefully chosen K-5 literature. So, if you're looking for a fresh way to bring math teaching to life in your classroom, visit MathByTheBook.com to download a free sample or order a copy. That's MathByTheBook.com.
SHOW NOTES:Bek was once a divorced and bankrupt single mama who lost it all by the age of 25, she then turned her life around and in 3 short years she is now a fully financially independent mum and a CEO to a global multiple 6 figure business within the network marketing industry. Beks links: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/beks.health...Website: https://bekshealthyjourney.com/ Time Stamps: How she became an ENTREPENURE [1.20] The mindset and the source of her energy for the business [7.00] She lost her focus and the struggles she went through [9.00] The biggest things she changed for herself [14.00] Putting ourself first and feel proud of what we are doing [18.30] CONSISTENCY is very important [22.00] You can buy time [28.00] Dealing with lack of support and wrong ideas [33.00]
In this week's show, Phil talks to Alan Pope, an Engineering Manager and Developer Advocate for InfluxData, the creator of InfluxDB which is an open-source time series database. He is also a podcaster and he describes himself as a through and through geek. Alan talks about why it's okay to move on when the time is right in your career journey. He also discusses why it's important to take people's advice with a pinch of salt. KEY TAKEAWAYS: TOP CAREER TIP It's okay to move on in your career when the time is right. Never feel as though you are chained to a position for your entire career. Being comfortable is often not a place where we challenge and grow. WORST CAREER MOMENT When transitioning to a new company, Alan was confronted by HR who advised him that if he left, it would damage his career journey. It was a time of anxiety, but their threats came to nothing. CAREER HIGHLIGHT Alan trained many aspiring IT professionals, so when it came to looking for a position of his own, his reputation was already secured. Putting yourself out there is incredibly valuable to your career path. THE FUTURE OF CAREERS IN I.T The IT world is enormous and offers countless possibilities. It is incredibly easy to pivot and move between pursuits and sectors and offers an endlessly interesting path for any aspiring IT professional. THE REVEAL What first attracted you to a career in I.T.? – Alan was a nerd, and after receiving a ZX81, Alan developed a love for coding. What's the best career advice you received? – You always have a choice What's the worst career advice you received? – What would you do if you started your career now? – Alan would like to have attended university so as to establish a better foundation for his career. What are your current career objectives? – Learning new things. Alan is intent on staying far from his comfort zone and constantly challenging himself. What's your number one non-technical skill? – Having empathy for other people's points of view and perspectives. How do you keep your own career energized? – Alan keeps moving once the challenge has faded. It's vital to find the things that bring you joy. What do you do away from technology? – Cooking, which allows him the time to reconnect with the things that matter. FINAL CAREER TIP Take other people's advice with a pinch of salt. Everyone has their own story and path through life, and the lessons they've learned may not always apply to your own path. BEST MOMENTS (3:26) – Alan - “People need to not be afraid to leave a role” (7:41) – Alan - “It's about looking after yourself and your own career” (8:57) – Alan – “Getting yourself out there and becoming known in your target industry is a very valuable thing to do” (13:15) – Alan – “Nobody cares what you look like. It's the output. It's the product you create, and it's the work that you do that's the important thing” ABOUT THE HOST – PHIL BURGESS Phil Burgess is an independent IT consultant who has spent the last 20 years helping organizations to design, develop, and implement software solutions. Phil has always had an interest in helping others to develop and advance their careers. And in 2017 Phil started the I.T. Career Energizer podcast to try to help as many people as possible to learn from the career advice and experiences of those that have been, and still are, on that same career journey. CONTACT THE HOST – PHIL BURGESS Phil can be contacted through the following Social Media platforms: Twitter: https://twitter.com/_PhilBurgess LinkedIn: https://uk.linkedin.com/in/philburgess Instagram: https://instagram.com/_philburgess Website: https://itcareerenergizer.com/contact Phil is also reachable by email at firstname.lastname@example.org and via the podcast's website, https://itcareerenergizer.com Join the I.T. Career Energizer Community on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/groups/ITCareerEnergizer ABOUT THE GUEST – ALAN POPE Alan Pope is an Engineering Manager and Developer Advocate for InfluxData, the creator InfluxDB which is an open source time series database. He is also a podcaster and he describes himself as a through and through geek. CONTACT THE GUEST – ALAN POPE Alan Pope can be contacted through the following Social Media platforms: Twitter: https://twitter.com/popey LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alan-pope-b3a109143/ Website: https://popey.com
The second in a new batch of interview segments with the stars of Putting 2&2 Together. Join Peter Cosmas Sofronas as he interviews Jon Vellante and Presley Duyck about the ins and outs of putting James and Christine and the bonus Arbor Day episode together. Theme Music by Valerie Forgione. The original play Two and Two Together and the scriptbook for Season One can be purchased at Amazon.com. Merchandise available at Teespring. For further information, please visit petersofronas.com. Support the show (https://www.facebook.com/groups/twoandtwotogether/)
Markets turn risk on. Producer prices rise to levels not seen since peak inflation of the 1970s. Inflation is double the Fed's benchmark now and will be triple by year end. Bitcoin rallies on ETF news, but will likely sell off on ETF launch. Putting profits first is putting people first. The Art Institute of Chicago fires their volunteer staff for the color of their skin. Thanks Ladder Life Insurance. Go to https://ladderlife.com/gold today to see if you're instantly approved. Thanks https://avast.com! INVEST LIKE ME: https://schiffradio.com/invest RATE AND REVIEW on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PeterSchiff/reviews/ SIGN UP FOR MY FREE NEWSLETTER: https://www.europac.com/ Schiff Gold News: http://www.SchiffGold.com/news Buy my newest book at http://www.tinyurl.com/RealCrash Follow me on Facebook: http://www.Facebook.com/PeterSchiff Follow me on Twitter: http://www.Twitter.com/PeterSchiff Follow me on Instagram: https://Instagram.com/PeterSchiff
Cults can be wildly different in beliefs, organization, teachings, and operations. But the culture of cults can be in things that seem innocuous on the surface. Inside Christianity, whether in churches, movements, families, or organizations, cult-like practices can cause incredible damage. Join Joe and Rachel as they discuss twelve things that can demonstrate cult-like behavior in a community.
Seth and Sean dive into how serious the McCullers situation is, look back at the nonsense spouted by the NBC Sports Chicago crew to put the White Sox in our rearview, Seth gives his keys to a Texans upset in Indy, and listen to Mama Stoerner's words for the Red Sox one more time before we get this thing started. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Putting people in the process. Four guests from the City of Fort Collins, Colorado and the City of Norfolk, Virginia joined the podcast to talk about equity and data in climate action planning. They discussed how the Cities are modifying their climate actions plans to be more equitable and the What Works Cities certifications. John Phelan is the Energy Services Manager in Fort Collins, Molly Saylor is the Senior Sustainability Specialist in Fort Collins, Pete Buryk is the Chief of Staff in Norfolk, and Lori Crouch is the Director of Communications in Norfolk. This episode was recorded live at the #ELGL21 Annual Conference. Host: Alyssa Dinberg
Join us for today's broadcast on “Putting Life Into Focus.” Billy Lambert will be sharing insight from God's word. This broadcast is part of a nationally televised series sponsored by the churches of Christ. For more information please visit our website at www.gettingtoknowyourbible.com. Please sign up for our FREE Bible correspondence course. https://www.gettingtoknowyourbible.com/free-bible-course Please check out our YouTube channel to see all the latest shows. Our goal is to encourage you to get to know your Bible. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_1Ry1ocZhqVYaJXfMv7EFQ Have you watched Getting To Know Your Bible? Please check us out on Dish Network or Direct TV. Our goal is to encourage you to get to know your Bible. #TelevisionMinistry #spreadthegospel Getting To Know Your Bible blogs are available on Spaces by WIX, the GTKYB social media pages, and on our website. Follow along with Billy's weekly posts and be encouraged. #billylambert #encouragement
Hey guys! Chris and Melissa here, one of our family values is “Smiths are adventurous” and it's something that even our youngest has taken to heart. But it begs the question, what can we as parents do to foster that curiosity to explore the world? In today's episode, we talk with some amazing entrepreneurs and parents, Joey and Berit Coleman. We were so excited to talk with them because they have some great insight into how you can raise your kids to be inquisitive of the world around them. They talk about the pillar of learning within their family and how it has helped not only their children but everyone grows. Join us as we discuss the upsides and downsides of technology, why we prefer real books over electronic ones, and how we've managed to instill a love of reading into our kids. As the saying goes “leaders are readers” and one of the best things you can do is to surround your kids with books. You'll learn about the importance of reading and how libraries are one of the resources you should be taking advantage of. Joey and Berit talk about the benefits traveling has had on their kids and share their best tips and tricks to fly anywhere you want to go. We always say to lead by example, so go out and live a life of adventure, and invite your kids to come along. This episode has inspired us to face our challenges head-on and start experiencing more of the world together. We hope it inspires you as well! For more resources or to connect with us check out the links below! More Of What's Inside: The number one reason kids start reading Feeding the natural desire of being curious Taking advantage of traveling work Approaching school with experiential learning Leaning into your kid's inquisitiveness The gift that libraries bring to our society Staying device-free as long as possible Leading by example with screentime Learning to connect even if you aren't together The upside of technology How traveling helps build curiosity in kids Why you should never be ashamed to fly with kids And much more! Website: familybrand.com Social: Facebook: www.facebook.com/FamilyBrandOfficial Instagram: www.instagram.com/ourfamilybrand YouTube: www.youtube.com/channel/UCGu-7odB6gkPbyXpUIQLkrg Twitter: https://twitter.com/OurFamilyBrand Free course: familybrand.com/10steps Episode Minute By Minute: 0:02 What we cover today 0:42 - Introducing Joey and Berit Coleman 5:19 - Being entrepreneurial parents 9:51 - Creating a pillar of learning 14:20 - How the Colemans plan a trip 18:29 - Practical tips to foster curiosity 23:56 - Online books vs. real-life books 28:18 - Why our kids aren't asking for phones 34:12 - Helping your family stay connected 38:38 - Creating rituals to strengthen your family 43:29 - Intentionally using the tools you have 48:56 - Tactics to fly easily with kids 53:20 - Inviting our children into our lives 1:00:07 - Putting in the reps 1:02:23 - Closing thoughts
We knew Cyd, like Tara and Dave, had just done a rewatch of the original-flavor CSI, so we were really glad she could join us to break down CBS's new reboot of its network-changing old favorite (which...only went off the air like six years ago?). We talked about whether we'll keep watching for "The New Class" after l'affaire Hodges gets resolved, when exactly the show thinks it is culturally, and what's going on with the sloppy editing. Then we went Around The Dial with Call The Midwife, Legends Of The Hidden Temple, grief-therapy sitcom recs, and Buried (with another Lauer rant from Buntsy) before Cyd was NOT a crackpot about shows using consultants on "hacker" and other internetty storylines. Chris Billig tried to get all our exercise balls up the hill in support of his Taskmaster Canon submission before Mlle. Caroline won, Netflix lost, and we put a foot in two worlds with a Game Time about reboots. Make sure to leave a fingerprint on the "play" button; it's an all-new Extra Hot Great.Show TopicsCSI: VegasATD: Call The MidwifeATD: Legends Of The Hidden TempleATD: SeinfeldATD: Brooklyn 99ATD: BuriedIANAC: Web And/Or Computer ConsultantsThe Canon: Taskmaster S02.E01: Fear Of FailureWinner and Loser of the WeekGame Time: Getting The RebootShow NotesFollow Cyd on TwitterOr follow her hereCyd's drawing InstagramTara's William Petersen piece at DeciderSarah's review of Buried at Best EvidenceTaskmaster season playlists on YouTubePhoto: Sonja Flemming / CBS Broadcasting Inc.DiscussionTweet at us @ExtraHotPodcast on TwitterWe are @ExtraHotGreat on InstagramSupport EHG on PatreonThe EHG gang have been recording this podcast for almost a decade now. In podcasting terms, that makes us positively Methuselahian. Since the start of EHG, our listeners have asked if we had a tip jar or donation system and we'd look at each other and say surely that is a joke, people don't pay other people to do podcasts. We'd email them back "Ha ha ha, good one, Chet" and go about our business. Now we are told this is a real thing that real nice people do. Value for value? In today's topsy turvy world? It's madness but that good kind of madness, like when you wake up at 3:15am and clean your house. Or something. In all seriousness, we are humbled by your continued prodding to get a Patreon page up for EHG and here it is! Extra Hot Great on Patreon See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
One of the most asked questions when it comes to publishing is whether to go the traditional or self publishing route. Ruth Soukup has done both and is here to share both her experiences and her recommendations. Ruth is a New York Times Best-Selling author, founder of Elite Blogging Academy, and host of the Do It Scared Podcast amongst so many other things. After blogging for several years she decided to write a book and so started her journey into publishing. A friend of hers referred her to an agent and after paying thousands to have a book proposal written up, her blog exploded. While she was in the process of pitching one book, she decided to write and self publish, How to Blog for Profit. She kept being asked the same question over and over again and the book was born. She received amazing feedback on the book and later built Elite Blogging Academy to further help her audience learn to create a source of income from their blogs. By the time her traditionally published book came out, she'd written and self published another book. Ruth signed a contract with her publisher for two books and after she fulfilled her obligations, swore she would never go the traditional route again. Later on she did end up going the traditional publishing route one more time, but is now completely done with it. She has more control over her self published books and she receives almost 100% of her royalties. Listen in as she shares her experiences from both sides of the publishing world and why, for her, self publishing makes the most sense. She stresses that the way in which you publish your book needs to align with your overall goal for that book. Is your book meant to be an introduction to your company or are you publishing so that you can be labeled an author? Do you plan on writing more than one book and want to be able to use earlier books in your marketing? Are you building a business rather than JUST becoming an author. If you're on the fence about which publishing journey you want to take, then you need to listen to this episode. Ruth lays it all out there so that you can truly make an informed decision! Show Notes [00:41] Welcome back to the show New York Times Best-Selling author Ruth Soukup. [03:24] What's the difference between traditional and self publishing? [04:27] If you want to do traditional publishing, you have to have an existing platform. [07:41] During the process of trying to propose her book to a publisher, her blog exploded and she wrote a new book and self published it. [09:59] Traditional publishing is a much longer process than self publishing. [10:56] What was the most difficult part of the traditional publishing route? [13:23] The experience has gotten worse and worse with each new book. [16:26] Were her self published books outselling her traditionally published books? [18:16] All this said, why did she decide to traditionally publish a third book? [20:23] One thing traditionally published books do is make it easier to make the lists. [23:08] Learn more about “list” practices and why they mean nothing. [24:37] Why will Ruth never traditionally publish again? [26:56] How you can use your book in your buyer's journey when you self publish. [29:45] Which path does Ruth recommend for someone who has never published a book? [31:48] Is there a good reason to traditionally publish? [35:25] How has How to Blog for Profit helped boost Elite Blogging Academy? [38:21] Putting the book before the course has absolutely worked best for Ruth. [39:33] Has the free + shipping funnel been successful in generating leads for EBA? [43:33] If you want to see Ruth's funnel go to www.elitebloggingacademy.com/book. [44:29] Which marketing strategy has moved the most copies of her book? [46:43] Ruth gives one last amazing tip to take away from this conversation. [48:05] What advice would she give to the earlier version of herself? [48:56] Connect with Ruth. Links and Resources Self-publishingschool.com Spsfreetraining.com Circle of Profit Ruth's Website Ruth Soukup Omnimedia Elite Blogging Academy Do It Scared Do It Scared Podcast Living Well Planner Living Well Spending Less SPS 008: Creating a Thriving Business, Blog, and Raving Fans with Ruth Soukup Living Forward by Michael Hyatt Author Advantage Live 2020 Ruth's Books: Do It Scared Living Well Spending Less How to Blog for Profit 31 Days of Living Well & Spending Zero 31 Days to a Clutter Free Life Unstuffed
Hunting has started to gain some serious traction over the past several years. With notable influencers like Joe Rogan, Cameron Hanes, and John Dudley all advocating for the benefits of connecting with your food source, it's easy to see why so many have become interested in the process. In fact, I only started hunting 4 years ago and, in that time, I have been introduced to some amazing people in the community like my guest today, John Barklow, who is a big game product manager for the premier camouflage on the market, SITKA Gear. Today, John and I talk about how social media has both been helping and hurting the cause of hunting, why there is such a surge in the hunting space, why – if you want to get into hunting yourself – you need to take initiative, the beautiful responsibility outdoorsmen have, and the proficiencies men need to develop to become successful in harvesting wild game. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS: The rising popularity of hunting Instagram hunting vs. reality Finding common ground with vegans and vegetarians Building the best outdoor gear you can get How to get started in hunting Starting with the right equipment and clothing Putting in the reps before you go for the big trophy The trophy is a reminder of the memories and hard work Stop making excuses and get out there Getting experience even if you don't have a tag Training SEALs Understand the limitations of what you wear Want maximum health, wealth, relationships, and abundance in your life? Sign up for our free course, 30 Days to Battle Ready ⠀ Download the NEW Order of Man Twelve-Week Battle Planner App and maximize your week.