Podcasts about structurally

The Full House is getting "Fuller" this episode (hence the title), and we have to talk about the pink bunnies... Did Michelle deserve to be gifted the framed pink bunny from Jesse OR did he give away what was rightfully Stephanie's?! Jodie remembers having strong opinions about this, even as a child. And, we can't forget to talk about the attic! Structurally, this house makes no sense... Plus, it isn't a podcast episode if one of the girl's isn't hysterically laughing, and this time, Andrea broke Jodie! Tune in for all the fun right here on How Rude, Tanneritos! Follow us on Instagram @howrudepodcast & TikTok @howrudetanneritosSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Cutting Through the Chaos with Wallace Garneau – The black economist who questions systemic racism narratives. The gay writer who critiques gender ideology. The female professor who challenges feminist orthodoxy. These people are not debated. They are disowned as ‘traitors' to their identity, and their voice is stripped of legitimacy. Why? ...

Episode 4422: META Sponsors The Press In DC; Structurally Dismembering Facebook

Last time we spoke about Operation Jinzhou and the defense of Harbin. In the tumultuous landscape of early 1930s China, Chiang Kai-shek hesitated to engage in combat, fearing internal factions and the looming threat of the CCP. Zhang Xueliang, commanding a substantial force, felt pressure from both the Japanese and his own government. As tensions escalated, the Kwantung Army launched a brutal campaign against Jinzhou, leading to its fall. Amidst chaos, resistance leaders like Ma Zhanshan and Ding Chao emerged, rallying against Japanese aggression, determined to protect their homeland despite limited support. In November, the Jilin Provincial Anti-Japanese Government formed under Cheng Yun, rallying over 3,000 troops led by Feng Zhanhai against Japanese forces. After several battles, including the retaking of Shulan, they faced fierce resistance but ultimately had to retreat. As the Japanese advanced, the Jilin Self-Defense Army was established, but after intense fighting, Harbin fell to the Japanese on February 6. Despite earlier victories, the Chinese resistance crumbled, leading to the establishment of Manchukuo and the end of organized resistance in Manchuria.   #145 What was Manchukuo? Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War.   To start off this episode I want to turn back to our old friend Ishiwara Kanji. Ishiwara's ambition to dominate Manchuria was primarily a means to an end: to secure resources and a strategic position against America. After gaining control of Manchuria, Ishiwara shifted his focus toward another objective: fostering racial cooperation among Asian peoples. His vision for Manchukuo, or rather his interpretation of it, served as a launching pad for his idea of an East-Asian league, rooted firmly in his Final War theory. During his time in Manchuria in 1932, this Pan-Asian concept of Manchukuo distinguished him from many of his colleagues in the Kwantung Army and marked him as unconventional within the Imperial Japanese Army .   As many of you may know, Manchukuo was a fraudulent puppet state designed to legitimize Japan's takeover of Manchuria. The Japanese high command aimed to disguise their invasion of this part of China as an indigenous independence movement. To achieve this, they installed Puyi, the last Qing emperor, as the figurehead of Manchukuo while promoting ideals of racial harmony. This facade was necessary, as controlling a population that harbored resentment towards them required some effort to win their favor. Fortunately for the Japanese, there were factions in Manchuria that actually desired independence. This region was the heartland of Nurhaci's Manchu people—yes that guy we spoke about all the way back in the beginning of this podcast. The Japanese had considerable leverage, framing their actions as a noble revival of the Qing dynasty or a restoration of power to the Manchu. Additionally, there was a significant Mongolian presence, and Inner Mongolia would soon play a role in these events. Manchuria was reluctantly drawn into the nationalist movement, and it shared Japan's apprehension towards the USSR, having faced its own struggles against it for a long time. Moreover, a large population of Japanese settlers in Manchuria welcomed the takeover, as the Zhang Xueliang regime had not been particularly accommodating to them, implementing various discriminatory measures. Zhang Xueliang's alliance with the Nationalists effectively sealed the fate of the Japanese settlers, who anticipated expulsion.   As military operations progressed, Ishiwara and Itagaki convened with other prominent Kwantung officers to strategize control over Manchuria. They met with Officer Katakura, Chief of Staff Miyake, and Dohihara Kenji from the Mukden special service, reviewing a prior plan by Colonel Dohihara for a multi-ethnic autonomous nation in Manchuria. This entity was to be led by Puyi, possessing complete autonomy in internal matters, while defense and foreign relations would be managed by Japan. Ishiwara drafted the plans by September 22nd, which were sent to Tokyo on October 2nd. Although Tokyo's high command disapproved of the objectives, they collaborated with the Kwantung Army for five months to establish a new state based on two main principles: the purported indigenous movement for Manchurian independence and the administrative framework for Kwantung Army control.   The Kwantung Army proceeded to utilize Manchuria's traditional structure of local self-governing bodies. Throughout 1931, they bribed, persuaded, and threatened local leaders to foster a movement for autonomy against the Kuomintang hardliners. One of their first initiatives was the establishment of the "Jichi Shidobu Self-Government Guidance Board," responsible for coordinating regional independence movements in collaboration with the Kwantung Army to, as Miyake put it, "guide Manchuria to self-government." The board was headed by Yu Ch'ung-han, a Mukden elder statesman educated in Japan and a former advisor to Zhang Zuolin. It comprised 20 Japanese and 10 Manchurian members. Such organizations attracted Japanese civilians in Manchuria, who supported the so-called multiracial political structure, as they could exploit it for their own interests. The Kwantung Army heavily promoted slogans like “racial harmony, racial equality, and the righteous way.” Their control over Manchuria was solidified by placing Japanese advisors in all governmental bodies with ultimate veto power, ensuring that everything was effectively under Japanese control. While it seemed that Ishiwara's vision was unfolding as planned, by 1933, he became a fierce critic of the very system he had helped establish.   It's quite ironic that the man who played a key role in initiating the conquest of Manchuria would be unable to exert his influence in shaping Manchukuo. While Ishiwara Kanji served as the operations officer officially responsible for planning and executing military operations to capture Manchuria, the political arrangements for the new state fell outside his control. Nevertheless, Ishiwara was very vocal about his views on the development of Manchukuo, strongly advocating for racial harmony. He persistently urged his colleagues that the economic growth of Manchukuo should embody the spirit of racial cooperation. Ishiwara believed that the economic interests of Manchukuo would naturally align with those of the Kwantung Army, as both aimed for the unity of Asia against the West. He was gravely mistaken. Ishiwara was driven by his theory of a final war, and everything he did was aimed at preparing for it; thus, his fixation on racial harmony was part of this broader strategy.   In March 1932, the self-government guidance board was dissolved, transferring its functions and regional organizations to newly established bureaus within the Manchukuo government. In April, an organization called the Kyowakai (Concordia Association) was formed, led by Yamaguchi Juji and Ozawa Kaisaku, with the goal of promoting racial harmony. This initiative received support from members of the Kwantung Army, including Ishiwara, Itagaki, and Katakura. The Kwantung Army invested heavily in the organization, which quickly gained traction—at least among the Japanese. General Honjo expressed concerns about the organization's potential political influence in Manchukuo; he preferred it to remain an educational entity rather than evolve into an official political party. By "educational role," he meant it should serve as a propaganda tool for the Kwantung Army, allowing them to exert influence over Manchukuo without significant commitment.   But to Ishiwara the Concordia Association was the logical means to unify the new nation, guiding its political destiny, to be blunt Ishiwara really saw it should have much more authority than his colleagues believed it should. Ishiwara complained in August of 1932, that Manchuria was a conglomerate of conflicting power centers such as the Kwantung army, the new Manchukuo government, the Kwantung government, the Mantetsu, consular office and so on. Under so many hats he believed Manchukuo would never become a truly unified modern state, and of course he was one of the few people that actually wanted it to be so. He began arguing the Kwantung army should turn over its political authority as soon as possible so “Japanese of high resolve should hasten to the great work of the Manchurian Concordia Association, for I am sure that we Japanese will be its leaders. In this way Manchukuo will not depend on political control from Japan, but will be an independent state, based on Japanese Manchurian cooperation. Guided by Japanese, it will be a mode of Sino-Japanese friendship, an indicator of the present trends of world civilization” Needless to say the Concordia Association made little headway with the Chinese and it began to annoy Japanese leaders. The association gradually was bent into a spiritless propaganda and intelligence arm of the IJA, staffed largely by elite Japanese working in the Manchukuo government.  Ishiwara started utilizing the Concordia Association to advocate for various causes, including the return of leased territories like the Railway zone, the abolition of extraterritoriality, and equal pay for different races working in Manchukuo—efforts aimed at fostering racial harmony. However, this advocacy clashed significantly with the Japanese military's interests, damaging Ishiwara's reputation. As a result, the staff of the Kwantung Army began to shift dramatically, leaving Ishiwara increasingly isolated, except for Itagaki and a few loyal supporters. The higher-ups had grown weary of the disruptive Concordia Association and gradually took control, ensuring that discussions about concessions were halted. In August 1932, Ishiwara received a new assignment, and he appeared eager to leave Manchuria. Now that finishes off our story of Ishiwara, he will return later on in future episodes. Again if you want a full sort of biography on him, check out my youtube channel or Echoes of War podcast where I have a 4 part series on him.    Now I want to get more into the specifics of what exactly was this new state known as Manchukuo? During the mayhem that was the invasion of Manchuria, by October 6th of 1931, the Japanese cabinet had finally relented and decided to no longer interfere with the establishment of a new regime in Manchuria and Inner Mongolia. The remaining disagreement between the Japanese government, Tokyo General HQ and the Kwantung army was not whether or not to establish a new regime, but whether or not to promote the establishment of a new regime. Japan obviously did not want to break the Washington system established by the treaty of Versailles. Yet they of course wanted to expand Japanese interest in Manchuria. So it was to be a delicate game of chess balancing their interests in coordination with the western powers. This was specifically why Prime Minister Wakatsuki Reijiro had opposed direct participation of Japanese soldiers in the establishment of a new regime, because clearly it would open Japan to condemnation from the west.    Over the course of the invasion, Japan managed to occupy the 3 northeastern provinces of Liaoning, Jilin and Heilongjiang by establishing pro-japanese regimes within each under Zhang Shiyi, Xi Qia and Ma Zhanshan respectively. On September 20, 1931, Jianchuan proposed the establishment of a Japanese-backed regime led by Puyi during a meeting with Honjo Shigeru, the commander of the Kwantung Army. Obviously Jianchuan was in league and under the influence of our old friend Doihara. Two days later, on September 22, the Kwantung Army General Staff developed the "Solution to the Manchuria-Mongolia Issue," based on Doihara's suggestion to create a Five-Nation Republic in Manchuria and Mongolia, with Japan as the "leader." The plan outlined the establishment of a new regime under Puyi, supported by Japan, to govern the 3 northeastern provinces and Mongolia. The new regime would entrust Japan with national defense and diplomacy, as well as the management of key transportation and communication infrastructure. It also proposed appointing Xi Qia, Zhang Haipeng, Tang Yulin, Yu Zhishan, and Zhang Jinghui to oversee garrisons in locations such as Jilin, Taonan, Rehe, Dongbiandao, and Harbin. To execute this plan, the Japanese Kwantung Army, led by Chief of Staff Itagaki, utilized local intelligence agencies and some mainland ronin to initiate a so-called strategic operation. To facilitate the plan's implementation, the Kwantung Army informed the commander of the Japanese Army in Tianjin that afternoon, requesting immediate "protection" for Emperor Xuantong.   After the Kwantung Army took control of Jinzhou, it believed the moment was right to establish the hastily assembled puppet regime. To secure the full backing of the Japanese government and the military leadership, the Kwantung Army decided to send Itagaki back to Tokyo for negotiations. At that time, Itagaki had a fairly detailed plan to present. The proposed "Manchuria-Mongolia Central Government" aimed to create a centralized power structure that would be distinct from mainland China, effectively becoming a truly "independent" nation. They intended to appoint local collaborators as officials at all levels and were prepared to fabricate "public opinion" to obscure global perceptions of Japan's scheme to establish this regime. This of course was highly influenced by the announcement from the League of Nations that they would be investigating the entire incident in what would become known as the Lytton Commission.  Thus they believed it was essential to set up the regime before the League of Nations investigation team arrived in Manchuria. They understood that if these actions were "carried out directly by Japan," they would violate both the Nine-Power Treaty and the League of Nations. However, they reasoned that if the Chinese initiated the separation themselves, it would not contradict the principles of those treaties.   The Kwantung Army established puppet organizations using collaborators, starting with the "Liaoning Provincial Local Maintenance Association," which was formed on September 25, 1931. The association's chairman, Yuan Jinkai, represented the civil governance faction of the Fengtian clique. After the First Zhili-Fengtian War, he was appointed governor of Fengtian Province by the Zhili government, which led to his unpopularity with Zhang Zuolin. At the time of the incident, he was already retired. The association's vice chairman, Kan Chaoxi, had previously served as the governor of Rehe and commander of the Third Division. He fell out of favor with Zhang Zuolin due to his involvement with Guo Songling and subsequently retired. A common characteristic of the puppet organizations created by the Kwantung Army is that they always included Japanese advisors, regardless of their level. The "Liaoning Provincial Local Maintenance Association" was no exception, hiring Kanai Shoji, head of the health section of the local department of the Manchurian Railway and chairman of the Manchurian Youth League, as its top advisor. In the Japanese-occupied Fengtian, this highest advisor effectively became the leader of the maintenance association. While the association was ostensibly responsible for maintaining local order, it actually functioned as a tool for Japan to establish a puppet regime. Recruiting discontented officials and creating puppet institutions was just a minor part of the Kwantung Army's strategy to set up a puppet regime. The crucial factor in this endeavor was gaining the support of influential local warlords. To achieve this, the Japanese Kwantung Army, along with various intelligence agencies, employed a mix of soft and hard tactics, including coercion and incentives. As a result, they successfully pressured figures such as Yu Zhishan, Zhang Haipeng, Zhang Jinghui, Xi Qia, Zang Shiyi, and Ma Zhanshan to defect to the Japanese forces.   Following the Mukden Incident, former Qing nobles who had hoped to restore the Qing Dynasty believed the moment had arrived. Xi Qia, a member of the former Qing royal family and the Chief of Staff of the Jilin Provincial Army at the time, took advantage of the Jilin governor's absence due to his mother's funeral to open the gates of Jilin and surrender to Japan. This made Xi Qia the first Chinese official to collaborate with the Japanese invaders since their invasion of China. He sent a secret letter to the abdicated Qing emperor Puyi, urging him to return to "the birthplace of the ancestors, restore the Qing Dynasty, and rescue the people from their suffering," with the backing of "friendly nations". Xi Qia and the former Manchu nobles, who had elevated him to acting governor of Jilin Province, proposed to the Japanese to invite Puyi to the Northeast to establish a monarchy. The Japanese Kwantung Army had already identified Puyi as a suitable puppet leader. After the 15 year war had concluded, under interrogation, Shirono Hiroshi confessed that the reason why the Japanese chose Puyi was: First, Puyi had “no connection with the Kuomintang in mainland China”; Secondly, "some old classes in the Northeast and Mongolia still have traditional yearnings for the Qing Dynasty"; Third, “the peasants in general… seemed to welcome the kingly political system implemented by the Aisin-Gioro family.”   On November 8th, 1931, Doihara orchestrated the "Tianjin Incident" and covertly removed Puyi from his home in the Japanese Concession in Tianjin. They traveled through Dagukou, Yingkou, and Lushun before arriving in Fushun. By February 5th, 1932, the Japanese army had taken control of Harbin, stabilizing the situation in North Manchuria. Afterwards the Kwantung Army Headquarters organized a series of "National Construction Staff Meetings" to plan for a "National Construction Conference" involving collaborators. On February 16th, leaders from the Northeast provinces, including Zhang Jinghui, Xi Qia, Ma Zhanshan, Zang Shiyi, Xie Jieshi, Yu Chonghan, Zhao Xinbo, and Yuan Jinkai, gathered for the "Northeast Political Affairs Conference" at the Yamato Hotel in Shenyang. The meeting was led by Honjo Shigeru, the commander of the Kwantung Army. They decided to invite Puyi to rule the puppet state of "Manchukuo" and assigned government positions to the attendees. Notably, Itagaki Seishirō was appointed as the head of the Fengtian Special Agency and the chief advisor to the Military and Political Department of Manchukuo.    On February 18th, the "Northeast Administrative Committee" issued a "Declaration of Independence," stating: "From now on, we declare that the regions of Manchuria and Mongolia will be separated from the Chinese central government. Based on the free choice and appeal of the residents of Manchuria and Mongolia, these regions will achieve complete independence and establish a fully independent government." On February 23rd, Itagaki met with Puyi in Fushun to inform him that he would be the "ruler" of Manchukuo. Although Puyi had hoped to reclaim the throne, he was disappointed with the "ruler" designation but felt compelled to accept it. On the 29th, the "All-Manchuria National Construction Promotion Movement Conference" passed a resolution urging Puyi to take on the role of ruler. In February, the Japanese army began its offensive against Rehe. Meanwhile, the League of Nations declared that it would not recognize Manchukuo.   On March 1st, Japan orchestrated the establishment of "Manchukuo," appointing Puyi as its "ruler" under the reign title "Datong." China firmly rejected the notion of Manchukuo's "independence" and lodged a strong protest against Japan on the same day. On March 8th, Puyi officially declared his inauguration as the "ruler of Manchukuo" in Xinjing. Concurrently, officials were appointed to various "offices," "ministerial positions," and "ministries," leading to the formal establishment of Manchukuo. The following day, Puyi conducted an inauguration ceremony, and on March 10th, a secret agreement was signed with Japan. Japanese Ambassador to Manchuria, Nobuyoshi Mutō, and "Prime Minister" Zheng Xiaoxu signed the Japan-Manchuria Agreement in Changchun, with the Japanese government issuing a statement recognizing "Manchukuo."   In October of 1932, the League of Nations Assembly released the Lytton Commission Report.  Alarmed by the Mukden incident, the League of Nations had dispatched a group of investigators, led by British statesman Lord Lytton, to uncover the truth of what was going on. The commission traveled to Manchuria, gathering testimonies and examining evidence. Their task was daunting: Japan insisted its actions were defensive, protecting its economic interests and citizens. Meanwhile, China accused Japan of orchestrating the railway incident as an excuse for invasion. Months later, the Lytton Report emerged, painting a balanced yet damning picture.    On February 24, the commission concluded that the "Mukden Incident" was staged by Japanese troops. It condemned Japan's actions as a violation of Chinese sovereignty, rejecting their claims of self-defense. Moreover, the report did not recognize the puppet state of Manchukuo, established by Japan in Manchuria. Instead, it called for Manchuria's return to Chinese control under an arrangement respecting regional autonomy. Though praised for its fairness, the report lacked teeth. Later on the League urged Japan to withdraw, but Japan walked out of the League instead, solidifying its grip on Manchuria.    Manchukuo's territory would span the former provinces of Liaoning, Jilin and Heilongjiang, excluding the Kwantung Leased Territory. It would also gradually incorporate eastern parts of Inner Mongolia, Chengde City and Rehe Province. The 1932 "Japan-Manchuria Protocol" established that the sovereignty of the Kwantung Leased Territory belonged to "Manchukuo." This entity acknowledged the Qing Dynasty's agreement to lease the Guandong Territory, which includes Lushun and Dalian, to Japan. As a result, the Guandong Territory remained under direct Japanese control and was not included in the "administrative division of Manchukuo." By 1934 Manchukuo was divided into 14 provinces, 2 special cities and 1 special district: Andong Province , " Fengtian Province ", Jinzhou Province , Jilin Province , Rehe Province , Jiandao Province , Heihe Province , Sanjiang Province , Longjiang Province , Binjiang Province, Xing'an East Province , Xing'an West Province , Xing'an South Province , Xing'an North Province , Xinjing Special City , Harbin Special City , and North Manchuria Special District. By 1939 this would increase to 19 provinces and 1 special city.   Politically, Puyi served as the nominal head of state for "Manchukuo." He took on the role of ruler on March 8, 1932, adopting the reign title "Datong." On March 1, 1934, Puyi conducted a "coronation ceremony" in Xinghua Village, located south of "Xinjing," and renamed "Manchukuo" to the "Great Manchurian Empire." In this capacity, Puyi was designated as the "emperor," with the reign title "Kangde." "Manchukuo's administrative structure was led by the 'State Council,' headed by the 'Premier.' This pseudo 'State Council' included the 'Ministry of Foreign Affairs,' 'Ministry of Civil Affairs,' 'Ministry of Finance,' 'Ministry of Justice,' 'Ministry of Industry,' 'Ministry of Transportation,' 'Ministry of Culture and Education,' and 'Ministry of Military Affairs.' The 'Ministry of Finance' was later renamed the 'Ministry of Economy,' while the 'Ministry of Military Affairs' retained its name. The 'Ministry of Industry' was split into the 'Ministry of Agriculture' and the 'Ministry of Labor,' and additional departments like the 'Ministry of Health and Welfare' were established. Each ministry was led by a 'minister,' but real power rested with the Japanese vice ministers. The head of the 'General Affairs Department of the State Council,' who was also Japanese, effectively served as the 'Premier.' This role was first held by Komai Tokuzo, followed by Hoshino Naoki and Takebe Rokuzo. Every Tuesday, the Japanese vice ministers convened to discuss and make decisions on 'national' policies and various specific matters in a meeting known as the 'Fire Tuesday Meeting.'"   The legislative assembly of "Manchukuo" was known as the "Legislative Yuan," with Zhao Xinbo serving as its first "President." However, true legislative authority rested with the Kwantung Army. Manchukuo operated without a formal constitution, instead relying on a series of special laws. The advisory group was referred to as the "Senate," led by a "Speaker," with Zang Shiyi being the inaugural holder of that position. The highest judicial authority in puppet Manchukuo was the "Supreme Court," with Lin Qi as the first "Supreme Justice" and Li Pan serving as the "Supreme Prosecutor General." The judicial agency was the "Imperial Household Agency," headed by Xi Qia.   Following the September 18th Incident, Zhang Xueliang maintained a policy of "non-resistance." Most of the former Northeastern Army was "ordered" to retreat south of Shanhaiguan without engaging in combat. Those who could not withdraw were split into two factions: one group, motivated by national integrity and a shared animosity toward the enemy, rose to fight against Japan and became a significant part of the renowned Northeast Volunteer Army. The other faction consisted of traitors who surrendered, acknowledged the enemy as their leader, and acted as the enforcers and thugs for the Japanese invaders. These collaborators and the forces they commanded formed the backbone of the puppet Manchukuo army. Simultaneously, they recruited defectors and traitors, as well as bandits and social miscreants, thereby bolstering the ranks of the puppet Manchukuo military. They were under the influence of the highest advisors from the puppet Manchukuo Military and Political Department, which was made up of Japanese military officials. Directly controlled by the Kwantung Army, they served as vassals and accomplices of Japanese imperialism.   "The State Council of Manchukuo" served as the governing body of the puppet state. It functioned as the highest political authority in the region. Structurally, it operated under the direct control of the head of state, Puyi. However, in practice, the State Council was heavily influenced by the Japanese Kwantung Army, with many key positions occupied by Japanese officials. The breakdown of power is as follows: "Head of State": "Emperor" ( before the transition to the imperial system , the ruler) "Emperor's direct agencies": Imperial Household Agency - Shangshufu - Senate - Military Attaché Office - Military Advisory Council - Sacrifice Office "Yuan": State Council - Courts - Legislative Yuan - Control Yuan "National Army": Royal Guards - River Defense Fleet - Flying Squadron - Xing'an Army - Jiandao Special Forces "Police": Maritime Police Force - Security Bureau Other "agencies": General Affairs Department (not official) External Group: Concord Society   To fulfill its goal of annexing Northeast China, Japan initiated a "national policy immigration" campaign under the guise of development, intending to relocate 1 million households and 5 million Japanese citizens from Japan to Northeast China over two decades. Additionally, around 2 million Koreans were moved to the region as political immigrants. In April 1936, the Japanese Kwantung Army convened an "immigration" meeting in Changchun, where they developed the "Manchuria Agricultural Immigration Million Households Migration Plan." By September 1944, there were 1,662,234 Japanese immigrants (including early settlers) residing in various areas of Northeast China. Following 1945, most Japanese immigrants were repatriated, notably during the large-scale repatriation in Huludao, although the issue of Japanese orphans also arose.   After the September 18th Incident, in response to the invasion by Japanese fascists, people from all nationalities and professions in China resisted fiercely. The Japanese fascists employed military forces, police, and special repressive agencies to brutally suppress the anti-Japanese movement, inflicting significant suffering on the Chinese populace. In addition to collaborating with the Kwantung Army for extensive military encirclement and suppression, the Kwantung Military Police Force oversaw other repressive agencies during peacetime and became the primary force behind the implementation of white terror.   As for its economy, Manchuria is rich in natural resources. By 1936 its coal reserves were about 3 billion tons, iron reserves roughly 4 billion and had other minerals including Gold, Magnesite, Bauxite, Oil shale, Diamonds. Its forestry and fishery industry was quit rich as well. During the Zhang Zuolin era, Manchuria's industrial base was already well-developed, and Japan required a robust military industry to support its aggressive war efforts. Steel production was primarily located in Anshan and Benxi, while the chemical industry was centered in Liaoyang. The coal industry was concentrated in Fushun, Benxi, and Fuxin. Oil shale and synthetic fuel production were mainly found in Fushun and Jilin. Magnesite mining took place in Haicheng and Dashiqiao, and hydropower generation was focused in Jilin and along the Yalu River. Fengtian (now Shenyang) served as the hub for machinery, arms, and aircraft industries, whereas light industries, including textiles and food production, were concentrated in cities like Dalian, Dandong, Harbin, and Qiqihar.   The industrial sector of the puppet state was largely controlled by the South Manchuria Railway Company. Following the establishment of the puppet state, investments from various Japanese conglomerates rapidly flowed into Northeast China. After 1937, the puppet state implemented an economic control policy for the industrial sector, adhering to the principle of "one industry, one company," which led to the creation of monopoly companies for each industry. Under this framework, the South Manchuria Railway transferred its industrial operations and reorganized them into a massive conglomerate called the "Manchuria Heavy Industry Development Corporation ," which monopolized all steel, coal, chemical, and electric power industries in the region. Additionally, over 40 specialized companies were established, including the "Manchuria Electric (Telephone and Telegraph) Company," "Manchuria Machinery Manufacturing Company," "Manchuria Mining Company," "Manchuria Airlines," "Manchuria Artificial Oil Company," "Manchuria Textile Company," "Manchuria Wool Textile Company," "Manchuria Chemical Industry Company," "Manchuria Forestry Company," "Manchuria Gold Mining Company," "Manchuria Livestock Company," "Manchuria Fisheries Company," "Manchuria Tobacco Company," "Manchuria Agricultural Commune," and "Manchuria Development Commune." These companies were jointly established by Japanese investors and the "Manchukuo" government, with profits shared according to their respective investments. In case of losses, the Manchukuo government guaranteed 10% of the profits for Japanese investments.   To transform Manchuria into a base for its aggressive expansion against China and the Pacific War, Japan imposed strict control and extensive exploitation of the region's economy and resources. The primary focus of this control and exploitation was on mineral resources such as coal, iron, and oil, as well as essential industries. Under the intense plundering and strict oversight of Japanese imperialism, Northeast China's economy rapidly became colonial, leading to severe hardships for its people. Due to Japan's stringent economic control policies and large-scale colonial exploitation, the local industry and mining sectors suffered, national industries declined, and the rural economy collapsed, resulting in a swift transformation of Northeast China into a colony. To maximize the extraction of colonial resources, the Japanese invaders minimized the consumption levels of the local population. Since 1935, they implemented comprehensive distribution controls on vital strategic materials and everyday necessities. This distribution control policy plunged the people of Northeast China into extreme poverty and suffering.   The 1936 resource survey report from the State Council of the puppet Manchukuo indicated that the region had an arable land area of 40 million hectares (equivalent to 4 billion mu), with 25 million hectares classified as cultivated land. Additionally, the forested area covered 170 million hectares. The annual production figures included 2.5 million tons of soybeans, 2 million tons of wheat, 700,000 tons of rice, 1 million tons of millet, 8 million tons of sorghum, 5 million tons of corn, 600,000 tons of other grains and beans (excluding soybeans), 300,000 tons of cotton, and 160,000 tons of tobacco. The livestock population consisted of 4 million horses, 3 million cattle, 30 million sheep, and 40 million pigs. The total annual grain output in the puppet Manchukuo was approximately 20 million tons. Of this, around 7.5 million tons were consumable grains for local farmers throughout the year, while 4 million tons were designated as seed grains. Furthermore, the region was responsible for supplying rations to Japanese and Korean immigrants. In compliance with the demands of the Kwantung Army, the puppet Manchukuo was obligated to deliver over 1 million tons of grain to Japan annually. The grain collection process commenced in mid-August and concluded at the end of November, imposing a significant burden on farmers. Japanese colonists were exempt from agricultural taxes and received monthly rations.   The puppet state of Manchukuo had a “military force” known as the “Manchukuo Army.” It was divided into three components: "rear security" and "law and order maintenance," all under the control of the Japanese Kwantung Army. Initially, its military capabilities were limited, with the Kwantung Army handling most combat operations. However, as the main forces of the Kwantung Army shifted south and manpower became scarce, the anti-Japanese armed groups in Northeast China were suppressed and weakened. Consequently, the puppet Manchukuo began to assume more military responsibilities on its own, with many of its soldiers being Korean Japanese recruited from the Korean Peninsula. The entire Northeast was segmented into eleven military control zones, each led by an individual known as a commander. The military authority of the puppet state of Manchukuo was under the control of the Japanese Kwantung Army. Any troop movements, training exercises, equipment modifications, or personnel changes required approval from the Kwantung Army Headquarters. The puppet Manchukuo Army had nine ranks: general, colonel, and lieutenant. Upon graduating from the military academy, individuals were promoted to second lieutenant. After two years, they advanced to first lieutenant, and then to captain after another three years. Following that, a captain would be promoted to major after three years, then to lieutenant colonel after another three years. After four years, a lieutenant colonel would become a colonel, who would then be promoted to major general after four years. After three additional years, a major general could rise to the rank of lieutenant general, and finally, after four years, a lieutenant general could achieve the rank of general. The highest military rank was general, which was a lifetime appointment. Above the rank of general was an honorary title modeled after the Japanese marshal. Individuals such as Zhang Jinghui, Zhang Haipeng, Yu Zhishan, and Ji Xing were conferred the title of general. Thus was born a puppet state that would contribute to the 15 year war in Asia.   I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. Yes perhaps this episode was a bit on the boring side of things, but its important to take a critical look at what exactly Manchukuo was. The new puppet state would be used for various means during the 15 year war and would ultimately be the crown jewel in a long list of conquered territories by the Japanese Empire.

As the long, exhausting march toward summer begins for many students, the wise and compassionate David Wagoner takes us to the intersection of love and weakness. Happy reading.David Wagoner was recognized as the leading poet of the Pacific Northwest, often compared to his early mentor Theodore Roethke, and highly praised for his skillful, insightful and serious body of work. He won numerous prestigious literary awards including the Ruth Lilly Poetry Prize, two Pushcart Prizes, and the Academy of Arts and Letters Award, and was nominated twice for the National Book Award. The author of ten acclaimed novels, Wagoner's fiction has been awarded the Sherwood Anderson Foundation Award. Professor emeritus at the University of Washington, Wagoner enjoyed an excellent reputation as both a writer and a teacher of writing. He was selected to serve as chancellor of the Academy of American Poets in 1978, replacing Robert Lowell, and was the editor of Poetry Northwest until 2002.Born in Ohio and raised in Indiana, Midwesterner Wagoner was initially influenced by family ties, ethnic neighborhoods, industrial production and pollution, and the urban environment. His move to the Pacific Northwest in 1954, at Roethke's urging, changed both his outlook and his poetry. Writing in the Contemporary Authors Autobiography Series, Wagoner recalls: “when I drove down out of the Cascades and saw the region that was to become my home territory for the next thirty years, my extreme uneasiness turned into awe. I had never seen or imagined such greenness, such a promise of healing growth. Everything I saw appeared to be living ancestral forms of the dead earth where I'd tried to grow up.” Wagoner's poetry often mourns the loss of a natural, fertile wilderness, though David K. Robinson, writing in Contemporary Poetry, described the themes of “survival, anger at those who violate the natural world” and “a Chaucerian delight in human oddity” at work in the poems as well. Critics have also praised Wagoner's poetry for its crisp descriptive detail and metaphorical bent. However, Paul Breslin in the New York Times Book Review pronounced David Wagoner to be “predominantly a nature poet…as Frost and Roethke were nature poets.”Wagoner's first books, including Dry Sun, Dry Wind (1953), A Place to Stand (1958), and Poems (1959), demonstrate an early mastery of his chosen subject matter and form. Often comprised of observations of nature, Wagoner links his speakers' predicaments and estrangement to the larger imperfection of the world. In Wagoner's second book, A Place to Stand,Roethke's influence is clear, and the book uses journey poems to represent the poet's own quest back to his beginnings. Wagoner's fourth book, The Nesting Ground (1963), reflects his relocation physically, aesthetically and emotionally; the Midwest is abandoned for the lush abundance of the Pacific Northwest, and Wagoner's style is less concerned with lamentation or complaint and more with cataloguing the bounty around him. James K. Robinson called the title poem from Staying Alive (1966) “one of the best American poems since World War II.” In poems like “The Words,” Wagoner discovers harmony with nature by learning to be open to all it has to offer: “I take what is: / The light beats on the stones, / the wind over water shines / Like long grass through the trees, / As I set loose, like birds / in a landscape, the old words.” Robert Cording, who called Staying Alive “the volume where Wagoner comes into his own as a poet,” believed that for Wagoner, taking what is involves “an acceptance of our fragmented selves, which through love we are always trying to patch together; an acceptance of our own darkness; and an acceptance of the world around us with which we must reacquaint ourselves.”Collected Poems 1956-1976 (1976) was nominated for the National Book Award and praised by X. J. Kennedy in Parnassus for offering poems which are “beautifully clear; not merely comprehensible, but clear in the sense that their contents are quickly visible.” Yet it was Who Shall Be the Sun? (1978),based upon Native American myth and legend, which gained critical attention. Hayden Carruth, writing in Harper's Magazine, called the book “a remarkable achievement,” not only for its presentation of “the literalness of shamanistic mysticism” but also for “its true feeling.” Hudson Review's James Finn Cotter also noted how Wagoner “has not written translations but condensed versions that avoid stereotyped language….The voice is Wagoner's own, personal, familiar, concerned. He has achieved a remarkable fusion of nature, legend and psyche in these poems.”In Broken Country (1979), also nominated for the National Book Award, shows Wagoner honing the instructional backpacking poems he had first used in Staying Alive. Leonard Neufeldt, writing in New England Review,called “the love lyrics” of the first section “among the finest since Williams' ‘Asphodel.'” Wagoner has been accused of using staid pastoral conventions in book after book, as well as writing less well about human subjects. However, his books have continued to receive critical attention, often recognized for the ways in which they use encounters with nature as metaphors for encounters with the self. First Light (1983), Wagoner's “most intense” collection, according to James K. Robinson, reflects Wagoner's third marriage to poet Robin Seyfried. And Publishers Weekly celebrated Walt Whitman Bathing (1996) for its use of “plainspoken formal virtuosity” which allows for “a pragmatic clarity of perception.” A volume of new and collected poems, Traveling Light, was released in 1999. Sampling Wagoner's work through the years, many reviewers found the strongest poems to also be the newest. Rochelle Ratner in Library Journal noted “since many of the best are in the ‘New Poems' section, it might make sense to wait for his next volume.” That next volume, The House of Song (2002) won high praise for its variety of subject matter and pitch-perfect craft. Christina Pugh in Poetry declared “The House of Song boasts a superb architecture, and each one of its rooms (or in Italian, stanzas) affords a pleasure that enhances the last.” In 2008 Wagoner published his twenty-third collection of verse, A Map of the Night. Reviewing the book for the Seattle Times, Sheila Farr found many poems shot through with nostalgia, adding “the book feels like a summing-up.” Conceding that “not all the work reaches the high plane of Wagoner's reputation,” Farr described its “finest moments” as those which “resonate with the title, venturing into darkness and helping us recognize its familiar places.”In addition to his numerous books of poetry, David Wagoner was also a successful novelist, writing both mainstream fiction and regional Western fiction. Offering a steady mix of drama seasoned with occasional comedy, Wagoner's tales often involve a naive central character's encounter with and acceptance of human failing and social corruption. In the Contemporary Authors Autobiography Series, Wagoner described his first novel, The Man in the Middle (1954), as “a thriller with some Graham Greene overtones about a railroad crossing watchmen in violent political trouble in Chicago,” his second novel, Money, Money, Money (1955), as a story about “a young tree surgeon who can't touch, look at, or even think about money, though he has a lot of it,” his third novel, Rock (1958) as a tale of “teenage Chicago delinquents,” and his fifth novel, Baby, Come On Inside (1968) as a story “about an aging popular singer who'd lost his voice.” As a popular novelist, however, Wagoner is best known for The Escape Artist (1965), the story of an amateur magician and the unscrupulous adults who attempt to exploit him, which was adapted as a film in 1981. Wagoner produced four successful novels as a Western “regional” writer. Structurally and thematically, they bear similarities to his other novels. David W. Madden noted in Twentieth-Century Western Writers: “Central to each of these [Western] works is a young protagonist's movement from innocence to experience as he journeys across the American frontier encountering an often debased and corrupted world. However, unlike those he meets, the hero retains his fundamental optimism and incorruptibility.”Although Wagoner wrote numerous novels, his reputation rests on his numerous, exquisitely crafted poetry collections, and his dedication as a teacher. Harold Bloom said of Wagoner: “His study of American nostalgias is as eloquent as that of James Wright, and like Wright's poetry carries on some of the deepest currents in American verse.” And Leonard Neufeldt called Wagoner “simply, one of the most accomplished poets currently at work in and with America…His range and mastery of subjects, voices, and modes, his ability to work with ease in any of the modes (narrative, descriptive, dramatic, lyric, anecdotal) and with any number of species (elegy, satirical portraiture, verse editorial, apostrophe, jeremiad, and childlike song, to name a few) and his frequent combinations of a number of these into astonishingly compelling orchestrations provide us with an intelligent and convincing definition of genius.”Wagoner died in late 2021 at age 95.-bio via Poetry Foundation This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit dailypoempod.substack.com/subscribe

 You've gone to the doctor and had your cholesterol checked, but what do all those numbers mean? And is there anything you can do to lower your cholesterol without medications? I'm so glad you asked.  I'm Dr.Vickie Petz Kasper. If you're ready to take control of your health, you're in the right  place. Whether you're focused on prevention or you're trying to manage a condition. I'll give you practical steps to start your own journey toward better health because healthy looks great on you.  This is episode 1 64. Cholesterol, the Good versus the Bad. When I was about 26 years old, I had my cholesterol checked for the first time. Imagine my surprise when the number was 256.  Yikes. Now admittedly, the hospital where I was doing my residency had a fast food restaurant conveniently located right there in the cafeteria and my go-to: hamburgers and french fries. But also I have a strong family history of significantly elevated cholesterol.  The doctor said I could lower it some and I should diet and exercise and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. But guess what? I eventually lowered my cholesterol to 156 without medication, and I'm going to tell you how you can do it too. But first, let's start at the beginning and go to mini medical school and learn exactly what is cholesterol. Technically we call it a lipid, which is sort of like a fat that circulates in your bloodstream. Structurally, these compounds make up parts of cell membranes and functionally they help regulate the transport across these membranes, so that's good. Right? Well, yes, we do need cholesterol to help move and store energy, produce hormones, and absorb vitamins. But you know, too much of a good thing. We'll get to that. Lipids don't dissolve in water, so they have to hitch a ride on proteins to travel through the blood, and when they get hitched, they change their name to lipoproteins. Now this is gonna sound familiar if you've ever had a lipid panel drawn.  HDL stands for high density lipoproteins and LDL stands for low density lipoproteins.  Where does it come from? Well, your body actually makes it in both the liver and small intestines. Then it's stored in the liver where it's converted to bile acids, so you can get rid of it. Is it bad or good? Well, that depends. HDL cholesterol reduces inflammation, prevents blood clots, and helps transport oxygen. And your body makes all of it that you need all of it. But here's the deal. Not only does your body make cholesterol, but we also eat it. Most of the cholesterol in the standard American diet comes from meat, eggs, cheese, and dairy products. Oh, well, who can afford eggs anyway? But seriously, cholesterol is sneaky. Rather than announcing its presence, it just slips through your blood vessels undetected, but it leaves a calling card and we call it plaque. This buildup in the wall of the arteries can lead to hardening of the arteries and therefore cardiovascular disease. Think about it. If a plaque gets big enough, it can compromise blood flow and cause a heart attack or stroke. And this can also happen with smaller plaques when a piece breaks off. I told you cholesterol is sneaky. Most people who have high cholesterol have no symptoms. We call it hyperlipidemia, and that's why you need to know your numbers and you need to know what they mean.  I guess all those burgers weren't helping me have healthy blood vessels when I was in my twenties.  But that's not the whole story. We could go to mini medical school and learn the difference between HDL and LDL cholesterol, or we could just call them good cop, bad cop. Because that kind of sums it up. The reason LDL cholesterol is the bad cop is because it causes a fatty buildup inside the arteries and that impairs blood flow and puts you at increased risk of a heart attack or stroke. You've seen those detective shows where they lock someone in an interrogation room and they just yell at 'em. No, it's not exactly the same, but I bet you'll remember now that LDL the bad cop cholesterol can make you have a heart attack. Now the good cop HDL cholesterol can actually lower your risk of heart disease and stroke. You know, it's the reassuring I'll be your friend cop. Picture the scene, bad cop is giving the suspect a really hard time and good cop comes in and sends the bad cop away.   Stick with me here. HDL, good cholesterol carries at least a little bit of the LDL or bad cholesterol out of the arteries where it causes damage and into the liver where it can be broken down and eliminated. So speaking in very general terms, you want your HDL cholesterol to be high and your LDL cholesterol to be low. We'll get to specific numbers in a sec. I do want to mention triglycerides. They are not the same thing as cholesterol, but they hang out together because you know, birds of a feather... When you have a lipid panel done, they often measure the whole flock, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, LDL, cholesterol and triglycerides. You've also probably heard about the ratio and yes, it's very important, but whose side are these triglycerides on anyway? Well, they're the most common type of FAT in the body. And like all things in our bodies, they have a purpose and that is to store excess energy from your diet. And yeah, that's the problem. Most of us have plenty of excess in our diet.  Hamburgers and french fries, or as Steve Martin said in the old Pink Panther movie, "Am barger." If you don't know that scene and that didn't make you laugh, please google it and watch a clip.  The bottom line is that high triglycerides combined with high LDL means fatty buildup in the walls of the arteries, and that increases the risk of heart attack and stroke. Okay, I hope you're convinced that Steve Martin is hysterical and you need to see the clip from the Pink Panther, and you need to get your cholesterol checked.  You are convinced, right? Don't believe me. The American Heart Association recommends that if you are over the age of 20, you should have your cholesterol checked and depending on your risk factors, every four to six years after that, until you get older and have an increased risk of. every dang thing. So now you've had your blood drawn and the doctor calls you with your results.  No. Oh yeah. Your results are now on the portal and you want to know what they mean.  I do have to tell you that context matters and you really should discuss the results with your doctor, but if you don't hear from them, I'll give you some generalities for people who do not already have cardiovascular issues, and by the way, you should fast for at least 12 hours before you go to the lab and get this. You shouldn't have the test done if you're sick or stressed. Stress affects cholesterol too. It wreaks havoc on your body in so many ways. First of all, people who are stressed often smoke more, drink more, sleep less, exercise less socially isolate and eat more junk. So there's that, but also our old friend Cortisol, the stress hormone also plays a role. Cortisol is our body's way of preparing us to physically respond to a threat. So it triggers the release of glucose and fatty acids into the bloodstream and muscles. So energy is available for slaying dragons   threatening our safety, and that's a good thing when there are dragons pulling up in your driveway. Not so much if you live in a constant state of stress. Of course, if you have prolonged stress, you'll have to go ahead and surrender that vein in your arm and get your lipids checked anyway, because when it comes to your numbers, you need to know. So let's get to those numbers. Total cholesterol should be below 200 milligrams per deciliter, and if it's between 201 and 239, that's considered borderline high cholesterol, and if it's above 240, that's just plain over the limit. Now, LDL cholesterol should be below 130 or even much lower than that if you are at risk of heart attack or stroke, HDL should ideally be above 60 and triglycerides below 150. Any numbers outside of these parameters should be taken seriously because you have a higher risk of cardiovascular disease, especially if you continue to eat ham ba burgers.  Now, let's say you do hear from your doctor's office. You know, the nurse calls and says you either need to take a cholesterol lowering medication like a statin or that you need to eat a low cholesterol diet and exercise. Thank you very much. But shouldn't we have a more detailed conversation about this result?  You bet. Your cholesterol is just one group of numbers. It's not the whole picture. Your risk of heart disease is impacted by other factors like smoking, high blood pressure, your family history, your age, and yes, of course your diet. And we are going to talk about a heart healthy diet in a bit. But first, let's discuss that conversation you're having with the nurse who calls from the doctor's office and said, we've sent in a prescription for a statin.  Hold up a minute. This literally happened to me last year. My total cholesterol was 202, a whopping two points above the normal range, and my ratio of good cholesterol to bad cholesterol was excellent. So I questioned this recommendation,  but what are the recommendations? Remember, I am board certified in lifestyle medicine, which is a subspecialty of conventional medicine. So we're not opposed to treatment with medication when indicated, but before we go firing off prescriptions, we should at least examine the indications. If your cholesterol is abnormal, and I would argue that mine is not thanks to some serious changes in my lifestyle and not my inherited tendencies, then you may need a cholesterol medication. Depending on your age and the likelihood of developing heart disease, but if you're not at risk for heart disease, then you might not need a medication, even if your cholesterol is high. At least not for now, because here's the deal, the number of your years only increases and age is a risk factor for heart disease, which by the way, is the number one killer of Americans. So let's say you are at risk and your cholesterol is high and your doctor wants you to take a medication quick pharmacology review. These medications can help the body make less cholesterol, which is one source. They can block the absorption of cholesterol from food, which is another source, and on top of that, they can actually help your body get rid of cholesterol faster. Sounds great. Right, and it can be, you should probably take medication if you have known heart disease, especially if you've actually had a heart attack or stroke. And because diabetes is such a big risk factor for cardiovascular disease, you may need to take a medication if you have type two diabetes, even if your cholesterol isn't high. And that's to prevent heart disease. Of course, you need to discuss all of this with your personal healthcare provider, and I recommend following their advice after you've had a conversation about options and risk. The most commonly prescribed class of medications are statins, but there are others. But can you lower your cholesterol without medications? I'm living proof  exercise helps raise your good cholesterol and lower your bad cholesterol, but you gotta do it regularly. Ideally, 30 minutes, five days a week, or if you wanna step it up a notch, 20 minutes of vigorous exercise three times a week. And remember, vigorous means you cannot have a conversation if you're talking, you are not exercising vigorously. You gotta be huffing and puffing to reach this level. So if you decide to stick with moderate, you can talk, but you can't sing. But here's the beauty of exercising - every little step in the right direction has immediate benefits, so you can start small and see results. Resistance training is great to build muscle strength and burn energy. You know, bands, weights, pushups, things like that. Or maybe you could start walking briskly. Or go to the gym and join a class for built-in accountability and social connections.   Let me give you a startling fact.  People who have a heart attack are four times more likely to die within three years if they don't have social connections. The older you get, the stronger the association. And if you're wondering how in the world that could be, it turns out the key is caring about others. When you value people in your life and you know they value you, you are more likely to make healthier choices like not smoking and positive relationships help manage stress and lower inflammation, and that damages blood vessels and also contributes to heart disease.  Sleep matters too. As part of an overall healthy lifestyle, you should aim for seven to nine hours per night and less than six hours a night is associated with higher cholesterol levels.  In the past, medical literature reported a positive association between drinking a glass of red wine and heart health. Turns out that's probably not true and moderate to heavy drinking  unquestionably raises your risk for heart disease. You know, if your liver's working overtime to get rid of alcohol, it's much less effective in dealing with cholesterol. Now, your Dr. may not have mentioned any of this except diet and exercise. So let's park there for a minute. A healthy weight is often associated with better numbers, but that isn't always true. Genetics also plays a big role, but whether you're at an ideal weight or overweight, changing your diet can have a huge impact on your cholesterol. In fact, depending on how much change you're willing to make, I would say that you can lower your cholesterol to a healthy level. And if you're interested in making healthy habit changes, you might want to go to my website Healthy Looks Great on you.com and sign up for Kickstart to Better Health. And for sure, you're going to want to stay tuned for an upcoming interview I have on Habit Change. Subscribe to this podcast. There's a link in the show notes or go to the website Healthy looks great on you.com. Either way, you should listen to your doctor. And make sure they listen to you as well. You may need medication to lower your cholesterol, and you may need to make lifestyle changes, especially if your numbers are going up in the wrong direction, even a little. But if you're motivated to do it without medications, let me harp on your diet. Hear me when I say this. When it comes to cholesterol or weight loss, diet matters more than exercise. Of course you should do both, but if you don't change your diet, exercise may not have the impact you're looking for. If you want to reduce the intake of cholesterol, stay away from trans fats, sometimes referred to as partially hydrogenated oils. They've basically been outlawed and banned anyway, but sometimes these transitions take some time to implement. Just make sure packaged pastries and things like margarine, which you shouldn't be eating anyway, don't have them. Avoid foods that are high in any kind of saturated fat.   Here's my top five list of foods that are high in cholesterol. Maybe we can find some hints about why my cholesterol was high eating in that fast food restaurant every day. Number one is red meat, beef, pork,  and especially processed meats like bacon, sausage, and hot dogs. Ah, remember what those hamburgers did to my cholesterol numbers. Number two is fried foods, and yes, I ordered french fries with my burgers. And fried foods are particularly bad when certain oils are used. Number three is sugar sweetened beverages and good grief. I drank a Coke with my burger and fries. No wonder my numbers were bad. Number four is sweets, pastries, pies, cakes, cookies, and ice cream. Yep. I probably ate that too. Number five is dairy, especially whole milk, cream, butter, and unfortunately cheese, which I also put on my burger. Good grief. I was daring my cholesterol to be high with all the foods from the naughty list. So what am I doing now? Well, I'm glad you asked. Here's a fun fact.  You really don't find cholesterol in plants. So eat plants, eat a lot of plants, eat different plants, eat plants that have different colors. Usually the darker, brighter the color, the more nutrients it has. Cholesterol's only found in processed foods, meat and dairy. But you wanna know what's only found in plants. Fiber and a high fiber diet is so important in lowering your cholesterol. It creates a healthy gut microbiome. Think of it like a sponge too, that soaks up cholesterol out of your bloodstream and helps remove it. Things like unprocessed oatmeal, whole wheat bread, whole grain brown rice, and popcorn. Also, beans, broccoli, sweet potatoes, apples, pears, oranges, grapes, all kinds of berries and nuts are on the good list. You didn't just ask me about eggs, did you? Goodness, that's a whole other conversation. And so is the other player in this conversation, triglycerides. But I will tell you that if you have high LDL cholesterol, you should at least limit your consumption of eggs. And the bottom line is that HDL cholesterol is your friend. It can help protect you from cardiovascular disease. And LDL Cholesterol levels should be low for heart health. That's easy to remember. H stands for high. L stands for low, and in some cases your doctor will want it really, really low. Below 70. So is cholesterol good or bad? The answer is yes. Cholesterol helps with cell membrane transport, absorption of vitamins, brain function, hormone production. But don't get the wrong idea. LDL cholesterol causes fatty buildup in the arteries, and that can be a huge threat to your health. So lower your bad cholesterol with medications if you need it, but definitely lower it with lifestyle changes because lower LDL is better for your health and healthy. Looks great on you.    The information contained in this podcast is for educational purposes only and is not considered to be a substitute for medical advice. You should continue to follow up with your physician or health care provider and take medication as prescribed. Though the information in this podcast is evidence based, new research may develop and recommendations may change 

Adrian Saville – Professor: Economics, Finance and Strategy, Gibs SAfm Market Update - Podcasts and live stream

A Caldecott Award winner! It's been a minute, hasn't it? When Betsy thinks of today's book she thinks of something David Wiesner said about it during one of his own Caldecott acceptance speeches. "Structurally unlike any medal winner before it — or since — Black and White...redefined the way stories could be told in picture books. And, just as importantly, it did this while being very, very funny." That's our bag, baby. As such, Betsy introduce Kate to this metafictional picture book and the legacy it engendered. Today we discuss newspapers, abstract cows, how the book occasionally hurts Kate's brain, and why it reminds her of the testing she took for her own autism. For the full Show Notes please visit: https://afuse8production.slj.com/2025/01/06/fuse-8-n-kate-black-and-white-by-david-macaulay/

"Structurally, I transferred the crow of the cockerels into midi notes and used these for the overall cadence and tonality of the arrangement. This was then transmitted to outboard synthesizers and effects and recorded. A cockerel crow from the original recording was then pitch shifted, stretched and layered texturally into the recorded arrangement.  "Thematically, the audio piece made me think a morning brimming with light and suddenly becoming flooded with the warmth and radiance of the sun; a satiating feeling that makes the day feel like a chance to greet life anew." Dusk in Valldemossa reimagined by Twilight Sleep.

Markets opened flat to begin the trading day after most indices reached new all-time high the day before. Kevin Green notes strength in the market but says broader participation will ensure the SPX can continue its bullish trend. He turns to a correlation between SPX futures and the VIX to explain potential headwinds for the index. ======== Schwab Network ======== Empowering every investor and trader, every market day. Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribe Download the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185 Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7 Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watch Watch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-explore Watch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/ Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetwork Follow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetwork Follow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/ About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe [DS] rushed to get climate regs in to make more difficult for Trump to remove, big fail. Rates cuts had no effect on inflation, inflation is rising. DOGE has been formed and now Elon and Vivek will cut and cut govt waste. [CB] panicking. The [DS] is being very nice to Trump, they want a smooth transition, they want to help, when criminals are nice to your face they are planning something. The [DS] ran a war game simulation for Trump's second term. Trump has nominated the dream team, remember the head fake. Trump is ready to drain the swamp, panic in DC, remember schedule "f".   (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Economy White House: We Rushed to Get Climate Regulations in So They'd Be Harder to Repeal  White House National Climate Adviser Ali Zaidi stated that “we really ran early this year to finalize” many climate regulations “before May, which, really, I think, ensures durability relative to this arcane statute, the Congressional Review Act. So, I think, because of that foresight, we have, actually, quite a durable regulatory regime going into the next few years.” Host Joumanna Bercetche asked, [relevant exchange begins around 2:10] “Well, there are still a couple of months left, as well, of the administration. I do wonder if there's anything that can be done on the regulation front, because regulation can swing quite quickly and it's set at the federal level. Is there anything that your administration is focusing on to make sure that the climate regulation stays intact as well?” Zaidi responded, “Yeah. One of the things we're making sure that we do on the spending front is to get as many of those resources in the hands of communities, nine out of every ten dollars in the investment agenda, already into the bloodstream. On the regulatory front, we really ran early this year to finalize a lot of the key regulations before May, which, really, I think, ensures durability relative to this arcane statute, the Congressional Review Act. So, I think, because of that foresight, we have, actually, quite a durable regulatory regime going into the next few years.” Source: breitbart.com https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1856694768765411760 https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1856700864615878691   7. Hospital Services Inflation: 3.9% 8. Food Away From Home Inflation: 3.8% Both headline and Core CPI inflation are now higher than they were 2 months ago. The US economy added the least amount of jobs in October since the pandemic in 2020. Consumers are struggling. Mexico is preparing to engage in trade wars with the US Mexico's government   signaled that it planned to hit back with trade restrictions of its own if President-elect Donald J. Trump followed through on his threats to impose sky-high tariffs on Mexican exports to the United States. “If you put 25 percents tariffs on me, I have to react with tariffs,” Marcelo Ebrard, Mexico's economy minister, told a radio interviewer on Monday. “Structurally, we have the conditions to play in Mexico's favor,” he added. Such moves could send shock waves through the economy of Mexico, which is exceptionally dependent on trade with the United States, exporting about 80 percent of its goods to its northern neighbor. But an array of sectors in the United States, including farmers and manufacturers of semiconductors and chemicals, also relies on exporting to Mexico, which last year eclipsed China to become the largest trading partner of the United States. Complex supply chains also intertwine the economies of both countries,

Kouri Richins, a Utah children's book author accused of fatally poisoning her husband with fentanyl in 2022, will remain behind bars after a judge denied her bail request. Richins, who wrote a book on coping with grief called *Are You With Me?* following her husband's death, faces charges of aggravated murder and attempted murder. During a hearing in Utah's 3rd District Court, Judge Richard Mrazik outlined his reasons for rejecting Richins' bond request. “There simply are not reasonably available means of mitigating her risk to the community and to herself or the strong incentive for her to flee the jurisdiction of the court,” Mrazik said. He emphasized the severity of the charges and her diminished ties to the community as critical factors in his decision. Prosecutors accuse Richins of spiking a cocktail she made for her husband, Eric Richins, with a lethal dose of fentanyl. They also claim she attempted to kill him previously, on February 14, 2022, by giving him a drugged sandwich. Eric Richins, a father of three, died at their home near Park City, a small mountain town known for its scenic beauty. Richins was arrested in 2023, just a year after her husband's death, and gained further attention for her public appearances discussing her family's grief. Her book, marketed to help children deal with the loss of a loved one, has become a focal point in media coverage of the case. The defense team, led by attorney Kathy Nester, argued that the case against Richins is weakening. “With two charges dismissed and four others severed, the defense stands more confident. The case against our client is rapidly narrowing, exposing deeper weaknesses with each step,” Nester said. Judge Mrazik dismissed two counts of distributing a controlled substance and agreed to separate four real estate-related fraud charges from the upcoming murder trial. However, he denied a motion from the defense to try the murder and attempted murder charges separately. The judge also refused a motion to increase the jury size from the standard eight to twelve members. Despite acknowledging that Utah's law “may be on the wrong side of history,” Mrazik said he is bound by his oath to uphold it. The trial, set to begin in April 2025, will cover multiple charges, including aggravated murder, attempted murder, two counts of filing fraudulent insurance claims, and one count of forgery. To ensure a fair jury pool, both the prosecution and defense agreed to select jurors from a broader geographic area, spanning Salt Lake and Summit Counties. Richins' defense team emphasized her connections to the area and disputed the notion that she poses a flight risk. However, Judge Mrazik pointed to several concerns, including her loss of business and strained relationship with her children, which he said could increase her motivation to flee. "Structurally, she just doesn't have the same connections to the community that she had then," the judge concluded. Richins remains in custody, awaiting her day in court, as both sides prepare for what promises to be a closely watched trial. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Kouri Richins, a Utah children's book author accused of fatally poisoning her husband with fentanyl in 2022, will remain behind bars after a judge denied her bail request. Richins, who wrote a book on coping with grief called *Are You With Me?* following her husband's death, faces charges of aggravated murder and attempted murder. During a hearing in Utah's 3rd District Court, Judge Richard Mrazik outlined his reasons for rejecting Richins' bond request. “There simply are not reasonably available means of mitigating her risk to the community and to herself or the strong incentive for her to flee the jurisdiction of the court,” Mrazik said. He emphasized the severity of the charges and her diminished ties to the community as critical factors in his decision. Prosecutors accuse Richins of spiking a cocktail she made for her husband, Eric Richins, with a lethal dose of fentanyl. They also claim she attempted to kill him previously, on February 14, 2022, by giving him a drugged sandwich. Eric Richins, a father of three, died at their home near Park City, a small mountain town known for its scenic beauty. Richins was arrested in 2023, just a year after her husband's death, and gained further attention for her public appearances discussing her family's grief. Her book, marketed to help children deal with the loss of a loved one, has become a focal point in media coverage of the case. The defense team, led by attorney Kathy Nester, argued that the case against Richins is weakening. “With two charges dismissed and four others severed, the defense stands more confident. The case against our client is rapidly narrowing, exposing deeper weaknesses with each step,” Nester said. Judge Mrazik dismissed two counts of distributing a controlled substance and agreed to separate four real estate-related fraud charges from the upcoming murder trial. However, he denied a motion from the defense to try the murder and attempted murder charges separately. The judge also refused a motion to increase the jury size from the standard eight to twelve members. Despite acknowledging that Utah's law “may be on the wrong side of history,” Mrazik said he is bound by his oath to uphold it. The trial, set to begin in April 2025, will cover multiple charges, including aggravated murder, attempted murder, two counts of filing fraudulent insurance claims, and one count of forgery. To ensure a fair jury pool, both the prosecution and defense agreed to select jurors from a broader geographic area, spanning Salt Lake and Summit Counties. Richins' defense team emphasized her connections to the area and disputed the notion that she poses a flight risk. However, Judge Mrazik pointed to several concerns, including her loss of business and strained relationship with her children, which he said could increase her motivation to flee. "Structurally, she just doesn't have the same connections to the community that she had then," the judge concluded. Richins remains in custody, awaiting her day in court, as both sides prepare for what promises to be a closely watched trial. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Kouri Richins, a Utah children's book author accused of fatally poisoning her husband with fentanyl in 2022, will remain behind bars after a judge denied her bail request. Richins, who wrote a book on coping with grief called *Are You With Me?* following her husband's death, faces charges of aggravated murder and attempted murder. During a hearing in Utah's 3rd District Court, Judge Richard Mrazik outlined his reasons for rejecting Richins' bond request. “There simply are not reasonably available means of mitigating her risk to the community and to herself or the strong incentive for her to flee the jurisdiction of the court,” Mrazik said. He emphasized the severity of the charges and her diminished ties to the community as critical factors in his decision. Prosecutors accuse Richins of spiking a cocktail she made for her husband, Eric Richins, with a lethal dose of fentanyl. They also claim she attempted to kill him previously, on February 14, 2022, by giving him a drugged sandwich. Eric Richins, a father of three, died at their home near Park City, a small mountain town known for its scenic beauty. Richins was arrested in 2023, just a year after her husband's death, and gained further attention for her public appearances discussing her family's grief. Her book, marketed to help children deal with the loss of a loved one, has become a focal point in media coverage of the case. The defense team, led by attorney Kathy Nester, argued that the case against Richins is weakening. “With two charges dismissed and four others severed, the defense stands more confident. The case against our client is rapidly narrowing, exposing deeper weaknesses with each step,” Nester said. Judge Mrazik dismissed two counts of distributing a controlled substance and agreed to separate four real estate-related fraud charges from the upcoming murder trial. However, he denied a motion from the defense to try the murder and attempted murder charges separately. The judge also refused a motion to increase the jury size from the standard eight to twelve members. Despite acknowledging that Utah's law “may be on the wrong side of history,” Mrazik said he is bound by his oath to uphold it. The trial, set to begin in April 2025, will cover multiple charges, including aggravated murder, attempted murder, two counts of filing fraudulent insurance claims, and one count of forgery. To ensure a fair jury pool, both the prosecution and defense agreed to select jurors from a broader geographic area, spanning Salt Lake and Summit Counties. Richins' defense team emphasized her connections to the area and disputed the notion that she poses a flight risk. However, Judge Mrazik pointed to several concerns, including her loss of business and strained relationship with her children, which he said could increase her motivation to flee. "Structurally, she just doesn't have the same connections to the community that she had then," the judge concluded. Richins remains in custody, awaiting her day in court, as both sides prepare for what promises to be a closely watched trial. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Kouri Richins, a Utah children's book author accused of fatally poisoning her husband with fentanyl in 2022, will remain behind bars after a judge denied her bail request. Richins, who wrote a book on coping with grief called *Are You With Me?* following her husband's death, faces charges of aggravated murder and attempted murder. During a hearing in Utah's 3rd District Court, Judge Richard Mrazik outlined his reasons for rejecting Richins' bond request. “There simply are not reasonably available means of mitigating her risk to the community and to herself or the strong incentive for her to flee the jurisdiction of the court,” Mrazik said. He emphasized the severity of the charges and her diminished ties to the community as critical factors in his decision. Prosecutors accuse Richins of spiking a cocktail she made for her husband, Eric Richins, with a lethal dose of fentanyl. They also claim she attempted to kill him previously, on February 14, 2022, by giving him a drugged sandwich. Eric Richins, a father of three, died at their home near Park City, a small mountain town known for its scenic beauty. Richins was arrested in 2023, just a year after her husband's death, and gained further attention for her public appearances discussing her family's grief. Her book, marketed to help children deal with the loss of a loved one, has become a focal point in media coverage of the case. The defense team, led by attorney Kathy Nester, argued that the case against Richins is weakening. “With two charges dismissed and four others severed, the defense stands more confident. The case against our client is rapidly narrowing, exposing deeper weaknesses with each step,” Nester said. Judge Mrazik dismissed two counts of distributing a controlled substance and agreed to separate four real estate-related fraud charges from the upcoming murder trial. However, he denied a motion from the defense to try the murder and attempted murder charges separately. The judge also refused a motion to increase the jury size from the standard eight to twelve members. Despite acknowledging that Utah's law “may be on the wrong side of history,” Mrazik said he is bound by his oath to uphold it. The trial, set to begin in April 2025, will cover multiple charges, including aggravated murder, attempted murder, two counts of filing fraudulent insurance claims, and one count of forgery. To ensure a fair jury pool, both the prosecution and defense agreed to select jurors from a broader geographic area, spanning Salt Lake and Summit Counties. Richins' defense team emphasized her connections to the area and disputed the notion that she poses a flight risk. However, Judge Mrazik pointed to several concerns, including her loss of business and strained relationship with her children, which he said could increase her motivation to flee. "Structurally, she just doesn't have the same connections to the community that she had then," the judge concluded. Richins remains in custody, awaiting her day in court, as both sides prepare for what promises to be a closely watched trial. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

Explore the most important characters driving the narrative in a compelling story. Discover their motivations and how they impact outcome.

India-China relations are dynamic, featuring periods of marked conflict, competition, and some cooperation. Structurally, however, the relations face significant challenges today, in domains ranging from the boundary dispute and trade imbalance, to broader tensions surrounding leadership of the 'Global South', burgeoning US-China contestation, and competing visions for a regional order. And even though the structural faultlines cannot be wished away, they require a crisp and innovative means to think about achieving equilibrium and some stability. In this episode of 'All Things Policy', Manoj Kewalramani speaks to Anushka Saxena about a pathway towards achieving a new modus vivendi with China. He sheds light on the influential strands of thought shaping the two neighbours' policies toward each other, while also proposing a 6-part framework for India to consider as it approaches the 'China question'. Manoj's detailed ideas are also elaborated in his latest research paper for Takshashila, entitled 'Contours of a New Modus Vivendi with China'. Link: https://takshashila.org.in/research/contours-of-a-new-modus-vivendi-with-china Amit Kumar's conceptual framework on dependence and vulnerabilities (referenced in the ATP episode): https://takshashila.org.in/research/takshashila-discussion-document-defining-dependence-induced-vulnerabilities-in-asymmetrical-trade-interdependence-a-conceptual-framework All Things Policy is a daily podcast on public policy brought to you by the Takshashila Institution, Bengaluru. Find out more on our research and other work here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://takshashila.org.in/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Check out our public policy courses here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://school.takshashila.org.in⁠

The UK has made progress in addressing societal inequalities, but continues to be shaped by interlinked structural disparities. That includes those related to gender, race, class, sexuality, age and disability. Five years ago, the Resolution Foundation and UCL collaborated on a commission exploring the interactions between these inequalities. Since then, the UK has gone through significant challenges, including a pandemic and a cost-of-living crisis, so how have UK inequalities evolved? How have disadvantaged groups been affected by recent economic shocks, and what structural barriers persist? How do the issues of health and disability – which have risen up the political and public policy agenda – interact with other inequalities? And how do structural inequalities fit into the new Government's agenda, and what key policy challenges must they address? The Resolution Foundation, in partnership with UCL, hosted a webinar to explore these important questions. After presenting the key findings from the Structurally Unsound report and new research on the changed landscape of structural inequalities in the UK, leading experts discuss how to tackle persistent societal inequalities.  Speakers: Alesha De Freitas, Head of Policy, Advocacy and Research at the Fawcett society Imran Rasul, Professor of Economics at UCL Olivia Stevenson, Deputy Director of Public Policy at UCL Nye Cominetti, Research Director at the Resolution Foundation (Chair)

AlixPartner's Derek Knueve and Andrew Kerr join Talking Supply Chain to discuss how supply chains find margin growth in a market where volumes and pricing are not increasing.

Alexa von Tobel of Inspired Capital joins Nick to discuss ID'ing Generational Founders, Targeting Structurally Broken Markets, Bringing Venture Back to the Studs, and How Value will Accrue in AI Between Incumbents and Upstarts. In this episode we cover: Support Innovative Companies Addressing Societal Problems Investing in Structurally Broken Markets AI Adoption, Future of Work, and Potential Job Automation AI Value Distribution, Incumbents Vs. Startups, and M&A Challenges Future of FinTech and Reimagining Products Investment Strategy in Uncertain Macro Environment Guest Links: LinkedIn X Inspired Capital The hosts of The Full Ratchet are Nick Moran and Nate Pierotti of New Stack Ventures, a venture capital firm committed to investing in founders outside of the Bay Area. Want to keep up to date with The Full Ratchet? Follow us on social. You can learn more about New Stack Ventures by visiting our LinkedIn and Twitter. Are you a founder looking for your next investor? Visit our free tool VC-Rank and we'll send a list of potential investors right to your inbox!

Investing in Bizarro World Episodes: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLIAfIjKxr02sAztzlJNy1ug5bDvTVZkME&si=w2d_EF-B5jMo1dYD Subscribe to Investing In Bizarro World: @bizarroworld Is gold still bullish? Is copper? Questions are swirling after the softness we've seen the past few weeks. Not to worry. Both those assets are still bullish and worthy of accumulating. https://digestpublishing.com/order/JRMISSUE-199-1YR60D/The US stock market and dollar remain bullish as well. What we've seen over the past few weeks is a breakdown in equities and narratives in Asia and Europe. In India, for example, Modi didn't cruise to power as easily as the market assumed. In France, Macron has called snap elections to stave off the rise of the right. That is all mostly headline stuff. Structurally and fundamentally, many asset classes remain bullish. The market will soon enough find whatever narrative it needs to move higher. In the meantime, dips are worthy of buying and we've been guiding readers through that in our premium publications. We give a cursory outline of this setup in the 274th episode of Investing in Bizarro World. We also talk at length about junior mining deals. There is one we're participating in now that you are invited to partake in right alongside us. We also discuss other deals we're involved in, look at some gold companies with hidden uranium assets, and admonish those gold companies still blaming “the market” for their underperformance. All that, plus plenty of potpourri in the 274th episode of Investing in Bizarro World.0:00 Intro2:14 Macro Tour: Commodities, Indexes, Precious Metals, Dollar13:15 Junior Mining Deal Talk25:12 Politics, Banks, Kicking Cans35:31 Bizarro World PotpourriVisit our website Daily Profit Cycle for more content like this and more! https://dailyprofitcycle.com/

The decline in gas supply has led to production cuts and a 99 percent increase in coal-generated electricity, according to MBIE. Methanex, New Zealand's biggest energy consumer, has cut back on its methanol production as a result. Director of Enerlytica, John Kidd, says the system will adjust - but unfortunately this is not a costless exercise. "Structurally, we're short on energy - full stop. So it's often lost on people that we don't have enough energy in the country to be able to support our demands. So we do rely on international markets anyway." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Book of Psalms is a collection of 150 ancient Hebrew poems, songs, and prayers. These compositions span different eras in Israel's history. Notably, King David, a poet and harp player, is connected to seventy-three of these psalms. Other authors, including Asaph, the sons of Korah, and worship leaders, contributed as well. The book's themes include God as the King of all creation, hope for the Messiah after exile, and lament as a response to evil. Structurally, Psalms is divided into five books, each with its own unique design and message. The book concludes with five poems of praise, inviting readers to “Praise Yah” (an abbreviation of the divine name, Yahweh). Explore these timeless expressions of despair, hope, and praise! #brendonnaicker #psalms #

Can Congress require China-based ByteDance to divest itself of TikTok as a condition for TikTok continuing to be easily accessible in the US? Alan Rozenshtein, Jane Bambauer, and Eugene Volokh discuss whether the law is consistent with the First Amendment – and with the much more rarely talked about Bill of Attainder Clause. To view the full transcript of this episode, read below: Free Speech Unmuted Eugene Volokh: Hello, welcome to Free Speech Unmuted from the Hoover Institution. I'm your co host Eugene Volokh, now basically emeritus from UCLA Law School and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. Jane Bambauer: I'm Jane Bamberger, the Breckner Eminent Scholar and Professor of Law at University of Florida. And today we have with us Alan Rosenstein. So Alan, tell us, tell us about yourself and correct my pronunciation of your name if I just butchered it. Alan Rozenshtein: Sure. it's Rosenstein, but I, don't, I don't, wait, Eugene Volokh: wait, a minute. You, spell it Alan Rozenshtein: Rosenstein. I can't, I, I cannot, I am not responsible for my parents immigration choices. Eugene Volokh: Exactly. So Alan and I. are both of Russian Jewish extraction. I was actually born in Kiev and it came here when I was, seven. Alan's parents are from, from Russia. I don't know the former Soviet union, but he was born very [00:01:00] shortly after they came. So there is always this question of how you, how you transliterate the relic names into something that Americans can pronounce. And I, I'm not sure either of our parents did a great job with that. mu much as we love them on this particular point, they may have aired. Alan Rozenshtein: it's funny because both of our names have these silent Hs and I like to joke that there's a STL somewhere that's missing an H. There you go. Found its way into my name. It's s. Eugene Volokh: But I'm sorry to have interrupted, Alan, tell us about yourself. Alan Rozenshtein: Sure. I'm an associate professor of law at the University of Minnesota where I've taught now for seven years. And I am also a senior editor at Lawfare where I do a lot of my writing on the sorts of topics that we're going to talk about today. and before that, I was a, attorney at the Department of Justice in the law and policy section of the National Security Division. Jane Bambauer: Yeah, so we're here today to talk about the tick tock ban or so called tick tock [00:02:00] ban it will see what, whether it actually, you know what its future actually has in store. But can you tell us a little bit about the law that was passed by Congress and signed by President Biden and then. We'll figure out what the free speech issues are. Alan Rozenshtein: Sure. So the law and, this is actually one of these, cases where Congress did not use a backer name for some reason, it's the protect Americans from foreign adversary controlled applications act. So it's perfect. Jane Bambauer: Yeah. Which is, Alan Rozenshtein: which is not great. which is not great. So we're just going to tell, I'm going to call it the tick talk law. so this was a law that was introduced in the house as part of the, bipartisan select committee on China, sailed through the house, a few months ago, surprising a lot of people how quickly it went through. It seemed to stall in the Senate for a while, but then for a number of reasons, including some changes made to the [00:03:00] law and then the broader, foreign aid package that went through. To assistance to Ukraine, Israel in particular, this was, signed or enacted by Congress and signed the law by the president. I think late last month, and the law, is sometimes called a, it's called by its supporters as a divestment law, it's called by its opponents as a ban law. Basically what it does is it requires bite dance. The Chinese company that owns approximately 20 percent of TikTok to, divest itself of TikTok. And if it doesn't do so within a little less than a year. TikTok is banned now. What band means is a little complicated. really what it is that, the law actually applies to, app stores and in particular, internet providers. They're not allowed to, Host tiktok services, so it doesn't actually make for consumers using tiktok illegal or anything. But given that the vast, majority of people just want to use a, [00:04:00] social media platform without too much, fuss, once the app stores stop carrying updated versions of tiktok. And once it gets, hard to use tiktok through the website, through your internet service provider, the assumption is that tiktok will be for the vast majority of people effectively banned. Jane Bambauer: Yeah. Okay. so you've written on Lawfare about the First Amendment implications and I understand you're going to have another post coming out soon. We'll link to both of those. But what do you make of this? how would you apply First Amendment jurisprudence to this particular law? Alan Rozenshtein: Yeah, no, it's an interesting question. And to be honest, I, it's funny. I, I, have never thought of myself as a first amendment scholar, though, in the last year or two, just given how much time I spend thinking about all things internet related, I feel like I've become one. But really, I think of you two as far more expert in this than I am. So I have my own ideas, but I'm actually very curious This is what you two with kind of a much longer history of thinking about the First Amendment think, so [00:05:00] I think of myself as in the minority of scholars, not a tiny minority, but I think a minority of scholars who think that although the First Amendment arguments that TikTok and TikTok users will be making, against this law, although the arguments are strong, that ultimately the government actually has a pretty good Case and I think more likely than not that the first amendment that the government will ultimately prevail You know at the end of the day and here I'll cheat a little bit in answering your question Jane because When one traditionally starts a first minute analysis the most important thing to do once one has decided that The first time it actually applies so that this is First Amendment protected activity. And I think here there's general agreement that the first time it definitely is implicated is one has to figure out what the appropriate quote unquote tier of scrutiny is. is this a prior restraint, which is the highest level of review? Is it [00:06:00] a viewpoint based? Law. Is it a content based law? Is it a content neutral law? In which case, it's not strict scrutiny, but intermediate scrutiny. And then all these gradations in between, and again, it's something that you two who are real first known scholars know one can spend infinite brain cycles thinking about this. And I think one thing that's interesting about this law is that I think they're actually plausible arguments for all of those positions. I think you can argue that it's a prior restraint, that it's viewpoint based, that it's content based, that it's content neutral. I think part of that is because this is a, I think a pretty novel fact pattern, at least in First Amendment jurisprudence. I think it's also the fact that the tiers of scrutiny analysis has never been, I think, particularly clear. And when I said I'm gonna cheat in your answer a little bit, what I meant is that I think at the end of the day it doesn't matter all that much. Which is to say, at the end of the day, the vast majority of First Amendment cases come down to some sort of balancing of the various interests at stake. And this is particularly true at the Supreme [00:07:00] Court, where, you really, I'll be a little bit of a legal realist here. It's really all about can you count to five justices that will agree that your side's values are more important than the other side's values. and that although the tiers of scrutiny do real work in that they, function as kind of presumptions, if the court concludes that such and such is a prior restraint, then presumptively the government's going to have a big problem, though sometimes prior restraints are fine. Similarly, if the court concludes that this is merely a neutral time, place, and manner restriction, presumptively the government's probably going to be okay, though those are also struck down all the time. At the end of the day, a lot relies again, especially in really high profile, sui generous cases like this on the specific facts. in my writing on this, I have tried not to, and again, I'm happy to get pushback, from, you too. I have tried not to spend too many cycles worrying about exactly what level of scrutiny should apply here. And instead, just [00:08:00] try to outline what are the values on each side? What are the values The First Amendment interests of TikTok, and I think more importantly, the 150 million American users of TikTok on the one hand. Versus on the other hand, what are the government's interests here in potentially banning TikTok, or at least really risking a ban of TikTok? and there are two in particular. One is a data privacy concern, because in the course of personalizing the TikTok algorithm for users, TikTok collects an enormous amount of information on what it is that you are watching and clicking and liking and disliking. and TikTok and therefore ByteDance and therefore the Chinese Communist Party could potentially use that information to America's detriment. So that's the data privacy concern. And the other concern is a foreign manipulation concern. That, because TikTok is You know, entirely run by the algorithm is totally inscrutable. if [00:09:00] a foreign entity can influence that algorithm, they can influence the information ecosystem of 150 million Americans and not just 150 million Americans, but because of TikTok, because TikTok is so popular among young people. And for those young people, TikTok is not just a source of fun cat videos, but it's actually the main source of news that they get. one can imagine, just generally, or especially in a conflict, let's say over Taiwan, that TikTok could suddenly become a, profound, Vector of foreign influence and foreign manipulation. And so I think ultimately comes down to balancing those two. Jane Bambauer: Yeah. Okay. So before we go into the values and the sort of government interest, I do want to pause and Talk through the coverage or maybe levels of scrutiny issue because I'm actually not sure and I really regret to say this because as a policy matter. I have some major issues with the tick tock [00:10:00] band, but I'm not sure that actually the First Amendment would even apply. I'm curious to hear Eugene's thoughts as well. But here's, my thinking. I guess there are two reasons to doubt that we have to do a First Amendment analysis. One is that maybe you could conceive of this as really a trade restriction, that has obvious, free, speech, results, and, maybe even speech related, content based related, even viewpoint based related maybe motivations, but that ultimately still it's a Restriction on managing, trade and so the way, much, much the way that we, don't allow certain other types of, products or services, to, pass through the borders. Another reason though that I have some skepticism is because the Supreme Court in cases that are somewhat old, but, they've suggested that [00:11:00] even when the government's goal basically is to restrict information that comes from outside the borders in. They have wide latitude and, these cases don't seem to really apply a constitutional analysis. So the two cases I have in mind, first, the earliest was Zemel versus Rusk, which is a little different because this is the case that involves, a set of plaintiffs who wanted to travel to, to, Cuba in the sixties. And they alleged, and no one disagreed, that they wanted to go there in order to gather information and an understanding of what's happening in Cuba. And, the Supreme Court went out of its way, not only to say that the government has full authority to decide who can leave the country, but, but also the Supreme Court said that the right to speak and publish does not carry with it unrestrained right to gather information. A lot has happened since that case. And I think the Supreme Court has over time [00:12:00] recognized the right to gather information. but. the board, if you combine that logic with the logic of the whole state control of the borders. you can see where I'm going here. And then the second case, was, Kleindienst versus Mandel. Yeah. yeah. So this one I think is even closer analogy. that one, I know. Yeah. Yeah. And so this one involved, this is a little later in the seventies. It's still a long, long ago though. And it involved, an invitation offered by Stanford University to a Belgian revolutionary Marxist as he himself portrayed. Yeah. Yeah. his own work, who, applied for a visa to come to campus and give a speech and the, customs office said no. And although there were a couple of dissenting, justices, the Supreme Court decided there is, basically that the government has full control over, over these decisions, irrespective of the reasons, the [00:13:00] speech related reasons that they may be made. Eugene, do you, what, do you make of. Just this application question, the coverage question. Eugene Volokh: so I'd love to hear what Alan has to say about those cases. But I'd also add a third one, which is Lamont v. Postmaster General, which specifically involved the travel not of people, but of information. And that was actually, it was 1965, the first Federal statute ever struck down by the Supreme Court on First Amendment grounds. Of course, the Supreme Court has the power to strike down Lamont. It's true. It has the power to strike down federal statutes and often exercises it. In fact, The whole point of the First Amendment originally was to constrain Congress, that's it starts with Congress shall make no law, but it took a long time before the court actually said this federal statute, not a state statute, not a federal executive action, but this federal statute is unconstitutional, happened in 1965. The statute, [00:14:00] basically required Americans who wanted to receive foreign communist propaganda to go to the post office. maybe not the post office, but in any case, go to the government and say, I am willing to receive it by the mail. And it made it illegal to send and deliver it to them, unless they have actually specifically, specifically requested. and the Supreme Court did not decide the question whether foreign. Foreigners, and especially foreign governments, have any First Amendment rights. It didn't focus on the rights of the senders, but it did talk about the rights of the recipients and, concluded that this law was unconstitutional because it interfered with the rights of Americans to receive this information. And so it did not view, federal governments had undoubted power to control what comes into the country, [00:15:00] as A total as being unlimited or put, more positively concluded that even Congress's broad power to, control what goes into the country is limited by the first two. So those are the three cases that strike me as most, most relevant. Although Alan, I totally agree with you that in many ways, this is sui generis and part of the problem is the Supreme Court has never really confronted a question quite like this one. even Lamont, which I do think is. Some respects close. This is a mailings of foreign propaganda to Americans. How many Americans would likely, even if they didn't have to put their name down on a list, would have been particularly interested in reading that? Very few. Tick tock very many. so, it's an interesting, I'm not saying any of these cases are strictly binding here, but I'd love to hear what you think about how these cases play out. Alan Rozenshtein: Yeah. so a lot there. So let me say a couple of things. So first, and [00:16:00] this is not dispositive, but it's something all the, all of the courts to have all of the courts who have heard cases like the one that is about to be heard in the DC circuit, because this is not the first attempt to ban tick tock. There was, I think Montana. some Midwestern state. I think it was Montana tried to remove Wyoming, tried to ban it. And then, of course, in the Trump administration, Trump through executive order, tried to ban it in litigation there. everyone seemed to concede. And certainly the courts assumed that there was a first amendment issue here again. That doesn't mean that there necessarily is. But I think that's one data point. The second point I would say is, just to get back to Lamont, because I think Lamont is a very important issue. Case I reread it this morning because I needed to for this law for peace that I'm writing and what you described Eugene as the holding of Lamont, which is that Americans have a right to receive foreign propaganda, which is how Lamont is generally understood. I'm actually not sure. That's what Lamont says. That's what Justice Brennan's concurrent says in Lamont. But Justice Douglas is very short and in [00:17:00] true Justice Douglas fashion, extremely under argued and under theorized opinion really actually focuses on, the, the chilling effect of having to go to the government and say, Yes, I would like to receive the peaking review. And that was coincidentally, the, propaganda at issue. So it's another Chinese propaganda case. but we should get back to Lamont. I think Lamont is an interesting case. Jane Bambauer: Yeah, that, and that, yeah, that, that makes sense. And Brennan is consistent because he also dissented in that client and in the, case involving the Belgian. Yeah. Alan Rozenshtein: Yeah, I think, Kleindienst is very interesting, and again, it's, hard to know what exactly to make of that, what I, whatever Kleindienst stands for, the reason I don't think that it would really apply here is, it'd be one thing if the government From a blank slate said, or, let me give you a more specific example. It's one thing if a [00:18:00] Chinese company wanted to buy a us platform and the government, and here would be SIFI as the committee on foreign investment in the United States said, no, you can't do this. And in fact, CFIUS has done this, when a Chinese company tried to buy Grindr, which is a dating service, very popular with gay and lesbian Americans. CFIUS said, no, you can't do this because we don't want the Chinese government to have access to the HIV status of Americans. Cause that's something that Grindr allowed people to put in. that I think is different than you have an existing platform where 150 million users are every day doing things that have profound first amendment implications. And we are now going to ban this platform. I think that's quite different then. There's something outside the United States. And then the question is, can it come into the United States? Something you already have in the United States. Now, to, to your point, Jane, I think the fact that the government generally has broad national security, foreign relations, economic trade, however you want to think of it, powers, is a really important part of the First [00:19:00] Amendment analysis. But I think that, the kind of brute fact that you have 150 million Americans using TikTok every day is going to make it very difficult, I think, for any court, even if they ultimately uphold the law, which I think they will, to say there's no First Amendment issue here. Jane Bambauer: Yeah, I hope you're right, but it is one of those things that where, there's probably all sorts of ways in which our national security or customs and border enforcement, keep us from knowing what we'd actually like to know and we're just And so the being, joining you on the realist side a little bit I, you're probably right but if we knew more about what we're missing from certain policies, maybe that same logic should apply to cases that the Supreme Court, The thought where you're, unrelated to the first moment. So Eugene Volokh: I do want to, I do want to also stand by a little bit my characterization of a Lamonti Postmaster General. I think even in Justice, Douglas's [00:20:00] majority opinion for the court, he talks about how the requirement that the addressee must request in writing that it be delivered Is, quote, an unconstitutional abridgment of the addressee's First Amendment rights. Close quote. Sounds like in context, what he's saying is That the addressee has a First Amendment right to receive information and, that, by saying in order to get the information, you've got to do something that will put you on a list of people who are interested in foreign communists, but again, that which is a list most people might not have wanted to be on. the, the concern there is that, it burdens your ability to receive that information. It imposes a barrier to your First Amendment rights as a listener. But in any case, whether it's Justice Douglas or Justice Brennan's quite influential concurrence that you're [00:21:00] quite right, has gotten a lot of traction since then. I do think in many ways, Structurally it is quite similar because here the concern is also that TikTok users have an interest in using this app and receiving the information on it, although many of them are also TikTok content creators, so they have an interest in being able to use it to distribute their speech. So I'm totally with you that there's a Pretty substantial burden on people's ability to speak and to listen for sure. But also again just returning to your sui generis point You might say that what was true of this relatively minor form a potential form of foreign influence in the form of mailings of the peking review or similar publications from overseas may not be really relevant to a situation where we've got something that's being used by so many, Americans and so many young Americans. Alan Rozenshtein: [00:22:00] Yeah. And I, think it's part, partially what you just said, right? It's a scale issue, but I think it's partially also a transparency issue. So I think one thing that's important about this, ban is that it does not prevent Chinese propaganda. I can go today and I link from this from lawfare. So I the peaking review is interesting. It is, China's only English language state on newspaper. and it you can click on. It's called the Beijing review today. It still operates. it says exactly what you would think it would say. and you can access it and you can access it today. You can access it after the law goes into effect. Similarly, if you want to go and, you want to hear what, The China Ministry of Foreign Affairs wants to say you can go and hop on Twitter and read their Twitter account and you'll be able to do after this bill goes into effect as well. So it's not a ban on Chinese propaganda per se, or I think even at all. It's a ban on Chinese control over an information environment. Now why is that different? [00:23:00] if you dig into the justifications, so let's, say that we interpret Lamont Through the Brennan concurrence, right? and, we just say, okay, Lamont stands for some general proposition that Americans have a right to foreign propaganda. Why? I think the, best argument is there's like a marketplace of ideas. argument that foreign propaganda is information like anything else and it should be part of the flow and One person's propaganda is another person's truth And even if it's bad it helps sharpen our understanding all the standard marketplace of ideas arguments that i'm totally happy with but one difference I think between foreign propaganda and foreign control over a platform is foreign propaganda is usually at least Pretty clearly foreign propaganda when you're reading, or at least it's foreign when you're reading the Beijing review, you're reading the Beijing review. You know what you're reading. and I think that helps contextualize what you're reading. You can agree with it, disagree with it when you're on tick tock. The whole point is that this algorithm is totally unscrutable. You have [00:24:00] no idea why you are seeing what you are seeing and the potential for subconscious manipulation, that I don't think, furthers the marketplace of ideas. in the same way that being able to read the Peking Review does. I think that's another really big difference. Now, we could spend all day talking about it, but maybe even, subconscious propaganda still has information and stuff like that. But I think at the very least from a doctrinal matter, it's pretty clear that this distinguishes Lamont and, I emphasize this because I've heard a lot of critics of this law cite Lamont as if it straightforwardly disposes of this case because Lamont stands for some super broad proposition about foreign propaganda. And, what I would say is I don't think the case does. And I also don't think that. The historical context does either. Matt Iglesias, the, well known blogger, had a nice piece a couple months ago, why he is, was for the ban. And he's not a lawyer, so his is more of a policy analysis, but he made a very nice analogy. And he said, look, imagine during the height of the Cold [00:25:00] War, the Soviet Union wanted to go and buy CBS. Would we have allowed that? And the answer is no, we would not have allowed that. And it is, I think, inconceivable that the Supreme Court would have had problems with that. it, it strikes me as very unlikely. Again, this is not a legal point. This is a historical sociological point that even the court that I think unanimously, struck down that law in Lamont in 1965 would have, three years after the Cuban Missile Crisis, been okay with the Soviet Union buying CBS. Because I think there is really a distinction and it's not just one of degree. it's one of kind. Eugene Volokh: so first of all, I'm sorry, you're quite right that, the, court, the court, was unanimous in the case. I was mistaken, talking about dissent. I'm sorry. I should have said that the government's position, in Lamont postmaster general, but the second thing I wanted to say, is that, you, raise this question of buying, broadcasters and indeed, [00:26:00] there are to this day. Limits, substantial limits on foreign ownership of, of, broadcasters, presumptive limits. they could be, as I understand it, waived by the FCC, but there are such limits. what do you think of that as a precedent, do you think? the Supreme Court, to my knowledge, has never really squarely confronted them. But the broad assumption is that they are, they're valid. Is it something that's just a broadcasting only rule? Because there are a lot of. Supreme Court cases that say, broadcasting is special, or is it something that you think stands for a broader proposition and the other thing? actually, I have a follow up question for you, but I wanted to see what you thought about that. Alan Rozenshtein: Yeah, I think it's both. So, I do think the broadcast precedents are really important, in terms of, this long history of, foreign ownership rules. And, here I, I will. Suggest, the folks are interested. Ganesh Sitaraman, [00:27:00] who's a law professor at Vanderbilt, wrote a wonderful article in the Stanford Law Review last year, two years ago, I think called Foreign Ownership of Platforms. We can put it in the show notes. That really goes through this history, not just communications platforms, but generally of foreign ownership, restrictions. I think that precedent is, important. I think you're also right, Eugene, to be fair, that, A response could be, yeah, but those were in the broadcast context, and the court has often distinguished restrictions that are okay under the First Amendment for broadcast, or what are something called limited spectrum situations, and that would not be in the context of an unlimited spectrum. But I have a response to that, which is that, it is true that the internet is not limited in the way that broadcast is, right? If I want to broadcast on a radio frequency, no one else can broadcast on that radio frequency, and therefore you need to have government intervention. Otherwise, none of it works. That's not true for the internet. But the internet is limited in a different way, and that is with attention. [00:28:00] it used to be that the bottleneck for communications was the internet. Broadcast or spectrum now it's the attention of the audience and because you still have a bottleneck, right? You can still get monopolistic effects where it used to be that there were a few small a few very large Broadcasters and they carved the broadcast Spectrum that was the bottleneck now. There are a few large platforms. They're not carving up spectrum. They're carving up attention and I think that actually, if you think deeply about, what justified intervention in the broadcast industry, it was general scarcity, but it doesn't just be scarcity Of, of, spectrum. It can be whatever scarcity of the bottleneck there is. And so Jane Bambauer: I think I just go ahead, finish it. Yeah, it will. Alan Rozenshtein: So and, and and I think this is, this is, a different project and maybe this is a project I should write. [00:29:00] And then you Jane can tell me why, I'm wrong. I actually think that, where you have, limited attention, that is just as good of a reason as limited broadcast for the government to, regulate, if it regulates well. Now, ISIL has to regulate well. Jane Bambauer: Yeah, that's not my objection, though. I think the problem is the scarcity that the spectrum scarcity has to do with the means of production. The attention scarcity is more like saying there are only there's at any given point a set number of dollars in the world and consumers don't have unlimited dollars to spend on different types of content. It doesn't actually prevent a competitor from coming in and creating content or curating content, which I think. I think the limited set of platforms that are doing well, because they're actually in fierce competition with each other in a curation market, not in, a traditional content market. But, [00:30:00] nevertheless, there are lots of ways to get copious amounts of information. The trouble is figuring out how to pitch the right information to the right person so that it's worth their time. And there, I just don't see I don't see a monopoly style problem there. And I guess that leads me to the skepticism about, about the, policy behind the tick tock ban that, I, get that there's a lot of really bad content on tick tock and that the Chinese government may have a motivation that's different from the capitalistic one, and that is, that, that, does. seek to cause, disarray and, and, polarization among Americans. But I don't see a big difference between the effects of TikTok and the effects of every other social media company because, first of all, I think there's reason to think that even if you have completely malignant intent. There's [00:31:00] only so much that you can do to manipulate a person into thinking or pursuing some information that they don't already want to pursue. and then also that even through just the normal capitalistic, motivations, most of these platforms are incentivized to find information and curate information. that leads to polarization, that leads to anger and to resentment and to, all, of the things that the Chinese government may benefit from, but doesn't really cause in a, fundamental sense. Alan Rozenshtein: So I, I, so there are a couple, of points there, right? So, one, And let's just say generally, the field of, I don't even know what you'd call it, social media communication psychology, is still quite young. it is advancing very quickly or changing very quickly because The actual infrastructure is changing very [00:32:00] quickly. and if you're looking for a clear social science answer, like you can find, there are lots of papers that will say all sorts of things, right? So policymakers and judges are definitely going to be, legislating and deciding under real uncertainty, which raises interesting meta questions about, okay, then, should we err on this side or that side? then there's a more specific question about, what do we know about specifically China and specifically ByteDance and specifically TikTok? And we can get into the evidence that we have and how speculative or not speculative it is. and then third, we can get into this question of what is the specific threat here? Because I agree with you if the concern is it's in China's interest to addict all our kids to stupid cat videos, or it's in China's interest to feed, TikTok users inflammatory polarizing content because, that's what gets the most clicks. Then I agree with you that would not be a great argument because it's not clear that Twitter or Instagram or Meta operate any differently than, [00:33:00] than, than that, right? I think the unique danger is that, The Chinese government has shown, a couple of things. One, a willingness to, in a very heavy handed way, try to alter how it is perceived around the world with respect to any number of issues. the Hong Kong democracy protests, the issues with the Uyghurs, certainly relations with Taiwan. and in addition, And in a way that just goes beyond your general polarization or feeding people, content that gets them angry. and in addition that, the Chinese government, is also willing to use its, private companies, in a way that very much goes against those private companies own market and capitalist interests. If the Chinese government perceived that it is in their interest, right? And I, think the government's real concern is. In a [00:34:00] shooting war with Taiwan, right? what will the Chinese government, force TikTok to show to 150 million users, right? Now you may say, at the end of the day, people make up their own minds and so forth, right? And, it's a risk. But the question is, is are the courts going to require? And here we have to we have to separate the legal question from the policy questions, because courts have a very specific role. and although we all understand that they make policy, they don't really want to be in a position of second guessing the national security and foreign policy judgments of the political branches. do courts want to tell the government? No, Go get into a war with China. China over Taiwan. Let's see what's on TikTok. And if TikTok spends six months feeding the young people of America, pro China content and gets them all to protest and stuff like that, then we can talk again. That's a bit of a caricature of the view. But I think that's the thing that keeps the government [00:35:00] up at night. and speaking only for myself, right? That's good enough for me. this is a your mileage may vary situation. I totally accept that. Jane Bambauer: Yeah. I see the same logic in the communist era. but Eugene, what do you think? Eugene Volokh: so I want to ask a couple of follow up questions or maybe three questions. one first amendment question and two turns out they're more than first amendment issues in the case. Alan Rozenshtein: Yeah. Yeah. Eugene Volokh: So the first is we haven't focused on the fact that this law doesn't ban TikTok as such, but requires. It essentially to be divested from Chinese influenced ownership. So I'm inclined to think that doesn't eliminate the First Amendment issue. But at the same time, it sounds like maybe it Would affect it? maybe not. I'd love to hear your thinking. And then I wanted to follow up, with a couple of more questions. One about the [00:36:00] bill of attainder question, and the other about this weird procedural posture of the case. But first, tell me what you think about this, how this, divestiture option affects the first amendment analysis. Alan Rozenshtein: Yeah. again, I take a middle position between some of the defenders of the bill who just say this is just divestiture and some of the critics who say this is an outright ban. It's not. It's you have to divest or you get a ban. I do think, I don't think that eliminates the First Amendment issue because there's a real risk of a ban that has to be taken into account. and the government can't just say, it's China's fault if it's banned and therefore we don't have to defend this law in First Amendment grounds. That's not how this works. On the same, on the other hand, I do think that the divestiture option helps in, two ways. One is that a lot of First Amendment analysis is about overbreath, right? a lot of constitutional analysis is about, did the government's action go further than necessary? And by definition, a law that allows for divestment instead of a ban. is more narrowly tailored, again by [00:37:00] definition, than a law that just does a ban. So it's almost like a good faith showing on the part of the government that we're actually trying to solve a problem here. We're really trying to solve, have different options here. The second reason, and this is maybe a little cute, but I do think it's plays importantly, at least politically, maybe also legally. If the investment fails, it's probably be going to be because China refuses to allow ByteDance to sell the algorithm to TikTok. And in fact, in the complaint that TikTok filed with the D. C. Circuit, they have essentially said that. They said divestment is not an option because China will not allow it. But if China won't allow it, shows a little bit, exactly what the government is worried about. That China cares a lot about this, and it's going to use its weight to, It's going to use its weight around here, which is exactly the point. I want to be fair. Anupam Chander, who's a sparring partner of mine on this and is great. and is at Georgetown, has argued that actually there are plenty of good reasons for countries not to want to allow the [00:38:00] export of sensitive technologies that have nothing to do with manipulation. and that's a fair point, but I think it it's almost like performatively shows. It's very clever. It shows to the courts in part, the very problem that the government is citing, which is China's influence and ability to throw its weight around. so that's the divestment thing. Should we talk about bill of attainder? Eugene Volokh: before we get to bill of attainder, I wanted to ask you about the, procedural issues. So a lot of what we're talking about here turns on facts. just how much influence does the Chinese government have? over bike debts. just, just how much of a burden will this impose on American creators and others? just how much, just what evidence is there of real national security threat? and in a typical situation, what would happen there would be is that there would be a challenge brought in federal district court, which is a trial court, the [00:39:00] judge might have a hearing where the judge would consider both written submissions, written, declarations of experts and others and, and other witnesses, and, at the same time, would also potentially have, have an oral hearing. and then it would go up on appeal where the appellate courts and perhaps eventually the Supreme Court would consider, how the legal rules apply to that. here, Congress provided that the challenge would be brought in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, which is an appellate court, which does not regularly, and I'm not sure, If it ever, maybe it does have some mechanisms for this, but at least does not regularly hear evidence. The job of an appellate court is not to hear evidence. It's to review an evidentiary record built either by the, trial courts or by, administrative agencies. So tell us how any of these factual questions are going to be resolved, [00:40:00] in, a case like this. Alan Rozenshtein: Yeah, I will say this is a among the nerderati. This is a real topic of excitement. and we'll have to see. So so a couple of points. so first is, unfortunately, the bill does not have legislative findings attached to it, which is usually actually really important part of these kinds of bills. And it's surprising that it doesn't given that there's been reporting that Congress collaborated very closely with DOJ to really bulletproof this bill. It's not clear why they didn't On the other hand, the co sponsors of the bill, Representatives Gallagher and Krishnamurti, introduced a resolution, which is basically a very long list of legislative findings, and a lot of that resolution ended up in the House Committee Report. that accompanied the bill, and that has a lot of information about classified briefings that Congress received about the threat. Why alternatives that tick tock offered were not sufficient. I think that, though that resolution, this committee reports will play a really important role, [00:41:00] and may go some way to establishing the factual and evidentiary record. But Eugene, you're totally right. It doesn't go all the way, and it's certainly much less than what happened in district court. So what's going to happen? Appellate, you're right, appellate courts, they're appellate courts. They don't usually hear trials or take evidence, but they can, and not just the D. C. Circuit, but the Supreme Court can. So the Constitution provides original jurisdiction for the Supreme Court and all sorts of things. And I, there is at least one time that I know of that the Supreme Court tried to hold a trial and it went extremely poorly. I, have to, I, Once I read a very funny Law Review article about this. I got to dig it out. It's, it was a real comedy of errors, and so from then on, they decided, that what they would do is, in case of original jurisdiction, where like states sue each other, which happens from time to time, they would get a, I think it's called special master, basically an outside lawyer who would go do the fact finding for them. I'm sure the DC circuit could do the same thing. I haven't read the, I'm not a litigator. I haven't read the federal rules of civil procedure in a long time, repellent procedure. [00:42:00] I'm sure there's some mechanism for that. I think what's more interesting is the role of potentially classified information, because a lot of this is classified. the appellate courts can hear classified information. the DC circuit certainly can. It did so routinely in the 2010s during, the many Guantanamo habeas cases, that it heard. and actually just last year, the ninth circuit in another national security case, Twitter versus Garland, had to hear a lot of national classified information to decide whether or not Twitter's challenge against certain gag orders was constitutional and literally in the opinion, the Ninth Circuit says we are not at liberty to discuss the classified information that we have reviewed, but we reviewed it as part of our analysis and trust us. It's fine. I made up that last part. so it may very well be, that there is some classified information that is submitted to the court in camera. Maybe there's a protective order. I have no idea how it's going to work, but it may very well be that the D, the D. C. Circuit says, we look at the classified information, trust us.[00:43:00] Eugene Volokh: Got it. so that's very helpful to know. So let's just close by, stealing something from, we have a sister podcast, the Bill of attainder, unmuted podcast, we probably should have had this other, no, there is no real, for the real Alan Rozenshtein: Nerderati, Eugene Volokh: because it's a pretty rare issue to arise, but there is this issue of whether this law violates the bill of attainder clause and to quote the Supreme Court in actually a case involving President Nixon, is that, Bill of Attainder is a law that legislatively determines guilt and inflicts punishment upon an identifiable individual without provision of the protections of a judicial tribe. The classic example historically was Parliament backed law. Back in jolly old England would say we think this person is, is a traitor often or has done something [00:44:00] very bad. but maybe he's allied with the king, so we can't trust that he will be normally prosecuted. We're just going to say he is a traitor and needs to be beheaded. And that's that. so I think historically bills of attainder have been mostly for capital, punishment. There also used to be bills of pains and penalties, vague recollection, but the U. S. Constitution Were you Alan Rozenshtein: old enough to remember when Parliament used to do bills of attainder? Yeah, there you go. All that Eugene Volokh: gray hair. so the, so the U. S. Constitution has long forbidden bills of attainder. But the question is, what is a bill of attainder? Whenever we see a law that mentions someone by name, and maybe, interesting question, what about mentioning a business by name, then, people start talking about, maybe that's a bill of attainder, but not all such laws are indeed [00:45:00] unconstitutional. So, again, This is, on the one hand, not a free speech issue, on the other hand, very much an issue in this case, and I suspect many people who may have heard about the case, even if they're not lawyers, would say, wait a minute, this law, it's just the government, the Congress trying to ban a particular business, is that what they're supposed to do? Aren't they supposed to pass general laws that say, here are the criteria that, if met, cause you to be restricted in various ways. So what do you think about this bill of attainder, question, even if just tentative? Alan Rozenshtein: Yeah, I think it's interesting. so a couple of thoughts on the bill of attainder question. So first, there is an open question whether or not the bill of attainder applies to corporations. The Supreme Court has never, Definitively answer that question. I think one lower one appellate court, I forget which one has held that it does apply to corporations. I don't know if there's a circuit split on that or just other circuits haven't gotten to it. But that's [00:46:00] one interesting question. and, especially with the originalist turn that the Supreme Court's had, I think there's going to be a lot of, Justice Alito or, pouring over, 18th century parliamentary records to know was this ever applied to corporations. the second question is, the Bill of Attainder, it's not just about specifically singling someone out. It's specifically singling someone out for punishment and punishment is a technical term of art here. Unfortunately, again, the Supreme Court has never said exactly what a punishment is. There's a historical test and a functional test. so one might argue that this isn't a punishment. Nothing is being stolen. nothing is being taken away from tick tock. No one's being put in jail. This is a proscriptive regulation that tick tock can no longer afford itself of certain, corporate benefits. now, as with many things, There's a certain angels on the head of a pin kind of quality to, is that [00:47:00] a punishment or a regulation? But honestly, this stuff comes up all the time. there are similar logical puzzles in Fifth Amendment takings cases. Is it taking or regulation or whatnot? so that's another question that the courts will have to, decide whether this is a punishment or just a forward looking, prospective. regulation. And the third question is, and this is a part of the law we haven't actually talked about, but it's actually very important. The TikTok ban or divestment and ban is only one part of the law. The law also sets up a broader scheme by which the president can identify other TikTok like companies, which is to say social media platforms that are controlled by Russia, China, North Korea and Iran. and, and trigger a similar divestment type process. And so this raises the question of whether or not the government will be able to use that part of the law to soften the fact that the law also targets tick [00:48:00] tock. that may not be relevant to the bill of attainder issue, but tick tock has also made, other arguments that sound similar swiftly run equal protection that they're getting being singled out. and so the government may point to say, no, this is a general law. We're just starting with tick tock. I don't know if that gets there. I suspect that, and again, I'm not an expert in this, but I have done some preliminary research that the courts will ultimately move. This is just not a punishment. It's not a punishment in the way that the bill of attainder, contemplates that this is a, forward looking, regulation. Eugene Volokh: Got it. Thanks very much. very interesting. Jane, any closing questions or remarks? Jane Bambauer: Yeah, I think one thing that all three of us. expressed at one point is that one thing that makes this topic hard is that it's a, there are national security questions and facts that none of us have access to. And so it's hard to know as [00:49:00] a matter of policy, especially what should happen here. And, Alan Rozenshtein: and we haven't even talked about the international dimensions, potential repercussions. This is a big deal. Eugene Volokh: Big deal, indeed. Alan, thank you so much for joining us. It has been tremendously enlightening for me and I, sure for, our viewers and listeners as well. Jane, always a great pleasure to be on with you. And folks, we'll see you in a couple of weeks with our next episode.

In this groundbreaking video, you're invited into the minds of elite operatives as they divulge the keys to mastering a tactical mindset. Andrew Bustamante, former CIA Spy, joins forces with ex-Navy SEALs Jason Redman, Clint Emerson, Larry Yatch, and former FBI hostage negotiator Chris Voss to provide unparalleled insights into building readiness, thinking tactically, and thriving in uncertain times. Are you ready to equip yourself with the strategies and mindset necessary to navigate any challenge? These seasoned experts share their battle-tested wisdom, offering actionable advice on how to cultivate a mindset of readiness and adaptability. Whether you're facing personal or professional uncertainties, this video arms you with the tools to conquer adversity with confidence. Join us as we uncover the secrets behind mastering a tactical mindset, including: Building resilience in the face of adversity Developing strategic thinking for every situation Preparing mentally and physically for uncertainty Leveraging tactical approaches to achieve success Don't miss out on this exclusive opportunity to learn from the best of the best. Tune in now and unlock the elite secrets that will empower you to navigate life's challenges with unparalleled confidence and resilience. It's time to master the art of tactical thinking and prepare yourself for anything that comes your way! Timestamps: (00:00:00) JASON REDMAN: Being shot 8 times (00:04:50) Finding perspective (00:05:15) The criteria for a BAD DAY (00:07:40) Victim mindset (00:10:45) A life ambush  (00:16:30) REACT methodology (00:23:22) ANDREW BUSTAMANTE: Becoming a CIA agent (00:25:50) Espionage skills (00:28:35) Spy's Challenges of everyday life  (00:32:16) The power of being anonymous  (00:34:27) Compartmentalize like a CIA (00:39:34) 3 foundational ideas from espionage  (00:40:25) Becoming someone else (00:45:50) CLINT EMERSON: The 100 deadly skills  (00:48:28) Staying safe from real threats (00:53:07) Being Self-reliant  (00:56:41) Military skills for daily life (00:59:41) Taking action (01:08:55) CHRIS VOSS: Listen to the right people (01:11:50) One Degree Better every day (01:13:13) From Cop to FBI (01:16:19) Negotiation  (01:20:10) Critical training (01:21:53) Hostage negotiation (01:26:49) Relationships (01:27:20) LARRY YATCH: “Navy Seal” Brand (01:28:18) Individual vs Team performance (01:32:46) Structurally sound organization (01:37:08) Trauma and Growth (01:45:52) Trauma as a lesson (01:47:49) Post-traumatic stress

Speakers Tracey Allen, Head of Global Commodities Research  Gbolahan S Taiwo, EM, Economic and Policy Research   This podcast was recorded on 2 May 2024. This communication is provided for information purposes only. Institutional clients can view the related report at https://www.jpmm.com/research/content/GPS-4687740-0 for more information; please visit www.jpmm.com/research/disclosures for important disclosures. © 2024 JPMorgan Chase & Co. All rights reserved. This material or any portion hereof may not be reprinted, sold or redistributed without the written consent of J.P. Morgan. It is strictly prohibited to use or share without prior written consent from J.P. Morgan any research material received from J.P. Morgan or an authorized third-party (“J.P. Morgan Data”) in any third-party artificial intelligence (“AI”) systems or models when such J.P. Morgan Data is accessible by a third-party. It is permissible to use J.P. Morgan Data for internal business purposes only in an AI system or model that protects the confidentiality of J.P. Morgan Data so as to prevent any and all access to or use of such J.P. Morgan Data by any third-party.

Where Energy meets Facts: Empowering People to Reduce Energy Costs The average western consumer has no idea how much energy they use. It's not really their fault — the energy system was never designed to give the consumer visibility into their energy consumption. We even measure energy in many different and confusing ways. Gasoline is in gallons. Power is in kilowatt hours. Propane is in pounds.  Structurally, energy companies are not incentivized to provide their consumers with data about their energy use. Collecting the data is a huge exercise in building integrations from various data sources to build up a picture of energy use. Households have many different energy suppliers (power and gas utilities, gasoline retailers), and there are many individual buyers.  It's not clear consumers will pay for that insight.  Jotson is setting out to challenge that problem and fix it. To quote Mark Little, the CEO and co-founder, it's baffling that mankind can put people into orbit around the planet, and land astronauts on the moon, but the average household can't figure out how much they're spending on energy. By giving consumers real data about their energy use, Jotson hopes to empower people to take charge of their energy consumption and to make better personal choices to reduce their demands on the energy system.  In this interview, I speak with Mark about his start up,  Jotson, and his mission to empower Canadians to manage household energy cost and consumption.  Mark has more than 35 years of leadership experience in the Canadian energy industry, including 23 years at Imperial/Exxon, and most recently as President & CEO at Suncor Energy. During his career, Mark has led large complex organizations working on multi-billion-dollar energy projects, from the conceptual design, development, and project implementation through to operations and maintenance.  Mark has led the startup and operation of large wind, solar, and biogas projects, and is one of the founding CEOs of Pathways Alliance, an initiative that sets the six largest oil sands companies in Canada on a path to reach net-zero CO2 emissions.   He is a board member of General Fusion, and an advisor to both the Coalition for a Better Future and Cycle Capital.  Mark holds two degrees – one in computer science from the University of Calgary, and one in applied petroleum engineering technology from the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology. He is also a graduate of the advanced management program at Harvard Business School.  From 2003 to 2007 he served as Honorary Colonel for the 409 and 441 Tactical Fighter Squadrons at 4 Wing Airforce Base in Cold Lake, AB; a role that reflected his commitment to the relationship between the Air Force, the community and industry. Mark was also the Recipient of the Canadian Council of Aboriginal Business' Award for Excellence in Aboriginal Relations 2024. Additional Tools & Resources:  

Immaculate, starring Sydney Sweeney is the new religious horror film that we'll be reviewing today, and it goes hard at the end, so stay tuned. Synopsis Immaculate tells the story of a young American woman with heavy naturals named Cecilia joining a convent in Italy. It's slowly revealed to Sister Cecilia that the convent isn't as immaculate as it seems. The priest and other nuns seem to have ulterior motives for bringing Cecilia there. Once she discovers the convent's dark and mysterious secrets, it's too late. She be pregonate. Review of Immaculate Immaculate is a Catholic horror movie that somehow avoids all the tropes associated with that label. There's no exorcism, no devil, and not even a  strong supernatural element. This subversion of expectations alone makes it an interesting horror movie. Structurally, the film is sound, but it feels more like a framework and not fully fleshed out. The themes and implications of the story aren't fully explored. There is a lot of fertile ground here, in terms of exploring faith, devotion, obedience, and authority that are only skimmed over.  I wasn't a big fan of Sydney Sweeney's acting in the first half of the film. Her demeanor and vibe brought too much 21st century ambivalence for a character that is essentially a religious zealot. However, she won me over with her acting in the latter half of the film. The film goes pretty hard with the gore and body horror, but what else would you expect from a movie about pregnancy? We are given an early taste with a graphic leg breaking scene in the prologue, and the final moments of the film are some of the most visceral that I've seen in a while. The worst and most distracting element of the film was the sound. The score was terrible, and felt like it was out of a low budget student film. The Foley sound was almost comical with prolonged and impossibly loud creaks and squelches. Score 7/10

Shame is back from his field trip to Revolution and he has a show and tell for us! Redesign...Rebuild...Wait a minute...wrong show, but can the AEW Pillars be restructured? Also, the road to Wrestlemania is in full swing with major announcements this week. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/helluvamarkpod/message

In today's episode of Welcome To Cloudlandia, I share the story of my unexpected adventure travelling to Buenos Aires for a pioneering knee stem cell treatment. I describe how my blood and fat cells were transformed into new cartilage and transported across continents for the procedure. I also recount my partner Babs' experience treating an inflamed toe and the vitality we've regained. Our discussion explores the pursuit of longevity and regenerative medicine's potential to make 156-year lifespans attainable through the normalization of audacious goals. We delve into hopes for abundant years energized by purpose and new ventures. Additionally, I discuss the art of self-talk and strategies like daily focus tasks negotiated through self-management.   SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Dan shares his transformative experience with stem cell treatment in Buenos Aires, describing the process of turning his own cells into cartilage. We discuss the broader implications of regenerative medicine and how it might extend our lifespans and rejuvenate our vitality. The episode touches on the concept of setting ambitious longevity goals, like living to 156 years, to guide life's endeavors and encourage significant projects. Dean talks about the importance of mental self-management and compares it to a daily negotiation to focus on critical tasks. We delve into the balance between productive 'focus days' and the freedom of 'buffer days', and how each contributes to overall productivity and creativity. The conversation includes insights on the internal quest for happiness and whether the 'fountain of youth' might be a state of mind. Dean and I examine the concept of 'Dean Landia', a metaphor for the mental environment we create and have control over. We discuss the entrepreneurial mindset, emphasizing the role of deadlines, and the Danger, Opportunity, and Strength (DOS) and Money, Labor, and Time (MLT) frameworks for success. The episode reflects on how personal goals influence our actions and the normalization of extraordinary ambitions to build confidence. Dean describes his experience with stem cell treatment for his knee injury and his partner Babs' treatment for an inflamed toe, highlighting the physical and psychological benefits they've experienced post-treatment. Links: WelcomeToCloudlandia.com StrategicCoach.com DeanJackson.com ListingAgentLifestyle.com TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Dean: I wouldn't have it any other way. Welcome, Mr Claude Ladiak. Mr. Dan: Jackson. Mr Jackson, yeah Well, very pleasant woman who, and you know, I was the first one on today and she said you're the first one to Join the call, the others will join pretty soon and so far, in about seven years, only one person has shown up. So I want to know who the? Others are. Is this the National Security Agency? Is this the Communist Party of China? I'm just trying to get a handle of who the others are. Dean: I think you're probably right once, two or more Gathered that everybody is. Dan: Yeah, but I found that just the two of us is more than enough. That's the truth. Dean: Well, I am excited to hear about all of your Adventures here You've been. You've been all over the world. Here seems like you've been in Chicago. You've been in most exciting Lee Buena Flores. Yes, I'm excited to hear all about the Adventure here. Dan: Yeah Well, spire Chicago goes. I missed the bullets, so that's all I can report on we're not. We're not in the part of the city that's in the crossfire zone, but anyway yeah. Buenos Aires was interesting. It's only the second time I've been to South America, and the first time was just to land in Ecuador, co City in Ecuador, and then we took a flight to the Galapagos Islands and this was as the guest of Richard Rossi, who put together, you know, a gathering that went to the Galapagos Islands and you know the plain lands and one of the islands, and then you take a National Geographic boat and I think it's Linblad and National Geographic and then you know we investigated all the sea life and the animal life which are, you know, very distinct from what's found elsewhere, and that was great, but it was mostly just painting out, with a whole bunch of people that were interesting to talk to. So that's only the first time and that was a long time ago. And then we just do Create the setting here. The context, again, as a result of being a guest of Richard Rossi, has a mastermind group which is called Da Vinci 50, and Babs and I took us two or three years to get our schedule right so that we could Guarantee our attendance at all the different meetings, but the very first one, this was in New Orleans. This was last January. I met a doctor, babs. I met a doctor there from Buenos Aires by the name of Gustavo Mabilia, and, and he told a story about what he's doing with stem cells and these are your own stem cells, white blood cells and fat cells that if you collect them and then send them. It's not an entirely easy process to get them to Argentina, but we got them there and he would then convert them into the stelle, the stem cells that you're having problem with your and your body and I have an orthopedic injury in 1975. I tore my cartilage in the left knee and in those days they would Take out the torn cartilage. They wouldn't do that today, but that's you know, that was the best that was going 48 years ago. And he said oh, we can regrow your cartilage. She said we can the part that was snipped out. We can regrow that cartilage and I said that's cool. That's cool. Yeah, I was convinced that Babs has a chronically inflamed right toe that really impedes a lot of her walking or exercise and it's inflamed bones. So I didn't know that bones got inflamed. It shows up on MRIs when you do an MRI. So long story short, through dr Hasi, who's our main Medical guide and explorer for us in Nashville, tennessee. He's got a clinic there called Maxwell Clinic. He did all the, you know the coordination before us to. You know, make sure that our stem cells were there, make sure that the they turn it into a magic potion I don't know too much more about it and he arranged with for our trip down. So we went. This is so. Yesterday was Saturday, we're talking on Sundays, it was two. Two Saturdays ago we took an overnight flight to Buenos Aires, where it's now springtime because they're in the other hemisphere. Yeah, it's more complicated than I'm telling you, but that's the upshot of it for the week and and so, as far as the you know, the brain cells and the vascular cells, the only thing I can say and I have to be, I think I have to be cautious here, but because I have, like a lot of entrepreneurs do, I have the ability to create my own placebo's. Dean: Right. Dan: Yeah, okay so all. I can say I've come back after the trip and we had. We came back after seven days and and this week I have felt more energized and more confident. Dean: Then I can remember recently sounds like quite an adventure and the upside yeah, gonna be. The upside is gonna be a total new development of cartilage in your knee specifically. Second, what's the Hope for it Like? Are you gonna have the knees of a preteen Swedish boy, or are you gonna Just have the normal knees of 79? Dan: well, basically yeah, I'll basically have the, basically the knee I had before the injury. Okay so that's 48 years, so six months, and the orthopedic is pretty easy for them. I mean, they're doing some advanced work and other parts of the body, but the cartilage is, you know, it's pretty, it's not a complicated thing, right? But what happens is they take my blood cells and my fat cells and they turn, essentially turn it into new cartilage cells and that's. You know, that's what stem cells are that? How? Dean: does it gather. Dan: Yeah, well it's. This was all done in Nashville and. So, what they do is they? You know it's, it's basically a centrifuge and you have an IV in both arms and the blood that gets taken out and it's, and they take the white blood cells out and then you know it's simultaneously they're taking blood out now return it to your body, but they're taking the white blood cells, which is far prior less of your blood than your red blood cells. Okay, actually it was like a two hour, two hour session and it was like a cup full. You know, after a big cup, a big mug full, and so that's the white blood cells and then the fat cells. You go to a plastic surgeon Because they're used to taking you know it's part of plastic surgery of taking out fat cells and so and you get enough they're, they're told how much of each are required for them to basically do a year's worth of. You know we're going to go down probably four times during the next 12 months, starting with the first trip two weeks ago. And they'll have enough just from that one extraction, extraction of both, they'll have enough. So next time I go down I broke both my Achilles tendons in the 1970s. That was a bad decade. That my in 1970s were just a really bad decade anyway. So anyway, and the Structurally, I mean they're shortened because of the surgery, the tendons, are shorter, but they've developed calcification. Oh yeah which reduces flexibility, and it's got pain attached to it. So next time they'll Take my same fat cells and white blood cells and they'll turn it into something that gets rid of all the Calcification and my and my tendons. Yeah, so, and that will give me more push-off, it'll give me more flexibility to go along with the new cartilage. So I think probably, you know, probably I'll be gaining back about 30 or 40 years of Running ability out of my legs, you know. Dean: I always Run for his money yeah. Dan: Well, yeah, I just want to run again. I enjoy running and I haven't been and it's been too painful to do for the last 10 years. And then the whole thing is the overall, the Direct injection. You're just going after a particular issue, but the IV, the, it goes into your brain and it looks for anywhere where your brain cells Are not performing correctly and it wakes them up. So the stem cells don't cure anything, they just wake up the natural cells that are there and they start growing again. And the same thing with the Vax vascular system. That's your, but I. I would say that Knowing that now I have the means to repair anything in my body as soon as it's identified as a problem is Very confidence. Dean: It's very confidence building you know it's very and. Dan: I was noticing that I had sort of blot into Sort of why I know I'm wearing down and I know that there's an end to it at some point, but I hadn't realized how much that was until I got the other thought that, no, almost anything that's going wrong with you you can repair now and you can rejuvenate it, and so that's a. That's a huge confidence builder. Dean: Yeah, and it's really I mean perfectly timely, right as you're entering into, you know, in my ninth decade. Yeah, exactly entering into your ninth decade with the goal of it being the best decade ever which I love that framework, by the way and at a time when normally it would be, you know, physical deterioration happening, you're like physical rejuvenation. Dan: You're going backwards on that thing, yeah, I mean yeah, you know the there's so many factors that are involved in aging, and some of it is just the fact that your cells only reproduce 50 times. Okay, there's a thing which is called the Haflick barrier. This is a I don't know quite what kind of scientists he was, but he found that every cell in the body and there's 20, I think, 26,000 different types of cells in the body, some number like that they all reproduce only 50 times, as far as they can tell, but they don't do it equally. They don't, they don't. They're not doing it at the same time. Heart muscles might be faster, other cells are slower, but it sort of reaches the limit of everything by the time you're 120. We only have one person on record where there's actual valid records of birth who has lived 120. She also lived, she also. She got to 122. She died. A French woman who died about 10 years ago. Dean: And that's the only person that. Dan: I mean, there's all these claims, you know, you know around the world, the people who lived at 200 and 300 and everything else, but they don't have any valid records which actually established that. So anyway, but but most people don't get to 120. Dean: Right, exactly. Dan: Yeah, I mean, even if you only got to 120,. I said, even if you only got to 120,. I said well yeah, I mean, if you're an entrepreneur and you're at top of your game at 60, and you're saying, no, I guess I have to retire pretty soon. Well, the decision to retire is sort of telling your body it doesn't matter how long the body lasts now I mean, it can go really quickly. But if I know I'll be 18 next May and if I know that I can stay in top form for another 25 or 30 years at the top of my game right now, then that's a big deal. Dean: Yeah, I look at, I saw me. You know, bob Barker died earlier this year at 99. And the thing that was going around with that, he got to as close to 100 as he could without going over the big showcase showdown. Kind of close to 100. Dan: But you know George Burns, the comedian, very famous mid-century 20th century, you know, 40s through the 80s or 90s. He had a goal that he was going to do a full show at the Palladium in London, big Venue in London, england, and he did it. And then and I always gave him as an example because he was performing full time in his 90s and then- did an actual 100th birthday. And then he was in a shower about four weeks later, he slept, broke his hip and he died two weeks later. And I said, George, you didn't understand what you did. You should have set another date for when you were 110. Exactly. Dean: Isn't that amazing, I wonder? Yeah, I mean, that's kind of a. You've been programming yourself for 156 for as long as I've known you Since 1987, you know since 19, 36 years right now, yeah. Yeah. So that's kind of you know. You're just approaching or just at the halfway mark there ramping up, gaining speed, gaining momentum. Dan: Well, people say do you really think you're going to live to 156? And I said I know I won't if I don't have it as a goal. Amen. Dean: Well. Danny just setting yourself up for disappointment. Dan: Well not me everybody who ends up with my messes after I'm gone. You know when I'm gone. What do I care? Dean: Exactly, that's the point. I love that. Dan: I love, I laugh. Dean: I tell people that all the time, when you said the just for you, it's just going to be live, live, that's better. There, you go, you're not going to experience the disappointment. Dan: There's a great French philosopher from the 1600s named Blaise Pascal. Dean: And there's a blaze. Dan: There's a Pascal wager. And he says you know, when you think about it, all of us regarding if there's anything after this life, it's a guess. You know it's a guess and it's a bet and he says but let's just take a look at the two bets. There's nothing after you die. Okay. Dean: Okay well that's cool. Dan: The other one is there's a whole other world after I die. And he says it's not so much which makes the best sense after you die. It's what bet makes the sense right now? Because if you think that there is a whole world afterwards and it turns out there's nothing, well you really haven't lost anything, because you know there's nothing, but what? If you believe your whole life there isn't anything after death, and then you find out that there and they said you know, and you said geez, if only I had. Oh my God, if I had known this and he's believing there's a afterlife is a much better bet, psychologically and emotionally, for right now. Yeah, yeah so I'm kind of a. I'm a kind of a Pascal wager kind of guy. Mm, hmm, that, I mean, is so back then everybody you know lived a life that took the natural course. You know I mean living to 60 and 70 in those days was kind of an achievement, with all the different ways you could die back then disease and you know and violence unless you were, unless you were, matthew's a lot. Yeah, yeah, but birth records. Dean: No documentation. Dan: I'm sorry, Matthew's a lot. I'm sorry, but where's your come on? Where's your papers? That's everybody. Dean: Every time I think about muscle, I think about our Aubrey, aubrey de Grey. Yeah and the Missusola prize. Have you heard any updates on that? I've kind of lost the past. No, I saw video. Dan: I saw a video of him talking and I got a feeling that that Living living two or three times more than natural, but not being happy right now is probably Not a good bet, because I didn't get the sense that he was a happy. I didn't get the sense that he was a happy person, you know. So I mean you never know, I mean people who never saw aren't necessarily unhappy, and people who smile all the time aren't necessarily happy, you know. Dean: I mean happiness. Dan: Yeah, an internal disc, it's an internal disposition, yeah. But anyway, you know I'm just reporting back. I'm sort of a bit of a trailblazer in relationship to this stuff, but I'm only. I will tell you, dean, I was thinking about this when I was in Buenos Aires that if I didn't have that goal of living to 156, I wouldn't be doing this stuff right now. Dean: Yeah, that's true, right, you're already in traditionally if you speak about like. I'm beyond refund right now. You know, I mean, you're out of warranty. Right now You're an extra innings Actuarial tables. You're an actual outlier. Dan: Yeah, but I'm really a profit center for the insurance companies. It's just been me paying them, just been me paying them up until now. I love it. Dean: Dan is so great. I think this is like that's one of the great things of you know being alive at this time in particular, just all the access to these things. That's only gonna get better, as we understand. I remember when I went to the first, the first abundance 360 and Richard Rossi's friend, gary Kaplan, was there with us. I think you've met Dr Kaplan. Dan: Oh no, Gary. Yeah, Gary, you know, I see him every, I see him at every defense. She 50 maybe. Dean: You know, he's a great guy Okay yeah. Yeah, I really went to the go out there. Dan: I went to the go out because silence with Gary, so we had a lot of time to talk. Dean: So I've known him for a long time, you know, well, I remember when this was. This had to be Almost 10 years ago, right 9, 9 years ago. Anyway, the first abundance 360, not the very first one, the first one in LA Beverly Hills Hotel there, and you know I'm sitting with him and he was Saying you know, when you look at all the medical advancements that are coming right now, this is back then you said it's gonna. It's gonna seem like we've been Throwing rocks at people to get them healthy, you know, compared to what's actually coming. I mean, yeah, we would describe what you know regenerative, and that's a good word. That's kind of become, you know, newly minted. Regenerative medicine is All the things from the on a cellular level regenerative Regeneration, replacement. You know we're pretty much going to be able to replace everything Before we repair it or repair it. Yeah, replace repair, regenerate right. Dan: And that's pretty cool. So, yeah, I like well, I think, the hmm, I got involved with Peter Diamandas in I'm just trying to think. There was December of 2011, the first before a 360 meeting. We didn't have a name for it, but this was in Silicon Valley and and one of the things that sort of connected Peter and Peter and me Was really the fact that we both had this commitment to living way beyond normal age, you know. But I had a thinking process, you know. Of course it's the first hour of strategic coach, which is the lifetime extender. And he came in at that time and I said you know it's not a goal you can achieve unless you can normalize it as a normal thought. I said you know our brain, and Our brain really resists abnormal thoughts. We, it has to be normal. So I set myself the goal in 1987 that every time I thought of my lifetime I would just think 156, you know, you know, at that time, life expectancy for males you know of my background and you know the thing was 78, so 156 is twice and so it took me about three years before it was just a normal thought. So whenever I you know I'm pushing 80 now and you know, and I said, well, what's my lifetime, I said 156. So at 80. That makes me very ambitious because I know I've got in my own mind, I've got, a way you know, enormous amounts of time left, really twice a lifetime 76 years. Yeah, yeah, I got 76, 76 years to get things done, so it makes me Totally confident about starting new, big, new big things. And I mean your whole life is either happy or unhappy. Unhappy based on the kinds of conversations you're having with yourself. I agree. Dean: I agree a hundred percent. I mean, you realize, I was realizing, I've been thinking a lot about this. You know, this straddling of the mainland and the cloud land via, and those thoughts then brought me into the actual game, which is game land is where at all happened and I realized that how much of you know Dean landia is affected by the inputs and circumstances and the Context and relationships and conversations and environments that you voluntarily Put yourself in, you know, surrounding yourself with the environment that's going to shanty people yeah, people, I mean. Dan: Yeah. Dean: And. Dan: I just had a thought, and that was triggered by your Dean Landia, that I only have direct access to one human being on the planet. You know, and same goes for you, and a lot of people spend their life. A lot of people spend their life trying not to be, not to deal with the one person they have direct access to you know they're hoping they're going to be saved from the proof that they hope something else will save them from the person that they're actually inside of, and you know so. so my, my whole point is why don't you just take ownership for the, the relationship that you have just with this one person, and you know there's new dimension, there's new dimensions presenting themselves all the time. And and the other insight I had and that comes from our conversations, because we're we've got a very similar approach to life on a lot of different fronts and I was thinking, you know, I've been trying to control my brain up until I think, about two years ago. I was going to control my brain and, you know, make sure my brain was focused on this and that. And I said why don't we change the relationship here and take for granted that you want, I have no control over my brain. And the other thing is why don't we just see where it goes every day? Because it's totally unpredictable. I spent one day and just sort of locked in where my brain was going that day and there was absolutely no predictability to what's forever. And I said, okay, why don't we just I'm just going to do it deal with my brain wherever it goes? During that day I wanted to do three useful things for my plans. You can go anywhere you want, but by the end of the day, I want progress on this, I want progress on that, I want progress on that, okay just have fun, you know, do whatever you want, but by the end of the day, if you and I are going to sleep happily tonight, you know, I got to see progress on these three things. Dean: Oh, my goodness, Dan, that's so funny. You know, it's like I've been having these exact conversations with myself here. It's like taking over the management. You know, it's all in that vein of you know, imagine if you applied yourself your FELF, these things of taking over the management, you just you hit it on the head that I only have direct control over one human on the planet and that's me. And I thought about entering and I realized that my brain, my desires, my ambition, my you know vision, the visionary in my brain here is not necessarily the one in control of the, the doing part of my brain, the labor management versus labor right. And so I was thinking about I heard one time that there's a form of contract where a you know production will enter into a contract with an actor or a celebrity, that with their company on an SSO contract which is for services of. So it would be enter, as I thought it's kind of like entering into a contract with my brain here for services of being Jackson and thinking what you just said is like those. If I could just like allocate time and attention to you know I've I've thought a lot about your thing of three, three things a day. How much I'd love to hear from you how, on a buffer day when you are I don't know how you define whether buffer day or focus you've got workshop focus days where those are like the Bob's fled run kind of thing. That you know what's happening on a workshop day. You get up and I'm sure your car arrives at a certain time and you get taken to the workshop and everything is for my computer, or my computer does, because some of them are virtual. Yes, exactly Okay. And then but on the days where I never struggle with those, I realized that everything that I do get done has that external exoskeleton or that scaffolding to make sure that gets done. If you're just in the right, all you have to do is, you know, get in the car and the rest of it is taking place, or open up the computer and sit down and you're. You know you're able to focus and deliver the workshops. But I'm curious about your free range time, where I think I may have, like I crave and do a lot to carve out big blocks of uninterrupted time, only to end up having nothing to show for it. Because, I don't get myself to sit down and do the things that I've carved out all this time to do. I'm curious how, what your experience is on getting Dan to do stuff that requires his own batteries, I guess I'd love to hear your experience. Dan: Here again, I think we're very similar and I think that's why our podcasts are so enjoyable, because to a certain extent, neither of us wants it to end when we get going. But I have one of our models in the strategic coach is a theater model which is front stage, back stage, and front stage is really, whether you have a viable company or not, it's your front stage your profitable front stage impact is what determines whether you're getting paid to take care of everything else, and I don't have to be motivated for a front stage impact. You know, and workshops is an example, podcasts is another example, creating new thinking tools is another example, and writing books is another example, or videos or audios. So these are all front stage. In other words, if I can get this done, then it has a multiplier impact out in the world on other people, and that either me directly interacting with the world, or our coaches or our team members interacting with the world, and that ends up in profitability. Okay, so those are my focus days, but some of the days that are not focused days, I have to be preparing for those days. Okay, but anytime. I think of front stage impact preferably. I don't need to be motivated to do that, I love doing that. Dean: Okay. Dan: And that's my usefulness to myself, that's my usefulness to everybody I engage with. But just going back to my decision over the last two years of just letting my mind wander, when I'm not directly engaged in front stage impact activities, my brain can do anything at once. It can go anywhere and so I don't really care. Before I used to care. I'm not making use of my front stage, my back time, I'm not making it. I said leave it alone, just let it go where it wants to go, let it run, let it go out and frolic, let it explore and everything else they really run. So I mean, it took me till practically age 78 to come to this agreement with my brain, and so I'm either in hyper focus, actually doing the things that make money and spread the reputation and do all sorts of good things, or it's free reign. I really don't care. Dean: And to me what it does. Dan: It frees me up from the tyranny of time and effort. That you're absolutely maximizing the use of your time. I said I don't care about my time and I don't care about my effort, as long as I make a front stage a profitable front stage impact. If it takes me an hour to do that, and it's an hour if it takes me a full day workshop, then it's a full day workshop, but I don't really care about the time and the effort, I just really care about the impact. And then backstage. I just say brain, go and do whatever you want to do, think about anything you want to think about, and I couldn't care less. You don't have to justify your existence. My brain doesn't have to justify its existence when it's not on stage. Dean: That's very interesting when you're creating a new tool. For instance, you introduced a tool on Friday for our pre-melt connection. Call yeah, your melt tool, and what's happening? How does that come about? What's your process? Dan: for that. Dean: That's one of the key outputs that you're providing is new IP and thinking tools for the thing, so how does that come about? If your mind goes, you mentioned you've read Peter Zion's book seven times now. Dan: Yeah, the end of the world is just the beginning. I think it's the most important book in the world. I'm reading and I read it seven times. So it's Peter Zion. Dean: Z-E-I-H-A-N. Dan: And the book is called. Dean: The. Dan: End of the World is Just Beginning and he's written. This is the fourth book that he's written since 2014, where he's just predicting that everything we were expecting to happen 10 years ago ain't going to happen that way, and a whole new world is going to happen. Dean: And he's got very plausible readings. Dan: I'm not going to explain the book here but it has a profound impact on me. But it seemed to me that he was operating at a macro geopolitical level and I said well, is there a simple sort of set of gauges, if you will underneath, that determines in any place at any time whether things are moving forward or they're stagnating or they're falling behind? And I came up, it just sort of fell out of. He doesn't talk about this directly, but after I'd read it a whole number of times, it just struck me that it was the cost of four things that determine this, and one of them was the cost of money. How much is it cost you to get money? And that comes in two forms how much is it cost you to get a loan and how much is it cost you to get an investment? Those are the two main, the financial vehicles that underlay growth. And then your profitability is the third one. Are you keeping a lot of what you're making? Dean: That's savings. Dan: And then the cost of energy and all of its different forms and the cost of labor getting really top notch. You have access to other people's skills, and how much is it cost you to do that? And then the cost of transportation, because we live in a physical world and to move a pound costs money including your own pounds and that costs energy and I just started playing with this. I know we did. I was mentioned on a previous one of our podcasts Mike Kenix, we did it on that and everybody I talked about it. It had a simplifying effect on their thinking. I said this is a good tool. That's all I do If you come up with an acronym and it's. M-e-l-t. And I said I think we're going into a great meltdown next 30 years where everything of those four factors is going to cost more, and you can see it. Yeah, I mean you can see it. All you have to do is read the news every day. Most of this is going up, energy is costing more, labor is costing more and transportation is costing more. And I said so. You know, I think it's a neat way. So what I did is I just introduced a tool to the free zone entrepreneurs, just two days ago, when you were there and I said if this is true, let's just suppose that it's true, that these costs are going to go up for everyone else and what's your biggest advantage and opportunity over the next 30 years? And that's just. That would be a thinking tool, and it has two qualities it's a sudden new thought, it provokes your interest, but it brings your right back to what you, as an entrepreneur, can take advantage of. So those are my criteria for a new thinking tool for a strategic coach. It took me from the time the thought occurred me to Friday, because that's the first time I did it. It took me six months of playing around with the idea, checking with other people you know conversation and then just looking at the news and saying, is the news going in the direction of the theory? You know? Dean: Yeah, and then. So when you like to get it to that tool, state that's part of your when you're letting your mind wander. It's so funny, dan, I've been talking about this idea of the self-milking cow, the idea of embracing your bovinity and realizing that you're the one that can create the milk. And if you set up an environment like I've moved towards, is that we basically have things divided into three divisions. I call it the pastures, which is me out roaming the pastures, you know, exploring and being a happy cow. And then we have got a milking shed and the milking shed is set up for me to come in and be, milked, essentially to turn my thoughts, free range thoughts, into, you know, into digital milk, meaning that we're recording something about my you know I'm doing it either through a podcast or through a Zoom or interview or whatever we've got with my team. And then we have the processing plant, where they take the digital milk and they process it into podcast, courses, tools, anything like that. So I'm curious, like it sounds like one of your pasture roaming activities is reading things like the like Peter Zion's book and your six you know your of daily input from real clear politics and the Wall Street Journal and All the things that you do. You put those all in and then ruminate on them and and then outcomes the things. When you're turning it into a tool, though, are you consciously like? Are you starting with, like illustration, journaling, doodling? What's your, what's your kind of creation process for? Dan: yeah, I do, because our tools come in in One page written. There's boxes and the box. You know the number of boxes, the kind of boxes you have so with with the melt tool. All I did was have it's called your great meltdown and your great meltdown DOS. Okay, so DOS is a previous tool that we have in coach is that and any human activity. There people are responding to dangers that they're fearing loss of some sort. The other thing is opportunities, where they're excited about the possible gain of something. Dean: And then their strength. Dan: These are the things that they already have going for them. And I said I think all human beings, every day, operate within a unique DOS framework of things that are fearful about, things are excited about and things that they're confident about. So what I did is I did a matrix and matrixes are cool, so the cool way of structuring where you have MLT, money, energy, labor, t and then I had four arrows going up for, I think, cost, and then down the side I had danger, opportunity, strength. And then I said to the entrepreneurs, because they're familiar with the DOS, everybody At the level that you're at in coach, the free zone. This is an old tool. This is, you know, 20 years old and some of you have been there 20 years and I said so from your standpoint that all of your clients and potential clients, customers, are going to have the danger of rising melt costs. What's your opportunity in this? Okay. So what's there the opportunity with dangers? What's the opportunity? Yeah. What's your opportunity with other people's opportunities? And what's your Opportunity with other people's strengths? And then you go through it and there's another exercise which I won't go into right here, and you come back and then you just have a general conversation, you have breakout sessions and conversation, and the room goes crazy, you know, and because everybody's done thinking about their thinking, they've talked about their thinking, and they come back and they hear everybody else's thinking and that's what produces the workshop. But the thing that triggers all this motion is that I have deadlines to create new things. Dean: Yes, I got it and that's really how it all comes out and that's, I think, do you have a sense of what your, how much of your time? Is that free range versus you know the structured workshops? And so I guess it's getting left, or more and more Free range. Dan: Well, I would say even on my most intense front stage days. Still, the majority of the day is free range and then when I don't have that type of thing. It's all free range, yeah, but it's not a. Yeah, without a commitment to someone else to deliver something, giving myself deadlines is worthless. Yeah, me too. Dean: I've discovered that about me giving myself a backstage free range deadline. Dan: Well, first of all, I think free range and deadline is a contradiction in terms. Right. Dean: Yeah, this is what I like about the, you know is doing a workshop or scheduling a milking session. Is I know that if I've got a milking session Scheduled, like I've been going to the studio? Yeah you know, on Thursday morning, 10 o'clock to 12 o'clock, and I know that you know I'm prepared for For being milked at that at those times, you know. So I'm either, yeah, doing something myself. Some of the best things that I've done have been just preparing myself to record a State of the Union or a new, you know, record myself as a thought. I do find those a little more that I have to. You know, if I have to have that time set aside, right, that's how I've been. How I did the convert more leads book was I Could free range, I get my thoughts together for this section of the book and then I go and talk that out. So it gives me that structure. One thing that I have realized and that's been very helpful is this idea that Reality you know, the mainland, the real world here, applying yourself, moves at the speed of reality, which is 60 minutes per hour. And, yeah, if I'm going to embark on a project that's going to take 20 hours, that there's no possible way to allocate or Put in those 20 hours without actually putting in the 20 hours and that I can't do it. All at once. So the only thing I've got an infinite. I've got an infinite Opportunity list of all of the things that I could possibly do, but what I've been experimenting with that's very helpful is Just loading in my next 10 hours. What if I? What can I do in the next 10? 50 minute focus sessions that I have? you know that's really that narrow. That helps me prioritize and make a decision, which is the first step of you know my acronym of playing golf a goal, optimal environment, limited distractions, six time frames. So a goal is the decision of what am I going to do at Tuesday from 10 o'clock to 12 o'clock I've got two potential hours that I can allocate there and what am I going to do in those times. You know, that's really been a big help. Dan: Yeah, yeah and. I, you know and I've got a reputation that goes back, certainly the full extent of the Coach program, which goes back. I mean we'll be 35 years Next November. We're in our 35th year of the coach program. Dan always delivers. Yeah, and I have a Absolute commitment to never in any way undermining that reputation. So whatever it takes, dan always delivers, okay me too. And you know if you handle that, whatever it takes to deliver, you know life gets real, simple. Dean: Yeah even though it's sometimes. You've seen that illustration of the you know assignment made, accepted, deadline here the timeline, and then the little five percent at the very end and the 95% all allocated is goofing off. And then five percent, all the work done, while crying. Dan: No matter what. Dean: Yeah, well done, you know, yeah, yeah yeah, because your, your entire reputation is just in terms of commitment, is that you've made to other people? Yeah, and I think, though, our ability to our ability to always deliver, I think has really been, you know, honed because of our, the requirement of us always pulling a rabbit out of our hats growing up. Dan: I think yeah, even in any assignments or anything like that. Dean: We've gotten Really good at improv theater you know, yeah, I. Dan: Well, I think the other thing is if that's true, you always deliver then, what people can't see about that? Are you happy with the time you spend that other people can't see? And I would say that I'm up about 1,000 times over the last 30 years. I'm really happy with the free range time. I'm really happy with all the work backstage that I have to do. I used to be grueling. It was working nights, it was working weekends under severe pressure, and that's not true anymore, because I've got a sense of the framework of the project. I got the sense of the timing of the project. And I said you know and then you know, I've kind of worked out what the deal is with my brain. My brain always delivers at the end of the day. And I says, well, there's two of us that always deliver my brain. If I set my brain three things by the end of the day, have this self, I don't care what you do, You're not accountable for any of your time, but by the end of the day I want these three things delivered. And then I've got my commitments to deliver a front stage. So I've just worked out a two-way deal here. I love it. Dean: That's great. Well, Dan, I never yeah. Dan: I think we're kind of cosmic soulmates, you know, both the payoff and the problem. I think we're. Both of us have tried similar landscape in terms of coming to grips with ourselves. I agree. Yeah, I find these conversations infinitely interesting One takeaway that you got from today, and I'll tell you mine. Dean: So that's my big takeaway for today. It's given myself permission to just roam the pastures, to enjoy my free range, as long as I just hold up my end of the bargain right. That was a night. I got a lot out of that. Dan: Yeah, and I think that I do really interesting podcasts also with Shannon Waller which is called Inside Strategic Coach and people always want to know. Our clients especially want to know how we do, what we do backstage. And I'll just drop this as a topic for her, because I think this the greatest tension that entrepreneurs have is not front stage, but the greatest tension is backstage. Dean: Yeah, yeah, I agree, I agree. Well, I'm excited about next week. Yeah, I want to talk again even more conversation. I look forward to it. Thanks, steve, this is really great, thanks. Dan: Steve, okay, I'll talk to you next time.

⚡️⚡️⚡️در قسمت❌ هفتم ❌In-Sight در مورد مقایسه ی عملکرد آنله ی مستقیم و غیر مستقیم برای باز سازی دندانها با هم صحبت میکنیم.این مقاله مربوط به JPD هستش.‼️‼️پادکست In-Sight مجموعه ای از پادکستهای کوتاهه که در اون ها ما بدون پرداختن به جزئیات ،خلاصه ی مقالات را مرور میکنیمپادکست In-Sight اپیزود میانی دنتکستهاستدکتر فواد شهابیان متخصص پروتز ،ایمپلنت زیباییاهواز کیانپارس061 3338 0090⚡️⚡️لینک ابسترکت مقاله❌❌

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Speakers:  Natasha Kaneva, Head of Global Commodities Research   Shikha Chaturvedi, Head of Global Natural Gas Research   Gregory Shearer, Head of Base and Precious Metal Research   Tracey Allen, Head of Agricultural Commodities Research   This podcast was recorded on 29 November 2023. This communication is provided for information purposes only. Institutional clients can view the related reports at https://www.jpmm.com/research/content/GPS-4539172-0, https://www.jpmm.com/research/content/GPS-4553481-0, and https://www.jpmm.com/research/content/GPS-4566999-0 for more information; please visit www.jpmm.com/research/disclosures for important disclosures. © 2023 JPMorgan Chase & Co. All rights reserved. This material or any portion hereof may not be reprinted, sold or redistributed without the written consent of J.P. Morgan. It is strictly prohibited to use or share without prior written consent from J.P. Morgan any research material received from J.P. Morgan or an authorized third-party (“J.P. Morgan Data”) in any third-party artificial intelligence (“AI”) systems or models when such J.P. Morgan Data is accessible by a third-party. It is permissible to use J.P. Morgan Data for internal business purposes only in an AI system or model that protects the confidentiality of J.P. Morgan Data so as to prevent any and all access to or use of such J.P. Morgan Data by any third-party.

Talking points: culture, relationships, systemic issues 66% of young men are single, fewer and fewer men are graduating college, boys are disproportionately punished in school, there are fewer male teachers and therapists than ever, and millions of men aren't even listed as unemployed because they're simply not seeking work. Something's going on. (00:00:00) - Intro and some stats(00:04:17) - I'm not going to sit here and blame men OR women(00:06:30) - Social reasons men check out(00:09:45) - The definition of a good man is almost entirely up to women (00:12:06) - Structurally, men aren't being incentivized to go into higher education(00:14:59) - I think that support networks for men and boys are collapsing or are not male friendly(00:16:57) - Men generally aren't finding resonance in the therapeutic industry, nor can they find male therapists(00:19:41) - There's been a significant decline in the number and diversity of male relationships(00:22:30) - Where do we go from here? This episode is brought to you by Cured Nutrition! Cured offers everything from CBD to functional mushroom products to adaptogens designed to help the body thrive in all aspects of the daily human experience. Personal favorite? The Zen sleep bundle. Get 20% off your order here: https://www.curednutrition.com/mantalks/ Pick up my book, Men's Work: A Practical Guide To Face Your Darkness, End Self-Sabotage, And Find Freedom: https://mantalks.com/mens-work-book/ Check out some free resources: How To Quit Porn | Anger Meditation | How To Lead In Your Relationship Build brotherhood with a powerful group of like-minded men from around the world. Check out The Alliance and join me today.  Enjoy the podcast? If so, please leave a review on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or Podchaser. It helps us get into the ears of new listeners, expand the ManTalks Community, and help others find the tools and training they're looking for. And don't forget to subscribe on Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts  | Spotify For more episodes, visit us at ManTalks.com | Facebook | Instagram | TwitterSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today, we begin a series all about the Bible, covering things like what it is, who wrote it, and ultimately its relevance to us and our time.    It seems that even today, even in the United States, a country some folks consider a traditionally Christian nation, there's a severe lack of knowledge about the Bible. Now some would say otherwise, but the Bible is really a pretty straightforward account of how God has worked in the world from the beginning. In fact, in Genesis, which literally means beginnings, we see a rundown of God's creative powers.   Compiled over time, the Bible is not a single book, but rather a collection of 66 books that trace human history from beginning to end. There's disagreement as to exactly when the Bible was written and compiled. But we do know from archeology that writing had developed even before the time of Moses in Egypt. The conservative view is that the biblical accounts of history were written down at or near the time they occurred. In general, the 66 individual books of the Bible were at least written down over a period of 1,500 years by as many as 40 writers.    Jeremiah 2:4 says, “Hear the word of the Lord, you descendants of Jacob, all you clans of Israel.” This concept of people being able to hear and read God's Word is all through the Bible. Luke 11:28 says, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”    Structurally, the Bible is made up of 39 books in the Old Testament and 27 in the New. From the original written accounts, some were broken into two books. The Old Testament, sometimes called the Hebrew or Jewish Scriptures, reveals history from the creation of the world until a few hundred years before Jesus Christ came into the world.    The New Testament is the account of the rise of the church. It begins with the family tree of Jesus and finishes with the Book of Revelation, a vision of the future into eternity. Overall, the Bible is the most famous book of all time. For believers, it is the very Word of God.    Let's pray.    Father God, you've told us that your Word is available to all, that we can claim your promises for our lives. Thank you for communicating to us in this way. The Bible is our guide for life, and tells us how we can be reconciled to you and saved. In Jesus' name, amen.

In this episode of Design Vault, Doug speaks with William Smart, founder and creative director at Smart Design Studio in Sydney, Australia.Visit glengery.com/design-vault to see photos and additional information as you listen along.The new Smart Design Studio building is an innovative, sustainable and sculptural building with both new and renovated facades that sit within an inner city conservation area of brick warehouses. The design relates to the industrial buildings from the precinct.While it makes a departure with a modern facade of tiles, galvanized sheeting, steel frame windows and dynamic forms of curling and curving brick. Structurally, a large portion of the building feels industrial with precast concrete slabs, structural brick roof vaults and steel. Environmentally. The naturally lit and ventilated studio collects its own water and generates its own power, creating a carbon neutral building.In addition, large full length clear story windows enable natural light to enter the single industrial scale workspace. The Sawtooth roof trusses and a portion of the facades were retained with the exception of the offices on the western street frontage. That's where a narrow, highly designed apartment runs atop the length of the building. The apartment features four self-supporting offset brick, cat and airy vaults that allow light into the apartment.

In August, I hosted a webinar called "How To Write A Great Story" where I talked about what a "story" really is, as well as well as how to use personal stories to help your writing. This episode addresses questions you asked in our Q&A session that we didn't have time to answer. There's lots of great info here, make sure you watch.Show NotesFree Writing Webinar - https://michaeljamin.com/op/webinar-registration/Michael's Online Screenwriting Course - https://michaeljamin.com/courseFree Screenwriting Lesson - https://michaeljamin.com/freeJoin My Watchlist - https://michaeljamin.com/watchlistAutogenerated TranscriptMichael Jamin:Art is about taking something inside of you and expressing it in a way that helps you understand yourself and helps you understand the world around you. And in that way, people can see it or watch it and enjoy it and help them understand themselves. I think there's that greater good. I don't think craft necessarily does that. I think craft can sometimes be, the studio will give me a note and I'll say, okay, I can do that. That's what you want. I can do that. I don't think it's necessarily playing for the greater good. It's what they want and they're paying me. You're listening to Screenwriters Need to Hear This with Michael Jamin.Hey everyone, welcome back to another episode. We're doing something unusual today. So Phil is back with me. And as you may know, every three or four weeks I host a free webinar where I take one subject and kind of educate you on it. And at the end, if there's time, I answer questions because about an hour long. And so usually we answer a lot of questions, but we can't get to all of them. So we save the questions that we can answer and we didn't have time. And we're going to answer it here for you today on this podcast. And by the way, for people who don't know, the webinar is always free, but afterwards, I also do a V I P room for people who if they want to pay a small fee, then they get to be in a smaller chat with me and we talk. I try to answer their questions as best I can specifically. So if anyone's interested in that, you go to michael jamin.com and I dunno where they would sign up for that on michael jamin.com/course. Probably.Phil Hudson:Oh, for the vip it's /vip.Michael Jamin:Oh, /vip. Okay.Phil Hudson:We're fancy here, Michael. We use high tech stuff like links, short links.Michael Jamin:So there you go. But now I'll answer the other questions. Phil hit me.Phil Hudson:I was just going to say there are a lot of really good feedback and I found that there are people who don't sign up for your course who also sign up for that v i p, and they ask some really interesting questions. And then after that I think it kind of pushes 'em over the edge to feel like, okay, this is something I can do, and then they're a little bit more inclined to invest in themselves. Some really good questions out of this V i p, and this is based off of the August webinar, and that topic was the pep talk Every screenwriter needs to hear, which is slightly different than Michael Jamin's known tone of just smashing your hopes and dreams on the rocks of reality,Michael Jamin:Which he's a problem. Yeah, I don't want to just do that. I want to make sure that people get, I want them to be grounded in reality. That's what I'm, I'm not trying to smash it's dreams, but I want to be realistic. Once you find out if you know what the reality is, then now, okay, now we can figure out how to get in once there's a way around every problem. That's what I,Phil Hudson:And that comes from early on when we were talking about the marketing for this. How do we help you grow your audience? How do we do this? And you were like, I will not sell the dream. I will not be one of those guys who just promises the dream to make a buck. I can't do that. And I was like, okay, well, it's going to hurt your ability to make money. He's like, it's not about that. I just will not do it. And so you've leaned into this sincere, radical honesty, I guess you could say, and I think overwhelmingly almost immediately people were like, wow, this sucks to hear, but I'm so glad you're saying it. It just resets the expectations a little bit. And even for me, having learned from you and been to film school and worked in the industry now for almost seven years, I still think about this, Hey, this is a script. Whenever I write a new script, this is not, I'm not going to sell this. That's okay.Michael Jamin:It's a writing samplePhil Hudson:And it frees me up to just be whatever I want it to be, not hoping that my entire life is dedicated to this one story I'm writing.Michael Jamin:I see good things coming your way, Phil, by the way.Phil Hudson:I see good things coming my way asMichael Jamin:Well. Yeah, because you're putting the work in and obviously you've already, it may be hard for you to see because you're in it, but the distance that you've traveled at only a few short years in Hollywood is pretty unremarkable.Phil Hudson:I'm keenly aware of that. Honestly, I'm humbled to be where I am. I'm humbled to host the podcast with you. I think I even pitched somebody else to co-host the podcast with you, and you're like, why wouldn't you do it? Why can't I just have you?I don't need to, or I don't want to assume to be the guy. I do think I bring a skillset to this podcast of asking the questions the listener wants to ask, and I think that's really what I do. But yeah, I'm incredibly humbled. I think I've got some really interesting things on the horizon, and I've already had some great things this year as direct result of you and the stuff you're putting out in your course and the great feedback I'm getting from people in your course, by the way, super talented people in there just giving me feedback and making me better.Michael Jamin:Yeah.Phil Hudson:Thank you Michael. Alright,Michael Jamin:Let's do it.Phil Hudson:Okay. Structurally, we broke this up into a couple and we've kind of found a pattern here. There's kind of craft questions, there are breakin questions, there are course questions, and then there are miscellaneous questions. So I take all the questions, kind of broke 'em down, and then I'm really focusing on things that you haven't said before because there are a lot of questions we get that are repetitive questions. Should I move to la? Should I move to la? What about this? How do I get my script in the right hands? And you've addressed those tons and tons of times. So if you like this, go listen to all the other q and A's where we get questions from social media, we get questions from your course members, we get questions from the webinar starting with craft, because I think that's really what we're here to learn is how to be professional writers. I'm going to mess up a bunch of names today. You ready for this?Michael Jamin:Yeah, that's okay.Phil Hudson:Shi suey, shagan. No clueMichael Jamin:That you said it perfectly, however,Phil Hudson:Nailed it. How do you win the battle against that blank screen when trying to create?Michael Jamin:Yeah. Well, the problem is you don't know what you're doing. Listen, the blank page is always intimidating even when you do know what you're doing. But if you are this locked up, it's because you just don't know what a story is and you don't know. That's what the course teaches you. How to take an idea, identify if there's enough meat on that bone to turn it into an episode of television or a movie or whatever. Not every idea is worth turning into. It doesn't have enough there. So the course helps with that. I think all that the writer's block that you're experiencing is because you don't know what you're doing. Of course you're going to be blocked. Of course you don't know what your characters are going to be doing, so at least come to the free webinar, at least I can help you with that much if you don't want to buy the course. The webinar will help a lot at michaeljamin,com/webinarPhil Hudson:And all the other free resources you have, like the free story lesson on your website, michaeljamin.com/free. It's another great place to start. Absolutely true. If you don't know where you're going to go, you get stuck. And for many of us, it's that middle of act two, what's going on? What do I do now? How do I get my characters to this really bad thing that's going to happen? Whatever it is. And understanding the structure as you put it out, it's just so easy to grasp and understand. It's a no brainer. I clearly know where I need to go and what needs to happen here from a strategic perspective, and then tactically I can lay in things to get me where I want in a surprising way.Michael Jamin:Yeah.Phil Hudson:Perfect. Oh, if I may, when you're rewriting, print that thing out and use a red pen, man.Michael Jamin:Red pen.Phil Hudson:Yeah. Michael Michael's pro tip hand amboy. What is the best way to keep improving in screenwriting or storytelling?Michael Jamin:Just keep writing. I would write your episode or your feature, put it aside, write another one, put it aside, write another one, and you'll find that as opposed to just keep on working on the same piece, finish it and write a second one, then the third one, and you'll find that script number five is much better than script number one will ever be. You have to just let it go and continue doing something else. So that's my advice.Phil Hudson:Awesome. Chelsea. Steve, how in depth do you prepare a beat sheet or treatment to pass to a co-writer? Is it important to be specific or broad out of respect for them?Michael Jamin:Oh, well, I mean, you should be doing the beat sheets together. I mean, I would think that's how you get on the same page. My partner and I do everything together. We break the story together. We come up with a beat sheet together. We come up with the outline together. That's how you do it. I mean, you don't want to, if they're your partner, I dunno why you wouldn't bounce ideas of each other that's, or else why have a partner.Phil Hudson:Another really early podcast episode we had was writing with a partner where you talk about this process and there are several schools of thought about how to work with a writing partner. There are tons of resources and different writing have different things. One person sits at a keyboard, the other does, and I think you guys do that that way. Yeah.Michael Jamin:Vers been, I used to be the one at the keyboard, but for the last couple of years he's been the one at the keyboard. Although now we both have, we use collaborate so we both can type at the same time, which is really annoying.Phil Hudson:That's awesome. Yeah, so there's a bunch of that and there are other people who do it, but I think the real juice of what we're saying here, what you're saying, Michael, is you shouldn't be breaking your story separate. That's not Yeah,Michael Jamin:Yeah, yeah. You got to be on the same page.Phil Hudson:Yep. AllMichael Jamin:I'll tell a quick anecdote. One time Steve and I were working on a script for, I think it was Taco fd, and we were writing the outline together and we got into a fight over what this one scene was supposed to be. And I wanted one thing, he wanted another thing. And then I said, what do you think this story is about? And he told me, and then he goes, what do you think the story is about? I said, I think it's about this. We weren't even clear on what the story was about, so we had to stop, agree on that and then move forward.Phil Hudson:Yeah, that cleared up everything, I'm guessing.Michael Jamin:Yeah.Phil Hudson:Yeah. Great. Nina in your course, isn't she? Yeah. Yeah. Nina, I'm so worried about alienating my audience for too long. Is there a theory about thisMichael Jamin:Alienating? I wish I knew. In what way? I feel like you want to hold your audience's hand. That's how I feel. There are other filmmakers who may feel differently when I get lost. Sometimes when I watch watching, I'm like, I'm lost here. I dunno what's going on. And so that's not something that I like to do in my writing. I like to make sure that, especially if you're writing on television, because you're writing on tv, you go into a movie is one thing. You have their attention. There are hostage if they're sitting in the movie theater, but on TV show often people will be on their phone, they're reading a magazine, they're doing everything at the same time as watching a TV show. So I want to make sure they're with me the whole way or else they're not going to be engaged.Phil Hudson:Yeah. Yeah. That's great. Yeah. I wondered about this one too. What does she mean by alienating, right? I don't think you ever want to really alienate your audience. I think there's suspense, there's audience superior versus audience inferior. Does your audience know more than the character? Does the audience know less than the character does? And there's different tactics and tools you can use as a writer to build suspense, and they each have their own purpose, but alienating would be, yeah,Michael Jamin:That's not on my list of things to do.Phil Hudson:Yeah. Sorry Nina, if we had the misunderstanding here, but let us know in the private Facebook group putting us in there with a clarification, and I'm sure Michael hopinMichael Jamin:Into that. Just to be clear, the private Facebook group is just for members of my course, so you have to be a paid member to get into that. But there's a lot of good stuff going on there. These people are very active, and I answer more questions there for them.Phil Hudson:We'll jump down because there's literally this question under the section Mark Brozinsky. Is there a Facebook group we can join to network?Michael Jamin:Yes, there is. And once you purchase, you get a link to that and you should definitely take advantage of it. There's a lot of really smart people trading scripts. They're doing table reads once a week. They're giving each other notes film festival. And it's unlike, they got a festival coming up, which I can't believe, and it's unlike, there are other Facebook screenwriting groups where people are pretty mean. It's almost like Reddit, screenwriting Reddit, which is the dirtiest place on the earth, but that's not what this is going on in this group. It's really very professional and supportive. I think we were smart to gate that group and say, you have to be purchased because it hasn't turned into a cesspool.Phil Hudson:I can tell you from the e-learning side of my digital marketing career, that when people ask, and we had this conversation with the client a year ago when they were relaunching their online membership course for a specific topic, but anyway, very well renowned company, lots of people. And I said, you need to have a community manager that's in there full-time, keeping out the R riffraff. There's spam, there's ugliness, there's all these things. And if you don't have someone doing that, it's just going to get bad. And most of these things are set up by one or two people who just wanted to start a group. And I've had nothing but bad experiences in those groups. Nothing but bad experiences unless there is some unifying factor, like an alumni group tends to perform a little bit better, be in easier place, you have a problem.Michael Jamin:But we don't have that problem with our group. Nope.Phil Hudson:In fact, you have people who self-police. I get messages from people who are like, Hey, I shared this thing. Did I break a policy of self-promotion? I was like, you shared something you produced that came out of the course. I don't think, I think that's celebrating your hard work. You're not offering to pay to read someone's script. You're donating your time every Tuesday night to run a tableMichael Jamin:Group. Yeah. Yeah. Right.Phil Hudson:You're good.Michael Jamin:Yeah, you're good.Phil Hudson:Awesome. Tomer K. I've noticed in the blacklist scripts that there's a trend of making meta commentary about the script itself. Referencing page numbers or the reader. What are your thoughts on this? And maybe define what the blacklist is for people?Michael Jamin:Well, yeah, I mean, the blacklist, there's really, the blacklist started as a site where unproduced professional scripts that were sold were just never produced. And it was an honor to get on the blacklist, but now there's something, now it's something else. There's two lists, right, Phil?Phil Hudson:Yeah, there's that list. But then there's also, you can sign up for the blacklist and pay a monthly fee to host your script so people can access it and read it and give you notes. And you can pay a hundred bucks a pop to get notes and reader feedback on your script and get rated. And that's a little bit, I think more of the commercial side of it.Michael Jamin:Isn't that what they're talking about?Phil Hudson:That's the blacklist. There's also fellowships and things. So by no means are either of us knocking the blacklist. It's just a difference in what this is. And I think what they're referencing is the original that you're talking about,Michael Jamin:The original list. They're thinking. There's a lot of meta jokes in it and meta references.Phil Hudson:I've not read them, but I believe that's what they're saying. That is the blacklist I placed on the blacklist top unproduced scripts.Michael Jamin:Oh, so I can't answer it then.Phil Hudson:But from a style perspective, do you think that's an appropriate style of writing?Michael Jamin:Well, if they got on the blacklist, on the legit blacklist by doing this, who am I to say? No, I just think it tends to be cheap. Breaking the fourth wall or meta. You got to really be careful. Ryan Reynolds says that well in the Deadpool, but it can become a crutch and it becomes, the problem was when you do it, you're telling the audience, this is a movie, and it takes them out of it. You've sucked them into it. This is how I feel. When I first started, I thought all this meta jokes were great. Isn't that funny? Where self-referential isn't that interesting? But now that I've matured as a writer, I feel like you're spending all this time and energy to suck people into world, to make them suspend disbelief. And now you're going to pop it with a joke, and now you got to put more energy, get 'em back into it. I don't like it. I think I don't like it. Others can feel differently though.Phil Hudson:And in the Deadpool comics, he would break the fourth wall. So that is not something that he's doing in film. He's living in the character. And I think it's something everyone expects from Deadpool, but he's going to have a commentary with you, and it's Ryan Reynolds. If there's anyone who can do that, it's Ryan Reynolds. Right? I could do that. I don't know many people who could fourth wall just for people. I just want to make sure everyone's clear on that. It comes from stage place specifically where there are three walls, and then there's a line, and that line is three walls or the set, and then the fourth wall is the audience. And so they're either facing the audience or they're communicating with each other, but they don't turn to speak to the audience unless it's a narrator or it's someone else having, there's a specific need for that.Michael Jamin:Yeah. Fourth and wall is when you literally acknowledge that there's an audience watching your play, which is kind of odd, but it can be fun.Phil Hudson:Some of the first screenwriting courses I ever paid for talked about that. I was supposed to know what it was, and I got so lost. I had to go look it up. And man, that was very confusing. So I want to make sure we define that for people. Yeah, yeah. Projecting much, Phil. Cool. Pf, oh, I wanted to ask, I have a follow-up question on this. So there are screenwriting books that are kind of renowned, specifically story books by Robert McKee, more so than screenwriting books, where he says It is cheap for a writer to reference. We see, we hear, and I actually write in that style, and I get a lot of really good feedback on that. We see this happen. That's just a personal choice. I don have a problem with it. I've never had no bump on it. You read my scripts, you've never bumped on it. To be clear in the book, he clarifies that overused in the transition from, I want to say it was like it might've been silent films to specific moving into something else. So it was as a crutch, people leaned on at a certain point in the 1990, in 19 hundreds. So maybe we've got past that watch is why it doesn't bump. But I said, you answered the question, you don't care.So that's not breaking the fourth wall in that.Michael Jamin:No, no, no, no, no. You're just, yeah, that's a stage direction.Phil Hudson:Yep. Awesome. Yeah. To me, I'm inferring camera movement more than anything. Yeah.Michael Jamin:Okay,Phil Hudson:Cool. P F H, should I vet my idea before I write it so I have an idea to pitch? But once you know it is doable, then I can perfect it. Basically, I had to rewrite this question. It was a bit confusing. Does that make sense?Michael Jamin:Yeah. I think what they're asking is, this is what I would do. You have an idea of a movie for a movie or a TV show or whatever, put it in a sentence or two sentences and then pitch it to a friend. And if you can't explain it succinctly, then you've got a problem. So just saying it out loud, even if you don't have a friend saying it out loud, describing it is a good waste to the, oh, okay. I know what the story is. Sometimes you don't even know what it is and you can't clarify. So for sure, say it out loud and see if your friend is interested. If that sounds grabby, it might not be.Phil Hudson:Yeah. In that two sentences, would you say that separate from a log line, or would you call it a log?Michael Jamin:Yeah, that's basically a log line. But if you want to expand, if you want to make it a paragraph, if you find that a log line is like two sentences, but if you want to make it a paragraph, that's fine too. But don't make it a page. Just make it short and brief.Phil Hudson:Yeah. One script, early script, I wrote, the log line was about a small town. It's about a small town pastor who kills people. And it was interesting. See your face. That's an interesting enough logline. Yeah, I'd be interested in that. And then the questions are, well, what's it about? Why does he kill people?Michael Jamin:Yeah. I would go a little more detailed than that because if you pitched me out, I would say, maybe tell me more.Phil Hudson:Correct. And it's really more of an elevator pitch than anything. It's just a way to just slide it in. But the log line would be a full two sentences. Yeah. Cool. Course related question. Only one other. Today, melody, we answer a lot of these questions throughout the webinars. There's not a ton of these. Melody Jones, I have to do major research for my project. Should I take the course first or get my research done, then do the course?Michael Jamin:Oh, I would say take the course first. That way you know what kind of questions to ask and look for. Unfortunately, we couldn't answer this for her, probably live. But yeah, you may start asking yourself questions that you don't even need the answers to. SoPhil Hudson:Yeah, I would absolutely agree. In fact, the script I'm writing right now, I am doing a lot of research on, because it has a technical skillset that I am very familiar with, but I don't know the intricacies of. And so by doing my research, I'm looking into that. But I broke the script first from a story perspective, not a plot perspective. I said, what's the story? What do I want to tell? What's going to happen? How are my relationships going to play out? And now it's looking at it thematically to say, how can I utilize this experience they're going through from a technical perspective to elevate that story or to add stressors? How can I use this to get to this part where they get in an argument or whatever? SoMichael Jamin:Absolutely. What's also interesting, side note, but I'm rewatching Wolf of Wall Street, and I may be a quarter of the way through, but every fricking scene that I'm watching right now, everyone is interesting. The acting is brilliant, but every scene is written. There's something really interesting going on each scene. There's nothing lazy about that script. It's like, if you watch, you could show me one scene. I'd be like, Ooh, that's good. So think about that when you're writing your script. Is this scene amazing or not? Because that one, it was movie. Every scene is amazing.Phil Hudson:That's awesome. Yeah. You guys are freebie for you guys. I love that. All right. Breaking in. You ready to talk about breaking into Hollywood? Sure. Cool. There's a curse word in here. So to keep our non explicit label on the podcast F the Void, is there a chance for writers that are not from the US to find success in Hollywood? Like say, south American writers that want to make you big?Michael Jamin:Yeah. Well, there was that guy. Sure. I mean, the guy, the writer who did, ah, man, what was he? Australian? No, he was South African. It's the, ah, man. What was that movie called? District nine.Phil Hudson:And he did a bunch of stuff. They're all great.Michael Jamin:Yeah. And so for sure, you can make your stuff wherever you are. And to some degree, if you make a TV show in a foreign country other than the us, often it's easier to sell those shows to the US because it's IP that already exists. And for some reason, sometimes studios want that. So Wilfred, for example, I wrote on Wilfred, that was an Australian show. It did really well in Australia, and we adapted it for America here. It's not uncommon at all. So yeah, don't let that hold you back from creating great stuff.Phil Hudson:Yeah. From a purely cinema history perspective, a lot of the best cinematography came out of Mexico when Eisenstein moved there. So there's great stuff. You've got Rito, you've got all these amazing filmmakers coming out of Central South America. And North America. You've got Tero Titi out in New Zealand. YouMichael Jamin:Got right. I'm going to mention him. There's a movie, I'm just, I'm going to search it right now. Yeah. There's a movie I watched a couple of days ago, the Worst Person in the World. It's a Norwegian movie. Loved it, loved it. Thought it was so well done. The title was terrible. What's the title? But everything about the movie was great, except for the title. The Worst Person in the World. Yeah, go watch that. Yes.Phil Hudson:But there's some great films even just come out of Europe, the UK and Europe, which I think we're going to get. That's the next question is uk, maybe that one we answered in the thing. But anyway, but it's like once that musical is just fantastic and it's out of the uk. So yeah, I think oftentimes people group like UK and America is Hollywood, but they are different. You have BAFTA and you have the B, B C and the way they do their things, and then you have Hollywood. And the other thing to keep in mind too is with streaming, I mean, I get a lot of recommendations for Spanish films and TV on my Netflix, and they don't know that I speak Spanish.Michael Jamin:I think they DoPhil Hudson:You think they figured it out? I think theyMichael Jamin:Do, man. They might. You'd be surprised. ButPhil Hudson:I get some Korean stuff too. I getMichael Jamin:Ads in Spanish because I speak Spanish too. I'm like, why? How do they knowPhil Hudson:It's not zip code related? Maybe it's zip code related. Maybe it's just la, right? But yeah, anyway, I get a lot of that stuff. And so just because maybe you get something and you sell it to Netflix, Ecuador, and then all of a sudden it's being streamed all over the world. You've got all of the Spanish channels, and then you make it here. I have to, ah, here's a great example. Squid Games, squid Games, South Korea blew up huge. Right? Huge. Parasite. Parasite. South Korea.Michael Jamin:But there's a catch. It has to be good.Phil Hudson:Better than good has to be great,Michael Jamin:Right? Yeah. It has to be great.Phil Hudson:But that's the role for everyone in Hollywood too. And there's a lot of people here who are not willing to put in the effort to get to that. Right? Yeah. And I guess follow up question from F the void, do you know any writers that are not from the US or any first world country that have made it in Hollywood?Michael Jamin:Well, I've had Canadian writers on my show before on the podcast. You can ask them how they did it. Other, if you come from a non-English speaking country, you're going to have a more difficult time in the sense that even if your English is really good, it may not be perfect unless you've been here a long, long time. And so that's the catch. It's hard for you to write dialogue in a language that it's not your first language. It mayPhil Hudson:IMS idioms and all that other stuff too.Michael Jamin:So you do need to have really, not just a firm grasp of the language, but you really have to know it. You have to speak as well as a native speaker, but with just maybe just a slight accent. That's the only catch.Phil Hudson:Yeah. But there are also things like Selena, there's a girl I went to film school with, and she's a writer on Selena, and she's from Mexico, and she's a second. She just got naturalized just a bit ago, but she's right around Selena before she was a US citizen.Michael Jamin:Yeah, often. Interesting. Yeah. So if you get on a, there's demand for people with diverse backgrounds if the show is about that background. SoPhil Hudson:Yeah, it absolutely was. I think that whole writing staff were Latin American.Michael Jamin:Right? Right. Hey, it's Michael Jamin. If you like my videos and you want me to email them to you for free, join my watch list. Every Friday I send out my top three videos. These are for writers, actors, creative types. You can unsubscribe whenever you want. I'm not going to spam you, and it's absolutely free. Just go to michaeljamin.com/watchlist.Phil Hudson:Cole, our film festival is a good route to take for a script you wrote to get looked at.Michael Jamin:Well, you're not looking at it. You're shooting it, right? I'm not sure what the question is.Phil Hudson:Film festivals often have screenwriting screenplay contests attached to them.Michael Jamin:Oh,Phil Hudson:Interesting. And I can tell you, having been on staff for many of those indie film festivals, that is what pays the screenwriting contest is what pays for the cocktail hours and for the other things.Michael Jamin:So you're saying it's not really a way to be discovered?Phil Hudson:It depends on the film festival.Michael Jamin:Right. Oh, okay.Phil Hudson:Alright. So there are film festivals that I think matter. I think they're also, I think what you really want to talk about. We actually do a webinar on a little bit deeper on this, which is available on your website to purchase for like 29 bucks worth watching. WhichMichael Jamin:One is that? Which episode was that?Phil Hudson:I think it's how to get past Industry Gatekeepers.Michael Jamin:Oh, okay.Phil Hudson:I want to say that's what it was. Yeah. Thanks for clarifying. But yeah, I think what you really want to look for are fellowships fellowship. So you have the Sundance Film Festival and their fellowships that they offer there. Blacklist has a fellowship. You have the academy, the Nichols Fellowship. Awesome Film Festival comes up in another question here. That's one. That's a film festival where they do give screenwriting contests awards, and there are industry people who attend that. So it's a different thing. Tribeca, some of those bigger ones, south by Southwest. If they have those options, maybe go for those. But if you're talking about the Westborough, whatever film festival, maybe skip it. Maybe Skip Save the 40 Bucks on Film Freeway.Michael Jamin:Okay. You heard of the film. He knows more about this than I do.Phil Hudson:Daniel Celiac, poor guy. If someone is still in high school or early in college, what can they do to get closer to the industry?Michael Jamin:Stay where you are and just write, write and make your own stuff. As a kid, I shot my own stuff on a super eight camera. Now you can shoot on your phone. I didn't have sound back then. Just keep working on your craft and read anything and get inspired by our art. Draw upon it. Don't look for a job right now. I mean, if you want to look for a job as an intern or PA or something, that's fine. But don't start thinking about starting your film, writing your screenwriting career. Just start working on Become a good writer. That's the first step.Phil Hudson:And I was going to suggest PA Intern Volunteer. I started volunteering at the Sunrise Film Festival because that's all I could do. And it was because I was in the recession of 2008, nine, and I just had to work and I had to work two jobs. And so I would volunteer at the Sunrise Film Festival, and I put in those hours for four years. And then that's how I got my first real break through Sundance to do some stuff aside from the work I was doing and how I met you. We've talked about previously, great bv. Michael mentions moving to Hollywood if you're serious. What about those in the uk, for example, who physically cannot get a Visa to move there?Michael Jamin:Right. Well, there is an industry in the uk. I mean, they do make great movies and great TV shows there. So I don't know what cities, if it's London, I don't know where the centers are, but stay where you are and become great in your country, and then we'll get you, we'll send a visa your wayPhil Hudson:When we want that. There's a specific visa that gets you over. It's like you're an expert in your field that America wants to profit off of you by taking taxes.Michael Jamin:Yeah. The minute America sees dollar signs on you instead of just pound signs,Phil Hudson:You get that special visa.Michael Jamin:Yeah.Phil Hudson:Great. Bv, I just got your pound sign joke, by the way. That was clever.Michael Jamin:Thank you,Phil Hudson:Bev. No, I did that one. Lauren Gold. Any specific tips for fiction novel writers who want to transition to screenwriting?Michael Jamin:Yeah, create, write a bestselling book, and it'll be so easy. They will, Hollywood will come after you with buying their rights, but if you have a book that's not selling, honestly, the book doesn't even have to be good. It just has to be a bestseller because then it comes with the built-in market, and so is 50 Shades of Gray High Literature. I'm not sure, but I know a lot of people read it and loved it, and so they turned out into a movie. So it's about marketing. So these bestsellers have a built-in marketplace and look at a lot of these movies that are being made. They're adapted from movies. They're just hit books or hit books.Phil Hudson:And it can also be other things like The Martian, right? It was originally a blog post, a series of blog posts that we, on hisMichael Jamin:Website. Right? I know it was a self-published book. I didn't know it started from blog posts.Phil Hudson:I believe it was a blog. He would post blog posts. He would publish basically a new chapter as a blog post was bought, and then he would spin on from there.Michael Jamin:So there's a guy who wasn't asking for permission, he wasn't waiting to be discovered. He did it anyway. He built the mountain himselfPhil Hudson:At Twilight. Those were stories that she would tell her sister. And she brought that book and blew up. Yeah. Cultural phenomenon.Michael Jamin:Twilight was self-published. Did not know that.Phil Hudson:My understanding is that, yeah, I believe it was. And someone else, correct me if we're wrong, they'll definitely scream at me because it's such a big hit. That being said, I believe 50 Shades of Gray is a fan fiction of Twilight. That's at least what I've heard.Michael Jamin:I didn't know that. Okay.Phil Hudson:Awesome. I'm going to just offend half your audience who love those two franchises.Michael Jamin:That's okay.Phil Hudson:You're welcome, everybody. Rob, as I produced my own plays, staged comedy shows and web series for a while, great. Now is a way to break in. Is this a valid way of doing it? Does the industry care about any of this?Michael Jamin:Yes, of course. But the problem is you're doing all these great things, but maybe you're putting the work in, which is great, but maybe it's not good enough yet. It's okay. Keep doing it until you get good. Or maybe it's great, but it hasn't found an audience yet. So it does need to have an audience. The minute you have your web series gets discovered by a couple million people, Hollywood will find you because you are bringing more to the table than just your desire to cash a check. You are bringing an audience. But if you don't have that yet, then one or two things are happening. One is maybe your writing isn't good enough yet, or your show is not good enough yet, yet means you can keep working on yourself. Or maybe they haven't found you yet in that's the case. You still have to keep putting it out there just until you're found, until your audience finds you. Either way, you have to keep doing it. That's it.Phil Hudson:Andrew Spitzer, would you agree that ultimately you're selling yourself and your skills rather than a product? You gotMichael Jamin:To bring more to the table, and like I said, than just a script. And so what am I doing on here? I'm selling myself. I suppose I have a following on social media. It helps me get more opportunities. And so I still have a body of work and people know that I'm a good writer. But yeah, I come with this other end, this other, I bring more to the table than just me,Phil Hudson:Just my work brother. Sorry. Yeah, and I took this too. No, no. It's your podcast, man. I'm sorry. I stuck on your toes, Mr. Jamin. I did it again right there.Michael Jamin:No,Phil Hudson:I was going to say I took this as an, I think it's a bit of both, and I think the order is a little bit different, but my perspective of this, you have a product. That product is so valuable to someone that they want to buy it because you were able to craft that product. And because of that, now your skill sets are valuable and you are now selling your ability to continue to craft products like that one. So you have to have a sample that you've already checked the box. You can make these people money. If you can't do that, there is no evidence of your ability and your skillset. So there's nothing to sell.Michael Jamin:Okay.Phil Hudson:But I think it goes for your script. I think it goes for getting an agent. I think it goes for getting a manager. I think it goes for opening doors to meet people. You have to have something that is valuable to them. And it might be audience like you were just talking about. That might be enough, right? It might be your IP from the story you wrote and self-published.Michael Jamin:Sometimes it'll be approached by an actor, a big actor who has a terrible idea for a show or whatever, because you're going to be in it. And so you're a good actor. So that's bringing a lot to the table, their presence.Phil Hudson:Yeah. Sidebar here. Is there truth in the statement that there are certain actors who are not able to open a movie, who are not able to, that they come and they might have a name you'd recognize, and they might have some idea of a following, but they're not necessarily someone a studio would bank on?Michael Jamin:For sure, but I can speak more to this from the TV side, but for sure, I know even John Travolta, Quentin Tarantino wanted to cast Travolta in Pulp Fiction. And I think there was some pushback from the studios. He was a, has been. He was a washout, even though super talented guy. And Tarantino saw him and thought, dude, this guy is still a huge star. He can't walk down the street without people yelling. Vinny Bobino, people love him. And so he pushed, he fought for him, even though the studio didn't believe he could open a movie, and he did open a movie.Phil Hudson:He did. Did he ever?Michael Jamin:And then think of all the other opportunities that came because of that. But sure, the studios, at the end of the day, they're not so concerned with, is this actor a good actor? They want to know, can this actor put asses in seats? Will they sell tickets? And that's why some actors were not particularly good actors or great actors, but they can put asses in seats. That's what counts.Phil Hudson:Yep. Awesome. That's what I thought. I just wanted to get some confirmation there. This is a Phil Hudson q and a. Are everybody I can ask my questions too. Awesome. Lappe two TV or Lippe tv, whatever. If a short film is being optioned to pitch as a series, is it better to keep the short hidden while it's being shopped around, or is it okay to post it online?Michael Jamin:Well, it'sPhil Hudson:A bit of a one percenter for you, right?Michael Jamin:This isPhil Hudson:A one off question.Michael Jamin:Yeah. If you put your short on YouTube or whatever, and it gets a million views, it's a lot easier to sell. It's a lot easier to sell.Phil Hudson:Yeah. What I got from this question is, I made a short, somebody has optioned that short. Is it a mistake to now put that on YouTube? Does that advice still apply there?Michael Jamin:You'd have to talk to the person who optioned it, because now it's theirs. They have the rights to go to talk to them.Phil Hudson:Cool. Len Lawson, should I ask a potential producer to sign an N D A before reading my script?Michael Jamin:I wouldn't. But it depends who, I've never done that. But also, don't show it to the producer who's got a handlebar mustache. Who are you showing it to? Make sure what have they done? Look 'em up on I mdb. Are they legit or are they just someone who's claiming to be a producer? In which case, you better build a rapport with them. You better know whether you can trust this person or not. But I wouldn't. I would never ask. And I've told my scripts to tons of people. I don't ask for an N D A.Phil Hudson:I wouldn't either. It's just friction. I think about this in terms of friction, and we talk about adopting habits or influencing people to take action. There's this whole nuance of digital marketing called conversion rate optimization, which is, how do I get more people to take the action I want them to on my website, whether it's the headline or it's the colors or it's pattern interrupts, or if it's offers or bullet points, all that stuff. And to me, you want to reduce friction. How do I remove obstacles? And in sales, the best way to overcome an objection is to kill the objection before it becomes one. And that's a massive objection.Michael Jamin:Were to, I'm not a producer. I'm not an agent. I don't want to read anybody's script. I'd say right up front, I'm not. But if someone were to ask me for the favor, say, Hey, will you read my script? And then for some reason I was feeling magnanimous that day as opposed to every other day of the year, then I would say, all right, I'll read your script. And then they asked to ask me to sign an nda, a I'd like, forget it. The deal's off.Phil Hudson:We're done.Michael Jamin:We're done.Phil Hudson:And that's what you're doing.Michael Jamin:ButPhil Hudson:I think it also speaks to the psychology of people who are breaking in, who are so concerned. Someone's going to steal their idea. And that's one of the most prominent questions we get. This is that question asked a different way.Michael Jamin:Everyone is so convinced that they have an idea that's worth stealing. That's the funny part. Everyone thinks their script is gold, and most of 'em are not.Phil Hudson:By most, we mean a lot of them. A 99.99. And that's a hard thing for me to admit too, guys. I thought I was going to win an Oscar with my first script. I thought I was that prodigy. I've talked about Prodigy syndrome before on the podcast. I thought that was me, and it's not. And letting go of that's been so freeing for my creativity and my enjoyment of the process. So just look at it this way, if you think this is all you got, that's a problem. And that's why you're freaking out. My opinion is steal my idea. Awesome. Go for it. Why? Because that validates the fact that I got something and I got a lot more of that. Right?Michael Jamin:Right.Phil Hudson:But also, please don't steal my stuff.Michael Jamin:Yeah, don't steal the stuff that's for me to do.Phil Hudson:Yeah. Everything Jamin writes, I actually write, I'm his ghost writer. I've been a ghost writer for 26 years.Michael Jamin:Yep.Phil Hudson:I submitted a pilot, Nolan. See, I submitted a pilot to the Awesome Film Festival. Is this a good move? Is it bad timing with the strike I submitted before I knew there was going to be a strike.Michael Jamin:There's no bad timing. I mean, you're not going to take, if you become a hit at, if you win some prize, great. When the strike is over, you can capitalize on it. I don't think there's bad timing.Phil Hudson:No. I think there's specific advice on this from the W G A that I've seen, and it basically says that if you win anything that was done before the strike, it's whatever. But it's what you do with that after. So let's say that you submitted to a strike that was funded by a studio in the A M T P, and then you win. And part of that prize is to have a meeting with a producer that is in breach, because that is happening after the fact selling. Even having a meeting with them is a breach. It's crossing a picket line.Michael Jamin:So just to first say, Hey, thank you. I'm so excited. I can't wait to have this meeting with you in a month or two. When this R is over,Phil Hudson:You don't want to take that meeting to ruin your potential for a career because you can't get in the W G A and when the strike's over, they can only hire people who are in the W G A and they will not hire you becauseMichael Jamin:They won't give a crap about you. I mean, if you think you're going to build a friendship with them, they're going to be gone.Phil Hudson:Nope. They're going to make their payday and move on. And then when the Writers Guild qualified writers can come back, they will get their high quality scripts back from the people who write 'em. And you'll be sitting there just wasted opportunity with the Austin Film Festival. However, I believe it is technically, and I could be wrong, but I believe it's in, and I did submit this year, by the way, to everybody. I'm in the same situation. I'm not concerned if I win, awesome. I'm not planning on winning. It's just a benchmark, a litmus task for me to say, did I qualify? Am I good enough? Where am I at in what I consider to be a respected film festival? And you take what you get out of it, you accept the accolades, and then you move on and just avoid anything that crosses the picket line. Don't take this as an opportunity to scab.Michael Jamin:Yeah.Phil Hudson:Yeah. Cool. Four questions. Michael, you think we can do it?Michael Jamin:Let's blow through. Let's do it.Phil Hudson:Shauna Ibarra, miscellaneous. How do you find mentors or people who can give you feedback?Michael Jamin:You got to earn it. You got to earn it. You got to get a job or an internship or something at a studio, at a production company and work your butt off. And then after six months say, Hey, can I show you my script? But it's not like mentors are just lining up to help you. Or maybe they are. Maybe they're retired people, I don't know. But that's the connections part. That's the work you have to do. This is your job is to make connections, and it's to give first. And that's what I would do.Phil Hudson:I was given advice from a production supervisor and a producer that at a certain point you get an ask and you should take your askMichael Jamin:That time. You have to earn that ask first. Right?Phil Hudson:Yeah. And there are many people I've personally worked with in Hollywood where I probably have that ask, and I'm not taking that ask because I don't want to waste their time.Michael Jamin:You're saving itPhil Hudson:For when it's time. Yeah. Erica little since screenwriting is not audience facing, like acting. Is it an ageist industry? Since it is generally Hollywood based.Michael Jamin:Ageism is the last accepted in Hollywood that said, there are plenty of examples of people who are older who are still breaking in. So it's not like it's impossible, but they're still favoring the youth. But it's not impossible, especially if you do it yourself. I am always yelling at you, do it yourself so no one can stop you as you're older, you have wisdom, you have more life experiences to draw upon, and you might have a couple of bucks in your pocket so you can invest in yourself.Phil Hudson:Yeah, good point. Aaron Kami, what is your advice on how to make writing and screenwriting a less lonely pursuit? Especially when writing is a hobby. How do I meet and learn from others or get feedback, et cetera?Michael Jamin:Well, that's kind of one of the pluses of our course that Phil and I have is that there's a private Facebook group just for students. And it's a community. They trade scripts, they have table reads, they have a contest coming up. That's the community. That's their graduating class. That's their cohort. That's one way to do it.Phil Hudson:Yeah. Any other thoughts? Are youMichael Jamin:No, it's like I said, I think, I don't remember if we mentioned this or the last podcast, but it's a really good group of people where it's not, yeah,Phil Hudson:I was on top of this one.Michael Jamin:Oh, okay. So I've already mentioned it. So yeah, it's really high quality people in this group,Phil Hudson:Solid feedback. And even playing field, they're telling you things based off of what matters, not things that they've heard or read in a book. It's like, this is how a writer's room is going to give you notes. Here's a document, here's a workbook. Michael prepared with the types of notes that matter. That's the feedback he get.Michael Jamin:Yeah.Phil Hudson:Okay. Last question, Scott. Koski wants to know, Michael, would you consider your book art or Craft?Michael Jamin:Oh, good question. When I'm writing for tv, I consider that craft. I consider it. I know it is. I'm getting notes. I'm getting feedback. It's very collaborative. I don't think art at its core, and this is open for debate, but I think art, its core is not about compromising. And when you work with a bunch of people or when you're collaborating, you are going to compromise it. Compromises have to be made. And so it's everyone's work. And that's why I feel like it's craft. But I was thinking about this last night, and then I was like, well, what about Michelangelo? Sistine Chapel? He took notes on the Sistine Chapel. He was working for the Pope. He had to put some angels in there that he didn't want to put in. He had to compromise his vision. But you certainly wouldn't say the Sistine Chapel is not art.It certainly is. So I'm a little confused as to what my definition is. Even I'm other words, I, I'm contradicting myself. I do think art is about taking something inside of you and expressing it in a way that helps you understand yourself and helps you understand the world around you. And in that way, people can see it or watch it and enjoy it, and help them understand themselves. I think there's that greater good. I don't think craft necessarily does that. I think craft can sometimes be, the studio will give me a note and I'll say, okay, I can do that. That's what you want. I can do that. I don't think it's necessarily playing for the greater good. It's what they want and they're paying me. I also don't think design is necessarily art design. Sometimes a can be about selling something. So the design of the Apple boxes that they sell their phones and really beautiful, well done. But the design has an intention, and that is to sell this image of apple, of this blank slate, this pure white open for possibility, creative, blank slate. So is that art? No, I don't think so. I think it's design. I also, so there's art, craft, and design, but you can have your own opinion, feelings. And this debate has been raging for centuries.Phil Hudson:Yeah. I apologize. You might've answered this for you. Your book, is it art or is it craft? Oh,Michael Jamin:For me, the intention was only art. I was drawing upon my craft to make art. Whereas I don't usually draw upon my craft to make art. I usually do it to make a TV show. And so the book is called a Paper Orchestra. And when I wrote it, I was very, very, I was struggling with this. I've read similar books that were written by television writers. And to me, they felt like they had, I could tell they were written by sitcom writers. That's not to say that it was goofy. It just felt like it wasn't deep enough and it felt like they had taken the network note. Often we get notes from the network with the networks, can you round the edges off? And when you're writing on a network TV show, we'll often anticipate these notes and we'll do the notes in advance. But for this book, I was very insecure about it. I was kept on arguing with my wife, does this feel like it was written by Sid Car Rider? And sometimes she'd say, yeah, and sometimes she'd say, no, no, no. And so I was always pushing myself. I wanted to be seen as an author, not as a sitcom writer who wrote a book that feels like a sitcom. And so whether or not I achieved that, that's up for the individual to decide. But that was my intention. And I think intention's important. Think it counts for something.Phil Hudson:Absolutely. And it sounds to me like you took the craft that you've been working on for years and years and utilize it as a litmus test for your art.Michael Jamin:And if anyone wants to sign up when it drops or when I start touring, it's michael jamin.com/upcoming. But it's interesting because when people have enjoyed it and performed it as I performed, or when they've read,Phil Hudson:It's fantastic.Michael Jamin:Thank you. It's very visual. So I think when I write these scenes, I think, oh, what are we watching in our mind's eye as this scene goes? So there's that. I do write as if I'm a screenwriter. I don't know if I'll ever be able to get rid of that. And I do write, it's not high literature. I understand that. I don't know if I ever could write high literature, and I don't think, it was never my intention.Phil Hudson:I think it just speaks to the value of art. And you said it's to the greater good. And I think sometimes the greater good is what do I want to write? What is best for my soul?Michael Jamin:Yes.Phil Hudson:That's the intention. And that is the greater good. And that's the difference between canon fodder is the term that comes to mind. I don't know if that's appropriate, but it's just the BSS that can be mass produced, the AI generated content that can be mass produced versus the singular thing that only Michael Jamin could do because it spoke to his soul and came out of him based off of what he needed to express at this moment and what was going on in his life, reflecting on all of the experiences he's had.Michael Jamin:And that's interesting because how I protect myself from ai, because people say, what are you doing about ai? AI cannot write my stories because it hasn't lived my life. And these are very personal stories, so it just can't, AI might be able to do other things, but it can't do what I'm doing. Yeah.Phil Hudson:Yep. Beautiful stuff, man. I love when we end on these great little notes like that because I think it's incredibly valuable to people who are struggling with this. I know a lot of writers think they're artists and they want to be artists, and you are. You're doing something pure. And with the right intention, regardless of the quality that you can do now compared to everybody else, it's the best you can do with what you have right now. That isMichael Jamin:Art. And that's the advantage that an amateur or non-professional screenwriter or writer has over what we do. I'm a professional writer. It means I get paid. People are paying me to put out stuff that maybe I don't necessarily want to do, but I'm taking the money so I have to do it. But when you're writing for yourself as an amateur or you get to write whatever you want and you don't have to compromise and you don't have to worry about the money, you already have a job on the side, what you're doing, not you, but what those people are doing is more pure in that sense. You are writing because you just want to write, it's closer. It probably has a closer chance of being art than what I do when I take the paycheck.Phil Hudson:But it's probably also the thing that is going to get you into the machine to become the professional paid writer who does the craft?Michael Jamin:If you don't, right? If you stop thinking about, can I sell this and start thinking about how beautiful is this thing I'm making? And we were just talking to him a minute ago about Wolf of Wall Street, how I'm only a quarter way through, but every scene is so interesting. The writing is so great in every scene. Not lazy, nothing lazy about it, man. Yeah,Phil Hudson:Yeah. Well, it kind of leads to the end of the podcast. And so before we jump the gun, what do we say? Keep writing. That's Keep writing DoMichael Jamin:Phil. Great. Another great talk. Alright, everyone, keep watching. We have great stuff for you on the website. We like to always like to plug that. If you go to michaeljamin.com, what you can get is a free lesson on how to write. You can get on my newsletter, which I'll send you the three tips that I think you need to watch every week. Three lessons for you to pick up free. Also on my website, you can sign up for my book for when it drops a P Orchestra. You can sign up for my webinar, which we do every three weeks, and you could sign up for my screenwriting course. That's going to cost you. You can get a free writing sample that I've written all this stuff. Go get it. Yeah, it's all there@michaeljamon.comPhil Hudson:And there's other valuable things you have on there too. You can get the webinar rebroadcast. This was the pep talking screener writer and he's here. You can go get that. There's also the VIP Q and a, so these are the questions we couldn't answer in the main one. There's a VIP q and a. You can go sign up @michaeljamin.com/VIP for the next event and just have a chance on Zoom in a small group to ask questions directly to you. AndMichael Jamin:Let me clarify so the webinars, because I'm glad you brought that up. So the webinars are free if you attend live, they're free. If you miss it, we send you a free replay for 24 hours. But if you want to catch the old ones because you're like, Hey, those are really good, those are available on my website for a small fee,Phil Hudson:But they're lifetime access, so you buy it once. It doesn't have a take clock. It's like jurors, you have access. It's in there with the course. If you buy the course, you get access to all of them and the webinar, when you attend, you give away a free access to the course. So somebody will win that. And a pretty nice discount as well.Michael Jamin:Yes. Alright, Philly, we did it. Thank you everyone. Until next week, as Phil likes to say, keep writing.Phil Hudson:This has been an episode of Screenwriters Need to Hear this with Michael Jamin and Phil Hudson. If you're interested in learning more about writing, make sure you register for Michael's monthly webinar @michaeljamin.com/webinar. If you found this podcast helpful, consider sharing it with a friend and leaving us a five star review on iTunes. For free screenwriting tips, follow Michael Jamin on social media @MichaelJamin,writer. You can follow Phil Hudson on social media @PhilaHudson. This podcast was produced by Phil Hudson. It was edited by Dallas Green Music, by Ken Joseph. Until next time, keep writing.

Donte Whitner joined Papa & Lund to discuss how there is something structurally wrong with the 49ers defense and the Rams offense exploited itSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Donte Whitner joined Papa & Lund to discuss how there is something structurally wrong with the 49ers defense and the Rams offense exploited itSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this enlightening episode, we are joined by Jack Henkel, Senior Cluster Manager at the Florida High Tech Corridor. Jack brings over 15 years of experience within Florida's innovation ecosystem, making him a valuable resource for businesses seeking to thrive in the high-tech landscape. Jack's journey began at UCF, where he later joined the Office of Research and Commercialization for a decade. His primary role was aiding companies in spinning out of the university and facilitating growth for those looking to intertwine with academia. The Florida High Tech Corridor's sphere of influence encompasses the 23 Central Florida counties, stretching from Tampa to Gainesville. Originally founded as a partnership among UCF, USF, and UF, the corridor acts as a conduit linking research institutions, industries, and government entities. Structurally flexible, the Corridor recently adopted the name "Florida High Tech Corridor" to better represent its role as a resource hub. Unlike a membership-based organization, it offers a plethora of resources to companies without imposing any fees. One of the cornerstones of their assistance lies in the realm of SBIR and STTR programs. These programs, funded by the SBA across 11 agencies, provide essential resources for startups seeking financial support. With their seasoned team's expertise, the Corridor assists businesses in strategically engaging with these programs, fostering growth and innovation. Furthermore, the Corridor serves as the FAST Center for Florida, helping businesses determine the ideal agency fit and providing resources and training for those stepping into the SBIR and STTR landscape. Tune in to this episode to gain insights from a veteran in Florida's innovation ecosystem, exploring the myriad ways the Florida High Tech Corridor aids businesses in achieving success and propelling technological advancement. Recorded live at this year's Florida SBDC Network Small Business Success Summit hosted at The Westin Fort Lauderdale Beach Resort.  Learn more about the Florida High Tech Corridor: https://floridahightech.com/

Macro strategists Juhi Dhawan and Nick Wylenzek join host Thomas Mucha to explore how automation, shifting demographics, the onshoring of manufacturing, and other macro and geopolitical dynamics are impacting labor markets across the globe.Key topics1:50 – Structurally tight labor markets4:35 – How labor scarcity impacts policy7:25 – Automation across sectors8:55 – Worker retraining and policy solutions11:55 – Strategic sectors14:15 – Demographics and the Chinese economy16:40 – European politics, immigration, and labor markets18:55 – US immigration policy21:25 – Long-term policy and investment implications

Structurally, the fascia system suspends, supports, and enables all anatomical movement from skin to cells and everything in between. In this episode of The ABMP Podcast, Darren and Kristin are joined by Stretch to Win founders Ann and Chris Frederick to discuss Frederick Stretch Therapy (FST) and its origin, how FST can be integrated with massage therapy and other bodywork, and what the future holds for FST. Ann Frederick is the creator of a manual and movement therapy and assisted stretching called Frederick Stretch Therapy (FST). Her technique was originally designed for professional football players in the NFL. It then evolved to the public to address common conditions of pain, movement dysfunction, and lack of flexibility. Ann directs her school of training in FST at the Stretch to Win Institute in Chandler, Arizona, and Toronto, Ontario. Chris Frederick is an integrative physical therapist/physiotherapist, lead teacher of FST, practitioner of Anatomy Trains Structural Integration, and practitioner of Taiji, Qigong, and Taoist meditation. Chris has specialized in providing manual and movement therapy for several professional dance companies—including the New York City Ballet—and for professional athletes. Former professional dancers, the Fredericks co-wrote the books Stretch to Win and Fascial Stretch Therapy, both in their 2nd editions. Chris also contributed chapters and other content for eight additional books, most of which are bestsellers in the categories of fascia, movement, and manual therapy. FST is based on original research completed in 1997 and 2017 and is scheduled for another study starting in 2023. The Fredericks are excited to share their experience and thoughts about the exponential growth of assisted stretching, what makes FST uniquely different, and how it is integrated with all forms of massage and bodywork to enhance results and success with your clients.   Resources:   Use code ABMP23 at stretchtowin.com to receive 15% off your next purchase. Frederick Stretch Therapy workshops: https://www.stretchtowin.com/page/fst-level-1 Frederick Stretch Therapy 2nd edition (Handspring - Singing Dragon publisher): https://amzn.to/3Dtv8Bl - ABMP Members receive 20% off regular list price! Postpartum pain and dysfunction webinar with Chris Frederick, PT: https://www.stretchtowin.com/survey/10/post-partum-pain-and-dysfunction     Hosts:   Darren Buford is senior director of communications and editor-in-chief for ABMP. He is editor of Massage & Bodywork magazine and has worked for ABMP for 22 years, and been involved in journalism at the association, trade, and consumer levels for 24 years. He has served as board member and president of the Western Publishing Association, as well as board member for Association Media & Publishing. Contact him at editor@abmp.com. Kristin Coverly, LMT is a massage therapist, educator, and the director of professional education at ABMP. She loves creating continuing education courses, events, and resources to support massage therapists and bodyworkers as they enhance their lives and practices. Contact her at ce@abmp.com.     Sponsors:     Anatomy Trains: www.anatomytrains.com        Touch America: www.touchamerica.com       Anatomy Trains is a global leader in online anatomy education and also provides in-classroom certification programs for structural integration in the US, Canada, Australia, Europe, Japan, and China, as well as fresh-tissue cadaver dissection labs and weekend courses. The work of Anatomy Trains originated with founder Tom Myers, who mapped the human body into 13 myofascial meridians in his original book, currently in its fourth edition and translated into 12 languages. The principles of Anatomy Trains are used by osteopaths, physical therapists, bodyworkers, massage therapists, personal trainers, yoga, Pilates, Gyrotonics, and other body-minded manual therapists and movement professionals. Anatomy Trains inspires these practitioners to work with holistic anatomy in treating system-wide patterns to provide improved client outcomes in terms of structure and function.                      Website: anatomytrains.com                        Email: info@anatomytrains.com             Facebook: facebook.com/AnatomyTrains                       Instagram: www.instagram.com/anatomytrainsofficial   YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2g6TOEFrX4b-CigknssKHA       TouchAmerica is a leading manufacturer of professional grade wellness furniture, bodywork tables, halotherapy suites, hydrotherapy equipment, sound bathing loungers, and other related products. At TouchAmerica, we believe in a future where good health and vitality are common in all aspects of living. Promoting the positive power of conscious touch is at the core of our vision. We hope our products help add a touch of functional elegance to your massage & spa work environment. ABMP members receive 20% off all standard products. Discounts do not apply to salt or special-order SKUs. Visit https://www.touchamerica.com/ or Call 800 67 TOUCH and use code touchABMP*. Reach out today and feel the TouchAmerica difference!    

Visit: https://nursing.com/140meds to request your free copy of "140 Must Know Meds" Generic Name Diphenoxylate/atropine Trade Name Lomotil Indication Treatment for diarrhea Action Inhibits GI motility via anticholinergic effects Therapeutic Class Antidiarrheal Pharmacologic Class Anticholinergic Nursing Considerations • Contraindicated with angle-closure glaucoma, dehydration • Structurally related to opioids so use caution with patients that have allergies to opioids • May cause constipation, tachycardia, dizziness, ileus • Monitor liver function as the medication is excreted by the liver • Ensure that client is taking medication as prescribed and not double dosing

Every person on this planet has had some sort of order in their life instilled in them since they were a child. In fact, if you went through high school, then college, and then grad school you have really had nothing but structure, order, and pattern your whole life. There was never any room for randomness and unstructured time to create. This has influenced how you parent, run your household, structure your faith, and ultimately run your business. To that effect this could be what is truly holding your back from happiness and joy. People just want to be happy! When was the last time to you played? Do you let “play” seep into your work? This Episode is BA and we change the entire lens you view your life, work, relationships, and faith through!

Hey HBs! Meredith is back to recap Rosaline Palmer Takes the Cake by Alexis Hall! Structurally, it's one of the most interesting romance novels I've read. Plus, it comes with Alexis Hall's signature wit AND WE LOVED IT! Did it elicit some completely rational text messages from Mel to Meredith? No. This text required hard muppet texting; that's what good books do! They make you care. [Insert sheepish giggles here]Bonus Content: soliciting chickens, GBBO background, bi-phobia, Meredith and Mel are co-presidents of the Jennifer Hallet fan club, HOO IZ HEEROH?!?, and so much more!DANGEROUS TIDES will be launching soon, so make sure to follow the project page! That will ensure you're notified when we hit GOOOOO! Make sure to check out Mel's new podcast Bonkers Romance! Subscribe! Rate! Review! Tell all your friends :)Get more content on PATREON!!Sign up for our Newsletter! MERCH! Teepublic, Chicaloo Kate, RedbubbleInstagram: @heavingbosomsTwitter: @heaving_bosomsMentioned in this episode:Follow the Dangerous Tides Prelaunch page!!We're going to be launching the Kickstarter for our pirates series SOON and you don't want to miss it! In addition to special edition books and swag, there are super limited items AND bonus rewards if you back early! This will email you when we launch and not before!Dangerous Tides Prelaunch

Join this podcast's Facebook Group: The Dental Marketer SocietyJoin my newsletter: https://thedentalmarketer.lpages.co/newsletter/[Click here to leave a review on iTunes]‍‍Guest: Simon ChardPractice Name: Rothley Lodge Dental PracticeCheck out Simon's Media:‍Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/drsimonchard/‍‍Other Mentions and Links:PearlBACD - British Academy of Cosmetic DentistryAACD - American Academy of Cosmetic DentistryPärlaTime MagazineInterview about appearance on Dragon's DenCereciTeroBufferLaterThe Daily Stoic - Ryan Holiday and Stephen HanselmanHow to Invest - David RubensteinThe Almanack of Naval RavikantUnreasonable Hospitality - Will Guidara ‍Host: Michael Arias‍Website: The Dental Marketer Join my newsletter: https://thedentalmarketer.lpages.co/newsletter/‍Join this podcast's Facebook Group: The Dental Marketer Society‍‍My Key Takeaways:It's not about what you want to post on social media, it's about what your viewers want!Getting outside your comfort zone is the only way to grow. Keep this in mind when second guessing that next step!Success is never earned through constant succeeding, it is always achieved through failure instead. Failure is an important part of the process!If you're enjoying the journey along the way, then embrace your hard work and ambition!If your only driving factor is financial, the passion will eventually fade. Be sure to work towards your other fulfilling values and goals.There is a season of life where saying YES to all opportunities can help you grow your network. Don't forget about the season of saying NO to opportunities to prioritize your values though.‍Please don't forget to share with us on Instagram when you are listening to the podcast AND if you are really wanting to show us love, then please leave a 5 star review on iTunes! [Click here to leave a review on iTunes]‍p.s. Some links are affiliate links, which means that if you choose to make a purchase, I will earn a commission. This commission comes at no additional cost to you. Please understand that we have experience with these products/ company, and I recommend them because they are helpful and useful, not because of the small commissions we make if you decide to buy something. Please do not spend any money unless you feel you need them or that they will help you with your goals.‍Our Sponsors & Their Exclusive Deals:‍‍‍‍Dandy | The Fully Digital, US-based Dental Lab‍For a completely FREE 3Shape Trios 3 scanner & $250 in lab credit click here: meetdandy.com/affiliate/tdm !‍Thank you for supporting the podcast by checking out our sponsors!‍Episode Transcript (Auto-Generated - Please Excuse Errors)Michael: simon, how's it going? Very well, mate. Thank you for having me. No, man, thank you for being on. We truly appreciate it. If you don't mind me asking, where are you Simon: located? I live in Sur, so just south of London in the, in the suburbs.Michael: Okay. Did Simon: you grow up there or no? Yes. Yeah. Yeah. I've grown up in this area, so it's, it's a nice place to live. It's. Countryside, but it's about a half an hour commute into the center of London, so it's a nice mix of the, the, the busyness of the city alongside some nice outdoor lifestyle. Nice. Michael: If you don't mind me also asking, like you, where you're at right now, is that your home or is that your Simon: practice?Yeah, it's my home. It's my my dining. Michael: Guys, man, he's in a mansion. This is it. This is the west wings of his . This, I'm excited to have you on Simon. If you can tell us a little bit about your background. Tell us a little bit about your past, your present, how'd you get to where you Simon: are today? Yeah, sure. I mean, I'll start at the beginning, I guess.So I'm, I'm from a, a family dentist, both my parents and dentists. My parents bought their clinic together six months before I was born. That's the same practice that my wife Megan and I bought from them back in 2017. So there's a sort of generational lineage of dentists there. I always joked that there was a, a, a mirror and probe in the cutlery draw when we were growing up.So it's yeah, sort of in the blood. So that was my path. I actually went and did a different degree before going into dentistry. So I did a, a degree in pharmacology, so in drugs first, and then did my training at Kings College London, in dentist. Basically as soon as I foundry, I found my passion.I found what I feel like I was meant to do. I never looked back. From that point. I was very lucky at Kings to have a, a variety of fantastic professors who sort of pushed you to compete. Even from an undergraduate sort of student level. And that meant that by the time I qualified as a dentist, I already had a pretty solid cv pretty solid sort of background of awards and prizes and experience, which meant that I could sort of hit the ground running when I qualified, Michael: man.And then you already had your own practice and then right now I know you got your hands in a lot of things. . I also follow Kyle. He's been on the podcast before Stanley, right? Talking about Pearl and everything. And so I saw you and I was like, they're out here doing a lot of moves, man. Like, so what do you got going on right now?Simon: Yeah, I mean, it's, it's a busy, busy year. So yeah, obviously I run my own practice. It's a. Seven surgery practice with about 30 staff members now. So that's going very well. That's growing, growing rapidly. Primarily driven just through sort of organic social media and organic word of mouth. Not a lot of paid ads currently.I'm the president of the British Academy of Cosmetic Dentistry, so that's the, the biggest academy of dentist in the uk. Similar obviously to the A A C D in the. . So I'm the youngest ever president of that academy. And I also own a uh, a co-owner. Plastic free next generation oral care brand called Parlor which is in all the major supermarkets and, and stores across the uk. yeah, is doing very well. And we've got our whole, whole team running that alongside it. And then recently, this last month, I won um, I was, yeah, voted. The dentist who's had the most impact in dentistry in the UK in 22 by Dentistry Magazine. So that was quite a nice award to win as well. Yeah.Michael: How does that work? do you, I guess, like submit or they just like randomly pick, you're just like, oh, I'm it, you just see your face on the thing or? Well, Simon: it, it, it wasn't even a, it's the first time they've done it. They've based it off the sort of Time Magazine person of the year award. Mm-hmm. , and.Uh, Because it didn't exist. There was nothing to apply for. They as a, as a committee of sort of industry experts, came together and, and analyzed all of the high profile individuals in the market. And very fortunately, and they're very grateful to say that they, they chose me, which is, yeah, it's nice yeah.I mean, running all these things, Cool. And it, and oftentimes it is really cool cause you get to win awards like that. And we've had some amazing experiences with with Parlor. Like we were on the dragons Den, which is Shark Tank in the uk. So we were on national TV with that. So it has, its amazing sort of really peaking exciting moments, but it's also, a lot of stress and spinning the plates can sometimes all go a bit crazy, especially as I've got two young kids as well.Throw that in the mix and it all gets a little bit saucy sometimes. . Michael: Ah, man. So you got a family too, real quick. Simon, how Simon: old are you? I'm 36. Okay, Michael: man. Yeah, you got a lot of, you know what I mean, like everything going on. And we'll dive into that in a little bit uh, later on in the episode. But if we could rewind a little bit, you did a degree in pharmacology.Why did you go that route? Simon: Initially. Strangely enough, I think I, I listened to my peers at school and there was this one kid who said, oh, you don't wanna do what your parents did. That you, that's really lame. For some reason, that stuck in my head. So I just always discounted dentistry as something I wanted to do.And then actually when I got to my first university to study in pharmacology, coincidentally, my, my roommate was training to be a dentist. And I saw the community that he had and the practicality of being able to use your hands alongside, science, which I've, I've always been sort of fairly good at.I sort of saw in that first term at university that really dentistry is what I should be doing. Thankfully in the UK you can complete your degree and then miss out the first year of dental school. Cause a lot of it's just sort of basic science. . And so basically I did a fast track into dentistry from there, which, which worked out really well.And, basically I did a lot of my partying in the first degree and then really got my head down and got to work on my dental degree, which for me worked, worked really well. Michael: Yeah. Okay, nice. So it's interesting you, did your parents by any chance say like, nah, Simon, like, I don't care what your friend said, like, trust me, we, this is a good setup right here or something?Or, or were they Yeah. Do what you. Simon: No, they were children. I mean, they, they, they never wanted to push me or my, my siblings into anything we didn't wanna do. So from that point of view um, they, they sort of let me make my own decision. I also think, to be honest, that I, if I had gone against, at that first degree level, my grades probably wouldn't have been good enough.I didn't, I wasn't parti. ambitious or academically talented at school? Cause I didn't really have any, any focus or any drive. And actually it was, it was when I'd started at dental school, that was the first time that really sort of felt that I found my groove and and I actually started excelling and yeah, won of these awards and came top clinically in the year.And so, I, I, I'm not a sort of serial, a serially successful. I wasn't at that stage a seriously successful individual. Whereas now, sort of I'm hyper ambitious and, and driven, which is yeah. Very different than I was as a teenager. Michael: Yeah. Yeah. Cause I, I feel like that's um, once you found, right, this is what I wanna do, you went all in right.And became ambitious. So kind of like right. , you're like, I'm, I'm, I'm finding things that I want to do and I'm going all in. Right. And it's, it's making you, what's the downside of that? If, if you can let us know, like, Hey man, it's great to go all in, but then this could happen Simon: if there is a downside. Yeah, no, there's definitely a downside.I mean, I, funnily enough, my wife and I were talking about this on the phone as, as I was driving home from work that I just, I, I can't switch off. So there's always The next idea, the next business opportunity the next product that I'm creating with Parler, the next thing I wanna do to grow the practice.It's a constant state of progression and flux. And, my view on that is as long as you're enjoying the journey, then keep on driving and be as ambitious and shoot for the stars as as big as you wanna go. If you are grinding out and hating the journey, then sometimes enough is enough and you, you.You need to be grateful whilst being ambitious. And I think it's finding that balance between gratitude and ambition that's quite difficult for, for of type A driven entrepreneurial individuals. But I think for the, for the younger clinicians listening, I have this type, I, I don't think I made this up.I think I heard it somewhere, but let's just say for this, for this call, I made it up. Was that I said yes to everything in my twentie. And said no to everything in my thirties. And for me, that worked quite well because when I first qualified, I said yes to every opportunity that was presented to me, whether it be a speaking gig, doing lecturing going to an event where I didn't know anyone.It was really awkward and I really didn't wanna be there because I wasn't a naturally sociable individual at that stage. Whatever it was I just said, yes, yes, yes, yes. And what that meant was I just created this incredible network. I met so many people many of whom became future mentors or future employers because I worked in, in multiple different practices before coming in full-time to my own clinic.And so by saying yes to everything, I've got this incredibly broad experience. However, if you let that go of forever, then it becomes unmanageable and, and you. Especially when you have kids. So in my thirties, I've now tailored it right in and I'm very, very selective with what I say yes to. But I can only do that because I've got the I've built it from that solid foundation of a network of guys from industry as well as sort of high profile dentists and, and people sort of who were the movers and shakers of, of our industry, I guess.Michael: Gotcha. Okay. So you mentioned about the journey. , you gotta enjoy the journey. Um, Make sure you, you love it. How do you know Simon, when you're just in a road bump in the journey and you're like, oh my God, this is a headache. I hate this. Or how do you know? It's like, I'm not enjoying it anymore at this point.Simon: Hmm. That's a difficult question. I mean, I, I, I think you've gotta know why you're doing things and. What your ambition really is. If, if you're just doing it for money, for example, then that will fade and you will, it will, you will lose your passion for it. If, if the only passion there is the financial recommendation, then I think it's very easy to get jaded then to lose, to lose that.It's a personal thing at the end of the day. I mean, some people love dentistry, some people hate dentistry. Every job has its pros and cons. And I think we're very fortunate to actually do something that is genuinely meaningful for our patients and that we get a lot of satisfaction from.But clearly it has a lot of a lot of negatives as well, because there's still such. Massive issue with mental health within the profession. So I think it's really important that, that people don't just keep on driving because they think they should love it. Maybe taking some time away. So actually create a bit of open head space and then coming back to it and seeing if you actually want to go back or if you wanna move away from it.Michael: Hmm. I like that. Creating open that space, right? Like have you had to do that where you're like, oh man, I need to take some time, sit here and really think. , am I gonna drop this or am I gonna keep this? Simon: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, obviously I have, the beauty of dentistry is that you can. Toggle up and toggle down the number of days that you're working quite easily.So I've done that. Clinically, I only work three days a week clinically. Now, the other two days I'm working on sort of more entrepreneurial endeavors. And so I've found a, a lovely balance. Certainly if I was still working six days a week clinically now, I don't think I would've been enjoying my job half as much as I am doing now.. And even saying that sometimes it goes too far. I'm, I've got inbound emails coming in all the time, and if I'm in a three hour surgery placing implants, I'll come out and have 30 emails in my inbox. That's quite stressful, . and quite difficult to manage. So, I think it's important to create space the way I manage that.As I, as I try to travel as much as I can. Do, I try and block out times in my every month where. I'm just gonna be at home. I'm not gonna be doing any social stuff. And I'm just gonna be chilling with my family. And then around every six to eight weeks, I'll make sure that I'm going away somewhere to travel.Try to do a sort of as much of a digital detox as I can do. I'm obviously fairly active on social media. It's how I've built up a lot of my profile, and that's how I still get a lot of my patience. But social media can be obviously, A dopamine overload and, and very much or consuming if you don't know how to control it.So switching that off, controlling that so it doesn't control you. I think all those things were super important. Michael: Hmm. Where was the point in your life where you realized you had to do that? Where you're like, man, this is it. The I need a something, right. Something different. sometimes it can happen where it. You're, like you said, you're talking with your, your spouse, right? And then the af they're like, man, you're always doing this. You're, you're on social media, you're doing this. And then you realize like, I need that dopamine in the morning. I'm waking up at night.I'm going to sleep. I need to check it in the restroom. You know, all this stuff. So it's kind of like, when did you realize I'm going down the wrong, wrong path.Simon: I think, I mean, I, I think I, I dunno if I've really cracked that yet, to be honest. I think I still have that dopamine addiction and I think I just constantly want to be moving forward. And when you have the capability to look at your Shopify account, On your direct to consumer business to see how many sales you've had, look at your emails to see if you've landed that new retailer listing.Look on your Invisalign like doctor site to plan your cases. Like there's, there's so much now that you can do all the time remotely. I think certainly for the last five years where I've been running the startup, been a, on the board of the b, c, d and running my own practice. . During that whole time, I've really tried to, to control that inbound.And for example, I've not gone on TikTok intentionally because I just don't want any more, any more things to check and I know, cause I'm, I'm fully, I'm sort of all over the latest things in social media and I can see the monumental power of TikTok. And I'm not saying that other people shouldn't go on it, but I've grown my business on Instagram.It's been very successful for me. But, I've kind of take, pulled back a bit from where I was in that, like, like five years ago. I been posting every single day grid, post, post, post stories, every, like, just going like really hard on it. Whereas now I think, I feel like I've, I've, I've got to a certain level of achievements so I don't need to continuously prove myself.And so, I've tried to pull back from it a bit more than I have done previously and really focus on just delivering sort of a few nuggets here and there in essence. Hmm. I like Michael: that. Where does that come from, where you feel like you need to continuously or what you felt like you've had to prove yourself?Simon: I don't know, to be honest. I think I've, I think I've been like that since, since dental. . I think uh, I mean I have, like anyone had, a reasonable amount, amount of form in my childhood. My sister had cancer when she was seven, which was a, a major, sort of seminal moment in my childhood. Mm-hmm. , um, and obviously in hers.Thankfully she survived and, and it's, it's healthy and well and has, has two kids of her own now. But she was in hospital for six months. It was, it was a serious, incident. , for the whole family. And I think for me, age nine at that time, obviously I had in essence lost my parents as they were sort of looking after my sister.I think that there's probably some, there's probably some, internal sort of desire to be seen if I'm gonna. Heavily myself to the max here. but um, I think the end entrepreneurialism and business is a passion of mine. And so I be as successful as I can do, as I can. And I derive my satisfaction from, from being a man and, and working in our industry.Really. Yeah, Michael: man, that's, sorry about your sister man. Like that's really um, light bulb a a light bulb moment. You know what I mean? For, I think myself, for a lot of us, like in essence when the parents' attention goes, you know what I mean? To like a one full kid. I never thought about that Simon until you mentioned it.Like mm-hmm. You kind of do lose a bit of your, you know what I mean? Like your, the attention you, not a little bit, a lot of, bit of your, the attention from your parents and, and that does stem where you're like, I need to, I need to work harder now for their attention. . And so you feel like that's where it kind of, from that point on and still, and then obviously magnified way more in dental.Simon: I'm sure, I'm sure it's played a part, but I mean, I think the thing is with success, when you, when you taste a bit of success, you won that success again, right? Mm-hmm. . Um, For example, I won best young dentist in the country in 2015, and that was an amazing award to win. But then I was like, right, that it's like gold medal syndrome, isn't it?It's just you, you, you get that big peak of dopamine and then you have the reverse crashed the same way, and then you want to go again to get up to that same level. And that's why I say it's so important that you're enjoying the journey, because if you are only striving for that one moment of success, it's so fleeting that actually it's, it's probably not worth it.Whereas if you're enjoying the journey along the way, as I do with entrepreneurship, I mean building a brand, building a profile, building businesses, that's just play for me. That's fun. And so, I don't look at that as being like, oh God, I've gotta listen to this podcast, or I've gotta come on this podcast with Michael tonight.It's, I, I, I just look at that as fun because I like to, I like to meet new people. I like to talk about experiences and, and all the the various components that make up running a business in, in 2023. Yeah. Michael: No, man. Yeah, I appreciate that. When it comes to the moments of success that you were talking, What would you feel so far is not worth it when it comes to striving for, and maybe you see it on social media where people are like, yeah, you gotta do your own startup.You're gonna love it, and maybe you wanna let them know like, no, not, not everybody's meant for this or not everybody's meant for that kind Simon: of thing. I mean, I definitely agree that not everyone's meant to be a startup entrepreneur. It's incredibly. , especially building a, I think you call them CPG brands in the us right?We call 'em Met fm cg, but consumer package goods like Parlor. Mm-hmm. like toothpaste. It's such a competitive market and you're constantly fighting uphill. You're fighting against the biggest brands in the world. You can leave her and part of Pro and Gamble and Colgate. These guys have got some serious money behind them.And so you constantly feel like you're running up a uphill treadmill. And the girl posts are always changing, especially doing it through a pandemic and, and now going into a recession. So it is, it is a rollercoaster emotion. I think if you don't have a solid support structure around you, then it's not surprising to see so many startup founders have mental health issues.I couldn't not do it. Like I just have this fire inside me where I, I, I can't not execute on my ideas, and I have a million ideas every single day. And so I had to actually execute on one of them. And I'm really proud with Parla that actually we, we've, we've done it. I mean, we've landed on, we're in over a thousand stores in the uk.We've got tens of thousands of subscribers online. So even if we fail from now, . I feel like we've achieved what we set out to do. And I've sort of actually made a difference with this idea where, I mean, the reason we created the brand is that 20 billion toothpaste tubes made a single use plastic end up in landfill or the ocean every year.That every tube of toothpaste you never use still exists somewhere on the planet. That's why we created a brand. So it's a plastic. Solution. And a zero waste solution as well. So I feel like I've made that positive impact as well as creating what is a really cool brand and also disrupting an industry that is in dire need of disruption.Gotcha. Wow, I Michael: didn't know that. So Parlo, what, why that name? Simon: So parlor means Pearl in Swedish. And we felt that the Pearl was the perfect representation of what we were striving to do as a brand. Obviously we're designed by a dentist pearl, white smile and then also the pearl of the ocean.We created the brand really to protect the ocean from single use plastic. That's my happy place. That's where I derive the most joy is when I'm on the ocean, in the ocean by the ocean. And to see the, the level of devastation of single use. Across the world. I mean, anywhere I travel, I see microplastics all over the beach.I just don't wanna see that get worse for, for my kids. And so Parla was, was the, my thing that I could do to actually, to actually make a difference in. I mean, it's dentistry small, but toothpaste. Everyone in the world uses toothpaste in these single use plastic tubes. So it is a big way that we can make a difference as dentists.And so, yeah, hopefully that'll be part of my legacy. Michael: Yeah, man, that's nice. That's beautiful. And so I kind of wanna rewind a little bit. You talked about your, your practice, right? The, the one you currently have, 30 staff members. Yeah, you have 30 staff , and so there's nine operatories, right? 7, 7, 7. I'm sorry, seven operatories, 30 staff members.Do you, let me ask you the positions of all them, you don't have to explain all their single positions or anything like that, but how does that look? 30 staff members, Simon: Structurally? Oh no, you're asking, I mean, I guess we've got about.10 to 12 clinicians but obviously part-time. And then around four or five hygienists. About five receptionists, again, part-time. Two practice managers and to treatment coordinators. . obviously those figures probably don down up to 30, but you get a rough idea on, on what the split's like.Michael: Gotcha. And so you solely run it, or you, and, and your wife is like the COO or how, Simon: how does that look? My wife's a dentist as well, and but yeah, she is, she's best basically the uh, the COO because, obviously with everything else that I'm running , I'm more of the ideas guy where youth more operationally working alongside our practice management team to make sure everything runs, runs smoothly.Okay, Michael: that's good. And so you mentioned you grew it, or actually, lemme ask you, how many new patients are you getting a month if you Simon: Roughly No. Uh, About 50 Michael: 50. Okay. And so organically you grew this through social media, right? They people are finding you through social. Simon: Yeah, so I mean, it's a nice it's a nice setup in the practice where obviously my parents have been there for 35 years.They grew it from a one surgery to a five surgery practice, and then we grew it from a five surgery to a seven surgery practice with a an additional scanning room and, and training center as well. And so it has this nice base of a local reputation, uh, with a large patient. . But then on top of that, obviously I've brought in the specialists, the technology, the cerec, the iro the, the focus on cosmetic and implant dentistry.So, I, I've brought in all these additional additional offerings, which means that we can service all of those existing patients with additional dentistry. But then on top of that, yes, I mean, . I mean, my following on Instagram is nothing, nothing major. It's only about 27,000. But I've been very successful in certain instances with working with influencers with them still paying for treatment but only re receiving a, a discount in exchange for some activity.And that's led to a lot of organic growth of patient demand. I think also because I was on Instagram, Ly very early on, just because photography's a passion of mine anyway, I sort of leveraged on, on most of the alpha of Instagram, if that makes sense. Mm-hmm. , um, before now, em, it's incredibly saturated.Now. Everyone's doing Invisalign whitening and bonding on Instagram, certainly in the, in the uk. But it still drives patience and, and still I have patients coming from around the UK around the. Flying in to, to have the dentistry because they like, my specific style of dentistry, which I, which I, I was, I was talking about this um, on another podcast recently, I think about the fact that the thing that I love about social media with dentistry is that actually by the style of dentistry that you do, you attract a certain clientele of patience.So my style is very much A natural aesthetic. So my patients in general want to have a beautiful white smile, but they don't want anyone to know they've had their teeth done. Whereas there's certain areas of the country and certain dentists who, who carry out more sort of flay dentistry where there's less texture and more flat in size ledges and less translucency, and they, those patients almost want everyone to know they've had their teeth done, if that makes sense.Mm-hmm. as sort of like, A show. And so, I don't really get any of those, that second group of patients, I, I only get the patients and they, they always say to me, I've come and see you because I like, I like the style of dance. You do. I like how natural it looks, et cetera, et cetera. And so that's just a really nice self-selecting vehicle for my patients wear.They already know me from a personality point of view. They've, they've seen my profile online and they've, they've seen me talking to the camera, et cetera. But then secondly, actually the clinically we're on the same page as well. that point of view, it's worked quite well for me. Michael: So then what can you give us as far as like, advice when it comes to, Because you've seen that, right?Where people are like, man, Simon, I'm trying to grow my Instagram page, and I have like 105 and it's just like, you know, other dentists following me, but I want like my community to follow me, you know? New patients to get new patients from it. What do you recommend we do from like, if you can give us instructions to start from this point and continue to try and grow.Simon: Well, whether or not Instagram or TikTok is the right place to do that, I would probably say TikTok now, given how much more reach you can achieve, after obviously just saying that I'm not on TikTok, so I mean, that's fairly hypocritical, but that is, that is, that is the truth that TikTok is the place that you should be playing in right now.I think the key thing with social media in general is you need to be not thinking about what you want. You wanna be thinking about what the viewer wants. And so when you are producing content, Think about who you are producing that content for, and then create contact content that's gonna give them value for the things that they want.So, . Instead of just putting up a before and after, for example, fine put up a before and after, but then add onto that, right? This is how I did this. These are the steps. This is what's involved. Try and give more behind the scenes, more real stuff. Not, not necessarily reals, even though reals is what you should be doing, but mean more real content as in more behind the.I think the best way to be successful on social media is to be true to who you are as an individual and just be as honest and real as you can be. Because I think people fall into the trap with Instagram density, where they try to just replicate what they've seen has been successful with other individuals, and then all that happens that everyone just starts looking the same and it just gets very, very dull and boring.I think the more you can be yourself and unique to you and your own values and your own personality, the the more you'll cut. . So I think by following those two things of thinking about what value you're providing to the consumer and to the viewer, and also just being true to who you are as an individual, that's the way that really should be thinking about the content.And then you just need to be doing it at scale. I think people are too sort of blase with, with how they how they produce their content. When I was doing it properly, I was having someone in every single. For a whole day to generate that content. And it was, it was a serious operation and we were looking at what was working, what trends were working, what, what was successful, and then putting our own spin on it.And, and as I say, trying to add value to the consumer with with the way we delivered it. And, and that worked very well for me. And I think if you were to implement that on, and I've seen this with lots of young guys in, in the uk, they've done, they've been incredibly successful with. If you can mass produce and batch produce that content, then it can be really efficient and you don't have to think about doing it every single day.You can, preload your posts using Buffer or later or something like that, and just have them running and then you, you can just sort of set it and forget it. . I say that, but then you really need to be engaging and communicating with your community if you want to grow it. So you, after it's posted, you probably do need to be on there.Liking, commenting and communicating. Michael: Gotcha. Do you still do that right now? Do, are you like having somebody once a month come in or No. Gotcha. Simon: Okay. You right now, I'm, I'm very lazy now. , Michael: you ain't like you're doing a lot, man. You know, that's what I'm thinking. Like, I feel like you're doing so much that you can kind of like take pictures, you know what I mean?And it's just on your Simon: own. Share it. Yeah. I mean, I think I, like, as I say, I, it's probably not the right way to be because. I think this is like the classic pathway of like Blockbuster and Kodak where they become very successful and then they die because they haven't adapted with the times. I'm certainly doing that at the moment, but I think at the same time, you've gotta just, you've gotta look at the realities of your own life.And for me at the moment, the most important thing for me is I've got two young kids and I wanna be spending as many hours of the day in the week as I can do with. . And so something has to give and I have to be respectful of my time and, and not push myself because I know, just because I know I can do something doesn't mean that I should do it.For example, I know that I would smash on TikTok if I really went through it properly and sort of producing content at scale, but I also know that's gonna take me a day, a day, a month, and I literally don't have a day a month. my diary is I have a pa, a personal assistant, and. It's literally blocked out by the minute.I mean, there's no, there's no room anywhere . And so that doesn't mean that I, I neglect my, my health or my family or anything like that. It just means I've blocked out my gym session every day. I've blocked out a therapy session. I've blocked out meditation. I blocked out family time where I'm not on my phone.But if I'm gonna add anything else into. Then something has to come out and at the moment there's nothing really need to come out to add that into. Michael: Yeah, man. Simon, you've, you're very aware, right? Like of your time, you're very aware of like your very specific, why, how did that come to be? Simon: Well, I think it comes back to learning where to say.and being, being respectful of your time and actually knowing what your val, what your life values are. I mean, my, as I say, my, my main focus is that my family is everything. I will never get this time back when my kids are, at this age. And once it's gone, it's gone. And I, I've heard so many successful individuals say that their only regret is that they didn't have enough, they didn't spend enough time with their kids when they were.So that's my main focus with regards to my personal life. With regards to my professional life. I'm very, very clear now on what my values are with regards to that as well, which is that I only want to be doing stuff that I enjoy and that I feel is meaningful and I only wanna do it with people that I love.And so that's how I make my decisions on. on how I move forward is that I, I, I don't, I have to be very, very careful with what I say yes to. And if it doesn't help me with one of those things, if I'm not doing it with people that I enjoy spending time with, if I don't enjoy it, or if I it's not allowing me to progress with something that's meaningful in my life, then I'll just say no to that opportunity.So, for example, if a brand that I'm not particularly keen on, gets in touch with me and asks me to do, An Instagram post and they're gonna pay me a thousand pounds, I'm, I'm not gonna do it because it's gonna take time outta my day. I, I don't, it doesn't, it doesn't fulfill my, my ambitions. Do you know what I mean?Even though it's easy money in, in many ways. Michael: that's the thing. Do you think this kind of can apply at any stage in our lives or, you know how, like at the beginning you said, when we're grinding and we're, we're, we're trying to say yes to a lot of things. Do you think it can't apply there?Because if you say no to, you know what I mean? Like what I don't want to do, then you're, you're not growing kind of thing or, Simon: or what are your thoughts? I think it's gotta be personal to you. I think you've gotta, you've gotta, I think awareness and self objectivity is the really important thing. And you've gotta, you've gotta know what your diary looks like and then tailor your attitudes to, where you're at in your career.For sure. You wanna push yourself outside of your comfort zone as much as possible. And I still do that now because I know that that's where the growth, that's where the growth area is. I mean, God, I've learned so much in the last four years on, on through running par on the, talking with retailers and margins and marketing and.To LTV ratio for my performance ads. I mean, there's just, there's so much stuff that I've learned in the last four years that is way outside of my company zone that I've had to just think on my feet. Like pitching to five dragons on, on Livet, on on live recorded TV for two and a half hours. I mean, that's pretty far outside my comfort zone.I've learned an incredible amount from it, and it's, it's created an incredible opportunity. So I'm definitely not saying that you shouldn't say yes to as much as possible when you're in your early stages, but I think it's just when you have lots of time pressures and lots of opportunities, you have to learn when to start tapering that in because there's only 24 hours in the day and seven days in the week, and so you can only do so much if that makes.No, Michael: that makes a ton of sense. Ton of sense. Okay. So one of the last questions I kind of wanted to ask you. One of 'em right, is throughout this time, your wife is a dentist, right? She's also operations, like the whole, she, I mean, she does all right a lot, right? When it comes to running the practice, family, everything.Yeah. And you, same thing doing a lot. Visionary when it comes to your personal life. I don't know. Do you guys ever agree like, all right, at this time we're not gonna talk about. work-wise, none of that stuff? Or is it more like, yeah, you know what, let's whatever. If it comes up, it comes up. If it doesn't, it doesn't.Or is it like, don't ever stop enough kind of thing with each other? Simon: You might get a different answer here from me and from Megan, but . No, I think, I think one, well, one time that we're very, very careful with is, is the time just before we go to bed. So we always make sure that we're not like dropping like.Oh, this, this hygienist just handed in a notice, like just before we go to bed or something. Or like, like not cause sleep is so important to us, to us both. And we try and uh, sort of flow down the brain in that pre in that free bedtime. So I like that that section is, is certainly sort of demarcated as, as not being appropriate for dental chats.But in general, I think that Megs and I are both very honest, open people, and if we're worrying about something, then we will just talk about it. I mean, I very much wear my hat on my sleeve. if there's something wrong with me, then everyone around me unfortunately will know about it. And if I'm happy about something, everyone will know about it.And so I think we have a very open and honest relationship where we are. We're comfortable talking about whatever. I don't think either of. Get, it is not being necessary to have that conversation to say, these are the times when we talk about this. These are the times when we don't. Because firstly, that's not the reality of owning a a small business.Things come up normally when you are on holiday, um, and you have to deal with them sometimes. So that is just the reality of running your own business. That's, that's what you sign up for. But also we enjoy it. And it's, it's, it's part of, it's, it's part of the fabric of our relationship. I mean, it's certainly.The majority of our relationship, but we've been together now for, for 13, 14 years. And it's, it's always been, obviously we, we grad, we, I met her on the first day of university. We graduated together. Dentistry's always been a part of our relationship, and so, uh, and now businesses as well. And it's just, it's nice to learn new things together and to grow together.So I think I, we look at it very much as a positive. Michael: Nice. You met her on the first day of Univers. You're like, this is, you're it. You're the one that, that that's how it went. Pretty much. Yeah. , that's, and she was like, yeah, I guess. Yeah, you too. Yeah. . So that's good, man. That, that makes me happy, Simon. And then last question is, throughout this process, let's talk about from the moment I guess you decided to open, not open this practice, but like take over your parents to like today, right?What's been some. Your biggest struggles, fails, or Simon: pitfalls?I mean, the biggest struggle was the pandemic, to be honest with you. Certainly that day when I had to call my team and tell them all we were posing, I mean, that was a, that was a very emotional day. and, uh, yeah, a lot of tears, a lot of anxiety around, when we were gonna open again, we. Terrible information for Mark governing Embodi, very poorly disseminated.I mean, we found out, we were going back to work on the BBC with, with everyone else, and they said Dentists will be open, or healthcare providers, we open in a week. We're like, is that us? Are we, are we, are we back in action here? , like we had no, no protocols. Like it was just, it was awful. It was a constant battlefield.But, I'm a very emotional person, so I, I, I feel that the ups and the downs very viscerally, but I am a huge advocate that the hard times are what you need to go through to get to, to get to successful parts of your life. And . Yeah, I think certainly. I mean, whenever something bad happens in any of our businesses, we're always just like, we're just gonna, we'll put it in the book, we'll put it in the book one day when we write a book of our, of our story.And so I think that's a good way to look at it, is that nobody who's ever run a business, ever run their own business, has ever succeeded their way to success. They've always failed their way, success. And that is just what happens. You've gotta, you've gotta build that resilience and you've gotta just understand.Your favorite associate's gonna hand in their notice or that patient who, you've tried your best for is gonna complain and, and sue you or whatever. These things are just the reality of life. Life is not fair. Life is not just, but you have to build that resilience and. I sort of push through.I, I read a lot of stoic philosophy, so I read I dunno if you're familiar with the Daily Stoic book. um, from Ryan Holiday, but I read that every morning uh, as part of my morning routine, first thing. yeah, I love stoic philosophy for looking, for looking at uh, a lens through which to look at the hard times in life because we're all gonna have them, right?Yeah, yeah, that's Michael: true. And you gotta build that. Resilience, like you said, when it comes to reading, I guess, is that the one that you're on right now, like as far as, or is that what you do in the morning for like, and then you read other things? Simon: Yeah, I mean, I, I, I only read the, the idea with that book is that you just read one quote and you sort of let, let that, sink in and, and process it as opposed to sort of rattling through.So I've been reading that for I think three years every. So I read one quote every morning. It's literally the first thing I do. And even travel with it. It goes everywhere with me. So yeah, so that, that I wouldn't really class as reading. The book I'm reading right now is called How to Invest by, I think his name's Daniel Rubenstein.Which yeah, it's quite interesting. I'm quite interested in sort of angel investing and that sort of thing as potentially part of. My ongoing career obviously with my sort of deep understanding of building a startup now and looking for ways to sort of diversify my, my portfolio moving forward.That's quite a, an interesting area for me. So yeah, that's a book that that I'm reading currently. And then the book that I always recommend to everyone, which I just think is so good is uh, the Almanac of Nav. . It's just an amazing book. It's just such a well-rounded view on life. I think everyone should read it.It's, it's so powerful. Michael: Yeah. Yeah. You're right. That I just read, finished it. Uh, I wanna say December. Really good book. Yeah. Oh, Simon: really? Yeah. It's, it's Wick. Good. it's the only book that I, apart from Daily Stewart that I've read more than once. Cause I just wanted to get that knowledge again.Michael: Yeah. When you reread it, like, for example, the, the Daily s. , do you feel like where was this? I didn't see this last year. Do you feel like that? Yeah. Simon: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, you not in concentration mode reading book right out and you'll different. But Steve reminding, like, especially with the daily Stoic, it's so easy to let whatever the current.Storm is to distract you, but I think it's good to go back to those sort of classic philosophies. Michael: Yeah, nice man. You need to start a book club and we'll join and, you know, kinda get your suggestions, but Awesome. Simon, I truly appreciate you coming on. If anybody has any questions or concerns or they just wanna reach out to you, how can they Simon: find you?Um, So Instagram's probably the best place. My Instagram handles at Dr. Simon Char. And then Yeah, that's probably it. Really just, just send me a D on Instagram and normally on there uh, a little bit too much. Awesome. Michael: Awesome. So guys, that's gonna be in the show notes below, and Simon, thank you for being with us.It was a pleasure and we'll hear from you soon. Cheers.‍

On today's episode, Dr. Jaime interviews Medical Doctor and Metabolic Health Coach, Dr. Elie Jarrouge. "I used to be proud of my good health and athletic tendency growing up. Fast foreward many years, while busy with medical training, I wasn't paying attention to my own health. Weight slowly creeped up and within 8 years, I had gained 30 pounds and my waist grew 4 inches. My blood pressure started to run high, I was starting to become pre-diabetic, and my energy level plummeted. I developed text book Metabolic syndrome and I was only 28 years old. I thought I knew the answer. I just had to eat less and move more. Great! I did it… Except nothing changed. One day at age 30, I was putting pants on and my back gave out. I was in excruciating pain for a week, slept on hard floor and it took me 3 weeks to walk straight again. I didn't think much of it at the time, except bad luck. Then, for the following year, my lower back kept giving out every 2-3 months, debilitating me, and in between episodes, I suffered with chronic lower back pain. Structurally there was nothing wrong with my spine. I just could not understand it. Every attempt to exercise inevitably led to another flare up.As a hospitalist since 2013, I treat patients admitted to the hospital for a myriad of conditions. It was high acuity and fast paced. When I first started, I saw patients show up very ill, treat them and see them improve dramatically. I thought I was fixing problems. Life was good, right? I couldn't be more wrong. Over time, I realized that it was all band-aid. Many of my patients kept getting readmitted with the same problems and deteriorated slowly overtime. I wasn't fixing anything. I just managed their diseases. It dawned on me that I couldn't even help myself heal!I dismissed any dietary advice from friends, ignoring the fact that I didn't get any nutrition education in medical school. I thought it was easy for them to say since they were fit. Then one day, after my 5th or 6th severe back strain episode, it became clear that I had to do something different. Feeling desperate, I didn't see a reason to resist lifestyle changes any longer. I started reading about nutrition starting with the Whole 30 program, which is basically paleo with focus on the psychology of food. A month later I was down 15 lbs. I repeated it a couple of months later and I was down another 5 lbs. In between, I kept a semi clean diet and felt amazing. My back pain was 80% better, my energy was up and my waist size dropped 4 inches. I started working out and felt stronger. I was so excited about my progress that I went down the rabbit hole of nutrition and health. I read many books, listened to endless podcasts and eventually I decided to take my journey up a notch and dived into the ketogenic diet in January 2018. I did it for 3 months straight. I dropped another 10 lbs (30 lbs total), lost another inch off my waist and never felt better in my life. My back was 100% better. Since then, I continue to tweak how and what I eat and added intermittent fasting. I haven't had a flare up of my back pain in over 2  years. My high blood pressure resolved, I am no longer pre-diabetic and my weight is down to where I was when I was 17 years old."

Feb 9, 2023 – The era of cheap money, cheap energy, and cheap labor is over. Structurally, this means we are set up for a prolonged period of higher-than-average inflation with generally higher commodity prices as supplies remain constrained...

Author and Associate Professor Jana Matthews (Rollins) joins the queens to discuss her new book which dissects the sexual politics of fraternities and sororities on college campuses. The queens uncover the structural issues contributing to pick-me dynamics and what young women can do to take back their power.    You can check out her book here: The Benefits of Friends: Inside the Complicated World of Today's Sororities and Fraternities https://www.amazon.com/Benefits-Friends-Complicated-Sororities-Fraternities/dp/1469669641#customerReviews   Join our newsletter: https://www.thefemaledatingstrategy.com FDS War Room on the Queen Patreon Tier: https://www.patreon.com/TheFemaleDatingStrategy Paypal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/femdatstrat   Follow us! Weekly Bonus Content/Merch/Discord on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/TheFemaleDatingStrategy Paypal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/femdatstrat Website:https://www.thefemaledatingstrategy.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/femdatstrat @femdatstrat Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_thefemaledatingstrategy/  @_thefemaledatingstrategy Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/The-Female-Dating-Strategy-109118567480771