Young People Around The World Can Save Democracy

Posted on December 21, 2022 by Guest Contribution

“Young people around the world can save democracy — but they need our help” by Evelyn Namakula Mayanja, Carleton University

A photograph recently circulated on social media purportedly shows two Chinese professors in Shanghai standing between a squad of police officers and students protesting the government’s zero-COVID policies.

That morning, when I met my class for the course I teach on political repression, a Chinese student remarked:

“Since the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre, Chinese students never dared to demand democracy, respect for human rights, freedom of speech, freedom to assemble and freedom of the press. Something new is happening. I wish we had brave adults like the two professors supporting us to fight for democracy and for a better future.”

Where are those brave adults supporting the struggle of young people to revive democracy? How is my professorial role can I support students from repressive regimes who are risking it all to achieve democracy? What kind of support should be offered to young people fighting these battles in 2023 — and well beyond?democracy

Democracy Under Threat

In every region of the world, liberal democracy is threatened. In 2018, Michael J. Abramowitz, president of the global Freedom House think tank, noted that democracy is in crisis. He wrote:

“Political rights and civil liberties around the world deteriorated to their lowest point in more than a decade in 2017, extending a period characterized by emboldened autocratic, beleaguered democracies, and the United States’ withdrawal from its leadership role in the global struggle for human freedom.”

According to the Swedish research institute V-Dem’s 2022 report, democracies are deteriorating and tilting into dictatorships at the fastest rate in 50 years.

The organization notes that only about 13 percent of the global population lives in liberal democracies, while Freedom House’s approximation is 20 percent.

There are thought to be three phases of democratic decline over the last 100 years. One was in the 1920s, another in the 1960s and now we’re in what some scholars have dubbed “a third wave of autocratization,” arguing:

“Once in power, unscrupulous leaders can sometimes manipulate the political environment to their own benefit, making it more likely that they will be victorious in future contests. By winning those elections, they gain the stamp of democratic legitimacy — even for actions that ultimately undermine democratic norms.”

Authoritarian regimes are subtly entrenching their power domestically and abroad by rejecting popular demands for good governance, adherence to the rule of law, institutional independence, human rights, and freedoms.

Some of the nations with veto power at the United Nations, most notably China and Russia, are turning out to be domestic and international aggressors. They violate human rights with impunity because they control global political systems that could otherwise prosecute them.

While for a long time the United States was the beacon of democracy, American democracy is now in danger.

In many countries, democracy is now limited to casting votes in elections that are often rigged. Technology has complicated the political landscape and is used to fix votes and put civilians under surveillance.democracy

Youth Fight For Democracy Around The World

For centuries, politics and economics have largely been the purview of elite aging men and a few women. These elites have often assumed young people are nonpolitical and incapable of civic and political engagement.

But youth are fighting for democracy around the world, in countries that include China, Russia, Belarus, Rwanda, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, India, Hungary, Turkey, Uganda, Sudan, Iran, Chile, Peru, Palestine, Myanmar, Malaysia, Thailand, Tunisia, Kuwait, Egypt, Nigeria, Ghana, the Democratic Republic of Congo and the United States, to name just a few.

Unfortunately, they lack support. The absence is most keenly felt and conspicuous in underdeveloped countries where political regimes use resources and institutional violence via police forces and military to incarcerate, torture and even kill young protesters.

Nonetheless, by using social media to mobilize nationwide protests, as well as music and dance in some places, young people are resisting state repression and decrying human rights violations.

Supporting The Fight

Democracy has long been regarded as the political system that transformed the world. Today, we urgently need healthy democracies to resolve pressing domestic and global issues, including wars, poverty, food insecurity, and climate change.

Nelson Mandela, in his iconic autobiography Long Walk to Freedom, noted how in African democracy, community chiefs listened to everyone until they came to a consensus, unlike some western democracies, where the winners take all.

Today, it’s important to engage in that kind of dialogue with young people around the world to determine appropriate forms of democracy. Any form of governance should be rooted in local cultures.

Many youths lack political experience and knowledge. They need to be guided and empowered with civic and political education. But we must also listen to them.

And that’s not all. The tech giants that manipulate their platforms and violate the privacy of their users in ways that help dictators must be regulated.

Judicial and financial penalties must be imposed on any officials who take their countries backward and into autocracy, and we must demand a commitment to the rule of law by all nations.

If we don’t support the youth’s struggle for democracy, there’s little chance of a peaceful, secure, sustainably developed, and environmentally friendly future.The Conversation

Credits

Evelyn Namakula Mayanja, Assistant Professor, Interdisciplinary Studies, Carleton University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Share our story!
Posted in Life | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Rewarding “Good” Companies—How the Economy for the Common Good Wants to Change the World

Posted on December 19, 2022 by Guest Contribution

The Economy for the Common Good (ECG) is an alternative to the existing economic model of capitalism, including the pursuit of profit and constant growth. The ultimate goal is a good life for all people. The idea: the state supports companies that produce in an environmentally friendly way and pay their employees fairly. Through favorable loans and tax breaks, they receive a clear advantage and can thus operate even more successfully. Piece by piece, this could lead to a sustainable and socially just economic system.

Let’s imagine that a small café, a local carpentry shop, and a family bakery are suddenly more successful than the branches of large global corporations. The reason: the state supports them with favorable loans, investment aid, and tax breaks because they operate more sustainably, socially, and fairly. Corporations, on the other hand, have to pay higher taxes because they exploit their employees and destroy nature. This deliberately gives small businesses a clear advantage over corporations and enables them to assert themselves on the market with their fair and sustainable products.

A utopia? From today’s perspective, yes. But in the sense of the Economy for the Common Good, this is what our economic reality could look like.

Economy for the Common Good Explained: What is it?

The Economy for the Common Good (ECG) is an alternative to the existing economic model of capitalism. The primary goal is a good life for all people and not the maximum enrichment of a few company owners. It is an ethical market economy based on basic human values. The focus is on human dignity, solidarity and justice, ecological sustainability, transparency, and co-determination. Values are also shared by almost all democratic constitutions.

ONE OF THE STRENGTHS OF THE ECONOMY FOR THE COMMON GOOD IS THAT IT LINKS TO CORE ELEMENTS OF THE CAPITALIST MARKET ECONOMY: CORPORATIONS, CREDIT, TRADE, MARKETS, PROPERTY. HOWEVER, IT TRANSFORMS THESE ELEMENTS BY CONSISTENTLY PLACING THEM AT THE SERVICE OF OVERARCHING VALUES—HUMAN DIGNITY, SOLIDARITY, JUSTICE, SUSTAINABILITY, DEMOCRACY. IT IS THEREFORE TRANSFORMATION AND EVOLUTION, NOT “DISRUPTION” OR “SYSTEM CHANGE.” (CHRISTIAN FELBER, FOUNDER OF THE ECONOMY FOR THE COMMON GOOD)

These overarching values are only a proposal. The concept envisages that they will be (further) developed jointly in a democratic process.

Three Pillars of Sustainability

The Economy for the Common Good understands sustainability as being, not only the resource-conserving use of nature but also respect for human dignity as well as free and successful economic activity as part of an ethical market economy.

    • Upholding human dignity
    • Respectful treatment of nature
    • Entrepreneurial freedom and success within the framework of an ethical market economy

ECG leads to more sustainability, as it promotes those companies that operate in an environmentally friendly and socially responsible manner. Through loans, investments, and tax breaks, they gain a clear advantage over others and thus prevail with their products on the market.

Following this simple principle, it would simply no longer be worthwhile to disregard human dignity, destroy the environment or drive inequality in society for the profit of a few. Step by step, this could lead to an economic system in which careful use of our finite resources pays off—while reckless and exploitative behavior does not.

Many people are now looking for meaningful work. Sustainability is particularly important—especially among the younger generation. This is another advantage for companies that focus on the common good: many of their employees feel significantly more satisfied as they see their work as making a contribution to the common good.

The “common good balance sheet” measures exactly how much a company contributes to the common good.

Common Good Economy Goals: Democratize the Economy

Through a new economic order and a fundamentally new way of thinking about business, the common good economy aims to achieve a good life for all. This is its ultimate goal. Everything is to be discussed anew and decided democratically:

    • Should a CEO really earn 300 times as much as an employee? Or wouldn’t 10 times be fairer? Of course, there should be more pay for more responsibility. But at the moment there is a lack of proportionality. Because such high salary differences endanger social cohesion.
    • Shouldn’t toxic sprays be banned altogether, even if a global corporation is resisting one with all its might? After all, every single person bears the health consequences. Wouldn’t it be fairer if they were the ones to decide?
    • Eight billionaires own more than the poorer half of the world’s population. Is that still fair? Or do we need a wealth cap, higher inheritance taxes, and a fairer distribution of property?
    • How high should the minimum wage be? Is 12 euros per hour (Germany) enough? Is it okay that there is none at all in Austria?

The Economy for the Common Good wants to put control over our future back into the hands of democracy. An accumulation of capital, money, and consequently power should only be possible to a limited extent. Where this limit lies, all people should decide together.

The Common Good Balance Sheet: This Is How It Is Assessed

    • Raw materials used are they mined in an environmentally friendly way?
    • Are there human rights violations in the supply chains?
    • Does the customer benefit take precedence over the company’s own sales aspirations?
    • Are all those involved paid fairly?
    • Is transparency ensured in dealings with employees?

One of these companies is the sporting goods manufacturer Vaude. Vaude pays attention to the highest ecological standards in textile production. With the Common Good balance sheet, the company can measure the resulting contribution to the common good.

The Common Good Matrix

"The

The Common Good Balance Sheet is based on the Common Good Matrix and rates companies in 20 categories with + or – points. Plus points are awarded, for example, for resource-conserving and environmentally friendly business practices, fair wages, and social working conditions. Minus points, on the other hand, are awarded for environmentally harmful behavior or disregard for human rights. The more plus points a company has, the more it contributes to the common good.

The Economy of the Common Good advocates that such a balance sheet would be mandatory for companies and, above all, would have legal and economic consequences. Companies with a high score would receive certain advantages, such as lower taxes, and more favorable investments, or would be given preference in the awarding of public contracts. This would create concrete incentives to operate and produce in a sustainable and socially responsible manner.

Around 1,000 companies in 35 countries are already drawing up a common good balance sheet and have decided to pursue social goals beyond mere profit maximization. These include well-known companies such as Vaude, Sonnentor, Windkraft Simonsfeld, the Trumer brewery, and the Freistadt brewery community.

Pros & Cons of the Economy of Common Good: Advantages and Disadvantages for Society

The basic values of the common good economy (human dignity, solidarity, justice, sustainability, and democracy) result in the following benefits:

    • Sustainability: By committing to sustainable and resource-conserving production, we save our planet.
    • Transparency: The common good balance sheet makes the behavior of companies comprehensible and transparent for society.
    • Solidarity and justice: Social cohesion and solidarity with one another grow as inequalities and injustices are reduced.
    • Equality of opportunity: A wealth cap (for legal entities: e.g., a limited liability company, stock corporations, or trade associations) reduces the differences between rich and poor. This leads to greater equality of opportunity. This is because wealth and private ownership contribute significantly to economic, social, and also political inequality in a society. Today, the rule is: those who are rich get richer. Those who are poor remain poor.
    • More democracy: In Austria, 90 percent want a new economic order—in Germany, the figure is 88 percent (Bertelsmann Foundation survey, 2012). People want change, but in the current model, they have no voice. It’s quite different in the common good economy: here, they would vote together on every aspect of the economy. Everything would be up for debate: Is it fair, for example, for a manager to earn 300 times that of a regular employee? Wouldn’t 10 times be enough?
    • Less lobbying: Lobbying and corporate influence on political decisions would simply no longer be possible, as the common good would be the ultimate goal. As a result, global corporations and extremely wealthy individuals would lose the basis of their power and influence.
    • Human dignity: No more exploitation, as the economic consequences (more taxes and duties) would make it no longer worthwhile.

Disadvantages would arise mainly for those who exploit the current situation and profit from the fact that people and the environment are exploited, that political influence is possible, and that there are no real consequences for it (yet).

The Economy for the Common Good: Examples

Worldwide, there are nearly 60 practicing cities and communities, 175 active regional groups, and 200 universities committed to the common good economy. These people have chosen it because they no longer want to watch large corporations destroy the environment and erode democracy. They want to see meaning in their work again, and working together for a better society gives them just that. The reasons and the examples for their commitment are numerous and could not be more different, but they all have one thing in common: dissatisfaction with the current situation and the will to change something.

Faced with the climate crisis, the gap between rich and poor, and the crisis of confidence in politics and democracy, transforming the current economic system towards a common good economy could defuse, if not solve, many global problems.

Constraints will result from this. However, these restrictions will not curtail our freedom but will set in motion a democratic process that can make all our lives better.

Credits

Article provided: by Ingo Geiger – December 12, 2022

Share our story!
Posted in Features, Life | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

How This Year’s Christmas Ads Are Navigating The Cost Of Living Crisis

Posted on December 14, 2022 by Guest Contribution

“How this year’s Christmas ads are navigating the cost of living crisis” by Karen Middleton, University of Portsmouth

Christmas adverts have become a festive and highly competitive tradition. They are critiqued and compared, enjoyed and endured, and (retailers hope) viewed by millions of potential customers.

The amount retailers spend on Christmas marketing campaigns is significant, but not surprising. The season is a pivotal time in the retail calendar, with November and December accounting for more than 20% of the year’s revenue.

This means that every year, advertisers are under huge pressure to deliver something new and eye-catching that will pull on consumers’ heartstrings – and make them spend money.

A key element of this is one of the classic goals of advertising: creating an emotional response. Research shows that advertising created around emotional appeals, especially during holidays and on special occasions, is considered more likable and more memorable. And crucially, it drives consumer decision-making.

Christmas Ads During Crisis Economy

During the seasonal period retailers often move away from the usual, year-round focus on cost savings in favor of generating a “Christmassy” feeling to encourage shoppers. But doing all of this in a cost-of-living crisis is perhaps an even greater challenge when energy bills and food prices are putting a serious squeeze on household spending. So how are the UK’s big companies faring so far in 2022?

One media ranking this season places the advert from Boots in first place with its glitzy modern fairy tale, aimed at rejuvenating their beauty and personal care range. A woman finds a magical pair of glasses which, when worn, have the power to transform everyday wintry scenes into dazzling moments – and reveal what people are secretly wishing for.

On Christmas Day though, the glasses no longer work, because (spoiler alert) she has managed to supply everything her friends and family need by buying them presents from the high street chemist.

Ranked second is supermarket Waitrose, which tells the story of a year in the lives of British farmers, and feels reminiscent of key workers keeping the country going through the pandemic. It uses the popular advertising device of featuring real people to create resonance with the audience. At the same time, it is attempting to create appeal by boasting of the quality and provenance of the food it sells.

The ad got my vote though, is placed third: department store John Lewis’s tale of a man trying, failing, and trying again to learn to skateboard as he prepares to become a foster parent.

Feel Good Moment

The familiar moral trope of persistence unfolds over 90 seconds as consumers’ responses of sympathy and empathy are deployed to stimulate a positive response. At the end of the story, there’s an even bigger feel-good moment, when it is revealed that John Lewis has developed a partnership with charities working with young people in care.

This kind of emotional engagement – even at the expense of showcasing products altogether – is at the heart of most advertising campaigns this Christmas. Businesses seem acutely aware that at a time of global emergencies and economic uncertainty, they must work even harder to remain relevant and trustworthy to advertising-savvy consumers.

After all, research suggests that consumers are more likely to be drawn to brands that share, or are aligned with, their own values and goals. John Lewis’ Christmas campaign gets the tone right by using the investment in expensive media space to raise awareness of the societal problem of children in care.

When we buy products or even enjoy an advertising campaign, we develop a sense of meaning about our place in the world. So when we engage and connect (spend money) with brands that we trust, it gives us a sense of well-being.

Socially Responsible Shopping

Beyond Christmas, this kind of relationship can be useful where consumers respond to broader issues, such as how we treat the environment. For although the majority of consumers describe themselves as being worried about climate change, they do not always feel able to act on such concerns when they buy things.

There are many factors that may prevent people from buying sustainable products, from quality concerns to peer perceptions, and value for money. There are also hidden social stereotypes that characterize social consciousness and environmentalism as “unmanly”, stopping men from seeking out eco-friendly products.

But evidence suggests that one solution is for brands to normalize sustainability and social inclusion by putting relevant, meaningful issues front and center of their advertising campaigns. Having a “brand purpose” related to social responsibility is no longer just for the likes of well-established eco brands like Patagonia or Tom’s Shoes.

Budweiser for example has recently established a partnership with a personal safety app designed to help people get home safely after a night out. Ikea has made moves towards greater sustainability with an initiative that allows customers to sell their old furniture back to the company to be resold.

These companies, like John Lewis with its charity partnership, have understood the moral argument for brands to do social good. But they have also understood the solid business case which goes with it.

Consumers want to trust companies to make a positive difference, as well as give them products they desire and value. Providing an authentic brand purpose allows customers to feel socially responsible while they tick off the items on their shopping lists.The Conversation

Credits

Karen Middleton, Senior Lecturer in Marketing and Advertising, University of Portsmouth

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Share our story!
Posted in Lifestyle | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

What Legacy Will Vladimir Putin Leave Russia?

Posted on December 12, 2022 by Guest Contribution

“What legacy will Vladimir Putin leave Russia?” by Matthew Sussex, Australian National University

“Nobody listened to Russia,” Vladimir Putin intoned in 2018, as he unveiled the poisonous fruit of Russia’s military modernisation project: a nuclear-powered cruise missile; a hypersonic glider; and a nuclear warhead atop a drone submarine, designed to flood coastal cities with tsunamis. “Well, listen up now.”

Whether it’s new weapons, threatening nuclear war, or illegally invading sovereign states, Putin has a habit of seeking attention. In fact, it’s been his most predictable strategic reflex. Combining a thirst for great power status with a primitive nativism that has crossed over into xenophobia, Putin has consistently sought to compel others to respect Russia, though having them fear it will also apparently do.

But what sort of Russia will Putin leave behind for the millions of citizens at whose expense he has enriched himself, both personally and politically?

As his disastrous war in Ukraine demonstrates, Putin’s achievements embody anything but greatness. He will leave Russia geopolitically weakened, economically little more than a Chinese vassal, its people viewed with suspicion and hostility. Russia will have little more than a hefty nuclear arsenal and a disregard for the laws of war to coerce its neighbours.

For those reasons, future Russian historians are likely to view Putin with revulsion, not respect.

Putin’s Progress

It’s worth recalling that Putin first came to power in 2000 on a wave of popular relief, not euphoria. For years, Russians had faced unappealing leadership choices: an increasingly ill and gaffe-prone Boris Yeltsin; the Communist Party’s dour Gennady Zyuganov; and Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the neofascist “clown prince” of Russian politics.

Unsurprisingly, Russians stoically but unenthusiastically voted for Yeltsin as president, but repeatedly elected rogues’ galleries of communists and nationalists (often called reds and browns) to Russia’s emasculated parliament as symbols of their discontent.

Enter Putin, who was plucked from obscurity by Yeltsin to become prime minister in August 1999. He soon became acting president when Yeltsin unexpectedly resigned on December 31.

In Putin, a population disillusioned with democracy and capitalism – which it blamed for economic shocks, rampant inflation and corruption, the war in Chechnya, a decline in life expectancy and a shrinking population – saw the promise of relative youth. With that also came a sense of optimism that there was an alternative future for Russia than slow sclerosis, a return to the bad old days of the USSR, or muscular fascism.

At first, Putin made few commitments: a vague notion of restoring Russia’s great power status, and a promise to clean up corruption.

Early in his tenure, pundits at home and abroad speculated about Putin the man. Did his shadowy KGB past hint at a preference for control, and ultimately dictatorship? Or did his role as chief of staff to the reformist mayor of St Petersburg, Anatoly Sobchak, suggest a democrat in disguise?

Of course, any doubts about Putin’s character have long since been expunged, save for a small number of his ardent Western supporters.

Placating Putin Has Emboldened Him

Yet it is worth recalling that the West has not just given Putin the benefit of the doubt on numerous occasions, but actively promoted him as a potential ally. Meeting Putin in June 2001, George W. Bush apparently “looked into his soul” and saw a trustworthy man. Tony Blair pushed hard (with Putin’s firm backing) for a new Russia-North Atlantic Council in 2002 to strengthen ties between Moscow and NATO members.

After those relationships soured over the war in Iraq, Putin progressively repressed domestic freedoms with formal legislation and black PR, moulded the media into a propaganda arm, imprisoned oligarchs, embarked on gas wars against Ukraine, renationalised the energy industry, foreshadowed his current ultranationalism at the 2007 Munich Security Conference, launched the five-day war against Georgia, and threatened the West with nuclear annihilation.

Even then, Barak Obama still attempted to “reset” relations with the Kremlin in 2009 and 2010, prompting Russians to joke that when you reset a computer you didn’t erase its memory.

Western attempts to socialise Putin should therefore have ended well before Russia’s seizure of Crimea in 2014. Yet the West responded with sanctions packages, reflecting an unwillingness to accept significant risks or costs. It then actively rewarded Putin with the opportunity to further extend Russian energy dominance in Europe – and the strategic leverage that came with it – via the Nordstream gas project.

The shooting down of flight MH17 by proxy Russian forces raised opprobrium, but no retributive justice. Nor did the poisonings of dissidents in Western capitals with fourth-generation chemical weapons, the horrendous conduct of Russian forces in Syria, or the Kremlin’s earnest attempts to polarise Western societies and interfere in their elections.

The dwindling ranks of those who support a softer line on Russia often justify Western behaviour with an odd sense of victor’s guilt, in which they see the West as partly culpable for Russia’s problems.

They are right, although not in the way they might expect. It is not enlarging NATO but placating Putin that has emboldened him to invade a sovereign state in the service of his imperial ambitions and throw Europe’s security order into turmoil.putin

A House Of Cards

Ironically, Putin’s singular capacity to divide has assisted his success in uniting Russia. He recognises that human frailties – fear, mistrust, anger – can be weaponised to generate support and even legitimacy, albeit not one recognisable in pluralist societies.

He set Kremlin clans against one another, elevating and demoting them in games of super presidential sport. He encouraged victimhood by blaming Russia’s woes on moral decay in the West, American imperialism, liberals, “fascists”, Islamic terrorists, the Baltic states and Ukrainians.

He presented Russia’s oligarchs with a deal: they could continue to obscenely enrich themselves on the condition they stay out of politics. All the while he gradually shaped the apparatus of the state and society into a form in which he became the essence of all decisions, and the personification of Russian nationhood.

But, even in an autocracy, that only works provided there’s some good news to report.

For many of Putin’s presidencies, he was able to point to rising standards of living. Yet Russia’s structural inequalities have remained. In 2021, for instance, Russia’s 500 richest people controlled more wealth than the poorest 99.8% of the population.

That wealth is clustered in major cities. Russia’s ethnic minorities, save for local elites, are largely excluded.

Sanctions are also hurting. According to Andrei Illarionov, Putin’s former chief economic adviser, the number of Russians living in poverty will likely triple – to around one-third of the population. And an inability to diversify its economy will make Moscow beholden to Beijing as the main viable provider of capital to fund Russia’s extraction of energy and resources.

There is also no good news from the front lines. A combination of losses and defeats has made it harder to deny the scale of Russia’s military ineptitude. Having decried Ukrainians first as Nazis and then Satanists, Russia’s propagandists are now reduced to calling them ugly.

It is therefore increasingly evident that Putin has succeeded only in creating not a great power but a pre-modern petty state, characterised by fluid fiefdoms. He presides over a decaying and stratified society where wealth can be more precarious than poverty, where failure to intone whatever nonsense pours out of a cynical state media is grounds for suspicion and mistrust, and whose much-vaunted military might have been crippled by his own hubris.

Ultimately, Putin’s bequest to his people is grimness, not greatness. The next generation of Russians will be untrusted and unwanted in many of the world’s most prosperous and welcoming nations. Those who remain will be isolated, increasingly poor, and unable to shape their own destinies.

For all the suffering Putin and his people have inflicted on others, we should not be triumphant about that. On the contrary, we should lament it.The Conversation

Credits

Matthew Sussex, Fellow, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Share our story!
Posted in Life | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

A Person is Only Limited by the Thoughts He Chooses

Posted on December 7, 2022 by Guest Contribution

“A Person is Only Limited by the Thoughts He Chooses” by Daniel N Brown

Many of the circumstances in a person’s life are often produced by him, or herself.

I believe we each create our own luck, whether it be good or bad. Consciously, or unconsciously, we may have at some time or another, produced our own conditions, desirable, or undesirable, either in our bodily health or other circumstances.

Many of these conditions in our lives, whether they be favorable or unfavorable, are largely determined by our beliefs.

You may not accept that. You might be like a lot of people that I have encountered that make excuses. Making excuses and casting blame only make us out to be the victim. There is absolutely no power in playing the part of a victim.

I know we each experience our own individual successes and failures because of our beliefs.

Our beliefs definitely determine the quality of our lives. The amount of money we earn is determined by our beliefs. We each earn the income we do today because of the beliefs we maintain. Simply because it is the amount we have limited ourselves to earn. We possibly could earn five, ten, twenty times, or more if we did not limit ourselves through our beliefs.

Don’t believe that’s true? Surely you know people who earn much more than you who don’t have your education, your skills, or your intelligence. So why do they earn more than you?

Limited? Check Your Beliefs

It is a fact that one’s belief system is ultimately responsible for whether one lives a successful life or not. So, it would do each one of us good to get an understanding of our individual beliefs.

It starts with our thoughts. Our thoughts are what our belief system is composed of, and it is our beliefs that ultimately dictate the outcome of every area of our lives.

Your true beliefs are a sum total of all of your accumulated experiences over the course of your life. They create your expectations for future experiences, and your expectations are really nothing more than your current pattern of thought.

Your thoughts have brought you to where you are right now. But, you are not limited to the life you now live. It has been accepted by you as the best you can do at this moment. Any time you’re ready to go beyond the limitations currently in your life, you’re capable of doing that by choosing different thoughts.

Since there are tremendous reservoirs of potential within you, you are quite capable of doing anything you set your mind to (as long as it’s within God’s will for you). All you must do is decide that you can. And once you have made your mind up that you can do it, it’s amazing how your mind begins to figure out how.

All Things Are Possible

The “how” is the easy part. It’s the “believing” part that trips up most people.

Jesus said in Mark 9:23, “All things are possible to him who believes.”

You are only limited by your beliefs, and it is your thoughts that make up your beliefs. Therefore, it makes sense to choose better thoughts. It’s completely within your control. Choose thoughts that contribute to success and not failure, or a “settle for” attitude.

If you sincerely want to move on with your life, you can if you decide to.

Make a decision today to take full responsibility for where you are. Decide from this moment on that you will choose thoughts that contribute to a life of success and dismiss all thoughts of doubt, fear, and unbelief. God’s Word says, “Whatsoever things are just, honorable, pure, lovely, good report, virtue, and praise, think on these things” (Phil 4:8).

Your thoughts are critical to the quality of your life! Jesus said in Matthew 9:29, “According to your faith, let it be done unto you.”

Credits

Author Bio
Daniel N. Brown is an entrepreneur and teacher of biblical success principles. Get your FREE report entitled, “How to Receive from God” when you sign up for your FREE weekly newsletter. www.SecretPlaceOnline.com

Article Source: http://www.ArticleGeek.com – Free Website Content

 

Share our story!
Posted in Life | Leave a comment

7 Research-Based Resolutions That Will Help Strengthen Your Relationship In The Year Ahead

Posted on December 5, 2022 by Guest Contribution

“7 research-based resolutions that will help strengthen your relationship in the year ahead” by  Gary W. Lewandowski Jr., Monmouth University

The new year is going to be better. It has to be better. Maybe you’re one of the 74% of Americans in one survey who said they planned on hitting the reset button on Jan. 1 and resolving to improve. Those New Year’s resolutions most commonly focus on eating healthier, exercising, losing weight, and being a better person.

Admirable goals, to be sure. But focusing on body and mind neglects something equally important: your romantic relationship. Couples with better marriages report higher well-being, and one study found that having a better romantic relationship not only promoted well-being and better health now but that those benefits extend into the future.

The lesson is clear: Your relationship is important. Resolve to get it right.

Psychological Research Results

That doesn’t mean you have to be perfect. But here are seven resolutions based on recent psychological research that you can make this New Year to help keep your relationship going strong.

1. Set yourself up for success

Adjust your mindset so you see your relationship as a key source of positive experiences. Psychologists like me call this boosting your social approach motivation. Instead of merely trying to avoid relationship problems, those with an approach motivation seek out the positives and use them to help the relationship.

Here’s how: Imagine a conversation with your partner. Having more of an approach to motivation allows you to focus on positive feelings as you talk and to see your partner as more responsive to you. Your partner gets a burst of positivity, too, and in return sees you as more responsive. One partner’s good vibes spill over to the other partner, ultimately benefiting both. After a year when your relationship may have felt unprecedented external strains, laying the foundation to take advantage of any positives is a good place to start.

2. Be optimistic

While things in the past may not have always gone how you wanted, it’s important to be optimistic about the future. But the right kind of optimism matters. A 2020 research study from Krystan Farnish and Lisa Neff found that generally looking on the bright side of life allowed participants to deal with relationship conflict more effectively – as they put it, better able to “shake it off” – than did those who were optimistic specifically about their relationship.

It seems that if people focus all their rosy expectations just on their relationship, it encourages them to anticipate a few negative experiences with their partner. Since that’s unrealistic even in the best relationships, it sets them up for disappointment.research

3. Increase your psychological flexibility

Try to go with the flow. In other words, work on accepting your feelings without being defensive. It’s OK to adjust your behaviors – you don’t always have to do things the way you always have or go the places you’ve always gone. Stop being stubborn and experiment with being flexible.

A 2020 study by Karen Twiselton and colleagues found that when you’re more flexible psychologically, relationship quality is higher, in part because you experience more positive and fewer negative emotions. For example, navigating the yearly challenge of holidays and family traditions is a relationship minefield. However, if both partners back away from a “must do” mentality in favor of a more adaptable approach, relationship harmony will be greater.

4. It’s OK to put ‘me’ before ‘we’

It’s easy for some people to play the self-sacrificing martyr in their romantic relationship. If this sounds like you, try to focus more on yourself. It doesn’t make you a bad person or a bad partner. When you’re psychologically healthy, your partner and your relationship also benefit.

Researchers have identified four main traits that are part of good mental health: openness to feelings, warmth, positive emotions, and straightforwardness. These traits help with being more clear about who you are, feeling better about who you are, expressing greater optimism and less aggression, exploiting others less, and exhibiting less antisocial behavior. You can see how what’s good for you, in this case, would be good for your partner too.

5. Do something for your partner

But it’s not all about you. Putting your partner first some of the time and catering to your partner’s desires is part of being a couple. A 2020 study by Johanna Peetz and colleagues found that prioritizing your partner makes you feel closer to them, increases positive feelings, reduces negative ones, and boosts perceived relationship quality.

In the new year, look for ways to give your partner some wins. Let them get their way from time to time and support them in what they want to do, without exclusively prioritizing your own wants and needs.research

6. Don’t be so hard on yourself

So many New Year’s resolutions focus on body image. Aspirations to eat better and work out often stem from the same goal: a hotter body. Yet, research from Xue Lei shows that you may not really know what your partner wants you to look like.

Women tend to overestimate how thin male partners want them to be. Similarly, men believe that female partner want them to be more muscular than women say they do. It may seem harmless, but in both cases, individuals are more critical and demanding toward themselves, in part based on misreading what a partner truly desires.

7. Stay in touch

I saved the easiest item on the list for last: Touch your partner more. When Cheryl Carmichael and colleagues followed 115 participants over a 10-day period, they found that initiating and receiving touch – things like holding hands, cuddling, and kissing – was associated with both a boost in closeness and relationship quality. Importantly, being touched by your partner has the added benefit of making you feel more understood and validated. Who couldn’t use more of that in the coming year?The Conversation

Credits

Gary W. Lewandowski Jr., Professor of Psychology, Monmouth University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Share our story!
Posted in Lifestyle | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Joe Biden, A Father’s Love And The Legacy Of ‘Daddy Issues’

Posted on November 30, 2022 by Guest Contribution

“Joe Biden, a father’s love and the legacy of ‘daddy issues’ among presidents” by  Chris Lamb, IUPUI

President Joe Biden often talks about the close relationship he had with his father and how this influenced him growing up as “the scrappy kid from Scranton,” Pennsylvania.

Biden was born into wealth, the son of a polo-playing yachtsman. But his father, Joe Biden Sr., lost his job after World War II and abused alcohol, struggling financially for years before getting back on his feet and finding middle-class work selling cars near Wilmington, Delaware.

Sunday, June 19, is Father’s Day. Biden’s relationship with his father contrasts with perhaps every president in the last four decades, who had either absent or distant fathers or abusive or alcoholic fathers or stepfathers.

“The measure of a man is not how often he is knocked down,” Joe Biden Sr. told his son, “but how quickly he gets up.”

His father’s support boosted young Joe’s political career and offered comfort when Joe Jr.‘s wife and daughter were killed in a car crash.

On the 2020 presidential campaign trail, Biden remembered his late father’s belief that “there’s no higher calling for a woman or a man than to be a good mother or a good father.”

My own father died in August 2020 at age 95. He, too, believed in the calling of fatherhood. My father and mother were there for us. They encouraged us to follow our own dreams and not theirs.

This sort of supportive father-child relationship is common – except perhaps in politics.

Former congressional staffer and political journalist Barron YoungSmith once wrote an article for Slate with the headline, “Why Do So Many Politicians Have Daddy Issues?” “American politics,” he wrote, “is overflowing with stories of absent fathers, alcoholic fathers, neglectful fathers.”

Ford, Reagan, Clinton

Gerald Ford’s father, Leslie Lynch King Sr., was an abusive alcoholic. Ford’s mother left King 16 days after the future president was born when her husband threatened her and her infant son with a butcher knife. Ford’s mother married Gerald Rudolff Ford. When he was 22, Ford changed his name from Leslie Lynch King Jr. to Gerald Rudolph Ford.

Jimmy Carter’s father, James Earl Carter Sr., was a high school dropout who encouraged his son to read, a hard worker who urged his son to work hard, and a devoted husband and father. He served in the Georgia Legislature but died during his first term of pancreatic cancer at age 58.

Alcoholics

Unlike other presidents, Jimmy Carter did not have to search for his father, who never left. Carter’s upbringing stood in contrast to both Ford, the man who preceded him in the White House, and Reagan, the one who followed him.

YoungSmith wrote that Ronald Reagan remained haunted by the moment he found “his alcoholic father on the front porch … his hair filled with snow.” Reagan said his father was “drunk, dead to the world.” Reagan, who was then 11, had to drag his father into the house. He spent the rest of his life trying to connect with a man who was not there for him.

Psychologist Robert E. Gilbert said Reagan can be properly understood only as the child of an alcoholic. “Alcoholic parents leave deep marks on their children’s lives; even after those children become adults,” Gilbert said, adding that Reagan was aloof and distant, living in a world of make-believe where he craved approval.

Bill Clinton’s biological father, William Jefferson Blythe Jr., died in a car accident before his son was born. Clinton was raised by a stepfather who was an abusive alcoholic and regularly beat his wife, Clinton’s mother. The beatings stopped after Clinton stood up to his stepfather.

The Bushes

George H.W. Bush experienced the burden of having a great man as a father. His father, Prescott, was a Wall Street investment banker who became a U.S. senator and an influential leader in the Republican Party.

George H.W. moved to Texas to escape his father’s shadow. He then relied on his father’s influential friends to make a fortune in oil before entering politics, where he served as a congressman, ambassador to the United Nations, director of the Central Intelligence Agency, vice president of the United States, and then president.

Two men, one sitting on a desk and the other in a chair, smile and gesture at each other
George W. Bush and George H.W. Bush were only the second father-son pair to both become president.
Eric Draper, White House Photo Office

G.H.W. Bush’s oldest son, George W., responded to the pressures of having a great man as a father by drinking too much before quitting drinking and using his father’s influence to help him become governor of Texas and then U.S. president. YoungSmith said that George W. “spent his entire life, including his presidency, careening between attempts to live up to H.W.’s impossible expectations and efforts to garishly repudiate them.”

Obama and Trump

George W. Bush’s failures as president contributed to the election of Barack Obama, the first Black president. Obama’s parents separated when he was two when his father left Hawaii and returned to his home country of Kenya. The father-son relationship became the basis for his autobiography, “Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance,” where he wrote about the difficulty of not having a father around to help him navigate the issues of being a Black man in a white-dominated country.

father's“It hardly bears recounting that President Obama built his political persona around a search for his absent dad,” YoungSmith said.

Father’s Love Or???

Obama was succeeded as president by Donald Trump, who once said he was “so screwed up because I had a father that pushed me pretty hard.”

Fred Trump Sr., a real estate magnate, bullied and intimidated one son – Fred Jr., who died of alcoholism when he was 42. Fred rejected another son, Donald, sending him off to military school when he was 12. When Donald returned, Fred taught his son to be a “killer” in business, that the ends justified the means and that empathy was a sign of weakness.

“Freddy just wasn’t a killer,” Donald said of his brother.

Mary Trump, a clinical psychologist who was the daughter of Fred Trump Jr., said this lack of empathy prevented her uncle, Donald Trump, from acknowledging human suffering, including the widespread death associated with the coronavirus pandemic.

“Acknowledging the victims of COVID-19 would be to associate himself with their weakness, a trait his father taught him to despise,” Mary Trump wrote.

Biden, by contrast, talked openly on the 2020 campaign trial about his love for his father and about his own grieving over the death of his son, Beau, who died from brain cancer in 2015. In doing so, he made a very human and relatable connection between his own father, himself, and his own approach to fatherhood.

Credits

Chris Lamb, Professor of Journalism, IUPUI

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Share our story!
Posted in Lifestyle | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Is Your Partner A Man-child? No Wonder You Don’t Feel Like Sex

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Guest Contribution

“Is your partner a man-child? No wonder you don’t feel like sex” by Emily Harris, The University of Melbourne and Sari van Anders, Queen’s University, Ontario

A man sits on the couch, watching TV. His partner, a woman, prepares dinner, while mentally ticking off her to-do list. That includes returning her partner’s shirts she’d ordered online for him last week, and booking a GP appointment for their youngest child.

He walks in and asks her “what’s for dinner?”, and then goes back to the TV.

Later that night, he’s surprised she’s not interested in sex.

The people in this scenario are a woman and a man. But it could be a woman and her child. The dynamics are very similar – one person providing instrumental and emotional care, and the other receiving that care while showing little acknowledgement, gratitude or reciprocation.

You’re reading about a man who depends on his partner for everyday tasks that he is actually capable of. Some people call this the “man-child” phenomenon.

Maybe you’ve lived it. Our research shows it’s real.

The Man-child Is Real

The man-child phenomenon (or perceiving a partner as a dependent, as we call it) describes the blurring of roles between a partner and a child.

You may hear women describe their male partners as their “dependent” or one of their children.

When a partner starts to feel like they have a dependent child, it’s not surprising if that affects a woman’s sexual desire for him.

We set out to explore whether this might explain why many women partnered with men report low sexual desire.

Surprisingly, until our study, there were no studies that had tried to directly measure the impact of the man-child phenomenon on women’s sexual desire.

man-child

What We Did

We conducted two studies with more than 1,000 women from around the world, in relationships with men. All our participants had children under the age of 12.

We asked the women to rate their agreement with statements like, “Sometimes I feel as though my partner is like an extra child I need to look after.” We also asked them about the division of household labour in their relationship, and their level of sexual desire for their partner.

We found consistent evidence that:

  • when women performed more household labour than their partner, they were more likely to perceive their partner as dependents (that is, the man-child phenomenon)
  • perceiving a partner as a dependent was associated with lower sexual desire for that partner.

When taken together, you could say women’s partners were taking on an unsexy role – that of a child.

There could be other explanations. For instance, women who perceive their partners as dependents may be more likely to do more around the house. Alternatively, a low desire for a partner may lead to the partner being perceived as a dependent. So we need more research to confirm.

Our research highlights a pretty bleak snapshot of what people’s relationships can involve. And while the man-child phenomenon may not exist for you, it reflects broader gendered inequities in relationships.

Is There A Man-child Equivalent In Same-sex Relationships?

Our research was solely about relationships between women and men, with children. But it would be interesting to explore if the man-child phenomenon exists in same-sex or gender-diverse relationships, and what the impact might be on sexual desire.

One possibility is that, in relationships between two women, men, or non-binary people, household labour is more equitably negotiated. As a result, the mother-child dynamic may be less likely to emerge. But no one has studied that yet.

Another possibility is that one person in the relationship (regardless of gender identity) takes on a more feminine role. This may include more of the mothering, and nurturing labour than their partner(s). If that were the case, we might see the man-child phenomenon in a broader range of relationships. Again, no one has studied this.

Perhaps, anyone could be the “man-child” in their relationship.

What Else Don’t We Know?

Such future research may help explore different types of relationship dynamics more broadly.

This may help us understand what sexual desire might look like in relationships where roles are equitably negotiated, chosen, and renegotiated as needed.

We might learn what happens when household labour is valued like paid labour. Or what happens when both partners support each other and can count on each other for days and life needs?

Women might be less likely to experience their partners as dependents and feel more sexual desire for them. In other words, the closer we are to equity in actively caring for each other, the closer we might be to equity in the capacity for feeling sexual desire with our partner.

Credits

We thank Aki Gormezano, who was a co-author of the paper discussed in this article.The Conversation

Emily Harris, Postdoctoral fellow in psychology, The University of Melbourne and Sari van Anders, Canada 150 Research Chair in Social Neuroendocrinology, Sexuality, & Gender/Sex, Queen’s University, Ontario

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Share our story!
Posted in Lifestyle | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Why Isn’t Anyone Talking About Who Gets Long COVID?

Posted on November 23, 2022 by Guest Contribution

“Why isn’t anyone talking about who gets long COVID?” — Podcast with Lygia Navarro, The Conversation, and Vinita Srivastava, The Conversation

Join us for this episode of Don’t Call Me Resilient as we speak with Margot Gage Witvliet who has insights into long COVID both as a patient and an epidemiologist.

Suffering From Long COVID

If you don’t pay close attention to news about COVID, you might think the pandemic is nearly over. But for the millions of people worldwide suffering from long COVID, that couldn’t be further from the truth.

And the number of those experiencing long-term symptoms keeps growing: At least one in five of us infected with the virus go on to develop long COVID.

The effects of long COVID are staggering. Researchers say it can lead to: blood clots, heart disease, damage to the blood vessels, neurological issues, cognitive impairment, nerve damage, chronic pain, and extreme fatigue.

And there is no treatment for long COVID.

Brown-skinned person with hand on head crying, sitting against a bed.
Recent stats show that 80 percent of long haulers are women.
Claudia Wolff/Unsplash

So why don’t we hear more about long COVID? Why haven’t governments warned people about the risks we face with infection?

It might be that this debilitating disease is largely overlooked because of who gets it: Almost 80 percent of long haulers are women.

Many Are Women of Colour

And in the United States, where our guest on this episode is from, many of those suffering from the prevailing conditions of COVID are women of colour, with Black and Latinx people most likely to get the illness.

Our insightful guest for this conversation on long COVID is Margot Gage Witvliet, assistant professor at Lamar University in Beaumont, Texas. Margot is a social epidemiologist who studies health disparities, including as they relate to long COVID, and has presented her research findings to the United States Health Equity Task Force on COVID-19.

Margot is also a Black woman living with long COVID and has created a support and advocacy group for women of colour.

Listen and Follow

You can listen to or follow Don’t Call Me Resilient on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you listen to your favourite podcasts. We’d love to hear from you, including any ideas for future episodes. Join The Conversation on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok and use #DontCallMeResilient.

Also in The Conversation

Sources

The Long COVID Survival Guide: How to Take Care of Yourself and What Comes Next, Stories and Advice from Twenty Long-Haulers and Experts Edited by Fiona Lowenstein

The Long Haul: Solving the Puzzle of the Pandemic’s Long Haulers and How They Are Changing Healthcare Forever By Ryan Prior

Transcript

For an unedited transcript of this episode, go here.

Don’t Call Me Resilient was produced in partnership with the Journalism Innovation Lab at UBC and with a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.The Conversation

Credits

Lygia Navarro, Associate Producer, Don’t Call Me Resilient, The Conversation and Vinita Srivastava, Host + Producer, Don’t Call Me Resilient | Senior Editor, Culture + Society, The Conversation

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Share our story!
Posted in Life | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Runaway Meetings Are The Top Time Waster At Work

Posted on November 21, 2022 by Guest Contribution

“Runaway Meetings Are The Top Time Waster At Work” by Barbara Bartlein

A new nationwide survey finds that “runaway” meetings are the biggest time waster in the workplace. More than 27 percent of workers polled said meetings are the largest culprit for inefficiency and lack of productivity.

The survey was developed by Office Team, a staffing service specializing in skilled administrative professionals. With responses from 613 men and women, all 18 years or older, the findings are part of the “Office Team Career Challenge,” a project to help administrative professionals advance their careers.

With today’s lean staffing levels, there is increasing pressure on employees to manage their time effectively. Yet, many employers actually sabotage time management with runaway meetings and interruptions. Industry Week calls meetings “the Great White Collar Crime” estimating they waste 37 billion dollars a year.

Some red flags that can indicate a mismanaged meeting:

  • No one is in charge. If the leadership of the meeting isn’t clear, there is a tendency for attendees to waste time, pontificate about their points, and not draw any conclusions.
  • Not starting on time. This practice ‘trains’ employees to come late and expect additional time for socializing.
  • Lack of objectives or agenda. With no clear purpose or agenda to follow, it is easy for the meeting to get off track. Participants may not be clear as to what needs to be discussed or for how long.
  • Lengthy guest list. As a general rule, the more people at a meeting, the less work accomplished. When the list of attendees is extensive, it is often because there is a focus on not excluding anyone, not because each member’s participation is necessary.
  • Just part of the routine. Regularly scheduled meetings can lose value as circumstances and staff change. All routine meetings should be periodically evaluated to determine whether they should be held at all.

meetingsProductive Meetings

To learn how to make meetings more productive, I contacted Chris Clarke-Epstein, CSP, who wrote the book, “I Can’t Take Your Call Right Now, I’m In a Meeting.” The former president of the National Speaker’s Association, she works with clients to help employees learn faster and work better. She offers concrete ideas to make your meetings more effective.

      • Idea #1:  Not every meeting should take place. The right times to schedule a meeting are when conflicts need to be resolved, groups of people need to start working together or information needs to be shared at the same time. Meetings are group activities so they can be effective when a group needs to reach a consensus or rally around an idea or plan.
      • Idea#2: The person who calls the meeting has more to do than reserve the room. They need to also consider other logistical issues, including; time, equipment needed, and food/beverage. They need to take ownership of the content including the preparation of an agenda and distribution of review materials. It is important to have a system to follow up on assignments and monitor the results of the meeting.
      • Idea #3: Meetings are no better than the people attending them. According to the Warton Center for Applied Research, the primary cause of unproductive meetings is not having the right people in attendance. The most effective participants at any meeting are people who have the information you need, people who can make decisions, and people who will implement the decisions.
      • Idea #4: What gets recorded at a meeting has a chance of getting done. All meetings need some form of collective, agreed-upon memory. Without documentation, consensus can quickly evaporate. Meeting notes need to summarize the decisions made, itemize the actions agreed upon, fix accountability, and document the deadlines for all actions.
      • Idea #5: Meetings that end without assignments are doomed to be repeated. Groups are often very good at decision-making and unbelievably poor at implementation. There needs to be an identified person to implement each decision within a specific timeframe. Watch to make certain that everyone is getting some of the responsibilities.
      • Idea #6: Teams that evaluate their meetings have better meetings. Take two or three minutes at the end of each meeting to evaluate the process. Use index cards and answer the following questions: Were the meeting’s objectives met? Was the meeting’s format effective? Was the meeting of value?

True Value

The true value of any meeting is what actually happens after the meeting takes place.

Make sure that individuals are held accountable for meeting results. And remember, if you don’t measure it, it won’t happen.

For more ideas on effective meetings and building productive teams, please visit: www.chrisclarke-epstein.com

Credits

Author Bio
FREE E-MAIL NEWSLETTER. Sign up at www.ThePeoplePro.com. Barbara Bartlein, CSP, is the People Pro. She offers keynotes, training, and products that help you build your business and balance your life. She can be reached at 888-747-9953, or by e-mail at barb@ThePeoplePro.com. Visit her website at www.ThePeoplePro.com.

Article Source: http://www.ArticleGeek.com – Free Website Content

 

Share our story!
Posted in Lifestyle | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment