Showing posts with label change. Show all posts
Showing posts with label change. Show all posts
08 March 2011
Getting Started
The most difficult part of any project is getting started. It can often seem like you're taking on the world, like a boulder the size of a house is before you, like there's a meatball the size of your head waiting on the dinner plate in front of you with only a fork beside it.But the reality is somewhat different. You have to step out of your house (and your comfort zone) to get started. The boulder may be a useful piece of the puzzle. And meatballs are often fork-tender, so what's the point of a knife. Change is good. Starting something new is easy because you don't have to worry about repeating yourself. There is no "rut" to get out of because you haven't been that way before and, if you're fortunate, you won't go this way again. So put on the new shoes, get a few blisters but get on your way. Otherwise, you'd just sitting around in the muck waiting for someone to come by and dust you off.
23 August 2009
"Fresh Veggies! Get Your Vegetables Here!"
Stop me before I get annoyed at naivete, er, I mean "change" in action again.
Mr. "Change," our rookie-year President, has said that he'd like to see a farmer's market set up outside the White House.
"One of the things we're trying to figure out is, can we get a little farmers market set up outside the White House. That is a win-win situation. It gives suddenly D.C. more access to good, fresh food, but it also is this enormous potential revenue maker for local farmers in the area."
Okay first and foremost, DC doesn't have a shortage of farmers' markets. There are somewhere between 50 and 70 (you try counting all these tiny little markers) between the southern most tip of Washington Metro area and Pennsylvania's state line. That map doesn't take into account the numbers of little sort of jitney roadside stands and actual farm locations where one can buy fresh produce.
Second, since the most likely position would be either the blocked off block at 1600 Pennsylvania (or the open Washington Mall area in what is technically the front of the White House), has our President considered the seemingly universally acknowledged favorite device of large-scale destruction known as the car bomb? How does he imagine those vegetables are going to get in to fill the tents and stalls that he wants put up? In his vast experience as an American, has he never seen a farm truck roll up? Perhaps he should consider that not all bushels of corn (or potatos) are what they seem.
Second, since the most likely position would be either the blocked off block at 1600 Pennsylvania (or the open Washington Mall area in what is technically the front of the White House), has our President considered the seemingly universally acknowledged favorite device of large-scale destruction known as the car bomb? How does he imagine those vegetables are going to get in to fill the tents and stalls that he wants put up? In his vast experience as an American, has he never seen a farm truck roll up? Perhaps he should consider that not all bushels of corn (or potatos) are what they seem. Third, consider also this statement:
"Getting local farmers connected to school districts: That would benefit the farmers delivering fresh produce. Right now they don’t have the distribution mechanism set up."
Let me just submit that perhaps delivering the vegetables to the area near the White House is perhaps not the best point of destination. Since we only know of two little girls who are in need of vegetables (and theirs aren't sourced on a street-corner) perhaps this is an ill-conceived idea that President Obama has popped off the top of his head. Er, another one.
12 July 2009
You've Come A Long Way, Baby
Given any thought to the future of your job lately? What about the balance of power in your relationship? Any consideration at all to the girl in the Honda Civics next to you on I-Wherever?
You might want to. I read this Washington Post article today and I have to admit that I sorta liked it. I used to be neighbors with Claire Shipman who now is senior national correspondent for "Good Morning America" and reading her thoughts on the future of our global economy was interesting. I liked that she listed Russian examples because I know she used to be based there as a reporter for CNN and probably retains strong contacts and excellent insights. And I am, afterall, a woman.
The article discusses the shift of economic power on a world-wide basis. In short, the end of economic power being held by an all-male culture of good old boys who block economic progress for women. While the Washington Post article also links to this lengthier article in Foreign Policy Magazine, I'm guessing a lot of the reason that Claire and her writing partner, Katty Kay of the BBC wrote it was to hype their newly released book, "Womenomics" available from Harper Collins Books. The article (and the book, I assume) details Shipman and Kay's theorems of how government stimulus projects in the past, ie The New Deal and every road and infrastructure project ever devised, have been devised to prop up the male-dominated economy and keep women out of the workplace. Hmmmmmm. Interesting premise. Except that now, great minds are starting to think alike. Financial statisticians are churning out research showing that companies with more women in upper management report consistently higher corporate earnings. Democracy is getting the message, too. Norway requires 40% of any corporation's board to be female. Iceland, after its last economic meltdown, elected a woman to head its government. Same for Lithuania. The Vilnius newspaper headline proclaimed, “Lithuania has decided: The country is to be saved by a woman.” I bet Hilary is choking on this. I bet Bill is even more angry. So, it's an interesting concept to read about. And whether you agree with "Womenomics" or not, Shipman and Kay are putting it out there. And shaking it.
You might want to. I read this Washington Post article today and I have to admit that I sorta liked it. I used to be neighbors with Claire Shipman who now is senior national correspondent for "Good Morning America" and reading her thoughts on the future of our global economy was interesting. I liked that she listed Russian examples because I know she used to be based there as a reporter for CNN and probably retains strong contacts and excellent insights. And I am, afterall, a woman.
The article discusses the shift of economic power on a world-wide basis. In short, the end of economic power being held by an all-male culture of good old boys who block economic progress for women. While the Washington Post article also links to this lengthier article in Foreign Policy Magazine, I'm guessing a lot of the reason that Claire and her writing partner, Katty Kay of the BBC wrote it was to hype their newly released book, "Womenomics" available from Harper Collins Books. The article (and the book, I assume) details Shipman and Kay's theorems of how government stimulus projects in the past, ie The New Deal and every road and infrastructure project ever devised, have been devised to prop up the male-dominated economy and keep women out of the workplace. Hmmmmmm. Interesting premise. Except that now, great minds are starting to think alike. Financial statisticians are churning out research showing that companies with more women in upper management report consistently higher corporate earnings. Democracy is getting the message, too. Norway requires 40% of any corporation's board to be female. Iceland, after its last economic meltdown, elected a woman to head its government. Same for Lithuania. The Vilnius newspaper headline proclaimed, “Lithuania has decided: The country is to be saved by a woman.” I bet Hilary is choking on this. I bet Bill is even more angry. So, it's an interesting concept to read about. And whether you agree with "Womenomics" or not, Shipman and Kay are putting it out there. And shaking it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)