I’ve always stated that I love watching films and movies, because it gives us a glimpse into what another might be thinking; and as it turns out, they sometimes are thinking of the same things we are. Imagine that!
Watching a movie today brought back a memory of my grandparents, my grandma in particular. The basic phrase was, “Passing things on to our grandchildren, assures us that we’ll live on after we’re gone.”
And that’s how you know you love someone – watching a film, made through someone else’s eyes, that brings a tear to the eye, because of a shared memory.
Yes, I did happen to think of my own grandma, whom passed 2 years ago. But, then I got to thinking, in movies it’s usually based on something material, a possession that’s passed through a multi-generational facet of something tangible. For me, it was ideals and notions, of ethics and morality, instilled in me that will stay a lifetime that I, too, hope to one day pass on …
It’s the little things in life that seem to mean so much … slow things down, or you might just miss out on something grand …
Respect is taken, when respect is given …
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Sunday, June 14, 2009
The Blind Men and the Elephant
The Blind Men and the Elephant – John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887)
“”It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind)
That each by observation
Might satisfy the mind.
The first approached the Elephant
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side
At once began to bawl:
"Bless me, it seems the Elephant
Is very like a wall".
The second, feeling of his tusk,
Cried, "Ho! What have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear".
The third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Then boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake."
The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
"'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right
And all were in the wrong.
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!””
Think about this the next time you meet someone, or someone meets you – interests differ depending on the perspective, yet none are wrong – just different. We are drawn to people for different reasons, and those reasons should be respected as such; yet when someone new comes along, it will be respect for yet another reason.
I think it’s more of an understanding that you will see this person in a different light and must be adjusted as such, rather than “training” someone. Adhere to the reasons that make this person respect you for a reason other than what was given by someone else.
Don’t be blind to the fact that everyone has something to offer …
Respect is taken, when Respect is given …
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
“”It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind)
That each by observation
Might satisfy the mind.
The first approached the Elephant
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side
At once began to bawl:
"Bless me, it seems the Elephant
Is very like a wall".
The second, feeling of his tusk,
Cried, "Ho! What have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear".
The third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Then boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake."
The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
"'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right
And all were in the wrong.
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!””
Think about this the next time you meet someone, or someone meets you – interests differ depending on the perspective, yet none are wrong – just different. We are drawn to people for different reasons, and those reasons should be respected as such; yet when someone new comes along, it will be respect for yet another reason.
I think it’s more of an understanding that you will see this person in a different light and must be adjusted as such, rather than “training” someone. Adhere to the reasons that make this person respect you for a reason other than what was given by someone else.
Don’t be blind to the fact that everyone has something to offer …
Respect is taken, when Respect is given …
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
Friday, March 13, 2009
Starbucks and the Bucks
Starbucks a few times a year makes a percentage donation from sales of certain types of drinks, benefiting some charitable organization – most recently it happened to be Project Red, which helps fight AIDS in Africa. Many people who are against corporations came out to say that if one were to donate directly to the cause itself, that organization would see more of the money.
You know, I'm agreeing with many of the nay-sayers that the donations I make directly to these foundations and charities is more significant than what Starbucks offers - But damn few of us give direct donations. Even a small portion of all the coffee drinks they produce daily is helluva lot more than I'd likely be able to donate myself. This won't stop personal donations, and is just an additional supplemental source of funding. In the current economic recession here in the US, this is a way to provide a great deal of money, even if it is only $.05 at a time, when many larger and smaller donors are cutting back on charitable donations. Not to mention, now we're putting power of even $.05 from perhaps tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of individuals who are unlikely to be donating a nickel or anything else. (And since I belong to a non-profit, I can attest to the underfunding aspect of economic recession.)
This is a BUSINESS though, and they have no requirements on charitable obligations. I say thank you and kudos! Get me a triple tall latte, please!!
A very loose real number would be Starbucks gross profit margin. It’s currently about 19.2%. Taken loosely that means off of your $4 latte, Starbucks makes 77 cents. So even after they give to Project (Red) they still make 72 cents. That’s a cost to them of 6.5% of their gross profit from the sale.
Lets do a little math:
For every 100 latte's they normally sell:
Donation to Project (Red): $5
Starbuck's gross profit (after the donation): $72
Starbuck's lost gross Profit: $5.
Number of additional Latte's they need to sell to make up for the lost $5: 7
So for each 100 latte's they normally sell, they need to sell an additional 7 latte's to have their profit unaffected by the donation.
This also doesn't take into account that Starbucks will get a tax break on their donation.
And they're still a business, so I ask again what local non-corporate entity has the power and resources to DONATE millions every year to various non-profits associated with rejuvenating the lands, people, and culture that grow their precious beans, or house a precious commodity?
You should probably take a look and read over their annual CSR to find out what they actually GIVE away each year to global non-profits (without a mass marketing campaign, I might add), before making lofty folderol. The prices quoted are fair. According to their Fiscal 2008 Q4 report, they were down almost a dollar in stock - a 7 year low - with 2008 seeing a ~$200M loss. Q1 2009 already saw a .50c drop, due to pressure from the housing market.
Not to mention that a few of the Starbucks in my area donate all of the overstocked food products and GIVE it to homeless shelters. And all of the grinds go into my garden every year. And all of the donation boxes that a couple of my stores have MATCH donations.
It would seem then, in the end, the idea of a corporation is much more detrimental to the psyche, than the actual good they can accomplish. True, not all major corporations donate and make good by helping where and how they can, but it’s not fair to those that do (with little understanding) to lump them all together.
Respect is given, when respect is taken ...
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
You know, I'm agreeing with many of the nay-sayers that the donations I make directly to these foundations and charities is more significant than what Starbucks offers - But damn few of us give direct donations. Even a small portion of all the coffee drinks they produce daily is helluva lot more than I'd likely be able to donate myself. This won't stop personal donations, and is just an additional supplemental source of funding. In the current economic recession here in the US, this is a way to provide a great deal of money, even if it is only $.05 at a time, when many larger and smaller donors are cutting back on charitable donations. Not to mention, now we're putting power of even $.05 from perhaps tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of individuals who are unlikely to be donating a nickel or anything else. (And since I belong to a non-profit, I can attest to the underfunding aspect of economic recession.)
This is a BUSINESS though, and they have no requirements on charitable obligations. I say thank you and kudos! Get me a triple tall latte, please!!
A very loose real number would be Starbucks gross profit margin. It’s currently about 19.2%. Taken loosely that means off of your $4 latte, Starbucks makes 77 cents. So even after they give to Project (Red) they still make 72 cents. That’s a cost to them of 6.5% of their gross profit from the sale.
Lets do a little math:
For every 100 latte's they normally sell:
Donation to Project (Red): $5
Starbuck's gross profit (after the donation): $72
Starbuck's lost gross Profit: $5.
Number of additional Latte's they need to sell to make up for the lost $5: 7
So for each 100 latte's they normally sell, they need to sell an additional 7 latte's to have their profit unaffected by the donation.
This also doesn't take into account that Starbucks will get a tax break on their donation.
And they're still a business, so I ask again what local non-corporate entity has the power and resources to DONATE millions every year to various non-profits associated with rejuvenating the lands, people, and culture that grow their precious beans, or house a precious commodity?
You should probably take a look and read over their annual CSR to find out what they actually GIVE away each year to global non-profits (without a mass marketing campaign, I might add), before making lofty folderol. The prices quoted are fair. According to their Fiscal 2008 Q4 report, they were down almost a dollar in stock - a 7 year low - with 2008 seeing a ~$200M loss. Q1 2009 already saw a .50c drop, due to pressure from the housing market.
Not to mention that a few of the Starbucks in my area donate all of the overstocked food products and GIVE it to homeless shelters. And all of the grinds go into my garden every year. And all of the donation boxes that a couple of my stores have MATCH donations.
It would seem then, in the end, the idea of a corporation is much more detrimental to the psyche, than the actual good they can accomplish. True, not all major corporations donate and make good by helping where and how they can, but it’s not fair to those that do (with little understanding) to lump them all together.
Respect is given, when respect is taken ...
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Respectful Rewards
"As long as you're trying to be somebody else, the best you can ever hope for is second best. If you're genuine and consistent even those that disagree with you will be respectful of you." ~ Paul Harvey
And that's why Paul Harvey will be missed. His story telling ability was spot on each and every time, able to spin a yarn into something believable and unbiased. But, unfortunately, this isn't about Paul Harvey. This is almost in continuation of the Assistive Rewards post.
The world is full of questions, and the answers are rarely sought out. Politicians are exceptional at spinning a question into another question, as if that is itself the answer. So we are left questioning, and second-guessing our choices all the time. We ask "what if" too much, and not accept things as they are, in my opinion.
Can you really argue that trying to be like someone else, or what someone else wants you to be is beneficial to anyone? Sounds more like superficial.
Isn’t being genuine a sure fire way of grabbing someone’s attention? Everyone has what others will perceive as faults, that’s a given, and usually only on the outside and upfront. But isn’t that what can grow a healthy discussion, is taking those faults, accepting them, and maybe realizing that there is always more than one way to look at something?
There should always be some modicum of leaving some subjects alone, because you know that you will agree to disagree to which you leave it be, and that’s where civility comes into play. In the end, I’ve garnered respect for folk that have been able to logically convey their thoughts and feelings toward a particular subject, than haphazardly throwing something out there just because the feeling that that is the end all of everything.
The back-story leads into the whole story – if only what’s on top is taken, and nothing underneath is perused through, then you’ll never know … the rest of the story.
I always end my blogs and posts in one simple line:
Respect is taken, when respect is given …
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
And that's why Paul Harvey will be missed. His story telling ability was spot on each and every time, able to spin a yarn into something believable and unbiased. But, unfortunately, this isn't about Paul Harvey. This is almost in continuation of the Assistive Rewards post.
The world is full of questions, and the answers are rarely sought out. Politicians are exceptional at spinning a question into another question, as if that is itself the answer. So we are left questioning, and second-guessing our choices all the time. We ask "what if" too much, and not accept things as they are, in my opinion.
Can you really argue that trying to be like someone else, or what someone else wants you to be is beneficial to anyone? Sounds more like superficial.
Isn’t being genuine a sure fire way of grabbing someone’s attention? Everyone has what others will perceive as faults, that’s a given, and usually only on the outside and upfront. But isn’t that what can grow a healthy discussion, is taking those faults, accepting them, and maybe realizing that there is always more than one way to look at something?
There should always be some modicum of leaving some subjects alone, because you know that you will agree to disagree to which you leave it be, and that’s where civility comes into play. In the end, I’ve garnered respect for folk that have been able to logically convey their thoughts and feelings toward a particular subject, than haphazardly throwing something out there just because the feeling that that is the end all of everything.
The back-story leads into the whole story – if only what’s on top is taken, and nothing underneath is perused through, then you’ll never know … the rest of the story.
I always end my blogs and posts in one simple line:
Respect is taken, when respect is given …
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
Assistive Rewards
Assistive Rewards
Is there a reward for doing something that comes second nature? If a person does something that is a reward in someone’s eyes, does the one helping actually see it that way, or is it without thought?
What is it when someone helps on a grand scale, but seeks a reward – how is it different than helping one person, but seek nothing in return? How is reward defined? Is a reward a given in any situation no matter what happens?
Have you ever been the one that helps someone, only to feel a sense of let-down when nothing happened after the fact? Have you ever worked in a group of people, no matter the size, where you felt good about the deed that was done, but there was no reward, so to speak? Isn’t completion of the deed in itself the reward?
What if by proxy of a mandate of effort you are given an award that you didn’t necessarily do anything to deserve? How does doing nothing constitute being rewarded?
In our blue ribbon society, everybody is supposed to win – but what about the people actually putting forth effort to achieve something greater than being rewarded …
Respect is given, when respect is taken …
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
Is there a reward for doing something that comes second nature? If a person does something that is a reward in someone’s eyes, does the one helping actually see it that way, or is it without thought?
What is it when someone helps on a grand scale, but seeks a reward – how is it different than helping one person, but seek nothing in return? How is reward defined? Is a reward a given in any situation no matter what happens?
Have you ever been the one that helps someone, only to feel a sense of let-down when nothing happened after the fact? Have you ever worked in a group of people, no matter the size, where you felt good about the deed that was done, but there was no reward, so to speak? Isn’t completion of the deed in itself the reward?
What if by proxy of a mandate of effort you are given an award that you didn’t necessarily do anything to deserve? How does doing nothing constitute being rewarded?
In our blue ribbon society, everybody is supposed to win – but what about the people actually putting forth effort to achieve something greater than being rewarded …
Respect is given, when respect is taken …
Namaste and Slainte
~BG~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)