Category Archives: Golden Rule

Image source: Getty Images

Get to know some of the financial gurus who've switched from Bitcoin critics to believers.

There are many things we don't know about what the future holds for Bitcoin (BTC) and cryptocurrency. But one thing's for sure: The sprawling industry has attracted its share of fierce critics and loyal fans and will continue to provoke extreme reactions for a while.

But what of the people who changed their minds? According to research by crypto exchange Gemini, over 40% of crypto owners worldwide got started in 2021 -- which is just one indication of the evolving attitudes toward crypto. Lets take a look at three billionaires who changed their minds on Bitcoin.

The Shark Tank judge and Dallas Mavericks owner is now a huge cryptocurrency convert. He said recently that 80% of his non-Shark Tank investments are in and around crypto. He believes crypto can disrupt the way that many traditional companies operate, and he's particularly excited about the potential of smart contracts.

But he hasn't always been so bullish on blockchain. In a 2019 YouTube video, Cuban said he'd rather have bananas than Bitcoin. "I'd rather have bananas," he said. "I can eat bananas. Crypto not so much." Now he believes Bitcoin is digital gold and crypto is money 2.0.

Dalio's views on crypto are quite nuanced, but he's certainly moved from being uncertain about Bitcoin to being a Bitcoin investor, albeit an uncertain one. Back in 2020, the Co-Chairman & Co-Chief Investment Officer of Bridgewater asset management firm tweeted that he thought he might be missing something about Bitcoin. He raised concerns that it doesn't make a great medium of exchange, is too volatile to act as a good store of wealth, and would likely be outlawed by governments if it becomes too successful.

Fast forward today. Not only are there rumors that Bridgewater will launch a crypto fund, but Dalio also says he owns a small amount of Bitcoin. However, he says, "Bitcoin looks like a long-duration option on a highly unknown future that I could put an amount of money in that I wouldnt mind losing about 80% of."

Among other things, Dalio recognizes that it's an "amazing accomplishment" to create a new type of digital money that's worked for 10 years. He also thinks Bitcoin has crossed the line from a speculative idea to something that could have value. But he's still concerned about cyber risks and government intervention.

Kevin O'Leary is another Shark Tank judge who's become a crypto fan. The man who called Bitcoin a "giant nothing burger" in early 2021 has now backed -- and even given his nickname to -- a crypto app called WonderFi that aims to make decentralized finance accessible to all. He's also become an official ambassador for the FTX cryptocurrency exchange.

O'Leary was initially concerned about the regulatory environment and Bitcoin's environmental impact. His native Canada relaxed restrictions on Bitcoin, which eased some of the prolific investor's concerns. He also took positions in clean Bitcoin mining companies so he could be confident he only owns sustainably-mined coins. These two factors combined contributed to his turnaround. He now argues that green Bitcoin mining is a huge investment opportunity.

These aren't the only billionaires who've changed their stances on Bitcoin and cryptocurrency. But these three highlight some of the wide-ranging concerns and viewpoints about what is still a relatively new asset class. If you're considering buying Bitcoin, it's good to understand what drives the skeptics, the believers, and everything in between. Then you can make up your own mind about what's right for you.

As Dalio points out, it is a high-risk asset that could produce huge gains, but also could lose a lot of its value. One of the big unknowns is how increased regulation will impact crypto's development. Various countries including the U.S. are inching toward clearer regulatory frameworks, but the details are still unclear.

The high levels of risk is why investing in cryptocurrency is as much about your individual financial situation as it is about your belief about its potential. The golden rule is to only invest money you can afford to lose. That way if the market crashes, it won't be financially devastating. It's also important to prioritize other financial goals ahead of crypto investments. If you're paying down debt or building up an emergency fund, take care of these financial bases first. Once you're on top of them, you can see how crypto might fit into your wider investment planning.

It's interesting to see how some of these financial gurus' opinions have evolved. If nothing else, they highlight that there's no right or wrong decision, beyond treading carefully and doing your research.

There are hundreds of platforms around the world that are waiting to give you access to thousands of cryptocurrencies. And to find the one that's right for you, you'll need to decide what features that matter most to you.

To help you get started, our independent experts have sifted through the options to bring you some ofour best cryptocurrency exchanges for 2022. Check out the list here and get started on your crypto journey, today.

Go here to see the original:

These 3 Billionaires Changed Their Minds on Bitcoin. Should You? - The Motley Fool

On the day of his neck surgery, Nov. 12, 2021, Jack Eichel walked into the Rocky Mountain Spine Clinic alone. Due to COVID-19 restrictions at the time, Eichel could not be accompanied by family members when he entered the clinic located in Lone Tree, Colorado, a small municipality just south of Denver.

I had never had surgery before, so youre obviously nervous before surgery, Eichel said. I got into Denver and had dinner with my parents that night. You wake up the next morning and youre just going to the surgery center, and well, here we are.

I went in by myself, and I was just sitting in the room and didnt really have anyone there. The nurses were obviously great, but when youre in that situation youre just like, Hey, this is pretty real now.

Surgery of any kind can be distressing. For Eichel, he was the first NHL player to ever undergo artificial disc replacement surgery to repair a herniated disk in his neck. It required an eight-month battle with the Buffalo Sabres over which surgery would be performed, followed by a trade to the Vegas Golden Knights and months of rehabilitation that followed the surgery. But on Feb. 16, 2022, Eichel stepped back onto NHL ice for the first time in nearly a year, finally able to do what he loves most once again.

In doing so, Eichel displayed dedication to the sport, made a stand for the medical rights of players around the NHL and opened a new door of possibilities for players needing similar surgeries moving forward. For all of those reasons, Eichel is the Las Vegas chapter of the Professional Hockey Writers Associations nominee for the 2022 Bill Masterton Memorial Trophy.

The Masterton Trophy is awarded by the PHWA annually to the player who best exemplifies the qualities of perseverance, sportsmanship and dedication to ice hockey.

Eichel initially suffered the herniated disc while playing for Buffalo on March 7, 2021, but after initial evaluations, the Sabres wanted Eichel to have disc-fusion surgery, rather than the artificial disc replacement option preferred by Eichel and his camp.

Obviously, I wanted to look at how I am going to sustain my career and be as least invasive to myself, Eichel said, explaining his thought process when debating which type of surgery would be best for his situation. I looked at it as fusion was going to change me permanently. With disc replacement, theres still some major change that youre doing, but youre just kind of swapping a herniated disc for a prosthesis, and your neck looks the same as it did before.

Fusing the discs has long been the more popular option of the two, but through Eichels research and help from surgeons, he discovered that ADR not approved until 2009 was the newest trend, had a much shorter recovery process and could potentially provide better long-term results.

You also look at the long-term benefits, Eichel said. Theres a lot that goes into it. It was a decision that I considered everything. If you just look at the numbers of medicine right now, the disc replacements are rising so quickly and fusions are starting to decimate. Medicine is always changing. The way we do things is always changing and I thought this was the best option for me.

The Sabres werent as comfortable with the surgery that had yet to be performed on an NHL player, and because the leagues collective bargaining agreement gives teams the final say over player recovery, Buffalo used its authority to decline Eichels preferred operation.

Its a disagreement that may happen more than we know, but most players dont have the leverage that Eichel did as the Sabres captain and one of the most talented players in the world. For players just hoping to make NHL rosters, holding their ground in a similar dispute with the team isnt much of an option. And while Eichel didnt hold his ground with the intention of paving the way for future hockey players to potentially have control own recoveries, he may have done so unintentionally.

As of now, nothing has changed in the wording of the CBA, but the next time its negotiated, the rule will be a topic of discussion due to the public nature of Eichels battle with Buffalo.

There have been guys that reached out, whether it was over the summer or after the surgery, that were just happy that I was standing my ground, Eichel said. They expressed their frustration with what I was going through and some of the hoops I had to jump through. It was good. Its always nice to have support from your peers.

In the meantime, Eichels successful ADR surgery set an immediate example. He underwent the procedure and was out of the clinic enjoying dinner with his parents that same night.

Id be lying to say that I wasnt nervous, Eichel said. Youd be surprised by how smooth everything went, and how well I felt after the surgery.

Eichel continued his recovery process in Charlotte, N.C., where he worked with Dr. Mark Lindsay for several weeks. Less than two weeks after his procedure, Eichel received a call from Chicago Blackhawks forward Tyler Johnson, who was also considering the surgery.

He just wanted to pick my brain on the whole process of why I came to the conclusion that I did, Eichel said. It was a good conversation. He had a lot of similar questions that I did, and I hope that some of the information that I gave him helped him make a decision.

Jack Eichel helped out a lot, doing a lot of that for me as well, Johnson said on March 6 after undergoing ADR surgery. I wouldnt say it was talking a lot, but probably two or three phone calls that lasted a little while. He was unbelievable in the whole process, even post-opt kind of explaining to me what he was doing recovery-wise and what his plans were going forward so we could kind of put things together. We had different doctors, but pretty much the same timelines. It was kind of nice having somebody else that was going through it at the same time as me to be able to lean on and say, Hey, did you have this? Or, Did you feel this? Or, What can you/cant you do? type of thing. So its been great.

Being the first to do anything can be a terrifying proposition. Eichels leap of faith may spark a new trend when it comes to repairing herniated discs. At the very least, it helped Johnson get back on the ice in just over four months.

When asked if he wouldve opted for the ADR over fusion if it wasnt for Eichel, Johnson said, Thats kind of a tough question because I think the first doctor I spoke to kind of had that on the last-resort type of thing. So I probably would have been leaning the other way a little bit more, just from that initial talk. But as I started to ask more and more doctors about it, got more and more information on it, had some friends luckily in Florida that are spine surgeons, I was able to talk to them about it. That kind of led me a lot more to the ADR. I dont know if it would have changed anything, but I guess it really did help me know that hes done a lot more research than I did. He spent roughly a year or whatnot learning about it. It made me feel a little bit better in that sense.

Eichel made his return to game action only three months after his surgery and has been the Golden Knights leading scorer in the 31 games since. Directly following an 11-month absence, on a new team for the first time in his career, Eichel has 12 goals and nine assists for Vegas. More than anything, hes grateful to be back on the ice, spending his days in NHL dressing rooms and doing what he loves for a living.

I think when you have it taken away from you, sometimes you can take it for granted how lucky we are to play in the NHL, Eichel said. It might sound cliche, but its an honor just to be able to come to the rink every day and play hockey. Sometimes I pinch myself when I think, This is what I have to do today.

Not only did Eichel display dedication to the sport and his fellow players, but the entire process strengthened his love for the game.

Im constantly reminding myself how lucky I am just to be playing again, he said. I always look up at the crowd during the national anthem and think how lucky I am to be playing in front of these sold-out arenas, in front of all these fans that came to see you play. Its great to be doing it again.

(Photo of Jack Eichel: Christopher Mast / NHLI via Getty Images)

Read more here:

Golden Knights Jack Eichel opens up about the fears and relief of this season Sometimes I pinch myself - The Athletic

Photo 68040641 Homiel | Dreamstime.com

German carrier Hapag-Lloyd has been ordered to pay $822,220 in civil penalties for 14 violations $58,730 for each offence of the US Shipping Act.

An FMC investigation found it incorrectly applied detention and demurrage (D&D) charges to 11 containers handled by California drayage firm Golden State Logistics (GSL).

The D&D charges levied to GSL amounted to $10,135, but the FMCs Bureau of Enforcement (BOE), which Hapag-Lloyd had unsuccessfully claimed had no jurisdiction over the case, said the penalties were punitive in nature as the carrier had knowingly and wilfully applied the D&D charges despite GSL being unable to return the containers.

The BOE had originally claimed that the fine should be $16.5m, because a significant penalty is required to both deter Hapag-Lloyds violative behaviour and ensure future compliance with the FMCs interpretive rule on D&D, adopted in 2020.

However, the BOE accepted that it did not provide the burden of proof for certain days that D&D fees were levied and thus reduced the overall penalty.

However, the BOE did establish that GSL had made every attempt to return the containers, but was unable to do so because there were insufficient appointment slots to make the deliveries, and that D&D charges should not have been levied because they could not have served the interpretive rule, which states the charges are levied to expedite the flow of cargo and equipment.

The record contains contemporaneous evidence of good faith attempts to return these eleven containers well before free time expired and there is no evidence of extraordinary circumstances which would justify imposition of all of these detention fees, the FMC case record published last week states.

The case also established the charges were knowingly and wilfully applied erroneously, as Hagag-Lloyd was well aware of the FMCs interpretive rule but applied them nonetheless.

Hapag-Lloyd was aware of the detention and demurrage rule published in the Federal Register on 18 May 2020, for at least one year before the present controversy occurred in the spring and summer of 2021.

After the issuance of the interpretive rule, Hapag-Lloyd reviewed its procedures with respect to the assessment and waiver of detention charges, and concluded its existing procedures were in compliance with the interpretive rule, the case document states.

However, while the decision may be a milestone in the numerous claims being brought by hauliers disputing D&D charges in the US with container shipping lines, an attempt by another drayage operator, Orange Avenue Express, which is also claiming Hapag-Lloyd applied unfair D&D charges, to intervene on the case, was dismissed.

Orange Avenue Express filed a motion to intervene in this proceeding after filing a complaint in Docket No 21-10, alleging that Hapag-Lloyd violated the Shipping Act regarding the return of empty reefer (refrigerated) containers was denied due to the factual and legal differences between the cases.

Which suggests that each further case will have to be decided on the individual circumstances.

BOEs argument is not that there were no appointments available, but rather that there were not sufficient appointments available.The evidence demonstrates that GSL alerted Hapag-Lloyd to its problems finding appointments and attempted to enlist Hapag-Lloyds help to return the containers.

However, Hapag-Lloyd did not suggest other options for returning the containers and did not identify to GSL locations that had sufficient available appointments.

More here:

Hapag-Lloyd fined after levying 'wilful' and 'erroneous' D&D charges - theloadstar.com

MARTIN Lewis revealed a credit card hack that can slash your fuel bills when you fill up your tank.

But drivers must remember one golden rule to reap the rewards of his advice.

2

The money-saving expert recommended paying for fuel with cashback credit cards, which pay you back each time you spend on them.

Martin's trick can save drivers precious pennies when filling the car, so long as they always abide by the golden rule.

Set up a direct debit to repay the card in full each month, so you never pay interest. Interest would outweigh any money you gained.

Credit card companies offer cashback or reward schemes for one reason - to get customers to spend on the card and pay them interest. The interest cost of all the cashback cards will dwarf the cashback a customer earns.

Lenders credit-check anyone who applies for a cashback card, so beware that multiple applications in a short period of time can impact your future ability to get credit.

Setting up a direct debit is an easy way to pay off the card in full, because it allows the card company to take whatever is owed each month.

Martin recommended selecting the pay off in full option from direct debit forms, but warned drivers that some providers deliberately miss this option off the application, as it makes them less money.

In this case, he said to write pay off in full on the form and to call up the provider after a week or two to check theyve received the request.

The money-saving experts top pick cashback credit card is the American Express reward card. It offers a 5% bonus cashback on everything you buy, up to a maximum 100. Cashback is capped at 1% after this introductory bonus, and you need to spend more than 3,000 a year to get any cashback.

Martin has been vocal about the difficulties facing the nation as the cost of living continues to soar. He predicted on the radio that "civil unrest isn't far away" as many have "nothing left to cut back on".

The finance guru's motoring advice comes after he warned Brits not to spend money renewing their passport. He advised holidaymakers should be careful when going to renew their documents online, as a number of websites on Google offer a fast-track service but you needlessly.

Martin has also directed Brits recently towards a maternity grant for new parents. The one-off payment of 500 is designed to help those on the lowest incomes known as a Sure Start Maternity Grant. He recommended the fund for new or soon-to-be parents struggling with the rising cost of living.

The petrol pump advice comes after one in three garages were closed yesterday in the South of England, according to fuel campaigners. The eco-mob Just Stop Oil protesters blocked oil terminals, affecting as many as 1,200 pumps south of Midlands.

However, retailers have assured drivers there is no need to panic-buy fuel. Motorists have been advised to continue to fill their tanks as normal when they need to.

2

Visit link:

Martin Lewis shares credit card you should use to slash your fuel bills but youll need to remember a gol... - The US Sun

Image source: Getty Images

Buffett says cryptos are just going to sit there and won't multiply.

Billionaire business magnate Warren Buffett is not a big fan of Bitcoin (BTC). In fact, he famously told reporters years ago that it's "probably rat poison squared." He's been more circumspect in recent years, and refused to be drawn on his views at his company Berkshire Hathaway's annual meeting last year. That didn't stop his second in command Charlie Munger telling attendees cryptocurrency was "disgusting and contrary to the interests of civilization.

Buffett's main concerns about Bitcoin are that it has no intrinsic value and it doesn't produce anything. He's not a fan of gold for similar reasons. Buffett likes assets like farms, businesses, or real estate that generate income in and of themselves. He calls them "commercial cows" that aren't valued as a medium of exchange, but by their ability to produce milk.

He told CNBC in 2018, "If you and I buy various cryptocurrencies, they're not going to multiply. There are not going to be a bunch of rabbits sitting there in front of us. They're just gonna sit there. And I gotta hope next time you get more excited after I've bought it from you and then I'll get more excited and buy it from you."

Several of Bitcoin's biggest critics agree with Buffett. The argument is that the only reason Bitcoin increases in value is that people are speculating on being able to sell it to someone else for a profit. This is why many warn that the cryptocurrency industry is a bubble that's doomed to burst.

Bitcoin enthusiasts disagree, pointing to the leading crypto's utility as a form of payment or store of value. They also argue that its scarcity -- only 21 million will ever be mined -- makes it valuable. Scarcity is one of the characteristics of a useful currency.

They did. But those stories were a bit exaggerated. Buffett's company, Berkshire Hathaway, invested in a Brazilian fintec company called Nubank. But Bitcoin only makes up a very small part of Nubank's business. And Nubank only makes up a very small percentage of Berkshire Hathaway's investment portfolio.

Our top crypto play isn't a token - Heres why

Weve found one company thats positioned itself perfectly as a long-term picks-and-shovels solution for the broader crypto market Bitcoin, Dogecoin, and all the others. In fact, you've probably used this company's technology in the past few days, even if you've never had an account or even heard of the company before. That's how prevalent it's become.

Sign up today for Stock Advisor and get access to our exclusive report where you can get the full scoop on this company and its upside as a long-term investment. Learn more and get started today with a special new member discount.

In fact, there are a couple of businesses in Berkshire Hathaway's portfolio with slight crypto connections. But this doesn't reflect any big U-turn on Buffett's part. It's just that Berkshire Hathaway invests in several major financial institutions. And the rise of cryptocurrency means some of those institutions have now opened the door -- albeit very slightly -- to crypto.

Buffett is a highly successful investor and it's wise to take note of his concerns. Cryptocurrency is a relatively new and unregulated industry and we don't know what will happen. Bitcoin could become the digital currency of the future, but it may not. It certainly has a lot of hurdles to clear before this happens. This uncertainty makes it a risky investment.

This is why the golden rule of crypto investing is to only spend money you can afford to lose. That way if Buffett is right and the whole market collapses completely, it will be disappointing but not disastrous for your finances. As we've seen in recent years, Bitcoin's price is extremely volatile and can lose 50% in a matter of months. As a new crypto investor, you need to be prepared for what can be a rollercoaster ride.

READ MORE: Top Cryptocurrency Apps and Exchanges

Another reason Buffett won't buy Bitcoin is that he only invests in things he understands. This is sound logic for any investor. If you decide to invest in Bitcoin, make sure you understand the basics of blockchain, the main risks involved in crypto investing, and the factors that might impact Bitcoin's performance long term. Don't buy Bitcoin because other people are doing it -- take time to research the industry for yourself and make your own decisions.

In addition to understanding Bitcoin, the decision to buy has a lot to do with your own personal financial situation. If you're not on top of other financial goals such as building up your emergency fund or paying down debt, focus on these things first. High-risk investments shouldn't come at the expense of the foundations that will give you financial security in the future.

There are hundreds of platforms around the world that are waiting to give you access to thousands of cryptocurrencies. And to find the one that's right for you, you'll need to decide what features that matter most to you.

To help you get started, our independent experts have sifted through the options to bring you some ofour best cryptocurrency exchanges for 2022. Check out the list here and get started on your crypto journey, today.

See more here:

Should You Invest in Bitcoin? Here's What Warren Buffett Thinks - The Motley Fool

As space science matures and accelerates, the time has come for a democratically accountable UN to moderate human activity beyond Earth.

In his best-selling book Cosmos astronomer Carl Sagan asks: Who speaks for Earth? As humanity continues to explore the universe, a UN space agency could provide much stronger international oversight of space activities than the relatively weak treaty regime under which spacefaring nations currently operate.

Sagans question is essentially political: which country, which body, which agreement represents our planet as a whole as humanity moves out into space? In the early years of the space age, the underlying geopolitical context was shaped by Cold War competition. This political contest drove technical triumphs such as the flight of Russian Yuri Gagarin in 1961 and the landing of US astronauts Neil Armstrong and Edwin Buzz Aldrin on the moon just eight years later. Many scientific benefits resulted from this early period of competition, especially from the Apollo program. However, international competition is essentially a negative geopolitical driver for space exploration.

The world lacks global political institutions that legitimately speak for humanity

Fortunately, over the ensuing decades international cooperation has increased significantly. Fifteen nations, including the US and Russia, cooperate on the International Space Station (ISS), and 26 of the worlds space agencies, including the multinational European Space Agency (ESA), coordinate their activities through the International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISECG).

The ISS is a good example of a positive geopolitical driver for space cooperation because it was, at least in part, born out of a postCold War desire to build diplomatic bridges between Russia and the West. Whether this cooperation will survive the current crisis in Ukraine remains to be seen, but the underlying geopolitical logic for international cooperation in space will remain. Returning to an era of Cold War competition between nation states, increasingly joined by poorly regulated commercial companies, is unlikely to be a sustainable model for 21st-century space activities. Indeed, some of the geopolitical dangers of unregulated competition in space have recently been articulated by the international relations scholar Daniel Deudney in his bookDark Skies.

Back in 1984 planetary scientist William Hartmann in his book Out of the Cradle proposed a golden rule of space exploration:

Space exploration must be carried out in a way so as to reduce, not aggravate, tensions in human society. Every decision, each policy, must be tested against this principle.

The world lacks global political institutions that are strong enough to legitimately speak for humanity in the transnational domains beyond Earth. At present, human activities in space are guided by a framework of internationally recognised policies, including several intergovernmental treaties (most notably the 1967 Outer Space Treaty), and internationally accepted guidelines (such as the COSPAR Planetary Protection Policy). These agreements provide an excellent foundation on which to build, but they do not satisfactorily address many issues. They would also be difficult to enforce.

Grenville Clark and Louis Sohn suggested a possible way forward in 1962 in the second edition of their book on UN reform, World Peace Through World Law. There they advocated the creation of a United Nations Outer Space Agency designed to ensure that outer space is used for peaceful purposes only; and to promote exploration and exploitation of outer space for the common benefit of all mankind. Significantly, one of its proposed functions would be to prevent disputes relative to the occupation and control of the Moon or any other planet by having the Agency take over [in the name of the United Nations] any control which may be advisable and possible as soon as any such bodies are reached [by spacecraft].

Seyom Brown and Larry Fabian revisited the concept in their 1975 article Toward mutual accountability in the nonterrestrial realms when they advocated the creation of an Outer Space Projects Agency. They envisaged that all countries would belong to this agency, and that, among other responsibilities, it would be empowered to give final approval to all outer space exploration projects for civilian purposes, under guidelines requiring international participation and the international dissemination of all data and results.

The success of the ESA, established in 1975 and now comprising 22 member states, clearly shows that large international space agencies are practical and can result in many scientific and cultural benefits. There has not yet been any serious attempt to expand this concept to a global scale, although a positive start was made in 2007 when 14 of the worlds space agencies developed the Global Exploration Strategy. This initiative resulted in the formation of the ISECG, which could be viewed as a tentative step towards a global space agency.

As advocated by Clark and Sohn, the obvious overarching political authority for a world space agency would be the United Nations, especially since space is beyond national boundaries. This was recognised at the dawn of the space age with the creation of the UN Office of Outer Space Affairs and the General Assemblys Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) in 1958. Since then the UN has been instrumental in negotiating the current legal regime that governs human activities in space, and it continues to act as a valuable global forum for coordination, decision-making and information-sharing related to international space activities. An excellent recent example is the October 2021 General Assembly Resolution The Space 2030 Agenda: space as a driver of sustainable development, which aims to use space technologies to solve ongoing quality-of-life problems on Earth.

The time may have come to give the UN operational responsibility for space activities, and the creation of a UN space agency would facilitate this. However, even if furnished with its own space agency, the UNs ability to speak for Earth would be compromised because, as currently constituted, the worlds citizens are not directly represented in its decision-making structure. Increasing the democratic accountability of the UN is desirable for many reasons, quite apart from space policy. One way to achieve this, as articulated by Jo Leinen and Andreas Bummel in their book A World Parliament: Governance and Democracy in the 21st Century, would be to add an elected Parliamentary Assembly to the UNs governing organs. Deciding the structure and voting rights of a UN Parliamentary Assembly would doubtless be fraught with difficulties, but it would greatly strengthen the legitimacy of the UN in all its areas of responsibility, on Earth and in space.

Compared to the present organisation of international space activities, these suggestions may seem far-reaching and perhaps utopian. Yet, as the tempo of space activity ramps up in the 21st century, including the likely use of space resources and the possibility of encountering alien life, it seems unavoidable that strengthening international space-governance institutions will be required. The key proposals of establishing a world space agency and greater involvement of the UN in space activities were identified 60 years ago at the beginning of the space age. Implementing them would go a long way to satisfying Hartmanns golden rule of space exploration and, crucially, answering Sagans question about who speaks for all of us here on Earth.

Ian Crawfordis professor of planetary science and astrobiology at Birkbeck College, University of London. The argument presented here is developed in more detail in his chapter Who Speaks for Humanity? inAstrobiology: Science, Ethics, and Public Policy(edited by Octavio Chon Torres and Ted Peters, Scrivener Publishing, 2021). He has no conflicts to declare.

Originally published underCreative Commonsby360info.

Read more:

Space governance: Who speaks for Earth? - Democracy Without Borders

Every week, Oprah is setting an intention exclusively for Oprah Insiders, with reflections on topics like letting go, forgiveness, coming into your own, and more. Visit the page with this weeks video on Being Fully Present every day this week for a new dose of inspiration.

Living in the moment isnt always just about you! If youre going to engage with someone else, its a good idea to make sure they can be fully present, too. Here, Gayle King shares the simple questions she uses to make sure anyone she strikes up a conversation with is able to give their full attention.

Id like to think that I am able to be fully present a majority of the time. Im not a scatter-brained kind of person, so its not hard for me to be and stay in the moment.

Though I will say that sometimes you just want a moment for yourself and someone who you didnt invite in comes up to you and starts talking. At those times, it can be tough to be fully present.

I remember being on a plane once and the man next to me just started talking. Ill be honest, I did not want to engage. For the first few minutes, I did my best to stay fully present and listen to him. But after a while, I started checking my phone and doing other things. He actually told me I was being rude! But I hadn't asked to participate in that conversation. In hindsight, I suppose I could have let him know that I needed to devote my attention to other things.

That encounter actually made me more mindful in my everyday encounters. If youre talking to someone else, its not just about whether or not you have the space to be fully present in that conversationits about whether they do, too.

Now, before I start a conversation, I will say, Do you have a minute? or Is now a good time? Ill do this if I am calling someone who isnt expecting my call or if I approach someone without warning.

Weve all had those moments when we call someone and just launch into a conversation and they have to say, Actually, can I call you backIm on another call! You instantly feel bad because you didnt even think to check if they had the time and energy to devote to you.

So I think its always a good idea to give someone the opportunity to decide if they have the time and energy to devote to you and be fully present. When youre able to do that and youre both able to decide you have that time and energy, your conversation is going to be much more enjoyable.

This content is imported from OpenWeb. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Read more:

Wednesday Inspiration: This Golden Rule of Conversation Is the Key to Better Connection - Oprah Mag

Today, the number of hospital beds available is seen as a parameter for urbanisation and economic growth. In reality, it should be the other way around. The ultimate healthcare goal should be to eradicate the need for hospitals! Today people spend half of their health in earning wealth and then spend all of their wealth in regaining their lost health. And we consider this a sign of progress.

Earlier, there was no CT scan, no MRI, yet the benchmarks were much higher. People lived longer, they were healthier and more importantly they were happier.

We need to look at urban healthcare in a holistic manner. Just creating healthcare infrastructure will not build a healthy society. Today, there is hatred in society, there is greed, fear and because of this depression and stress has set in. Stress is one of the biggest causes of urban health problems. It is appalling to hear that in the coming decades depression will be one of the leading cause of illnesses in the world.

So what does it exactly mean to be healthy? The sign of not being healthy is if you are feeling rough inside; if your mind is stiff and not calm, you are not mentally healthy. When your emotions are rough, you are emotionally unhealthy.

One has to be mentally calm, steady and emotionally soft, to attain a perfect state of health. In today's fast-paced life,this is not an easy state to attain. We have heard about dental hygiene, physical hygiene but we have forgotten the most important of all and that is mental hygiene. Mental well-being is improved perception, improved observation and improved expression. Our mind is like a container. We are simply dumping things into it and not attending to its cleanliness thus accumulating stress and in-turn ruining our health.

Stress levels can be managed in two ways. One, we can cut down our mental and physical workload. That seems quite impossible. Alternatively, we can increase our energy level. Mind-body activities such as breathing techniques, meditation and yoga work wonders in keeping our energy or prana level high.

Yoga is a very simple way to keep our system free from stress. Practice of yoga can help one to live in the present moment, release the tensions and negative emotions. In this age of technology, we care very little for our emotional and spiritual needs. Neither at home nor in school, do we learn how to release negative emotions. Yoga and meditation can help one get rid of it.

Meditation is food for our soul and it brings forth inner wealth. Meditation removes fixed and preconceived impressions and removes the stresses of day-to-day living. It is hundred times more refreshing than sleep because it helps you live in the present moment and frees you from anger of the past and worry of the future.Practices such as yoga, pranayama and meditation not only give you physical but also mental and emotional health and this is true wealth.

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar is the founder of the Art of Living Foundation, which offers a Happiness Programme, among others

Originally posted here:

The golden rule to stay healthy is this - India Today

In a world full of negativity, sometimes its challenging to take the high road.

There are definitely members in our community of Summit County who need lessons in manners, ethical behavior and the golden rule: treat others how you wish to be treated.

The online community of Facebook, specifically One Mans Junk Summit County, is a cesspool of negativity and bullying. During my campaign for Breckenridge Town Council, I received hateful emails and direct messages, as well as experienced online bullying, even from people who preach inclusivity. The irony isnt lost on me.

Facebook is to blame by allowing individuals to hide behind aliases such as Schmoknow Joe and Locals First.

Schmoknow Joe is a well-known online troll. He posted lies about me online going so far as to assert that I dont live in Summit County, a claim which is patently false.

Locals First posted negative comments on my Facebook page, and when I made an invitation to sit down face-to-face to discuss their concerns, they declined.

Another Facebook user, whose wife is on the school board, also bullied me online. I truly hope theyre not teaching this kind of behavior to their children.

Im a person who believes in carrying out civil dialogue with people whom we may disagree with. Its alarming to me how many people are seemingly incapable of treating other humans with respect. Has our society devolved to a point where we can no longer communicate like adults in a civil manner?

Instead, I have grown men bullying me on Facebook.

I read recently that Summit County plans to sever ties with Mind Springs Health, but perhaps we need to invest more with this important organization, because it would appear there are many people in our community in dire need of mental health services.

View post:

Letter to the Editor: The high road - Summit Daily

I frequently hear comments about the shifting societal morals. Typically, it is in a negative sense. We have lost the important values. The America I grew up in (the 1950s and 1960s) were halcyon days of virtue and civility? This is a rearward-looking perspective (the past is better than today). Moreover, many who ascribe to this notion also believe that the future will continue the negative trend.

Are we disgruntled because we believe we have lost our footing? Or are we simply idealizing the past because we are uncomfortable with change and unwilling to accept the uncertainty of the future?

The underlying question is whether those values in which we believe are fixed or whether (like the Constitution), they can evolve and be understood correctly only within the context of the time in which they are applied. In other words, are they living (relative) values or absolutes? If there are absolute universal truths, what are they and from whence are they derived?

Our history is replete with standards of behavior relevant for their time but are ultimately cast asunder. A significant example is how the concept of honor has devolved. Honor includes both personal ethics and behavior, as well as a reflection of societal codes of conduct. It lies at the core of the hard choices people make. The importance of personal honor seems to be declining.

In the age of chivalry, a leader might be driven into a Quixotic (and suicidal) attack rather than suffer a perceived stain on their personal honor. Even as late as the 19th century, duels were fought over supposed slights. Today, the watch phrase seems to be discretion is the better part of honor. The depth of insult required to trigger such a response seems infinite. Is that a bad thing? Have we lost our bearings? Or simply come to our senses?

Relativism is the antithesis to absolutism. Today, it is most obviously demonstrated in politics. Our national leaders (on both sides) have undertaken activity or made outrageous proclamations that their supporters tolerate in their own man but rail against in the opposition. We justify our sides behavior not by acknowledging that it fits an objective standard (of ethics), rather that it is not as bad as the other guys. Somehow this has become acceptable even among those who otherwise lament the perceived shifting mores.

The evolving prevalent belief is secular humanism, a philosophy that embraces individual reason and worldly principles while specifically rejecting religious dogma. Ethics and moral principles are derived solely from human faculties such as logic, empathy or moral intuition, without divine revelation or guidance.

Top stories, delivered straight to your inbox.

In other words, right and wrong are derived from our own power of reason.

The differentiation between right and wrong is perhaps the most fundamental value. It is the basis for the biblical admonition, In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you But this is not simply a religious decree. We humans seem to have an innate sense of this. It is the basis of the Golden Rule. This seems about as universal a moral as we have. In fact, all other values are grounded in this single notion.

However, this creates a conundrum. In a state of nature, without some divine inspiration, why would we intrinsically believe this? While at some level, it protects us (primarily the weak), it also violates the evolutionary imperative of survival of the fittest. There are always occasions in which cheating will yield the best results. Often habitual cheating yields long-term prosperity. How many successful people from robber barons to oligarchs have followed this path? If this is the case, why would we not always look for such opportunities if there is no higher source for such beliefs?

I am torn. I do believe in universal truths, and I believe they are divinely inspired. However, I also believe that actions must be placed in context. The knight errant might also have owned a slave and oppressed the peasantry in addition to being honorable and faithful. I can reconcile such inconsistencies with my principles. While there may be fixed moral values, they play themselves out in a culture of flawed humans. A person may innately (or divinely) believe in the Golden Rule but be just as likely to accept an incorrect bill at a restaurant if it is in their favor (just a little white lie).

Our times have issues, but I do not believe that previous epochs were necessarily more virtuous. My happy youth in which we pledged allegiance to the flag was also a time of gross racial injustice. We are more egalitarian and tolerant than before, but we are also more self-absorbed and narcissistic (if its good for me, its good!).

We never have had, nor will we ever be perfect beings in an ideal society. All we can do is follow our own beliefs, with the understanding that we will fail, then try again.

Rather than simply critique the failings of others, perhaps we would be better served to acknowledge our own and let God sort things out.

Dave Clark is an entrepreneur and a former Kingsport alderman.

Continue reading here:

Are we less virtuous than we used to be? - Kingsport Times News