#Practice Management Systems Market Industry

[thedansemacabres]

Introduction To Supporting Sustainable Agriculture For Witches and Pagans

[ID: An image of yellow grain stocks, soon to be harvested. The several stocks reach towards a blurred open sky, focusing the camera on he grains themselves. The leaves of the grains are green and the cereals are exposed].

PAGANISM AND WITCHCRAFT ARE MOVEMENTS WITHIN A SELF-DESTRUCTIVE CAPITALIST SOCIETY. As the world becomes more aware of the importance of sustainability, so does the duty of humanity to uphold the idea of the steward, stemming from various indigenous worldviews, in the modern era. I make this small introduction as a viticulturist working towards organic and environmentally friendly grape production. I also do work on a food farm, as a second job—a regenerative farm, so I suppose that is my qualifications. Sustainable—or rather regenerative agriculture—grows in recognition. And as paganism and witchcraft continue to blossom, learning and supporting sustainability is naturally a path for us to take. I will say that this is influenced by I living in the USA, however, there are thousands of groups across the world for sustainable agriculture, of which tend to be easy to research.

So let us unite in caring for the world together, and here is an introduction to supporting sustainable/regenerative agriculture. 

A QUICK BRIEF ON SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE 

Sustainable agriculture, in truth, is a movement to practise agriculture as it has been done for thousands of years—this time, with more innovation from science and microbiology especially. The legal definition in the USA of sustainable agriculture is: 

The term ”sustainable agriculture” (U.S. Code Title 7, Section 3103) means an integrated system of plant and animal production practices having a site-specific application that will over the long-term:

A more common man’s definition would be farming in a way that provides society’s food and textile needs without overuse of natural resources, artificial supplements and pest controls, without compromising the future generation’s needs and ability to produce resources. The agriculture industry has one of the largest and most detrimental impacts on the environment, and sustainable agriculture is the alternative movement to it. 

Sustainable agriculture also has the perk of being physically better for you—the nutrient quality of crops in the USA has dropped by 47%, and the majority of our food goes to waste. Imagine if it was composted and reused? Or even better—we buy only what we need. We as pagans and witches can help change this. 

BUYING ORGANIC (IT REALLY WORKS)

The first step is buying organic. While cliche, it does work: organic operations have certain rules to abide by, which excludes environmentally dangerous chemicals—many of which, such as DDT, which causes ecological genocide and death to people. Organic operations have to use natural ways of fertilising, such as compost, which to many of us—such as myself—revere the cycle of life, rot, and death. Organic standards do vary depending on the country, but the key idea is farming without artificial fertilisers, using organic seeds, supplementing with animal manure, fertility managed through management practices, etc. 

However, organic does have its flaws. Certified organic costs many, of which many small farmers cannot afford. The nutrient quality of organic food, while tending to be better, is still poor compared to regeneratively grown crops. Furthermore, the process to become certified organic is often gruelling—you can practise completely organically, but if you are not certified, it is not organic. Which, while a quality control insurance, is both a bonus and a hurdle. 

JOINING A CSA

Moving from organic is joining a CSA (“Community supported agriculture”). The USDA defines far better than I could: 

Community Supported Agriculture (CSA), one type of direct marketing, consists of a community of individuals who pledge support to a farm operation so that the farmland becomes, either legally or spiritually, the community’s farm, with the growers and consumers providing mutual support and sharing the risks and benefits of food production.

By purchasing a farm share, you receive food from the farm for the agreed upon production year. I personally enjoy CSAs for the relational aspect—choosing a CSA is about having a relationship, not only with the farmer(s), but also the land you receive food from. I volunteer for my CSA and sometimes I get extra cash from it—partaking in the act of caring for the land. Joining a CSA also means taking your precious capital away from the larger food industry and directly supporting growers—and CSAs typically practise sustainable and/or regenerative agriculture. 

CSAs are also found all over the world and many can deliver their products to food deserts and other areas with limited agricultural access. I volunteer from time to time for a food bank that does exactly that with the produce I helped grow on the vegetable farm I work for. 

FARM MARKETS AND STALLS 

Another way of personally connecting to sustainable agriculture is entering the realm of the farm stall. The farmer’s market is one of my personal favourite experiences—people buzzing about searching for ingredients, smiles as farmers sell crops and products such as honey or baked goods, etc. The personal connection stretches into the earth, and into the past it buries—as I purchase my apples from the stall, I cannot help but see a thousand lives unfold. People have been doing this for thousands of years and here I stand, doing it all over again. 

Advertisement

Farmers’ markets are dependent on your local area, yet in most you can still develop personal community connections. Paganism often stresses community as an ideal and a state of life. And witchcraft often stresses a connection to the soil. What better place, then, is purchasing the products from the locals who commune with the land? 

VOLUNTEERING 

If you are able to, I absolutely recommend volunteering. I have worked with aquaponic systems, food banks, farms, cider-making companies, soil conservation groups, etc. There is so much opportunity—and perhaps employment—in these fields. The knowledge I have gained has been wonderful. As one example, I learned that fertilisers reduce carbon sequestration as plants absorb carbon to help with nutrient intake. If they have all their nutrients ready, they do not need to work to obtain carbon to help absorb it. This does not even get into the symbiotic relationship fungi have with roots, or the world of hyphae. Volunteering provides community and connection. Actions and words change the world, and the world grows ever better with help—including how much or how little you may provide. It also makes a wonderful devotional activity. 

RESOURCING FOOD AND COOKING 

Buying from farmers is not always easy, however. Produce often has to be processed, requiring labour and work with some crops such as carrots. Other times, it is a hard effort to cook and many of us—such as myself—often have very limited energy. There are solutions to this, thankfully:

Many farmers can and will process foods. Some even do canning, which can be good to stock up on food and lessen the energy inputs. 

Value-added products: farms also try to avoid waste, and these products often become dried snacks if fruit, frozen, etc. 

Asking farmers if they would be open to accommodating this. Chances are, they would! The farmer I purchase my CSA share from certainly does. 

Going to farmers markets instead of buying a CSA, aligning with your energy levels. 

And if any of your purchased goods are going unused, you can always freeze them. 

DEMETER, CERES, VEIA, ETC: THE FORGOTTEN AGRICULTURE GODS

Agricultural gods are often neglected. Even gods presiding over agriculture often do not have those aspects venerated—Dionysos is a god of viticulture and Apollon a god of cattle. While I myself love Dionysos as a party and wine god, the core of him remains firmly in the vineyards and fields, branching into the expanses of the wild. I find him far more in the curling vines as I prune them than in the simple delights of the wine I ferment. Even more obscure gods, such as Veia, the Etruscan goddess of agriculture, are seldom known.

Persephone receives the worst of this: I enjoy her too as a dread queen, and people do acknowledge her as Kore, but she is far more popular as the queen of the underworld instead of the dear daughter of Demeter. I do understand this, though—I did not feel the might of Demeter and Persephone until I began to move soil with my own hands. A complete difference to the ancient world, where the Eleusinian mysteries appealed to thousands. Times change, and while some things should be left to the past, our link to these gods have been severed. After all, how many of us reading know where our food comes from? I did not until I began to purchase from the land I grew to know personally. The grocery store has become a land of tearing us from the land, instead of the food hub it should be.

Yet, while paganism forgets agriculture gods, they have not forgotten us. The new world of farming is more conductive and welcoming than ever. I find that while older, bigoted people exist, the majority of new farmers tend to be LGBT+. My own boss is trans and aro, and I myself am transgender and gay. The other young farmers I know are some flavour of LGBT+, or mixed/poc. There’s a growing movement for Black farmers, elaborated in a lovely text called We Are Each Other’s Harvest. 

Indigenous farming is also growing and I absolutely recommend buying from indigenous farmers. At this point, I consider Demeter to be a patron of LGBT+ people in this regard—she gives an escape to farmers such as myself. Bigotry is far from my mind under her tender care, as divine Helios shines above and Okeanos’ daughters bring fresh water to the crops. Paganism is also more commonly accepted—I find that farmers find out that I am pagan and tell me to do rituals for their crops instead of reacting poorly. Or they’re pagan themselves; a farmer I know turned out to be Wiccan and uses the wheel of the year to keep track of production. 

Incorporating these divinities—or concepts surrounding them—into our crafts and altars is the spiritual step towards better agriculture. Holy Demeter continues to guide me, even before I knew it. 

WANT CHANGE? DO IT YOURSELF! 

If you want change in the world, you have to act. And if you wish for better agriculture, there is always the chance to do it yourself. Sustainable agriculture is often far more accessible than people think: like witchcraft and divination, it is a practice. Homesteading is often appealing to many of us, including myself, and there are plenty of resources to begin. There are even grants to help one improve their home to be more sustainable, i.e. solar panels. Gardening is another, smaller option. Many of us find that plants we grow and nourish are far more potentant in craft, and more receptive to magical workings. 

Caring for plants is fundamental to our natures and there are a thousand ways to delve into it. I personally have joined conservation groups, my local soil conservation group, work with the NRCs in the USA, and more. The path to fully reconnecting to nature and agriculture is personal—united in a common cause to fight for this beautiful world. To immerse yourself in sustainable agriculture, I honestly recommend researching and finding your own path. Mine lies in soil and rot, grapevines and fruit trees. Others do vegetables and cereal grains, or perhaps join unions and legislators. Everyone has a share in the beauty of life, our lives stemming from the land’s gentle sprouts. 

Questions and or help may be given through my ask box on tumblr—if there is a way I can help, let me know. My knowledge is invaluable I believe, as I continue to learn and grow in the grey-clothed arms of Demeter, Dionysos, and Kore. 

FURTHER READING:

Baszile, N. (2021). We are each other’s harvest. HarperCollins.

Hatley, J. (2016). Robin Wall Kimmerer. Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous wisdom, scientific knowledge and the teachings of plants. Environmental Philosophy, 13(1), 143–145. https://doi.org/10.5840/envirophil201613137

Regenerative Agriculture 101. (2021, November 29). https://www.nrdc.org/stories/regenerative-agriculture-101#what-is

And in truth, far more than I could count. 

References

Community Supported Agriculture | National Agricultural Library. (n.d.). https://www.nal.usda.gov/farms-and-agricultural-production-systems/community-supported-agriculture

Navazio, J. (2012). The Organic seed Grower: A Farmer’s Guide to Vegetable Seed Production. Chelsea Green Publishing.

Plaster, E. (2008). Soil Science and Management. Cengage Learning.

Sheaffer, C. C., & Moncada, K. M. (2012). Introduction to agronomy: food, crops, and environment. Cengage Learning.

Sheldrake, M. (2020). Entangled life: How Fungi Make Our Worlds, Change Our Minds & Shape Our Futures. Random House.

Sustainable Agriculture | National Agricultural Library. (n.d.). https://www.nal.usda.gov/farms-and-agricultural-production-systems/sustainable-agriculture

[mclalan]

Corp Zomphis, 2020s Design Speculation

I want to talk about Corp Memphis again— that corporate style of gangly, dead-eyed characters trapped in a neoliberal purgatory, posed between pot plants and spreadsheets.

I don't need to go too far into describing it. Heaven knows there are already so many takes on it that you're probably sick of hearing about it. However, I think a succinct description of it can be found at the end of that Wired magazine article from a few years back:

Wired: Corporate Memphis: The Tech Industry’s Favourite New Art Style

"But, despite all this, it may not be worth lamenting the immense reach of Corporate Memphis or the design possibilities we’ve been deprived of because of it. The style is, after all, simply a reflection of big tech, and how it has constructed a world with users on one side and executives on the other.

A more interesting and visually rich digital space would mean more than coming up with a new illustration style—it would require a change in how the tech economy is run. Until then, Corporate Memphis is likely to stick around, bendy arms and all."

This touches on why Corporate Memphis looks the way it does: it's a reflection of the material reality it's made in and the economic conditions it serves.

To work in a design job today often involves being a "multi-practitioner"— corp speak for a jack of all trades. You might have multiple platforms to manage, need to create a mix of media (motion graphics, branding, illustrations, etc.), and produce multiple pieces of content, all for some pointless product consumed by placated consumers.

And that’s all in a day's work, to be repeated the next. It's gruelling, unforgiving, mind-numbing work—especially if you take pride in what you do. Life doesn't become easier, but it does become bearable if the medium you're working in isn't fighting against you. A style that can work across platforms, can be easy enough for anyone in the department to use, but versatile enough to allow effort when there's time and money. It's homogeneous to the point where the messy, qualitative complications of art direction don't come into play. You can download a vector stock or make it in-house with relative ease and speed, and it looks good enough. The consumer, despite being fatigued by it all, seems to find it good enough. And that's what marks the style really: it's "good enough." It's a style linked to speed and practicality in the face of intense demand and pressure, low industry wages, accessible skills for entry levels, and high corporate barriers as everything's locked within Adobe's infrastructure.

But its strength as this homogeneous vector glob style, with its lack of any real individual identity, is also its biggest weakness. Although I'm sure some designers might enjoy working in this style, it's not really a style designed for creative individual expression. It's called "corporate" for a reason. If you want something different, you might be tempted to try freelancing...

Outside the corporate design department, you might think you're finally free to create in your own style, no longer having to work in that dreaded Corporate Memphis one anymore. But it’s hard enough to work in your own individual style under the best of circumstances. That's because the whole economy is based on the same structures of endless content production for algorithmically optimised consumption that allowed Corp Memphis to thrive, so you're still facing familiar obstacles—creating vast amounts of content, quickly, for wide and insatiable consumer audiences. So, in a way, we have this algorithm-enforced market of content, favouring those who have optimised their style to be better seen by it. It's no wonder Corporate Memphis has endured past its welcome.

However, despite all that, illustrators and artists still plod on. They end up making stuff, somehow navigating these systems— either playing them like a fiddle, outright rejecting them, or going accelerationist about it, like with something such as Corecore. Self-expression can take many forms, and that potential untapped capital value is tantalisingly mouthwatering to corporate capitalists.

Corp Memphis is optimised to a fault. It's too polished, too automated, and fits too well with the well-oiled design apparatus. Thus, it's developed a semiotics to reflect this—it's cheap and it's perceived as cheap. That's why an art director (typically) won’t just stick some Corp Memphis imagine on an album cover or use it to illustrate a particular lifestyle magazine. It wouldn't suit it, it's signalling the wrong stuff. Culture, art, ideas, aesthetics are reflected in work created by practitioners with an artistic vision, or that taps into what's going on in the present. And this is reflected in their art style, something Corp Memphis can't easily do, if at all.

That's why there's still a kind of fringe freelance industry with a speciality in design identity, otherwise known in the industry as "creatives", albeit small and closely gatekept by the likes of legacy institutions such as Goldsmiths and corporate industry leaders like The HudsonBec Group. If a corporation needs design to be spiced up with some kind of creative identity, it'll turn to these agencies or freelancers from this background rather than use Corp Memphis.

But the sad thing is how a corporation doesn't have total control over the process and thus can't control the value and pricing since they have to deal with hiring these pesky freelancers. But how does a corporation even know who to hire? With moodboards, of course! It’s easier to hire someone in-house with "good taste," who can simply curate hot practitioners to hire, like a dragon collecting .png gems. Although a corporation will try to get the best deal it can, these pesky freelancers can potentially negotiate a price for themselves, especially if they’re some big shot who holds a lot of cultural capital.

But another benefit of a moodboard is that it can be converted into a design guide. Simply share the sorts of designers and illustrators that a corporation dreams of hiring but with a cheaper designer, and ask if they can copy the desired style for less. Failing that, they can just outright steal the style anyway. If the creator is small enough, who cares?

But the value and cultural capital that corporations must seek outside their infrastructure, the very thing Corp Memphis cannot do, comes at the price of what Corp Memphis can do. Freelancers are annoying to corporations. They’re inconsistent, outside their remit, and expensive—since any level of lost capital is an expense. And worse of all, they don’t own them. Work made in-house in a corporation is completely theirs to be used forever, however they see fit. A freelance gig is limited to the contract, and typically you have to keep paying for different uses, or pay a lot if it’s expected to be used for something big.

How dare these skilled workers... sorry, freelancers, leverage themselves. If only we, the corporation, could control and treat the work of freelanced art direction like we do Corporate Memphis. Well, maybe we can—with AI.

AI is a whole can of worms of its own. But I will outline how AI shares a lot with Corp Memphis in terms of mechanics, but it's not "good enough" like Corp Memphis is in terms of its aesthetics.

Let's put it like this, if Corp Memphis is above a stock image, which is above clip art, which is above a farting Elsa asset-flip mobile game, then AI-generated images are below that, sharing the same disdainful semiotics of a YouTube thumbnail. AI renders are synonymous with trash, with viewers combing over images seeking out any sniff of AI to decry it. This is, of course, unfortunate for corporations, because AI is wonderfully cheap and efficient to produce. The problem with even "the best" AI is that it still reeks of AI, because it's trained on relatively limited data sets that are the wrong semiotics that corporations typically use and that their consumers are typically familiar with. It's not consistent with typical standards and trends. But even the AI art styles synonymous with AI are really that of unfortunate ArtStation artists whose work has been stolen, scraped, and trained into these models. But none of it is directed, follows trends, or should I say, reflects trends favoured by brands.

Design industry standard work is also bolstered by their industry standing. Their "credibility" sets them apart from, as Mark Zuckerberg puts it, the worthless creators and publishers who ‘overestimate their value’. Sure Zuckerberg might say design is worthless, but let's not forget that Facebook Alegria, the design language developed for Facebook by the mega studio Buck Design in 2017, pretty much started Corp Memphis! I don't know how much that would have cost Zuck, but given how huge Buck is, I don't know, close to $1 million if I had to speculate. So what Zuck is actually saying is you are worthless, without your titles and industry standing, and are ripe for the scrapping.

I still think it would appear crass to the wider public if someone as tactless as Zuck were to steal wholesale from something like It’s Nice That's list of featured artists, due to the "prestigious" tutelage and culture capital of such trendy practitioners. Good luck if you're on your own though.

There's also the issue of copyright. I've no idea how litigious David Rudnick is, maybe he wouldn't even mind, but perhaps it would be legally safer to just hire a copycat of him rather than train an AI on his work. There's no shortage of copycats of him after all, and they'd probably do a better job than AI anyway.

No, a corporation if it wants to avoid all this mess will instead use AI this way:

Step One: Moodboardism

Directed by their little Pinterest moodboards and Instagram saves, a corporation will find the next latest and strongest trend that they want to utilise, be it Y2K or whatever's current on the human ant colony-as-algorithm site, Carri Institute's aesthetics.

Step Two: The Sellout

Hire an on trend freelancer with a large sack of money marked with a dollar sign to do a year's worth of graphic content in a particular on trend style. This is all then fed into their in-house AI database model.

Step Three: Rise and Grind

It's then handed over to the in-house sweatshop graphic designers as the latest toolset that they have to use. They're now tasked with grinding out prompts in this trendy style with the consistency, efficiency, and speed once only achievable with Corp Memphis.

So congratulations, now we have AI that isn't generic Facebook shrimp Jesus trash; it'll be its own unique trash. And sure, perhaps some AI artefacts might come through, but that's what the in-house graphic designers are for— to Photoshop those fingers. The corp no longer needs to put up with some meddlesome expensive freelance art director, as the AI model is consistent enough that someone in-house can direct it, just like Corporate Memphis. And even then, if it still comes across as AI-ish, the hope is that for the general public, it's "good enough", just like Corp... You get the idea.

And this is possible because a freelancers' perceived autonomous strength as corporate mercenaries is also their biggest weakness. They think they can dance with the devil and win, making essentially veneers for capitalists, never once thinking the corporations will one day come to extract capital from them too. Corporate Memphis is never going to die; it's going to mutate into a corporate zombie... Corp Zomphis?

Why bother hiring individual skilled freelancers to do a job in a specific style when you have a year's worth of art, seeded by one of them, to prompt out your own "unique" designs in their style. It's more efficient and cheaper to approach design as a egragore hungry for its next feed, rather than pay for a single illustration. But you'll just have to trust me when I say that I'm not making this up; annual hires to train their own ai is genuinely what big corporation are doing.

But what about the industry, are they just gonna let it happen? I don't know. But I think freelancers don't typically see themselves as a working class, but instead as individualistic, competitive even, little businesses. This is why I think corps will be able to steamroll over freelance designers and illustrators with AI driven Corp Zomphis, because there's no solidarity amongst designers and illustrators, unlike US animators with their union and perception of themsleves as workers. If one freelancer rejects that devil deal to make the annual quantity of prompt feed for a corp, then the next hire will. I remember even hearing the AoI stressing how it wasn't a union, as if union was a dirty word. Instead its existence is to help one interface with their corporate client overlord. Well, soon enough that interfacing will be about betraying your industry freelance brethren to a corporate egragore, basically turning everything into a potential Corporate Memphis reskin. If Corporate Memphis is the design logic of the economy of the 2010s, then I wouldn't be surprised to see people nostalgic for it in the future, if the speculative 2020s model I've described turns out to be true.

[kleopatra45]

Greetings, I had request if you can post careers related to the 10th house/MC from both western and vedic perspective... Thanking you

Careers Related to the 10th House/MC: Western and Vedic Perspectives

The 10th house, often associated with the Midheaven (MC), is a pivotal house in astrology that governs career, public reputation, achievements, and how we strive for success. Both Western and Vedic astrology provide rich insights into the career potential through the analysis of this house, though they approach the interpretation differently.

Western Astrology:

In Western astrology, the 10th house and the Midheaven (MC) reveal the nature of one's career, public image, and long-term aspirations. The sign on the MC, the ruling planet of the MC, and any planets in the 10th house shape the direction of one’s professional life. Below is a breakdown of possible career paths based on the sign on the MC and the planets associated with the 10th house.

Aries MC: Individuals with Aries on the MC are natural leaders, driven by ambition and a pioneering spirit. They thrive in careers that allow them to take charge and lead, such as entrepreneurship, military roles, sports, or any field where quick decision-making and initiative are valued.

Taurus MC: Taurus on the MC suggests a career focused on stability, security, and material success. These individuals are drawn to professions in finance, real estate, agriculture, luxury goods, and any field where their practical nature and aesthetic sensibilities can shine.

Gemini MC: With Gemini on the MC, communication is key. These individuals excel in roles that involve writing, teaching, media, journalism, marketing, or any job that requires adaptability, networking, and intellectual engagement.

Cancer MC: Cancer on the MC often indicates a nurturing career path. These individuals may be drawn to professions related to caregiving, such as nursing, childcare, social work, or real estate, hospitality, and any job where creating a sense of home or emotional security is important.

Leo MC: Leo on the MC is associated with a desire for recognition and creative expression. Careers in entertainment, acting, politics, fashion, and leadership roles are common. These individuals often seek careers where they can stand out, inspire others, and express their creative talents.

Virgo MC: Virgo on the MC points to a meticulous and service-oriented approach to work. These individuals may excel in healthcare, research, editing, service industries, and any career that requires attention to detail, organization, and a focus on improving systems.

Libra MC: Libra on the MC is linked to careers involving beauty, harmony, and relationships. These individuals might be drawn to law, diplomacy, fashion, art, counseling, or any role that involves balancing opposing forces, aesthetics, or creating harmony in social settings.

Scorpio MC: Scorpio on the MC suggests a career involving intensity, transformation, and depth. These individuals may pursue careers in psychology, research, finance, detective work, or any field where they can explore the unknown, deal with crises, or engage in transformative work.

Sagittarius MC: Sagittarius on the MC is associated with careers that involve exploration, education, and the pursuit of knowledge. These individuals may find fulfillment in teaching, travel-related jobs, publishing, philosophy, or any field that allows them to broaden their horizons and share wisdom.

Capricorn MC: Capricorn on the MC is linked to ambition, structure, and long-term goals. These individuals are often drawn to careers in government, management, business, engineering, or any field where discipline, responsibility, and strategic planning are required.

Aquarius MC: Aquarius on the MC indicates a career path that involves innovation, humanitarian work, and social reform. These individuals may excel in technology, science, social causes, or any field where they can contribute to progressive change and work towards a better future for society.

Pisces MC: Pisces on the MC is associated with creativity, compassion, and spirituality. These individuals may be drawn to careers in the arts, healing, spirituality, film, photography, or any field where they can express their imagination and connect with the emotional or spiritual dimensions of life.

Vedic Astrology:

In Vedic astrology, the 10th house, also known as Karma Bhava, represents career, professional success, and one's contributions to society. The planet ruling the 10th house, the condition of Saturn (the natural significator of career), and the placement of planets in the 10th house are crucial in determining one's career path.

Sun in the 10th House: The Sun in the 10th house signifies leadership and authority. Individuals with this placement may pursue careers in government, politics, administration, or any role where they can be in charge. They are often seen in positions of power and influence, where their leadership qualities are recognized.

Moon in the 10th House: The Moon in the 10th house brings a nurturing and emotionally responsive approach to one's career. Individuals with this placement may excel in public relations, hospitality, healthcare, real estate, or any field that involves caring for others and creating a supportive environment. Their careers often involve a connection to the public or dealing with the needs of others.

Mars in the 10th House: Mars in the 10th house indicates a dynamic and action-oriented career. These individuals are likely to be drawn to careers in the military, engineering, sports, law enforcement, or any field that requires courage, determination, and physical energy. They excel in competitive environments and are often seen in roles that involve taking decisive action.

Mercury in the 10th House: Mercury in the 10th house signifies a career involving communication, intellect, and business acumen. Individuals with this placement may excel in writing, teaching, journalism, trade, commerce, or any profession that requires intellectual skills, adaptability, and the ability to convey information effectively.

Jupiter in the 10th House: Jupiter in the 10th house indicates a career in teaching, counseling, law, or finance. These individuals are often drawn to roles that involve guiding others, sharing knowledge, and upholding ethical principles. They may find success in academic fields, religious institutions, or any profession where wisdom and morality are valued.

Venus in the 10th House: Venus in the 10th house suggests a career in the arts, entertainment, fashion, or luxury goods. These individuals are often drawn to professions where beauty, aesthetics, and creativity play a central role. They may also find success in diplomacy, public relations, or any field that requires charm, social skills, and a sense of harmony.

Saturn in the 10th House: Saturn in the 10th house indicates a disciplined and structured approach to one's career. These individuals may pursue careers in politics, engineering, construction, or labor-related jobs. They are often seen in roles that require responsibility, hard work, and long-term commitment. Saturn's influence may also lead to careers involving law, administration, or any field where persistence and patience are key.

Rahu in the 10th House: Rahu in the 10th house signifies unconventional and innovative career paths. These individuals may be drawn to careers in media, technology, foreign jobs, or any field that involves breaking new ground and challenging societal norms. They may also find success in professions that deal with mystery, research, or hidden knowledge.

Ketu in the 10th House: Ketu in the 10th house indicates a career focused on spiritual pursuits, research, or the occult. These individuals may be drawn to roles that involve detachment from material success, such as in astrology, spiritual counseling, or any field where inner wisdom and insight are valued over external recognition. Ketu's influence may also lead to careers in fields that require a deep understanding of the metaphysical or esoteric.

Additionally, the D10 chart (Dasamsa) is used for a deeper analysis of career prospects.

I hope this helps! ♥️

©️kleopatra45

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Big Train managers earn bonuses for greenlighting unsafe cars

Tomorrow (November 16) I'll be in Stratford, Ontario, appearing onstage with Vass Bednar as part of the CBC IDEAS Festival. I'm also doing an afternoon session for middle-schoolers at the Stratford Public Library.

Almost no one knows this, but last June, a 90-car train got away from its crew in Hernando, MS, rolling three miles through two public crossings, a ghost train that included 47 potentially explosive propane cars. The "bomb train" neither crashed nor derailed, which meant that Grenada Railroad/Gulf & Atantic didn't have to report it.

This is just one of many terrifying near-misses that are increasingly common in America's hyper-concentrated, private equity-dominated rail sector, where unsafe practices dominate and whistleblowers face brutal retaliation for coming forward to regulators.

These unsafe practices – and the corporate policies that deliberately gave rise to them – are documented in terrifying, eye-watering detail in a deeply reported Propublica story by Topher Sanders, Jessica Lussenhop,Dan Schwartz, Danelle Morton and Gabriel L Sandoval:

https://www.propublica.org/article/railroad-safety-union-pacific-csx-bnsf-trains-freight

It's a tale of depraved indifference to public safety, backstopped by worker intimidation. The reporting is centered on railyard maintenance inspectors, who are charged with writing up "bad orders" to prevent unsafe railcars from shipping out. As private equity firms consolidated rail into an ever-dwindling number of companies, these workers face supervisors who are increasingly hostile to these bad orders.

It got so alarming that some staffers started carrying hidden digital recorders, so they could capture audio of their bosses illegally ordering them to greenlight railcars that were too unsafe for use. The article features direct – and alarming – quotes, like supervisor Andrew Letcher, boss of the maintenance crews at Union Pacific's Kansas City yard saying, "If I was an inspector on a train I would probably let some of that nitpicky shit go."

Letcher – and fellow managers for other Tier 1 railroads quoted in the piece – aren't innately hostile to public safety. They are quite frank about why they want inspectors to "let that nitpicky shit go." As Letcher explains, "The first thing that I’m getting questioned about right now, every day, is why we’re over 200 bad orders and what we’re doing to get them down."

In other words, corporate rail owners have ordered their supervisors to reduce the amount of maintenance outages on the rail lines, but have not given them additional preventative maintenance budgets or crew. These supervisors warn their employees that high numbers of bad orders could cost them their jobs, even lead to the shutdown of the car shops where inspectors are prone to pulling dangerous cars out of service.

It's a ruthless form of winnowing. Gresham's Law holds that "bad money drives out good" – in an economy where counterfeit money circulates, people preferentially spend their fake money to get it out of their hands, until all the money in circulation is funny money. This is the rail safety equivalent: simply fire everyone who reports unsafe conditions and all your railcars will be deemed safe, with the worst railcars shipped out first. A market for lemons – except these aren't balky used sedans, they're unsafe railcars full of toxic chemicals or explosive propane.

When cataclysmic rail disasters occur – like this year's East Palestine derailment – the rail industry reassures us that this is an isolated incident, pointing to the system's excellent overall safety record. But that record is a mirage, because the near-misses don't have to be reported. Those near-misses are coming more frequently, as the culture of profit over safety incurs a mounting maintenance debt, filling America's rails with potential "bomb cars."

Rail mergers and other forms of deregulated, anything-goes capitalism are justified by conservative economists who insist that "incentives matter," and that the profit motive provides the incentive to improve efficiency, leading to lower costs and better service. But the incentive to externalize risk, kick the can down the road, and capture regulators rarely concerns the "incentives matter" crowd.

Here's an incentive that matters. Rail managers' bonuses – as much as a fifth of their take home pay – are only paid if the trains they oversee run on time. Inspectors have recorded their managers admitting that they have quotas – a maximum number of bad orders their facility may produce, irrespective of how much unsafe rolling stock passes through the facility.

Inspectors have caught their managers removing repair order tags from cars they've flagged as unsafe. Inspectors will log orders in a database, only to have the record mysteriously deleted, or marked as serviced when no service has occurred. Some inspectors have seen the same cars in their yard with the same problems, and repeatedly flagged them without any maintenance being performed before they're shipped out again.

Former managers from Union Pacific, CSX and Norfolk Southern told Propublica that they operated in an environment where safety reports were discouraged, and that workers who filed these reports were viewed as "complainers." Workers furnished Propublica with recordings of rail managers berating them for reporting persistent unsafe conditions the Federal Railroad Administration. Other workers from BNSF said that they believed that their bosses were told when they called the company's "confidential" work-safety tipline, setting them up for retaliation by bosses who'd falsified safety reports.

Whistleblowers who seek justice at OSHA are stymied by long delays, and while switching their cases to court can win them cash settlements, these do not get recorded on the company's safety record, which allows the company to go on claiming to be a paragon of safety and prudence.

The culture of retaliation is pervasive, which explains how the 47-cars worth of propane on the "bomb train" that rolled unattended over three miles of track never made the news. There is a voluntary Close Call Reporting System (operated by NASA!) where rail companies can report these disasters. Not one of America's Class 1 rail companies participate in it.

After the East Palestine disaster, Transport Secretary Pete Buttigieg pushed the rail companies to join, but a year later, none have. It's part of an overall pattern with Secretary Buttigieg, who has prodigious, far-reaching powers under USC40 Section 41712(a), which allow him to punish companies for "unfair and deceptive" practices or "unfair methods of competition":

https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/10/the-courage-to-govern/#whos-in-charge

Buttigieg can't simply hand down orders under 41712(a) – to wield this power, he must follow administrative procedures, conducting market studies, seeking comment, and proposing a rule. Other members of the Biden administration with similar powers, like FTC chair Lina Khan, arrived in office with a ranked-priority list of bad corporate conduct and immediately set about teeing up rules to give relief to the American public.

By contrast, Buttigieg's agency has done precious little to establish the evidentiary record to punish the worst American companies under its remit. His most-touted achievement was to fine five airlines for saving money by cancelling their flights and stranding their passengers. But of the five airlines affected by Buttigieg's order, four were not US companies. The sole affected US carrier was Spirit airlines, with 2% of the market. The Big Four US airlines – who have a much worse record than the ones that were fined – were not affected at all:

https://prospect.org/infrastructure/transportation/ftc-noncompete-airline-flight-cancellation-buttigieg/

Rather than directly regulating the US transportation sector, Buttigieg prefers exacting nonbinding promises from them (like the Tier 1 rail companies' broken promise to sign up to the Close Call Reporting System). Under his leadership, the Federal Railroad Agency has proposed weakening rail safety standards, rescinding an order to improve the braking systems on undermaintained, mile-long trains carrying potentially deadly freight:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/11/dinah-wont-you-blow/#ecp

The US transportation system is accumulating a terrifying safety debt, behind a veil of corporate secrecy. It badly demands direct regulation and close oversight.

If you are interested in rail safety, I strongly recommend this episode of Well There's Your Problem, "a podcast about engineering disasters, with slides" – you will laugh your head off and then never sleep again:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BMQTdYXaH8

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/11/15/safety-third/#all-the-livelong-day

[probablyasocialecologist]

Articles, reports, and studies about agriculture are likely to contain some version of the following sentiment: “The population is expected to grow to almost 10 billion people by 2050. We must double food production in order to meet demand without hiking up prices. How are we going to produce enough food to feed all of these people without destroying the planet?” Increasing food production to meet the demands of a growing population is presented as the ultimate conundrum. Proposed solutions are predominantly centered on increased reliance on technologies to maximize yields and feed ‘all of these hungry people’ as the population grows, accelerating at a seemingly unstoppable rate. Whatever new technologies or techniques are introduced, they are, first and foremost, measured along the metric of increasing yield. This narrative isn’t just misguided — it depoliticizes the problem, shifting blame in a dangerous way. The reality is that we have enough food on the planet to feed every human being a calorically complete and healthy diet. Contrary to popular belief, hunger is most often caused not by a lack of food but by a lack of access. With the amount of food we produce today, we could feed the highest population prediction of 10 billion people by 2050 — today. This has much more to do with economic inequality than anything to do with population. The people who cannot afford food are most often the people involved in growing it. The vast majority of the world’s impoverished people, most of whom live in rural areas, are involved in agriculture. This seems counterintuitive, but many farmers worldwide are net food buyers, meaning they do not subsist on the food they grow, they sell their crops and use that money to buy food for their families. When prices for crops are too low to offset input prices, when farmers face barriers to accessing markets or credit, or they are forced into exploitative contracts or other arrangements, farmers do not have adequate funds to purchase food for themselves and their families. This is the result of the long process of industrialization that has displaced millions of rural people and removed them from their traditional agricultural practices, replacing polycultures with monocultures. Perhaps the other most damning piece of evidence to counter the narrative that we must ramp up production to end hunger is that some cities have already ended it — without increasing yield. Belo Horizonte, one of the largest cities in Brazil, managed to virtually eliminate hunger through a network of policies addressing different facets of the issue. They expanded school meal programs; partnered with local small farmers to deliver produce to underserved parts of the city at fixed prices for staples; created subsidized restaurants where people could eat affordable, dignified meals, and a host of other policies. It never took more than 2 percent of their annual budget, and the whole transition took less than 10 years. It didn’t require corporations ‘innovating’ or developing expensive technologies. It required political will, the strengthening of governance systems, declaring food as a right of citizenship, and correcting for hunger as a market failure. We are choosing not to end hunger. Presenting it otherwise obscures the fact that it is, at its core, a matter of political will — not a matter of ability.

[mariacallous]

Editor's note:This is the first blog in our series that examines how social determinants influence gender biases in public health research, menstrual hygiene product development, and women’s health outcomes. 

Worldwide, over 100 million women use tampons every day as they are the most popular form of menstrual products. U.S. women spent approximately $1 billion from 2016 to 2021 on tampons, and 22% to 86% of those who menstruate use them during their cycles, with adolescent girls and young adults preferring them. Tampons and pads are the most practical and common option for those who are working and have limited funds. Yet, a recent pilot study exposed concerning amounts of lead, arsenic, and toxic chemicals in tampons: 30 different tampons from 14 brands were evaluated for 16 different metal(loid)s, and tests indicated that all 16 metal(loid)s were detected in all different samples. This news comes as quite a shock to women who use these products. It raises many concerns and questions for those who do not have other viable options when they menstruate. We explore some of the major questions and concerns regarding the products on the market and their potential to increase the risk of exposure to harmful contaminants. It is clear that beyond this pilot study, further research is required to understand the potential health challenges. 

Unpacking the potential risks for those who use menstrual products  

Measurable concentrations of lead and arsenic in tampons are deeply concerning given how toxic they are. The World Health Organization (WHO) classifies lead as a major public health concern with no known safe exposure level. Arsenic can lead to several health issues such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes. There are three ways in which these metal(loid)s can be introduced into the product: 1) from the raw materials that absorbed the soil and air, like the cotton used in the absorbent core; 2) contamination from water during the manufacturing process; and 3) intentionally being added during the manufacturing process for certain purposes. No matter how these metal(loid)s are introduced into the product, the pilot study stresses that further research must be done to explore the consequences of vaginally absorbed chemicals given the direct line to the circulatory system.   

On an institutional level, the public health system has historically been biased toward the male perspective, essentially excluding research related to women’s health. In 1977, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommended that women of childbearing age should be excluded from clinical research. Because of this gendered bias, many women now experience delayed diagnoses, misdiagnoses, and suffer more adverse drug effects; eight out of 10 of the drugs removed from U.S. markets from 1997 to 2000 were almost exclusively due to the risk to women. In 1989, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) amended its policy to include women and minorities in research studies, but it wasn’t until 1993 that this policy became federal law in the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993. Then, in 2016, the NIH implemented a policy requiring the consideration of sex as a biological variable in research.  

Historically, women haven’t been in control of the various industries that support their unique health needs and develop products that allow them to manage their health in safe ways. In spite of this, women-owned businesses have increased over time, with many of them supporting a range of products, services, and health and child care needs. Changes in these industries can lead to a better understanding of how certain products aid or impede women’s health trajectories.  

Racialized and gendered bias in health research  

The life expectancy of women continues to be higher than men’s. That does not suggest there has been universal nor equitable support for women’s health issues and women’s health care. Black women are three times more likely to die from pregnancy-related issues. They also experience racism and differential treatment in health care and social service settings. This reality becomes starker when stigma and bias influence negative behaviors toward Black women and other women of color, and socioeconomic status limits access to preventative care, follow-up care, and other services and resources.   

Toxic menstrual products are just the tip of the iceberg for gender bias in health research. Gendered bias extends into how health care professionals evaluate men and women differently based on the stereotypical ideas of the gender binary. This results in those who are perceived as women receiving fewer diagnoses and treatments than men with similar conditions, as well as doctors interpreting women’s pain as stemming from emotional challenges rather than anything physical. In a study comparing a patient’s pain rating with an observer’s rating, women’s pain was consistently underestimated while men’s pain was overestimated. Women’s pain is often disregarded or minimized by health care professionals, as they often view it as nothing more than an emotional exaggeration or are quick to blame any physical pain on stress. This has led to a pain gap in which women with true medical emergencies are pushed aside. For instance, the Journal of the American Heart Association reported that women with chest pain waited 29% longer to see a doctor in emergency rooms than men.  

For people of color, especially Black women, the pain gap, as well as the gap in diagnoses and treatment, is exacerbated due to the intersectionality of gender, race, and the historical contexts of Black women’s health in America. Any analysis must consider the unique systemic levels of sexism and racism they face as being both Black and women. They face a multifaceted front of discrimination, sexism, and racism, in which doctors don’t believe their pain due to implicit biases against Black people—a dynamic that stems from slavery, during which it was common belief that Black people had a higher pain tolerance—and women. A study found that white medical students and residents believed at least one false biological difference between white and Black people and were thus more likely to underestimate a Black patient’s pain level.  

Intersectionality, as well as sexism, further explains why medical students that believe in racial differences in pain tolerance are less likely to accurately provide treatment recommendations or pain medications. A Pew study found that 55% of Black people say they’ve had at least one negative experience with doctors, where they felt like they were treated with less respect than others and had to advocate for themselves to get proper care. Comparatively, 52% of younger Black women and 40% of older Black women felt the need to speak up to receive care, while only 29% of younger Black men and 36% of older Black men felt similarly. Particularly among Black women, 34% said their women’s health concerns or symptoms weren’t taken seriously by their health care providers. This even happened to Serena Williams! 

Restructuring the health system  

On Tuesday, September 11, 2024, the FDA announced they would investigate the toxic chemicals and metals in tampons as a result of the pilot study. This comes after public outcry and Senator Patty Murray’s (D-Wash.) letter to FDA Commissioner Robert M. Califf asking the agency to evaluate next steps to ensure the safety of tampons and menstrual products. In her letter, she specifically asks what the FDA has done so far in their evaluations and what requirements they have for testing these products, ensuring a modicum of accountability within this market. As of July 2024, the FDA classifies tampons as medical devices and does regulate their safety but only to an extent, with no requirements to test menstrual products for chemical contaminants (aside from making sure they do not contain pesticides or dioxin). The pilot study on tampons containing harmful metals was the first of its kind, which sheds light on how long women’s health has been neglected. Regulations requiring manufacturers to test metals in tampons need to be implemented, and future studies on the adverse health impacts of metals entering the bloodstream must be prioritized. The FDA investigation will hopefully be a step in the right direction toward implementing stricter regulations.  

For too long, the health field has been saturated with studies by and for men. Women’s health, on the other hand, faces inadequate funding, a lack of consideration for women’s lived experiences, and the need for more women leading research teams investigating women’s health. Women, especially those who face economic and social disparities, have the capacity to break barriers and address real issues that impact millions of women each day but only if they are brought to the table. With structural change, we can address how women’s concerns are undermined and put forth efforts to determine new and effective measures for women’s health.  

[billionairebabes]

I'm Back!! Kinda...

I know it's been a while since I posted my own content or writing but I wrote this a few years back and never shared it but I know this would be helpful to a lot of you girlies now that the job market has once again taken a downturn. I originally wrote this after landing my first full-time job post-2020.

Like many, I graduated into a pandemic and found myself looking for my first job in the midst of a nationwide hiring freeze. The process was grueling but in failure, there are also many lessons learned and luckily, my search ended in success at one of the biggest tech companies in the world. In the past few years, I’ve worked at some of the biggest and best companies in the world making it past several rounds of interviews, impressing my future colleagues, managers, and even VPs so it’s safe to say I know a thing or two about landing a job. Here goes!

B's Guide to Landing Your DREAM JOB PART 1!

If you’re still in college there are a few things I would suggest a few things. 

Start interning as soon as possible. The sooner you start practicing interviewing at companies you’re interested in, the better. Also, a few internships on your resume prior to your graduation will help A LOT. Trust me. You’ll have experiences to speak about in all those behavioral interviews as well. 

Become friendly with the professors in your field. They can become a good reference for you later. Even if only one to three times a semester go to your professor’s office and chat. They can also put in a good word for you for programs. This brings me to my next point. 

In most industries, there are conferences each year that either offer discounts (or free tickets) to college students and/or are directly aimed at college students. If you’re a POC, find programs aimed at diversifying that industry. These conferences often have recruiting opportunities with large companies and most times the interview process won’t be as rigorous compared to an applicant who may have applied online. I would recommend compiling a list at the beginning of each school year with these program names as well as their application due dates. 

Don’t join clubs just to have them on your resume. Aim for leadership roles or redirect your time to other personal projects that interest you. It’ll make for a better conversation with your recruiters and hiring managers to say “I built XYZ because I was interested in ABC” rather than “I was just a member of that club and went to the meetings once a month.” 

This varies across industries but for the most part, your GPA isn’t all that important especially after you land your first job after college so breathe. 

Perfect your resume and this part couldn’t be more critical. In the age of ATS (Applicant Tracking Systems) and fierce competition, it’s become vital that your resume can stand out and communicate very clearly how you’re qualified for the job. Here are my resume tips: 

My favorite program to create resumes on is Canva. They have a ton of great templates and are super customizable and not to mention, it’s FREE. 

Use quantifiable measurements to show your results if possible. 

Use action verbs at the beginning of your bullet points. Personally, I believe each description should have at least 3-4 bullet points but never only 1. Here are some of the words on my resume: Constructed, Spearheaded, Managed, Collaborated, and Lead. All of your descriptions should state what you did, how you did it (programs used, methods, etc.), and the outcome.  

I personally think every resume should include your: Experience, Skills, Leadership/ Professional Development (for college students this could mean conferences attended, programs, boot camps, etc.), Projects (shows independence and initiative), Contact, and Education. Make sure your LinkedIn is included in your ‘Contact’ section. You should have a personalized LinkedIn link, that’s free. 

Your LinkedIn needs to be at 100% completion. This is a place where you can really show off because there are no space limits. This can showcase every job or internship you’ve ever had, every program or project you’ve had an impact on, etc. The better your LinkedIn, the better chance you have a recruiter finding you and inviting you to interview for a role they think would be a good fit. 

Your profile picture ideally is a professional one but if not possibly find time to take one in natural daylight with a quality camera and a plain background. I’ve also seen people using AI to now turn regular pics into professional ones. 

Interact with posts, comment, and share. This will help get your name and profile circulating. 

Announce that you’re looking for a job to your network. Include your resume and what you’re looking for in that post. You never know who might see it. 

Grow your network and the easiest place to start is with people you’ve gone to school with and current or previous coworkers. 

Put your resume on your LinkedIn profile (You can do this by attaching a media file) 

Know your elevator pitch and know it well because every single person you interview with will probably ask you this. My elevator pitch sounds something like this: 

I’m Britt and in  June, I graduated from Icy University with a degree in Math and a minor in Sociology. Throughout college, I completed a number of internships doing _______ and have developed skills in _______. When I was a senior I learned about (or developed an interest in) _____  and did _____ to grow my skills or learn more about it. Now that I’ve graduated I’m looking for a role in ______ where I can continue to ______. (My elevator pitch is now different now that I’ve had two full-time roles but you get the point)

Now we apply. 

LinkedIn is your friend here and my favorite job posting platform. Set up Job Alerts for companies you’re interested in so that you have a better chance of being an early applicant. 

As annoying as this is, you will have to edit your resume for almost every position you apply to. Use the words they use to describe your roles in your work history and remember to always save your resume as a PDF. This definitely will help you get past the ATS system. Remember to adjust the words used in your ‘Skills’ section too but don’t lie. These days, many companies with decent salaries are giving applicants take-home assignments. This applies to your cover letters as well. (I no longer write cover letters though, no one reads them).  I saved every version of my cover letter and could eventually just mix and match paragraphs according to the type of job I was applying to. Of course, you will still have to change some words to best match the position’s job posting. 

The LinkedIn stalking begins. Find someone at the company you’ve applied for and invite them to connect but ALWAYS include a note.  In this note, you will give a very brief introduction and your reason for messaging. Mine usually looked something like this: Hi ___, I’m Britt and I recently applied for the ____ position. I’d love to learn more about the department, the team, and the company. Would you have 15 minutes to chat sometime this week or next? Thanks in advance, Britt. 

My tip is that you find a manager on the team rather than a recruiter for the company. I find that they never accept invitations but managers usually will. 

On this call, you’ll discuss exactly what you mentioned in your opening note, and remember to have prepared questions for them. If you make a good impression, most managers will be willing to forward your resume to the recruiting team. 

Let me know if you all want a part 2 on how I prepare for my interviews. I’d say I have an interview success rate of about 90% in the past 2 years! 

[syteline-csi]

Why Infor SyteLine ERP Is Ideal for Mid-Market Manufacturers & Service Providers

When electronics and other mid-market manufacturers want their ERP system to enable growth and create a new competitive advantage, they rely upon Infor Infor SyteLine, also known as CloudSuite Industrial (CSI).

When service and rental equipment providers want their ERP system to enable their growth into world-class service organizations and empower field technicians with data at their fingertips, they also rely upon Infor Infor SyteLine CSI.

We’ve all heard the horror stories of failed ERP implementations so, when manufacturers and service providers want SyteLine ERP successfully implemented—and guaranteed—they rely upon Bridging Business Technology Solutions (BBTS).

An ERP Ideal for Manufacturers

Infor SyteLine is the primary ERP we support because it’s ideal for use by discrete and process manufacturers, especially electronics manufacturers. We also guarantee the success of your Infor SyteLine implementation whether you’re commissioning an ERP system for the first time or replacing your current system, so you can cross the risk of a failed implementation off your list of worries.

SyteLine also can be customized to recognize customer-owned inventory and allocate it only to that customer so you don’t have a unique part number for the same part used by multiple customers. You can also reserve stock for specific products of the same customer or reserve any part in your inventory for a specific order until the order is released.

SyteLine delivers the same type of functionality as SAP and Oracle for a fraction of the cost and headache of implementing a tier 1 ERP system.

An ERP Ideal for Service Providers

Infor SyteLine is the primary ERP we support because it’s a perfect fit for service providers, especially those who rent equipment. We also guarantee the success of your Infor SyteLine implementation. So, whether you’re commissioning an ERP system for the first time or replacing your current system, you don’t have to worry about the disruption of a failed implementation.

Among the biggest benefits of SyteLine for service providers is no longer having to enter data multiple times into disparate systems. Working with common data means that everyone works from the same real-time information, which:

Empowers your service technicians to complete more service orders

Enables your employees to spend more time building relationships with customers

Gives your managers the tools to analyze data and find strategic growth opportunities

SyteLine delivers the same type of functionality as SAP and Oracle for a fraction of the cost and none of the headaches associated with implementing a tier 1 ERP system.

Successful Implementations, Guaranteed

The BBTS team has implemented SyteLine successfully over 165 times since 2013 with a proven ERP implementation process that begins with improving inventory control, planning and forecasting, financial close, and other business processes. SyteLine then standardizes these process best practices and ensures they are followed.

BBTS also provides post-implementation SyteLine enhancements, upgrades, business process improvements, and workflow optimization so you get the most out of your SyteLine investment.

Get Started Today

To determine if SyteLine ERP is right for you, we will connect you with one of our implementation experts as part of a process review. A successful implementation begins with understanding your core business processes, then recreating and evolving them in SyteLine.

Together, we can determine how you will benefit from SyteLine and calculate a target return on investment (ROI) to help justify the move. Contact us to learn more about SyteLine and how we are able to guarantee a successful ERP implementation when so many fail. You can also take advantage of the process review offer.

[femmefatalevibe]

How to survive having a job that you don't like? (Sadly. It's not the vibe. But quitting is not an option)

Hi love! I empathize with you on this one. Spending your entire day and mental energy on tasks you dread doing (and need to execute well) can be overwhelmingly draining. I'm hoping that this job only takes up 5 days of your week! Here are my best tips:

Keep Your "Why" Top of Mind: Even if a job doesn't align with your interests and passions or is in a bad working environment, you have to focus on the short-term purpose the job provides. Relish in having a steady paycheck to give you food to eat and a roof over your head. While long-term you deserve to find more purpose in your work, having a semblance of financial security will always top having to constantly worry about where your next meal is coming from – even if you hate every moment of being on the clock.

Plan Ahead: Mentally work through the following day ahead of time. Plan the tasks, meetings, and logistics right when you're ending your work day. This framework allows you to overcome the mental blocks and dread before you can go into decompress mode, so you can just wake up and go through the motions the next day. Taking the emotional aspect out of the daily work you hate is the simplest way to avoid burnout (at least in the short term).

Systemize Your Days (When Possible): Creating systems for different tasks or even your entire day can help you be more productive and lighten your mental load. This practice can help you to get your dreaded work done in less time while allowing you to feel less drained at the end of your shift. It's a win-win strategy. Create email templates you save for different types of messages (client-facing, different types of projects, scheduling meetings, presentation notes, etc.), have a folder organizing your different projects, program different Excel formats, and have outlines of decks saved – almost like a pre-made template that's actually useful (and potentially unique).

Focus On Skill Building Over Purpose: Consider the transferable skills you're acquiring while enduring this position – even if they don't pertain to your desired industry or role. Some of these universally-helpful transferable skills include writing a killer email, building a convincing case or admirable deck, learning how to speak to clients or stakeholders with confidence and grace, team-building and collaboration, organization, interpersonal communication, or simply prolonging your attention span. Reflect and dive deep to consider all the life lessons you can leverage later on by holding down this occupation.

Find Ways To Network Outside of Work Hours: Follow & connect with colleagues and influential figures in your industry on social media. Thoughtfully engage with the content they share. Ask about treating them to coffee for an informational interview. Go out to industry-related events, conferences, etc., and make sure to connect with those you met on LinkedIn the next day with a personalized connection message. Connect two of your mutual connections whenever possible. Allow karma to work in your favor.

Lurk, Research, & Study To Optimize Your Job Search: Set aside 20-30 minutes a day to search LinkedIn, job boards, social media (Twitter, Instagram), etc. to see potential next opportunities and evaluate the current market, trends, and most in-demand skillsets within your field/industry. Always tailor your applications and messages to mutual connections or hiring managers when applying to new roles. Be aware of your desired role/industry is evolving. Upskill whenever possible to increase your market value.

Incorporate Simple Pleasures Into Your Days: Make your favorite coffee every morning, have a go-to playlist that improves your mood to listen to before work, incorporate your favorite healthy meals into your week, find a workout you enjoy to add into your day either before or after work, indulge in a favorite book or TV show after work as a "reward" for making it through the day. Practice self-care – do a face mask or specialty hair treatment on a weeknight. Invest in an at-home massage tool or luxurious loungewear to wear in the evenings.

Indulge In A Creative Outlet: Find an opportunity for growth and self-expression outside of a workplace setting. Write, read, paint, draw, cook, bake, take a dance class, learn a new language, how to play a new instrument, or about interior design. Create Pinterest boards, poems, new playlists, and new recipes to celebrate your desire for variety in your otherwise mundane life.

Have Plans To Look Forward To Every Week: Whether it's hanging out with friends, going to a museum, watching a movie, or taking a walk along your favorite local route. Ensure you enjoy how you spend your days off. Don't waste time worrying about a dead-end job when you're off the clock. Spending your leisure time on your own terms. Take this time to do what you love.

Romanticize The Lifestyle It Provides: When motivation or your morale hits a low point, take time for gratitude and focus on the resources this job allows you to integrate into your life – whether that's a roof over your head, the opportunity to eat meals you enjoy, wear outfits you love, or even just provide you some sort of daily routine.

Consider your current job as a chapter in your life and career. Acquire the lessons, skills, relationships, and resources you can as preparation for the next stage in your ever-evolving journey.

Hope this helps xx

[dailyanarchistposts]

I.1.3 What is wrong with markets anyway?

A lot. Markets soon result in what are termed “market forces,” impersonal forces which ensure that the people in the economy do what is required of them in order for the economy to function. The market system, in capitalist apologetics, is presented to appear as a regime of freedom where no one forces anyone to do anything, where we “freely” exchange with others as we see fit. However, the facts of the matter are somewhat different, since the market often ensures that people act in ways opposite to what they desire or forces them to accept “free agreements” which they may not actually desire. Wage labour is the most obvious example of this, for, as we indicated in section B.4, most people have little option but to agree to work for others.

We must stress here that not all anarchists are opposed to the market. Individualist anarchists favour it while Proudhon wanted to modify it while retaining competition. For many, the market equals capitalism but this is not the case as it ignores the fundamental issue of (economic) class, namely who owns the means of production. Capitalism is unique in that it is based on wage labour, i.e. a market for labour as workers do not own their own means of production and have to sell themselves to those who do. Thus it is entirely possible for a market to exist within a society and for that society not to be capitalist. For example, a society of independent artisans and peasants selling their product on the market would not be capitalist as workers would own and control their means of production. Similarly, Proudhon’s competitive system of self-managed co-operatives and mutual banks would be non-capitalist (and socialist) for the same reason. Anarchists object to capitalism due to the quality of the social relationships it generates between people (i.e. it generates authoritarian ones). If these relationships are eliminated then the kinds of ownership which do so are anarchistic. Thus the issue of ownership matters only in-so-far it generates relationships of the desired kind (i.e. those based on liberty, equality and solidarity). To concentrate purely on “markets” or “property” means to ignore social relationships and the key aspect of capitalism, namely wage labour. That right-wingers do this is understandable (to hide the authoritarian core of capitalism) but why (libertarian or other) socialists should do so is less clear.

In this section of the FAQ we discuss anarchist objections to the market as such rather than the capitalist market. The workings of the market do have problems with them which are independent of, or made worse by, the existence of wage-labour. It is these problems which make most anarchists hostile to the market and so desire a (libertarian) communist society. So, even if we assume a mutualist (a libertarian market-socialist) system of competing self-managed workplaces, then communist anarchists would argue that market forces would soon result in many irrationalities occurring.

Most obviously, operating in a market means submitting to the profit criterion. This means that however much workers might want to employ social criteria in their decision making, they cannot. To ignore profitability would cause their firm to go bankrupt. Markets, therefore, create conditions that compel producers to decide things which are not be in their, or others, interest, such as introducing deskilling or polluting technology, working longer hours, and so on, in order to survive on the market. For example, a self-managed workplace will be more likely to invest in safe equipment and working practices, this would still be dependent on finding the money to do so and may still increase the price of their finished product. So we could point to the numerous industrial deaths and accidents which are due to market forces making it unprofitable to introduce adequate safety equipment or working conditions, (conservative estimates for industrial deaths in the USA are between 14,000 and 25,000 per year plus over 2 million disabled), or to increased pollution and stress levels which shorten life spans.

This tendency for self-managed firms to adjust to market forces by increasing hours, working more intensely, allocating resources to accumulating equipment rather than leisure time or consumption can be seen in co-operatives under capitalism. While lacking bosses may reduce this tendency in a post-capitalist economy, it will not eliminate it. This is why many socialists, including anarchists, call the way markets force unwilling members of a co-operatives make such unpleasant decisions a form of “self-exploitation” (although this is somewhat misleading, as there no exploitation in the capitalist sense of owners appropriating unpaid labour). For communist-anarchists, a market system of co-operatives “has serious limitations” as “a collective enterprise is not necessarily a commune — nor is it necessarily communistic in its outlook.” This is because it can end up “competing with like concerns for resources, customers, privileges, and even profits” as they “become a particularistic interest” and “are subjected to the same social pressures by the market in which they must function.” This “tends increasingly to encroach on their higher ethical goals — generally, in the name of ‘efficiency’, and the need to ‘grow’ if they are to survive, and the overwhelming temptation to acquire larger earnings.” [Murray Bookchin, Remaking Society, pp. 193–4]

Similarly, a market of self-managed firms would still suffer from booms and slumps as the co-operatives response to changes in prices would still result in over-production (see section C.7.2) and over-investment (see section C.7.3). While the lack of non-labour income would help reduce the severity of the business cycle, it seems unlikely to eliminate it totally. Equally, many of the problems of market-increased uncertainty and the destabilising aspects of price signals discussed in section I.1.5 are just as applicable to all markets, including post-capitalist ones.

This is related to the issue of the “tyranny of small decisions” we highlighted in section B.6. This suggests that the aggregate effect of individual decisions produces social circumstances which are irrational and against the interests of those subject to them. This is the case with markets, where competition results in economic pressures which force its participants to act in certain ways, ways they would prefer not to do but, as isolated individuals or workplaces, end up doing due to market forces. In markets, it is rational for people try to buy cheap and sell dear. Each tries to maximise their income by either minimising their costs or maximising their prices, not because they particularly want to but because they need to as taking into account other priorities is difficult as there is no means of finding them out and deeply inadvisable as it is competitively suicidal as it places burdens on firms which their competitors need not face.

As we noted in section E.3, markets tend to reward those who act in anti-social ways and externalise costs (in terms of pollution and so on). In a market economy, it is impossible to determine whether a low cost reflects actual efficiency or a willingness to externalise, i.e., impose costs on others. Markets rarely internalise external costs. Two economic agents who strike a market-rational bargain between themselves need not consider the consequences of their bargain for other people outside their bargain, nor the consequences for the earth. In reality, then, market exchanges are never bilateral agreements as their effects impact on the wider society (in terms of, say, pollution, inequality and so on). This awkward fact is ignored in the market. As the left-wing economist Joan Robinson put it: “In what industry, in what line of business, are the true social costs of the activity registered in its accounts? Where is the pricing system that offers the consumer a fair choice between air to breath and motor cars to drive about in?” [Contribution to Modern Economics, p. 10]

While, to be fair, there will be a reduced likelihood for a workplace of self-employed workers to pollute their own neighbourhoods in a free society, the competitive pressures and rewards would still be there and it seems unlikely that they will be ignored, particularly if survival on the market is at stake so communist-anarchists fear that while not having bosses, capitalists and landlords would mitigate some of the irrationalities associated with markets under capitalism, it will not totally remove them. While the market may be free, people would not be.

Even if we assume that self-managed firms resist the temptations and pressures of the market, any market system is also marked by a continuing need to expand production and consumption. In terms of environmental impact, a self-managed firm must still make profits in order to survive and so the economy must grow. As such, every market system will tend to expand into an environment which is of fixed size. As well as placing pressure on the planet’s ecology, this need to grow impacts on human activity as it also means that market forces ensure that work continually has to expand. Competition means that we can never take it easy, for as Max Stirner argued, ”[r]estless acquisition does not let us take breath, take a calm enjoyment. We do not get the comfort of our possessions … Hence it is at any rate helpful that we come to an agreement about human labours that they may not, as under competition, claim all our time and toil.” [The Ego and Its Own, p. 268] Value needs to be created, and that can only be done by labour and so even a non-capitalist market system will see work dominate people’s lives. Thus the need to survive on the market can impact on broader (non-monetary) measures of welfare, with quality of life falling as a higher GDP is created as the result of longer working hours with fewer holidays. Such a regime may, perhaps, be good for material wealth but it is not great for people.

The market can also block the efficient use of resources. For example, for a long time energy efficient light-bulbs were much more expensive than normal ones. Over the long period, however, they used far less energy than normal ones, meaning less need to produce more energy (and so burn coal and oil, for example). However, the high initial price ensured that most people continued to use the less efficient bulbs and so waste resources. Much the same can be said of alternative forms of energy, with investment in (say) wind energy ignored in favour of one-use and polluting energy sources. A purely market system would not allow decisions which benefit the long-term interests of people to be made (for example, by distributing energy-efficient light-bulbs freely or at a reduced cost) as these would harm the profits of those co-operatives which tried to do so.

Also, markets do not reflect the values of things we do not put a price upon (as we argued in section B.5). It cannot protect wilderness, for example, simply because it requires people to turn it into property and sell it as a commodity. If you cannot afford to visit the new commodity, the market turns it into something else, no matter how much you value it. The market also ignores the needs of future generations as they always discount the value of the long term future. A payment to be made 1,000 years from now (a mere speck in geological time) has a market value of virtually zero according to any commonly used discount rate. Even 50 years in the future cannot be adequately considered as competitive pressures force a short term perspective on people harmful to present and future generations, plus the ecology of the planet.

Then there are corrosive effects of the market on human personalities. As we have argued elsewhere (see section B.1.3), competition in a free market creates numerous problems — for example, the creation of an “ethics of mathematics” and the strange inversion of values in which things (property/money) become more important than people. This can have a de-humanising effect, with people becoming cold-hearted calculators who put profits before people. This can be seen in capitalism, where economic decisions are far more important than ethical ones — particularly as such an inhuman mentality can be rewarded on the market. Merit does not necessarily breed success, and the successful do not necessarily have merit. The truth is that, in the words of Noam Chomsky, “wealth and power tend to accrue to those who are ruthless, cunning, avaricious, self-seeking, lacking in sympathy and compassion, subservient to authority and willing to abandon principle for material gain, and so on … Such qualities might be just the valuable ones for a war of all against all.” [For Reasons of State, pp. 139–140]

Needless to be said, if the market does reward such people with success it can hardly be considered as a good thing. A system which elevates making money to the position of the most important individual activity will obviously result in the degrading of human values and an increase in neurotic and psychotic behaviour. Little wonder, as Alfie Kohn has argued, competition can have serious negative effects on us outside of work, with it damaging both our personal psychology and our interpersonal relationships. Thus competition “itself is responsible for the development of a lower moral standard” which places winning at any cost above fairness and justice. Kohn quotes Nathan Ackerman, the father of family therapy, who noted that the “strife of competition reduces empathic sympathy, distorts communication, impairs the mutuality of support and sharing, and decreases the satisfaction of personal need.” [No Contest, p. 163 and pp. 142–3] Thus, the market can impoverish us as individuals, sabotaging self-esteem, promoting conformity, ruining relationships and making us less than what we could be. This is a problem of markets as such, not only capitalist ones and so non-capitalist markets could make us less human and more a robot.

All market decisions are crucially conditioned by the purchasing power of those income groups that can back their demands with money. Not everyone can work (the sick, the very old, children and so forth) and for those who can, personal circumstances may impact on their income. Moreover, production has become so interwoven that it “is utterly impossible to draw a distinction between the work of each” and so we should “put the needs above the works, and first of all to recognise the right to live, and later on the right to well-being for all those who took their share in production.” This is particularly the case as “the needs of the individual, do not always correspond to his works” — for example, “a man of forty, father of three children, has other needs than a young man of twenty” and “the woman who suckles her infant and spends sleepless nights at its bedside, cannot do as much work as the man who has slept peacefully.” [Kropotkin, Conquest of Bread, p. 170 and p. 171] This was why communist-anarchists like Kropotkin stressed the need not only to abolish wage-labour but also money, the wages system.

So it goes without saying that purchasing power (demand) and need are not related, with people often suffering simply because they do not have the money required to purchase, say, health care, housing or food for themselves or their families. While economic distress may be less in a non-capitalist market system, it still would exist as would the fear of it. The market is a continuous bidding for goods, resources, and services, with those who have the most purchasing power the winners. This means that the market system is the worst one for allocating resources when purchasing power is unequally distributed (this is why orthodox economists make the convenient assumption of a “given distribution of income” when they try to show that a capitalist allocation of resources is the best one via “Pareto optimality”). While a mutualist system should reduce inequality drastically, it cannot be assumed that inequalities will not increase over time. This is because inequalities in resources leads to inequalities of power on the market and, assuming self-interest, any trade or contract will benefit the powerful more than the powerless, so re-enforcing and potentially increasing the inequalities and power between the parties. Similarly, while an anarchist society would be created with people driven by a sense of solidarity and desire for equality, markets tend to erode those feelings and syndicates or communes which, thanks to the resources they control (such as rare raw materials or simply the size of their investments reducing competitive pressures) have an advantage on the market may be tempted to use their monopoly power vis-à-vis other groups in society to accrue more income for themselves at the expense of less fortunate syndicates and communes. This could degenerate back into capitalism as any inequalities that exist between co-operatives would be increased by competition, forcing weaker co-operatives to fail and so creating a pool of workers with nothing to sell but their labour. The successful co-operatives could then hire those workers and so re-introduce wage labour. So these possibilities could, over time, lead to a return a post-capitalist market system to capitalism if the inequalities become so great that the new rich become so alienated from the rest of society they recreate wage-labour and, by necessity, a state to enforce a desire for property in land and the means of production against public opinion.

All this ensures that the market cannot really provide the information necessary for rational-decision making in terms of ecological impact as well as human activity and so resources are inefficiently allocated. We all suffer from the consequences of that, with market forces impoverishing our environment and quality of life. Thus are plenty of reasons for concluding that efficiency and the market not only do not necessarily coincide, but, indeed, necessarily do not coincide. Indeed, rather than respond to individual needs, the market responds to money (more correctly, profit), which by its very nature provides a distorted indication of individual preferences (and does not take into account values which are enjoyed collectively, such as clean air, or potentially enjoyed, such as the wilderness a person may never visit but desires to see exist and protected).

This does not mean that social anarchists propose to “ban” the market — far from it. This would be impossible. What we do propose is to convince people that a profit-based market system has distinctly bad effects on individuals, society and the planet’s ecology, and that we can organise our common activity to replace it with libertarian communism. As Max Stirner argued, competition “has a continued existence” because “all do not attend to their affair and come to an understanding with each other about it … . Abolishing competition is not equivalent to favouring the guild. The difference is this: In the guild baking, etc., is the affair of the guild-brothers; in competition, the affair of chance competitors; in the union, of those who require baked goods, and therefore my affair, yours, the affair of neither guildic nor the concessionary baker, but the affair of the united.” [Op. Cit., p. 275]

Therefore, social anarchists do not appeal purely to altruism in their struggle against the de-humanising effects of the market, but also to to egoism: the simple fact that co-operation and mutual aid is in our best interests as individuals. By co-operating and controlling “the affairs of the united,” we can ensure a free society which is worth living in, one in which the individual is not crushed by market forces and has time to fully develop his or her individuality and uniqueness:

“Solidarity is therefore the state of being in which Man attains the greatest degree of security and wellbeing; and therefore egoism itself, that is the exclusive consideration of one’s own interests, impels Man and human society towards solidarity.” [Errico Malatesta, Anarchy, p. 30]

In conclusion then, communist-anarchists argue that even non-capitalist markets would result in everyone being so busy competing to further their “self-interest” that they would loose sight of what makes life worth living and so harm their actual interests. Ultimately, what counts as self-interest is shaped by the surrounding social system. The pressures of competing may easily result in short-term and narrow interests taking precedence over richer, deeper needs and aspirations which a communal system could allow to flourish by providing the social institutions by which individuals can discuss their joint interests, formulate them and act to achieve them. That is, even non-capitalist markets would result in people simply working long and hard to survive on the market rather than living. If one paradox of authoritarian socialism is that it makes everyone miserable by forcing them to altruistically look out for the happiness of others, market-based libertarian socialism could produce the potential paradox of making everyone miserable by the market forcing them to pursue a limited notion of self-interest which ensures that they do not have the time or opportunity to really be happy and at one with themselves and others.

In other words, bosses act as they do under capitalism in part because markets force them to. Getting rid of bosses need not eliminate all the economic pressures which influence the bosses’ decisions and, in turn, could force groups of workers to act in similar ways. Thus a competitive system would undermine many of the benefits which people sought when they ended capitalism. This is why some socialists inaccurately call socialist schemes of competing co-operatives “self-managed capitalism” or “self-exploitation” — they are simply drawing attention to the negative aspects of markets which getting rid of the boss cannot solve. Significantly, Proudhon was well aware of the negative aspect of market forces and suggested various institutional structures, such as the ago-industrial federation, to combat them (so while in favour of competition he was, unlike the individualist anarchists, against the free market). Communist anarchists, unsurprisingly, argue that individualist anarchists tend to stress the positive aspects of competition while ignoring or downplaying its negative sides. While, undoubtedly, capitalism makes the negative side of competition worse than it could be it does not automatically follow that a non-capitalist market would not have similar, if smaller, negative aspects to it.

[wispstalk]

bear with me while I sound like some kinda online course for white collar management track ppl, but. there is a ton of advice out there about writing process and it's good to read it and try things out, but I only ever saw improvement when I set out on a project with a concrete goal and then used that goal to center my attention around *my* workflow. I have an inclination toward certain practices. Whatever I'm doing, however well it's working (or not), that's data and I can collect it, learn from it, and implement what I learn. I have a good outlining and drafting system, and it's incomprehensible to anyone but me, but it works because I leveraged my own working practices instead of trying to emulate how others work.

As for the goal, it's along the lines of "I'm gonna work on [characterization, dialogue, perspective switches, etc]" but you pick one priority and then you do that. Other shit can fall by the wayside at the expense of this priority. It's a little ridiculous to use words like "measurable" when it comes to writing ability but if you narrow your focus to one technique, you can then look back on your finished product (which you did finish, because you prioritized) and see if you accomplished what you set out to do. Are you satisfied with your attempt, are you getting feedback on the success of your attempt.

Previously I gauged my writing by, like, ~the gestalt~ of the whole story, and I spent so much time tweaking and editing and rewriting and staring at the screen in despair (while covered in crumbs. that's a little texture for visual appeal, which I'm prioritizing lately). It's inefficient. It's a huge amount of labor hours in comparison with the results. In that same amount of time I could work through three or four techniques that I've prioritized, and I'll see improvement in leaps and bounds.

I know I sound like a self help book for software guys but part of the reason they make six figure salaries is because they know how to work effectively. like, there's a whole industry around teaching these ppl how to work effectively, and they have some important shit figured out. Writing might be a labor of love but it's still labor, and I live in a world where I have to think about my time in terms of its market value. I'm vying for the highest net returns.

Sorry that I phrase things in these terms in another life I'd have been an economist but like. I get one life on this earth and it costs money to live it. Regardless of how I feel about that structure, when it comes to my hobbies I'm looking at the returns. Maybe that sounds grody bc creating is so personal and emotional but I have a bunch of finished stories I can point to as a result of thinking about it in terms of time=value. I can make things efficiently and I'm happy with what I make. Let me say some redneck shit to reset my karmic balance tho. y'all wanna go muddin in my lifted toyota

[happigreens]

Fair Trade

By going beyond accreditation practices, consumers and companies can reach those at the bottom of the global social production ladder. Nonetheless, these efforts require purchasers to take personal responsibility for their impact, rather than relying solely on certifications. Simply by being more thoughtful and ethical in our sourcing practices, we have a huge opportunity to create brighter futures for all people and their families throughout the supply chain.

https://borgenproject.org/fair-trade-product-markets/

Despite many well-intentioned consumer attitudes, fair trade product markets frequently feature marketing strategies that conjure up imperialistic images [...]

[...] In products marked as fair trade, the certification might only apply to the product’s raw materials, rather than the full process of production. [...] A 2014 study theorizes that these practices are somewhat effective, “although on a comparatively modest scale relative to the size of national economies"

Social Media conversations about Fair Trade Practices:

[From user seriousxdelirium] - Like almost all other labels for coffee, it's absolutely useless. It only applies to growers large enough to afford the fees, and is not regulated well enough to make meaningful impact on the industry. If you really care about this sort of thing, do some research and develop an understanding of what you think a fair price is for farmers, and ask roasters what they paid for that coffee. Most good roasters are willing to be transparent about that sort of thing, and even publish transparency reports where you get a breakdown of the entire transaction.

From user Ramakrishna Surathu:

[...] Here are some reasons why fair trade may not always be as fair as it seems [...]

1. Market Access and Power Imbalances: Fair trade initiatives often focus on small-scale producers in developing countries, who may face challenges in accessing global markets and negotiating fair prices. Power imbalances within supply chains, influenced by factors such as geography, politics, and market dynamics, can limit the ability of producers to fully benefit from fair trade practices.

2. Certification Costs and Barriers: Obtaining fair trade certification can be costly and time-consuming for producers, particularly small-scale farmers and artisans with limited resources. Certification fees, auditing expenses, and compliance with standards may pose financial barriers and administrative burdens, leading some producers to forego certification altogether.

3. Limited Impact on Poverty Alleviation: While fair trade aims to reduce poverty and improve livelihoods, its impact may be limited by systemic barriers and structural inequalities. Addressing poverty requires broader social, economic, and political interventions beyond the scope of fair trade alone, such as access to education, healthcare, land rights, and infrastructure.

4. Market Volatility and Price Instability: Fair trade prices are often based on predetermined minimums, which may not fully reflect fluctuations in global market prices. Producers may be exposed to market volatility and fluctuations in demand, which can impact their income and livelihoods, particularly in commodity markets subject to price instability.

5. Complexity of Supply Chains: Fair trade supply chains can be complex and challenging to navigate, especially in regions with limited infrastructure and logistical challenges. Ensuring compliance with fair trade standards, maintaining transparency, and traceability throughout the supply chain can require significant investment in monitoring and management systems.

[...] Some manufacturers also use tricks. For example, some products do not explain exactly which part of a product was produced fairly. Another trick is to increase the percentage of "fair" ingredients by subtracting out the water content. The credibility is of course "fair watered".

[...] The statement here should not be that fair trade is useless, but one should always question things or understand them better and not just be blindly guided by seals in the purchase decision. Since this works so well, manufacturers like to use such seals or make one up themselves.

[...] rather than cutting out the middle man, and offering farmers a more direct compensation for their work, Fair Trade still facilitates a level of bureaucracy that supports an uneven distribution of revenue.

[...] The price point that separates Fair Trade produce from the rest of the market is often significant enough that lower-income households cannot afford to budget for it. This means that Fair Trade cannot reach mass markets in a way that would really effect wide-scale change, and instead serves as a token gesture to alleviate the guilt of middle-class consumers.

[...] [premium pricing coffee] is a worthy move if the coffee is of a high quality, but if it is not of sufficient quality to merit this price tag, then it risks turning consumers away from Fair Trade produce, and further impeding its reach to mass markets [...]

Fair Trade is a concept worth embracing, but first it must prioritize effective and transparent processes of production and distribution. What Fair Trade aims to achieve is admirable, but what it could potentially achieve is far greater [...]

[jonathanshaw4747]

Why Canadian Companies Prefer Digital Marketing Agencies over In-house Teams

In the ever-changing digital landscape of Canada, companies big and small have to make one very important decision: develop an in-house digital marketing team or hire the services of a dedicated agency. Far from being a routine operational issue, this choice has great implications for its competitive position, market relevance, and general growth trajectory. With the digital platform becoming increasingly complicated and the stakes of online visibility soaring high, a trend has definitely been witnessed across Canadian companies: that of choosing between the expertise and agility provided by digital marketing agencies over in-house teams.

Expertise and Specialization

This has been one of the major reasons for the tectonic shift in the approach of Canadian enterprises. Digital marketing is not a monolithic discipline but a constellation of specialized areas, each with its own particular demands in expertise. From SEO virtuosos to social media savants, content marketing maestros to PPC prodigies, agencies house a cadre of specialists under one roof. Such an assemblage of talent allows businesses to tap into a wellspring of knowledge that would be prohibitively expensive and logistically challenging to cultivate internally.

What is more, the digital marketing field keeps on changing 24/7, since that is when algorithms, best practices, and consumer behaviors change at the speed of light. This places agencies in a much better place to be updated due to their focus and the heterogeneity of their client base. They undertake heavy continuous learning and serious means of professional development investment to ensure that their strategies remain at the cutting edge of industry changes. This means a commitment to staying current translates into better marketing solutions for their clients-more effectively and innovatively.

Agency versus in-house: financial implications are huge and multi-dimensional. At face value, the retainers or project fees associated with agency services might appear huge. However, a close look will reveal that this is not true on the cost-efficiency level. By outsourcing an agency, a business may significantly reduce overheads like salaries, benefits, office space, and equipment, which are kept by full-time employees.

The next strong economic case lies in the fact that it can make that great sense of scalability and flexibility. It eases the opportunity to adjust marketing spend against seasonal demands, special campaign needs, or fluctuating economies without getting into the complexities of hiring or drastically reducing an internal team. That elasticity of resource allocation permits better budget efficiency and implores optimization of Marketing ROI.

Technology and Tools

The digital marketing arena is the haven for sophisticated tools and platforms-most of which come with heavy price tags, coupled with steep learning curves. Agencies, able to use economies of scale, invest in a wide array of premium software and technologies that would be financially unviable for most individual businesses to acquire. From advanced SEO tools to full-service social media management platforms, agencies arm their clients with the technological arsenal needed to drive marketing effectiveness.

Besides tools, agencies often have state-of-the-art analytics and reporting. These systems allow for the granular tracking of campaign performance, consumer behavior, and ROI. Insights gained from these advanced analytics become the powerhouse that drives businesses into making data-informed decisions and fine-tuning their marketing approaches with strategy precision.

Strategic Objectivity

One of the most overlooked benefits of hiring a digital marketing agency is the fresh perspective it brings to the challenges a brand faces. Sometimes a company's internal teams, despite being quite familiar with the brand, can suffer from tunnel vision or be stuck in paradigms. Agencies, drawing on diverse experience across industries and markets, have become a fertile source of new solutions and unconventional creative approaches, which for those within the organization can be virtually invisible.

This objectivity extends to performance appraisal as well. Large agencies are usually held to very tight KPIs through which they are accountable to deliver measurable results. The setup ensures a very transparent culture of business betterment, whereby the agencies fall under pressure to prove their strategies right and value-proposition-valid on a regular basis.

Time and Resource Management

For most Canadian businesses, more so for the SMEs, the job of dedicating or committing resources to build and maintain a fully-fledged in-house digital marketing team is surely going to distract them from their core business activities. By outsourcing such functions to an agency, this energy is freed for product development, customer service, and other mission-critical activities.

Furthermore, more often than not, agencies are in a much better position than in-house units to implement marketing initiatives. With the established processes, loads of already-vetted resources on standby, and a lot of previous work to its credit, an agency can consequently save time throughout the process from conceiving of the strategy to launching the campaign. This agility is paramount in the fast-paced digital landscape, where usually the early bird catches the worm.

Many of these digital marketing agencies boast of having an extensive industry network, including influencers, media, and technology partners that can open various doors of opportunity to collaboration. Beta programs and early access to new marketing channels/features fall into this category. To Canadian businesses, this is quite an invaluable asset that networks with potential new customers.

Moreover, most agencies have good relations with key platforms, such as Google, Facebook, and LinkedIn, which provide them with the latest features, premium support, and, in some cases, almost privileged rates. More probably than not, such partnerships are passed on as tangible benefits to the clients to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of their digital marketing initiatives.

As a sustenance of risks

The regulatory requirements associated with digital marketing, encompassing privacy, advertising standards, and the specific policies of these diverse digital platforms, make hazardous minefields for businesses. This adds further pressure on digital marketing agencies because they possess specialized knowledge and experience in ensuring that their clients work in conformance with these regulations. This becomes even more crucial in instances involving Canada, where there are regulations like CASL, which is anti-spam law dictating strict requirements on electronic messaging.

Additionally, the agencies adapt by nature through adaptation to market changes. Their diversified client bases and regular activities with businesses in various industries enable them to identify and respond to the change in consumer behavior, change in technology, or economic conditions very fast. Adapting to the situation at hand helps hedge against potential risks associated with sudden changes in the market which could render several marketing strategies irrelevant.

Performance and Results

What's arguably most convincing in the move towards agency partnerships is the attention to accountability and measurement of performance. Most of the agencies operate on performance-based models with clear KPIs and reporting structures that generate tangible means through which firms realize their marketing return on investment. In other words, therefore, the approach is results-based, with continuous optimization of marketing to align with business objectives.

As such, agencies can contribute to performing competitive benchmarking. With many years of experience across industries and data, they can paint a view for a business regarding its relative standing in digital marketing performance from its competition and industry benchmarks. Such a comparative perspective may also help them zero in on opportunities for performance improvement and areas of differentiation.

The Future of Digital Marketing Partnerships in Canada

The trend of Canadian businesses partnering with specialized marketing agencies is showing no signs of abatement in the evolving digital marketing landscape. The recipe combining experience, the advantage of being cost-effective, technological advances, and strategic value when working with an agency makes compelling economic sense. And, of course, in-house teams will always have their role; it's actually quite important for big organizations. The passed "advantages to this kind of approach are flexibility and comprehensive capabilities available to organizations of any size.".

The collaboration with a digital marketing agency is considered an investment in terms of growth strategy and competitiveness. Increasingly, this is a cost consideration that Canadian executives are factoring in as Canadian businesses strive to find their way through digital complexities—and as a result, a way to innovate the catalyst for success in the long term.

[everfastfrieght]

Logistics Solutions Company in India: Excellence Delivered by Everfast Freight

India's rapidly evolving economy thrives on a robust logistics sector. A well-structured logistics system ensures seamless transportation, optimized supply chains, and timely deliveries. Among the key players transforming this industry, Everfast Freight emerges as a premier Logistics Solutions Company in India, offering unparalleled services tailored to meet diverse business needs.

Why Choose a Reliable Logistics Partner? Businesses today demand efficiency, accuracy, and reliability in logistics operations. A dependable logistics partner can:

Streamline supply chain operations. Minimize costs and enhance productivity. Ensure timely delivery, which boosts customer satisfaction. Adapt to industry-specific challenges and provide customized solutions. Everfast Freight stands as a trusted name in this domain, excelling in providing comprehensive logistics solutions across India and beyond.

Services Offered by Everfast Freight

Transportation Services Efficient transportation forms the backbone of logistics. Everfast Freight ensures safe and timely delivery of goods, whether it’s domestic or international transport. Their fleet management system and network enable smooth operations across urban and remote areas alike.

Warehousing Solutions With strategically located warehouses across India, Everfast Freight provides secure storage facilities equipped with modern technology. This service is essential for inventory management, ensuring businesses can scale operations without logistical constraints.

Freight Forwarding Be it air, sea, or road freight, Everfast Freight’s expertise in forwarding ensures cost-effective and timely delivery. Their global connections and strategic partnerships make international shipping hassle-free.

Custom Clearance Navigating the complexities of import and export regulations is easier with Everfast Freight’s customs clearance solutions. Their experienced team ensures compliance with Indian and international laws, minimizing delays.

Supply Chain Management Optimizing the end-to-end supply chain process is Everfast Freight’s forte. From sourcing to delivery, their innovative solutions enhance operational efficiency and reduce overheads.

What Sets Everfast Freight Apart? Cutting-Edge Technology The company leverages the latest tools to track shipments, manage inventory, and ensure real-time communication with clients.

Customer-Centric Approach Every client receives personalized attention. Everfast Freight’s solutions are tailored to match specific industry demands, whether in e-commerce, manufacturing, or retail.

Pan-India Presence With an extensive network across major cities and ports, Everfast Freight ensures comprehensive logistics coverage throughout India.

Sustainability Practices Acknowledging the environmental impact of logistics, Everfast Freight integrates sustainable practices like fuel-efficient vehicles and eco-friendly packaging.

Industries Served Everfast Freight’s logistics expertise spans a variety of industries, including:

E-commerce: Quick delivery solutions for the fast-paced online retail sector. Pharmaceuticals: Temperature-controlled storage and transport for sensitive products. Automotive: Seamless supply chain integration for vehicle parts and components. FMCG: Efficient handling of perishable and fast-moving consumer goods. Why Everfast Freight is Your Ideal Logistics Partner In a competitive market, businesses need a logistics partner that ensures reliability, scalability, and innovation. Everfast Freight excels in providing end-to-end logistics solutions that adapt to market demands and technological advancements.

Whether you're a startup looking to expand or an established company seeking to optimize your supply chain, Everfast Freight offers services that drive success.

Conclusion As a leading Logistics Solutions Company in India, Everfast Freight continues to redefine the benchmarks of logistics excellence. Their commitment to quality, innovation, and customer satisfaction makes them the go-to partner for businesses aiming to streamline operations and ensure timely delivery.

[masllp]

Setting Up a Business in India: A Comprehensive Guide by Masllp

India has become a preferred destination for both local and international entrepreneurs, thanks to its growing economy, favorable government initiatives, and emerging consumer market. Whether you're a small startup or an established company looking to expand, setting up a business in India can offer remarkable opportunities. Masllp, a trusted consulting partner, specializes in helping businesses navigate the complex procedures of registration, compliance, and scaling in India.

Why Set Up a Business in India? India’s business landscape is evolving rapidly, making it an attractive destination for a wide range of industries. Here are a few key reasons to consider setting up a business in India:

Growing Consumer Market: With a large and young population, India offers a vast market for consumer goods, services, and technology. Ease of Doing Business: Government initiatives like Make in India and Startup India have simplified regulatory processes, reduced barriers, and encouraged foreign investment. Supportive Economic Policies: India's government has introduced tax incentives and simplified tax structures that foster a business-friendly environment. Skilled Workforce: India is home to a skilled and diverse workforce, making it easier to find qualified employees in virtually any industry. Steps to Setting Up a Business in India with Masllp Masllp offers end-to-end support in setting up a business in India, from choosing the right business structure to managing compliance. Here’s a step-by-step guide:

Choosing the Right Business Structure India offers several business structures, including Private Limited Company, Limited Liability Partnership (LLP), and Sole Proprietorship. Each has its advantages and requirements:

Private Limited Company: Ideal for businesses seeking to raise funds or expand quickly. LLP: Offers flexibility with limited liability and is easier to manage. Sole Proprietorship: Suitable for small businesses looking to test the market before expanding. Masllp assists clients in selecting a structure that aligns with their business objectives, ensuring compliance with local laws and regulations.

Registration and Legal Formalities Once the business structure is chosen, Masllp handles the complete registration process, including obtaining a Director Identification Number (DIN), Digital Signature Certificate (DSC), and Certificate of Incorporation. These are crucial for:

Establishing the company’s legal identity in India. Allowing the business to operate under its registered name. Providing a smooth setup process without regulatory hiccups.

Securing Necessary Licenses and Permits Depending on the nature of the business, specific licenses and permits might be required. Industries like food, pharmaceuticals, and manufacturing often need approvals from regulatory bodies. Masllp guides businesses through this process, ensuring that all permits are acquired for seamless operation.

Setting Up Bank Accounts and Financial Structuring Setting up a local bank account is essential for conducting business in India. Additionally, understanding India's taxation system is crucial for compliance. Masllp assists in setting up business bank accounts, as well as in understanding the Goods and Services Tax (GST), Income Tax, and other fiscal regulations, ensuring compliance and optimizing tax efficiency.

Hiring and Staffing Solutions India offers a large talent pool across diverse industries. Masllp provides HR solutions, including assistance with recruitment, payroll management, and employee benefits, to help businesses find the right team and establish efficient HR practices.

Ongoing Compliance and Reporting India has specific reporting and compliance requirements, such as annual returns, GST filings, and income tax submissions. Masllp offers ongoing compliance management, ensuring that businesses meet regulatory deadlines and avoid penalties.

Benefits of Partnering with Masllp When setting up a business in India, having an experienced partner like Masllp can streamline processes, reduce delays, and enhance operational efficiency. Masllp’s services include:

Expert Guidance: With in-depth knowledge of India’s business laws and market trends, Masllp offers strategic insights for a successful setup. Personalized Solutions: Each business is unique, and Masllp provides customized solutions to meet specific requirements. End-to-End Support: From registration to compliance, Masllp offers comprehensive support throughout the business setup journey. Common Challenges in Setting Up a Business in India While India’s business landscape is promising, challenges such as regulatory compliance, tax structures, and complex documentation can arise. Masllp has a deep understanding of these potential obstacles and employs a proactive approach to address them, ensuring smooth business initiation and growth.

Start Your Business Journey with Masllp Today! Setting up a business in India can be a transformative decision for entrepreneurs and companies alike. With Masllp by your side, you’ll have a trusted partner who understands the intricacies of the Indian market and regulatory environment. From initial planning to full-scale operations, Masllp ensures a smooth, compliant, and successful business setup experience in India.

[mariacallous]

The Biden administration’s approach to the governance of artificial intelligence (AI) began with the Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights, released in October 2022. This framework highlighted five key principles to guide responsible AI development, including protections against algorithmic bias, privacy considerations, and the right to human oversight.

These early efforts set the tone for more extensive action, leading to the release of the Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence, or the White House EO on AI, on October 30, 2023. This EO marked a critical step in defining AI regulation and accountability across multiple sectors, emphasizing a “whole-of-government” approach to address both opportunities and risks associated with AI. Last week, it reached its one-year anniversary.  

The 2023 Executive Order on Artificial Intelligence represents one of the U.S. government’s most comprehensive efforts to secure the development and application of AI technology. This EO set ambitious goals aimed at establishing the U.S. as a leader in safe, ethical, and responsible AI use. Specifically, the EO directed federal agencies to address several core areas: managing dual-use AI models, implementing rigorous testing protocols for high-risk AI systems, enforcing accountability measures, safeguarding civil rights, and promoting transparency across the AI lifecycle. These initiatives are designed to mitigate potential security risks and uphold democratic values while fostering public trust in the rapidly advancing field of AI.  

To recognize the one-year anniversary of the EO, the White House released a scorecard of achievements, pointing to the elevated work of various federal agencies, the voluntary agreements made with industry stakeholders, and the persistent efforts made to ensure that AI benefits the global talent market, accrues environmental benefits, and protects—not scrutinizes or dislocates—American workers.

One example is the work of the U.S. AI Safety Institute (AISI), housed in the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which has spearheaded pre-deployment testing of advanced AI models, working alongside private developers to strengthen AI safety science. The AISI has also signed agreements with leading AI companies to conduct red-team testing to identify and mitigate risks, especially for general-purpose models with potential national security implications.

In addition, NIST released Version 1.0 of its AI Risk Management Framework, which provides comprehensive guidelines for identifying, assessing, and mitigating risks across generative AI and dual-use models. This framework emphasizes core principles like safety, transparency, and accountability, establishing foundational practices for AI systems’ development and deployment. And just last week, the federal government released the first-ever National Security Memorandum on Artificial Intelligence, which will serve as the foundation for the U.S.’s safety and security efforts when it comes to AI. 

The White House EO on AI marks an essential step in shaping the future of U.S. AI policy, but its path forward remains uncertain with the pending presidential election. Since much of the work is being done by and within federal agencies, its tenets may outlive any possible repeal of the EO itself, ensuring the U.S. stays relevant in the development of guidance that balances the promotion of innovation with safety, particularly in national security. However, the EO’s long-term impact will depend on the willingness of policymakers to adapt to AI’s rapid development, while maintaining a framework that supports both innovation and public trust. Regardless of who leads the next administration, navigating these challenges will be central to cementing the U.S.’s role in the AI landscape on the global stage. 

In 2023, Brookings scholars weighed in following the adoption of the White House EO. Here’s what they have to say today around the one-year anniversary.