Feeds:
Posts
Comments

“Atlas”: people guided by reason and self-interest” (Rubin 2007).  A writer by the name of Ayn Rand publishes a lengthy novel in 1950s about objectivism and the idea that it is fair for individuals to live entirely for their own interest.

The notion that individuals should only be concerned entirely about their own well-being seems very selfish according to moral rules in our society. Rand’s message is geared towards the belief that we should not be controlled by government or corporate politics but rather our own individual goals and achievements. This is a objective philosophy that looks at the world from an individual’s point of view without further asking the questions: how will my actions impact other individuals? Is my happiness worth another’s suffering?  Can happiness be obtained by helping others than perusing someone’s own goals?

Objectivism is not wrong, but it should be controlled as it can be interpreted differently by numerous individuals. The philosophy does account for respecting the rights of other, but not at the price of your own well-being or individual benefits. The road to success, even for those who are self-built millionaires, did not come without any help from other individuals along the way. Building a business can be an individual task, but your customer makes that business successful and in turn leads to happiness. The issue with this philosophy is the elimination of the “gray area” where if everyone thought as an individual then the human race would be worse off than it is today. When first reading this article, I was reminded by the words uttered by JFK, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country”. In a time where our country continues to recover from a major recession, we are reminded about how we reached this point in our economy: individual greed and egotistical goals. In order to progress as a human race, we should strive at helping others and in turn we would help ourselves grow into better individuals.

References

Rubin, H. (2007). The Literature Of Capitalism, The New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Sep 15, 2007 pg. C.1. from ProQuest pg. 3.

ObjectivismObjectivism (Ayn Rand), the philosophy of Ayn Rand (1905-82) whose tenets are presented as metaphysically objective

A comparison between the married working men of the 18th & 21st century as women enter the workforce, where men are expected to take on additional duties at home while maintaining similar or larger duties at work to ensure their commitment to their careers. Are men at a disadvantage when it comes to work-life balance?

In my short career, I have seen this moral dilemma when it comes to men and women in the workplace. It is an unwritten rule, but men at the corporate world are expected to commit more of their time and effort to their careers whether their goals are to climb the corporate latter or just sustain their status at work. On the other hand, there is a softer approach managers seem to take on when managing women at the workplace. This stems from a culture change as more women enter the workforce while still handling most of the tasks at home. The idea that women have to do a “double shift”, due to professional and home duties, tends to change the feelings of managers as they empathize with the situation. Who’s really at a disadvantage?

As women enter the force at larger numbers than ever in the 21st century, men are expected to continue their duties just as they did in the past at work while also entering into the ‘double shift” world. The culture shift seems to be one-sided and a disadvantage for men since the workload at the workplace has not decreased, at times it has increased due to our economic situation, yet duties at home are increasing for the corporate man. Should couples shift back to the 18th century?

Our education system is providing better opportunities for both genders and the idea of a second income is an attractive one for couples especially since our labor market has not stabilized since the economic downturn of 2007. What is the answer to this dilemma? Men are going to have to sacrifice and manage their time more than they have in the past as this culture shift becomes a norm in the 21st century.

            References

Gautam, T. (2012). Real Men Don’t Need Work Life Balance, ForbeWomen. May 23, 2012.

Since the beginning of last season, we began hearing rumors of an NFL lock out due to player compensation and ownership revenue sharing. In the month of March of 2011, the owners locked out the players and NFLPA was dismantled. We began reading about veteran players suing the NFL individually, rookies were being drafted with a “Thank you, we hope you will play for us this year pending the CBA”, and free agents were not even sure they would have a job come September. Really, it was a lot of drama and at the end of it all, a new agreement have approved by both sides (Owners & Players) for the next 10 years without an opt-out clause in place so we call be ensured that we do not go through this again until Spring of 2021. Great, just in time for another NFL season right? But why did this new CBA really last almost 5 months to obtain an agreement on? What changed since the last one? How do these delays impact the 2011 NFL Season? I thought I would take the time to do my own research to understand a little better the new agreement (Hey, it’s the month of August…I would rather do this than watch a pre-season game!!)

Let’s get started with why it took so long: Money. Money makes and breaks this league and of course money was a major factor for these past five months. The NFL is the only sport of the big four (NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL) where the players contracts are not guaranteed. Of course If I am an owner, why would I want to pay an injured player to sit on the bench the entire season? The players have a point here as well, I am getting injured on the job, can’t do anything about that so my money should be there at the end of the day. They both have a point, so the compromise here is: we will compensate veterans in the long run but a rookie will have to prove they are worth the money. This is a CBA positive because we have seen busts following the drafts (Ryan Leaf, J Russell, and the list goes on). Also from the list of  different articles I read during this lengthy process, I believe this probably took the most time and at the end of it all, both owners and players came out winners here.

Now, let’s discuss the major changes this new CBA bring along. I don’t want to re-write what many have already spoke and broke down so I am going to refer to the content written by Kareem Copeland from PackersNews.com and his conversation with Andrew Brandt, Packers former vice president of player finance/general counsel.

“Front office: there will be simpler and more manageable rookie contract negotiation.  Also, with the “guaranteed spend” and cash and Cap minimums, the system will reward teams that effectively manage their costs on a “pay as you go” model, rather than spikes. ”

“Coaches:  They will see their players far less in the offseason and have them padded less in the preseason.  Teaching will be rewarded.”

“Players:  They will theoretically be fresher for the season due to all the reduced time and contact.  Less cash and cap will go to top rookies, theoretically more to veterans.  And with a cash minimum calculated at the end of the year, there will be more renegotiation late in the season.”

In the end, the owners received a little more money than was distributed in the old CBA and the players received increased health concessions.The Owners achieved a better revenue split, going from what was a net 50/50 to 52/48 and perhaps better in some years.  The Players have reduced time and contact and teams will be forced to spend more with the new minimums.

So who are the winners of this new CBA? I think everyone came out a winner here, the owners do get a better revenue split but the veterans will be getting better contracts, more guaranteed money in the long run,  and better health benefits. The rookies from this year lost out on the big pay check on their first contracts, but this has been talked about for so long, it was time to make this more fair.

Now the delay of signing of the CBA will most likely also hurt the rookies the most since they don’t the usual 3 plus months to study their playbook and get in sync with their teams so most of them might not start until later in the season while other might have to wait until next season. If you were a veteran player, hope you continued off-season workouts on your own, otherwise injuries will be a major impact factor for this 2011 NFL season.

The biggest winner? The fans….football is back!

Sinan

Since the month of August will most certainly be full of news around the NFL now that the lockout have been lifted and new CBA is in place leading to the NFL 2011 season, I figured what a better way than to focus the topics for this month on the football world. I will mainly focus on the transactions of free agency, rookie impact, coaching changes, and how CBA delay might impact this NFL season.

If you have a topic in mind which you would like me to explore further, post your comments and I will be sure to talk about them.

P.S. This could turn out to be fun after all, I am liking it so far…

P.S.S. Sorry Saif, I will write something up in the month of September about the housing market but you don’t have to wait, you are the best loan officer out there. If anyone needs his information, ping me.

Cheers…

Sinan

Hello world!

This is my first blog and I am not even sure what I am going to talk about here but I am planning on submitting something at least once a week. I’ll probably just start with some of the things going on around the news, since most of it does not tell the whole story. If you have any ideas, comment and Ill make it a point to talk about those as well.

 

Back to work…Cheers

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.