Entries from November 2009 ↓

KICK THE WORRY HABIT

Most of us WORRY.

Some people will even tell you that you SHOULD worry!

But worrying is worse than USELESS!

Firstly, it attracts misfortune.

Secondly, it is bad for your health!

So what should you do about worry?

POSTPONE it!

TAKE ACTION first – and postpone worry indefinitely.

That’s what effective people do.

Here is your mission for the next 24 hours:

Whenever you want to worry, ask yourself, “What is the problem RIGHT NOW?”

Guess what you’ll find …

Unless you are in a life threatening situation, you DON’T have a problem.

Look at your life.

Has there ever been a situation you didn’t survive?

There hasn’t!

You can HANDLE the present.

It is just the FUTURE that gives you trouble!

So your mission is to focus on the present.

Your mind will want to drift into the future.

Your mind will want to ask questions like: “What happens if …?”

Drag it back to the PRESENT.

Tell yourself:

“If there is SOMETHING I can do now, I will do it.”

“If there is NOTHING I can do right now, I refuse to worry.”

Make this your motto:

“I take whatever action I can now – and I postpone worry!”

“I deal with problems MOMENT BY MOMENT.”

I never thought that I had a high IQ. This article from ‘New Scientist’ comforts me.

After watching last night a satirical  TV show on the French Satellite about G W Bush I searched on the web for IQ and  G W Bush.

Having a high IQ doesn’t necessarily mean you’re smart.
Far from it, says Michael Bond (New Scientist, 31st October 2009).

Is George W.Bush stupid? It’s a question that occupied a good many minds of all political persuasions during his turbulent eight-year presidency. The strict answer is no. Bush’s IQ score is estimated to be above 120, which suggests an intelligence in the top 10 per cent of the population. But this, surely, does not tell the whole story.

Even those sympathetic to the former president have acknowledged that as a thinker and decision-maker he is not all there. Even his loyal speechwriter David Frum called him glib, incurious and “as a result ill-informed”. The political pundit and former Republican congressman Joe Scarborough accused him of lacking intellectual depth, claiming that compared with other US presidents whose intellect had been questioned, Bush junior was “in a league by himself”. Bush himself has described his thinking style as “not very analytical”.

How can a “smart” person act foolishly?

How can someone with a high IQ have these kinds of intellectual deficiencies? Keith Stanovich, professor of human development and applied psychology at the University of Toronto, Canada, has grappled with this apparent incongruity for 15 years. He says it applies to more people than you might think. To Stanovich, however, there is nothing incongruous about it. IQ tests are very good at measuring certain mental faculties, he says, including logic, abstract reasoning, learning ability and working-memory capacity – how much information you can hold in mind.

But the tests fall down when it comes to measuring those abilities crucial to making good judgements in real-life situations. That’s because they are unable to assess things such as a person’s ability to critically weigh up information, or whether an individual can override the intuitive cognitive biases that can lead us astray.

This is the kind of rational thinking we are compelled to do every day, whether deciding which foods to eat, where to invest money, or how to deal with a difficult client at work. We need to be good at rational thinking to navigate our way around an increasingly complex world. And yet, says Stanovich, IQ tests – still the predominant measure of people’s cognitive abilities – do not effectively tap into it. “IQ tests measure an important domain of cognitive functioning and they are moderately good at predicting academic and work success. But they are incomplete. They fall short of the full panoply of skills that would come under the rubric of ‘good thinking’.”

IQ isn’t everything

“A high IQ is like height in a basketball player,” says David Perkins, who studies thinking and reasoning skills at Harvard Graduate School of Education in Cambridge, Massachusetts. “It is very important, all other things being equal. But all other things aren’t equal. There’s a lot more to being a good basketball player than being tall, and there’s a lot more to being a good thinker than having a high IQ.”

IQ tests and their proxies, which are designed to measure a factor known as general intelligence, are used by many businesses and colleges to help select the “best” candidates, and also play a role in schools and universities. “IQ tests determine, to an important degree, the academic and professional careers of millions of people in the US,” Stanovich says in his book, What Intelligence Tests Miss (Yale University Press, 2008). He challenges the “lavish attention” society bestows on such tests, which he claims measure only a limited part of cognitive functioning. “IQ tests are overvalued, and I think most psychologists would agree with that,” says Jonathan Evans, a cognitive psychologist at the University of Plymouth, UK.

The difference between intelligence and rational thinking

Stanovich and other researchers into rational thinking are not trying to redefine intelligence, which they are happy to characterise as those mental abilities that can be measured by IQ tests. Rather, they are trying to focus attention on cognitive faculties that go beyond intelligence – what they describe as the essential tools of rational thinking. These, they claim, are just as important as intelligence to judgement and decision-making. “IQ is only part of what it means to be smart,” says Evans.

I picked up the following article from the South China Morning Post today. Whilst I can easily understand the rationale  of the US in pushing for raising the parity of the Yuan to the dollar, which will make exported Chinese Goods more expensive in the US and at the same time re-establishing the balance of trade flow. On the overhand I am asking myself what would become in Yuan value of the deposits the Chinese hold in US dollars placed in US. Do the Chinese write off the value from their books?

I am reminded of a story many years back when I was in Taiwan, and when it was officially announced that the Taiwanese dollars in agreement with the governments concerned will be appreciated to reach a level of 20% higher than the US dollar parity of the day within a rather short period of a few months. It was a fabulous piece of news for smart speculators. They all rushed in to buy Taiwanese dollars and within a short period made millions.

Even today, if the Chinese government is thinking to appreciate the Yuan, it would be wrong for them to admit it. So it is better to stay silent of this issue. Politically it may not suit President Obama’s agenda: more imports from China translate in fewer jobs in the US. More trade surpluses of China do not mean more purchase of US bonds by the Chinese!

It is a tough nut to crack. Market Economy v/s Controlled or ‘reined in’ Economy

Wen seeks to reassure Obama on trade

Reuters in Beijing

Updated on Nov 18, 2009

Premier Wen Jiabao told President Barack Obama his nation does not seek a trade surplus with the United States and wants to balance flows, striking a conciliatory note but avoiding public comment on currency rifts.

Wen made the comments on Wednesday during a meeting with the US President, according to a report on the Chinese Foreign Ministry website.

“China does not pursue a trade surplus,” Wen said, adding that his government wants “to encourage a steady balancing of bilateral trade.”

“Lively global trade and investment will help to overcome the international financial crisis and accelerate global economic recovery,” said the Chinese Premier, also urging both countries to “together oppose trade and investment protectionism.”

Wen’s comments are unlikely to mollify US industry groups and politicians who say Beijing is holding its yuan currency so low against the dollar that it is stoking a US trade deficit with China and worsening global economic imbalances.

But Wen’s reassuring language, as well as praise for Obama in Chinese state media, set a guardedly upbeat tone at the end of a four-day visit that exposed rifts over trade and currency policy.

“The West’s perception of China has been changing gradually, and a positive turn has occurred as Obama has said more than once during his ongoing Asia tour that the United States would not seek to contain China’s rise but welcome China as a strong and prosperous player in the community of nations,” said a commentary issued by Xinhua news agency.

Obama’s words “forged a good starting point to further Chinese-US ties”, it said.

After the talks with Wen, Obama visited the Great Wall, for Chinese people a proud symbol of their heritage.

But the absence of any comment on the yuan in Wen’s published comments was a telling reminder of the rifts remaining as Obama prepared to head for South Korea on Wednesday evening.

The report said that Obama did raise reform of China’s exchange rate policies.

At a summit on Tuesday, Obama made plain to President Hu Jintao that he wants movement on China’s currency policy. Hu also avoided mentioning currencies in comments to reporters.

China has had a huge trade surplus with the United States, and is also the largest foreign holder of US government bonds.

The US trade deficit with China widened 9.2 per cent in September to $22.1 billion, the highest since November last year, according to US data released last week.

“A stable, co-operative, forward-looking China-US relationship will benefit our two countries and all the world,” Wen told Obama.

Despite the bright rhetoric, officials and experts from both sides have stressed Obama’s visit will not bring about immediate policy shifts, or end friction over the yuan, US anti-dumping rules, and Washington’s criticism of China’s controls on citizens’ rights and policies in Tibet.

Such summits are about setting priorities for future dealings, not making immediate policy changes, said Jin Canrong, an expert on China-US ties at Renmin University in Beijing.

The issue of currencies has drawn testy comments from US and Chinese officials. China’s Commerce Ministry on Monday rebuffed calls for the yuan to appreciate, signalling resistance to change foreign exchange policy.

Outside pressure has been building on Beijing to let the yuan rise after more than a year of it being nearly frozen in place against the weakening dollar, with the latest appeal voiced by the head of the International Monetary Fund on Tuesday.

But Chinese officials have swatted down speculation of any big moves soon, and the government appears likely to keep the currency on a tight rein at least until the middle of next year to cement the country’s economic recovery.

“Any policy changes by China, including on the exchange rate, will be based on its assessment of its own interests, not on external pressure,” said Jin, the professor.

Wen has voiced his own worries about the US economy.

In March, he took Washington to task over its fiscal policies, saying he was worried about the health of China’s vast US assets, and repeated those worries at a summit in Africa this month.

China has amassed US$2.27 trillion of foreign exchange reserves, the world’s largest stockpile, and analysts think about two-thirds of this is invested in dollar-denominated assets.

The Xinhua commentary said the United States, and not only China, needed to absorb some lessons and “figure out effective new ways to tackle its own chronic problems”.

It also warned that US mid-term congressional elections next year might encourage “more finger-pointing and protectionism” aimed at China.

Obama and Hu have said that strains over trade and US criticism of China’s human rights restrictions should not overshadow co-operation.

Bonnie Glaser, an expert on China at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, said the statement issued by Obama and Hu underscored “the two countries have a lot of common interests, but it remains to be seen whether they can co-operate to advance them”.

I came to know the term ‘Eurabia’ when watching journalist Mark Steyn. Listening to him awakened in me, the shift that is happening in Europe within the next generations.  In America Alone, the book he wrote, it would seem that any democratic country with a majority of 20 percent of Muslim population would be very tough to govern.

Europe is feared to be in shambles soon as the demographics are laid. America Alone of the super powers would be able to resist the surge of Islam.

Mark Steyn believes that  Eurabia – a future where the European continent is dominated by Islam – is an imminent reality that cannot be reversed. “The problem, after all, is not that the sons of Allah are ‘long shots’ but that they’re certainties. Every Continental under the age of 40 – make that 60, if not 75 – is all but guaranteed to end his days living in an Islamified Europe.” “Native populations on the continent are aging and fading and being supplanted remorselessly by a young Muslim demographic. Steyn claims that Muslims will account for perhaps 40 percent of the population by 2020, but The globe & Mail  correspondent  Doug Saunders labels the assertion false:

Slightly more than 4 percent of Europe’s population is Muslim, as defined by demographers (though about 80 per cent of these people are not religiously observant, so they are better defined as secular citizens who have escaped religious nations). It is possible, though not certain, that this number could rise to 6 percent by 2020. If current immigration and birth rates remain the same, it could even rise to 10 percent within 100 years. But it won’t, because Muslims don’t actually have more babies than other populations do under the same circumstances. The declining population growth rates are not confined to native populations. In fact, immigrants from Muslim countries are experiencing a faster drop in reproduction rates than the larger European population. In his book “America Alone”, Steyn posits that  Muslim population growth  has already contributed to a modern European genocide:

Why did Bosnia collapse into the worst slaughter in Europe since the second World War? In the thirty years before the meltdown, Bosnian Serbs had declined from 43 percent to 31 percent of the population, while Bosnian Muslims had increased from 26 percent to 44 percent. In a democratic age, you can’t buck demography — except through civil war. The Serbs figured that out, as other Continentals will in the years ahead: if you cannot outbreed the enemy, cull ’em. The problem that Europe faces is that Bosnia’s demographic profile is now the model for the entire continent.

Nearer to us, because of the numerous visit of Tariq Ramadan, I was also pleased to read an article published on his repudiation by Stephen Schwartz on American Thinker on August 28, 2009.

As a very liberal observer I find the topic very interesting.

In a 5 points article Greg Soltis give the 5 keys to happiness.

If you’re not happy and you know it read along.

You’ve watched “Seinfeld” re-runs, splurged on yourself and downed pints of Ben and Jerry’s. Nothing’s helping. Maybe you’re one of the 20 million Americans diagnosed with depression, you’re bottoming out or you just want something to improve your day.

Here are five ways — some admittedly challenging — to help you get that much-needed mood boost:

1. 1. Pick good parents
2. 2. Give it away
3. 3. Ponder this
4. 4. Work out
5. 5. Live long

In spite of the literature that are published there on, I am of opinion that there is only one way to achieve happiness: just be Happy

The question will then be: How?

Andrew Matthews who I cited earlier, have 7 lessons to guide you in the’ How’:

Lesson 2: SUPPORT YOURSELF!

Some people constantly CRITICISE themselves.

They say things like:

“I’m FAT.”

“I’m BORING.”

“Watch me SCREW THIS UP!”

There are two problems with criticizing yourself:

Firstly:

You BECOME what you think about.

So when you criticize your own performance, it gets worse!

Secondly:

Criticizing yourself IRRITATES other people.

Eventually, even your friends will want to smack you in the mouth!

Self criticism is not humility, it’s stupidity.

So this is your job for the next 24 hours:

Notice what you say about yourself.

Starting today, say ONLY GOOD THINGS about you!

If you have nothing good to say, say nothing!

And the result?

1. You’ll feel better.

2. You won’t irritate other people.

3. Your performance will improve.

Just today, support yourself!

You may choose to make it a lifelong habit!

Mc 13,24-32.
En ces temps-là, après une terrible détresse, le soleil s’obscurcira et la
lune perdra son éclat.
Les étoiles tomberont du ciel, et les puissances célestes seront ébranlées.
Alors on verra le Fils de l’homme venir sur les nuées avec grande puissance
et grande gloire.
Il enverra les anges pour rassembler les élus des quatre coins du monde, de
l’extrémité de la terre à l’extrémité du ciel.
Que la comparaison du figuier vous instruise : Dès que ses branches
deviennent tendres et que sortent les feuilles, vous savez que l’été est
proche.
De même, vous aussi, lorsque vous verrez arriver cela, sachez que le Fils
de l’homme est proche, à votre porte.
Amen, je vous le dis : cette génération ne passera pas avant que tout cela
n’arrive.
Le ciel et la terre passeront, mes paroles ne passeront pas.
Quant au jour et à l’heure, nul ne les connaît, pas même les anges dans le
ciel, pas même le Fils, mais seulement le Père.

================================================================================

Cardinal Newman qui a vécu de 1801 à1890 nous a légué dans ses écrits une merveilleuse   réflexion sur ‘la comparaison de figuier’ mentionné dans le texte de Saint Marc :

L’exemple du figuier

Une fois seulement par an, mais une fois pourtant, le monde que nous
voyons fait éclater ses puissances cachées et se révèle lui-même en quelque
sorte. Alors, les feuilles paraissent, les arbres fruitiers et les fleurs
s’épanouissent, l’herbe et le blé poussent. Il y a un élan soudain et un
éclatement de la vie cachée que Dieu a placée dans le monde matériel. Eh
bien ! ceci nous est comme un exemple de ce que le monde peut faire au
commandement de Dieu. Cette terre…éclatera un jour en un monde nouveau de
lumière et de gloire dans lequel nous verrons les saints et les anges. Qui
penserait, sans l’expérience qu’il a eue des printemps précédents, qui
pourrait concevoir deux ou trois mois à l’avance que la face de la nature
qui semblait morte puisse devenir si splendide et si variée ?…

Je reste ce matin en émoi devant  la puissance de Dieu pour nous faire régénère dans notre destinée, c’est-à-dire de devenir enfant de Dieu et ce malgré mes éclatements volontaires. La puissance de l’Amour de l’infini est si forte, elle passera sur mes péchés.  Il me  suffit d’y croire et  d’y espérer. N’est ce pas cela la raison de la venue du Christ rédempteur, sauveur de l’humanite !

A ma messe d’hier au moment de l’hosannah, le préambule de la consécration, le chant de la congrégation, a éveillé en moi une nouvelle conscience des paroles : ciel et terre passeront, Tes paroles ne passeront pas..non non Tes paroles ne passeront pas.

“Les trois premiers mots, ‘Immanence de Dieu’, vous paraîtront peut-être secs, froids et sans attrait. Faut-il vous les traduire ? Cela veut dire que Dieu est partout et dans tout. Mais ce n’est pas assez. Cela signifie que lorsque vous suivez le bord de la mer, en regardant les grandes vagues de l’océan déferler avec un bruit de tonnerre sur le rivage, vous voyez en elles Sa puissance. Si vous parcourez quelque belle forêt et jouissez du silence, du calme et de l’ombre à midi, alors vous connaissez cette paix divine, vous connaissez cette sérénité qui révèle Dieu.” (La vie occulte de l’homme, trad., 2005, p. 83).

Tout ce transforme : les objets que nous connaissons changent et changeront, les idées évoluent, les pensées passent… Toute chose semble avoir un début et une fin. Seul Dieu ne passe pas. Dieu est eternel. Dieu par ses paroles ne passera jamais. Et dire que Dieu nous – les infimes petits grains de sable- invite à participé dans Sa gloire de l’eternel Amour avec lui !
Merci Seigneur, je le veux.

Last Wednesday I was invited by the current President to attend the 45^th year luncheon celebration of the Rotary club of Port Louis which was the founding club of Rotary in Mauritius.  It is now almost five years since I left the club because of my health condition. I walked back to the club and I felt as if I had never left: I found the same welcoming atmosphere & fellowship from my Rotarian friends. Admittedly the regular weekly luncheons, the monthly firesides, and frequent team working on projects for the club has throughout the years build a fantastic  bonding to the club and the members.

Claude Obeegadoo a founder member of the club still active in the club gave a brief account of the forming of the institution 45 years ago. As a matter of fact the club was created more than 45 years ago. The club was chartered on the ^10th November 1964 but had been running some time before. Most of the founding members were already in the spirit of the Rotary whilst they are united prior to the independence of the country under the Stella Clavisque club with the motto of Service to the Community and they were influential leaders who had experienced social work during the dramatic cyclones Alix & Carol which destroyed the country in 1960.

The story of Claude Obeegadoo brought back to me the memories of my youth and the dedication of my father who was also involved in social service. I was part of ‘les compagnons batisseurs’ organisation put up under the leadership of Edwin de Robillard to help the homeless victims of the 1960 cyclones. I do recall helping my father who was involved in the fund rising banquets organised by the Stella Clavisque clubs. Under the aegis of the Rotary our Music group of the time was often asked to perform for the handicapped and Polio victims at the Hospice Père Laval and the Tamarin Cheshire home.  The names mentioned at the luncheon as founder members were indeed very good friends of my father. Some of them  dinned at  home when the club held the firesides.

For record purposes I have kept a note that Andre Robert who until a few years back  attended the weekly luncheon at age over 90. Andre Robert since passed away. He wrote on the founding of the club.

When Rotary International entrusted me with the task of establishing a Rotary Club in Curepipe, my primary concern was to avoid repeating the mistake which had been committed in the earlier establishment of the Rotary Club of Port Louis and which had been the failure to preserve club records.

This omission has resulted in the loss of useful information on the beginnings of the Club which would have been of great assistance to future generations. Thus, Curepipe Rotary Club has kept records of its first meetings which will provide a useful account of its first steps within this vast organisation.

In early 1964, my friend Louis Espitalier Noel (Bouzic) who had just returned from a trip to Europe came to see me in my office in Port Louis in order to discuss his plans for setting up a Rotary Club in Mauritius. At that time I did not have the slightest idea about Rotary. To me Rotary was a club for dominoes players.

Indeed, I had read in those days in the local newspapers advertisements concerning dominoes tournaments organised by a club in Port Louis named the Rotary Club. That was all I knew about Rotary. Bouzic, who had attended several authentic Rotary Club meetings in Europe and in Madagascar and who have had useful discussions with Messrs Le Goff and Paul Giraud, told me about the aims and ideas of Rotary. I was immediately attracted to Rotary ideals and I accepted without hesitation to join Bouzic and other friends interested in setting up a club in Mauritius. Bouzic also told me that several unsuccessful attempts had been made in the past. We enlisted the support of those who had been involved in earlier attempts and we set forward resolutely.

The first meetings were held in early 1964 at Bouzic’s house in Floreal. We received much help and support from Monsieur Le Goff, Allan Bates who was a Past President of Cyprus Rotary Club and former Manager of the Development Bank of Mauritius, Paul Giraud, Annauth Beejadhur, José Poncini, Amédée Maingard de la Ville-es Offrans and Bouzic. Once the activity had taken shape and we could count on the sponsorship of the Rotary Club of Tananarive, of which Monsieur Le Goff was a member, we started holding regular meetings like a functional club. We had alternate weekly lunch meetings at the former Flore Mauricienne in Sir William Newton Street, Port Louis and drinks meetings in the evening in the loft of the Park Hotel, in Curepipe. We also organised “Ladies Nights” in the loft of the Park Hotel.

We started on a probationary basis on 1st June 1964 and our regular weekly meetings to go back to that date. We encountered some problems with our recognition by Rotary International. These were mostly due to geographical considerations. Rotary International failed to understand why our club, the Port Louis Rotary Club was named after a District of Mauritius, when in fact most of its members lived in the high parts of the island, in Plaines Wilhems and Moka Districts. We submitted detailed explanations and maps to Rotary International, saying that although most of our members lived in Plaines Wilhems and Moka districts, at distances varying between 6 and 16 miles from Port Louis, in fact our members’ business activities were in Port Louis. After our explanations had failed to convince the Board of Rotary International, we decided to include the whole island within the territorial limits of the Rotary Club of Port Louis, in order to avoid any confusion and further delay in our recognition.

On 10th November I964 we received our formal recognition by a cable addressed to José‚ Poncini.

In the meantime we had constituted our first Board of Directors with Annauth Beejadhur as President, Allan Bates as Vice-president and myself, André Robert as second Vice-president. Our Secretary was José Poncini and our Treasurer, Maxime Seriès. The other Board members were K. Sunassee, Ebrahim Dawood, Amédée Maingard de la Ville-es-Offrans and Louis Espitalier Noël who was also our Sergeant-at-arms. Fritz Kux was the Attendance Officer when Maxime Seriès was abroad, K. Sunassee stood in as Treasurer. Our charter was officially handed to us by District Governor, John Longman, at a banquet held at the former Vatel which was situated on the present location of the Continental Hotel.

All the members of Port Louis Rotary Club attended this banquet. The guests were Mr. Tom Vickers, the official in charge of the Government of Mauritius, Prime Minister, Sir Sewoosagur Ramgoolam, Ministers of the first coalition Government, The Bishops of Port Louis and Mauritius, Monsieur Le Goff, our sponsor and members of Saint Denis, Réunion Rotary Club. Grace was said by Monseigneur Daniel Liston, Bishop of Port Louis. Speeches were made by Annauth Beejadhur, our President, District Governor, John Longman, Prime Minister, Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam, top Government official, Tom Vickers (himself a former Rotarian) and Monsieur Le Goff.

The same Board stayed in office following the official receipt of the Club charter. The following 3 committees were created: Club Service, Community Service (of which I was a member) and International Service. We did not form a Vocational Service Committee because we were unsure of its purpose and also because of a lack of members to serve on it. We preferred to concentrate our efforts on a limited number of committees. Like our fellow members of St. Denis Rotary Club, we were independent and did not wish our club to join District 220.

I was appointed President of Port Louis Rotary Club for its second year starting on 1st July 1965. I was attending a Conference on legal studies in St. Denis, Réunion. My friend and lawyer colleague, Dominique Sauger, was at that time President of St. Denis Rotary Club. My friend Dominique and myself received for the occasion a very warm and enthusiastic reception from St. Denis Rotary Club.

Upon my return to Mauritius, I started my term of office as President with the same Board members as for the previous year. At first we found it difficult to select a project. We had several projects in mind during my Presidency. One of them was “Alcoholic Anonymous”. The idea was that Dr. Raman would train for a period of 6 months a medical officer selected from his staff at Brown Sequard Hospital. The Club would than temporarily take over and would pay the medical officer’s salary. If the project had been successful, the Government would have been asked to take it over. Another project was that every Rotarian would look after an elderly or disabled person. We also considered asking Rotarians to employ first offenders, ex prisoners with a view to their rehabilitation upon the recommendation of the Commissioner of Prison. Unfortunately these projects, which were rather ambitious for a new club, were not carried out successfully.

Subsequently we bought musical instruments for the paralysed people of Tamarin Cheshire Home and we also paid for a music teacher to give them lessons.

As far as I can recall the list of founder members of Port Louis Rotary Club is as follows:

• Philippe Lenoir ( Beverages – Alcoholic (Wine Distributing)
• Pierre Hugnin ( Beverages – Non-alcoholic (Carbonated Beverage Manufacturing)
• Bhopal Beeharry Panray ( Business Service (Patent and Trade Marks)
• Clément Dalais ( Construction Service (Building Construction)
• Fritz Kux ( Construction Service (General Contracting)
• K. Sunassee ( Dry Goods and General Merchandise- Drapery (Variety Stores)
• Claude Obeegadoo ( Education (Private School)
• Archibald Archibald Engineering (Civil Engineering)
• Allan Bates ( Finance (Development Banking)
• Ebrahim Dawood ( Food Industry (Food and Grain)
• Maxime Seriès (Fruit, Vegetables and Nut Products (Fruit and Vegetable Importing and Distribution)
• Marcel Lagesse Glass Industry (Mirror Manufacturing)
• James 0. Greig Government (Taxation)
• H.R. Hurd ( Government (Taxation)
• Commander Lavender Government (Public Defence – Sea)
• John Schoon-Wagen Government (Tourist Promotion)
• José Poncini Horology (Watch Servicing and Retailing).
• Michel Pitot Hotels and Restaurants (Hotels)
• Philippe Lim ( Hotels and Restaurants (Restaurants)
• André Robert ( Law (Solicitor)
• Henry Latham-Koenig ( Law (Notary Public) )
• Fernand Espitalier-Noël ( Medicine (Surgeon) )
• Abdool Raman ( Medecine (Psychiatrist) )
• Annauth Beejadhur ( Printing and Publishing (Newspaper Publishing)
• Radhamohun Gujadhur ( Real Estate (Land Development)
• Carrim Currimjee ( Real Estate (Renting-Proprietary)
• Robert Antoine ( Sugar Industry (Sugar Research)
• Philip Scott ( Sugar Industry (Sugar Milling)
• G.P.N. Weller ( Tobacco Industry (Cigarette Manufacture)
• Amédée Maingard de la Ville-es-Offrans ( Transportation (Air Transportation)
• Louis Espitalier-Noël ( Transportation (Travel Agency)

The following members inducted in early May 1965 were the first members admitted to Port Louis Rotary Club following the receipt of its charter:

• Robert Antelme ( Laundry, Cleaning and Dyeing (Laundries)
• Pierre Desmarais ( Architecture )
• Redmond Hart de Keating ( Law – Notary (He replaced Henry Latham-Koenig who had resigned)
• Edward Bathfield ( Shoe Manufacture)
• Alain Raffray ( Banking – Commercial)
• Leslie Mayhew ( Life Assurance)
• Grewal (Lumber)

Other members admitted upon the opening of their classification round about June or July I965 were:

• Docteur B. Jowry ( Dentistry)
• Hamid Moollan ( Law (Barrister-at-Law)
• L. France Yip Tong ( Refrigeration)
• R. Seeyave ( Refrigeration )

During my Presidency, I received on 19th and 20th September I965, Kendall Young from the Eastern Hemisphere District Governor Service. I learnt much from him. He encouraged me to try my best to have the club included into District 220. I remember that accompanying him at about I p.m. to the Park Hotel. Upon his arrival by plane in Mauritius after an exhausting day in St. Denis, I offered him a drink which he refused. I then offered him tea or coffee which he also refused. He then told me he was a Mormon and , as such, never drank any alcoholic or stimulating beverages. He then told me that he would like to have a bath. Unfortunately not a drop of water was running from the taps at this late hour, although it was raining abundantly outside. He seemed very disappointed.

I also received Anant Pandya who was then Governor of District 220. He also pressed our club to join District 220. In spite of the explanations of my friend Anant Pandya and the assistance given by Allan Bates and myself, Club members still hesitated and did not want to commit themselves. We wanted in fact to follow St. Denis Club which had remained independent. It was only after the visit of Rotary International President, Luther Hodges, in January 1968, that Port Louis and St. Denis Rotary Clubs decided to join District 220.

Our monthly bulletin first appeared in January 1965. Archibald Archibald (Archi) was responsible for its publication. I have kept some of the early issues of our bulletin. I think that I have given you an outline of our beginnings in this noble organisation: Rotary International. I leave to other founding members the task of completing the picture and of giving you an account of the Club’s more recent achievements.

ANDRÉ ROBERT

In 2002, Junkie XL remixed a song first recorded by Elvis Presley in 1968 and used in one of his movies, Live a Little, Love a Little. The single went straight to No.1 in more than 20 countries. “A Little Less Conversation” became an anthem that was used in the soundtracks of movies from Bruce Almighty to Ocean’s 13.

It also became a favourite line for journalists and commentators to use every time they were dissatisfied. Politicians of all persuasions were asked for “a little less conversation and a little more action.” Executives spanning the entire economic spectrum from the health to the financial sectors were directed to have “a little less conversation and take a little more action.”

But if journalists saw the resurgence of the song as an opportunity to capitalize temporarily on its popularity, business leaders should have recognized it as the best articulation of one of their most entrenched and mistaken beliefs — actions speak louder than words.

Just do it….NIKE

It was great watching Parag Khanna on TED mapping the future of countries. He published ‘The second world’ last year and talks with authority of current geopolitics.

Here is an interview he gave recently:

What is “The Second World” from the title of your book?

The “second world” is a swath of the world’s most strategic countries around the world that are located between or on the peripheries of the three dominant empires: America, the European Union, and China. These countries include: Ukraine, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil, Libya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia, and others. Second world countries are the emerging markets, but we have to understand them more than just economically: they now hold the majority of the world’s reserves and a growing share of the total global economy, but they are also endowed with natural resources and are pursuing political agendas on their own. In every second world country I have heard people talk about how they will no longer be listening to the US but doing things “our own way.”

Europe is often portrayed in the U.S. as having an unsustainable socialist economy that will soon collapse under its own weight. You see it in a very different light.

Every day on the news we hear about how our own medicare and social security systems are under great stress and may collapse, so I’m dubious about such characterizations of Europe. At least their system works now and has for decades. Europeans are for more efficient in public management with far lower inequality – America has a great deal to learn from them.

Your view of Russia and its future is something I had never heard before. Would you talk a little about that?

There are two very different views on Russia today, pitting those who view its recent short-term resurgence as heralding its return as a superpower (or at least an energy superpower) versus those who see the underlying instability in almost all aspects of its governance and economy. It has poor technology, a crippled infrastructure, a dying and sick population, an authoritarian government, and a great deal more weaknesses which will prevent it from ever becoming a superpower again. It continues to face widespread unrest in its south, while it’s de-populating eastern zones are increasingly Chinese populated. It simply isn’t logical to look at Russia on the map, as gigantic as it is, and think of it as a truly single, coherent, unified country. The world map is always changing, and Russia, whose map changed drastically for the worse when the Soviet Union collapsed, will continue to suffer in the coming decades.

Where do India and Japan fit into your global view?

I see India and Japan as two powerful swing states, sort of the second geopolitical tier behind the “Big Three.” They are not superpowers (Japan no longer and India not yet), but they can be important balancers in determing whether America or China becomes more powerful in the Pacific Rim region. At present, both lean towards the US and are suspicious of China, yet at the same time both are integrating with China economically much faster than before. So it is a delicate and precarious situation, one that very much embodies the tension throughout my book between globalization and geopolitics. It’s not clear to anyone how it will play out.

Although the United States has, by far, the world’s most powerful military, you don’t seem to believe it is of much importance.

Given that we are batting .000 in our foreign policy objectives such as stabilizing Iraq, resurrecting Afghanistan, and countering global terrorism, the burden of proof really falls on those who believe military power is most important. Around the entire world what I see is Europe and China investing into and buying greater shares of foreign economies—and thus gaining significant political and even military leverage over them—at our expense. Power has to be a fair balance among a range of tools, including the military, in order to be used effectively. We’re not doing that now, and I don’t see a good strategy coming out of Washington as to how to do it better.

The big three—U.S., China and Europe—are all pursuing Central Asia with its huge oil and gas reserves. It also offers a textbook look at the different methodologies that each one uses to engage with the world.

Very much so. The U.S. is the geographically most distant player and has at best been able to establish very small forward bases in the region in countries like Kyrgyzstan and Afghanistan. But in the former Soviet republics, this presence is highly unstable: we were kicked off our base in Uzbekistan in 2005, and the same could happen at Manas in Kyrgyzstan. Europe has been investing more and more in the region and has been very tough on political conditionality, freezing the travel of Uzbek officials and so forth. China directly borders the region, so has been pursuing pipelines, roads and trade in tandem to boost its connections to the region. All three styles of diplomacy are at play and in competition with each other. Whether the future of the region will be a return to the Silk Road era or the “Great Game” era is what I try to answer in the book.

You write that economic well-being trumps ideology. Radical Islam, in the minds of most Americans, does not follow any norms of rational economic self-interest. Is our view distorted? How do you recommend we deal radical Islam and also the Middle East?

Our view is beyond distorted: it is itself more irrational than the people to whom we ascribe irrationality. Quite a few studies have shown that terrorists largely come from the middle class and are pursuing very clearly articulated political objectives of resisting authoritarian regimes and American-backed aggression. There is no one policy for the Middle East, nor is there even a “Middle East” in my book. There are Arabs, and among them there are North Africans who can be elevated through the economic and political efforts of the EU; then there is the Mashreq where we need to push for a re-arranging of the borders of states such as Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan so that populations and ethic groups are not so fragmented and divided, but also allowing them to integrate more peacefully with their neighbors. Radicalism would not go away even if we did, but it could be dealt with through more socio-economically oriented programs that are driven from the ground-up rather than through our outside interventions.

You’ve written about America decaying from within, particularly with its growing gap between the rich and poor. Can we even afford to be playing the Empire game? Is there any historical precedent for a country going into debt to a rival (in our case China) to fund its foreign wars?

Wars do of course often cause indebtedness, but indeed we are already there! The American government does not think in guns or butter terms though, so the rich-poor gap is not an effective argument against changing our foreign policies. Those who defend our current over-stretch will always say that the percentage of GDP spent on the military remains very low, which is true. I argue that playing the empire game is nothing less than playing the globalization game, which means we need to channel even more foreign investment into America, but steer it towards rebuilding our society and creating jobs.

Charles Krauthammer once wrote that “America’s purpose should be to steer the world away from its coming multipolar future toward a qualitatively new outcome — a unipolar world whose center is a confederated West.” It’s clear from your book that you disagree, but what are the long and short-term consequences of America pursuing this neoconservative ideology.

At present we are pursuing neither the course Krauthammer advocates nor the one I do! We have alienated Europe and accelerated its coalescence into an alternative pole of power within Western civilization. America and Europe will surely continue to partner on a great many things (trade, Afghanistan, Mideast issues, etc.), but that still ignores the fact that the East already is far too powerful for anyone to claim that the West alone would be the sole pole of power. In other words, Krauthammer’s vision is not only wrong, but it’s too late anyway. We need to do things that integrate East and West, not things that inspire the East to rise against the West.

In 2008, the Boston Consulting Group ran a lifestyle survey of 12,000 women in 22 countries. Their survey findings inform the conclusions in Women Want More, a book that details the burgeoning women’s consumer market. I have not read the book. Here is a book review which I picked up from the web.

Each chapter includes statistics, company stories, and anecdotes from individual women. Readers finish the book with an idea of how women behave as consumers, and how to gear their products for success in the female economy.

Authors: BCG Senior Partner Michael Silverstein, who wrote Trading Up (2003) and Treasure Hunt (2006). Co-written with BCG Partner Kate Sayre.

Recommended for: Corporate leaders and marketers who want to tap the growing women’s consumer products sector.

Background

Women comprise a huge potential market for companies. They control almost $12 trillion of the $18.4 trillion in worldwide consumer spending (65%). By 2028, they will control 72%. Over the next five years, they will gain $5 trillion in earned income. The result? A consumer market bigger than China and India.

That’s just the beginning. So far, 80% of unemployment growth has been male, making the term he-cession ring true. Women own 40% of US businesses—and that number is growing. Women make most of the household decisions about travel, cars, and electronics. Many control household finances.

With economic potential like that, companies need to think seriously about catering to discerning females. “Making it pink” just won’t work.

The Survey

After reviewing the results of their survey, the authors came up with some noteworthy findings. Some of it is familiar: People have either researched and concluded it before, or it sounds like common knowledge:

1) Most women are employed.

* 71% of US mothers are in the labor force (2006 stats)
* 56% have children under one year old (2006)

2) At the same time, women still do all the housework.

* 88% are responsible for grocery shopping
* 85% make all the family meals
* 84% do the laundry
* 84% do most of the housecleaning

3) As a result, they’re stressed.

* 47% say that demands on their time are the “big stress in their life”
* 45% don’t have enough time for themselves

4) Finally, in an unrelated vein of womanhood, they don’t feel skinny or pretty.

* 68% think they’re overweight
* 44% of women rarely or never feel beautiful

Sayre and Silverstein also uncover some tidbits that you may not have heard before:

* Women’s happiness, as correlated with age, is a V-shaped curve. That means women are happiest when they’re young and old, but not so much in between.

* Love, health, honesty, and well-being are the four most important values to women

* When asked what makes them extremely happy, women said:
1) Pets (42%)
2) Sex (27%)
3) Food (19%)

Sorry, guys.

The authors claim there are still a lot of first-mover advantages in the female market. Overall, women fell pressured for time and stressed. They’re constantly looking for products that meet their specific needs (unlike men, who are more loyal to brands). If you create a product that saves women time, feel in control of their finances, or offers other key features as defined in the book, you, too, can capture your piece of the femme pie.

Archetypes

To learn exactly how to address women’s needs, you need to consider the archetype your target market belongs to. The authors divide women into six archetypes. They’re based on economic class, age, and family status:

Fast tracker: 24% of population, 34% of earned income
College-educated, career-minded, makes a lot of money

Pressure cooker: 22% of the population, 23% of earned income
Middle-income, middle-aged, never enough time in the day

Relationship focused: 16% of the population, 13% of earned income
Young, single, adopting brands

Fulfilled empty nester: 15% of the population, 16% of earned income
Money in pocket, enough time, likes leisure and travel

Managing on her own: 10% of population, 9% earned income
Divorced/widowed, making a lot of decisions by herself

Making ends meet: 12% of the population, 5% of earned income
Low income, less education. Low-paying jobs or unemployed. Dissatisfied.

Companies need to understand exactly who they’re trying to serve, and refine from there.

Although the archetypes serve the purposes of this book well, they don’t take culture, lifestyle, and other important market aspects into consideration. They’re a starting point for companies, but not a definitive guide for defining a market segment.

Features of Each Chapter

After explaining the archetypes, the book explores different categories of products that women care about. Each chapter is devoted to a category. Food, fitness, beauty, and apparel make up the first four categories. Financial services and healthcare, which women perceive negatively, make up the next two.

The authors cover how women perceive each product category, how they spend their money on it, and how archetypes react to it. Quotes, statistics, and anecdotes about individual women add flavor to the chapter.

The authors also describe commercial opportunities in each category, illustrating them with major corporations that “got it right.” These include Whole Foods, Curves, Olay, Banana Republic, and several other large corporations.

Next, the book talks about women in low- and high-growth global economies. The former include Japan and Europe. The latter include BRIC, Mexico, and the Middle East. Readers learn more about the characteristics of women in those countries, and how to cater to them.

Before concluding the book, the authors detail women’s attitudes towards charity and giving.

Analysis

The book is well-written, even fun to read. The statistics, stories, and quotes in each story engage readers with the subject matter. Some topics might feel familiar—of course women don’t have enough time—but the book adds value to previous assumptions by going into specifics.

Sadly, several of the characters in the book aren’t original. One was sourced from Wikipedia; another came from a blog.. The authors have agreed to make revisions.

Also note that the book targets leaders of large, consumer-goods corporations (who might, incidentally, read the book and hire BCG consultants). It doesn’t go into depth with regards to service industries, outside of financial and healthcare services. It doesn’t give readers refined tips, or schedules on how to revise their product offerings. One assumes that’s where the consultants come in.

The book provides a general reminder to capture a growing market. It gives a deeper definition of who inhabits that market. And, as far as business books go, it is conventional. It covers established companies and brands. It does not mention burgeoning industries (eg. the green industry) or edgy innovations.

The material is in-the-box and focused on big companies. Undoubtedly, that serves a purpose. Just know that the business wisdom within won’t push many boundaries.

In sum: Useful and fun to read, but not groundbreaking.