Author: KathrinStauffer

Business must-reads for Summer 0

Business must-reads for Summer

It’s that time of year with holidays on the horizon, when we share our list of must-reads for all aspiring entrepreneurs and business owners.

Take the opportunity over the summer to get stuck into an inspiring business book and why not pass it on to one of your team when you’ve read it and invest in their personal development too?

How to become a Rainmaker 1 – Jefferey J Fox The One Minute Sales Person 2 – Spencer Johnson Good to Great 3 – Jim Collins Start with the Why 4 – Simon Sinek Business is a Contact Sport 5 – Tom Richardson Oversubscribed 6 – Daniel Priestley Predictable Revenue 7 – Aaron Ross & Marylou Tyler Watertight Marketing 8 – Bryony Thomas Feel the Fear and Do it Anyway 9 – Susan Jeffers Leaders Eat Last 10 – by Simon Sinek More… 11 References ^ How to become a Rainmaker ( ^ The One Minute Sales Person ( ^ Good to Great ( ^ Start with the Why ( ^ Business is a Contact Sport ( ^ Oversubscribed ( ^ Predictable Revenue ( ^ Watertight Marketing ( ^ Feel the Fear and Do it Anyway ( ^ Leaders Eat Last ( ^ More… (

Royal Family 'Sex Slave' Scandal Gets Worse with Publication of Diary 0

Royal Family 'Sex Slave' Scandal Gets Worse with Publication of Diary

Poor Kate Middleton . It should be all about her baby bump, but the press has lately been more focused on her husband’s uncle’s sex slave scandal. Prince William’s uncle, Prince Andrew , has been accused by a now-30-year-old woman of having sex with her several times when she was underage.

At the time, she says she was 17, and living in Florida with the prince’s pedophile pal, Jeffrey Epstein . The prince has denied the shocking allegations. Now a diary purportedly written by the woman in question, Virginia Roberts, has been published by RadarOnline .

And the diary is NOT at all flattering to the former playboy prince.

1 2 Roberts, who says she was Epstein’s sex slave though it’s unclear how he was forcefully keeping her enslaved, also claims she was forced to have sex with a series of rich and powerful men to keep Epstein happy — one of those men she claims was the prince. Although a picture of Virginia when she was 17 and a grinning Prince Andrew with his arm around her does exist , the royal denies everything. So either Virginia was making up these diary entries, or the prince isn’t telling the truth.

Who knows which! Some highlights or, shall we say, lowlights: Ghislaine Maxwell, a woman who acted as the “madame” of Epstein’s underage harem sat down next to me, as I was just starting to uncover the sheets and told me told me excitedly we were going shopping because I needed a new dress I could wear to dance with a prince. Wow, what?

were the first words that popped into my head, not knowing that meant using my body as entertainment for another rich pedophile, or worst, being convinced it was exciting … We were expecting his royal highness, Prince Andrew. Virginia claims that Maxwell had Prince Andrew guess Virginia’s age, and when he guessed 17, Virginia lied and said no, she was 16, and Maxwell added, “She’ll be too old for us soon.” At dinner, Virginia wrote: The Prince s attention towards me amplified making eye contact at every given chance and concentrating at my plunging V-neck top.

They then went to a nightclub, where the prince allegedly procured her an alcoholic cocktail, despite her age. She uncharitably writes: He was the most incredibly hideous dancer I had ever seen and not to mention how embarrassing it was to have to be the one he was smashing pelvics with, even if he was a prince. Well, you know what they say about men who can’t dance.

The two then went back to Epstein’s mansion, where Virginia supposedly drew him a bath and things got more intimate: He was caressing every part of my naked body and filling my head with endless compliments about my blossoming figure. She claims that the prince even kissed her toes. Must run in the family because remember when Andrew’s ex-wife, Fergie, got caught having her toes sucked by her lover?

But I digress. According to Virginia, the prince wasn’t exactly the most attentive lover: As soon as he’d had his fun, he quickly got dressed and absconded. Hm, Prince Andrew might be British royalty but it sounds like he’s a peasant when it comes to more important things.

That is, if any of this is remotely true. And who knows about that. Do you believe Virginia?

And do you really think he’s a hideous dancer?

Image via Chris Jackson/Getty Images Entertainment References ^ husband’s uncle’s sex slave scandal. ( ^ diary is NOT at all flattering to the former playboy prince. (

CO2 Emissions and Temperature Target Goals 0

CO2 Emissions and Temperature Target Goals

Time 1 : Why the Coming Budget Crisis May Be the Worst UK Guardian 2 : IPCC: 30 years to climate calamity if we carry on blowing the carbon budget The Washington establishment and the media have been mesmerized into inaction by a short-term budget crisis funding the continued operation of the government. But it is the continued operation of a livable climate that should have their full attention. Decades from now, our children won t be fretting over the inanity of the GOP shutting down the government because of their implacable opposition to giving health security to millions of uninsured Americans.

Rather, they will be our struggling to secure the health and well-being of billions of people in a Dust-Bowlified world 3 ruined by their parents greed and myopia. On Friday, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its latest assessment of how humans are destroying a livable climate. As we discussed, it was yet another dire prognosis 9 F Warming For U.S., Faster Sea Rise, More Extreme Weather, Permafrost Collapse 4 .

It should have spurred an immediate global move toward deep cuts in carbon pollution. Instead, U.S. opinion makers steering the ship of state went right back to arguing about whether the deck chairs infirmary beds?

should have been rearranged in the manner approved by President Obama, Congress, and the Supreme Court. Our inaction on climate is primarily the fault of the disinformers and obstructionists and those in the media who enable them but the IPCC certainly deserves some amount of blame for its poor communication skills and flat learning curve 5 . The UK Guardian, in its IPCC piece 6 (cited above), writes: But the most controversial finding of the report was its carbon budget .

Participants told the Guardian this was the last part of the summary to be decided, and the subject of hours of heated discussions in the early hours of Friday morning. Some countries were concerned that including the numbers would have political repercussions. The scientists found that to hold warming to 2C, total emissions cannot exceed 1,000 gigatons of carbon.

Yet by 2011, more than half of that total allowance 531 gigatons had already been emitted. To ensure the budget is not exceeded, governments and businesses may have to leave valuable fossil fuel reserves unexploited. There s a finite amount of carbon you can burn if you don t want to go over 2C, Stocker told the Guardian.

That implies if there is more than that in fossil fuel reserves, that you leave some of that carbon in the ground. This raises key questions of how to allocate the remaining carbon budget fairly among countries, an issue that some climate negotiators fear could wreck the UN climate talks, which are supposed to culminate in a global agreement on emissions in 2015. To ensure the budget is not exceeded, governments and businesses may have to leave valuable fossil fuel reserves unexploited.

They may have to ? Try must. Is there any other subject than climate change where the media feel obliged to hedge even the most obvious statements?

As an aside, the fossil fuel reserves that must remain unexploited are valuable only in a world that actually doesn t accept the climate science reviewed in the IPCC report. The sentence would read more accurately this way: To ensure the budget is not exceeded, governments and businesses must leave climate-destroying fossil fuel reserves unexploited. Climatologist Ken Caldeira emailed me with an even greater concern about the way this issue is being framed, pointing to the same UK Guardian piece: There is some noise around the idea that it useful to think about some amount of allowable CO2 emissions budget that would keep the world under 2 C of global warming.

This concept is dangerous for two reasons: 1. There are no such things as an allowable CO2 emissions. There are only damaging CO2 emissions or dangerous CO2 emissions.

Every CO2 emission causes additional damage and creates additional risk. Causing additional damage and creating additional risk with our CO2 emissions should not be allowed.

2. If you look at how our politicians operate, if you tell them you have a budget of XYZ, they will spend XYZ.

Politicians will reason: If we re not over budget, what s to stop us to spending? Let the guys down the road deal with it when the budget has been exceeded. The CO2 emissions budget framing is a recipe for delaying concrete action now.

We should be framing the issue around what we need to do today: stop building things with tailpipes and smokestacks and start retiring the things we have already built that do have tailpipes and smokestacks. Stop using the sky as a waste dump for our CO2 emission. These are things that we can hold politicians accountable to today.

Trying to hold politicians to a budget that will be reached 30 years in the future is a recipe for disaster. If our current crop of politicians is any indication, it is unreasonable to expect politicians to feel constrained by something that might happens 30 years from now, long after they have left office. The key point is that every CO2 emission is bad; the budget for allowable CO2 emissions should be zero.

When I emit CO2, I am transgressing against nature and future generations. It is not something allowed; it is a violation. As long as we are still building CO2-emitting devices, the politicians are failing, and we must hold them accountable for their failure today, not 30 years into the future.

A key flaw in the carbon budget framing is that most people including most opinion makers and politicians don t understand that that avoiding catastrophic global warming requires stabilizing carbon dioxide concentrations , not emissions (see here 7 ), which means emissions have to become zero when the budget is expended. The metaphor is also flawed because people naturally have a mental model that you can afford to exceed your budget as long as you make up for whatever you borrow. People may think we can easily pull CO2 out of the air at that point (assuming they think about 30 years from now at all).

People understand that we can solve our federal budget crisis any time we want to. And, of course, we can just pass a simple law that increases the ceiling on the national debt, as we have many times in the past. But solving the carbon budget crisis requires immediate action and doing things utterly different than what we have done in the past.

The post The Real Budget Crisis: The CO2 Emissions Budget Framing Is A Recipe For Delaying Concrete Action Now 8 appeared first on ThinkProgress 9 .

Connect: Authored by: Joseph Romm 10 Joe Romm is a Fellow at American Progress and is the editor of Climate Progress, which New York Times columnist Tom Friedman called “the indispensable blog” and Time magazine named one of the 25 “Best Blogs of 2010.” In 2009, Rolling Stone put Romm #88 on its list of 100 “people who are reinventing America.” Time named him a “Hero of the Environment and The Web s most influential …

See complete profile 11 References ^ Time ( ^ UK Guardian ( ^ Dust-Bowlified world ( ^ 9 F Warming For U.S., Faster Sea Rise, More Extreme Weather, Permafrost Collapse ( ^ poor communication skills and flat learning curve ( ^ IPCC piece ( ^ here ( ^ The Real Budget Crisis: The CO2 Emissions Budget Framing Is A Recipe For Delaying Concrete Action Now ( ^ ThinkProgress ( ^ Joseph Romm ( ^ See complete profile (