For a country with 1 billion people, India is handling the situation better than most countries from a numbers perspective.
As of today, India has around 1.19 million cases with 28,732 deaths and more importantly, 753k recoveries.
Comparatively, the US has around 4.04 million cases with 145k deaths and only 1.2 million recoveries.
What is missing from most conversations around COVID is how to strengthen your immune system to resist the more deadly symptoms of the virus.
The Indian diet, based on Ayurvedic principles, emphasizes the use of spices and other ingredients that are naturally anti-oxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anti-bacterial. It is common in many Indian families to treat seasonal illnesses through home remedies rather than immediately resorting to medication. Doctors in India are recommending COVID-positive patients to do the same. These home remedies include eating "soonth goli" (a mix of ginger, piprimul jaggery, almonds, and ghee), drinking turmeric milk, and various forms of steam therapy, to name a few.
When almost 75% of COVID patients are recovering, clearly India must be doing something right.
>As of today, India has around 1.19 million cases with 28,732 deaths and more importantly, 753k recoveries.
Only if you believe the reported number.
India has a bad track record in tracking deaths.
Most deaths go unreported specially in rural areas. Only 20% of the deaths are reported and it was found that most of the deaths where reason was covid19 were reported as death due to other morbidities like organ transplant, diabetes etc...
Followers of Jainism have been doing this for hundreds of years. There are multiple variations of intermittent fasting. For example, you can fast one day, feed once the next day or fast one day and feed twice the next day.
During the fasting days, people only consume boiled water between sunrise and sunset. No foods or drinks of any other kind are consumed. On feeding days, there are restrictions on the types of foods you can consume as well.
As a Jain, it's interesting to see research and studies being done around religious practices we've been following for years and more importantly, what the data and outcome shows.
> They quit a good job, a job they liked, because other people got a raise.
> This is our culture of 'getting ahead' talking.
That's a pretty bold conclusion without any evidence. The concept of a salary is to pay someone in return for work performed. How would Seth feel if I make the same amount of money as him just by sitting at home (obviously an extreme scenario from one aspect)? It would undervalue his contributions, his hard work and dedication, the obstacles he had to overcome, etc. Any reasonable individual would have second thoughts about working at a company that considers a manager as an equal (financially, salary-wise) to a janitor (for example).
It would be safe to say that those two people didn't quit because other employees got a raise. It was probably due to the fact that their contributions didn't hold the same value anymore.
>It would be safe to say that those two people didn't quit because other employees got a raise. It was probably due to the fact that their contributions didn't hold the same value anymore.
The linked NYT article in the posted article says that the two that quit were two of the "most valued employees", which to me seems like people who were early hires or responsible for some/most the revenue (through tech/sales/whatever). If that's the case, they took the small/early business risks and when a pay off came, they got passed over. I would absolutely consider other opportunities if that happened to me and I was in a key position because it's likely I was under market value to begin with.
If you want to do this kind of thing, all of your early hires have to be on board with the eventual change or you just need to hire everyone at $70k minimum from the ground up. If not, it's reasonable to expect high performers to leave. Mr. Price either didn't know how those two felt or didn't care.
Seth probably doesn't give a shit if you make as much money as he does by sitting at home. As I understood it, that's the whole point of his article: Enjoy what you have, don't waste your time being jealous of other people.
>It would be safe to say that those two people didn't quit because other employees got a raise. It was probably due to the fact that their contributions didn't hold the same value anymore.
Their contributions held exactly the same absolute value, which is the entire point of Godin's post. Their decision is completely irrational unless they place a significant value on their relative status within the organisation.
> How would Seth feel if I make the same amount of money as him just by sitting at home (obviously an extreme scenario from one aspect)?
That's the entire point of the article. He's saying your compensation for doing nothing at home should have no effect on how happy he is. It certainly doesn't change the actual buying-power of his income in any noticeable way.
The scenario I was imagining is when we're both in the same company or same business. Obviously, he shouldn't/wouldn't care how much I make if I'm some random person. The idea is that if you have two employees within the same organization and they both make the same amount of money despite one employee doing less work, it definitely would anger the other employee, wouldn't it?
The point isn't about money. I agree with Seth on that. We shouldn't be chasing money and trying to one-up those around us. But the fact that the work I do as an employee is not viewed in the same regard as someone's else work is slightly jarring.
In a business, particularly a small business the amount of money to go around is a fixed pool. Giving raises to low performers means less money for the high performer.
The amount of money dedicated to salaries is not fixed - particularly in regard to owner compensation, capital investment, marketing costs, team composition, training, etc
The question is whether Seth's work is undervalued or if your work is overvalued.
If Seth was making $75k, how much you're make is irrelevant to whether that's the number that he was looking for for his skillset.
You could consider the company overvaluing your work a bad signal, but I don't get how that translates to Seth should make even more money than you (Company's made one bad judgement, so should now make two bad judgements?)
EDIT: I understand the sentiment though. It's kind of childish ("why does he get more pasta than me??") but I think most humans are affected with it. I think the feeling is one of wanting to be worth more than others... I have a hard time justifying it on a moral level.
Though in principle I agree with you, it isn't very nice to throw labels around: the janitor might well deal with dangerous waste and earn 10x the call center manager.
> The concept of a salary is to pay someone in return for work performed.
Not necessarily. Having someone retained for future needs, for example, is worth paying for in some cases. Value isn't limited to work performed.
Pay is, of corse, just the point where the buyer and seller agree. There is no fundamental reason why a janitor position cannot pay the same or more than a manager, if janitors refuse to do the job for any less.
How do interns apply? I wasn't able to find internship postings on the link you provided nor on the Priceline careers page. Have you started looking for 2016 summer interns yet?
Google's working on something called YouTube Gaming, which inspired this post, but it's basically their competitor to Twitch, rather a competitor to Meerkat/Periscope/Facebook Live.
It would be interesting to see what else they could bring to the table.
What's your point? I can do a simple search of any keyword and get back hundreds or thousands of results. There's no harm in sharing a recent article about a topic to spark discussion.
If you ignore the GP's tone, it's actually a useful search link. Along with accumulating insight and conclusions, to referencing previous articles and discussions helps to avoid specific redundancies.
As of today, India has around 1.19 million cases with 28,732 deaths and more importantly, 753k recoveries.
Comparatively, the US has around 4.04 million cases with 145k deaths and only 1.2 million recoveries.
What is missing from most conversations around COVID is how to strengthen your immune system to resist the more deadly symptoms of the virus.
The Indian diet, based on Ayurvedic principles, emphasizes the use of spices and other ingredients that are naturally anti-oxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anti-bacterial. It is common in many Indian families to treat seasonal illnesses through home remedies rather than immediately resorting to medication. Doctors in India are recommending COVID-positive patients to do the same. These home remedies include eating "soonth goli" (a mix of ginger, piprimul jaggery, almonds, and ghee), drinking turmeric milk, and various forms of steam therapy, to name a few.
When almost 75% of COVID patients are recovering, clearly India must be doing something right.