Chapter 7 – Health Care Undoubtedly the preservation and furtherance of one's life ranks as one of the most potent driving forces of man. Many individuals cite the paramount importance of health care as the reason that its provision should be generously supported or completely provided by the state. However, this reasoning seems peculiar, because the more fundamental human needs for food, water and shelter are largely provided by free market forces. As in all other industries however, the free market provision of medical care is not only more ethical but also more effective at providing more accessible and higher quality treatment than any state regulated or provided health care service. In contrast to today's environment, health insurance in freed markets will likely play a much smaller role. This is due to the economic considerations discussed in the previous chapter. Hopper provides some relevant commentary. Quote, The first thing we can say is that sickness is insurable only in so far as the health risk for a particular group is purely accidental. Such is the case with certain forms of accident insurance or even for events such as cancer. But for most health risks we would have to say that they fall into the province of individual control and very little in this field is actually insurable. Such risks must be assumed individually and must be paid for out of individual savings. End quote. In other words, insurance is most effective when it can group a class of individuals who all share common levels of risk and whose coverage extends to those events which are largely unforeseeable and random in their occurrence. Thus health risks which are largely in one's control are not insurable as they are neither unforeseeable nor random in occurrence. If the occurrence of a particular event may be systematically predicted then any attempt to cover this would undermine the purpose of insurance. That is to say insurance is intended to act as a sort of lottery in the sense that each of its individual clients are largely uncertain in advance regarding the degree to which they will have insurable damages to claim. However they realise that if such an insured event occurred they may not have the funds available to pay for the resulting damage. Thus they may choose to purchase coverage as a means to protect them from this risk. In the case where a largely foreseeable health risk was covered many of the predictably affected individuals would buy into the insurance just prior to the occurrence of the covered risk. Conversely most of those who would predictably be unaffected by such an event would abstain from buying insurance. Any insurer of largely foreseeable events will attract those who expect to profit and at the same time detract those who expect to lose from the arrangement. Insurance operations cannot perform under such conditions. Their business is risk management. They act not only as a shield against damages but to exchange unpredictable and dangerous risks for predictable monetary payments. Without virtually unforeseeable risks insurance serves no viable purpose. Finally it seems plausible that to become eligible for high quality healthcare coverage in a free market one would likely be required to submit to certain behavioural standards. In the case of automobile insurance rules for entry may require that seatbelts are worn and that drivers travel under a certain speed if they are to receive reimbursements for the treatment of injuries caused by collision. Various rules of these organisations may be amenable to clients as their observance will result in smaller payments due to lessened risks. Additionally such insurance may require its clients to receive a certain number of health exams a year so as to detect and treat health risks early when they are comparatively cheaper to treat and serve to prevent future more expensive procedures. In this way the insurance agency's profit interests are aligned with its clients interests to be secure from the overwhelming costs of future unforeseeable medical procedures. In other words preventing covered medical risks from occurring at all will be the greatest contributing factor to the profitability of a given insurance agency's services. In today's state managed environment minimum mandated coverage requires many clients to pay for unwanted or unneeded coverage thus driving up the cost of such insurance provision altogether. On top of this much of this mandated coverage includes risks which should not be insurable such as alcoholism drug addiction and the subsidisation of predictable routine checkups. These ailments are often self-inflicted or in the case of pre-existing conditions are clearly foreseeable. The willpower to resist submission to alcoholism and drug addiction is fully within man's capability. However only those risks which are both unpredictable and largely beyond the client's control may be viably insured. Moreover laws prohibiting discrimination amongst clientele regarding pre-existing conditions cause insurance agencies to inevitably pool higher risk clients with lower risk ones thereby perverting the function of premiums and causing the lower risk to subsidise the higher risk clients. Finally as firms are mandated to cover many otherwise uninsurable risks the incentive for clients to shop around will be decreased as the potential variance between each insurance agency's services will have been artificially curtailed i.e as more risks are mandated to be covered health insurance will have a lesser capacity for customisation. Without allowing out-of-pocket costs to serve as a deterrent to unnecessary medical care e.g trivial or at-home treatable ailments the demand for medical services will be artificially inflated and with it a corresponding rise in insurance costs due to this distortion. Hopper comments on these unintended consequences of government interference in the healthcare industry. Quote, this is a lesson in the logic of interventionism. The first interventionist act brought about a big mess. Insurance premiums always go up because insurers are no longer allowed to discriminate correctly and are even forced to include uninsurable risks. So now the problem arises of more and more people dropping out. For those who remain insured premiums have to be raised to adjust for the fact that so many are dropping out. The next step which we in the United States are on the verge of taking is to make health insurance compulsory no more dropping out. If this step is taken compulsory health insurance with all the other mandates remaining in place then of course premiums will skyrocket even more than they have in the past. End quote. Does this mean consumers will generally pay for most of their healthcare directly in freed markets? Yes, though there would likely be alternative arrangements available. For instance individuals may choose to outsource risk by means of group insurance. Group insurance has the unique advantage of members being able to apply potent social pressures on anyone who abuses their coverage by either making false claims or going to the hospital for trivial ailments. Such practices were the norm in the early 20th century with the advent of lodge medicine. This was a practice typically provided by various fraternities comprised of impoverished and working class individuals. It proved to be advantageous financially and qualitatively as David Beto describes. Quote. The leading beneficiary of lodge practice was of course the patient of modest means. He or she was able to obtain a physician's care for about $2 a year, roughly equivalent to a day's wage for a labourer. For comparable amounts some lodges extended coverage to family members. The remuneration the lodge doctor received was a far cry from the higher fee schedules favoured by the profession. The local medical society in Meadville, Pennsylvania was typical in setting the following minimum fees for its members, $1 per physical examination, surgical dressing and daytime house call and $2 per night time house call. Such charges, at least for ongoing service, were beyond the reach of many lower income Americans. Hence it was not coincidental an editorial in the medical council pointed out that lodge practice thrived in communities populated by the working core. End quote. As communities evolve and grow the need for group insurance will tend to fall as individuals over time become more wealthy and productive. Many healthcare services will be paid for directly like most other services. When services are directly purchased the consumer is more strongly incentivized to shop around for the lowest priced and or highest quality services. This in turn will spark fierce a competition between medical providers on the grounds of quality and price. Because the consumer will be much more involved in the selection of his or her service provider there will be a comparatively higher demand for the development of new technology which improves various medical procedures making them safer, more effective and more affordable over time. Furthermore the absence of costly regulations and taxes will translate into lower prices for the consumer allowing them greater access to healthcare of their own choosing. Finally the absence of licensure requirements, patents and other forms of intellectual property will result in a far greater supply of healthcare providers and medicine. Consequently the cost for these services and products will be far cheaper in comparison. Of course a skeptical person may be worried about the quality or shade of free market healthcare providers as they are not forced to submit to state set minimum standards. These standards however may easily be supplanted by private accreditation firms or other third party ratings agencies akin to consumer reports. In free markets reputation is vital to the success of every firm in every industry. Without state oversight or monopolistic boards of approval transparency would increasingly be demanded of medical providers. When reputation marks inform and determine massive consumer choice imagine a vast and detailed Yelp. Companies and associations that refuse to allow third party evaluations will be pressured accordingly. What is more likely, any quality healthcare firms would be more than happy to submit themselves and their staff to third party evaluations as a means of distinguishing themselves from the competition and to assure any prospective patrons that their services will be performed safely and efficiently. Firms which do not submit themselves to such independent third party evaluations would be seen as suspect when compared to their more transparent counterparts. Some fear the propensity for such ratings agencies to be bribed. While bribery is inherent in all human institutions this sort of foul play will be greatly tempered by the presence of competitive upstarts in the ratings agency. For a ratings agency to accept a bribe or engage in any foul play would be to put its reputation and therefore its future profitability at great risk. Their competitors would be eager to investigate any claims of foul play and to make public any damning evidence that may be discovered. Of course different healthcare firms may hold different standards. However the various levels of standards of care will be reflected by higher or lower prices. For example one may only be willing to pay $20 for a physical and as such settle for patronising a firm which provides a moderate quality of service or whose staff has little experience. Quality diversity is valuable because most people who are unwilling or unable to afford the highest quality healthcare prefer to purchase the quality of service they can afford. While there may be the Motel 6 quality of healthcare closer to the bottom rungs there will also be the 4 seasons quality healthcare closer towards the top. In markets freed from regulation and taxation all levels of service increase in quality and decrease in price over time. For instance modern Toyota cars are a much higher quality good than a Mercedes Benz from 75 years ago. It is understood that value is subjective however this manner of speaking is shorthand for properties overwhelmingly desired by consumers such as greater safety fuel efficiency speed acceleration reliability automation etc. Freed markets allow and incentivize consumers to discriminate between healthcare providers on the basis of many criteria ranging from where the practitioners studied what private certifications they have their years of experience the number of successful and failed procedures asking price the friendliness of staff the cleanliness of facilities their bedside manner and much more. Furthermore the reputable third party agencies may make up for a lack of expertise held by the average consumer required to make a credible evaluation of a given firm or medical practitioner. Just as many of us turn to Google or other sources of public information to research products so too would references given by established and legitimate ratings agencies inform us on which medical provider to select. The site corrective procedure LAZIC exemplifies the incentives to which medical providers adjust in the face of unadulterated demand from consumers. This practice is unique in that it is not covered by most standard insurance causing the majority of consumers to pay for it directly out of pocket. This incentivizes them to discriminate more thoroughly among the various levels of price and quality. VJ Boyapatti explains the results of this practice. With these incentives in place the LAZIC procedure has been reported to have fallen in cost by over 30% during the last decade. Even more importantly the quality of the procedure has improved dramatically in that period as providers competed to deliver the most efficacious treatment. According to Eric Gross an expert in the field of LAZIC technology early procedures were not LAZIC at all but uncomfortable surface ablations with no astigmatism correction. Subsequent generations of the procedure increased the treatable range, added correction for astigmatism, correction for hyperopia, the LAZIC flap to increase stability and comfort, accuracy and safety features and finally moved to true custom wavefront analysis and correction. The same methods of quality assurance in the medical care industry, competition, mercurial consumer choice and influential third party evaluations may also be applied to the pharmaceutical industry. Some theorists maintain that without patents and the overarching edifice of intellectual property law pharmaceutical companies will not have enough incentive to perform expensive R&D unless they can recoup it through monopoly profits in the future. What must be considered is that one of the greatest expenses associated with ongoing research is the cost of complying with mandated tests and trials conducted by the FDA which can last decades. Not only are these mandatory testing requirements incredibly expensive thereby creating huge barriers to entry in the industry but they also keep otherwise life-saving drugs off the market for long periods of time. In the interim many people suffer and die while they wait for the FDA to grant approval for the drug. Patients in very dire circumstances may prefer to take the risk of consuming experimental or untested drugs as opposed to waiting for their deaths which all too often occurs while waiting for FDA testing to complete. Of course this is not an argument against testing and research per se, rather it is meant to show the destructive and wasteful effects of giving quality assurance to a monopolistic agency. Competing pharmaceutical firms will have to find the optimal balance between testing and release times for their drugs. If they release them with too little testing their customers may suffer unduly from harmful side effects. However should they take too long to test they may be losing market share to competitors who are in a better position to release their own safe versions of the drugs sooner. One innovative option would be to release their drugs throughout all testing stages and label them according to their respective stages of testing, thus allowing the consumer to express their own risk profiles individually. As there will be no one-size-fits-all method for testing and release, such varying methods of production and testing will be competing against one another, creating a tendency towards ever more safe and efficient practices. Not unlike medical care providers pharmaceutical companies may seek third party safety certification as a means of assuring their customers. Different third party safety certifiers will have different levels of reputability, which will affect the credibility of their respective certifications. This will of course just be one more factor for the pharmaceutical entrepreneur to consider. Finally there is the ethical consideration of a free market based healthcare system. State interference in the healthcare industry, taking the form of regulations, minimum mandated coverage, occupational licensing, taxes, the enforcement of intellectual property laws, etc. are unique in that they are unilaterally imposed and enforced via aggressive means. That is to say the ultimate consequence for not complying with them is imprisonment or potentially death should one resist arrest. In sharp contrast however, the consumer and entrepreneur are only held to standards upon which both parties agreed beforehand. Even the formation of tacit agreements such as eating at a restaurant and being asked to pay the bill are legitimate in free markets because the restaurant has a private institution is legitimately owned by the person setting the rules of service. In contrast the state dictates policy over property on which it has no legitimate claim. Unlike the state private entities must adhere to general norms and practices in society and persuade others to trade with them on good terms. Healthcare providers competing in free markets would have to rely upon voluntary consumer patronage to maintain economic viability and any such providers who offer poor quality or undesirable services will continually stumble and fall in light of more satisfying and more efficient products and techniques. This is the way in which markets are organically and perpetually regulated in accordance with the consumer's ever-changing desires.


Hi, beautiful. You're very up close and personal today, which is pretty much the theme of the video. Today's video is all about my ears. And if you think that's weird, I would have to agree with you. Basically, I got something done to my ears that I've been wanting to get done for a very long time and it finally happened.  We'll get there. Today you'll watch me go through getting some surgery done. You'll see some before and afters and I'll let you know how everything went throughout the entire journey. But let me warn you, things will get graphic at some point in this video. If you're not somebody who likes that, maybe this isn't the video for you. I also wanted to share my story on YouTube about this topic because when I was wanting this surgery, there was not a lot of YouTube videos about it or people just didn't really break down the entire journey very well and I couldn't really get much information out of it. So I decided to make this video today to help those people who also want to get this done and maybe bring more attention to the topic and help some people out there. So with that all said, let's get into it. Let me tell you a little story about what happened to my wonderful earlobes. Back when I was 15 years old, I was a very angsty scene slash emo boy, whatever you want to call it. A lot of the emo kids had stretched earlobes, had piercings, all the above. And my mom was definitely not for it. She did not want me to get any piercings and I really wanted to do this. So it was super important that I got my ears pierced and I ended up doing it myself along with a lot of other piercings on my body. After I pierced my ears, I began stretching them very, very quickly from just a regular old ear piercing to five-eighths of an inch and this is what that looked like. It was quite large. I can't even believe my ears used to be that large and if you can't already tell what this video is about or what surgery I'm getting done, I am getting my earlobes repaired from having them stretched. So I ended up stopping at five-eighths of an inch and that was enough for me. I decided I was done and I still had the possibility of shrinking my ears back down to its regular size or something very small from five-eighths of an inch. If I went up to an inch or two inches, girl, there is definitely no going back. Listen, I just wanna preface what I'm about to say. I never hated my gauged ears. It was a great thing at the time. I loved them. I thought it was so fun to do it. It was like, how big can I get them? How fast can I do it? It was really painful, really fun, oddly enough. I mean, I really liked pain at that time. Again, very angsty. It was enjoyable for some odd reason and it gave me something to do. It was cool, but then I grew out of that eventually. So at the age of 19, when I moved to New York, got an amazing job, I decided it wasn't for me anymore. I didn't want my ears stretched. I thought it looked a little childish. Just in my opinion, if you have them and you like them, that's totally cool. I took them out and began the shrinking process. So took them out, left them out for a year. They shrunk down to a double zero gauge, which is much smaller. Here's a comparison between a 5.8 of an inch and a double zero gauge. They are much smaller. Here's some pictures of me wearing my gauges. You guys have seen them before. I wear them on my channel every time I film up until recently because I don't have them anymore. They are very small for me. They look like earrings. I can totally rock that. And then I kind of got sick of that. I wanted to wear earrings so badly. I got a second hole pierced in my right ear to make me feel better so I could wear other earrings, but that wasn't doing it for me and I wanted to experiment more with earrings. I just wanted regular ear holes so badly. Oh my God, don't ever take your ear holes for granted, guys.  Okay, so boom. Let's fast forward to the day before surgery. Here's what my earhole size was the day before surgery. Here's me kind of stretching them out and showing you guys what they look like. They're not that cute. They're definitely stretched, not so nice. I can't not wear my plugs or else I feel like they just look really ugly and droopy and nasty. So it just wasn't fun. So I'm chilling. It's the night before the surgery and I just wanted to show you guys my ears. As you can see, they're gaping and they are large. They're definitely large and in charge and I'm over it. So I finally am getting them done. It's been forever. So yeah, tomorrow morning, we're getting it done. This is the last of them. They've been with me since I was like 15, 16. So I shrunk them down and now getting them closed the frick up. Shout out to my mom who always told me my whole life that I was going to want to get them fixed and that's gonna cost a lot of money to get them fixed. And yeah, mom, I get it. I'm dreading the healing process. I'm just like so lazy with healing stuff.  I'm gonna think positively about it, it'll be great. So off to surgery, I went the next day. I went to Dr. Rappaport in Manhattan and you'll see a bit of my experience with him. We consulted about my ears, which you'll see and then we went forth with the surgery. So here is my quick consultation with Dr. Rappaport and everything we kind of talked about before getting the surgery done. It's pretty straightforward, but here you go. All right, so I'm here with Dr. Rappaport and he is about to talk to me about my ears that have been stretched very wide and we are gonna close them up today. So we're gonna analyze exactly what we're seeing. Your desire is to not have the gauge holes anymore. What I wanna show you is what's involved here. This is not the biggest size gauge hole I've ever seen but it's not tiny. And what I'm explaining is it's just like in general when you're fixing or closing an ear piercing, when a piercing happens, the skin grows from the front to the back. So you see there's just skin and that's why it doesn't close out. And when you're closing it, basically you're removing that skin that's grown in and then you have a raw edge on the front and a raw edge on the back and you close the front to the front, the back to the back. Now, if we only did exactly what I said, there's an issue, right? Because if we go in this direction, which it seems to be asking for, your ears a little pointy, right?  Right, I thought about that. Sometimes when they're bigger, we actually cut this whole thing and lay it down, but I think you're in that borderline place that what I just said is gonna go best.  Right, so I'm gonna numb you.  Then I'm gonna basically, this isn't the right marker for that, but everything behind that white line is gonna get cut out, right? That whole middle thing. I started arranging the tissue for closure and my main goal is to pick this up just a little to try to make it more like, you know, rounded like that and less pointy like that. Because remember, when you have a line here, the more I go on the outside, when you close the line, it's actually longer, right? Cause I have an arc and then when I close it, it becomes a longer line, which makes the ear even pointier. So I'm not gonna go out too far at all, but again, I'm gonna have to take it up a little bit and we'll deal with, I'll be dealing with that with, you know, little, little snips and then just some stitches and the stitches will come out in seven days. You'll be able to, to shower and wash and dab dry tomorrow. We're gonna put a bandage at the end, mainly just to protect you for the rest of the day and tonight because there's always a little chance of bleeding a little when the numbing medicine wears off, but then tomorrow you don't have to have it covered. I wouldn't do hard workouts for the next few days, but you can pretty much be active. How long is the procedure? 30 minutes or less each side? Less, maybe 20. How many stitches do you think will be in my hands? We've never counted. Patients always ask, I ain't never counted. There may be some running stitches, not a lot, I don't know, on each aspect, you know, front to back, to seven. So that was our consultation, pretty straightforward.  I actually waited so long for this appointment because I had it booked right before everything happened in the world with, you know, Ms. COVID and things got pushed back months. I was so excited to get it done. Now is the time where this gets really graphic. I'm about to show you guys exactly what happens when he sliced my ear open. I don't think it's that bad to watch. I do, however, love surgery shows, so maybe I am numb to, you know, stuff like this, but I think it's interesting. I mean, it's not that bad. Just try and watch it and if you think it's bad, fast forward, okay? That's all I'm trying to say. Both sides have been repaired.  Yes.  The bandage always looks a little weird, but again, just try to keep it til tomorrow morning. Okay. And then you can shower, dab dry. You want, like, in a couple days to not have it look scabby, so if it's scabby, just spend a little more time in the shower because then it'll just make for a better scar and easier suture removal, which will happen a week from today. Great. All right? How was it? I didn't feel anything. Thank you so much. So we did that whole thing. I, by the way, did not feel a thing. My ear was numb. A lot of people were like, did you go to sleep for this? Like, no, it's not that big of a deal. It's like, they numb your ear. The only thing you can feel is them putting the needle in your ear to numb your ear.  I don't really care. I'm not really one to, like, care about those things. I'm pretty chill when it comes to needles. I thought it was fine. So here's a photo of them right after the surgery. They are stitched up, bruised up, really swollen, so ugly. I was like, I had to wear bandages home and I wore bandages to sleep that night. It honestly wasn't that bad because they weren't painful because they were numbed, took a few Advil, got over it. I slept right in between two pillows. That's a good idea to do when you get this done. Sleep right in between two pillows. That way your ear kind of floats. You just don't wanna put pressure on them too much or else they bruise even more, which is what I found out the hard way because I was kind of rough that first night with my sleeping and I was like, oh, my ear that I sleep on more, which is this one, got much more bruised and much more swollen. So be careful with that, but it's not the end of the world. It's not a big deal. And if you do plan on getting this done, I just wanna mention that it is a little bit, like, scary when you first look at your ears after getting this done and you're like, maybe this is just me. But I was like, was this a good idea? Like, why do my ears look like this? Like, did he screw it up? I do worry about these things and it's my ears, like, they're on my face. Like, it's kind of a really big deal and I don't want botched ears and you can't just grow ear lobes back. Like, it was a big thing. I was really worried about it. And I'm on camera all the time. I wanna look presentable. So I was freaking out. I don't know if other people do this. And then I was like, Brad, it's gonna be fine. Your ears are going to heal. It's all gonna be okay. Hopefully. Overall though, it's a pretty low maintenance procedure. You really don't do much. You don't really have to clean them. You can let water run on them, but you don't wanna, like, scrub them or, like, do anything crazy. You just let them be. Dr. Rappaport said it was very important too. It just let them be, let them heal on their own. Don't massage them. Don't do too much. Just let them be. Put SPF on them so that the sunlight doesn't make the scars darker, which I need to remember to do more. That's basically it. It was really straightforward. The healing process didn't really do anything. And the only thing that was kind of ugly was wearing stitches in your ears, unless you think they're cool. I thought it was kind of cool having stitches in my ears, but also when I talked to people, they were like, the fuck's in your ears.   So there was probably like, I don't know, eight stitches on each side or seven, whatever. It doesn't really matter. Everybody gets a different amount of stitches. They get their ears sewn up a different way to fit their ear. It's very unique to your ear lobe. At least that's how Dr. Rappaport did it for me. And he kind of figured out what would look the best and proportionate to the rest of my ear. You know, if I didn't have this, it would look weird. So after a week of having my ears all stitched up, I went back to my doctor and he then took out the stitches, which was also pretty painless. I mean, there's a few pinches here and there. Wasn't a big deal. Got them out. I was like, oh, thank God I'm done with this. I'm gonna have to come back again. Like, I don't wanna leave my house. They looked like they had stitches in them. You know, here's some photos for you. They were very big, bruised, swollen, nasty, kind of ugly, still worried a little bit, but still just like, trust the process, Brad. Trust the process. So then the recovery process continued. I just monitored them. I didn't do much to them. I didn't actually put anything on them. He said it, honestly, just leaving them alone would be best. And so I just did that. And I feel like it's been really great. I'm still doing that. I'm still just leaving them alone, cleaning them off once in a while. So I don't get an infection or anything like that, but they're very closed up. I don't think anything's getting in there at this point. And slowly but surely they began to look normal again. And I was getting happier and happier every week or every day that I had the stitches out. They were looking so much better, so much more normal. And I was feeling so good and so confident about my ear lobes.  Okay, so that brings us to where we are now. I got my surgery on June 11th. It is now July 9th, so it has been four weeks. So they are looking really nice, as you guys can see on camera. But also I will say they're still swollen. You know, they're still red. They're still a little tender. They're definitely not totally normal yet. This one's still a bit more swollen than this one. This one's a little smaller. This one's a little bigger.  Just like our eyebrows and the rest of our body. Nothing is exactly identical. They're still healing. It's gonna take about a year for them to fully heal. Just like any other surgery you get done, it usually takes a year to fully heal up. So still trusting the process. I think they look really great though. And I'm really happy with them so far. I will show you a quick close up of my ear lobes right now. So as you can see, I still do have a scar down them. I think it looks kind of rad. I'm not mad about it. I don't mind scars. I have one on my face right here too. You can kind of hardly see it now, but I thought that one, I was like five. But that's a different story. I don't mind the scar.  It's only been four weeks, so it has a long ways to go. Overall, I'm very happy that I did this.  I didn't really know how he was going to make it look normal since he's taking out so much skin and then sewing it back together. I was like, how is this gonna work? Like, how am I gonna have normal sized ear lobes and not like tiny ones? Somehow it worked. I think that the scar tissue maybe added to the volume of my ear lobe, which is really cool. Maybe he's just a magician. I don't know. I do feel like he did an amazing job at making it proportionate to the rest of my ear. I've never thought about ear lobes so much in my life until now. And now I look at everybody's ear lobes and I'm like, wow, great lobes. Another thing that I need to add to my list of weird qualities. I do plan on getting my ear lobes re-pierced. I do want to wear regular earrings, like I said before. So he said you could get it pierced. I think it was like three weeks after. It was very soon after you can get them re-pierced, but I kind of wanna let them heal for a little while. They just seem like really irritated and my ears don't do super well with piercings.   We'll just wait it out. I'm sure I'll get them done in like six months or whatever. I wanna live my piercing free life for a moment. I also wanted to quickly mention that you can get this done even if you don't have ear lobes stretched out as far as mine were. You can get this done if your ear lobes were stretched out from heavy jewelry. If you have a long slit in your ear, you can totally do this. You can do it if you have even bigger holes than I did. You can get it if you had way smaller ones. So anybody who has that concern can totally get this surgery done. Again, it's pretty chill, pretty straightforward and it's not the baby deal. I will however say it can be very pricey. Luckily I can afford a surgery like this and I do understand that some people cannot but you know, you get what you pay for a lot of times with surgery stuff and I just wouldn't recommend going to somebody who may be a lot cheaper just because this is on your face, you're gonna have to live with this forever. You can't really add a tissue back to your ears once it's gone. Take that and do what you will with it. That is my two cents on that.  I don't regret it. Was it a lot of money to fix it? Yes, I mean, I don't know. Just think about it, make a good decision. You're like a one life to live, go for it but just know that you may have to go through exactly what I went through and pay a lot of money to fix it. That's what I would say to my kids, you know?  And I wanted to just lastly say that this video is not sponsored by Dr. Rapaport.  So if you guys would like to visit him, his links are down below. You can get a consultation, you can go see him. It was a great experience with him. I do recommend him and I love my lobes. That's really my full earlobe reconstruction surgery story. I hope this helped you decide whether or not to get it done or, you know, if you are getting it done, I hope this just kind of calmed your nerves for getting your ears done. It's a pretty chill process. It'll be fine, it'll be great. And if you guys have more questions, please leave your questions below. I or someone else, I'm sure, will answer your question. I will try and do my best to get back to some of you guys after I post this video and hopefully I can answer some of them for you. That is all for today, guys. Thank you so much for watching this. Don't forget to follow me on all the different social media networks, Instagram, Twitter and TikTok at BradMondoNYC. And also you can find my Facebook page and my Snapchat show under BradMondo. And make sure you check out my hair care brand, X-MondoHair at X-MondoHair on Instagram or X-MondoHair.com to get beautiful, fabulous, amazing glowing hair. And don't forget to live your extra life. And I'll see you next time. Bye, guys. This is Viper Smoothin' Oil. This oil is a combination of all of my favorites. It has Bobap Oil, Argan Oil, Carrot Seed Oil. Now, what sets this oil apart is it really penetrates the hair cuticle. It goes deep inside. Instead of just laying on top of the hair and adding a greasy film, it's gonna actually go inside, help supply nutrition, hydrate and add a lot of shine.


Hello everyone. Sorry for the small delay. I'm Igor Stopa. I work for Intel. Today I would like to talk with you about my experience advice, survival course of how to build IoT device. I hope we can have it as an interactive session, so if you have comments, if you disagree violently with me, feel free to just press your hand and let's discuss about it. So, couple of monetary disclaimers. What you're gonna hear is my mostly in a sense or opinion. I do not claim to own any trademark or copyright that I will be using. So, what are we gonna talk about? What is an IoT device? Why do you want to build one? And what it's gonna do? Where it's gonna live? What are the constraints you have to deal with when you create a IoT device? What are the hardware software options? The idea is that here you want to create something maybe for yourself, maybe because you want to sell it, it doesn't matter. But the idea is that you want to be as fast as possible, as effective as possible in delivering something which makes you or your customer happy. So, there's also part of selecting the tools. And then how to integrate it. And then some final considerations about what could be done on top of that. So, what is an IoT device? It's a semi-autonomous agent producing and or consuming information, mostly by interacting with other IoT agents. Doesn't say much, but that's what it is. You have this thing and it's supposed to go on mostly by itself, unattended, chitchatting with something else like that, possibly also with something on the cloud. For those who like me start to have some gray hair, this is not in particular different from embedded device. We used to call them SCADA or with other words, now the buzzword is IoT so we go by that, cloud is the other one. The difference is that what previously used to be SCADA costing north of thousands of dollars, now you pay a few bucks and it fits in your pocket and the battery probably lasts forever.  And actually what I'm not gonna talk about it here, but I find even more scary is that you can correlate it. I mean, that's what we saw in the introduction with all these cloud services. There's a really unprecedented computational power available. So, not every IoT device looks the same. If you look at them with, yes, like a tree. So, you have a cloud which is high above and then you have nodes and leaves. And some devices in the IoT world are kind of smart. Some others are less smart but probably cheaper. On some you can run Linux. On something else you cannot or do not want to run Linux because, for example, it's more convenient or appropriate to run a real-time operating system because maybe they are microcontrollers. And they also get to operate in very different environment. If you had them on the internet at wild, they are more likely to be exposed to certain types of threats. Depending on what sort of services they are providing, they are more or less subject to certain types of attacks. And depending on what sort of information they deal with, they might be subject to tampering or not. If you are making some set of box which can play movies, it might be that your user is actually also the one who feels like tampering with it. But that's not necessarily the case. From my perspective, what is more interesting is the first of these three points. You might think that your local LAN at home is safe, but how many of you have some box that you got from your internet provider or some Android player, something like that? I have one. And it's already a couple of Android versions behind. In practice it's something which I do not fully control because I bought it. I do not have any idea what software it's running and it's exposed to the internet so potentially malicious applications can touch it. So even if you think that you are deploying your IoT device in a friendly environment like your local network at home, that's not necessarily true. What do we want to do and what is going to limit us? No matter what's the type of device that we are trying to build, we want to do it fast. And we also have a limited amount of resources. Think about it as your hobby project so it might be something that you do in the spare hour you have in the night or the weekend or it might be that you have a small team of people and you really want to focus on what you think is going to make a difference for your customers. You want to waste your time and money doing something which someone else has already done. Constrains, certain types of use cases are not standard so you might have to deal with, for example, ways to make your device interoperable with others and there are several competing standards. They are trying to unify them but you might have to make a choice which means that in a sense you are betting your money on the fact that the one of the standards that you will choose or more will be the winning one if you are in for the long run. So the type of device we want to build is a high-end leaf compared to the description I gave earlier in which it means that it runs Linux, it has a certain amount of computation and power on board. It can be considered almost like a PC or almost like what in the past we would have thought to be a PC. From this perspective and from the fact that we do not want to overoptimize, the idea is we want to be able to treat this device in a standard as possible way. Either we would be able to even develop over it to minimize the amount of tools that we have to deal with. My advice in that sense is it's not so important to choose this or that distra as long as it's something that you are familiar with, something which you can command fluently. Almost every major distro, actually every major distro nowadays is a good quality, much better than what someone might try to achieve by working on it by himself. Then there comes also the question how long you want your device to be around. As I said, the box I bought was very cheap, it was running Android, it was version 4.something, and now it's not getting any love from its manufacturer. I cannot run Netflix on it anymore, I cannot install a certain application anymore simply because things have moved on. I'm under the assumption here that you are trying to build a device where it's providing a useful service and you want it to continue to be usable in the future, which means that if you rely on some hardware manufacturer to be your software vendor of BSP, for example, you might get stuck with some old kernel and that's gonna be a problem in the long run. This is the sort of consideration that I would recommend to have when choosing the hardware. Ideally, you would not need to have any special patch to maintain yourself or the distro you choose. Ideally, your device would run on a kernel from mainline. Why? Because most likely then it will not be used by one single distro, but by several, which means that the amount of people using this device is much larger and therefore you have much better chance of having a software base which has been tried and tested and debugged compared to the single DM vendor. The last point is how critical is the data you are gonna have on your device? If you are doing a media player, you might have some legal obligation with content owners. In other cases, if you are dealing with people's sensitive data, then you have a different type of obligation that you have to fulfill. In other cases, it might be security. You don't want to give out to easily personal data of your users. So my recommendation is the approach to the security solution you choose should be proportional to the criticality of the data that is gonna live on the device. And why am I saying all of this? Because what we want is to minimize the total cost of ownership. So that's a bit of material, of course, but that's just the most obvious part of it. You are gonna spend time learning new tools if you have decided that you have to use something that you don't know. So in that sense, my question is, do you really want to or have to do it? You might have decided that this is a good learning opportunity for you. Then so be it, but it must be a conscious decision. The development time, how painful will it be for you to go through the iteration of developing new software, deploying it, testing it and then going back to the development board? Maintenance. This is life. Things will be taught for sure. So you might have your nice application and then after a while you find out that you have to update some of the other components and over time slowly or not so slowly your API or ABI change and you have to maintain what you've written. So my personal conclusion is the more the device we are talking about looks like a PC, the more we can apply methodologies which are typical of the PC world and they have been refined over the years and you have a wealth of resources that you can leverage. You are far less on your own so there is a much bigger community than if you choose some custom niche board which might be the sexiest of the moment or it might be slightly cheaper but on the other hand the ODM might disappear in one year or two. So when does this make sense? When your resources are constrained. In reality they are always constrained but in some cases you might actually have ability to afford a larger spending larger investment. In other cases you might not. Typical example is if you are doing something for yourself as a hobby project it's just you. And do you want to waste your time playing with the distro or do you want to focus on working on the use case that started it all? For this perspective the idea is to reuse whatever is available and try not to reinvent. The hardware cost as I said typically is not that critical. Nowadays most of the boards they are almost equivalent cost wise and performance wise. At least unless you are doing some really high performance application there is going to be very little difference between one board and the other. The simplification is the user is not a threat which might not be true for some cases as I said if you are doing a media player something which is playing some protected content but if you are going to be the user then I hope you are not going to hack into your own device. And similarly when you really want to leverage what many others have done other case which can happen in certain situations you don't want to waste your time waiting for packages that are not part of your core application to rebuild. In some cases you end up having to rebuild a multitude of packages. To make a practical example I've picked the Minoboard Toolbot. It's one of the other devices that I know best developed by my same organization OTC open source technology group in Intel. It's small it behaves like a PC because it has a UFI BIOS it doesn't have a fan it has low power you can out of the box boot I've tried a few distro I've tried Debian, I've tried Wound they all work it has a USB 3 port so it provides speed and expandability. Other alternative that I have not tried but should work are the Raspberry Pi 2 and 3 Nowadays I am told that they are supported out of the box by Ubuntu. What I do not know is if Ubuntu is using some out of kernel patches or not. That part I haven't checked but you might try or you might not care. In my case just to pick one I've chosen Debian, but really you could take whatever you are comfortable with even Arch Linux if you really like. The idea is really do not waste time relearning the basics use some environment that you are familiar with unless you have some gap to fill and what you know is not capable of filling it. So just get it installed in the case of the minoboard there is no internal storage. What it has is two USB ports and one SD card which is located I think it is located underneath. Sorry it is here so the idea is to proceed with the installation put installer on a USB key installed on the SD card and choose the most minimalistic configuration available. After that basically all you need in most of the cases is just enable SSH services enable a firewall make sure that the only service that can access it is SSH and that is your starting point. I really want to stress the part about enabling the firewall if you are not familiar with it there are websites where you can kind of specify what you want and it will generate some rules. It is not perfect but it is better than nothing it is a starting point even if you want to play with it by yourself it is already something that should work. At the end of the presentation I have collected a set of links you can refer to those. One thing that I like about the minoboard is that since it does not have internal storage but it uses SD card once you have created the base image you can just duplicate that and then you can happily go and hack without carrying if you are ruining some of the installation because you can just restore a previous image then your application I haven't defined it yet in the example but the idea is do not necessarily try to use some standardized protocol unless you need to you probably have to exchange some data so whatever comes familiar to you it can be use data stream archive, http page just go with that in many cases when you embark yourself on this sort of adventure there are surprises waiting for you which you have not well they are surprise so they are unexpected so what is preferable is to get somehow at the end get your use case somehow running and then go back and optimize parts where you might have intentionally used some hack because at least this is a more controlled way of refining your creation, your IoT device premature optimization can be caused for delays or even cancellations in time of a product which another way might mean that you just get bored or frustrated and that is not what you are going to do other easy way out of one of the typical problems with IoT with IoT you are typically using some sensor actuator and most of them come over some standard buses, they can be I2C, SPI, camera buses, one wire whatever they are nice, they are optimized but my advice is go with USB if you can USB is old it is not particularly optimized bus but exactly because it is old it has been debugged quite thoroughly if you have chosen proper hardware you also have good kernel drivers and the upside of it is you do not need to develop on the target device because your main PC has a USB port so you can even develop your application directly on that the major drawback of USB is gonna make your device to draw higher power but as long as you are doing some application which is ok to deal with the world world so if you are not running on battery, USB is the cheapest and easiest way out of your problem and most of the sensors are available either as a USB device or as whatever bus they really have USB is a convenient way to hide the complexity of the sensor behind some more standard bus at least the board I choose has one USB 3 port so throughput is not even a problem in some cases you have USB 2 port you might have issues with throughput but with USB 3 no as very simple example I choose to create an IP camera so in this case all you need if you are following my advice to use USB is just webcam you don't need much more than that you need a webcam you already have support for it with Linux nowadays I haven't found a single webcam even this 50 cents one that you can find on ebay that wouldn't work with Linux and then you need gstreamer so the lot of gstreamer tools on the SD card that you have or rather on the copy of it put couple of comments that show how to set up a simple streaming server and that allows you to stream video from inside the device now of course you are not connected directly to the device so what you want to do is to stream this video elsewhere again I'm gonna use a hammer like solution and secure proof just establish in the way you prefer SSH tunnel to the device and forward the port where the streaming is available and you have already created your streaming IP camera this might be suboptimal because I think it generates twice the encoding so there are ways to do it better but there are ways I would be more concerned about keeping the device safe secure it's not uncommon to read in the news of some C device which has some security hole so that random people can log into it actually I think there is even a search changing for these cameras so my main message is no matter what you do avoid growing the attack surface when you are exposing your sensitive data to the network be overkill in that sense do not try to optimize it rather make sure that you keep low the number of ports you are opening we already have opened the SSH port so this solution is basically reusing that it doesn't require you to open more holes in the firewall and then I've put reference 11 to the command that is used to see the stream this is the part that I said is optional that's why I call them pain points you might need them if you are making a C device something which will be produced in many units something that you will not be managing yourself so for example for a typical PC installation you are probably happy to just use the software editor that comes with your distro but if you are making a real C device then that's not enough you will need some form of software editor you might want to add additional security features and you might want to add some standardized APIs for interoperability coming to the software as I said the first simple option the one that comes for free is to use the package manager of your distro it's well tested the problem is that typically they do not provide the atomicity to the update so you might have something that goes wrong and your device is in some intermediate state some packages have been updated so if you are managing the device directly that's probably non-issue if your user is competent enough to just flash a new SD card and replace it, that's again non-issue if your user is supposed to be blissfully unaware of this problem that can occur then you cannot rely on the distro package manager, you need something else something else is typically fully in two camps one is you just you have to develop some means to replace the entire image I think there was a speech about it yesterday it's reliable in the sense that it's a simple operation you just stream the entire content of the new image possibly some small optimization if you have zeros you can compress those bandwidth intensive in general the other approach is to use one of the many solutions that are currently being proposed there's oyster with flatback snappy, they are based on containers there's a clear Linux approach which instead uses bundles they are far more optimized to be frank they have a smaller use base so when you use one of those you are basically deciding to be part of the guinea pigs so if you feel like guinea pig go with that security there's a lot of stuff that you can do I just listed few of the options that are the more recurring ones and each of them comes with some advantage if you know how to use it and that's a big if I don't think to be one of those people who know how to use it the question is first of all do you really need it I mean try to think about what data is gonna go on your device what's the worst scenario that can happen and then decide if it's worth the fourth also you might actually do something bad when you're using one of these solutions and that's just about the outcome the other part that will happen almost for sure is that it will make your life more miserable when you develop on it because this security solution per se they tend to make it harder to replace stuff on the device so it means that during your development cycle you will have to develop means to somehow cope with this additional difficulty so really the question is is it worth I'm not saying that it is not depends really on what sort of device you are doing and that's why I was tunneling the video stream through SSH because in that sense it's something that is I think more likely to be achievable by random linux guide using proficiently one of these security features that I've listed here and finally interoperability we saw a nice demo about Node Red during the starting keynotes there's OCF Intel, my employer participates, so let also is another flow base solution they're nice again the question is what do you need them for because you will have to create bindings for this so do you have a use case where for example you want to do something with your phone or with some other IoT device which will interact with it that might be an answer it's up to you again I'm not saying that it's good or bad but it should be a conscious decision what I can say is that at least in the IP camera example that I whip together you do not necessarily need any of this for example you can just set it up as web page secure web page log into it with your browser your phone and that's it so the question is do you want to do something fancy do you want for example to run face recognition on the camera that might require some cloud service and that might justify creating the bindings for it but you really need to understand your use case because there's gonna be a cost in creating the bindings and maintaining them so this is my final message if there's anything I would like you to take away from this top is be opportunistic don't go for the nicest cleanest solution go for the most effective one the one that you are more comfortable with something that you feel you will be able to debug because there will be a time where the thing falls apart and you don't know why and you have to debug it so be nice to your future self is there any question thank you for listening


So that's really what has me very concerned. You don't really need to round people up in FEMA camps if you can simply lock them down I'll give you one example the city of Cambridge. I recently interviewed on my radio program a city council member from Cambridge She would give him back money that was used to install Video cameras federal money for video cameras at all the points of egress from Cambridge And she said why do we need this and the answer was well in the event that we have to shut Cambridge down and keep people in We need to know what the roots are out of the city so we can set up checkpoints and prevent people from leaving We can set up checkpoints and prevent people from leaving so we can set up checkpoints and prevent people from leaving So we can set up checkpoints and prevent people from leaving so we can set up checkpoints and prevent people from leaving So we can set up checkpoints and prevent people from leaving so we can set up checkpoints and prevent people from leaving So we can set up checkpoints and prevent people


Here's a collage of James Webb's first release images. For a deeper look, see the James Webb first release video. Here's a Spitzer infrared space telescope image of some stars in the large Magellanic Cloud Dwarf galaxy orbiting the Milky Way. Now we're morphing this into the image taken by Webb's mid-infrared instrument. As you can see, Webb, with its significantly larger primary mirror and improved detectors, allows us to see the infrared sky with significantly improved clarity, enabling even more discoveries. Here we are zooming into the southern ring planetary nebula, 2,000 light years away. The southern ring has a binary star system at its center. One is a white dwarf. The brighter star in both images has not yet run out of fuel. It closely orbits the dimmer white dwarf, impacting the distribution of the ejected material. Pairing Webb's infrared images with existing data from the European Space Agency's Gaia Observatory, researchers were able to precisely pinpoint the mass of the central star before it created the nebula. Their calculations show the central star was nearly three times the mass of the sun before it ejected its layers of gas and dust. After those ejections, it measured only 60% of the mass of the sun. This is not only a crisp image of a planetary nebula, it also shows us objects in the vast distance of space behind it. Note the bright angled line at the upper left. It's a far away galaxy seen edge on. Here's Hubble's view of NGC 3324 called the Cosmic Cliffs, located at the northwest corner of the Corine Nebula. As we transition this to the Webb near infrared image, we begin to see hundreds of previously hidden stars. These insets highlight three regions of the cosmic cliffs with particularly active molecular hydrogen outflows. Molecular hydrogen is a vital ingredient for making new stars and an excellent tracer for the early stages of their formation. As young stars gather material from the gas and dust that surround them, most also eject a fraction of that material back out again from their polar regions in jets and outflows. What we're seeing here is the molecular hydrogen getting swept up and excited by these jets. This image from Hubble, released in May 2022, shows the barred spiral galaxy NGC 7496, which lies over 24 million light years away. As we transition to the Webb view, we can see that it still picks up the glowing gas, but also shows much more detail. Here we are zooming into a Hubble image of Stefan's quintet. Here's the Webb image.  This one is active, meaning significant quantities of material are falling into it. The spectrum, from the black hole's outflow, shows a region filled with hot ionized gases including iron, argon, neon, sulfur, and oxygen, as denoted by the pixels at given wavelengths. Here's a Hubble view of the Cartwheel galaxy, a ring galaxy around 500 million light years away. Here's Webb's combined image from both the near-infrared and mid-infrared cameras. The galaxy has two rings, a bright inner ring, and a surrounding colorful outer ring. These two rings have been expanding outwards from the center of the collision for around 440 million years. Here's a look at the galaxy from just the mid-infrared camera.


In this presentation, we will take a look at the liquidation of a partnership and a situation where a partner results in a negative capital account during the liquidation process and does not pay back the partnership for the negative capital account resulting in us having to allocate that capital account to the remaining partners. Here's going to be our data. We're going to put this in a table format and then work it through with journal entries and a trial balance. The first thing we want to do is work out what our rates will be. We're going to have the 2, 3, 1 split here, so just remember how to deal with these. You're just going to add them up, 3 plus 2 plus 1 adds up to 6 and then we'll just take the division, the fraction of 3 to 6, 2 to 6, 1 to 6, or 3 divided by 6 is 50 percent for K's capital. It's not there yet. And then it's 2 over 6 for C's, notice it's not exact here. That's why we need a ratio. And then 1 over 6 and note, again, it's not going to be exact when we write it down. So when we write these down then K's was 50 percent C, about 33.33, not exact. That's why we use ratios. And then we've got 16.67, not exact. That's why we use ratios. And we're going to say that we have the balances. This is kind of like the trial balance, but in table format. We've got assets including cash. We've got inventory. We've got liabilities of accounts payable, 240,000. Then we've got the three capital accounts for our three partners. Note that this is just basically a accounting equation problem when we consider it in table format. It's like the trial balance, but instead of debits and credits we've got the accounting equation, which is assets, 182.5. And 530 for the cash and inventory of 712,500. Then the liabilities and equity of 240,000 accounts payable, 93,000 capital, 212.5 capital and 167,000 capital for 212,500. The assets equal in the liabilities and equity. We're going to go through our normal process through the closing process. First selling the inventory. Then allocating that gain or loss to the capital accounts in accordance with their profit share and agreement. Then we're going to see if there's any negative capital accounts and deal with them then there will be in this problem and we'll have to deal with it. And once dealt with, then we will pay off the liabilities. Then we'll pay off the capital account balances. Has to be in this order, what doesn't have to be, but to avoid any kind of problems or reduce them as much as possible. This is the preferred order to do this in, otherwise we're more likely to have negative capital accounts and not only have them, but then being kind of partially our fault by not going in the proper order. So we're going to go through this, sell the assets. We're going to sell the assets for 320,000 even though they're on the books for 530,000. So we're going to get cash at 320,000. We're going to take them off the books at 530,000. Then we're going to allocate the difference to our three owners in accordance with their profit sharing. So we've got the 530 minus the 320, it means we have a loss of 210 times 50% times .5 is 105. Note we can use the 50% there and be exact, but we can also use the ratio which was 210,000 loss times, I'm going to say 3 over 6 times 3 over 6. 3 divided by 6, 105. Now that's going to be more important for the second one because we have that same loss 210,000. And if I say times .3333, it's not exact. We're off by a few bucks here. So we could do our same ratio analysis, 210,000 times the 2. This is on the 2 divided by 6. That'll give us a more exact number. And the same is true for M here, where we have, and I'm using these ratios. These will come into play later, these other ratios. So then we'll have the 210,000 times, we're going to say 1 over 6, gives us the 35. So that's what our split will be. And that means that our assets still equal our liabilities plus equity with this transaction if we bring down our balances then. Cash goes from 182,500 up by 320,000 to 502,500. Inventory goes down to zero. Capital accounts payables remains the same. The capital account for K goes from 33,000 down by 105,000 to negative 12,000. That's the problem. That's what we will have to deal with. Sees capital account goes from 212,500 down by 70,000 to 142,500. M's capital account goes from 167,000 down by 35,000 to 132,000. Then we're going to allocate this deficit. Now we're going to say here that we went to K and we said, hey, hey, could you pay the capital account because we did everything we're supposed to do? We sold the inventories, but we had this loss. We allocated that loss in accordance with the profit sharing, which means 50% to you. And that brought your capital account balance from a positive to a negative representing the fact that you owe the company money. And K very well may say, I'm not paying the company because it's a liquidation process and I just want out of this partnership and I don't expect to pay anything at this point. I had a $93,000 capital account before the process and whatnot. So we won't get into like the legal scenario between the other partners and K here. We're just going to say, okay, well, if that happens, there might come a point where we have to just allocate that to the other partners and move forward so that we can close out this partnership agreement. So how are we going to do that? We would have to allocate that loss then reducing C and M's capital accounts in some way. So we're going to take that $12,000 and allocate it. Now we can't allocate it using the same ratio, 3 to 1, because the 3 is gone. We can't allocate it to K, he's gone. So we got to allocate it between the other two. One way we can do that is we can say, okay, well, there's 2 and 1 remaining for C and M and 2 plus 1 is 3. So we can take the 2 over 3 and allocate 0.6666 of that $12,000 to C and then, of course, we can take the 1 over 3 for the 0.333. So again, they're not exact, so the ratio would be better to use. So if we took the 12,000, in other words, times 2 over 3, that's going to be 8,000. And if we take that 12,000 times 1 over 3, that's going to give us 36. So we'll apply that 12,000 taking K's capital down to 0, apply it 8,000 to C and 4,002M. So then if we look at our balance then, we're going to say that the cash is still just bringing brought down, the account's payable just bringing it down. The K's capital now going to 0 and the C's capital starting at $142,500 going down by 8,000, his portion of what he's reducing his capital account by due to C not paying back partnership for the negative capital account to $134,500 and then M starting at $132,000 going down by 4,000, same scenario, his portion or her portion of the 12,000 being a reduction to 128,000. Then we're going to pay off the liability accounts. So the liabilities are on the books for $240,000, we're going to pay off the $240,000 and then we're going to reduce the liability by the $240,000. If we bring the balances down then we're going to say the $502,500 cash minus the $240,000 cash brings us to $262,500 accounts payable going from $240,000 down by $242,000. Then we'll just bring down the capital accounts at $134,500 for C and $128,000 for M. Then we have the distribution to the owners all we have remaining being cash and what is owed to the owners and we can just distribute what is owed bringing the balances down to zero. Note that these final distributions and the capital accounts along this whole way will not necessarily match the profit sharing agreement. So remember the profit sharing only has to do with the allocation of net income, not with draws, not with investments, therefore the balance in the capital accounts will not necessarily match the ratios given for the profit sharing. Okay so now we're going to do the same thing in terms of a trial balance in terms of journal entries. When you see this in practice many times you'll work with a lawyer if you actually do this in practice and they will probably most likely and a lot of times they like to see things in table format, obviously when recording the information or just going through it I like to see journal entries as well to visualize this process. So the journal entries will help us to visualize what actually happens and when we actually do it we will need to have the journal entries. So here's our trial balance, our nice little short trial balance, let's give us an example here and we've got the debits in positive numbers, the credits in negative numbers, debits minus the credits equal zero or debits equal the credits. We have the assets in grain, liabilities in orange and the capital in blue. The income statement, revenue and expenses in dark blue, note there are none, they're all zero. No revenue and expense accounts, when we close out the company we need to have those at zero meaning we have in essence a post-closing trial balance with no income statement accounts. That must be the case otherwise the capital accounts will not be properly valued because the net income hasn't been allocated to it. So now we're going to go through the closing process, same thing as we did with our table, journal entry format, first selling the inventory, the only inventory we have selling the assets, the only assets we have being inventory. And obviously cash is an asset but we're not selling cash, we're going to get cash. So cash will be the last thing we're going to sell all other assets. So we're going to say that we sold it for 320,000 and the assets on the book for 530. So we're going to reduce it by 530, 530 minus 320 gives us a difference or a loss of 210. So here's going to be our journal entry. We result in this loss. If we post this out, the cash is going to go from 182,500 up by 320,000 to 502,500. Inventory is going to go from 530,000 down by 530,000 to zero and the loss then going from zero up in the debit direction to by 220, 210 to 210. Now of course you'll note that we have recorded this loss here a little bit different than we did it on the table where we just allocated that difference directly to the capital accounts in accordance with our profit sharing. This loss is probably the way we would see it more likely in practice when we sell an asset, something like this, we would record the loss. So we're doing this in kind of a two step process. We're going to record the loss and then we're going to go back and close it out in essence have a little closing process to close it out to the capital accounts because that's probably more familiar than us doing just allocating that loss in this journal entry. So that's our next step. We're going to have to get rid of this, get back to the post closing trial bounds, close any income statement accounts to the capital accounts before moving forward. To do that we're going to say that this loss is going to be allocated to K, C and M respectively in accordance with 50.33 and 17% profit sharing. Now note that these are not exact again. So they're just going to be rounded because we're not using the actual ratio. So 210,000 times 50%. That one's exact because that's 50% but this one's an estimate. So remember this was 210,000. It's really like 0.3333 and that's pretty close. It should be 70,000 and then 210,000 times 0.16666 is what it really is. And that's pretty close there. So just be aware that if we just used 0.33 we would be fairly substantially off, 0.33. That's why we use ratio. So it should be 70,000. So just be careful with those. So we're going to go through these again. C we're going to have 70,000 and M 35,000 allocated of this 210. So 105, 70, 35 and then we're going to credit the gain or loss. So in other words I would think of it this way. We're going to take the gain or loss off the books with a credit which we put on the bottoms to be proper. And then we're going to debit the capital accounts in accordance with the profit sharing of the 105 to 70 and the 35 which is 50.33 and 0.17% of the 270,000 about 0.3333 really 0.16666 not forever. Okay. If we post this out then we're going to say that the capital account for K it started at 93,000. We're going to make it go down by 105,000. Not only to zero, but past it to negative 12,000. There's our problem. We shouldn't have a negative capital account. We shouldn't have a debit balance in the capital account and that's what we're going to have to deal with. Then we have the 70,000 is going to be posted to this 212,500 goes down by 70 to 142,500. Then we have the 35,000 is going to be posted here to the 167,000 bringing it down by 35 to 132,000. Then we have the 210,000 gain or loss is going to be posted here, bringing that 210 down by 210 to zero. So if we look at our balances now, our problem here is going to be this 12,000 negative capital. Same thing we had on the table. We're going to ask K the partner, hey, you know, we did everything we could. You got a negative capital account. We really should pay the partnership back in the closing process because that 12,000 should be is really kind of owed to the either the liability or the other two partners. And so we really kind of need you to pay the partnership before we can move forward with the partnership closing or liquidation. If they say no, then at some point we might have to say, okay, we're going to move forward anyway. And again, we won't get into the legal ramifications of that, but we'll just move forward in terms of journal entries, which means we're going to have to allocate that 12,000 to C and M in some way. So now we're going to reduce to 12,000 and allocate it. So this is going to go off the books. It's on the books at a debit. We have to make it go to zero doing the opposite thing to it a credit. And then we're going to debit the other two capital accounts C and M's in accordance with their profit sharing. Now we have a problem to do that same problem we had on the table in that the profit sharing was at a 321, which adds up to six, which is 50, 30, and 0.17 about. But we can't allocate here because this person, that's who we're allocating from. We're taking it from Case Capital, who's basically not paying it back to go to C and M. So we can't use the same ratios. We can't use 0.33 or 0.17 because that doesn't add up to 100. So what we can do is that's the same thing we did on tables, take these two. That's a two and a one, by the way. And then the two and the one, which adds up to three. So then we can take the 12,000 times two over three is 8,000. And we can take the 12,000 times one over three, which 12,000 times one over three is 4,000. Or in other words, we're taking two over three is 0.666, which matches here, times 12,000 is 8,000. And we're taking one over three is 0.3333 times 12,000 is the 4,000. OK, so that's going to be our allocation. So we're going to take this off the books, making it go to zero, allocate the debits, which will reduce their capital accounts for C and M in accordance with the profit sharing, which we just reallocated to be this 0.6666 and 0.333333 on forever. OK, so then we're going to post this. So there's the 12,000 first, bringing the 12,000 down by 12,000 to zero. The other two losing or reducing their capital accounts, the 8,000 C started at 142,500, going down by 8,000 debit to 134,500. M starting at 132,000, going down by 4,000 to 128,000. So now we have our balances. We only have our two partners. They're both negative capital accounts, so we are OK to move forward and pay off the liabilities. So we're going to pay off the liabilities now with cash. So the liabilities are on the books for 240,000 credit. We're going to do the opposite thing to it, debit to bring them off the books and credit, of course, cash. That's what we're going to use to pay it. So if we post this out then, this liability is going to be posted here, this 240 bringing it down by 242,000. Then we have the cash here. It's going to be posted to the 502,500 cash debit. We are going to credit it, making it go down to 262,500. Now we're going to be left with just the cash and the two capital accounts. Nice easy ending process here. All we have to do now is pay off the cash in accordance with whatever is in the capital accounts. No ratios, no math here. We're just going to pay it off whatever is there. So that means that this capital accounts on the books for 134,000. It's a credit. We're going to debit it. This capital account for Amazon, the books for 128,000. It's credit. We're going to debit it. Then we're going to credit the cash, which is on the books for 262,000, which also, of course, is equivalent to 134,500 plus the 128,000. If we post this out, then the capital account for C goes from 134,500 down by 134,500 to zero. M's capital account goes from 128,000 down by 128,000 to zero. Cash goes from 262,500 going down by 262,500 to zero. And now we have all zeros and the liquidation process is complete.


I'm interested then. What attracted you to the project? Was it the technology or the philosophy? I must answer that very easily, it's the philosophy. Technology changes, as you know, I think things have changed a great deal. I've worked in technology for 30 years and most of that in higher education alongside teachers and as a teacher, using digital content and a long history with Moodle as well. And I've seen teachers having to create courses from blank pages with no budgets and very quickly. So MoodleNet as a philosophy can greatly help anyone who wants to sort of do this and share and curate and reuse educational resources. So as a philosophy, it's a great help.


The ins and outs of lifelong learning A lifelong learner, to me, is one who desires to learn new things based on interests, motivations, and knowledge to be gained. As one who is a certified teacher in first through eighth grades, in Louisiana, USA, possesses a master degree in education, as well as having a PhD in curriculum and instruction with a minor in leadership and supervision, does not mean that I know it all, far from it. In my middle school teaching days and years of teaching in higher education preparing teachers to teach, I encountered students from other culturally diverse backgrounds, yet, I do not have the basic fundamentals of teaching students whose first language was not English. This I regret. My personal experience. Within our global world, as it has become in the 21st century, I feel that I may have been of a disservice to some of the students within my classes. I had students who were from Mexico, Russia, Costa Rico, Venezuela, as well as Native Americans. Yet, in my teacher education courses, I was not completely prepared to teach them, as I have learned from this course. In my PhD program, I did have a class in multiculturalism, yet it was just for one semester, not nearly enough time to learn all that I should have known as I embarked on my teaching career. And, it was not focused on teaching non-native learners of English. English is a synonym of lifelong learning. I believe that people who want to learn English are learners who crave to be lifelong learners. Their motivations may be different, such as for purposes for travel, working in an English language country, diversity and personal socialization, and for other reasons, yet they have the desire for learning, thus, learning for life, becoming a lifelong learner. Living life to experience life is what I yearned for. I completed this deaf course because I wanted to learn how best to teach learners from around the world and so that I could also continue to learn in my chosen field of education. The opportunity to teach English to foreign language learners will also give me exposure to diverse cultures while I hope to gain the appreciation of the differences and similarities among our men, women, children, and young learners around the world. There is so much knowledge, experiences, and understanding to gain that can make my life rewarding, and those with whom I come into contact with more fulfilling. This, in itself, is a reason to learn. What better way than through a deafle course? Learners Experience As I look back on my experiences of becoming a certified teacher, I realize that a big part that was missing was to address the needs of those who sat in my classroom, especially those who were non-native English speakers and those from different countries and cultures. As I grew in my profession of education, I recognized the need to teach all students, especially those from other countries who wanted to learn English and perhaps live in the United States or other English-speaking countries. Or perhaps, they would like to stay in their own country, yet have the working knowledge of English. I knew that all students brought their various experiences to the classroom, but how to address their needs was not part of my educational studies until I decided to take this deafle course. Taking this course has given me the opportunity to learn how to address the needs of monolinguistic and multi-linguistic learners as well as teaching one-on-one, individual students, if I so choose to do. The little information on learning about teaching English for those in business was an added asset. If I can become a better teacher and teaching deafle students, then I think I will also be a better teacher to the general and whole population of my class. Are you ready to teach English to non-native speakers? While earning my teacher certification degree and teaching in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, USA, the focus was not on teaching English to non-native English speakers. Of course, this was several years back, and education has come a long way, I am now so glad and privileged to learn more about teaching deafle courses. I thank the scholars, researchers, and those who focus on academics for their research and resourcefulness in the field of teaching English to non-native learners. This is one big reason why I choose to take this deafle course so that I can be a lifelong learner and hopefully inspire those who also want to continue learning. To me, lifelong learning equals a better and more prosperous long life. This essay focuses on lifelong learning and what this deafle course has done for me. I am not through yet, there is still much to learn, do, and experience. Speak with an ITTT advisor today to put together your personal plan for teaching English abroad. Send us an email or call us toll free at 1-800-490-0531 to speak with an ITTT advisor today.