Welcome back, and to other parts of Africa, Sierra Leonean President Jelits Mada Bahu has won a second term in office, receiving 56.17 percent, a ballot cast and narrowly clearing the threshold for awarding a runoff in the West African nation. Main opposition candidate, Samora Kumara, received 41.16 percent of the vote, according to official results from Saturday's election. Bahu has been facing criticism because of debilitating economy conditions, but Kumara pledged to improve. Nearly 60 percent of Sierra Leonean's population of more than 7 million people are facing poverty, with youth unemployment being one of the highest in West Africa.


Is sugar really that bad for us? According to the World Health Organization, we should only be consuming about 6 teaspoons of sugar per day. However, the average American exceeds this recommended daily amount in only one can of soda. In fact, most Americans don't know that added sugar is hiding in about 74% of our packaged foods. The average American is said to consume 150 pounds of sugar per year. Most Americans eat 100% of their daily sugar allowance during breakfast. 33% of the average American's sugar consumption comes from soda. And last, sugar is about as addictive as cocaine. Because sugar impacts just about every organ system in the body, overconsumption of it can lead to a variety of health issues like obesity, diabetes, and even depression. Sugar can masquerade in unexpected places. Stay alert to foods and drinks like fruit juices, potato chips, ketchup, crackers, peanut butter, salad dressings, mayonnaise, and yogurt. If you have any questions, please call, visit, or email us and one of our knowledgeable staff members will be happy to assist you.


Hello and welcome to the session. Here we will discuss the following question which says solve 3x plus 1 over x plus 1 plus x plus 1 over 3x plus 1 is equal to 5 by 2, where x belongs to r which means the set of real numbers. Now we will start with the solution. Here we have to solve 3x plus 1 over x plus 1 plus x plus 1 over 3x plus 1 is equal to 5 by 2, where x belongs to r which means the set of real numbers. Now for solving this equation first of all we will convert it to quadratic form and further is quote 3x plus 1 over x plus 1 is equal to y. This implies x plus 1 over 3x plus 1 is equal to 1 over y. Now putting these values in this equation it will be y plus 1 over y is equal to 5 by 2. Now this implies taking the asm it will become y square plus 1 over y is equal to 5 by 2. Now cross multiplying this implies 2 into y square plus 1 is equal to 5 by 2. Now this implies multiplying to one side it will be 2 over y square plus 2 is equal to 5 by 2. Now this implies total 5 y on this side it will be 2 over y square minus 5 y plus 2 is equal to 0.  Now combining the first two terms and the last two terms this implies from the first three terms 2 y is common inside y minus 2 and from the last two terms minus 1 is common and inside y minus 2 is equal to 0. Now this implies y minus 2 the whole into 2 y minus 1 the whole is equal to 0. Now either y minus 2 is equal to 0 or 2 y minus 1 is equal to 0. This implies y is equal to 2 or 2 y is equal to 1. This implies y is equal to 2 or y is equal to 1 by 2. Now if y is equal to 2 then 2x plus 1 over x plus 1 is equal to 2. This implies on first multiplying 3x plus 1 is equal to 2 into x plus 1. This implies 3x plus 1 is equal to 2x plus 2. This implies 3x minus 2x is equal to 2 minus 1. This implies 3x minus 2x is x is equal to 2 minus 1 is 1 also if y is equal to 1 by 2 then x plus 1 over x plus 1 is equal to 1 by 2. This implies on first multiplying this then we get 3 into 3x plus 1 is equal to x plus 1. This implies multiplying 2 inside it will be 6x plus 2 is equal to x plus 1. This implies 6x minus x is equal to 1 minus 2. This implies 6x minus x is 5x is equal to 1 minus 2 is minus 1. This implies x is equal to minus 1 over 5. Hence x is equal to 1 and minus 1 over 5. So this is the solution of the given question and that's all for the session. Hope you all have enjoyed the session.


Number one, on my favorite foods for healthy skin are foods that contain probiotics. Now, good health begins in the gut. Believe it or not, your gut, the lining of your gut is your skin turned inside out. And what happens in your gut is not like Las Vegas. What happens in your gut doesn't stay in your gut. And it's reflected on your skin. So your gut health has a direct impact on your skin. So probiotics are the good gut buddies. So you really want good gut buddies to outweigh the bad guys. Now there are lots of foods that provide either probiotics, probiotics, which are living bacteria, or postbiotics. And postbiotics are the fermentation products that bacteria make. And interestingly enough, as you'll learn in gut check when you book, dead bacteria, dead probiotics, actually are incredibly useful for fostering good skin health. So fermented foods like vinegar, kimchi, goat and sheep kefir that are plain, goat and sheep yogurts, coconut yogurts, miso, sauerkraut, and various probiotic supplements are a great way to improve your skin health. There are some specific probiotic bacteria that have been shown to enhance skin thickness, skin health, hair growth, hair health. And that's exciting new information that a number of us have been talking about recently. Number two, prebiotics. Now it goes without saying that prebiotics are important for skin health, in that they support a healthy gut microbiome. Remember, think about probiotics as basically grass seed. The problem with grass seed is I tell my patients in the desert that if I give them grass seed and tell them to go plant it, unless they fertilize and water the grass seed, it's never going to grow. And so many of us make the mistake that all we have to do is swallow probiotics and everything else takes care of itself. And unfortunately that's not true. You've got to feed the friendly bacteria what they want to eat. And we're beginning to know exactly what these guys like to eat. And these are called prebiotics. Prebiotics primarily with soluble fiber. Now people say, oh, fiber is really good for you and you need lots of fiber, but don't make them a mistake. There are soluble fibers and there are insoluble fibers. The problem with insoluble fibers like ingrains is these are literally like swallowing razor blades, which will damage the wall of your gut and that damage will be reflected in your skin. So soluble fiber on the other hand is what your gut buddies want to eat and soluble fiber will not damage the wall of your gut. Quite the contrary, it will help repair the wall of your gut.  So flax seeds. Flax seeds are a great source of soluble fiber. They're great sources of a short chain omega-3 fat, which is called alpha linolenic acid, ALA. And it's also a great source of protein. There's a recent study showing that the lignans in flaxseed or hive lignan flaxseed oil actually change the microbiome in a positive way that suppresses breast cancer growth. Sounds good to me. Artichokes. You know, artichokes get a bad rap for being hard to prepare. Get the frozen artichokes and eliminate all the hard work or get them in a can. I particularly like them frozen because then I can do anything I want with them. They're available in most grocery stores in the freezer section. They're available at Trader Joe's. Incorporate them into the meals you're cooking. Put them in soups, cook them in stews. I like to saute them with olive oil. I like to bake them with olive oil and salt and pepper. They're great with garlic sprinkled on them. It's really easy to do and they're just an amazing source of soluble fiber. Leeks. I just got back from England and France and I can tell you that almost every meal I had there had some form of leek either as a part of the dish or in a soup or in a stew. And it always reminds me how we really have never appreciated the ability of leeks as a great source of prebiotic fiber. They're a cousin and they're part of the onion family. And again, it was just amazing how many times I had leeks in a week in London and Paris. It should be part of our diet. And they're really easy to prepare. Make sure you slice them in half the long way and rinse thoroughly before you cook them because they can contain some grip. But that's the easy way to fix them and then just treat them like you would treat onions. They don't have the pungency of onions so people who don't like onions can actually do great with leeks. Now, okra is one of my all-time favorites. Okra, believe it or not, absorbs lactons. But more important than that, okra is loaded with muco polysaccharides, with polysaccharides. Now, a lot of people don't like the slimy effect of okra. That's okay. Buy it frozen, slice them in half, put them in a bag with olive oil, salt and pepper, some seasonings, throw them on a baking sheet, bake them at 400, 425 degrees, flip them over in about 10 minutes. You will have the tastiest okra potato chips. We have yet to get a batch to the dinner table because they're gone the minute they come out of the oven. It's here on my YouTube channel. Try it out. Hikama, hikama is another great root vegetable that tastes like a cross between an apple and a potato. You can actually roast it or eat it raw. You can put it in a salad. I like to use it as a dipping chip for my guacamole. And reminder, please don't put tomatoes in your guacamole. It's not supposed to be in there. You can also supplement with prebiotic fiber. I like anacetol, myoanacetol and inulin, and they're readily available as supplements. All right, the number three food, foods that are high in silica. Now, silica is basically sand.  They also pack a powerhouse of polyphenols and antioxidants that your skin needs. They all provide the body with vitamin A, which works against dry, flaky skin. They provide vitamin C, which undoes the sun's damage to collagen and elastin. And they have vitamin E, which helps keep your skin calm and comfortable. But what most important in these greens is it's high in the content of silica in dark leafy greens. What else is high in silica? Artichokes. So there's a double good reason to get these little guys into your diet. And again, it could be easier now that we have frozen artichoke hearts. Number four, mushrooms. Mushrooms are loaded with biotin, but perhaps more importantly, they're loaded with these polysaccharides, which are one of the favorite foods of your gut microbiome. And the happier and more diverse your gut microbiome is, the happier the wall of your gut is, and that'll be reflected once again in how great your skin looks. Number five, olive oil. High quality, organic extra virgin olive oil is brimming with nutrients that benefit your skin, including essential fatty acids and vitamin E. But more importantly, it's loaded with polyphenols like hydroxy tyrosol and tyrosol that have been shown to improve skin quality by improving the wall of your gut. There's an exciting new paper that shows it even improves the ability of your blood vessels to expand and contract properly, and more blood flow to your skin means your skin looks more radiant. And don't forget, you don't have to just drink olive oil.  Number seven, sweet potatoes. It's rich in beta carotene, which is the precursor of vitamin A, vitamin E and antioxidants. Vitamin A fights skin discoloration. I bet you a lot of you are putting retinoic acid on your skin. That's vitamin A, and retinoic acid is also, by the way, an interesting mitochondrial uncoupler. Vitamin E supports the collagen production in your skin. Finally, walnuts. One ounce of walnuts contains 8% of the daily recommended value for zinc, and zinc is incredibly important for skin function. Walnuts are also an excellent source of short chain omega-3 fats like alpha-linolenic acid. Avocados, before I go. Avocados are a fantastic source of oleic acid, the same fat in olive oil, but they contain vitamin E and a ton of fiber, prebiotic fiber that your gut buddies are gonna love. Turmeric, let's not forget turmeric. Turmeric is also shown to fight fine lines and wrinkles. There's an abstract in a dual study, or random clinical trial, that the application of topical turmeric extract reduced the appearance of facial hyperpigmentation and fine lines and wrinkles. And it was actually a split-faced study among Caucasian women. Turmeric was combined with niacinamide. Women put it on one side of the face and a placebo on the other. And the combination product was significantly better at improving fine lines and wrinkles than just alone. So tell you what, why not try a turmeric mask at home and let me know the results. If you found this video helpful, I think you're gonna love this one. Now, there are plenty of people out there who love their morning smoothies. Now, sorry folks, smoothies are just not healthy. And they're not gonna help with bloating.


And now, another tale well-calculated to keep you in suspense. Tonight, Rokovsky's Rubles by William N. Robeson. This is a story of old Russia. Of Russia before Sputnik and Khrushchev and the Soviet. Of the Russia of resplendent sides and the hopeless characters of Dostoevsky. Our hero is such a character, intelligent but without hope. We shall call him Ivan Ivanovich. He is a student. His sweetheart we call Anna Petrovna. We find them in the Venice of the North before it was Leningrad, before it was Petrograd. When it was still gloriously named St. Petersburg.  But there is no money for firewood. So they are cool. They are also hungry. And they are hopeless. Hopeless. Hurrily hopeless. What is hopeless, Ivan Ivanovich? Life, Anna Petrovna. The noblemen of the half-naked women danced the night away in their warm palaces while we sat outside and shivered. What have we got to live for? Each other. It is not... It is not enough? No. No, Anyushka. I would die for you. You know that. But you would not live for me? Living is more difficult. This is not living. This is existing like an animal. But it will not always be like this. You will graduate from the university soon. And then what? Position in the government office if my marks are good enough? If not the army? No, Anyushka. There is no place for me in this society without money, without a title. You talk like a revolutionist. Not me. Where did it get them those anarchists who tried to kill the little father of all the Russians as he worshipped at Easter mass last year? They were all dead. Or worse, they'd been sent to Siberia for the rest of their lives. No. A tsar is too mighty. He will not topple easily. They have no stomach for martyrdom. No, Anya. I'm only interested in myself. And you, of course. Anyushka. Do you love me? No, I do. Enough to wait for me. Wait for you? Yes, but 20 years. 20 years? Where are you going? To prison. What are you talking about, Yvonne? I have a plan that will make us rich 20 years from now. I'm going to steal a fortune. Steal? But the police will arrest you. Indeed. It is necessary to the plan that they do. I do not understand you, Yvonne Yvonnevich. I do not need your understanding, my little dove. Only your help. Will you help me? Yes, Yvonne. I will do anything you say. Good. And you must get me an interview with your employer. The Prince Bolinin? Yes. Why do you want to see him? I'm going to work for him. You are? Yes. What will you do for him? I don't know. Secretary Footman Vallet. Whatever he needs me for, you will find out. And so the devoted and willing Anna kept her tiny closed-set eyes open and also her rather large ears. And she reported all she saw on her to Yvonne Yvonnevich. At last the day came. Yvonne Yvonnevich Marusa, Kanna has told me much of you. You're from the Volga? Yes, Excellency. You are graduating from the university? Yes, Excellency. And you are looking for a position?  I have all the qualifications, my grades at the university, and you are without the secretary at the moment. Yes, I am without the secretary, the young man who has served me so well for the past several years was suddenly taken ill. So ill, he nearly died. It was almost as though he had been poisoned. What a pity. Anna speaks very highly of you. Consider it done. Only see that you don't become ill as your predecessor did. Oh, no, Excellency. You need not worry. I am sure there is no danger of that. Yvonne Yvonnevich insinuated himself into the good graces of the Prince Bolinon with the celerity and precision of a Potemkin taking over the court of Catherine. He soon knew all there was to know about the Prince. All except one thing. The combination to his safe. No, my dear Yvonne Yvonnevich. No, no one but I opened that strong box. But, Tsaiyar, what if you were to God save you? Die suddenly. And the secret would go to the grave with me. And all that money? It would no longer be my problem, would it? No, but as your confidential secretary, it would be mine. I mean to pay off your creditors to satisfy your heirs. But it is not your problem now. No, Excellency. Then why worry about it, my little Yvonne? But Yvonne did worry about it day and night. All those rubles, all those jewels. So close. Just beyond that little iron door. Anyushka. You are aware that the Prince goes to his villa at the lake on Friday? So I have been told. And does not return until Monday? That is what they say. Good. You go with him? The whole household goes. Good. All except me. But Yvonne... I shall be taken ill. But you'll be all alone in the house. Exactly. Who will look after you? I will look after myself, Anya. Don't worry about me. I will look after myself handsomely. In just a moment, we will return for the second act of suspense. One of the imponderable conundrums of philosophy is the old chestnut, which asks if a falling tree makes a sound, if there is no one in the forest to hear it. No one knows the answer. And no one knows whether a muffled explosion was heard in the Marion Scolia Street that Sunday night so many years ago. Or certainly there was no one about to hear it. Except Yvonne Ivanovich, who stood in front of the Prince Bolin in the strong box as the smoke cleared away, and feasted his eyes on the fortune which would buy his future. When the great bank of Biolo Russia opened its doors Monday morning, its first customer was Yvonne Ivanovich, burdened with two bulging valises. Yes, sir. What can I do for you? I wish to rent a safe deposit box. Your name, please. Rukovsky. Piotr Rukovsky. Very well, sir. Here is your key. Thank you. I may have to go on a long journey. My things will be safe. Oh, yes, sir. For how long? We do not touch the contents of any unclaimed boxes until 30 years have elapsed. Good, good. I shall not be away in that land. But I do not understand. You do not have to. Just take this key. Guard it with your life. Wear it on a string around your neck. Do not ever lose it.  Yes, sir. And one more thing. Remember the name Piotr Rukovsky. Piotr Rukovsky. Yes, don't ever forget it. But why? Never mind why. Just don't forget that name. What is it? Piotr Rukovsky. Say it again. Piotr Rukovsky. Vod! Yvonne Ivanovich! It has come. What has come, Yvonne Ivanovich? The moment of truth in which the great lie is told in silence. I shall not understand the word you are saying. Good. Just remember that name. Vod! Yvonne Ivanovich! I am coming, Your Excellency. At the word, Anya. Yes, Excellency. I trust your feeling better. The feeling better? Yes, you were ill when I went away. Oh, yes, that it passed. I am feeling fine now. And you were here in the house the whole weekend? Yes, Your Excellency. You did not go out at any time? No, Your Excellency. Then perhaps you can explain this. Explain what, Your Excellency? Look, you dunderhead! Look for yourself! The strongbox! It has been blown apart! Why so tense? What do you know about this? Oh, nothing, Your Excellency. Nothing at all. But you admit that you are alone in the house the whole time. You must have heard something or seen something. Nothing, Your Excellency. It's impossible. You are forcing me to believe that you know a great deal you're not telling. If you are thoroughly convinced of that, you are at liberty to call the police. Indeed I am, and I shall exercise that liberty at once. The Tribunal of the Tsar found themselves in a quandary. The accused would neither admit nor deny the crime. Yet the circumstances spoke for themselves in the loudest of talks. And so at last, the Tribunal did just as Ivan Ivanovich hoped. They would. We find the defendant guilty and sentence him to twenty years at hard labor in the salt mines of Siberia. His relatives. For the child, a day is an eternity. For the old one, it is but a dull and painful tick of a faceless clock. In the salt mines of Siberia, time stands still. There, nothing happens. In the flickering torch light there is neither day nor night. In the constant clammy forty degree temperature, there is neither summer nor winter. The brain softens here. The mind wanders away and is lost. Unless a man has a dream. A drashke with the finest of horses and a coachman and a great house in the town and another in the country. Ah, Yuri, the millionaire is counting his money again.  You laugh.   If you are so rich, what are you doing here? I am here so I will be rich. I stole it. I am paying for it. And where is this portion of yours while you are paying for it? It is in a safe place. Locked away waiting for me to claim it. It is all right, Ivan Ivanovich. We understand. You understand why? These salt mines. We all need something to help us get through. With you it is this dream of riches. There is nothing wrong with it. It's good if it helps the days go by and fills the night with something more than the snores of your comrades. But it's true, I tell you. I am rich. I have the money and the jewels. They are mine. They are hidden away waiting for me. I know to that age. I know. No, you don't. It's true. It's true. Why don't you believe me? But no one would believe him.  And more and more he began to doubt it himself. At first, Anna had written to him. But then her letters came further and further apart. And at last, ceased altogether. And Ivan Ivanovich was alone. With a fading dream. But at last the day came when Ivan Ivanovich's account was settled. His debt to society paid. Look at him now. Shuffling up the Marion Scolia Street. A graying, stoop-shouldered middle-aged man. He stops at the door of member 33 and pulls the bell now. The door is opened by a young girl with largest years. And eyes set too close together. And you shinker. You have not changed a bit. You are even prettier. You must be mistaken. My name is Natasha. Natasha? How old are you? 18. Then your mother? Is her name Anya? Yes it is. Is she home? Would you call her? I'm an old friend of hers. Natasha, I have ears to hear you with. What do you want? There's an old man at the door. He says he's a friend of yours. A friend of mine? I have no old men for friends. What is it? What do you want? You do not remember me Anya? No. I never saw you before in my life. You do not remember Ivan Ivanovich? I don't see you. I thought you were dead. Is that why you married? You said you would wait for me. A girl cannot wait her whole girlhood out. You didn't wait very long? I never expected you to come back. So little faith. After all our plans. The key. You still have the key? What key? The key I gave you. The key I told you to keep for me. Oh that key. My husband was jealous of it. He found it hanging around my neck on our wedding night. Oh no. He yanked it off me. He threw it away at me. Oh no. The key to all my riches I told you. You promised. I never understood about that. Except it was dangerous. My man said it was dangerous when I told him about it. Dangerous? It was the key to our life together. It could have gotten me into trouble. Receiving stolen goods or something he said.  At least a name. You remember the name? What name? When I gave you the key I told you a name. I told you to repeat it after me. I told you to remember it always. Remember? I remember you telling me. Then what was the name? They have not the slightest idea. Oh no. You have not forgotten. Why should I remember? I told you to. But you did not tell me why. You said I needn't know. I shouldn't have my head cluttered with such things. So I did not clutter my head at all. Yes.  Now is the right.  Careful Yvonne Yvonne.  Stop it. Stupid. Natasha. Go fetch your father. He'll know how to deal with this mad man. Yes, mad man. No, Anu. Forgive me. I let myself go too far. Forgive me. And just remember that name. I will give you a third of all my wealth. If you will only remember that name. I have not the slightest idea. You must. You must without the name. I cannot realize the fortune. You must. You must. I cannot Yvonne. I have forgotten it completely. I will give you half a nushka, a half of it all for the name. It is no use. Twenty years is too long a time. You drive a hard burden. Very well. Three quarters of the rubies and jewels are yours. Just to remember the name. Remember it, Ania. Remember it. Remember it.  I don't remember. I tell you. I can't remember. In just a moment, we will return for the concluding act of suspense. Yes, sir. What can I do for you? I want to speak to someone about the safe deposit box. Yes, sir. I have a box here. I rented it 20 years ago. I've been out of the country and I have lost the key. Well, if you can identify. Yes. Yes. It was Monday in March 20 years ago.  Well, I suppose we could go about it that way. What is your name? I don't remember. I'm Nisha or something.  I don't remember. I'm sorry. There is nothing I can do until you do remember. A bitter wind swept down from Lake Ladoga carrying night and snow out of the north. As Ivanovich stepped out the great bank of Baylor Russia into the empty street.  Useless, meaningless, and the sooner over the better. Ivanovich shuffled across the wide boulevard to the bridge where Catarina Street crosses the river Nevia. And here he stood, looking down on the black freezing water, choked with cakes of ice slowly slipping seaward. Ivanovich was numbed in body and in spirit. As a person apart, he watched himself climb to the top of the parapet, stand irresoluably for an instant, lose his balance, slip, and plummet into the black and icy water. The shock of the freezing water brought him back to his senses. He flailed his arms widely. And then in a blinding flash, he remembered. Piatrykovsky, Piatrykovsky! But no one heard about the whining of the Arctic wind and alone there in the icy water, Ivanovich fought vainly to save himself and his glorious memory of the name. But there was too much against him, time, and his age, and the cold of the Russian winter. And so it was that Ivanovich died by drowning with his now useless alias on his lips. Suspense You've been listening to Rokovsky's Rubles, written for suspense by William M. Robeson. Heard in tonight's story was Santos Ortega as Ivan Ivanovich. Others featured in the cast were Bob Redick, Bryna Rayburn, Roger DeCoven, Ivor Francis, William Redfield, and Lynn Loring.


Introduction Scarcity is an immutable characteristic of the physical realm. As humans we require the consumption of various scarce, aka economic, goods for our sustenance and pleasure. Fortunately the digital age has produced a superabundance of non-scarse goods for our pleasure. However, as marvellous as this advent is, it cannot wean us entirely from our dependence on economic goods. The enjoyment of many non-scarse goods may only be enabled by the use of those goods which are scarce, i.e. by servers, microchips, monitors, phones, cell phone towers, satellites and at the very least the standing room for this equipment, infrastructure and personnel etc. The problem of social order then stems from mutually exclusive desires for how to employ such scarce goods. Being scarce there are a limited number of these goods and the desire for them exceeds their availability. Thus over time there have been innumerable attempts to solve this dilemma through the formulation of various property norms and the erection of various states to create, interpret and enforce them. Property norms themselves simply refer to the criteria used to determine who has the rightful authority to employ a given scarce good. When conflicts inevitably arise regarding the use of scarce goods it is such property norms that serve as the philosophical and legal basis for arbitrating between the conflicting parties. Thus the efficacy of a norm is measured by the degree to which, if followed, it is able to mitigate or eliminate interpersonal conflict. The thesis put forth regards the private property norm as the one best suited for such conflict avoidance and hence the optimal production of wealth. This norm will be extended to its fullest to show how it may also be applied towards those functions traditionally assumed by the state. Simultaneously it will be revealed how the state owes its very existence to the continued violation of the private property norm and must therefore be dissolved for both practical and ethical reasons. What is the private property norm? The private property norm first and foremost states that every person is the exclusive owner of his or her own body. This is referred to as the principle of self-ownership. This entails respecting another's agency by not initiating the uninvited use of physical force against him. The principle of self-ownership allows for any action that respects the autonomy and liberty of others. For example only Joe has the exclusive right to employ his body as he sees fit, so long as such employment does not involve uninvited physical interference with the body's or external property of others. The private property norm permits one to acquire ownership over external economic goods through original appropriation or voluntary exchange. To acquire property via original appropriation one simply needs to be the first to mix his labour with an unowned good. This is commonly referred to as the first user or homesteading rule. A careful examination of this rule should reveal that it is necessarily conflict free as being the first user and claimant implies there can be no valid competing claims over said good at the time of its acquisition. Voluntary exchange is the second and only other means by which one may acquire rightful ownership over a good according to the private property norm. This includes any voluntary transfer of title over a given good to someone else. This may take the form of a monetary sale, barter exchange, gift, inheritance etc. Once again because such exchange is voluntary it too is free of conflict and is therefore in accordance with the purpose of norms, conflict avoidance. An important derivative of the private property norm is the non-aggression principle aka the NAP which states that no one may rightfully commit aggression against the persons or property of others. To clarify aggression in this context and for the remainder of the book will entail the initiation of uninvited physical interference with the persons or property of others or threats made thereof. Finally what the free market refers to is simply the social arrangements that develop in the absence of coerced exchanges which implies the widespread adoption of the private property norm. That is to say it refers to that environment which is comprised of a myriad of voluntary exchanges and acts of original appropriation. In such an environment one is only able to increase his wealth through the production of desired goods and services which are valued more than the sum of their individual separate components. Thus the self-interests of the individual are beautifully harmonized with the interests of greater society. The free market then is a system which only takes for granted that humans are self-interested and that they seek to use means to achieve various ends. Hopper expounds on the nature of the private property norm. Contrary to the frequently heard claim that the institution of private property is only a convention, it must be categorically stated a convention serves a purpose and it is something to which an alternative exists. The Latin alphabet for instance serves the purpose of written communication and there exists an alternative to it, the Cyrillic alphabet, that is why it is referred to as a convention. What however is the purpose of action norms? If no interpersonal conflict existed, that is if due to a pre-stabilized harmony of all interests, no situation ever arose in which two or more people want to use one and the same good in incompatible ways, then no norms would be needed. It is the purpose of norms to help avoid otherwise unavoidable conflict. A norm that generates conflict rather than helping to avoid it is contrary to the very purpose of norms, it is a dysfunctional norm or a perversion. With regard to the purpose of conflict avoidance however, the institution of private property is definitely not just a convention, because no alternative to it exists. Only private exclusive property makes it possible that all otherwise unavoidable conflicts can be avoided. And only the principle of property acquisition through acts of original appropriation, performed by specific individuals at a specific time and location, makes it possible to avoid conflict from the beginning of mankind onward, because only the first appropriation of some previously unappropriated good can be conflict free, simply because, per definition, no one else had any previous dealings with the good. End quote. What is the state? Throughout this book there will be innumerable references to the state. This should not be confused with say California or North Carolina. Rather it is interchangeable with what is more commonly referred to as the government. However using the term government in place of the state can be misleading as it insinuates that a private property or free market anarchist society is absent a governing presence in a more general sense. In a free market anarchist society, a.k.a. anarcho-capitalist or voluntarist society, the market is the governing presence and enforceable rules and norms still exist, e.g. the NAP. In the free market no one may rightfully or legally commit aggression against the persons or property of others. In distinct contrast however, the state is that institution which has the exclusive legal right to commit aggression against others in a geographical area. More specifically, the state is that institution which confers upon itself the status of ultimate arbiter in all conflicts, as well as the exclusive privilege to create, interpret and enforce law. In addition to these privileges, it also retains the unique power to lay taxes on its citizens, i.e. to make them pay for its services or else face fines, imprisonment or even death if arrest is resisted. Hopper summarizes the defining characteristics of the state. First, the state is an agency that exercises a territorial monopoly of ultimate decision-making, i.e. the state is the ultimate arbiter in every case of conflict, including conflicts involving itself. It allows no appeal above and beyond itself. Second, the state is an agency that exercises a territorial monopoly of taxation, i.e. it is an agency that unilaterally fixes the price that private citizens must pay for the state's service as ultimate judge and enforcer of law and order. End quote. The illegitimacy of the state rests on the fact that it exercises control over resources that its agents never acquired through original appropriation or voluntary exchange, and it does so without the consent of the rightful owners of said resources. This is what separates the so-called social contract of the state from a restaurant owner who expects a customer to pay after he has enjoyed a meal. In the first place, the restaurant owner offers the good upon the customer's specific request. And only then asks for payment. In distinct contrast, the state first expropriates or steals wealth from its citizenry in the form of taxes, and we are told this is payment for its services. In the second place, the restaurant owner would have acquired his establishment and the food that he serves through original appropriation or voluntary exchange, and would thus have the legitimate authority to dictate how it is to be run and to expect payments from his customers for services rendered. The state, on the other hand, cannot claim to own the land of an entire country, as it never homesteaded or purchased it from prior owners, at least not with funds generated through original appropriation or voluntary exchange. Logical and economic errors of the state. As normally understood, the primary role the state is charged with is to serve as the authoritative institution in the creation, interpretation and enforcement of law, and to protect the property of its citizens. However, as noted earlier, before it can embark on any task, it must first confiscate a portion of its citizens' property without their genuine consent, so that it may have the means to perform the aforementioned services. Thus the means the state uses to achieve the ends of conflict mitigation and property protection themselves generate conflict and violate the property rights of its citizens from the outset. This logical error associated with state operations explains the inherently destructive economic consequences of this arrangement. Hopper explains, First of all, among economists and philosophers, two near-universally accepted propositions exist. Proposition 1 Every monopoly is bad from the viewpoint of consumers. Monopoly is here understood in its classic meaning, as an exclusive privilege granted to a single producer of a commodity or service, or as the absence of free entry into a particular line of production. Only one agency, A, may produce a given good or service, X. Such a monopoly is bad for consumers, because shielded from potential new entrants into a given area of production, the price of the product will be higher and its quality lower than otherwise under free competition. Proposition 2 The production of law and order, i.e. of security, is the primary function of the state as just defined. Security is here understood in the wide sense adopted in the American Declaration of Independence, as the protection of life, property and the pursuit of happiness, from domestic violence, crime, as well as external foreign aggression, war. Both propositions are apparently incompatible with each other. This has rarely caused concern among philosophers and economists, however, and insofar as it has, the typical reaction has been one of taking exception to the first proposition, rather than the second. Yet there exist fundamental theoretical reasons, and mountains of empirical evidence, that it is indeed the second proposition that is in error. In addition to the state's monopolistic complacency, the fact that it receives payment through aggressive confiscation and not voluntary sale, severely hinders its ability to ascertain which activities are worth pursuing. In the market, this would be determined by comparing one's costs with his revenue. Profits occur when revenue exceeds costs, and losses when costs exceed revenue. One's productivity in the free market is reflected by his degree of profits or losses. Profits and losses are only able to measure productivity because they reflect the purchasing preferences of consumers. If one is profitable, this means he is generally satisfying consumer preferences. If he is, on the other hand, making losses, this means he is transforming the goods at his disposal in such a way that their resulting configuration is worth less to the consumer than the sum value of the individual goods used in the process. Thus, profits equate to a production of wealth, and losses equate to a destruction of wealth. Fortunately, in a free market, those who destroy wealth or generate losses tend to lose command over ever more resources, freeing them up for more productive use in the marketplace by more capable market participants. However, no such regulating mechanism exists for the state. Because the revenue the state generates comes from violent confiscation, its resulting profits or losses do not necessarily correspond with the creation or destruction of wealth. Thus, it has no rational means by which to make economic decisions, such as where a good should be produced, what materials to produce it with, who should produce it, where it should be allocated, nor how it should be produced. Even if agents of the state could miraculously determine the correct answers to these questions at a given point in time, the very next second the answers would become obsolete, because consumer preferences continually fluctuate, along with the available technology and supplies to satisfy them. Navigating a spontaneous order. Some of the more common criticisms of the free market are that it fails to address externalities, the collective action problem, a lack of uniformity in safety and other quality standards, the free rider problem, and of course that it provides insufficient protection for the common man against the predations of the greedy businessman. All of these allegations and many more will be addressed throughout this book. The book starts off with chapter zero, covering the epistemological limitations of empiricism in the realm of economics. It is due to such limitations that much of the discussion throughout this book will be based in theory, logical proofs and analogies, as opposed to seeking credibility through the lens of empirical data. Of course some empirical examples will be utilised, but this should not be misconstrued as an attempt to prove the propositions made throughout this book. They are instead used to help illustrate some of the concepts which will be discussed. The next few chapters will then be geared towards providing a conceptual foundation for the remainder of the book, by providing a rational proof for the private property norm, defining the scope and nature of property, examining the characteristics of enforceable contracts, and establishing the economic boundaries and role of insurance in a free market. The remaining chapters will speculate on how various services and social problems may be addressed in a free market, in contrast with the state. The topics covered will range from healthcare, monopolies and cartels, money and banking, road production, law and order, security production, environmentalism, poverty, education and the corporation. The book will then culminate in a discussion on some effective means one may employ to diminish the power of the state, and help usher in a free and voluntary society in its stead. The Utopian Alligation The purpose of this work is not to suggest that a society based on free market principles will necessarily be a utopian one, nor does it require a change in human nature in order for such a society to arise and be sustained. Rather it is to argue that a free market society is both ethically and economically superior to a state managed one, regardless of what form the state may take. For this proposal to be true, it does not require people to become better than they are or to adopt a greater social awareness. It must only assume that they are and forever will be self-interested creatures. This is not to say that all members of such a society will be misers or misanthropes. There will still be crime and there will still be charity. These too are motivated by self-interest. However the incentive structure that is created by the free market most closely aligns the self-interest of the individual with the interests of the members of greater society, and therefore crime and other anti-social behaviour are most effectively dealt with in this environment. When reading through the pages of this book I encourage you to be sceptical, challenging each proposal that is made, and to be relentless in your pursuit of truth. I would also encourage you to employ this same level of critique to the state itself, and to allow your objectivity to take precedence over the comfort of the familiar. End the state, free the market, liberate your mind.


Joey you saw 15 pitches in those first two of bats how much did that help you with that second at bat in that three run homer. Yeah I think it always helps getting to see as many pitches as possible I think it helps the whole line up as well the guys behind me so that's really the goals to see as many pitches as you can and let guys like you know Big G and Gary and those guys behind me get to see what he's throwing and what he's going to and what he has a good feel for and yeah it's always nice I take pride in trying to work work the count and see a lot of pitches. You're five for 10 four homers six rubies two walks against Caprelli and what why have you had so much success against him. Yeah I mean I think it's just just one of those things. You know he's a great pitcher and he's been outstanding this year so you know I think it's just sometimes you know you're hot and you feel good at the plate and I think it's just it's just one of those one of those weird things you know I just I just feel confident but like I said he's a great pitcher so it's nice to have success off really good pitchers like that. Joey with the 12 game winning streak what's the feeling like in the clubhouse. Yeah I mean it's obviously very very confident every game we feel like we're going to win and and that's it's nice to be a part of a clubhouse like that even when we go down and you know behind in games you know we still feel like we're going to come back and win a game so it's it's it's a very very positive and very fun clubhouse right now. Thank you Joey. Hi Joey I know sometimes it's hard to explain but why have you had so much success in this particular ballpark I believe it's seven home runs this year here. Yeah I don't know I mean I in years past I didn't hit good here I think it's just one of those things like I said it's just I think you kind of have a good game here and then you build on that and then you build on that and then you start feeling good you know playing here and then you know you get to face the kind of those pitchers over and over again obviously being in the AL West for as long as I was that also gives you confidence but no I mean it's just I can't really explain it it's just this year's I've done well here that's all.  Yeah I mean really really respect it honestly and I think it fires you up and like I was telling guys after the game like that's that's I really I really like I said respect Boone for doing that and because you can just tell that he's into the game just as much as we are and he wants to win just as bad as we do and for him to have our back and you know fight for us like that and trust that you know he was trusting necessarily that I that pitch was a ball he didn't see it he was from the side angle he was trusting that he was trusting me in the fact that I thought that was a ball and so for him to go out there and fight for me and you know fight for our guys it's you know it's special it's special for a manager to do that it means a lot.


Okay, so let's do one of these density problems.  The density of silver is 10.50 grams per mil. What will be the final volume in the graduated cylinder? So you would expect this volume to increase, right, because you've got a graduated cylinder with 10 mils of water in it, right, and then you're sticking something in there. So the final volume better be more than 10 mils, if you're putting something like 1.37 for your final volume then you're getting that wrong, okay? So the mass of silver is that, okay? Let's figure out how many milliliters of silver we have. What's the volume of silver, okay? So how do we do that? The volume of silver, well, we have the mass there, 12.31 grams, and remember, we have a conversion factor here. So grams for every 10 grams, 10.5 grams, which makes one milliliter, okay? So what we can do with this is use that as a conversion factor. So density you can use as a conversion factor going from mass to volume. So on the bottom we're going to have to put our mass to cancel it out, so 10.50 grams is one mil. So that's going to cancel that, right, and that's going to give us the volume of the silver, right? So the volume of the silver is the volume of the object that you put in there, 12.31 divided by 10.50. So this volume, the force sheet, is 1.172 mils, okay? So that's how much volume is in the silver, okay? So the final volume, well, the volume final, that's going to be the initial volume of plus the volume of the silver, does that make sense? Okay, so the initial volume is 10.00 mils, volume of the silver is 1.172 mils, okay? So this is going to go to two digits after the decimal point, so it's going to be just in my head, 11.17 mils, that's going to be the final volume of the graduated silver, okay? So make sure you're getting the number that's above 11 on these ones. Any question on this one? I hope. Wonderful.


Hello everyone, welcome to tomorrow. There's quite a few things that we need to talk about in this video, including what we know a week later after SpaceX's rapid, unplanned disassembly and what else has been going on in spaceflight and the week ahead. This is your space pod for September 7th, 2016. So if you're watching this video, I'm going to assume that you at least mildly care about space, or at the very least have a passing curiosity about what's going on with spaceflight right now. You also might have heard that SpaceX suffered an explosion at their launch pad in preparation to launch a satellite into space, and this was on September 1st of this year, 2016. But within the space industry, they don't like to call an explosion or a catastrophic failure. They instead like to use terms like rapid, unplanned disassembly or an anomaly. And the reason for this is that the space industry doesn't like to focus on the negative. If they did, I mean they would just cancel the entire space program outright. But instead they want to focus on the positive and foster a spirit of resilience to pick up the pieces and continue where they left off. That being said, we still don't know why SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket and the satellite that it was supposed to launch exploded. I mean they had a rapid, unplanned disassembly on September 1st. But they are getting a lot of positive support from the space industry. SpaceX and the FAA, the Federal Aviation Administration, are investigating why this accident occurred. And they're getting lots of support from NASA and the United States Air Force, who both groups have expressed that they have full confidence that SpaceX will be able to recover from this mishap and be able to continue in their operations. Although the destruction of the primary payload for this launch, the AMO6 communication satellite is tragic, it's not necessarily all bad news. And there was quite a lot hinging on the success of this satellite. Thankfully the satellite was covered under an insurance policy, and there were two insurance policies actually. One if the vehicle was destroyed during the launch itself, and another for any problems on the ground, such as being damaged while being transported from one place to another. So thankfully there's that insurance policy. Another piece of good news is that SpaceX is going to be reimbursing the company that owned this satellite, which is not a Facebook as the mainstream media has been reporting, but is actually an Israeli company called Spacecom. And the reason this launch was so important to Spacecom was because the AMO6 satellite was supposed to replace the capacity of their aging AMO2 satellite. And the success of this launch was part of the deal to sell the company Spacecom to a company called Jinwei Technology Group. But how is SpaceX going to be making it up to this company? They're either going to be offering a free ride on their Falcon 9 rocket or giving them $50 million to reimburse them for this mishap. Some people were worried that the deal was off to sell the company Spacecom to the Jinwei Technology Group because this launch was not successful. However, a representative from the company Spacecom told the website Spacenews.com that they were in the process of renegotiating the deal with the Jinwei Technology Group, who still expressed interest in purchasing the company. So good for them. And meanwhile, the rest of the space industry moves on. And there's quite a few launches, hopefully successful launches coming up, and quite a few other space activities going on right now as well. Too many to talk about in this video. Now, as far as SpaceX and their primary customer NASA are concerned, the main payload that NASA wants SpaceX to deliver is cargo to the International Space Station. And we don't need to worry about the space station running out of supplies anytime soon. They have plenty of supplies and they plan for unexpected events like this. Plus, there's two more cargo flights that are going to be launching very soon. One is from Japan and another is from the commercial company Orbital ATK, who also sends cargo to the space station. So even if SpaceX doesn't return to flight for a while, they will not run out of supplies at the space station and things will be okay. Plus, we also have our partner Russia, who delivers four Progress vehicles to the space station every year. So they'll be okay. Speaking of the space station, three crew members actually returned home to Earth yesterday. This was astronaut Jeff Williams and the cosmonauts Alexei Ovchinin and Oleg Skripochka of Roskosmos, and they landed in Kazakhstan yesterday at around 2151 Coordinated Universal Time. Also, congratulations to Jeff Williams for breaking the American record for most amount of time in space, breaking Scott Kelly's record, although the Russians still have us beat by quite a bit. Now there's some upcoming rocket launches that are going to be happening in quick succession. So come on board the hype train with me and let's talk about it. First off in India, we have a GSLV Mark III rocket, which is supposed to be launching the INSAT-3DR Geostationary Weather Satellite. So good luck India, good luck to ISRO, the Indian Space Research Organization, and I hope that goes off well. That's happening tomorrow, September 8th, somewhere around 1040 Coordinated Universal Time. Next up in the United States, we have an Atlas V rocket, which is finally launching the OSIRIS-REx asteroid sample return mission. I'm super excited about this mission. And the rocket itself is launching in a really weird configuration. It's the 411 configuration of the Atlas V, which means it has a four meter payload fairing, one solid rocket booster, not very symmetric, and a single engine centaur upper stage. And despite the weird rocket configuration, I'm really excited about this launch and this mission. Now when it's launching, it's either going to be launching on Thursday or Friday, depending on where you live, and the launch window itself. The launch window opens on 2305 Coordinated Universal Time on September 8th and closes at 105 Coordinated Universal Time September 9th. So good luck to United Launch Alliance and good luck to NASA. I hope this mission is a complete success. Next up in China, we have a Long March 2 F rocket that will be launching sometime next week, maybe. But the payload is going to be the Tiangong-2 space station module. And I'm really excited about this. Even though China is still in the early phases of their human spaceflight program, the Tiangong-2 module will help them to gain the experience that they need in order to fulfill their ambitions of creating a mere class space station, who they are trying very hard to reach out to the nations of the world to collaborate with them on that project. And I really hope that the United States is a part of that space station in the future, at least in some small way. But a rocket launch that's supposed to be happening next week that we have solid information about, unlike the information we get from China, is actually an Italian Vega rocket, which will be launching from Perot French Guiana in South America. And it'll be launching five satellites, the Peru-Sat-1, which is a reconnaissance satellite for the Peruvian government, and four Earth observation satellites, called SkySat, for Google and Terabella. The Vega rocket is scheduled to launch at 143 Coordinated Universal Time on September 16th. So good luck to Ariane Space, and I hope that we see a lot more commercial launches like this. Now, one more launch I wanted to talk about is also going to be happening on September 16th, somewhere between 1830 and 1844 Coordinated Universal Time. And this is going to be another Atlas V rocket, and it's going to be launching the WorldView 4 observation satellite for Digital Globe. And this Atlas V will be in the 401 configuration, which means a four meter payload fairing, no solid rocket boosters, and a single engine Centaur upper stage. So good luck again to United Launch Alliance. I hope both of these launches go off successfully. Now we're definitely going to be reporting on the outcome of these launches, most likely on our live show, which happens every Saturday at 1900 Coordinated Universal Time. So if you haven't checked this out live, you definitely should. But of course, we post all of those live shows to our YouTube channel here afterwards. So I hope that you're watching those as well as these space pods. But I think I need to end this video here for now. So please tell me what you think about some of the topics I discussed today. With the whole SpaceX thing, I mean, let's try not to speculate and make too many assumptions. I mean, here I go making an assumption, but for all we know, it could have been a freak accident that couldn't be replicated. I mean, we just don't know what happened yet. And as soon as we do, of course, we're going to talk about that and report it to you guys. But at least tell me what you think about this. And what do you think about the possible outcomes for space calm? And which of these launches upcoming launches that I talked about, are you excited about the most? Please let me know in the comment section below. Also, I'd like to invite you to connect with me and the other hosts of tomorrow on our social medias, our Facebook page, our Twitter, our subreddit, and our website tomorrow.tv. And I can't end this video without thanking and mentioning our wonderful, wonderful patrons. This is an entirely crowdfunded show. And without these beautiful people, we would not be able to do this. And I am eternally grateful to each and every single one of you. Every penny helps to the creation of the show and making it even better. And if you would like to support the show if you're not already, please visit patreon.com slash spacepod. Thank you again for watching this video. My name is Michael Clark. Hopefully you know just a little bit more today than you did yesterday, thanks to tomorrow. Keep moving onwards and upwards, everybody, and I will see you in the future.


Hello and welcome to this session. This is Professor Farhad. Today we would look at CPA exam questions that deals with reporting on the special purpose framework. It's a topic that's covered on the auditing section of the exam. Oftentimes it's not covered in an auditing course, which it should be covered in an auditing course, but oftentimes professors, they don't cover this topic because it's not part of the major gap and gas auditing. As always, I would like to remind you to connect with me on LinkedIn. If you haven't done so, YouTube is where you would need to subscribe. I have 1,700 plus accounting, auditing, tax, finance, as well as Excel tutorial. If you like my lectures, please like them, share them. If they benefit you, it means they might benefit other people, share the wealth, and connect with me on Instagram. On my website, farhadlectures.com, you will find additional resources such as lectures, practice questions, 2000 CPA questions. For example, this topic today is covered in depth in my auditing course. Once you go to my auditing course, not only you find this topic, you find other topics plus practice exercises. Also, I have CPA sections where you have 500 questions to practice for the CPA exam. The CPA exam is an adaptive test. It means if the AI CPA software notices that you have a weakness in the special purpose framework topic, they will keep asking you the same questions about this topic and they might fail you.  So let's take a look at this question. Reports on special purpose framework are issued in conjunction with what? So basically, what basis can we use to issue those special purpose framework? Reports based on what? Can we use cash basis? And the answer is yes. When you work with a small or a medium sized CPA firm, which is this is what I worked when I was in practice, we did a lot of cash basis. Why? Because small businesses, they prepare their financial statements on cash basis. So if one is correct, I can take out C because one is in A, one is in B, and one is in D. Income tax basis, can you prepare special purpose framework? Can you issue them based on income tax basis? Same thing, and the answer is yes. Also small businesses. So now I can take out A because A does not have two. I can keep B and keep D. All what I need to know now, can I issue those special purpose framework based on regulatory basis of accounting? And the answer is yes. Sometimes you have to issue them based on regulatory basis. Now there are special rules for regulatory basis, but you need to know that you have to issue them based on that. Therefore the answer is D as in Davis. D as in David. You could also issue those special purpose framework based on contractual basis. Anything that you agreed with the client, but you have to spell it out clearly and you have to include it in the report. Let's take a look at this question. When the CPA reports on a financial statements, prepare on cash basis. What is cash basis? Cash basis is a special purpose framework. So cash basis. The report will contain an emphasis of of a matter paragraph. Let me ask you this, just not knowing anything. Do you think you should tell the users that look, this is a cash basis report. Should you tell them this? What do you think? I would say yes. You should tell them this and you should tell them in the report this is a non gap because cash basis is non gap and you have to explicitly tell them it's non gap. So one, it should be just obviously you have to tell them, look, this is not gap. Okay. So I keep one, I take out D, I keep C, take out B and D. Okay. Now all what I have to find out now if number two is correct, if number two is correct, C is the answer. If not one is the answer. One only, which is A. The opinion paragraph would evaluate the usefulness of the basic accounting and compare it to gap. Do you think we have to do that? Do you think we have to evaluate how useful is cash basis? We don't have to. I mean, if we are reporting based on cash basis, it's acceptable and there's no reason to compare it to gap. If somebody is interested in converting the financial statements to gap, by all means, you know their cash basis, you can do your own evaluation and compare it to gap. But we don't, we don't do this work. Otherwise, if we do this work, it means we are doing gap and cash basis. Therefore, two is not correct. C is not correct. One A is the answer. And hopefully you can, you can learn this based on common sense. Yes, I have to emphasize the accounting method I'm using cash basis, but I don't have to compare it to gap. So why don't I compare it also to income tax? Or why don't I compare it to regulatory requirement? I don't. I don't have to compare it to anything. I just have to let you know which basis am I using. Which of the following reports would contain restricted use language? So what is your restricted use language? It means in the report, you clearly state this report is for a specific party, for a specific group. So if somebody else gets their hands on it, and if they use it, I'm sorry, we told you you can't use it because it's only, it's only targeted, targeting this particular group. So when do we, when do we do so? When do we do so? When do we do so? A report, a report on the client's compliance with regulatory requirement, assuming the report is prepared based on a financial statement audit of the complete financial statement. Do we do, do we have to use this restrictive language? And the answer is yes. If we are preparing a client's compliance with some type of regulatory requirement, but it's based on the audited financial statements, we have to use this language. We have to restrict the report to let them know this is, this, this regulatory report should be restricted to your use specifically. So under those circumstances, one is a correct answer. So we keep one, we take out B, we keep C, take out D. A report on financial statement prepare on the cash basis. Do we have to restrict the report on the cash basis? And the answer is no. If it's a cash basis, you know what you need to do. Just make sure you contain an emphasis of a matter of paragraph, letting them know it's a cash basis. So you don't have to restrict it. You know, restricted means it's only to a particular group. A lot of companies use the cash basis. A lot of small businesses use the cash basis. There is no reason to restrict the report. Therefore, A is the answer, something that you have to memorize. Just know, just know the rule for this. An auditor's report on special purpose framework statement would contain a restricted use paragraph. When the financial statements are presented using the cash basis, I just told you, you don't have to restrict under the cash basis. Therefore, one is not a correct answer. If you're using the cash basis, a lot of people use the cash basis. It's kind of, it's kind of an acceptable thing that, you know, if somebody see the cash basis, they should be able to understand it. Therefore, we'll take out one. We'll take out C. Income tax basis. Do you have to restrict the report if it's on the income tax basis? And the answer is no. Every company practically use the, not practically, every company that they have to report, they have to prepare their tax return. They have to have some sort of an income basis financial statement. So it's an acceptable method. Do you have to restrict the report if you prepare it based on income tax? And the answer is no. So these two, you don't have to restrict anything. Therefore, the answer is D. Let's take a look at this question. Which of the following will be included in an auditor's report on a special purpose financial statement not intended for general use? So what do you have to do when it's not intended for general use? Emphasis of a matter paragraph, alerting the reader about the preparation and according with a special purpose framework. Do you have to do that? And the answer is yes. If it's not for general use, if it's for regulatory use, or if it's specifically between you and that particular party, you have to emphasize this matter and a paragraph. So if somebody get their hands on the report, they would say, hold on a second, we can't use it because it's not intended for general use. And that will be shown in the emphasis of a matter paragraph. Other matter paragraph restrict in the use of the report. Do you have to do that? Yes, you have to do that. You have to put other matter paragraph letting everybody know, look, it's between the company and the regulatory agency. It's between the company and the party that contracted the company. Therefore, both one and two is the answer. If you need additional information about this topic, please check out my website, farhatlectures.com, specifically my auditing course, and you will find additional information about this topic. As always, I would like to remind you to also, like my lecture, share them, put them in playlists. If they benefit you, it means they might benefit other people. The CPA exam is a lifetime investment. Don't shortchange yourself. It's a 10, it's a 20 to 30 year investment in your career. Study hard, take it seriously, and stay safe if you are still living through this coronavirus. Good luck.


What is up guys? Karma Medic here and welcome back to another dose. If you don't know who I am, my name is Nasser. I'm a second year medical student at Kings College London and I make these YouTube videos to try and help you guys with your medical school applications. So today I'm going to be covering section three of the BMAT, the essay writing section. I'm going to go through some general tips for that section and then I'm going to take a look at some essay plans on my computer and talk about how I would answer them live on camera so you guys can see what are the kinds of things that I would be thinking about when solving them. If you guys want to see more videos like this, definitely leave a like on this video, subscribe to my channel and that way you'll be notified when new videos on the BMAT are uploaded. Before we begin, a quick shout out to Medify for sponsoring this video. If you guys want to check out their website or any resources for the BMAT, UK Cal or personal statement, I'll leave links in the description down below. Alright, now without further ado, let's get started on the general tips. So section three of the BMAT is all about communication. It's all about how you can logically rationally and efficiently get your thoughts down on a piece of paper and answer the essay question. I know this is the last section on the exam so you're probably really tired and drained by the time you get to it but you definitely don't want to neglect it. It's still part three. It's still looked at by universities and you still want to do well. Tip number one is don't misinterpret what the question is asking. You want to answer exactly what the question is asking of you because if you go off topic or you start talking about other things, you're going to lose a lot of marks. Tip two is to make sure that you answer every single part of the question. The question is probably going to have two maybe three parts and you want to make sure that you address all of them. The second that you forget one of those parts of the question, you're going to immediately be capped at 50% of the total marks so you definitely don't want to do that. Read the question two or three times to make sure you've answered every single component. The third tip is to not have a one-sided response. You want to make sure that you give both pros and against or for and on the contrary for every part of the question and then you can come to a conclusion and the conclusion that you come to should be the one that is most correct. It's the one that a doctor would do or one that the GMC wants you to do. So that's the conclusion that you should come to but always argue both sides of the argument. My fourth tip I would say is to have a look at as many past paper questions as possible. The reason for this is that if you take a look at all the past papers you'll notice certain themes that tend to come up over and over again. So you want to have a look at all those so that you can answer them really well if something similar comes up on your exam. Tip number five is don't spend too long choosing your essay question. You want to have a look at all the questions you want to skim through them and then just decide what you think works best for you, what you'll be able to answer best and just go for it. If you spend five even ten minutes flip-flopping or trying to decide which question you want to do that's a lot of wasted time that you could spend writing down your points on paper. Tip number five is about essay planning. I know that for me personally I never used essay plans because it would stress me out that I was spending time writing something down that wasn't my actual final essay but I know that a lot of people swear by essay plans and they can't write essays without them. So see what works for you, what type of person you are and if you use essay plans great, if you don't like essay plans that's also totally fine. And my final tip is to always leave enough time to review your essay. Leave something like three to five minutes at the end of the time so that you can have a look over your essay. You are going to find mistakes, you are going to find grammatical errors and there might be something that you want to clarify or make more easy to understand for the reader. Definitely take the time to do this because it's important that your overall language and use of English is correct and it gives a more professional and better read for your essay. I'm also going to include the essay rubric somewhere over here. You guys can have a look at it to compare your essay answers to this rubric. As you can see full marks is for an essay with an excellent answer and no significant weaknesses. You want to make sure you address all the components of the question like I said before. You have to have good arguments for and against the point. Yeah, you should have a compelling conclusion, logical, rational and coherent arguments. Okay, so now let's go and take a look at a couple of actual essays. See what I would plan for them, how I would structure my form, my against, my conclusion and all of that. Okay, so here we are on the medified BMAT online course. The essay plans are located under the tutorials section at the very bottom under section three. So I've actually had a look at quite a few of these essay plans. I've had a read of quite a few of them and I'm going to look at all the questions and answer the ones that I think I would do best that in the actual exam. Since 2016 or 2017, the BMAT has stopped including the vets related questions. So I'm not going to take them into account when reading which question I would choose. So looking at the 2015 past paper, we have these three questions. Computers are useless, they can only give you answers. Okay, so technology is something that I'm really interested in. It's probably something that I could talk about for a long time. So this is definitely one I'll keep on the side. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Okay, I actually find that pretty interesting. But I generally tend to not do the philosophy related questions. And that's just a personal preference. I'm personally not that good at them. So I'm probably not going to do that one. And then when treating an individual patient, a physician must also think of the wider society. That's also really good. I might do that one after. But first I'm going to do computers are useless, they can only give you answers. So this is the full question. Computers are useless, they can only give you answers, quote by Pablo Picasso, explain what is meant by this statement, argue to the contrary, what are the real limits of technology. I'm going to go away for 10 minutes, I'm going to type down a couple of things that I would write for each part of this question. And I'm going to structure it exactly as the question asks it to me, I'm going to explain what this means, or explain what the statement means, argue the contrary, and what are the real limits of technology. All right, so I'll see you guys in a couple of minutes once I've typed out a couple of my thoughts. Okay, so I'm back. First things first, I'm going to define the statement or explain the statement. I'm going to say that computers are electronic components that carry out instructions after a human gives them an input. Now to argue for this statement, I'm going to say that computers have no creativity, computers can think for themselves. The only thing that they can do is carry out instructions once they're told to do so. In fact, they can't even do something that's a little bit different, they can't adapt or change two different scenarios, they just do exactly what they're told. So computers lack creativity entirely. In addition to that, to someone like Pablo Picasso, whose whole definition of creativity revolves around being able to express his emotions and thoughts onto a painting, he's going to find something like computers pretty stupid, because obviously computers aren't able to do that computers simply carry out instructions one after another. And then some other things that have written down are that computers can't work alone, they need a human counterpart. And what a computer could do back then in Pablo Picasso's time is obviously very different to what a computer can do now to Pablo Picasso back then computers might have been deemed useless because they could only do very simple things. So to argue against the statement, I would say that computers back then are not the same as they are now.  Computers can actually come up with images from scratch, they can create voices, they can start to mimic human speech and things of that nature. So computers are definitely becoming much, much more advanced. In fact, nowadays they could probably inspire someone like Pablo Picasso and help Pablo Picasso in achieving their art. Not only are computers not stupid, but they can do things now that humans couldn't dream of doing over many, many years. And the last part of this question is about what are the real limits of technology. And personally, I think that the real limit of technology isn't in the actual humans creativity or the humans innovation, it's in the actual physical components of a computer. For example, the transistors, the resistors, all these things are limited by physics by the speed of light by the amount of electrons that can be transferred, the way they can be transferred, things like that. So I think those are likely to limit technology much, much quicker than humans are. Then I would conclude by saying something like computers aren't stupid, they just weren't very capable back then. And that's why Pablo Picasso may have deemed them useless. But nowadays, of course, computers are extremely beneficial and extremely helpful to wider society. And to someone like Pablo Picasso, if they were around. Okay, I was glancing over these questions. And I really liked this one from 2012. The scientist is not someone who gives the right answers, but one who asks the right questions. So this is the full question. The scientist is not someone who gives the right answers, but one who asks the right questions. Explain what this statement means. Are you to the contrary that the right answers are more important than the right questions? To what extent do you agree that the right questions must be asked before science can progress? So I would start this answer by saying that science can't progress if we don't answer the right questions. We can spend an eternity chasing the wrong questions, looking for an answer in the wrong place. And we'll never progress if we're not originally searching in the right place, or at least moving towards the correct questions. To argue for this statement, I would say that in scientific research, a lot of good research is involved and needed before actually investigating so that you make sure that you're answering the right question. Before you devote a lot of time, energy, people and resources to answering a question, you want to make sure that you're at least moving in the right direction. Why would we even ask a question if it's not going to lead to something useful, which we can apply to humanity and benefit society? To argue against that, I would say that you're never going to find out anything if you don't start asking questions. You don't have to spend an eternity figuring out what the exact correct question is. You just need to start somewhere. You can ask a question and then as you move along, as you discover more things, you can narrow down the question and move further in the right direction. In fact, a lot of discoveries in our past have come by accident. We've been looking into a question that's maybe related or even totally unrelated to what gets discovered. And that's totally fine. That happens through curiosity and looking into something. Any question you ask is only the beginning. As you move forward, as you discover new things, you can narrow down the question and start finding that correct answer. And then to what extent do you agree that the right questions must be asked before science can progress? I would say that I only partially agree. I definitely agree that it's helpful that if you ask the right question from the beginning, you'll probably be more on your way to finding the correct answer. But again, it's only a starting point and we didn't discover everything that we have today because we spent tons of time and research defining the exact correct question. We were just curious and we asked different things. We started exploring and we saw what we came up with and moved on from there. Over time, your question can always be refined. I think the correct answer is to strike a balance by finding the best possible question that you can and moving from there. Okay guys, I think that's where I'm going to call it for today. I hope you guys found useful the general tips that I gave you and also enjoyed when I was talking about the questions and the essay plans. If you enjoyed this video, definitely leave a like, subscribe to my channel and you'll see more videos from me in the future. Best of luck guys in your BMAP preparation. I hope you kill it and let me know how those applications are going. And that's it guys. I'll see you in the next one. Peace.


The question over whether or not there are too many links distros is an old one. In fact, I would say it's about as old as Linux itself. And I've talked about it before. And I don't really need to talk about it again, because my usual answer to that is that there aren't too many Linux distributions. That's just the nature of open source. It's not anything that we can either do anything about or anything that we should do anything about. So that topic is not something that we need to discuss at length. But the topic that I do want to cover today is whether or not there are too many isos. Now this is going to be a little bit of a nerdy topic, because when I talk about this, what I'm not talking about is distros themselves, but instead isos that a distro will create. So for example, and this is maybe the prime example, let's talk about Arco Linux. If you were to go to the Arco Linux website, you'll find that they have many different isos. Different versions that are kind of like top tier versions that you can get an iso of. You can also get an iso of every single one of their desktop environments or window managers if you wanted to.  Arco is obviously just one example, Manjaro also has several different isos. They have three that are official XFCE, GNOME, and KDE. They also have several spins, community additions. So each of those are isos that someone, whether it's part of the project or not, has to maintain. Fedora is similar in that they have a main version, which is the workstation version that comes with GNOME, but they also have several spins, things like Mate and KDE and i3. They all have their own isos and separate versions that need to be maintained by someone. Ubuntu is obviously the most popular example. They have flavors. So each flavor is its own separate kind of organization separated from canonical, but they're supported by canonical. It's a little bit confusing in terms of organizational structure. But basically, if you're an official flavor, you're part of family. So they have Xubuntu, Lubuntu, Mate, the official version, which is runs on GNOME, that there's a new one that is using the Unity desktop. They have like eight or nine different flavors. And each of them have their own isos. Several of them have multiple isos. So they have the 22.04, which is the LTS, they have the 22.10. Some of them still give a older version of Ubuntu. You get the idea. They all have at least one or two isos that they have to maintain. So every single distro out there, at least the main ones, all maintain multiple isos and additions that they have to support. Now, I am not a developer, so I can't really tell you how much work goes into creating each and every iso. But I would imagine that the answer to that question is at least some. There has to be some effort that goes into creating each and every one of these isos. Even if the differences between them are insignificant, there has to be, there is some effort there, whether I know what that effort is or not. The thing is, is that I am not opposed to distributions having different flavors. I'm not opposed to them offering different desktop environments or window managers. In fact, I'm all for that. I think that is fantastic. One of my favorite things about Arco Linux is that they offer so many choices when it comes to installing different window managers or desktop environments. It's amazing. I also like that Ubuntu comes in several different flavors because not everyone likes GNOME. Some people want to use Plasma. Some people want to use Mate. Some people want to use XFCE. It's good that those things exist. But maintaining multiple isos, even if it's a separate team doing so, takes the effort that could be used into bettering the distro itself and into creating its own thing, like it's fragmenting. And I hate to use that word. The effort people could otherwise be using into making the distro better. And really for no particularly good reason, in my opinion. So there are, or there is an excellent solution to all this. We have installers. Now, I know that a lot of the mainstream distros are almost terrified to complicate their installers. They want to make their installer as simple as possible. We saw this with the brand new Fedora installer. It's like three steps. That's it. And obviously that's going to get more complex as they finish it. But you can tell they're trying to make that as simple as possible. There's not even user creation in that installer. It is that is post install. Everything else is just the installer. And I can understand this idea. You wanting to create an installer that is as simple as possible. But it removes an opportunity that distros have to create fewer isos. Now, maybe they don't say this is a big problem. Obviously they don't because it's just kind of the way we've decided to do things as a community. If you want a different edition of a distro, you just create an iso that has the DE or window manager that you want on it. That's the way we seem to settle on it. But instead, we can do something similar to what ARCO kind of does, even though they still do the iso thing, where during install, you just select which desktop environment or spin or community addition that you'd like.  But instead of having eight or nine different isos that you have to maintain every time you do it a release, you just have one or maybe two. If you have two different versions, maybe maybe an LTS and an interim release version of Ubuntu or whatever. So you have two isos, but you install Ubuntu. And during the install, you can choose between the traditional Ubuntu, Zubuntu, Lubuntu, the Kubuntu, they really need to do some different names. But you get the point, right? You would choose during install what version of Ubuntu you wanted to install. Now, obviously this creates one big problem. Obviously, you can't put all of the possible versions of Ubuntu on one iso. That iso would be 20 gigabytes in size, maybe even more. That's impossible. That's not a good idea.  I don't know. I'm not actually sure how you'd get around that particular hurdle. Because you could have a net install. Most people who when they install Linux have the internet connected to their computer and that would allow them to download the particular version of the files and packages that they need in order to have the version of Ubuntu or whatever that they need. So for most people, my solution would work fine. But obviously there are people out there who don't connect their laptops or their computers to the internet or can't. And for those people, this solution is not as good. Also, you'd have to understand that you'd be downloading more packages during the install. So that would mean that people with bandwidth issues or bandwidth caps would have a harder time downloading Linux and installing it because you'd have to put up with that extra stuff that you have to download during the install because you're downloading the ISO and then you're also installing whatever packages you need in order to get the addition that you want. So there are problems with my idea for sure. I freely admit that and I'm also freely admitting that I don't have the smarts in order to solve the problems. So there is all that. But it feels to me just personally that this could be an option for the future in that it would at least somewhat if you could work past the problems, allow developers of these distros to focus on the things that matter like making their distributions better. So this is just an idea that I've been thinking about for a while because every time I navigate to a new Linux distribution, I'm kind of shocked at the number of versions that they maintain. It just feels like a whole bunch of extra work when they could do it in a much simpler fashion. Now, maybe there's not a way to work around the bandwidth and the complexity issues that I was talking about. Maybe that's just the reason why that hasn't been done. That's possible. And it would only maybe it would only work for distributions that are guaranteed net installers. So things like Arch, Gentoo, whatever, maybe it would work in those cases. But where in the more simple distros where you're installing stuff straight from the ISO, maybe it wouldn't work for those. And the way that they do it now is just the best way to do it. That's possible, too. But I'm interested to hear from you guys. What do you guys think about this? Do you think that distros maintain too many isos, too many versions? I'd love to hear from you in the comment section below. Let me know. You can follow me on MasterDiner Odyssey. Those links will be in the video description. You can support me on Patreon at patreon.com slash Linuxcast, just like all these fine people. Thanks to everybody who does support me on Patreon and YouTube.  Without you, the channel just would not be anywhere near where it is right now. So thank you very much for your support. If you would like to support me on something other than Patreon, links to the YouTube stuff and liberapair are in the video description. Thanks everybody for watching. I'll see you next time.