What comes to nursing school explain in today's video about hypoglycemia? Typically hypoglycemia is defined as a blood glucose level of less than 70 milligrams per deciliter. But that can be a little bit different depending on the facility that you're working at or with. Sometimes the level can be maybe 65 maybe 75. So just make sure that you're familiar with what that means. But the important thing is that we understand what hypoglycemia is how it occurs and what kinds of signs and symptoms we're going to see in the patient and then of course how we're going to treat them. So let's start here. So causes of hypoglycemia are either not enough food or too much medication meaning too much insulin usually in the patient system although oral antidiabetic agents can also stimulate insulin production and they can also lead to hypoglycemia. Mistimed food intake. Think about a patient who gets a meal coverage dose of an insulin and then the meal doesn't arrive on time, the patient gets taken to a procedure. Something like that happens that that mistimes or that the patient misses that meal intake that can definitely lead to hypoglycemia and then certainly vigorous exercise because if we are burning up all the glucose that we have in our bloodstream then we don't have enough glucose available to sustain ourselves and we're going to become hypoglycemic. So pathophysiologically when we have an episode of hypoglycemia our bodies are designed to activate the autonomic nervous system and two things happen with the autonomic nervous system. The insulin release is decreased because we don't even have enough glucose to sustain ourselves right now so we don't want to break down more glucose and the glucagon and epiproductions are increased and glucagon and epinephrine help to bring the blood sugar up. Now glucagon binds or causes release of glycogen stores from the liver and therefore glucose production to bring up the blood sugar naturally and epinephrine also helps to kind of kick start everything to make that happen. Now signs and symptoms that we're going to see in the patient who's hypoglycemic they might have palpitations, anxiety, tachycardia, their skin might change into pale, cool and diaphoretic kind of like a shocky response if you think about it and of course they're going to be hungry because they don't have enough carbohydrates or glucose in their system and these symptoms all happen because of the release of epinephrine so when you think about it the signs and symptoms that you might see think about what does epinephrine do in the body and it causes all these things but of course decreased levels of blood sugar also cause some neurologic effects because the brain needs glucose to function so when we don't have enough sugar in our system the patient might be altered, they might have vision changes, blurry vision, double vision, they might have slurred speech, they might actually exhibit seizures or develop a coma and eventually they will die because the body just doesn't, does not have enough glucose available to sustain themselves and then if we look over here so patients at high risk certainly are patients who are diabetic because they already take in medication to help lower their blood sugar so if something interferes with their food intake or they mistime it or maybe there's a medication change or an addition or a subtraction then they are at high risk. The other patients that are at high risk are those that take beta blockers because beta blockers inhibit the epinephrine and the glucagon response which is also what the antidote to beta dose or beta blocker overdose is glucagon so that's a nice little tidbit here for you. Now treatment for hypoglycemia, all hospitals have a hypoglycemia protocol so make sure that you're familiar with that and that you know the decision tree and how you can go about it to help your patient get better because the symptoms of hypoglycemia they might come on little gradually but once the patient has altered and the glucose goes below 70 then we need to really react quickly because coma and death are imminent if the blood glucose level continues to drop and we can't administer any kind of source of glucose then the patient actually might have very bad outcome. So a hypoglycemia protocol usually includes and this is a very simple explanation here if the patient can take PO fluids or food and they are alert we want to give them by mouth simple carbohydrates and simple because that they are easy to digest and they can enter the bloodstream quickly so those are things like orange juice, honey, syrup, jelly anything that you can get into the patient that will elevate the blood glucose quickly. Now keep in mind that the patient has to be alert because if they're altered and have slurred speech we always worry about their airway and their ability to swallow so we should not give any patient anything PO if we're not sure or if they are altered. After we've given the simple carbs we want to recheck their blood glucose level in 15 minutes and then repeat the simple carbs if we're still below 70 and the hypoglycemia protocol will give you the exact numbers that you need to treat to here and then if the blood glucose level is not normal the patient's symptoms resolve we need to follow their oral intake with complex carbohydrates so that's something that also contains carbohydrates but that will take a longer to digest to kind of keep the blood sugar up not just increase it and then drop it down again and these complex carbohydrates should also be accompanied by fat as well as protein because they slow the absorption of those complex carbohydrates. However if the patient is NPO and or they have an altered level of consciousness so now we don't want to feed them anything by mouth because that could be dangerous or that's not part of their of their allowed diet we have two options we can give them intramuscular glucagon basically to help that response or we can give them IV dextrose and that'll depend on the sugar level and on the protocol that you're following. Now for nursing care it's very important to know the signs and symptoms of hypoglycemia and also educate your patients and their family members about the signs and symptoms so that they know and they can react just like you would in the hospital. Know the patient medications and their food intake because we know an imbalance here can cause their blood glucose to drop. Check the blood sugar quickly even if you just have the slightest suspicion that with the patient presenting with any of these symptoms just check a blood sugar it's the best thing you can do. Remember we also check a blood sugar if the patient exhibits stroke symptoms so that kind of ties in with those neurologic symptoms I talked about and maybe it's just a low blood sugar and it can be resolved that we don't have a call to call a code stroke but always keep your eye on the patient and then follow the protocol and after the episode is resolved so now the patient is better the blood sugar is staying up investigate as to why this happened what happened with their medications with their beta blockers with their food intake so that we can prevent it from happening again because it can be very scary and it can be dangerous when the blood sugar goes too low and we don't recognize that. So thank you for watching this video about hypoglycemia also check out the other video I have coming up about the opposite hyperglycemia as well as a separate video about the hypoglycemia protocol where I actually go over an example and explain and break it down how it relates to this video thanks for watching see you soon


Madam Under Secretary, officers, professors, ladies and gentlemen, a great pleasure for me to be here. Great pleasure to be with my friends, Martin, Tim and several others, George, others who teach here also. There's an old saying that goes, show me your friends and I will tell you who you are. And that feels good in this company. I've heard from a friend who works in the post office that they say, show me your address and I will tell you where you live. So that's the simpler one. Anyway, I have been called here as a philosopher to speak about philosophy for the next approximately 55 minutes. We'll see how that goes. One thing that Martin and I often come up against when we referee articles for the Journal of Military Ethics, which I'll now do the commercial for. Here it is, read it and now it's said. It is the world's foremost peer review journal for professional military ethics. It is also incidentally the world's only peer review journal for professional military ethics. But still, even with competition or more competition, we would have been up there. One thing that we come across sometimes is an article that will obviously be very intelligent. Written by someone who masters her or his field absolutely perfectly, which makes your mind boggle. But does it really get anywhere or does it just discuss something internally between two philosophers? So there is one Kantian discussing with another Kantian what the categorically imperative actually means. There is nothing wrong about that. It brings philosophy forward and maybe some points down the line, brings the whole subject of ethics and maybe even professional military ethics forward. But it's not really about the world that we inhabit. So we have as our rule of thumb that what we publish should speak to you, should speak to highly intelligent practitioners of the military matters. Now, what happens then with some of these purely internal philosophers debates is, of course, that they seem to others to be really about nothing. So I tried to find some good philosopher's jokes to illustrate what I'm saying. There is one great one about two people meeting and the one says to the other, didn't I meet you in wonderful Newport? And the other says, no, I've never been to Newport. And the first says, well, I haven't either, must be two others. It doesn't really have any sort of reference. You can speak, what were they actually talking about? What was this? I'll come back to some others later. Now, I am going to speak about a particular debate that some of you will probably say comes across as such a purely philosopher's debate. It is the debate about the moral equality of combatants. It is one that has been set in motion by several thinkers over a long time, but it has not least been ignited during the last 10 to 15 years by philosophers Jeff McMahon and David Rodin, among others. So as almost to create two different debates. I was at a conference in Stockholm in May where Jeff McMahon and others put forward parts of what they call the revisionist just war theory. Lots of people there, and I asked them about such things as a journal of military ethics and asked if many of them were going to the ISMI conference next week, that is the International Society of Military Ethics, which is the foremost body of professional military ethics. Well, most of the philosophers who were there had never heard of ISMI. They knew nothing about that conference and generally did not really know what that other debate was about, what we would call professional military ethics. So you end up with these interesting conversations where you wonder, do they really know what they're talking about? In order to keep you awake, I'll take one more jocular example. There is a Norwegian who is going to a church conference in the US. He's bringing his wife and he's a little bit worried because she's a little bit incontinent, it's outside of town. So he's asking, how are things with toilet facilities? And he remembers that in the US, they normally don't say toilets. So he wonders, what should I use? WC, water closet. So he asks, how are things with WC? The guy who gets the letter doesn't quite understand what he's after, but then he understands, ah, it's our woodchapel. And the letter back has become a classic where he says, yes, we have this, which he of course reads as toilet. Most families go there during the weekend. They bring food and eat together and I love the last sentence of the letter which says, the acoustics are fantastic, every little sound can be heard. And you realize that it's a totally nonsensical debate because the one doesn't really know what the other is talking about. So what I'm trying to challenge us now, and I will take you on a little philosophical tour of this question, is whether this debate is among them, whether they are talking about something else, those who belong to what we now often call revisionist just war theory, or whether they actually challenge us in some important ways. Those of us who to a larger extent, we define ourselves as professional military ethicists, and who would at least aspire to address those questions that the undersecretary asked us to do. Those things that actually matter in how we meet people in the world. Last year, I was asked by Eric Patterson and James Turner Johnson to provide an overview of this debate for a book that is coming out on Ashgate right after Christmas. I think there are some other authors in this hall. And I was asked to address exactly this question. And both of these are quite skeptical. They said, this is a kind of weird debate, but please write 20 pages because we need to cover it. And I realized as I did so, that yes, there are some challenges here that are well worth thinking about. One final thing before I'll start properly. One reason why I think part of this philosophers' debate that has ended up in the revisionist just war theory comes across to many practitioners as a little bit strange, a little bit out of this world, is that it's people by professors, philosophers, who use a lot of imaginary examples. Have you heard about the trolley example? It's one of the favorites of philosophy. And a huge debate has come up around it called trolliology. This is the example which originally I guess comes from Philippa Foote being developed by James, by, by Judith Jarvis Thompson, about a trolley that is on the run, no brakes and it will hit five people down the road if you don't stop it. And the question is, can you push someone out in front of the trolley in order to stop it from killing those five people? You are intentionally pushing someone, but on the other hand, you are saving five people, could you do that? And many people have a certain worry, would I actually do it? So there are lots of variants on it. For instance, what if you could shift the tracks so that it just continues to another track? You don't have to push anyone, but on that track, there is only one person. And on the other, that's fine. Get the drift. And of course, many of us would ask, why are you coming up with that example? Because we have lots of examples that are much better from real life, where you don't have to discuss trolleys. And the danger, of course, is that in the end, you build up a lot of intuitions about what to do about runaway trolleys, but you rarely actually encounter them. I heard one some weeks ago, which was called the sledgehammer example. It was so weird, I still don't understand it. But there's a question of a child drowning in a pond. And you're wondering, I cannot save it, but there's a very strong guy next to me who can save it. But he will, in order to save it, use a sledgehammer to get it up. So the child will be hurt. Do you have responsibility for the child's scars? It's true. I heard it debated by several philosophers. I still don't understand quite the significance. Now, I'm not out to make fun of anyone here. But I think that's part of the suspicion. And it's one that we should be aware of in philosophy. And I'm sure a lot of other subjects as well, whether we use a sort of language, terminology, sort of examples that actually speak to what we're talking about, I think that is important. Now, I'll just start by saying that it is indeed a heated debate we are confronted with here. I'll present it to you in a second. To some, it will be well known. To others, it will be rather new, at least the way I'm getting at it. It is really about what we can call the groundwork or the loss of our conflict or as many lawyers say today, international humanitarian law. And the three-letter abbreviation I have here, MEC, stands for the moral equality of combatants. And I'll put it this way. One of the most celebrated features of the loss of our conflict, also known as international humanitarian law, is formal protection for prisoners of war. This provision rests on the presupposition that is the theme of my talk, namely the moral equality of combatants. Namely, a prisoner of war is not a convicted criminal. The prisoner of war is not being punished for wrongdoing. Rather, the prisoner of war has merely been removed from the battlefield and thereby stopped from attacking or endangering those who have taken him or her prisoner. This rule, and here comes a point, applies equally to both sides. And it is part of a larger convention that holds all soldiers to the same standards and gives them the same basic rights, including immunity for killing enemy soldiers when militarily necessary and in conformity with the loss of our conflict. All of you know this well. Many in this room have taught this exact teaching. The underlying assumption is that there is no moral or legal wrongdoing implied in being a soldier or officer per se. Members of fighting forces are prima facie, that is on the face of it, morally equal and until or unless they have committed war crimes or other crimes equally innocent before the law. This way of thinking has been challenged by what I just called revisionist just war theory. This moral equality of combatants builds on a distinction between the use oddbellum, the right to use force, and the use in bellow, the discussion about how we do it, rightly. The question of whether and when it is right to use armed force, use oddbellum, is according to this distinction to be decided on and answered by the political authorities of the realm, well represented here. The question of how to fight on the other hand, use in bellow, remains mainly the responsibility of the fighting forces. According to this distinction, the latter are not tasked with deciding on or judging the morality of any particular war. They are someone like a prison guard or officer of a court, a comparison often used. They serve an institution whose rules they obey. Prison guards or court officers, even if personally convinced that an accused or a prisoner is innocent, cannot themselves take action against the rules of the court and the legal system. Neither, of course, does anyone hold them personally accountable for incarcerating an innocent person. So there it is. This has actually sometimes been called the classical doctrine. That is probably inaccurate, because if you look back to St. Thomas Aquinas, he did not fully hold this teaching of moral equality of combatants, but I'll touch on this later. It's at least a teaching that has become widespread, as I said, it's in many ways the groundwork of much of modern law of armed conflict and it's famously held and argued for by Michael Walcher. Then comes the other side, because this is an idea that seems to have some counter-intuitive implications. If the difference between fighting for a just rather than an unjust cause has real significance and insisting on that significance is, after all, a central part of just war reasoning, then which side one fights for clearly has moral significance, doesn't it? It seems, morally speaking, awkward to argue that the acts of both sides simultaneously, including the actions of their soldiers, are to be counted as morally equal. But isn't that just what we said? Building on this line of thought, philosopher Jeff McMahon, as I've already said, interestingly, at Rutgers University, the same place where leading just-warrior historian James Turner Johnson is, and I thought they must be discussing with each other all the time, but they rarely even meet. Another example of these being two quite distinct debates. Anyway, Jeff McMahon, partly or wholly supported by a number of other writers, including Oxford philosopher David Rodin, has argued that the morally-qualitative combatant's thesis is unsustainable. It stands as a serious hindrance to a morally acceptable teaching about the ethics of war. A heated exchange of views has followed in the wake of McMahon's challenge, and this is no surprise, since we seem to be faced with a real quandary. It makes this little practical sense to ascribe blame to individual soldiers for the cause of the war in which they fight, as it makes theoretical sense to hold the fighters on the two sides to be fully morally equal. So there we are. What should we call this other view then? Well, we often call it asymmetry. And asymmetry theorists such as McMahon seem to resist the most immediately obvious practical consequences that could be drawn from their thesis, namely that some combatants should not be protected by the laws of war and conflict, right? If they are combatants for an unjust side, they have no right to do what they do. So therefore, if you take this argument seriously from McMahon, they are not protected by the laws of war and conflict. However, very few asymmetry theorists, including McMahon, reach that conclusion. But they say that there rests more of an obligation on each of us to ask questions about the justice of the conflict we are going into. And if we do not, but could have, then we have a larger responsibility for what it is we're doing. I will come back to that issue as well a little bit later. Hopefully my discussion will show that what the moral equality of combatant thesis most deeply implies is that there are indeed implausible and important philosophical reasons to question it also while it is important as a groundwork for international humanitarian law. I'll just say one more thing before I'm still on my introduction, I have a very long introduction, but I have a very short lecture, so don't worry. We'll get through, I do it that way. So Stu and you can wake up. Just say one more thing. From a moral point of view, the moral equality of combatants thesis, the one from Walzer, the one I just said underpin the laws of war and conflict, can be said to represent a double-edged sword, ethically speaking. On the one hand, as I've already said several times, it constitutes an important part of the ethical groundwork of, for instance, the rules of the Geneva Conventions and more generally the laws of war and conflict, stressing not least the protections that are due to non-combatants and to prisoners of war and the accompanying duties incumbent on combatants. On the other hand, it seems to justify actions in pursuit of manifestly unjust goals, since any soldier fighting for any cause as long as he or she obeys the orders of a sovereign authority and does not commit manifest war crimes, has full immunity and the full right to kill soldiers on the just side of the conflict. So there you have it. That's the quadrant. So let me try to summarize this. The moral equality of combatants view is built on firstly the idea that soldiers cannot be expected to investigate or know about the use ad bellum. That is not their job. The use ad bellum and use in bello are indeed distinct. The soldier has a duty to fight for what the state deems worth fighting for. The other question that is the one that triggers McMahon is, but who can rightly be killed? The model that Michael Walzer uses in his book, Just an Unjust Wars, is that when you are a soldier, you sometimes somehow lose your immunity. I mean, normally no one has the right to shoot at you. Suddenly, others have a right to shoot at you. How did that happen? Well, according to Walzer, it's because you are part of a military system and you don the uniform and you become a danger to the other side. And so you lose that. But what McMahon asks is, well, but if you fight for the just side, you are defending your own country, you have done nothing to lose your right to live. How can it be that it can be rightful to actually kill you? That is the challenge and that is what we call the asymmetry thesis. Okay, I'll give you an overview of the main arguments in the debate. Now the lecture actually starts. So I prepared it well, have a time. First, as I've already touched on, one argument is called the ignorance and duress argument. It's an off-sided argument in favor of moral equality of combatants, formulated by among others, philosopher Daniel Zupan. It's a claim that ignorance exculpates the individual soldier and that puts all soldiers regardless of sight or cause on an equal footing. That is that we cannot expect that a soldier should know or can know whether what he or she is fighting for is just. The ignorance argument emphasizes the cognitive aspect of the relationship between the use oddbellum and the use in bellow. The ignorance argument is predicated on the idea that soldiers cannot in all fairness be expected to have the ability to judge the justice of the words they fight, even if we morally speaking had wanted them to do so. Most soldiers are subject to a certain upbringing and political culture, possibly including propaganda, brainwashing, which are included and inculcated in them that they are to obey their superiors and protect their state. How are they reasonably to be expected that they should not fight any particular war? Furthermore, a soldier will often pay a heavy price for disobedience. Further strengthening the intuition of the moral equality of combatants that soldiers on either side simply cannot be expected not to fight. A further argument pertaining to states where propaganda and brainwashing are not prevalent and now we're in our democratic societies and where citizen will not suffer that severely from protesting against military service holds that the justice of wars is notoriously difficult to judge. It is an extremely hard question. And when we keep discussing these things, often many years after a conflict and we're still not clear, was it just or was it not? Should we then expect that individual soldiers and officers should make up their mind about this and draw conclusions from that? Against these claims, Jeff McMahon and others, including Judith Lichtenberg, have answered that asymmetry, that is the other view, the view that unjust soldiers do not have the same rights as soldiers fighting for just cause. That view does not imply that all unjust soldiers are individually liable or culpable for participation in an unjust war. In most cases, they say individual soldiers can indeed be exculpated due to ignorance or lack of actual choice and should not be punished for their mere participation in war. The primary point of McMahon's asymmetry doctrine is not to exact legal punishment of individual soldiers. Rather, the doctrine emphasizes that the use of armed force by unjust and just parties who arm conflict is not to be placed on an equal moral footing. From this follows, most especially, that what we can broadly call the chain of command on the manifestly unjust side of a war has a responsibility and culpability for that side's acts of war, which is basically different from, indeed, asymmetrical to the responsibility of those on the presumably just side. Exactly what conclusions to draw from that is unclear. When we prod these theorists, they have different views on this. But even those things that clearly fall within what we would call the loss of armed conflict, standard use in Bello should be differently judged if it is done by someone who really has no right to do so because they are on the unjust side of a war. Much more could be said about that. But I'll go to the second argument often put forward in favor of the moral equality of combatants thesis. This argument takes as it's pointed departure the fact that the military establishment is a collective. Thus, war must rightly be understood as a relation between or among collectives that rather than as a set of relations among individuals. Legal scholar called Chris Kutso has written excellently on this, has held this fact to be decisive. It is a soldier's nation, not the soldier as an individual who is at war. There's an echo here of the exculpation aspect of the ignorance argument, but the emphasis rests to a larger extent on the collective quality of the military enterprise. You somehow are not yourself in a real way. You are part of something that is bigger, a collective quality of the military enterprise. The collective is an ordered community with internal norms of authority and obedience in which individuals legitimately take part. This legitimacy flows from the fact that a nation has a right to organize such collectives, and while they may be condemned for their actions as a collective, those who take part in such collectives as individuals merely perform the political tasks that all citizens can legitimately perform and even be expected to perform. So this is in other words, a fully legitimate job. Like being a police officer or a shopkeeper. This is the sort of thing that we expect societies to have. And then you cannot be held guilty for doing it if you are part of that collective. Rousseau famously said in the social contract much the same. He said, war is not a relationship between one man and another in which individuals are enemies only by accident, not as men, nor even as citizens, but as soldiers, not as members of the fallen land, but as its defenders. Finally, any state can only have other states and not men as enemies, in as much as it is impossible to fix a true relation between things of different natures, says Rousseau. So that is the nature of war. It is between groups or between states. Dan Zupin has developed this argument for the moral equality of combatants further by defending the right of the state to organize such collectives and to uphold rules of obedience and authority within them. A citizen soldier, as Zupin denotes the soldier who does take part in the collective enterprise, is morally equal to any other individual who takes part in another state's prima facie legitimate political collective. As long as one does not clearly know, or at least clearly should know, that one state or its institutions are wholly illegitimate, both the soldier and the collective, meaning the military force fight with impunity as long as they respect the laws of war. It's part of a social contract. Jeff McMahon, as you can expect, has taken issue with this argument for the moral equality of combatants. He holds the collectivist defense, essentially that the collectivist defense essentially makes it permissible for individuals to do as part of a collective what no one would otherwise be admitted or allowed to do. So that what is obviously morally wrong suddenly becomes right, says McMahon. Does that make any sense? He says this presupposes a form of moral alchemy to which it is difficult to give credence. McMahon asks us to see the implausibility of this view by reflecting on the problem from the point of view of the soldier on the just side of a war. And here in many ways comes the crux because McMahon's argument is very much centered around individual rights. And the basic individual right is the right not to be killed. And a soldier on the just side of an armed conflict has done nothing to lose that right.  Each soldier fights for a justified side and cause in an armed conflict, say in self-defense against an aggressive invasion, has done nothing as an individual or as part of a collective to deserve being killed. Hence the fact that the soldier on the unjust side of the conflict acts on behalf of a collective does nothing to lessen the wrongfulness of his or her lethal action. There may, as I've already said, exist exculpating conditions for the individual soldier, but the collective still acts wrongly and the individual combatant is part of that collective. He or she, to the extent there is a reasonable opportunity to do so, and we would be dealing here in practice with the literate informed soldier of the 21st century, should ask serious moral questions about the legitimacy of fighting. The soldier cannot simply hide behind the facade of the collective. So that's argument number two. As a soldier, you are acting on behalf of a collective and you are not responsible except for when you, as an individual, transgress the loss of armed conflict. Number three and the last one is the following. And this is one that Michael Walzer famously spends quite a lot of time on. He stresses that war is and should be a rule-governed activity. The rules of war are of immense importance. They shield non-combatants from harm. They protect the rights of prisoners of war. They help decide which weapons can rightfully be used and generally restrained armed forces from unbridled brutality. From the morally quality point of view, from Walzer's point of view, from the loss of armed conflict point of view, this concern comes up when faced with the Yosemite doctrine. Because once we hint that the rules of war are not absolute, you can start chipping away at them. There isn't this equality that they said there was. Then we also stand in danger, say they, a weakening the already fragile framework that helps us avoid the worst excesses of war. I'll quote shortly Adam Roberts, who many of you will know, a leading legal scholar. And I understand when I hear him speak about this issue that he is not just worried about the slight difference of interpretation from some other philosophers, but he believes that this is a very, very dangerous doctrine. It actually stands in danger of unraveling much of the groundwork of the loss of armed conflict. The gist of this argument is closely related to the theme of this conference, and thanks again to Martin for convening it, namely the professional codes of conduct. Being a member of the military, regardless of where and in what service, generally implies a set of rules and standards that all should identify with. This is what it means to be a professional. And for the proponents of the moral equality of combatants, this is a crucial argument for moral equality between combatants on different sides. Furthermore, and I guess many of you will already have this in the back of your mind when you hear my arguments, when seen from a bystander point of view, it can be highly advantageous not to have to judge who is right and who is wrong. Civilian protection is a brilliant example. If what we are after is protecting the civilians in an area, if you should go in there and say, well, some are more culpable than others and don't deserve the same sort of protection, many would say that that makes little sense and is even quite dangerous. Most famously, if you represent the Red Cross and strive to ensure that the rules of war are respective, you are better off applying the rules to both sides impartially, period. Anything else just messes up the whole picture. Greater respect will then also be gained for such rules when both sides know that the rules are being administered impartially. Just mentioned to you here, if you want an example to use of this line of thought, famously used by Walzer, it is General Irwin Rommel's disagreement with and refusal to obey the command of orders of October 1942 that allowed soldiers and officers to kill prisoners of war. As many of you will know, Rommel did not obey that order, indeed tore it up and said that no decent soldier would do this and says, Walzer, even though he was on the wrong side of a war, clearly, we laud him for that. This point also leads us to a deep-seated worry among moral equality defenders, namely that the asymmetry argument by focusing on the justice or injustice of the warfare that is being waged will also have to conclude that some non-combatants on the unjust side should in some cases lose their immunity. The reasoning would be that many technically considered to be non-combatants by the current laws of armed conflict, for instance, propagandists for an unjust war, are as much to blame for the fighting and thus as instrumental in and important to the de facto criminal activity of unjust war as lawful combatants are. The logical conclusion of the asymmetry doctrine will be according to this argument that in the same way as just combatants are not liable to be attacked, morally speaking, unjust non-combatants are thus liable being partakers in a criminal enterprise. Now, if you draw that conclusion in practice, but it's worth noting. I'll quote Adam Roberts again. He says, at a time when use in bellow is under considerable pressure, not least from both sides in the war on terror, a philosophical, cum-legal approach that provides some basis for relativizing the application of the law on account of the alleged justice of the cause could only too easily be misused. For example, to minimize still further the already attenuated body of rules applying to detainees. Even if it was in no way the intention of those exploring and questioning the moral equality of combatants, this could be the unintended and unwelcome consequence. End of quote. I think that arguably sums up a key apprehension about the asymmetry doctrine from the point of view of those defending the moral equality thesis. The reply from Jeff McMahon and others consists in a distinction between the moral and legal parts of the argument. As McMahon puts it in a discussion of prisoners of war, just combatants have rights as prisoners that unjust combatants lack. When their existence as prisoners imperils the lives of their captors, unjust combatants are protected against being killed only by agreement or convention. But just combatants retain in war the same right not to be killed that they possessed outside the context of war. End of quote. In other words, morality goes further. Morality goes deeper than the law and it is more morally discriminating. Well, that is the way it probably should be and has to be according to his argument. But that doesn't mean that the moral pointed without practical force or meaning. According to McMahon, it makes a strong statement about injustice and about the individual soldiers and officers moral responsibility in the face of manifest injustice. So let me go to the conclusion. According to someone like Adam Roberts, also James Turner Johnson holds the same view. Much of the viability of the laws of armed conflict is at stake. I can put it in the following way. The contemporary debate about moral equality of combatants arguably pits an individualistic understanding of moral responsibility as represented by someone like McMahon. Against a more collectivist understanding of the military enterprise as represented and formulated by Michael Walzer. Both strands in the debate, however, seem to agree that retaining an overall symmetry in legal rights and liabilities makes sense since it would minimize the appeal to contested judgment on the battlefield and since the alternative would introduce a number of problems that are notoriously hard to adjudicate. First of all, who is just and who is unjust. Who can be said to understand that he or she is acting manifestly unjustly and who is plausibly ignorant. Who should decide on the overall justice of a war? And how would a legal framework look which took the moral inequality of combatants into considerations? Proponents of the asymmetry doctrine harbor the hope that a move away from moral equality of combatants and, nonetheless, even if only on a moral level, would contribute to placing more responsibility on combatants, making them more willing, and I think we here come close to what they're after, more willing to refuse engagement in unjust military enterprises before they become fully immersed in them. I think that lies behind much of it. I hope that as enlightenment grips the world, if that ever happens, the Kantian dream of actually individual citizens taking a stand and thereby saying, no, I don't want to fight in this war, will become much more widespread and that the basis of that is exactly this questioning, whether it is right to be a soldier if you know you are so on what you could call the unjust side. Now, I could have said much more but I think the important thing is, does this debate matter? Well, to a certain extent it matters because it takes up the question of the role of ethics and morality. Both parties unite in their insistence that morality matters and that is no trivial agreement, I would say. There is no general permission for combatants whether just or unjust under any circumstances or according to either of the two sets of arguments to pursue what they see as their legitimate goal by any means. Human beings are beings with dignity and rights and they should not be killed unless strictly necessary and unless moral arguments coalesce to make it permissible. It seems to both parties in the debate that the loss of armed conflict as we have them today to a large extent serve the purpose of safeguarding the moral baseline. The suspicion of the asymmetry theorists is that the laws and what Walter calls a war convention nonetheless rests on shaky ground. It reminds me of an old cartoon which I love which it's from the New Yorker. It shows two men standing in front of a straight tower in Pisa. Has anyone seen the Leaning Tower? It's really leaning. I saw it this summer, I hadn't seen it before. It's much more leaning than I thought. Well, this is a straight tower. Two men are standing in front of it. It's the 13th century. The one is obviously the master builder and he whispers to the other, I have cheated with the foundation but no one will notice. I think that sums up McMahon's worry. That somehow there is an inconsistency in the foundation because we don't fully take seriously that the laws of armed conflict actually allow is for unjust actions to happen with impunity. Well, this is what the debate is about, the moral foundation of the rights and liabilities of combatants, whether it is solid or not. And at least I think that it is one of those philosophers debates that does not just boggle the mind, that does not just bring up some weird sort of argument that in some extreme circumstance could be valid. And I think the whole debate and the questions that Jeff McMahon and others have asked of us who belong to what we call more traditional professional military ethics are worth listening to at least they make us charge our batteries, think more thoroughly through, help us fill the tank. And I'll finish there with a great story I heard which to me is an argument for why we sometimes need philosophers. The guy who's out driving, his car stops, doesn't really understand mechanics. So we call some mechanic who comes and looks at the car and says, but your tank is empty. And he asks, oh, have I been driving like that for a long time? And that's what I sometimes wonder whether we sometimes need to fill up the tank a little bit more, that we go on, take things for granted without really thinking through the moral foundations. Thank you very much. Mostly because I think it's practically a bit dangerous in its implications. If one grants that there still will be states that fight wars on a fairly regular basis. On the other hand, I take your point. You know, everyone in this room, he saw the Americans are volunteers. So when they volunteered, they gave up a good chunk of their moral autonomy by doing so, in particular, because there is no selection of selective conscientious objection in our tradition. So I think if you pushed the McMahon argument all the way, you would ask questions about the moral basis of voluntary military service and into a system that doesn't allow selective objection, wouldn't you? Yes, I think that, well, on one hand, it could be seen as an argument for an all volunteer force because that would actually make it possible for people to think through rather than what you would have if you had the draft where no one would have that opportunity. But on the other hand, you are quite right. And there is probably no surprise in the fact that most of the proponents of the asymmetry thesis are also strong proponents of selective conscientious objection. I think that there should be more room for individual soldiers and officers taking stands even in the middle of a conflict, which, of course, to most military ears sounds preposterous because it destroys the whole fabric of the contract, the military contract, the way in which a military works. If you want to read anything good about that, we have several excellent articles in the Journal of Military Ethics. Okay, questions from the floor, please.


Your coca-cola bottler presents Claudia Claudia based on the famous play and novels by Rose Franken Brought to you transcribed by your friendly neighbor who bottles coca-cola Relax and while you're listening refresh yourself. Have a coke and now Claudia Still yawning all day April showers almost April Winters as good as gone in a month. Everything will be green Junkals will be out air will smell better than a bakery always your stomach You're certainly in an eating mood tonight. Well, guess it's all this rain. I Hate it during the day, but there's something nice about it at night. Isn't there? nice Sides it'll make them yellow where this spring. Yeah much yellow What? Daffodils, of course It it makes them jump further to what? Daffodils now frogs. Oh, oh frogs. I'd almost forgotten about frogs They'll be coming up from the bottom of the brook any day You know David, I bet you frogs think springs made especially for them. I sure do David Bobby'll think springs made especially for him too. I don't know. I don't I don't think he's quite old enough yet He's only nine months. You know perfectly. Well Papa Get an old in it. You know actually he looks years younger than the day he was born David you think he'll notice spring. Oh beyond a doubt every bud this first, you know This kind of too bad that a first spring comes when you're so young our next child will arrange it differently. All right Still raining and probably rain all night. I don't mind just so long as it makes spring greener Oh, David Aren't you glad you're here and not any place else in the world? You're certainly in a rhapsodic mood tonight young woman Well Man likes to think that he's the cause for his wife Rhapsodizing not a change in the months months wouldn't mean a thing without the man though Especially April Mrs. Norton Are you professing affection for this poor dilapidated unworthy server that's much too forward much Kiss me begging for a kiss isn't forward. I suppose not a bit. It's only human. Oh It's only wonderful being human You sleepy Good we can Hey, what's my listen don't reach for that paper. Why not you don't want to read now Who says I don't I says whenever you don't feel like reading nobody else in the whole world is allowed to read about time You found that out. I found it out a long time ago. I was trying to forget Well, I'll even tell you why you don't want to read. All right.  I do you do don't you Come to think of it. I do Oh Feels good.  I love it and slush to my knees The only trouble with rain is the city I agree I mean when you're dressed right and you don't have to look as if you're going to the opera then walking in the rain is wonderful I know what you meant Wouldn't you hate being married to a woman who didn't like it? No, but not only hate it. I would abhor it Abhor It's a delicious word. You like remind me use it sometimes It's really dark out. Stay careful. Don't trip. I never trip You trip this time that was a stumble We're here Say David, I don't think it's raining as much on top of the hill as it is at the bottom At least it feels that way. Of course Why of course well, the drops haven't fallen so far So they hit less hard so it feels like less rain. Oh, you're so clever Come here under the walnut tree that old tree. It wouldn't keep a sparrow dry. Well, you're not a sparrow. So come on David come on if I were a sparrow, I would be sparrow pecked love this silly walnut tree Remember what a fight we had in mr. Tucker over it. I don't think it's really walnut I don't want to hear Always be a walnut to me and you will always be a plain nut to me. I knew you were going to say that I love this tree like a walnut more than that I I think I love it because fighting over it was the first thing that made me start to feel as if I Wanted to own this farm. Oh, you liked was the fight. You didn't want to be jipped. Well at first, but Then it grew And the tree itself became important and then the brook itself and then the lower pasture itself till a whole farm Do you know David? I'm not sure I think I suspected it, but didn't want to know I was a fraud.  You didn't say anything. You just left me to trash it out myself and you won I um, I knew you would yes. I won but with your faith not mine It was a whole year ago Almost exactly a year Seems longer Seems shorter too You uh, you sorry?  You need a windshield wiper cold me perfect You too But it's time. I think you've had enough rain. Oh, no, no not yet Oh, David. I wish I could see the house All I can see is a little light If it were on the other side of an ocean Lights downstairs Mama must have gone to sleep It's nice to think of her in the house Nice to think of you in the house too Come on David, it walks so fast. Well, come on. You're dawdling. Of course. I'm dawdling. I don't want to go in The rain's so warm so sweet. Well, then let's stop by the bar and take a look at the animal Now that is a good idea. Hey, watch out for the puddle Ah I stepped right in. I certainly did and flashed it all over me clumsy On the contrary perfect aim Oh, David Do all barn doors squeak as pretty as ours does a fatuous remark if I ever heard one Wasn't it though? Entrenched David Didn't tell me majesty was back. Yeah, she came back this afternoon. Nobody told me Well, is she pregnant? She hasn't told me Well, you can't wait for that to find out. I guess I'll have to Well, maybe you can but I can't. Yeah. Well, what do you propose to do propose to talk to her like a mother? I see a good farmer should certainly be able to tell when his own call is with calf Come on quick She'll be justice with calf in two minutes as she is now. I want to close the door To love the smell of a barn it ought to be bottled Ruby, hello Ruby. You still awake? Oh such a lovely pig. Ruby is with calf. All right. Just look at her Oh any day now? Yeah, any and a good litter too Oh, I love it This barn is getting just like a maternity ward without all the pampering and the fuss Animals really are superior They go around having babies all the time as if we're perfectly normal. It is I know It's just that ruby and majesty make me feel as if I weren't doing my fair share It does bobby and No prospects Hey, look abner has his head under his wing.  Oh, I'm sorry abner sleep later in the morning instead Here we are majesty Hello there. Well, it's good to have her back in the barn, isn't it? But the heifers, mr. Two. Yeah Well, David, what do you think you mean about yes about I told you it's too early to tell nonsense Majesty you and I are going to have a little chat So tell me all Now lovely girl just look at me with those deep brown eyes David what? Yes, yes, what? She's going to oh, you can't tell I certainly can I looked her in the eye The eye has nothing to do with it has so Yes, majesty's pregnant. I know you use tea leaves.  Now how about going back to the house? I'm ready It really belongs to us animals and all It's almost too much not if you know it life's very generous Majesty's going to have a calf ruby piglets Goes on and on doesn't it? Yeah, it's still raining now this time watch out for the puddles No, David In a way, it's not even so terrible about dying Spring always comes again Majesty's heffero have a heifer She'll go on Will have been part of it Our children will have children They'll go on Our same trees will stand The land we walk on will be here For the end of time Yes It's almost as if a person Never died, isn't it? Not if a person Really shook hands with life I really never knew until now Terrible part must be not being born I'd hate not to have been born I'd hate you not to have been born too You would very much What a stroke of luck we were born at the same time darling We could so easily have missed each other By centuries Not a chance darling David oh darling There's nothing I could kiss in the rain The parts of claudia and david on this program were played by kathryn bard and paul crab tree And the entire production is supervised and directed by william brown maloney During the day when you take time out from housework to listen to a radio program In the evening when the family gathers to hear a show together You'll find that good entertainment is even better when you listen refreshed with ice cold coca-cola When there's a case of coke on hand and plenty of bottles cooling in the refrigerator The pause that refreshes is only half a minute away at any time With today's episode the current series of claudia presentations on the air come to an end Claudia and david and all the members of the cast and your friendly neighbor who bottles coca-cola And all of us who've been with the presentation of the show would like to thank all of you who've listened to it so faithfully We leave you with sincere regret and with the hope that we shall someday meet again In the meantime, this is joe king saying Whoever you are whatever you do wherever you may be When you think of refreshment think of coca-cola Or coca-cola makes any pause the pause that refreshes and ice cold coca-cola is everywhere


due несколько య్వ minimalist వనటిరరంనిమాఓషస tiene యత Cake 26 నోగదిక్రార్లాva  WOODRUFF-MI… plicab---- want to... wat van auge  Understanding  GSA  end ), Canada ව � Grill ඩපා දෙය ලානyll අපා southernතිතය වන් ැපේෙය පුන් බත් ඛත් කැල්ලpal, ආී, අවී,භිජ කර්තිරtawa�ටට ඔණාතිස යුන්ත çමඣ�를ancedේ අ�ree ගා. 2 offspring ත්ලණාතබ්෴කති, අයතා, ලේසඅ ada abrir right now they are COVID so ーい Fish They are cooking up figures because how is it? It's hard to choose in terms of economics. They are struggling. One worker in the HLE is managing to bring down inflation. Hey, I was on death row. Even when? How were you on death row? How were you on death row? Yes, what a quick day. Yes, you are rested. 128 days. Understandably. And contested. And some of us, we stood with you. I stood with you. But you were not on death row. So why are you exaggerating? Why are you exaggerating? Even me, Mualinjiketi, you arrested me for attishanidat mutiny. You arrested me for mutiny. Nainanjivika pona nainat naini pa death row. Nainanjivika pona nainat naini pa death row. No, that is exaggeration. And you were on death row. And you were on death row. Nainanjivika pona naini pa death row. No, that is exaggeration. And you were on death row. And you were on death row. Reputed you were on death row. In psychology, aida webati miso-menya. Webati miso-menya. Tellusele a, a. Tellusele a, it is a condition that must be a problem. And this is what I am saying that ba haq'an indai itchilem could be having a problem. It could be having a problem. And that is why I am saying ubu ubu lweli wweli wawan fum but at the end of the day kutensha chialu. Ba haq'an indai itchilem but at the end of the day wweli wweli wweli wweli wweli wawan mytho-menya. Let him be tested. That is what I am saying. That is what I am saying. Let him be tested. And we have got hospitals that can test him. It is another science. It is another field. Psychiatric and the psychotherapy. It is just another science. And we have got physical physicians. I mean, you expect that where I went, where I went some believe that we know the son. They should be able to understand this. Don't take it out of context. I'm simply saying it could be a mental disorder. Let him be going to check it. That's all I'm doing. So, you can't say Even if they're not according to my bye bye bye bits  deity of the gods ை  investors imeto  catching 再 機會 enen ڈ น xi  end 款 겁 ڈ                                                                                బల్గడిమేలేడా, వర్త్imme బ్నె, � Bareq ఉయషి shrinking等一下 నియా రోమో ఆడిసి నికా.మjisమికృ శికకి కికా. ట్తిదర Consumer ఇరాద్కౠ� గైఀ మరా была థెరిల్ పోనుఎనిల్ర్ల౎నాపచిర్ండిల్నేఆందస్రందటినిసందర్ను. నేనికేనికునుక్మికి. మారిగెసోలిసందార్చిక్స్నేని.  início  fulfilling   diameter  之 life  ew                                          t  braces  inflammatory ELIPE న� Split మోటాచి క౮ండతschool మమigmat మ౤ా sac ాదెలసి ఆటిఇ USS ði Financial  Іta にちは  theatrical phas o  próxima  Qurock  last atherine , shag you don't have to start scrounging around looking for them they're just there before you and this one is doing the same thing is playing lip service the same lip service that the president pays is the same that this one is doing now land that we know this one is let me take you for a wait for it my long come up a movie tv my long come up a movie 20 hours in come up a movie tv make sure that cadders don't come to disturb us the program will go on at 20 hours let there be no one you know to come and disturb us and i want to go back to the copper boat i'm going back to the copper boat and i want to go to other areas also to go and talk to people i am a political party leader i have a political party leader i've got the rights to go on radio on radio and tv and talk to people that is a job of an opposition that is a job of an opposition so very good this one is so you have spoken well you have spoken well but let me not have those the extra vahs at extra vah i don't know whatever it is those militia that you are putting up together because that those are militia to me at extra vah a rapid response why is upnd having this extra vah a extra vah rapid response for what who are those don't we have the police to maintain law and order why is upnd coming up with this you know win over extra vah rapid response that's what they were calling themselves that they are extra vah rapid response they have come in who are they who are these extra vah rapid response who are they why isn't the police doing their job so i don't really take what this one is so seriously it's all it's all like somebody saying nato forces you know this this the issue of saying in pf it was happening like that pf here here because of nato forces people voted out pf pf here here so it is it is preposterous for anyone when we say you are doing violence you start saying but pf but pf no just stop the violence we talk about dictatorship no but pf just be democratic simple you don't have to talk about pf stop the violence stop the violence stop the violence it is as simple as that but i don't know if these people are going to stop you know being violent and being dictatorial i don't think so because they have got so many failures that's why they don't want us to talk they want to silence us they want to silence us they want to silence us in nene naban pin gila they have even been discussing in their blogs they want to send me to jail they want to send me to jail that's what they want they are looking for a case that they can fix me with they are even praying that that case of assault which is in court can end up in a conviction i know i've been told i know you are pulling strings you are pulling strings to have me convicted to have me convicted so that you send me to jail but why are you sending me to jail i'm not a criminal andry my hands are clean i've not beaten anyone neither have i stoned anyone with anything i have not but you want to send me to jail


There's been a whole lot of nothing news behind the scenes of Bond these past couple of years, mostly news of we haven't started filming yet, there is no script, nothing is going on and those then become the only breadcrumbs we're getting and us fans start discussing. Reasoned Bond news has been in that same vein too. Casting director Debbie McWilliams for instance made some comments on how there indeed is no casting going on at the moment. There is nothing yet. She mentions how the casting process used to go for Daniel Craig with Casino Royale and how they weren't looking for a particularly young Bond in that moment of time. And then that nothing news becomes the news. And the strangest comment to me was how she was quoted in saying, you know, it's not unusual for there to be quite a big gap between Bond's. It has been known to have a five year gap, so no, nothing. A five year gap? What is she talking about? Lazenby was casted as the new Bond in the standard two year gap after Connery. So was Roger Moore, just two years after Diamond's Off Forever. So was Timothy Dalton, only two years after a few to a kill. For Brosnan of course he's correct, but not because the filmmakers wanted to, plus they had multiple scripts ready in this particular period. It was only delayed because of the lawsuits and the legal fights Eon was in in the early 90s. So that one really doesn't count. Craig was casted in a four year gap. So what does he mean it has been known to have a five year gap? It just seems like such a delusional comment trying to rationalize how they still have nothing going on. It reminded me of that one comment that Michael G Wilson made when they didn't have a title yet for Bond 25. Another throwaway comment that had the opposite evidence. Anyway, apart from news, we also get the usual rumors you just have to take with a grain of salt. Get those Aaron Taylor Johnson rumors, which clearly weren't based on anything either. But the latest is Phoebe Walter-Britz is supposedly Barbara Broccoli's top choice at the moment. But then, as soon as I want to talk about that, these other rumors float about of Dennis Villeneuve being the frontrunner to Direct Bond 26. I don't know how these things come to life. We know there is nothing going on behind the scenes of Bond. Barbara is mentioned to be quite occupied with whatever other stuff she has going on. But Bond definitely doesn't have priority for her at the moment it seems. So again, this stuff really is nothing. But let's just discuss both of these nothings. First of all, the Phoebe Walter-Britz rumors. She contributed in the writing for No Time to Die. Even though this is just a rumor, I wouldn't be surprised of her getting involved again. We know Barbara Broccoli is a fan of her and would probably indeed consider bringing her back for Bond 26, maybe even at the helm this time. Even if there are people out there who are fans of Phoebe Walter-Britz's writing, you gotta wonder what experience would she have directing action? I am all for getting the first woman to direct a Bond film if she happens to be a great choice with great understanding of Bond and a clear vision of what to do with the character. But Phoebe Walter-Britz even admitted she knew very little about it not so long ago. Her writing mostly seems to just cater to social justice fans and keep everything in line with progressive thinking. You can totally identify those moments in No Time to Die as he contributed on. Really not being part of the plot, but being brought in out of left field so audiences can do a little social justice airpunch. I mean, I just find myself eye-rolling at those moments. So in your face, like this is the 2020s, we need to do liberal thinking and here's a reminder and for me it just falls flat. Not to hate on anyone who feels opposite on me on this, but to me instead of bringing in a female director who gets Bond and is passionate about him, what would make someone who even stated she knows very little about James Bond the top choice? Just to me, that just sounds like catering to progressive thinking for the sake of just that, instead of actually focusing on the potential quality she could bring to direct a James Bond film. I think the focus should be on what would Bond fans like to see in a Bond film, instead of what kind of ideology could we bring to the franchise to update it in line of thinking of today. So no, if these rumors held any merit, they don't excite me personally. Then there is the Denis Villeneuve rumors, also supposedly the number one choice of Barbara Broccoli. So I guess they're both her number one choice, according to these rumors then. Of course for No Time to Die, his name got dropped too. Craig supposedly really wanted him at the time, but he was doing Dune. In 2021 he starred in some podcast called Happy Sad Confused and he admitted he is a huge Bond fan and stated, But the answer would be a massive yes. I would deeply love to one day make a James Bond movie. It's a character that I've been with, like everybody, since my childhood. I have massive affection for Bond. It would be a big challenge for people to try and reboot it after what Daniel did. Daniel Craig brought to Bond was so unique and strong and probably unmatchable. He's the ultimate James Bond. I can't wait to see Carey's movie. I'm very excited. I'm one of the biggest Bond fans. So at least he seems much more of a fan of the series. I know fans would want to see him at the helm to direct a Bond film and yeah, while I'm kind of neutral on him myself, that rumor would excite me more than Phoebe Waller-Bridge. Personally, I would still advocate for a dream choice that would never happen, like Christopher Nolan doing an amazing trilogy in the Fane of the Dark Knight for Bond. Or maybe Martin Campbell, the one man who directed arguably the two best debuts for both Brosnan and Craig and is among the people responsible of updating and saving the franchise twice. I guess he's getting on a bit though. So what do you guys make of these rumors? Would you want Phoebe Waller-Bridge or Dennis Vilnyov to direct Bond 26 or would you have different choices too? Please like and subscribe and keep your eyes on the subscriber feed for next weekend when I'm finally planning to release the big one. Better click the bell icon for that one. See you guys in the next video.


QuickBooks Desktop 2024 Unearned Revenue Estimate Sales Order Receive Payment Forms. Get ready and some coffee because we're locking into some non-stop QuickBooks Desktop 2024. Here we are in our QuickBooks Desktop sample company file. We set up in a prior presentation using the enterprise version of QuickBooks Desktop so we can practice using the new Unearned Revenue feature. Under the view drop-down we have the hide icon bar selected. The open windows list selected. Open windows open on the left-hand side. Under the company drop-down we have the home page open. Under the reports we're going to look at the two major financial statement reports under company and financial like we do every time starting with the balance sheet report. Let's go to the customization change in the range in from 010127 tab, 123127 tab, fonts and numbers. I'm going to bring that font on up to 14 like we do every time. Okay. Yes, okay then. Then we're going to go to the reports drop-down again company and financial. This time the P, the L, the profit, the loss, the income statement. Change in that range. This time though from 010127 tab, 06327 and tab. And then I'm going to look at this on a month by month breakout, not the totals but on a month by month. And then let's go to the customize reports up top. We're going to customize and let's go to the fonts and numbers changing and bringing that up to 14. Okay. Yes. And okay. Let's actually go out one more month out to July. So I'm going to go 073127 at the end date. So we've been running our scenarios and kind of a side-by-side month-by-month type of breakout. We first started with a scenario where we didn't have any prepayment. Then we ran a scenario where we had a deposit on a large purchase like a surfboard in our example and we had a negative receivable, the old method and then we ran a scenario with the negative receivable subscription type of model for a magazine or a newspaper or a computer subscription model. And then we used the new feature first looking at a scenario where we have like the big deposit on a surfboard. Now we're going to look at the subscription scenario with the new feature not having a negative receivable but rather having a positive liability. So let's look at that over here on the home page. So we're imagining now that we sell something like newspapers or we sell a subscription model for our software, for example. In that case, what happens is we're going to get the money first. We're going to receive the payment before we invoice. So to properly record it, we shouldn't be recording revenue when we get paid but rather when we do the work. So this is the classic example in most book problems for unearned revenue in which case we're going to get paid for say like a year's worth of subscription, let's say, and then as the time passes, we should take it out of the liability account, which we're going to put it in when we get paid and remove it from a liability account to a revenue account. Now what usually generally happens is we're going to make the estimate. We might not make an estimate in this kind of model of a situation with a subscription, but we'll do the same starting point. We'll make the estimate. We'll lock people into the estimate with the sales order. These are non-financial transaction forms. And then from this point, instead of creating the invoice, which would record revenue, we're going to jump on over basically to the receive payment because we're going to get paid before we record the invoice because the invoice records the revenue. Now the receive payment would traditionally usually make a negative receivable if we don't have an invoice to tie it out to, but now we're going to make a positive unearned revenue with the new feature being turned on to allow us to put it into the negative revenue account. And then we can create invoices. Basically we're thinking like on a monthly basis to write down the unearned revenue and record the sales as they happen. So that's going to be the process. If I go down to the customer drop down and we go to the customer center, we ran a similar scenario, which I think was scenario number four here where we had a similar process, but this is with the negative receivable. So we made an estimate. We made a sales order and then we collected the payment all upfront. That payment created a negative receivable and then we made invoices to apply out to the payment as time passes. So internally from this page, this process is pretty nice from a bookkeeping standpoint, although not exactly correct from a financial reporting standpoint because if I go to my balance sheet until we pay it off, we're going to have that negative receivable in the client. Let me show you in a customer report reports drop down. We're going to go into customers and receivables and let's look at the customer balance detail. So we looked at let's make it a little bit larger. Let's go just to 12 this time. We're not going to go crazy to all the way up to 14 with this one because it's kind of a long report or wide report. Let's make it to 12 though. And then so we had this one here where we had that payment first and then these are being applied to it. So notice it's a negative number which is not correct because it should be a positive liability not a negative receivable but from a from just a a sub ledger perspective. It's quite easy to see in this format. So now we're going to do the other format where we're going to create a liability account. So as long as it's negative, it shouldn't be showing up in the customer side or the sub ledger for accounts receivable, but rather for some other sub ledger that we will set up. All right, so let's do that. We're going to go to the home page. First, let's make an estimate. So we'll do a same starting point the same starting point estimate and I'm going to call it then a similar name that we were calling the ones before so we can remember it's going to be five. I'm going to call it unearned revenue customer, which is a weird name for a customer. But the point is I'm trying to remember the scenario that we're running here. So we're going to say QuickBooks, add it, boom, boom. And this is going to be as of 070127 tab, tab, tab, tab. I'm going to make a new item by a similar name and we're going to make multiple items down here. And this is a method that might be used for a subscription type of model, which will make it easier to make our invoices monthly.


I Guys welcome to today's what I eat in a day as you saw I've already had a very busy morning It is currently only 8 a.m. And I have been to the gym did my strength training workout did my 30 minutes on the elliptical I actually just finished my coffee and I didn't show you what was in my coffee I plan on doing a video all about how I get protein in in my coffee in the morning But today my coffee was really simple. I did my collagen for her collagen peptides my just better fiber I'll link both of those down below and then today. I actually put in the core power elite 42 grams of protein shake because it was my strength training cardio day Which means that I'm burning a lot more calories and I'm needing that little extra bit of protein There's 230 calories and again 42 grams of protein. This is really good. I buy this at Sam's Club I know that you can buy this on Amazon so when I have a heavy workout day or if it's going to be a long time before I'm able to eat again and And my coffee actually needs to sustain me for a while I'll go ahead and use this one rather than the Elani or the regular fair life that are like 20 or 30 grams of protein So coffee is finished. I am going to fill up my water I'm using still those four C water enhancers that I bought off of nutrition. These are really really good I just ordered the Ultima ones off of Amazon. I'll link both down below for you I'll link the four C ones on netrition. I'll link the Ultima ones with electrolytes Sometimes I just feel like I need to recoup some electrolytes So I'll use the Ultima ones and then I'll also link my water bottle my Lululemon water bottle because it's pretty amazing Add the protein shake with all the protein. I'm not really eating breakfast I'm going to have a mid-morning snack and that should tide me over until lunch So I have the Ciggy's strawberry yogurt 15 grams of protein 11 grams of sugar 110 calories Super good really really clean ingredients I've been loving the Ciggy's yogurt and they were on sale at Sprout So I picked up quite a few and then I have the Trader Joe's peanut butter protein granola Let me just tell you how good that is with strawberry yogurt or berry yogurt It's kind of like peanut butter and jelly So I'm just going to weigh out 30 grams of the Trader Joe's peanut butter protein granola You can also pick up the Nature Valley honey and oat Protein granola and there's one other one I just figure if I'm gonna put granola on my yogurt I'm gonna get in some extra protein speaking of protein I did have a couple people requests that I share the number of grams of protein in my meals And then at the end of the day how many grams of protein that I ate because you know, I share points and calories So I'm gonna start doing that. I'm going to start letting you know how many grams of protein I'm eating in my meals and my snacks and how I'm reaching my protein goal every day in real time So let's put together some yogurt for breakfast. So there is my breakfast I mean, that's a lot of granola. So I have some ciggies yogurt topped with 30 grams of protein granola Working in my office all morning since I got ready got home from the gym had some breakfast It is just about lunchtime But lucky for me Troy is actually heading out to go golfing today with his dad Which is a really good thing because he loves to golf and he hasn't been able to Since moving to Arizona and his dad invited him today And it's lucky for me because I get the whole house to myself Which since moving has been quite the change at Troy was at work four days a week 12 hours a day He worked four tens when we lived in Washington and now he's home all the time I'm sure he agrees whenever we get a reprieve from each other for a little bit It's kind of nice to just have the whole house to ourselves I'm gonna pack him a cooler with some drinks and some snacks because a round of golf can take several hours And I want to make sure that he stays hydrated and that he has some snacks on hand I just picked up two of these insulated coolers I gave one to my father-in-law for father's day for golf So he has his I'm sure with him today And then I got one for our for us as well for golfing or for when we're out on road trips or for me If I'm out showing houses I can make sure I pack healthy lunches and healthy snacks So this is from my friend my foot and this is the large insulated lunch bag It is also a cooler tote bag. It is made of water-resistant fabric and it has a PEVA foil interior liner So it's really going to help keep your food nice and cold. It's a 15 liter capacity Which is enough to basically store 24 cans of coke And it's big enough to hold the essentials that a family needs for a picnic or for travel I really like the wide opening because I'm able to put you know His I'm able to put his meat stick in there and big bottles of water and Gatorade It has one front pocket two side pockets and an adjustable shoulder strap So you can either carry it on your shoulder or you can just carry it by the smaller handle And it can be it can be folded for easy storage It comes in great or black and it also comes in the 15 liter size Which is the one that I have and a 24 liter size, which is larger and it's $20 $20 for the 15 liter size and if you decide to get the larger one It's 32 and 99 which would be great for large family picnics I can't believe how affordable it was for how nice of quality is my father-in-law and my mother-in-law Loved it. In fact, my mother-in-law said ooh I can take this to pickle ball or when I go to shuffle boards and really handy again for camping picnics travel And we will absolutely get a lot of use out it out of it when Troy goes golfing with his dad And he also plays horses with his dad two days a week as well so that he can bring his drinks and snacks with him So I'll go ahead and link the life with lunch slash cooler bag down below for you So for lunch today, I'm actually going to have what I prepped in my meal prep If you miss this week's meal prep, definitely check it out because this has been such a good lunch for me So I prepped these lettuce wrapped BLT So I have two slices of turkey bacon some lettuce tomato a laughing cow cheese wedge And then I'm putting some avocado some raspberries a hard-boiled egg and a pre-portioned out little pack of Almond you could also put this on a wrap or bread whatever you want to do But first thing I'm going to do is actually weigh out 30 grams of avocado So there is 30 grams, which is actually almost an entire half of an avocado and then to assemble my little wrap I'm going to grab the lettuce.  I have some nuts for some added protein healthy fats I have my raspberries my hard boiled egg. Oh my gosh. This is such a good filling lunch It's this little snack plate like an adult lunch bowl It's so good and like crispy and refreshing. I love a good snack plate a good adult lunchable I have quite the captive audience when I'm eating my lunch. I got this one here Diesel's over here. He actually was begging a minute ago and I made him lay down and then this one Are you so tired Bobby?  Hi, baby. Okay. I just finished my lunch I'm gonna have a JoJo these are the Trader Joe strawberry lemonade JoJo's You guys these these are so delicious. You can see we still have a lot left I picked these up a couple weeks ago That's a huge win for me number one that there's still cookies left and number two that I can just have One cookie and move on so this is going to round out my lunch pretty exciting It's time to do a little bit of home Organization from the brand life with same brand that the cooler bag came from they actually sell Refrigerator organizer bins you get a set of eight of them and you don't have to just use these in your refrigerator I actually use these bins in my bathroom in my makeup vanity in my pantry Just anywhere that I want to be able to organize and these ones from life with were super are super super affordable I love just the added touch of the design on them. They are the clear clear acrylic They have handles on both sides and like I said, they're perfect for the refrigerator the pantry I store my makeup in these. I have these under the sink in my bathroom I mean, I really just use these everywhere in my house and I love that these came in a set of eight So one affordable price eight different storage containers So today I want to focus on my refrigerator and my pantry I have just a little bit more organizing to do since moving into our new house and after I did some Organization all I have left for my fridge were skinny bins And I actually wanted these a little bit larger ones just to help organize all those loose things that end up in your refrigerator So we always have just a ton of different cheeses in our refrigerator at all times You guys know this family loves cheese So I definitely want to take one of the life with bins and organize it with the cheese And then we always have these little no sugar added fruit cups as well And these are just loose items that roll around my refrigerator And then all my fun little snack packs and things that I buy as well So I'd like to have one of my life with bins that stores my hard-boiled eggs my snack packs my cheese sticks Because like I said things just roll around your refrigerator. They get lost in the back of your refrigerator They fall down in between the cracks. So these bins just come in really super handy. That is so much better already I already feel really good that everything's a little bit more organized I just can't believe how these bins are really really nice So let me go ahead and do a little more organization in the fridge I'll show you the final product and then we'll move into the pantry So I ended up using one of the bins for the top here for my cottage cheese Greek yogurt And I will also put all of my single yogurts in that bin I'm actually out of single yogurt right now And then I do have one of the large bins that has the cheese everything that you saw And then I also put one of the bins down here. So it's easy just to slide in and out This has my hemp seeds my flax seed my garlic olives all the stuff that I use all the time That way I can just pull it out and get easy access to the items It definitely looks a lot better and a lot more organized now I'm going to move in to my pantry because I have all this space that could use some storage I do have a couple other bins that I utilize a lot and I've been out of bins So I'm going to put a couple more into this portion And then I think I may add a bin to this shelf as well and potentially one that houses all of my Supplements right next to all of my nut butter. Look how much better this looks so I added two bins here These are my crunchy snacks rice cakes crackers. I have my almonds and my dried fruit And then I definitely needed a way to store my fiber gourmet pasta because I always buy it in bulk And I have like ten boxes and they just fall over every time I open my pantry So that bin comes in really handy for that and then I did add a bin here where my supplements are So my greens and my post-workout my water enhancers my protein water Powder all of that is in a bin now too, which also just looks a lot nicer I mean everything is much more organized easy to find things you can just pull the bins out as you need things I still have a couple of extra bins. I can use elsewhere in my house So the leftover bin I had perfect in my little hallway organizing closet here This is all of my body lotion. I know I have a lot I'm obsessed with fat and body works of body cream, but they always fall over. So again the bin just comes in Super handy So for my snack this afternoon, I'm having my normal snack Which is one of the sprouts brown rice rice cakes I always say I like these ones because they're only 25 calories and they're really the perfect size For a snack and then I'm also having nut butter, which is something I eat several times a day I love the American dream nut butter. I've shared this a lot here on my channel It's always linked down in the description box with 10% off But I'm having the one tough cookie cashew butter This one has like chocolate chip cookies Oreos M&M's all mixed into it That's what I love about the American dream nut butter is all of the yummy mix-ins It just makes the peanut butter or the cashew butter almond butter way more fun This one has seven grams of protein ten carbs and ten fat for two tablespoons, but I'm just going to have one tablespoon I just always weigh that out on my food scale. Look how good that looks I mean you can see the M&M's and the cookies and then I'm having a baby bell Gouda cheese and like I always say this is a really good snack option because we have a carb in the rice cake Paired with the protein and healthy fat in the nut butter and some extra protein in the baby bell Really is the perfect afternoon snack For dinner tonight. I am making caprese caprese chicken and roasted vegetables I have lots of vegetables I need to use up from my imperfect foods in my misfit market order, so we're going to roast those up So first let me show you the veggies.  There is no salt. It is a nice clean ingredient seasoning It's a small business I'll link them down below with 10% off for you And then I'm going to do a salt and pepper as well and then drizzle some olive oil on top and then for the chicken You're going to need fresh basil light mozzarella cheese Balsamic glaze you could probably use balsamic vinegar, but I'm going to stick with the glaze some chicken Really good quality chicken from imperfect foods by the way So I'll make sure that that is linked down below for you as well with $40 worth of free groceries And then you'll need some fresh roma tomatoes I'm going to drizzle some olive oil just right on top of the veggies at my Dax green zest I'm telling you game changer for vegetables so so good and no salt So if you're watching your sodium Dax is a great option None of their seasonings have salt, but they have a ton of flavor I'm going to add a little bit of pepper and then I am going to add a little bit of salt as well That these are going into a 400 degree oven to start roasting while we get ready to make the chicken I'm going to go ahead and slice up the tomato for the chicken and the basil And then we actually need to put our chicken between some saran wrap and kind of pound it out into thinner chicken pieces So I have my chicken wrapped in some saran wrap. I do not have a mallet So I'm just going to use a coffee cup and bang it until I can get it as flat as possible I sprayed my skillet with some non-stick cooking spray added my chicken I'm going to salt and pepper both sides And we're going to allow it to cook until we get a little bit of a brown on the chicken It should take about six to seven minutes Once the chicken is done, we're going to drizzle one third cup of balsamic glaze right on top Top it with some fresh tomatoes And I have one half of a cup of mozzarella cheese I did go ahead and turn the heat off as well because it should be warm enough to melt the cheese The chicken is done. This looks so Delicious, we're going to top it with some fresh basil. I'm pulling the veggies out Let me plate this up and I'll be back to share points and calories. So here is dinner. This looks so good There is the caprese chicken. The recipe makes three servings I'm going to only eat half of this chicken breast and save the other half that'll make the third serving I did end up taking the thicker bigger chicken breast And then I have some of the roasted vegetables, Brussels sprouts, mushrooms, squash, zucchini and broccoli So I'll go ahead and put points calories here on the screen As I promised last week, I want to share with you guys my new Kitchen gadget that I'm really obsessed with. I've been using it pretty much every single night. This is the ninja creamy So this is the ice cream maker We've been trying out all sorts of recipes. I mean, there are facebook troops dedicated to this machine And I love it best decision ever to purchase this. I'll link it down below for you I found it the cheapest at bed, bath and beyond. So I'll put all the information Down below for you. But I have my ice cream is softening for about a minute or so in the microwave And I'm going to show you how amazing this is. So when you purchase the ninja creamy, it comes with three of these little pints So you do have to make your ice cream base 24 hours in advance So I actually made these bases yesterday And then they stay in the freezer until you're ready to make them into ice cream I have been making protein ice cream, which has been really a game changer for me It's a great way for me to not only get dessert But to also get some extra protein So this particular one is an alani munchies protein shake and two tablespoons of pb2 And then I put in about a half a teaspoon to a teaspoon of xanthan gum Which is a thickener and that's just going to help it make a perfect ice cream. Like I said, I've been experimenting I've used vanilla protein shakes. I've used protein powder I also used the fair life shakes. I mean, there's so many different things that you can do You can add mix-ins like chocolate chips and nuts. I mean the possibilities are endless I'm going to list a couple of my favorite protein Ice cream recipes down in the description box for you as well as this one that I'm making Tonight for dessert and that will you have a couple ideas for some protein ice cream And if you have the ninja creamy and you make protein ice cream, let us know some of your favorite recipes So we're actually going to put the pint into the little container It actually looks like a little mini food processor container And the blade for your ice cream is actually in the lid So then we're going to put the lid on And then set it in the base and twist it to the right and see how it's raising And it locks into place and then you're actually ready to make your ice cream So you can see that there's lots of settings ice cream sorbet light ice cream smoothie bowl Gelato milkshake and then this mix-in button After you spin your ice cream if you want to add something to it like cookies or chocolate chips You would use the mix-in button and it gives it kind of a quick stir and really mixes it in So i'm not going to add anything to mine. I've had this one before and it's really good by itself So I do spin all of my protein ice cream with the light ice cream button So we are done. So this little button right here actually releases The container and then you just spin it down Pop it out and there's a release button here for the lid and ready. Are you ready for the magic? Look at that. That is legit Ice cream. Look at the consistency. So the xanthan gum really helps make it nice and thick like ice cream I mean Can we just admire how amazing that looks like I said this is seriously one of my Favorite favorite things once you spin it if you don't eat the whole pint you can put it back in the freezer You don't have to re-spin. I mean you can but if you just let it thaw for just a couple minutes It goes right back to that ice cream consistency It's so good It's chocolatey. It's peanut buttery. It's nice and thick and it has that perfect Creamy texture and taste this entire pint is less than 200 calories, which is incredible and over 20 grams of protein 25 grams ish of protein So like I said, it's a great way to have a sweet treat get in your protein I'm definitely going to enjoy every drop of this tonight So I'm going to take a shower wash my hair tomorrow's my filming day So I'm going to get ready for filming and then I'm going to enjoy the rest of my ice cream from the ninja creamy Highly highly highly recommend it is so good And like I said, there's so many different variations that you can make and try out different types of ice cream Troy's been having the regular ice cream like the full fat one and it is really really delicious So I'll link everything I shared with you down in the description box And if you enjoyed today's video give it a big thumbs up It really helps out my channel And of course make sure you're subscribed and your bells turned on because I upload five days a week And Wednesday's always what I eat in a day I'll link everything down below with nutrition coaching all the other links to my favorite things and don't forget We'd love to have you join our facebook community Happy wednesday friends, and I'll see you in fridays way in bye