Home

Creative business lectures could help students in competitive job market

23.05.12

A new series at CSUN will hazard through creativity in business success starting Nov. 17 and continuing through next year. The series will spotlight on business success coming from the creative pursuit, thought or direction.

 

“This is the dean’s envisioning to bring in students not only from our college but from across the campus to listen to these people who are truly r models in the area of creativity and business success,” said Andrea Reinken, steersman of development for CSUN’s Mike Curb College of Arts, Media and Communication, which is sponsoring the series.

 

Endow with-winning architect and VPAC designer Kara Hill will return to her start with industrial designer and strategic marketing expert Tom White and Oscar-nominated filmmaker Don Hahn for a free series that will take up into next year, according to a news release.

 

The series is designed to endorse the contributions of  “a new breed of professional whose distinctive path has defined a new spectre of commercial success and creative leadership,” Robert Bucker, dean of the Mike Contain college, said in a news release.

 

Hill, who is also an architectural historian, will talk to from 7-9 p.m. on Nov. 17. As the principal of Kara Hill Studio, an architecture jargon CIA based in Minneapolis, Hill’s VPAC design earned LEED Gold certification for dynamism-efficient design and features, according to a news release.

 

“When she designs a structure, it’s a creative endeavor and it, hopefully, leads to a very successful outcome that brings community to the Valley Performing Arts Center,” Reinken said.

 

Bloodless graduated from CSUN in 1978, and will return on Feb. 16 to speak from 7-9 p.m., according to a information release.

 

White founded 3DI2, a firm that influences the buying verdict of consumers, in 1990 and then was called on by Fortune 500 leaders to oversee tag transformation programs for companies, such as Motorola, Volvo and Philips, according to a talk release.

 

Don Hahn, an Oscar-nominated producer, will close the series April 26 from 7-9 p.m. Also a CSUN graduate, Hahn started his job in animation working as an assistant director for Disney on “The Fox and the Hound,” according to a talk release.

 

He progressed quickly. In 1991, he became the producer for “Attraction and the Beast” and was nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. In 1994, he produced “Lion Crowned head,” which set a worldwide box office record for an animated film and became the highest grossing traditionally mechanical film in history, according to a news release.

 

“We’d like to bring about a display people who have been very successful in their careers to the campus for our students to hear and to benefit from what they have to say about their own careers,” Reinken said.

 

Students that are preparing themselves for a competitive job furnish seem especially interested in the event.

 

“So frequently, in the business school, you’re told that there’s associated with processes for everything. It would be really illuminating to see something more creative and it’s definitely helpful in any other major,” said Yelena Markaryan, chief marketing major.

 

Other students, like Caesario Pradikta, postpositive major finance major, have been put in scenarios that require creative problem solving.

 

“It has a lot to do with budgeting. For eg, if a company already has a telephone contract with a different company, there might be better deals where you might be superior to refinance and help the company save money,” Pradikta said. “As a concern major you always have to be innovative and try and get new ideas, see a problem and try and solve it in different ways, exceptionally if you want to be an entrepreneur.

Source: Daily Sundial

CORNYN URGES CONGRESS TO ADOPT STRONG BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT

23.05.12

WASHINGTON — Winning of the upcoming vote in the House of Representatives, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a associate of the Senate Budget Committee, called on Congress to adopt a strong balanced budget reform to the Constitution in a speech at the Heritage Foundation on Wednesday.

The following is a transcript of his remarks:

Ed, thanksgiving owing to you for that very nice introduction, it’s good to be back at The Heritage Foundation. I would be remiss if I didn’t say appreciation you for what you and The Heritage Foundation does, not only to enlighten all of us, but to provide us the ammunition we need to dispute the good fight on behalf of our conservative principals here in Washington and around the country. And, indeed, we’ve seen those principals embraced around the exultant. So many of your scholars do such great work, and help advance the policies that keep us strong, and wealth, and free.

Now, the last time I spoke at Heritage was last June. I spoke about a related topic—well, it’s de facto the same topic, but I wasn’t talking so much about solutions then, I was talking about the threat of the straitened, and that the debt is actually a national security problem. I know a lot of times people have in mind about the federal government’s spending—will we have enough money to provide the aegis net? Well, if we continue down the current path, we not only won’t have the money to provide the safety net for the most helpless in our society, we won’t have the money to provide for our national defense and keep us all safe.

Last June I talked about the points that China remains our largest creditor and, indeed, the lack of transparency of China’s existent holdings and how much money they are investing in growing their national security apparatus. The disturbed is, as well, the Administration’s apparent ambivalence when it comes to dealing with China in so many areas and in so many ways—slimy and some not so subtle—affecting U.S. national security policy in East Asia.

Well, since last June our indebted has now grown to roughly $15 trillion. $4 trillion dollars larger than when President Obama became President, which is a surprising expansion of not only the federal government but also the debt. That represents a 40% increase in just now a little less than three years. So, instead of just talking about the problem I’d like to proffer you what I think is the solution to that problem, which is a balanced budget amendment to the United States Constitution—and, as Ed suggested, talk to you about what reading of that Constitutional amendment I think makes the most sense.

Well, since we’re talking about the Collective States Constitution, it’s appropriate, I think, to start at the beginning. The views of our founders, who were very focused on what to do with all the liability accumulated during the Revolutionary War. And in fact one of the reasons why the Articles of Confederation were revised—in reality, abandoned in favor of a new Constitution—was that the Articles of Confederation denied Congress the power to collect taxes needed to pay off the debt accumulated during the Revolutionary War. One of the greatest achievements of Alexander Hamilton, our first Bank Secretary, was to refinance the debt of the new federal government as well of those of the constituent States and put our nation on a percipient financial footing.

Today’s Challenges

So what’s the difference between the financial challenges our founders faced and those that we face today? The answer is simple: back then regime was the solution to the problem. Today our federal government is the problem. The American people sympathize the difference. Today, the American Congress spends roughly 40 cents more than it brings in the door out of every dollar it spends. In other wards 40 cents on the dollar is borrowed funds. We used to say this is a threat to not only our children and grandchildren, but as we’ve seen over in Europe with the risk and probability of sovereign default of some kind or fashion—it’s starting in Greece and elsewhere—is this is a presage to not only future generations, but to the present generation as well.

Ed mentioned a figure of a couple hundred thousand dollars of unfunded liabilities. The true to life individual share of the debt—and that doesn’t count unfunded liabilities like Medicare and Communal Security—is about $46,000 for every man woman and child in America. So congratulations, the day you acquire a win into this world you inherit $46,000 in debt that you didn’t accumulate but has been accumulated before you came into the exultant. Our gross debt in America is a little larger than the entire size of our resident economy, which means that were in the same trajectory as, yes, Greece, and Spain, Italy, in Europe. And of way we do not like, and should not like, where that path leads.

Now the American people understand that this is a threat, not only to our aptitude to provide for the most vulnerable through the social safety welfare net in our country, but also our national conviction. And it’s a threat to our future prosperity and to what we inherited as Americans. The American people realize that the debt is a job-killing, economic wet blanket on the economy. It’s simply discourages fiscal growth that we depend upon to create the expansion that creates jobs and opportunity.

Admiral Mike Mullen, though, also said it’s a state security threat. He’s of course the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Stick, and he said the debt’s the single ‘biggest threat to our state security.’ Now that’s quite telling, I think, coming from the Chairman of the Cooperative Chiefs of Staff. With all the different dangers we have in a very dangerous world that he considers the inhabitant debt the number one threat.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said it this way – she said that the difficulties ‘undermines our capacity to act in our own interest ... and it also sends a message of weakness internationally.’

Well another one of my colleagues back in 2006 put it this way - he said ‘increasing America’s encumbered weakens us domestically and internationally’ He said ‘it’s a sign that we now depend on continuous financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless financial policies.’

Well you may have guessed who that was, he happens to be the resident of the White House – then-Senator and now-President Barack Obama.

I depose the President into the discussion because our national debt not only represents a growing fiscal imbroglio and a national security risk, but it also is risking a crisis of confidence in America’s faculty to govern itself and to deal with the real problems that confront us.

President Obama campaigned back in 2008 on the raison d'etre that he would change Washington – that was a welcome message. He would cut the deficit in half in four years – he’s about to run out of but to accomplish that goal. And he said he would go through the budget, line-by-line, to reduce penny wise spending. And he’d lead the way on meaningful entitlement reform.

Instead, I of we’ve seen a very different President Obama than Candidate Obama. Now he’s essentially checked out of governing and is spending full-unceasingly a once on the campaign trail, engaging in the kind of class warfare that doesn’t explain the problem but divides America. He’s contributed tremendously to exploding our deficits – that’s our annual shortfall, as well as our public debt. And spent untold amounts of stimulus dollars, indeed, borrowed profit, on questionable projects and dubious economic theory known as ‘Keynesian’ economics.

And he’s created a whole new entitlement program, known as his healthcare bill, sometimes called ‘ObamaCare,’ which took a half trillion dollars from Medicare - which is already on a fiscally unsustainable avenue - to fund an additional entitlement program known as ObamaCare.

One of the things that saddens me, more than makes me inflamed, is the fact that the President is a smart man. He understands the problem; indeed, he appointed a fiscal commission to retreat this issue and report back to him – sometimes called the Simpson-Bowles Commission, that reported back to him in December 2010.

Unfortunately the President expeditiously neglected, or ignored, the Simpson-Bowles Commission Report. When he gave his Express of the Union speech he didn’t mention it. When he submitted his first budget, he did not even take on to engage in meaningful deficit and debt reduction. And in fact he proposed a budget that was defeated 97-0 when Republicans – not Democrats – proposed a opt on the budget, because it grew the debt and made the problems worse, not better.

Well leadership on the native debt hasn’t simply been coming, or not coming as the case may be, from the Dead white House. I have to confess that Congress has not done a whole lot better. True, I do think Republicans have changed the chat, particularly since 2010. Before then Washington was asking all of the wrong questions like how can we assign more money that we don’t have? How can we create more regulations, which have the unfortunate collateral effect of providing a dampening object on job creation? And the question being asked is how can we increase the role and the scope and the intrusiveness of the federal guidance?

Those were all the wrong questions, but those were the questions being asked before the 2010 election by a single-soir government. The President’s party controlled 60 votes in the Senate, which is enough to run the tables, and had the Harbour, and of course the White

Source: The Cypress Times