For Some strange reason beer commercials are always amongst the best ! (Hattip Satish Nagpal)
Author: Raoji
Linkfest:Feb 19, 2013
Some stuff I am reading today morning:
9 point financial plan-Indian edition (CapitalMind)
Moodys cautions India on negative credit outlook (Mint)
Small investors stuck as open offers in limbo (BS)
Weak rupee takes shine off India’s gold buying (WSJ)
Sahara Parivar launches ad blitzkrieg (Moneycontrol)
The secret trading strategy from the 1930s (BusinessInsider)
Carl Icahn thinks selling diet shakes is a real good business (Dealbreaker)
Why poor people pay more bribes than rich people (Reuters)
Heinz: Buffett’s kind of deal (Dealbook)
5 Reasons not to buy gold (Barrons)
As a student of history, I marvel at how ironical the fates are.
This true story probably highlights the irony more than anything.
Sir Currimbhoy Ebrahim was one of the greatest industrialists of his era.His family were fabulously rich and wealthy and at one time (1920) held the second largest number of mills in Bombay.
Belonging to the Ismaili Dawoodi Bohra community, he harbored a desire to give back to the community.So he started the Currimbhoy Ebrahim Khoja Orphanage in 1894 for the welfare of orphans .
One of the most generous princes of the time, Maharaja Madhavrao Scindia of Gwalior donated the land for the orphanage.
Fast forward, more than hundred years later, the richest man in India, Mukesh Ambani wants to build a private residence for himself and his family.
He buys the property from the trust for 21.5 Crores in the year 2002.He builds a 27 storey building there called Antilla and starts living there (see photos)
So in a supreme irony of fate, the land which was meant by Sir Currimbhoy Ebrahim and Maharaja Madhavrao Scindia to be used for poor orphans is now being used legally by the richest man in the land.
This is India !!
What to do?
Hat tip to Tejas Sawjiani and Debashish Basu for highlighting this article.
This is excerpted from a wonderful lecture given by Robert Weisbort, History Professor at Colby to his students.
“How long will you need to find your truest, most productive niche? This I cannot predict, for, sadly, access to a podium confers no gift of prophecy. But I can say that however long it takes, it will be time well spent. I am reminded of a friend from the early 1970s, Edward Witten. I liked Ed, but felt sorry for him, too, because, for all his potential, he lacked focus. He had been a history major in college, and a linguistics minor. On graduating, though, he concluded that, as rewarding as these fields had been, he was not really cut out to make a living at them. He decided that what he was really meant to do was study economics. And so, he applied to graduate school, and was accepted at the University of Wisconsin. And, after only a semester, he dropped out of the program. Not for him. So, history was out; linguistics, out; economics, out. What to do? This was a time of widespread political activism, and Ed became an aide to Senator George McGovern, then running for the presidency on an anti-war platform. He also wrote articles for political journals like the Nation and the New Republic. After some months, Ed realized that politics was not for him, because, in his words, it demanded qualities he did not have, foremost among them common sense. All right, then: history, linguistics, economics, politics, were all out as career choices. What to do? Ed suddenly realized that he was really suited to study mathematics. So he applied to graduate school, and was accepted at Princeton. I met him midway through his first year there–just after he had dropped out of the mathematics department. He realized, he said, that what he was really meant to do was study physics; he applied to the physics department, and was accepted.
I was happy for him. But I lamented all the false starts he had made, and how his career opportunities appeared to be passing him by. Many years later, in 1987, I was reading the New York Times magazine and saw a full-page picture akin to a mug shot, of a thin man with a large head staring out of thick glasses. It was Ed Witten! I was stunned. What was he doing in the Times magazine? Well, he was being profiled as the Einstein of his age, a pioneer of a revolution in physics called “String Theory.” Colleagues at Harvard and Princeton, who marvelled at his use of bizarre mathematics to solve physics problems, claimed that his ideas, popularly called a “theory of everything,” might at last explain the origins and nature of the cosmos. Ed said modestly of his theories that it was really much easier to solve problems when you analyzed them in at least ten dimensions. Perhaps. Much clearer to me was an observation Ed made that appeared near the end of this article: every one of us has talent; the great challenge in life is finding an outlet to express it. I thought, he has truly earned the right to say that. And I realized that, for all my earlier concerns that he had squandered his time, in fact his entire career path–the ventures in history, linguistics, economics, politics, math, as well as physics–had been rewarding: a time of hard work, self-discovery, and new insight into his potential based on growing experience.
No two career paths are exactly alike, and yours will surely range greatly. Some of you may spend a lifetime honing one set of skills; others may shift course more than once, tacking with the winds of discovery and circumstance. In every case: savor the time, and the work; and take heart from knowing that the path to your own best calling may not always be a straight line.”
I was happy for him. But I lamented all the false starts he had made, and how his career opportunities appeared to be passing him by. Many years later, in 1987, I was reading the New York Times magazine and saw a full-page picture akin to a mug shot, of a thin man with a large head staring out of thick glasses. It was Ed Witten! I was stunned. What was he doing in the Times magazine? Well, he was being profiled as the Einstein of his age, a pioneer of a revolution in physics called “String Theory.” Colleagues at Harvard and Princeton, who marvelled at his use of bizarre mathematics to solve physics problems, claimed that his ideas, popularly called a “theory of everything,” might at last explain the origins and nature of the cosmos. Ed said modestly of his theories that it was really much easier to solve problems when you analyzed them in at least ten dimensions. Perhaps. Much clearer to me was an observation Ed made that appeared near the end of this article: every one of us has talent; the great challenge in life is finding an outlet to express it. I thought, he has truly earned the right to say that. And I realized that, for all my earlier concerns that he had squandered his time, in fact his entire career path–the ventures in history, linguistics, economics, politics, math, as well as physics–had been rewarding: a time of hard work, self-discovery, and new insight into his potential based on growing experience.