Action Taker Quotes

Beauty is not who you are on the outside, it is the wisdom and time you gave away to save another struggling soul like you.

Seven Ways To Get Ahead in Business: 1. Be forward thinking 2. Be inventive, and daring 3. Do the right thing 4. Be honest and straight forward 5. Be willing to change, to learn, to grow 6. Work hard and be yourself 7. Lead by example

It is what it is because you let it be so.

When action is divorced from consequences, no one is happy with the ultimate outcome. If individuals can take from a common pot regardless of how much they put in it, each person has an incentive to be a free rider, to do as little as possible and take as much as possible because what one fails to take will be taken by someone else. Soon, the pot is empty and will not be refilled -- a bad situation even for the earlier takers.

The expense of spirit in a waste of shame Is lust in action; and till action, lust Is perjured, murderous, bloody, full of blame, Savage, extreme, rude, cruel, not to trust, Enjoy’d no sooner but despised straight, Past reason hunted, and no sooner had Past reason hated, as a swallow’d bait On purpose laid to make the taker mad; Mad in pursuit and in possession so; Had, having, and in quest to have, extreme; A bliss in proof, and proved, a very woe; Before, a joy proposed; behind, a dream. All this the world well knows; yet none knows well To shun the heaven that leads men to this hell.

​“A flower does not think of competing to the flower next to it. It just blooms.” ~Zen Shin

There is no doubt in my mind that there are many ways to be a winner, but there is really one way to be a loser, and that is to fail and not look beyond failure.

so taking the time to build experience is essential in any journey.

Comparison is the thief of joy”,

The secret to getting ahead is getting started.

You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take.

It is impossible to live without failing at something unless you live so cautiously that you might as well not have lived at all, in which case you have failed by default." ~ J.K. Rowling

The mind is a powerful force. It can enslave us or empower us. It can plunge us into the depths of misery or take us to the heights of ecstasy. Learn to use the power wisely." ~ David Cuschieri

Society often overlooks us introverts. We idolize the talkers and the spotlight seekers, as if they are the role models everyone should be emulating. I call this the Extrovert Ideal. This is the belief that we're all supposed to be quick-thinking, charismatic risk takers who prefer action to contemplation. The Extrovert Ideal is what can make you feel as if there's something wrong with you because you're not at your best in a large group. It's an especially powerful force in school, where the loudest, most talkative kids are often the most popular, and where teachers reward the students who are eager to raise their hands in class.

​Did you know that from all the things we worry about, 30% are things from the past that cannot be changed, 40% are bad scenarios that will never happen, 12% are related to people's opinion of us, 10% are related to health issues (which worry only makes worse), and only 8% are things that need us to take action? (Cox, 2015)

More often than not, risk takers underestimate the odds they face, and do not invest sufficient effort to find out what the odds are. Because they misread the risks, optimistic entrepreneurs often believe they are prudent, even when they are not. Their confidence in their future success sustains a positive mood that helps them obtain resources from others, raise the morale of their employees, and enhance their prospects of prevailing. When action is needed, optimism, even of the mildly delusional variety, may be a good thing.

Of all the things that we think matter to SAT scores, the number of test takers in the room is never one of them. What do you normally think is most predictive of SAT scores? Scores at the school over the past decade? The amount of federal funding received? The percentage of minority students? Socioeconomic class? Nope. The N, or number of test takers. Amazingly, the researchers found a –0.68 correlation between the N of test takers per location and their SAT score, meaning that the more test takers in the room, the lower their SAT scores. And that is a huge effect. A correlation of –1.0 would mean that test takers’ entire SAT score was determined solely by the number of people in the room and that none of it was based upon their intelligence and education. A –0.68 correlation is massive.

WHAT MAKES A GOOD TEACHERS – As a Student and Teacher I realised Teaching continues to undefinable profession which has a great impact on many of people, our students they are more honest not prejudiced against any one, I was interacting with many of my students they say they do not remember what really we taught with seriousness that at the end of the day, it’s not about the lesson plan. It’s not about the fancy stuff, colourful Power points we teachers make — the crafts we do, the stories we read, the papers we value. No, that’s not really it. That’s not what matters most.. They won’t remember how organized your bulletin boards are. How straight and neat are the desk rows. Certainly they remember our selfless actions As Medical teachers we can contribute best of empathy to suffering of humanity. Our kindness. Our empathy our care and concern. They’ll remember that you took the time to listen to their problems. If we look with wisdom never forget our Students are the future care takers of the Profession, when they say Good bye when leaving the department or college I say Be KIND TO SOME ONE EVERY DAY THAT IS WHAT OUR TEACHERS TOLD AND I AM PROUD TO LIVE IN THE SYSTEM WITH MANY TURBULANCES. BE ATEACHER TO LIFE JUST NOT YOUR SPECALITY? Dr.T.V.Rao MD

while we knew meetings were important, we didn’t designate a note taker to capture key points and action items, a common and basic practice in Silicon Valley.

Successful people make life happen. Successful people make money work for them. Successful people are committed to growing their wealth. Successful people think outside of the box. Successful people turn what life hands to their advantage. Successful people fear no failure. Successful people draw lessons from mistakes. Successful people focus on opportunities. Successful people understand basic functions of money. Successful people look at the big picture. Successful people associate with people with similar status. Successful people do not back away from obstacles. Successful people use all tools available to grow their business. Successful people are problem-solvers, problems do not scare them. Successful people are active listeners and action takers. Successful people act on opportunities to get ahead. Successful people earn based on performance. Successful people think broad and consider all good ideas. Successful people get their strength from their net worth. Successful people make money work for them, no other way around. Successful people commit to lifetime learning. Successful people don’t let fear take control. Successful people get up and shake off the dust after the hardest fall.

What is easy for one person may be terrifying for another. Not all people have developed an unshakable confidence to kick butt and conquer. How can meek and quiet wallflowers, both women and men, join the ranks of the risk takers and event shakers? The first step is to ask yourself how you may be feeling stuck and then get moving.

givers and takers differ in their attitudes and actions toward other people. If you’re a taker, you help others strategically, when the benefits to you outweigh the personal costs. If you’re a giver, you might use a different cost-benefit analysis: you help whenever the benefits to others exceed the personal costs. Alternatively, you might not think about the personal costs at all, helping others without expecting anything in return. If you’re a giver at work, you simply strive to be generous in sharing your time, energy, knowledge, skills, ideas, and connections with other people who can benefit from them.

Whereas selfless givers make the mistake of trusting others all the time, otherish givers start out with trust as the default assumption, but they’re willing to adjust their reciprocity styles in exchanges with someone who appears to be a taker by action or reputation.

two different ways to recognize takers. First, when we have access to reputational information, we can see how people have treated others in their networks. Second, when we have a chance to observe the actions and imprints of takers, we can look for signs of lekking. Self-glorifying images, self-absorbed conversations, and sizable pay gaps can send accurate, reliable signals that someone is a taker.

Wikipedia: Race Norming Race-norming, more formally called within-group score conversion and score adjustment strategy, is the practice of adjusting test scores to account for the race or ethnicity of the test-taker. In the United States, it was first implemented by the Federal Government in 1981 with little publicity, and was subsequently outlawed by the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Prior to being banned by the federal government, race-norming was practiced by 38 U.S. states' employment services. The aim of this practice is to counteract alleged racial bias in aptitude tests administered to job applicants, as well as in neuropsychological tests. The practice converted and compared the raw score of the test according to racial groups. The score of a black candidate is only compared to the scores of those who had the same ethnicity. If the candidate's score, which is reported within a percentile range, fell within a certain percentile when compared to white or all candidates, it would be much higher among other black candidates.

Page 42: Whatever the combination of sources of test bias might be, genuine bias against a minority will show up in a way that leaves no room for doubt: It will under-predict the test taker’s performance in the classroom or on the job. Whether predictive validity is the same for different groups can be subjected to rigorous statistical scrutiny, and it has been, repeatedly. The results are unambiguous, whether the thing being predicted is grades in school or performance on the job. The major tests do not under-predict the performance of Africans or Latins.

Like Wheeler, very few scientists would be happy about being associated in any way with the dreaded label “pseudoscience.” Besides incurring the fear and loathing of the mainstream, those conducting research on topics stamped “pseudoscience” may find that funding sources mysteriously dry up, journals refuse to publish their research, and opportunities for academic tenure vanish. The difficulty of getting scientists to attempt to replicate, or even pay attention to, psi experiments is related to what Thomas Gold of Cornell University has called the “herd effect.” This is the tendency for scientists (or any people, for that matter) to cluster together in groups where only certain ideas or techniques are acceptable. A scientific herd forms for essentially the same reason that sheep form a herd—to protect individuals. It is very risky for one’s career to stand apart from the herd, given the rapidly diminishing likelihood that one can continue to practice science outside the herd. Without exception, scientists who conduct psi research are high risk-takers, because the academic world lets them know very quickly that “we don’t take kindly to strangers in these here parts.” Psychological Factors It is well known that most scientists are “theory-driven” rather than “data-driven.” This means that scientists are uncomfortable with “facts” unless some theory can explain them. Parapsychological “facts” are uncomfortable because there are no well-accepted explanations for why the facts should exist. This does not mean that no scientific theories of psychic phenomena exist; actually, there are dozens. It is the adequacy of the theories that is in question. Being theory-driven also means that scientists fail to see data that contradict their theoretical expectations. This does not mean that they fail to understand the data, but rather that they have a strong tendency literally not to perceive the offending data. As discussed in some detail in chapter 14, a substantial body of conventional psychological research supports this strong consequence. Witnessing this effect in action is truly astonishing. It is like trying to get a dog to look at something that you know he will find interesting. “There it is! Look at the evidence there!” Where? I don’t see anything. “There I say. Look where I’m pointing, not at my hand!” Nope, I don’t see anything.

essential to understand the only person we should worry about letting down is ourselves. Even if we fail big, people won't leave us, and if they do, then maybe they weren't the right ones to have in our lives in the first place.

Think they can develop their abilities Embrace challenges and change Know setbacks aren't permanent roadblocks Seek improvement Enjoy experimenting and innovating Focus on the journey Don't see failure as an option; they continuously look to improve and learn, seeing obstacles as opportunities

There is only one way to avoid criticism: do nothing, say nothing, and be nothing.” ~Aristotle

deny that these factors definitely have an influence,

​Look around, and you will see that those people who dare to grab the bull by the horns are the ones that win at the game of life. They are not the most intelligent or knowledgeable. Courage/boldness/self-confidence — whatever you want to call it — is a better indicator of success than intelligence. Smart people think about all the possible negative outcomes, while the bold ones are looking for ways to figure things out.

We are too soft mentally to cope with the challenges that will come our way. We’ve lost the ability to be decisive, strong, action-takers.

after a certain point, trying to prevent failure does more harm than any mistake ever could.

amigos mios, please chase your dreams and goals. Even if you think you might not be the ideal candidate for a job, send your application. Even if you think someone will say “no” when you ask them out for a date, try your luck. It’s better to try and fail than not take any chance and wonder for the rest of your life what could have happened. Take risks and don’t accept anything less than you deserve. Be stubborn when it comes to achieving your objectives. Don’t take the first “no” you hear. Have faith in your own capabilities!

Further, as we discovered during the financial crisis that started in 2008, these blowup risks-to-others are easily concealed owing to the growing complexity of modern institutions and political affairs. While in the past people of rank or status were those and only those who took risks, who had the downside for their actions, and heroes were those who did so for the sake of others, today the exact reverse is taking place. We are witnessing the rise of a new class of inverse heroes, that is, bureaucrats, bankers, Davos-attending members of the I.A.N.D. (International Association of Name Droppers), and academics with too much power and no real downside and/or accountability. They game the system while citizens pay the price. At no point in history have so many non-risk-takers, that is, those with no personal exposure, exerted so much control. The chief ethical rule is the following: Thou shalt not have antifragility at the expense of the fragility of others.

This wider history notwithstanding, I believe India still constitutes a special case. Its distinctiveness is threefold. First, the tradition of the thinker-activist persisted far longer in India than elsewhere. While the men who founded the United States in the late eighteenth century had fascinating ideas about democracy and nationhood, thereafter American politicians have merely governed and ruled, or sometimes misgoverned and misruled.1 Their ideas, such as these are, have come from professional ideologues or intellectuals. On the other hand, from the first decades of the nineteenth century until the last decades of the twentieth century, the most influential political thinkers in India were, as often as not, its most influential political actors. Long before India was conceived of as a nation, in the extended run-up to Indian independence, and in the first few decades of freedom, the most interesting reflections on society and politics were offered by men (and women) who were in the thick of political action. Second, the relevance of individual thinkers too has lasted longer in India. For instance, Lenin’s ideas were influential for about seventy years, that is to say, from the time the Soviet state was founded to the time it disappeared. Mao’s heyday was even shorter—roughly three decades, from the victory of the Chinese Revolution in 1949 to the repudiation by Deng Xiaoping of his mentor’s ideas in the late 1970s. Turning to politicians in Western Europe, Churchill’s impassioned defence of the British Empire would find no takers after the 1950s. De Gaulle was famous for his invocation of the ‘grandeur de la France’, but those sentiments have now been (fortunately?) diluted and domesticated by the consolidation of the European Union. On the other hand, as this book will demonstrate, Indian thinkers of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries still speak in many ways to the concerns of the present. A third difference has to do with the greater diversity of thinkers within the Indian political tradition. Even Gandhi and Nehru never held the kind of canonical status within their country as Mao or Lenin did in theirs. At any given moment, there were as many Indians who were opposed to their ideas as were guided by them. Moreover, the range of issues debated and acted upon by politicians and social reformers appears to have been far greater in India than in other countries. This depth and diversity of thought was, as I argue below, in good part a product of the depth and diversity of the society itself.

What separates the action taker from the excuse maker is the habit of acting.

As Joe Polish frequently states, “Life gives to the givers and takes from the takers.” Consequently, once registered and paid, I immediately signed up to speak at the next small-group meeting in Arizona. I hired and worked extensively with Joel Weldon, a public speaking coach, to ensure I delivered my best strategies in the most effective way. I wanted my talk to be so easy and actionable that people would be naturally motivated to implement the principles. I used my journal as a visualization tool, in addition to several sessions with Joel.