top of page

Blog by Trusha Desai aka Trusha Pandit

Writer: Trusha Desai
Trusha Desai
Jul 28, 2016
2 min read

Glass ceilings were meant to be broken. With each successive crack, from Margaret Thatcher, Indira Gandhi, Benazir Bhutto and Imelda Marcos to Angela Merkel, Theresa May and Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner we have Parliaments, Senates, Upper and Lower Houses, Mayors and City Councils with women. Whether there is gender parity or otherwise in all these august bodies, whether all members of the United Nations have had women leaders at some point of their governing periods, it is not just in the political arena where women need to lead.

We need more women leaders in business, charities, on Boards and Chairs of Boards. We need more Janet Yellens, and more leaning in $FB COO’s like Sheryl Sandberg. More philanthropists like Melinda Gates ~ and yes! A long-reigning monarch like Queen Elizabeth II.

The point is, not just that we need more women leaders in different fields of life, but how do women and men work together. For that is the key to success. With the probability of a marriage more likely to end in divorce in the “developed” world, statistics have indicated that men and women do not necessarily communicate effectively with one another, resulting in marital conflict, separation and divorce. Does this therefore mean, that this man-woman conflict will translate into the political and business socio-economic juxtapositions, or do men and women work as a team? Is this a challenge that women shoulder when they are leaders while men lead the way they have since time immemorial, by driving a four-wheel drive over rough terrain? Not to say that I have anything against four-wheel drive vehicles. I have driven them, when they were the only sustainable means of transportation.

It is just that men and women communicate differently, and Mars and Venus are different planets, the focus lying on more than their distance from the Sun. It is just that men and women react differently to the same situation. It is just that men and women behave differently in similar situations. I am not stating that one behavior is “better” than the other. It is merely a matter of difference, and yes, we have the French commending that too. Perhaps we will reach some point of time in this century (or this millennium if we do not pedal faster) when we will stop nattering about glass and marble ceilings and take gender parity and equality as a fact, just as we chalk the Women’s Suffrage Movement as a historical landmark.

As a small business owner, I am cognizant of ceilings and their vertical restrictions. As a woman, I am aware that we get paid approximately 70% of our male counterparts: and this may be the case even when we "pay" ourselves. Until we value feminine output at par with male output; until we realize that it matters not what the gender of the individual, but the quality of the output that must be the decisive factor in meting wages, we may need to progress more than we think we should.

 
 
 
Writer: Trusha Desai
Trusha Desai
Jul 27, 2016
3 min read

Image courtesy relatably.com

The Oxford Dictionary (online) states that the noun “democracy” stands for the system of government by the whole population or all eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives. We might quibble as to how an entire population would govern through its elected representatives. We might say that we do not agree as the members of a state (eligible or otherwise) about anything. How then, might we govern? How then, might we stand up for the rights of the many, never mind the rights of the few? How then, might our singular voices ~ in the wilderness ~ be heard? If we speak, when we speak, who will listen, let alone act or pass laws that would bind upon the rest of the people? If those laws that might govern our human rights, are passed by the governing institutions: who will ensure that our rights are indeed upheld by the rest of the populace? Does this mean that we give up on elections? Does this mean that we give up on the system of parliamentary democracy? Does this mean that as I am not certain that anyone will listen to my voice if I speak, when I speak, I am justified in doing what I think is right, for that is to my benefit? Does this mean that if I believe that democracy and its systemic institutions and creations like the various courts of law, have not heard me or seen my plight, I may do what I believe is right? For after all, who decides who is right or wrong in this world? Does democracy and its institutions decide what is right? Or do the statutes and legalese ~ that the majority of us do not read or know an iota about ~ stand up and uphold the rights of each and every one of us? For we know well, through consequentialism, through the class of normative ethical theories (if indeed we do believe in ethics of any dimension) that the ends do not justify the means.

Going back to the Oxford Dictionary (for that is the only semblance of reality in today’s world, democratic or otherwise), as we mutter that it all is merely semantical ~ there is an extension to the meaning of “democracy”: control of an organization or group by the majority of its members. This brings us to the principle of consensus and majority, whether it is a razor-thin 0.0001%, yes, just that one silent, sighing voice in a corner of the Universe that the rest of us never did see or hear: that solitary voice crept in and tipped the balance. And democracy ruled, democracy won.

Does this mean that the remaining voices that were over-ruled were incorrect? Does this mean that the voices that were over-turned, have been silenced, or should remain quiet until eternity?

If we look back at history, it has been the single voices, those who were pushed to the rear of the bus … who eventually did win: they rustled up the forces of democracy. This reminds us again, that democracy did not win by taking pot-shots against the rest of the people. Suicide bombers may not overtake democracy. For democracy is not fearful. Democracy stands straight and tall and proud. And eventually, democracy is just.

Along with strategy (political and run-of-the-mill strategic planning), I also zoom in on coaching, management and small business consulting, accounting, GST reporting, personal taxes, payroll, QuickBooks, Sage 50 ... #TrushaDesai.com

 
 
 
Writer: Trusha Desai
Trusha Desai
Jul 16, 2016
2 min read

Image courtesy europeandemocracy.eu

Trump or Hillary, Hillary or Trump: do we know who will make it to the White House in November? There are pundits (political or not) who may have their theories. There are political aficionados (pundit or otherwise) who may deign to decide who it will be.

As a Canadian, why does it matter to me who the US President will be? As USA is Canada’s largest trading partner, the American economy does have remarkable repercussions on us. The Commander in Chief of the largest military undertaking does chart paths for the rest of us to watch with concern. Therefore, as a citizen of the world, it is of great interest to me who will decide where “the buck” should stop.

As an Obama fan, it might be a matter of necessity that a Democrat follow him in the White House. However, as a Canadian, and with the longest open border that separates us, it is essential that we welcome the new President. For that open border does not divide the two neighbors, it is a separation of sorts, that does not lead to divorce after a year. There is NAFTA with the three amigos, there are a host of trade agreements where USA and Canada go together. We play hockey, football, tennis and a slew of other sports together. The Stanley Cup, won by the Pittsburgh Penguins is now in Cole Harbour, NS: for we must remember that the US team that won the Cup has been captain’d by a Canadian.

And to return to November and our predictions of what may happen then. We have known, that the US economy (and the world economy as a result, thereof) takes some unpredictable twists and turns during the first hundred days of the new President’s office. We must necessarily observe the $DOW and $NASDAQ and our forecast of what policy changes will do to the global economy and stock markets. Perhaps a word will suffice: caution will carry the day.

I do accounting, boutique bookkeeping, GST reporting, payroll, personal taxes. I specialize in financial coaching for small businesses, professionals and individuals. #TrushaDesai.com

 
 
 

Accounting software expertise: QuickBooks Online & Desktop, Oracle NetCash & NetSuite, Xero, Sage

Trusha Desai Innovation Management Inc.

Trusha Desai aka Trusha Pandit (La femme, શ્રીમતી) 

Founder & CEO

BSMT-1582 Wintergreen Place, (Unit Basement)

No walk-ins: Please do not disturb neighbours

Coquitlam, British Columbia, V3E 2V5 Canada

 

Trusha Desai is a Certified Professional Bookkeeper

We are honoured to be located on the kʷikʷəƛ̓əm traditional and ancestral lands, including those parts that were historically shared with the q̓ic̓əy̓ (kat-zee), and other Coast Salish Peoples and elsewhere. 

© Trusha Desai Innovation Management Inc. 2024

bottom of page