Latest news with #urgency
Entrepreneur
09-07-2025
- Business
- Entrepreneur
Your Time Is a Weapon. Use It or Waste It.
The difference between being busy and being lethal is knowing what's worth your minutes and being bold enough to protect them. Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. Humans haven't figured out how to create more time. The people who win? They protect it like their life depends on it. Because it does. Time is your sharpest weapon. You either use it to cut through the noise, or you let it dull itself with distractions. If you're not lethal with your time, you'll lose it. Simple as that. Related: Time Is Money — Here's How to Leverage It to Add Value to a Product I talk about urgency a lot I talk about urgency all the time. Not just in business. In life. Urgency isn't panic. Urgency is respect. It's knowing time is limited and treating it like gold. When you move with urgency, you cut the fluff. You get to the point. You stop dragging things out that don't need to be dragged. The fastest way to kill momentum? Move slow. The fastest way to build momentum? Move now. People always say life is short. I don't believe that. I believe life is long. The question is not how fast you can fill your calendar. The question is how well you can fill your life. I love to work. But I had to learn the hard way. I love to work, but over the years, I've learned there's a difference between being busy and being lethal. That's a hard pill to swallow. People love to seem busy. That's not bad. It's human. But the faster you can learn what's not worth your time (and actually be okay with that decision), the more unstoppable you become. Busy people are usually just disorganized people in disguise. You can be busy doing the wrong things for years and still end up nowhere. Being busy is easy. Being intentional is hard. Busy fills your calendar. Intention fills your life. Busy says yes to everything. Intention says yes to what matters. Busy burns you out. Intention builds you up. I had to learn that busyness is a trap. It's loud. It's addictive. It makes you feel like you're winning when you're actually just treading water. Being intentional is uncomfortable because it forces you to choose. Busy people say they don't have time. Intentional people know exactly where their time is going. Related: 10 Simple Ways to Escape Busyness and Enjoy Free Time Fatherhood changed everything When I became a dad, my life got a whole new point. It wasn't about the next company. It wasn't about the next deal. It wasn't about stacking more to-dos. It was about family. It was about being present. Being a dad made me lethal with my time. When you realize your kid's only going to be that age once, you get real clear on what matters. I don't waste minutes anymore. I don't have minutes to waste. Faith brought it all into focus As a Christian, I know I don't control my timeline at the end of the day. God's in charge of that. Not me. But I do get to choose where that time goes. I don't want to waste it. I don't want to miss what matters. I had to learn to sharpen my time like a blade. Ruthless. Precise. Non-negotiable. You don't need more hours. You need sharper decisions. Your time sets the tone When I was building my companies early in my real estate career, I used to take every call. Every meeting. Every coffee. I thought being available made me valuable. It didn't. It made me exhausted. People respect your time when you respect your time. And theirs. Your calendar is your property. Treat it like that. If you're loose with your time, you'll attract people who are loose with your time. If you're lethal with your time, you'll attract people who value time. You set the tone. You build the boundary. You decide what's worth it. Related: The Most Successful Founders Take Retreats — Here's Why You Should, Too The power of no You can't master your time if you're afraid to say no. You're not being mean. You're being honest. Here's a rule: If it's not a "heck yes," it's a no. You don't need to apologize for it. You don't need to explain it. I've missed out on things I didn't need to be at. I've skipped calls that didn't move the needle. I've walked away from opportunities that weren't aligned. Saying no is how you say yes to what matters. Related: Why Rejection is the Best Thing for Every Entrepreneur to Hear Time doesn't wait Time is not waiting for you to get organized. It's not waiting for you to feel ready. Guess what? Perfect never shows up. You have to move now. You have to decide now. Time is your most unforgiving currency. You can spend it, but you can't earn it back. When you start treating your minutes like money, you get very clear. Very fast. On what's worth it and what's not. Be a time assassin Do you want to win? You have to become a time assassin. Cut the fluff. Cut the overthinking. Cut the dead meetings. Optimize the pointless tasks. Move fast. Decide fast. Focus fast. When I got lethal with my time, I made more room for what actually mattered. More room for building. More room for thinking. More room for living. And the best part? I made more room for them. My family. My why. You don't need to fill your calendar to feel valuable. You need to own your calendar to build value. Your time is either building your future or it's bleeding into someone else's. Be lethal with it. Every minute counts. Especially the ones you spend at home.
New York Times
03-06-2025
- General
- New York Times
Pochettino likens Pulisic to USA's Messi, addresses stars passing on Gold Cup
U.S. men's national team coach Mauricio Pochettino said this week he hopes to instill in his team the type of urgency and desire to play for the national team that exists in other countries. Speaking on the Unfiltered Soccer with Landon Donovan and Tim Howard podcast, Pochettino cited some of the biggest names he has coached — Argentine legend Lionel Messi, French World Cup winner Kylian Mbappe and Brazilian star Neymar — as examples of top players who remain 'desperate' to play for their respective national teams. Advertisement 'The people need to prioritize the national team,' Pochettino said. 'We were talking about Argentine players, or Brazilian players or English players or Spanish players, they are desperate. Even Messi, even Neymar, even Mbappé for France, these guys are desperate to go to the national team. For them, when they go, they don't see if it's a friendly game, if it's an official game, it's a World Cup, it doesn't matter, because the possibility to defend one time more your flag, your shirt. It's about to feel proud. And that is the responsibility to us to translate.' The comments are striking after Christian Pulisic made the decision, in conjunction with U.S. Soccer, to skip this summer's Gold Cup. Citing his heavy workload with AC Milan and the U.S. — Pulisic is one of just 10 outfield players in the top five European leagues to appear in 50 games in each of the past two seasons — Pulisic felt he needed the rest in order to be healthy for next summer's World Cup. Donovan compared Pulisic to Messi in that he has the most eyeballs on him of any American player and asked how the staff could handle competing in the tournament this summer without Pulisic. Pochettino praised his team's top player and said he does not question Pulisic's commitment to the group or the country. 'I think Christian in the last year showed a great quality,' Pochettino said. 'He's performing in Europe, also he's performing with the national team. He's a very talented player that can help us to win. You say people compare Messi with Christian Pulisic. I don't want to be disrespectful with Messi or Pulisic, but I think in this country, Pulisic should be our Messi, because he's an iconic player, the kids on the street for sure if you ask one soccer player in this country, it's Pulisic. 'We have very good communication with our players. Christian is a very nice guy, is very committed to the national team and he wants to help and of course is desperate to play in the World Cup and arrive in the best condition. All these conversations that we were taking with the players, I think that was the best decision to help him because every player are in different circumstances, and even if I want Christian here or another player here – Antonee (Robinson, injured Fulham left back) or like this – I think no one or another teammate is going to see badly about if I'm saying that, because I think … sometimes you need to put the interest in the medium and long term than in the present. Advertisement 'Because for me after the March camp, if I say, 'OK I don't care about [anything], I want to win tomorrow,' [there] is [a] consequence after, because I think we are all preparing and focused on the World Cup. And sometimes we need to be open and flexible in some decisions. When we talk about these types of decisions for us, it was a tough decision … It was our decision in the end, because if you say you need to come — you cannot force the player to come — but I think I need to be fair and say it was a collective decision to try to find the best for the national team and the best for the player.' 'We are building something and always when you are building something, always there are up and downs in this period. It's true that we are a little bit disappointed. We were really excited after January. not because of the two (games) … but how the players, how the team showed the responsibility that we wanted to translate. Then with all the circumstances in March, it didn't help us to show that.' The Gold Cup was meant to be an important team-building month for the U.S. under Pochettino, his first extended camp with the U.S. since taking over after last summer's Copa América failure. Now it takes on new meaning as Pochettino evaluates his wider national team pool. That being said, Pochettino insisted the goal was still to win. Ultimately, even without Pulisic and other starters — Robinson, Yunus Musah, Weston McKennie, Tim Weah, Folarin Balogun and Gio Reyna are also missing the tournament via injury or FIFA Club World Cup duty — the tournament serves as a step toward next summer's World Cup. That is true for MLS players trying to break into the squad, but also for others, including World Cup starter Matt Turner. Pochettino said on the podcast he told Turner that the goalkeeper had to start finding minutes in order to be ready for the World Cup. Advertisement 'We are very open,' Pochettino said. 'We don't have fears to talk with the player. Sometimes it's painful because you need to tell some players: 'Look, you need to play.' At the moment OK, so far it's good, because we are checking your character, your personality, your capacity to be a leader, the leadership that you have, but at some point to be a leader you need to compete.' Pochettino also praised players like Diego Luna, who have started to show they bring value to the squad simply with their mentality and approach. Pochettino noted that Luna didn't want to come out of the game after being elbowed in the nose during a January-camp friendly, then bloodied and taped up, assisted on a goal. Asked about who the leaders are on the team, Pochettino alluded to giving everyone a chance to prove their role — whether as a squad player, a starter or a leader. 'When we arrived in October I think the picture changed in the national team. In the way that we like to translate the message and the way that we are open to give the opportunity to all the players to step up and show the character,' Pochettino said. 'Because we don't want to assume that because four years ago someone was captain now should be the captain, because the circumstance changed. I think we are very open and giving the opportunity to the group and the players that are involved to say, 'Come on, show me.' For me, it's a natural process. Sometimes some players can surprise you and can step up. 'The most important thing is to see in a spontaneous way who will step up when things are wrong, when the stress is there, when the pressure is there, who is going to say 'Hey, I am here.'' There is, of course, an enormous amount of pressure on the team to perform in next summer's tournament. The U.S. advance to the knockout round in the 2022 World Cup with one of the youngest squads in the world. The belief that the payoff would come in 2026. Struggles in last summer's Copa América, where the U.S. was eliminated in the group stage, and in this spring's Concacaf Nations League, where it lost to Panama and Canada, have upped the stakes. 'I feel the responsibility. We all feel the responsibility,' Pochettino said. 'Knowing that it's soccer or football, it's about the joy, it's about not to put too much pressure on the players, because the players need to perform. … But yes of course it's a massive pressure. The mentality and the culture of this country is to win. Advertisement 'The size of this country puts you in a position that you need to deliver. You need to show that you are brave, that you are a winner, but not talking like I am now. It's easy to talk. The most important is go and to show. Show on the pitch when you need to defend your flag there, fighting and being a team, that is a moment to say, 'Yes we have quality, I am a good player, but now it's about to defend your country.''
RNZ News
28-05-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
What did the House get up to during Budget urgency?
A number of bills were debated in urgency over the weekend. Photo: VNP / Daniela Maoate-Cox Parliament sat for two extra days last week for an especially long and jam-packed edition of Budget urgency. It's pretty much routine for governments to adjourn the Budget debate and move to urgency once all the parties have given at least one speech. The purpose of Budget urgency is to progress legislation directly related to the Budget, but unrelated bills usually get thrown into the mix as well. On Thursday afternoon the House heard from Finance Minister Nicola Willis, Leader of the Opposition Chris Hipkins, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, Greens co-leader Chloe Swarbrick, Act leader David Seymour, New Zealand First deputy leader Shane Jones, and Te Pāti Māori MP Tākuta Ferris. After that, Leader of the House Chris Bishop adjourned the Budget debate with just under six hours remaining and asked the House to accord urgency, so that 12 bills could progress through 30 stages of debate. By the time urgency was lifted and MPs finally got to go home at midnight on Saturday evening, there had been nine first readings, five second readings, two completed committee stages, and two third readings. For more on why the government's urgency plan was so unsuccessful read The House's story Government urgency plans slow to a crawl . Exactly which bills did MPs spend most of their weekend debating? David Seymour's contentious Regulatory Standards Bill is one of the government's flagship 'cutting red tape' bills. Seymour and his party have long been proponents of reforming New Zealand's regulatory system in the name of lifting productivity and reducing regulatory burden. Specifically, this bill would create principles of responsible regulation that future lawmakers would have to adhere to, as well as a Regulatory Standards Board, which would be in charge of examining current and future legislation against those principles. During the bill's first reading on Friday afternoon, Seymour told the House: "If you want to tax someone, take their property, and restrict their livelihood, you can, but you'll actually have to show why it's in the public interest. The bill demands you show your working." Labour's Duncan Webb called the bill "a cherry-picked right wing neoliberal agenda" that, ironically, lacked a regulatory impact statement. The Regulatory Standards Bill was referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee and is open for public submissions until 23 June. You may have heard the Building and Construction (Small Stand-alone Dwellings) Amendment Bill being referred to as the Granny Flat Bill. The proposed legislation is another deregulation-oriented bill. If passed, Chris Penk's bill would allow stand-alone dwellings (up to 70m2) to be built without requiring building consents, as long as they adhere to certain requirements. The bill is now with the Transport and Infrastructure Committee and is also open for public submissions until 23 June. The Public Finance Amendment Bill is, while not explicitly a budget bill, it is certainly budget-adjacent. Broadly speaking, it aims to promote increased transparency of government in its management of public finances, and also seeks to improve the practical functionality of the Public Finance Act. It was referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee after its first reading late on Saturday night and is open for submissions until 7 July. The last bill to be sent to select committee during budget urgency was the Judicature (Timeliness) Legislation Amendment Bill. The bill's purpose is to increase the efficiency of the courts and by extension the police and corrections systems. Being an omnibus bill, it does this by amending several justice-related laws and making technical changes to the running of court proceedings. All parties except Te Pāti Māori supported the bill at first reading before it was sent to the Justice Committee, which will report back to the House by 23 September. The Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill (No 2) was agreed by the House and, pending Royal Assent, gives legal effect to budget announcements. Specifically, it changes KiwiSaver (increasing employer and employee contribution rates but reducing government contribution from 50 to 25 cents per dollar earned, capped at $260.72), increases the Working for Families abatement threshold, and brings in income testing for the initial year of the Best Start scheme. The other bill that is all but law is Louise Upstons' Social Assistance Legislation (Accommodation Supplement and Income-related Rent) Amendment Bill. The bill aims to ensure households are treated more equitably when calculating housing subsidies, and perhaps more notably, it seeks to mitigate the double subsidisation of housing subsidies, which in the context of accommodation, is a term for when a boarder and the person receiving board payments are both claiming accommodation subsidies for the same accommodation costs. When the House adjourned at midnight on Saturday evening, MPs were halfway through the debate on the first reading of the Legal Services (Distribution of Special Fund) Amendment Bill, which they will likely resume when they come back for the next sitting block, which commences on 3 June. *RNZ's The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk.
RNZ News
07-05-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
Listen live: Brooke van Velden on pay equity law changes
Workplace Relations minister Brooke van Velden. Photo: Screenshot Labour leader Chris Hipkins is slamming the ACT Party for championing better lawmaking the same day the coalition rushes through law changes under urgency, calling it "absolute hypocrisy". David Seymour announced on Wednesday that Cabinet had signed off on a proposal for the Regulatory Standards Bill that sets out new checks and balances for what constitutes good law making. It came on the same day the government is rushing legislation through urgency that will make it harder to argue for equal pay in sectors with predominantly female workers. Minister of Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden's equity law changes have been under fire, particularly for the speed at which they are being pushed through, and the lack of consultation. A report that often accompanies bills, known as a regulatory impact statement, had not been done on the effects the pay equity changes could have. Hipkins was scathing in his assessment of the lack of opportunity to scrutinise the bill. "They still haven't released the advice that they relied upon in pushing through this law change. "So not only is this law change not getting the scrutiny it deserves, the government aren't even explaining properly why they are doing it." He also said it highlighted the "absolute hypocrisy of the ACT Party". "On the day David Seymour's talking about the need to improve regulatory systems in New Zealand his government are ramming through a law change that's had no regulatory scrutiny whatsoever." Hipkins said Seymour seemed to think that regulatory scrutiny was something that should apply to "other people". "Because whenever the ACT Party wants to do something, they're quite happy to simply abandon a good regulatory process and ram things through parliament under urgency." Hipkins slammed Seymour as a "total and utter hypocrite". "He goes on about the fact there needs to be good process, that law changes shouldn't be rushed, and yet whenever something comes up that he wants to do, he rams it through with no real scrutiny." Green Party co-leader Chloe Swarbrick also said the hypocrisy was "abundantly clear". "The pay equity stuff in particular came as an absolute blindside to the hundreds of thousands of women who have been actively engaged in negotiating in good faith for years now, and to have all that cancelled in fewer than 24 hours - it's abhorrent." But Regulation Minister David Seymour defended the decision to bypass an impact statement. "They also know that the regulatory impact analysis regime allows [us] to do analyses after the fact, and that's what's being used in this particular case. "That's always been part of the rule, all governments of all stripes have used it." He also said he did not think there needed to be a lot of analysis when restrictions were being taken away. "It's when we're putting restrictions on people's lives, that's when the government should be properly disciplined and have to put its cards on table." National Party Cabinet Minister Chris Bishop said ultimately the government had made its own decision. "Ultimately, governments make decisions. The government decided that one wasn't required. "The government decided that we need to provide legal clarity and certainty, and do so expeditiously and quickly. We have done that." Bishop said the government always "has the right to do that" if Parliament agreed. "Lots of laws don't have regulatory impact statements attached to them actually, sometimes Parliament just has to act and we are acting." New Zealand First leader Winston Peters, who was acting prime minister at Parliament today, said far too many people were panicking about the law changes. "We're going back to the law of 2017 which got the nurses $2 billion, so all of this panicking and fearmongering is dispersed by the last time this law was in effect." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
07-05-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
Listen live: Brooke van Velden on pay equity law changes.
Workplace Relations minister Brooke van Velden. Photo: Screenshot Labour leader Chris Hipkins is slamming the ACT Party for championing better lawmaking the same day the coalition rushes through law changes under urgency, calling it "absolute hypocrisy". David Seymour announced on Wednesday that Cabinet had signed off on a proposal for the Regulatory Standards Bill that sets out new checks and balances for what constitutes good law making. It came on the same day the government is rushing legislation through urgency that will make it harder to argue for equal pay in sectors with predominantly female workers. Minister of Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden's equity law changes have been under fire, particularly for the speed at which they are being pushed through, and the lack of consultation. A report that often accompanies bills, known as a regulatory impact statement, had not been done on the effects the pay equity changes could have. Hipkins was scathing in his assessment of the lack of opportunity to scrutinise the bill. "They still haven't released the advice that they relied upon in pushing through this law change. "So not only is this law change not getting the scrutiny it deserves, the government aren't even explaining properly why they are doing it." He also said it highlighted the "absolute hypocrisy of the ACT Party". "On the day David Seymour's talking about the need to improve regulatory systems in New Zealand his government are ramming through a law change that's had no regulatory scrutiny whatsoever." Hipkins said Seymour seemed to think that regulatory scrutiny was something that should apply to "other people". "Because whenever the ACT Party wants to do something, they're quite happy to simply abandon a good regulatory process and ram things through parliament under urgency." Hipkins slammed Seymour as a "total and utter hypocrite". "He goes on about the fact there needs to be good process, that law changes shouldn't be rushed, and yet whenever something comes up that he wants to do, he rams it through with no real scrutiny." Green Party co-leader Chloe Swarbrick also said the hypocrisy was "abundantly clear". "The pay equity stuff in particular came as an absolute blindside to the hundreds of thousands of women who have been actively engaged in negotiating in good faith for years now, and to have all that cancelled in fewer than 24 hours - it's abhorrent." But Regulation Minister David Seymour defended the decision to bypass an impact statement. "They also know that the regulatory impact analysis regime allows [us] to do analyses after the fact, and that's what's being used in this particular case. "That's always been part of the rule, all governments of all stripes have used it." He also said he did not think there needed to be a lot of analysis when restrictions were being taken away. "It's when we're putting restrictions on people's lives, that's when the government should be properly disciplined and have to put its cards on table." National Party Cabinet Minister Chris Bishop said ultimately the government had made its own decision. "Ultimately, governments make decisions. The government decided that one wasn't required. "The government decided that we need to provide legal clarity and certainty, and do so expeditiously and quickly. We have done that." Bishop said the government always "has the right to do that" if Parliament agreed. "Lots of laws don't have regulatory impact statements attached to them actually, sometimes Parliament just has to act and we are acting." New Zealand First leader Winston Peters, who was acting prime minister at Parliament today, said far too many people were panicking about the law changes. "We're going back to the law of 2017 which got the nurses $2 billion, so all of this panicking and fearmongering is dispersed by the last time this law was in effect." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
