Annual Multi Trip Travel Insurance Explained

An upshot of the escalation in the availability of discount flights and budget accommodation has been that more and more Australians are heading off overseas. Combine this with increasingly hectic schedules and you see more people taking a number of shorter breaks than one or two extended holidays. As a result, Australia's frequent travelers are discovering the remarkable value of annual multi trip travel insurance. If you're buying individual single trip travel insurance policies every time you go overseas you could be spending more than you need to on your travel insurance.

To ensure that you are choosing the most appropriate cover, think about the holidays, business trips and school trips you, your partner and your family are likely to take this year. If you're planning to travel overseas more than once, then buying an annual multi trip travel insurance policy could save you both valuable time and money compared to the inconvenience and expense of taking out several single trip travel insurance policies.

Annual multi trip travel insurance is a great way to guarantee that you are covered for all your trips, even those last minute breaks. An annual travel insurance policy will also give you peace of mind as you will not find yourself in the situation where you've forgotten to ensure that your travel insurance cover is in place. Once you have bought your policy, you can sit back and relax for the next 12 months knowing that both your leisure and business trips are suitably covered.

Here are a few things to look out for when buying annual multi trip cover:

¥ What is the maximum duration you can be insured for any one trip? Most policies have a maximum number of days for leisure travel and a maximum number of days for business leisure. If you are planning to be away for longer then you should look at buying a single trip travel insurance policy.

¥ Are you too old? Most policies have a maximum age.

¥ Is there a limit to the total number of trips through the year?

¥ Does it cover business travel?

¥ Does it allow your partner or children to travel on their own?

¥ Does it cover frequent flyer points?

¥ Does it cover trips within Australia?

Understanding the Boundary Between Education and Literacy

The Title is self-explanatory. Let’s clear our concepts first;

What is Literacy?

Literacy is the ability to read, write and express ourselves. The key to literacy is reading development, a progression of skills that begins with the ability to understand spoken words and decode written words, and culminates in the deep understanding of text.

What is Education?

I define Education as the capability to use the ability to express ourselves. This is one line definition of education. Education is the application of literacy, not just the literacy.

A person can’t say that “I am educated because I know how to read, write and express myself.”

Coming to my point, Are we really getting educated or just literate? People pursuing great degrees are still left unemployed. Students with great minds and talents are unemployed and maximum number of unemployment can be seen in engineering. Why is this? The answer to all these questions is THEY ARE JUST LITERATE, NOT EDUCATED.

They lack skills because they just know to express themselves but they don’t know how to express, why to express and what to express. Education involves whole methodology of applying skills, to foster development and exploring new ideas.

Now, coming to India’s education system, I believe that India is focussing on its academics but not in proper manner. Children here are characterized on the basis of their grades, marks and how much they know, not on their talent, skills and how much they discover the undiscovered. The children who have knowledge are intelligent but the children who discover and explore knowledge are called to be wise and genius.

Taking an example, Albert Einstein found no profit and interest in knowing history and learning those dates, left one of the best schools by giving fake medical certificate of nervous breakdown and started discovering the undiscovered, exploring the unexplored and fostering the science and technology not for anyone else but for himself, for getting inner satisfaction and peace. He is one of the best scientists who brought a new look to the era of science.

The people in India who are extremely talented and skillful, leave the country for getting better jobs and opportunities in foreign cities. Why this happens? What is the reason? What makes people and talents of India to leave such a wonderful country? Is this because of outer fantasies, glories or fame? No, the answer is, India lacks in its education system which makes Indian talents to settle outside.

India is a democratic developing country. India is developing constantly in its academics but in wrong way. We are just getting LITERATE, not EDUCATED.

Leaving a question for you;

Are you just literate or educated?

The Most Important Things to Know Before Potty Training Boys

Is potty training boys harder than potty training girls?

Some say "Yes", I say "No, not really."

I only add the "not really" part because potty training boys properly requires a bit more preparation only because parents have to make a few more decisions before beginning (which I'll discuss below). But the basic approach is exactly the same for potty training boys and girls.

So, in spite of what you may have heard, the following "myths" are not true:

1. Boys are more stubborn and less motivated than girls, and therefore harder to potty train.
2. Potty training boys is a lot longer process than potty training girls.
3. Boys are less motivated and therefore less cooperative during potty training.
4. Boys can not be potty trained until they're three.

If you believe any of the above statements, the first thing you should do is erase them from your memory bank, because they're simply a bunch of hooey, and if you buy into any of them, you're doing your son and your Wallet a big disservice.

Therefore, let me set the record straight. If your son is a normal, healthy toddler he should be ready for potty training at about 18 months (average) although some boys are ready earlier or later – anywhere from 12 to 27 months.

Boys who are ready for potty training will often begin to imitate their fathers or brothers (it's as though they realize the differences in genders) and may even start to stand at the toilet like them (even if they have no idea what to do once there !). And once the potty training process begins, they may also ask to use the toilet like them. If so, go for it!
If your child wants to be like daddy or like his older brother and believers, by all means, then let him stand! Power struggles are big no-nos in the potty training world …

So, what is the biggest difference between potty training boys and potty training girls? In my opinion, the only significant variance between the two is that parents need to decide ahead of time if they'll train their sons to urinate standing up or sitting down, so they'll know what kind of equipment they'll need.

My advise? Teach boys to urinate and have bowel movements sitting down. Period. (By the way, The American Academy of Pediatrics supports this advice).

Here's why:

1. You'll need less equipment. You can begin training using a potty chair only – no need for stools, urinals, and the like.

2. They'll learn "potty basics" faster. Remember, your son is learning a brand new skill – one that requires his – and yours – complete concentration and cooperation. So, why complicate the process by introducing too many things at once? Once your son has learned to use the potty, the big learning curve is over and it's reliably easy to teach them to urinate standing up, when the time is right.

3. Potty chairs are much "friendlier" when children are sitting. Consider this … potty chairs are low to the ground (purposefully, so toddlers can get on and off them easily), less "weak," and have much smaller openings than traditional toilets. Therefore, when children pee standing up, there's likely to be a good deal of splashing. The alternative is a urinal for peeing, and a potty chair or toilet for poop; A toilet for both; Egypt a potty chair for both. If you choose to use a toilet, you'll need to make sure you have a step stool (so your son can get on and off the processed by himself) and should consider purchasing a seat reducer (or else there's a better than even chance That your son may be frightened by the large opening – a very common fear).

4. You'll have less mess. Just put, potty training boys standing up is just plain messy, because little boys are notoriously bad aims – even with the best of intentions – so you can expect lots of dribbling down the potty chair, on the seat, and yes, all over the Floors and walls. It just comes with the territory.

5. Potty chairs are more flexible. One of the very best things about potty chairs is their portability. That's right … you can load them up and bring them with you, and your son can pee pee or poop on the fly (no pun intended:>). Trust me, this will come in very, very handy during your potty training journey. For whatever reason, you'll find that your child suddenly has to pee (and I mean, "really, really bad.") At the most inopportune times and your portable potty chair will be a Godsend. Yes, little boys can urinate in a potty chair standing up, but you'll need to bring lots of wipes with you!

Please also keep in mind that regardless of whether you're potty training boys or girls, consistency is king (in fact this is one of the core principles of our potty training system)! So, please see to it that whichever method you use, it's reinforced by all of the other adults who come in regular contact with your son.

This is especially true if your son is enrolled in pre-school, day care or has a nanny or babysitter. In fact, some organizations have very specific rules regarding potty training – especially as it relates to potty training boys. Therefore, it's a good idea to check with your childcare providers beforehand, so you're all on the same page.

Once again, I hope my advice on potty training boys has been helpful and you'll take the time to check out my other potty training articles!

Family, Incest, and Law

Family Values ​​in Ancient Times:

Many people of the present make some very grave and disturbing assumptions about prior unethical behavior by humans. My theories may be biased and overly appreciative of a time before Empire and there is less data due to the destructive power of Empire and the hegemony to go on. However, that data is more pure and less likely to have been promoted or propagandized for the interests of power-mongers. Top scholars and those who are regarded as great academies still debate whenever women ever had equal rights and some state there were never matriarchal societies of great note. It would be a surprise for me if there were not many different approaches used in various cultures and millennia before the Ice Age we just experienced and thereafter, leading up to what we call history. Much of history today has all the marks of hegemony akin to the Middle Ages according to John Ralston Saul who says it "has come to resemble the obscure and controlling scholasticism of the Middle Ages." (1)

Could it be that ethics and moral behavior had higher importance in the communal homes of the Kelts and North American Indians, as well as other societies through this awesome world? We now know it has been traversed by ancient humans who loved and played all over the place for a far longer period than we have been lead to believe even though many may not be aware of these facts. Is it possible that basic principles were easily communicated and respect was the goal of people long ago? Why even debate the point about power and money – they had little need of it. Western society still has much of the ingrained misogyny of millennia of macho Mediterranean mores and the rest of the world is far worse. What greater issue is there than incest and family violence? It rots the fabric of families and society as a whole. This quote from respected anthropologist Carlton Coon about the 'hunting societies' of prehistory sets a stage we need to appreciate and evaluate.

"While under certain circumstances, in some societies, a young man may marry a woman past menopause, he may manage to have sexual relations with other women, and may possibly get a nubile second wife." (2)

This seems a workable arrangement that includes education and the planning of families to avoid unnecessary abortion or mouths who are not really cared for, does not it? The older woman would probably be able to satisfy the early sexual energy of the young man, without leading their social or tribal culture into all the problems associated with children having children such as often happen today. The young man might even develop some sexual techniques and understand his urges better than pure lustful infatuation or the need to run off to fight in order to get rape and pillage payment for some Lord or Caesar. Then when financially and emotionally prepared for parenting he might actually do a decent job. Coon was able to observe this still exists in some Neolithic societies of the present day. When the second wife arrived it might present some problems but in most cases the first wife would probably enjoy helping the new wife to understand her opportunities better. Yes, I do overstate the case, I suppose, but in the Keltic clandoms it was even better than I am suggesting.

Kids were a source and source of pride for the whole clan. In the dynamic of raising a child this allowed for many things to occur in a more mature environment with less emotional blackmail. That does not lessen the aspirations parents have for their children but it makes for a lot less vicarious pressure, as parents have to spend all their waking hours attending to the needs of kids; Who see a way to get what they want by playing to the unrealistic parents who have yet to learn what they need to know. There are aspects of North American Indians tribes that show a similar approach to child-raising. The Stadacona Indians sent some of their children with Cartier, much as the Kelts shared educational opportunities with trading partners. Aunts and uncles do the disciplining of children among the Cree. The extended family and communal living is very clannish and even Gibbon noted there were heraladic Indian regalia that mirrored those of British heraldry.

The Hurons and Iroquois are most like the Irish or Norse Kelts in their social structure. Crimes committed by a member of a family or clan (tribe) are paid for by the whole family. With this kind of policing or morals bureaucracy would starve for want of something to do. The compassion and behavior modification of a family is better than that of the police or prisons, I think. The women of the Iroquois were the decision makers in most cases except the daily running of a war once it was approved. These women owned the assets or leaseholds. No one owned land just as was true in the land use laws of the Kelts which the English had to expunge along with all other just and fair culture when they finally forced Ireland under their rule. The Indians still practice Potlatch or the giving of respect and assets respectively the 1920s law against it in Canada. We can all imagine the Tax collectors do not like this kind of custom. It was much more than mere taxes the government bought and the Supreme Court had ruled the government and Catholic Church were intent on the total destruction of Indian beliefs, in recent rulings.

"In any event, the incest tabus recognized in any given hunting society bear some relationship to his choice (or to his and / or her parents' choice) of a marital partner." Of these prohibitions there are three basic and quite different incest tabus, Prohibiting intercourse between father and daughter, mother and son, and brother and sister. These prohibitions are not based on instinct or the inductive experience of the genetic consequences that sometimes result {Like the idiots and haemophiliacs or sexual deviates who lead us as a result of 'Noble' heritage – to war and other great heroic endeavors.} Some individuals violate them, but if so the violations do not result in marriage.

To a considerable extent these primary incest tabus are based on two kinds of antisocial results. Parent-child intervention would disrupt the lines of authority between generations, lines that hold the family together. Brother-sister intercourse during adolescence would inhibit intermarriage between families, reducing their interdependence. There was a married woman to have an intercourse with her brother, it would create a state of serious conflict between her husband and his brother-in-law, two kinsmen by marriage who, in certain cultures, might need each other's confidence and help. " 3)

The 'controlling scholasticism of the Middle Ages' referred to by Ralston Saul was part of the continuing effort to destroy these real family values. The marriage laws of the Kelts had to be eliminated because these laws were equitable and fair to women and children. Bastards were not ever possible in Keltic society and the idea of ​​a single mother was totally different than it is today. Of course, the payment of mercenaries including the rape and pill which enabled men to gradually lose all decent tabus or constructs based on the ancient means of care for each other that were part of all the systems Brotherhood developed, through common sense. The elevation of Gods from the state of hero (mere human) to Divine Rights and separate from Nature, is at the root of a lot of it. Heyerdahl thinks Odin was a Keltic king in southern Russia around the time of Christ and I find that quite possibly. When man began to say other men were unable to comprehend nature and needed an interpreter for the collective soul of humanity and all life, things began the downward drift to the hegemony that often even sins man has a soul.

The extent of character assassination by academies that do not delve into the reasons for Caesar's publication or quote others who did not employ due diligence is as evident today as it ever was. The people who focus on Kelistic sacrifices and trophy head customs are telling a fact but not the whole truth. What is abortion and capital punishment if not sacrificing the life of people, perhaps for a common good? Victorian prudishness developed the 'sins and demons' fear-mongering of Jehovian greed even further. In fact the Western Tradition has succeeded in the destruction of all Ancient Knowledge if you were to believe what is allowed to be distributed through 'official' or educational channels. The Temples of Saphos and Mesopotamia joined all Mediterranean cultures in some form of forced prostitution for women, while the Biblical 'Devoted Ones' were sacrificed when the priest or his cronies were through with other obvious and disgusting uses of them. Often the orphans and waifs caused by the changing laws and racial unrest and prejudice made in these times, led souls to a place worse than the Hell ruled by the Catholic created Satan. The excellent book called The Golden Bough by Sir James Frazer gives ample evidence from reliable sources about burning Red Heads and women of all classes being forced to sell their bodies and give the money to the Temple. It may have started with Abraham (and other Ur-Story proponents with their harems) and his baby-factories but it was certainly not the way of ancient Kelts even after his time. The Indians of North America and the natives of Hawaii are ample testimony of the diversity of Keltic egalitarian approaches.