Where Next For Businesses After Brexit?

Where Next For Businesses After Brexit?

Mar 6, 2017

 

Photo Credit

The recent British referendum result to leave the EU came as a big blow to many businesses and companies who are established in the UK. Many people thought that the vote would surely go in favor of the EU and Brexit would not go through. Once the results came in, there were certainly many business owners watching their TV in absolute shock! Now this poses a big question for many international businesses – where next after Brexit? Here are some of the top choices for entrepreneurs and business owners who want to relocate from the UK.

Paris, France

Once the results were announced, it didn’t feel like the city of Paris wasted any time trying to attract London-based businesses over the English channel. The city even launched an advertising campaign last autumn! In fact, the city might not have needed to spend so much on their ad campaign, as it is believed that big banks have already been in talks about moving to the French capital. There will definitely be benefits with this move, as they will prosper from being directly in Continental Europe and can take advantage of the city’s cosmopolitan workforce.

The United States

Of course, there is always the option for businesses to leave the EU altogether. The EU already as many trading agreements and deals set up with the United States, so companies may start relocating across the pond to take advantage of these lucrative deals. Plus, after Trump became President of the United States this January, it looks like he may try to strike a very profitable trading deal with the UK. That means companies based in the US will be able to make the most of trading with the UK as well as EU nations.

Australia

Relocating to Australia was once almost impossible, and businesses were put off by the long distance. However, now that the Internet has brought the world closer, and modern shipping container modifications make it safer and easier to transport company equipment, lots more business owners are considering the move. Plus, there are now business and investment visas available for non-Australian nationals, helping them to set up and promote their new business. Even if you are already an established business owner, it’s worth considering expanding to an office down under to maximize on all of Australia’s trade deals that have been in place for decades.

Germany

Want to operate your business from the EU’s heartland? Then head to Germany. Angela Merkel puts so much money into the EU that Germany is one of the nations that benefits the most out of the institution. Not only that, though, but Germany’s friendly relations with its neighboring countries make importing and exporting extremely easy and efficient. Frankfurt am Main is Germany’s main financial city, but new businesses should consider moving to Berlin, which is one of the best start-up locations in the whole of Europe.

Don’t let Brexit get you down – as you can see, you have plenty of options when it comes to relocating!

 


A Dying Horse (A Move Towards The Collective)

A Dying Horse (A Move Towards The Collective)

Feb 20, 2017

By Skot Ward

What I see is a system collapsing due to the course and evolution of an inexorable progress made within the dynamic nature of the human animal. What I see within the eyes of those who refuse to allow this process to happen, is a palpable fear and anger, an aggression seasoned so strongly with desperation that it is impossible to swallow any longer. They are clinging tightly, they are fighting so hard to remain relevant that their actions appear stupefying and ludicrous to anyone with a modicum of common sense. The vitriolic hatred being stirred incessantly by these contemporary influential poster children and demagogues, is fanning the flames of divisive intolerance, and the result is nothing more than that of a last-ditch effort to beat a few more miles out of a dying horse, and the death of a self-serving desire for narcissistic self-deification merely to secure a place in our collective history. And that’s the irony right there now isn’t it? Individuals, seeking to secure a place in collective history?

Everyone is looking for a superhero, a savior, but no one wishes to sport the cape themselves, or to help others put them on THEIR shoulders. The saddest thing that there is to conceive of is the knowledge that our potential as human beings outweighs any other thought we can think of, but we choose instead to scatter those squandered possibilities and probabilities across a vast wasteland of nothingness, hoping that one day someone or something will come along and put all the pieces back together again; giving us all something to believe in once more.

By wasting our collective potential, we are doing nothing for the good of mankind, we are merely trying to keep ourselves from waking up from a shared dream which is quickening into a nightmare. We deny the reality around us because we are comfortable with persisting in our illusions. Illusions are something we can control, they’re not as scary as the results of the decisions we’ve made which we refuse to be accountable for. All of our little temporary dreams causing so much permanent damage. Are we ever going to acknowledge it? Or are we just going to let everything collapse into ruin?

We are the energy we prepare the spaces for within ourselves. We are whichever wave we choose to surf into the twilight of our horizons. It seems as though as of late upon this planet, we fear the burden of a struggle. We perceive the passage of time to create and formulate the solutions to our problems as a waste of our time, as if solutions are just supposed to magically appear before us whenever we make decisions. Or that a divine intervention will happen, just when we need it to, in order to steer the course of the planet so that it doesn’t tumble over the edge of the falls. So, inevitably we give in don’t we? We acquiesce to the flow of energy around us no matter what it consists of, and if it happens to run contrary to our values and belief structure, well, then just we hope that one day we may have the ability to reconcile its tenants against our own so we can justify all of our thoughts, actions, and inactions.

We don’t need a superhero. We don’t need a savior. What we need it’s to subvert the dominant paradigm of thinking about who we are, and what we’re capable of as human beings. We need to become familiar with the concept that “we” can become “I.” That the self can be plural. That we can be of one mind, with 7,000,000,000 vessels to work it’s concepts and ideas through. We need to stop with our incessant, selfish, individualistic “me first” thinking, which has succeeded only in destroying our world and driving it insane. We are constantly looking for simple, yet comprehensive solutions, a better way outside of ourselves, the highest yield with the least amount of labor. We elect officials to deal with global problems so compounded that delving into them at length would be an impossible task for one person to handle, and then we rant and rave, cry foul, and spit vehement hatred at the very person we have made solemnly responsible for them when they cannot follow through with what we’ve expected of them.

When in the course of our history have we ever ever looked in the mirror to realize that the overall solution has been there all along? Have we ever once pointed our fingers back at ourselves in that reflection and simply just asked, “Can I do it?” Could it possibly all start with me? Yes, as a matter of fact that’s the only way that it very well can succeed.

Do it. Come together. I dare you.

°8°

 

Skot Ward describes himself as such:  I’ve had 41 trips around the sun to make sense of this little blue dot floating inside infinite space. I truly believe that if enough people care, we can all make sense of it together.

Brian McKay describes him as the coolest guy he has ever met at a wedding.

Image courtesy of Flickr, under a creative commons license.

JUSTIFYING INHUMANITY AT DOUBLE THE COST

JUSTIFYING INHUMANITY AT DOUBLE THE COST

Jan 31, 2017

By Brian McKay

This week saw a lot of outrage over the decision of the Mylan CEO to jack the price of an EpiPen by 400% and give herself an $18 million bonus. It was outrage well placed as an EpiPen can mean the difference between life and death for many. Holding the life of a child over a barrel would typically be considered an unethical business practice.

What has been prompted by this story is again the question, “Why is our health for sale?”

It is for sale. To the highest bidder. Want competition in big pharma to fix the mess? Won’t happen. Can’t happen. In fact, the whole system can neither be fixed by or based upon competition at all.

Competition is great in some areas. Do I want to see competition among pizza places? Of course. I want a good pizza.

Competition can really stink in others though. Private fire departments didn’t work so well in the 1880’s. Can’t pay us? We’ll let it burn. Can’t pay the prescription cost or the doctor’s fee? Well your health can just burn too.

It seems that competition in health care has worked so well that the U.S. is 37th in the world. The 36 nations before us even include Costa Rica and that horrible place, Canada. In fact, we spend twice as much as number one France (17.5 percent in 2014) for far worse results. Where again is the advantage of competition?

Smart business would actually say that if a model exists that costs far less and provides better results, you go with it. The people that want government run as a business might need to realize this. Those of us that want a government that leads the world in compassion for its most vulnerable would be extremely satisfied as well.

Not only does cutting our GDP expenditure in half save money but it leaves money to ignite other areas of the economy that have higher ratios of employees per dollar spent. The velocity gets ratcheted up and that GDP thing that measures how fast money is moving, goes up with it.

Many argue unproven concepts for which no actual estimates exist. Something thrown around is opening up health insurance to compete across state lines. Again competition is proposed as the fix with no numbers to back it. The better model already exists. Why not run with that? Why are we so scared of the best fix? Oh that’s right, Republicans have a communist conspiracy theory for it. Obviously they prefer harboring ridiculous conspiracies to enacting change that stops people from needlessly dying.

The United States also comprises the majority of big pharma’s profits. Essentially we pay for everyone else. With years of patent protection there is no way the specific drug is open for that coveted competition. While there is no objection to companies making money, making exorbitant amounts while locking out our poorest is reprehensible.

The myth for years has been that citizens from other countries come here for their health care and that you could die before being admitted in other countries. Feelings are fun. Feelings taken from a crappy commercial on Fox News are even more fun for some, but the stats support none of those feelings. Yes, in France or Germany you have access to health care, its excellent and you needn’t worry about ending up bankrupt. Sounds pretty damn good doesn’t it. Walmart could actually plan on their under paid employees at least being able to see the doctor in order to keep working hard to deliver lower prices.

Obamacare has made some difference in that at least more people are insured. The dramatic cost increases that others say it has produced haven’t happened. Not yet at least. They will as insurers have been leaving the exchanges. What was an attempt to do better became a silly compromise that Republicans liken to the Holocaust on a regular basis. Honestly, all it does is suck a little bit less than the shit that came before it.

Its time. The inhumanity of leaving our most vulnerable without the care they need while spending at least double of everyone else equals nothing less than insanity. We can do better and our health is not a profit center.

Please feel free to write the greedy bitch at Mylan and tell her to go fuck herself. You may certainly use my name.

 

Brian McKay is a co-founder of zenruption. As an MBA he thinks capitalism can be great when used responsibly, kind of like alcohol. Oh that’s right, he has often violated that principle. The results usually speak for themselves the next morning.

 

 

 

 

Feature photo courtesy of Flickr, under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial license

WHEN TIME RUNS OUT ON THE TEST JUST FILL IN C

WHEN TIME RUNS OUT ON THE TEST JUST FILL IN C

Jan 31, 2017

By Brian McKay

What is a conscientious voter to do? We either have status quo or worse. That’s it. Stay the fucked up same or be even more fucked up. What a great choice.

One could say that the American people are getting screwed. I might go so far as to say that we screwed ourselves. We refused to educate ourselves and we refused to accept actual positive change over the status quo. The funny thing is that exceptionalism comes up in every narrative of the major parties and allows us the opportunity to forget how far other nations have started to eclipse us because obviously we know what is best and can only be right.

We are running out of time. Start marking C on the unfinished questions.

Race relations are deteriorating and starting a downward spiral based on years of unaddressed systemic inequality. Wealth disparity has exceeded levels last seen in the Golden Age. Mass shooting have become commonplace. A significant proportion of our population believes the statement written on the Statue of Liberty is pure junk. Families that have lost children in war zones are fair game to be criticized and a major political party can attempt to censor the best candidate it has had in years. Oh… and the Russians might be involved in a bunch of it.

What is a country to do when our best options are third party candidates? Maybe it is time to vote for them for once. Actually I like them… both. They are better than anything the mainstream can seem to put together with their manipulation and dysfunction. I’ll take either one, though I lean Green for sure.

That’s it folks. America got left with subpar. The least of two evils is what we have with major parties. I am imploring you to reject that notion for once and all. It’s time. Let’s rethink for once and bash on the system that has been failing us. Seriously, Congress has an 11 percent approval rating and you will most likely reelect the same guys. For fucks sake, just vote for the guy that wears horns on his head and promises free ponies for once. Seriously, he might actually get more done.

And this whole exceptionalism thing? Let it go. Large companies will often tell their employees how spectacular they are while being surpassed by the small and nimble startups. Yeah, the U.S. has become that large company. Hubris kills and it is now killing us as a nation.

Our health care is abysmal at 37th in the world. We have crafted a narrative that anyone can make it in America when we sit at 17th on the social mobility list and let’s not get started where we are on the happiness list.

So why do we keep buying the same shit? Both political party conventions were train wrecks. One candidate easily challenges Andrew Jackson for the asshole award and wins while the other one probably runs her own crime syndicate.

How did we get here? Laziness? Stupidity? Buying the lies and hype?

I have no idea but the U.S. has become a powder keg that is ready to blow. 2017 will most likely be one of the most disruptive years in our history regardless of who wins the Presidency and the captures the Senate and House. And guess what? It’ll still be a stalemate disaster where nothing gets done.

So at this point I guess we have nothing left to lose. Go out and vote third party this year. While you’re at it lift a middle finger to the traditional parties we have been saddled with for far too long.

Even Sisyphus found redemption in telling the gods to “Fuck Off” while pushing that boulder every day.

 

Brian McKay is a co-founder of zenruption. He is basically done with it all. The minute your child states her desire to move to Canada, that tells you where we truly have ended up. Vote your conscious this year and forget the winner equation.

 

 

 

 

Feature photo courtesy of Flickr, under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial license

Who Is Really Casting Your Vote?

Who Is Really Casting Your Vote?

Jan 29, 2017

By Ashley Richardson

For most Sanders supporters, the last year has been difficult to cope with. The divide between those voting for Green Party candidate, Jill Stein, and those planning to write in Bernie Sanders is becoming a growing concern. Some will vote for Bernie if the DNC replaces Hillary Clinton (unlikely), while others are dedicated to voting Green, regardless. One scandal after another has further revealed the devious nature of the “democratic” candidate, Hillary Clinton, as well the media’s bias unwillingness to cover topics exposing such. More than ever, I’ve resorted to personal research and peer input to sift through information, and while this is good practice, it’s also time consuming and frustrating at times. This election cycle has further destroyed my trust in the United States government as well as the companies I rely on daily.

Some states have “sore loser” laws, dictating that candidates who lost in the primary election cannot then run as an independant in the general election. When I searched these legalities using google, I was provided with the following information:

  “Sixteen states confirmed to Conservative Review that they have sore-loser laws which apply to presidential candidates: Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina,South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia.”

Google even offers this information to anyone who searches for something remotely similar:

 

This information is disheartening, to say the least. For some, this result may be the end of research road and solidify a vote. I personally question any information provided by a website with a clear political bias (conservativereview.com) and continued into the search result from Ballotpedia.com. The information I found there, said something quite the contrary.

 

Ballotpedia.com –

“Ballot access expert Richard Winger has argued that, generally speaking, “sore loser laws have been construed not to apply to presidential primaries.” In August 2015, Winger compiled a list of precedents supporting this interpretation. He argued that in 43 of the 45 states with sore loser laws on the books, the laws do not seem to apply to presidential candidates. Winger claimed that sore loser laws apply to presidential candidates in only two states: South Dakota and Texas.”

We have two conflicting results. Who is to be trusted? Can anyone be trusted?

Most recently, Matt Lieberman of Sourcefed posted a video demonstrating a clear bias in google’s search output, supporting Clinton. An investigation was conducted byRobert Epstein of The American Institute for Behavioral Research, the article and results can be found here.

Obviously it’s too late for Bernie to run as an independent, so the information provided in my example is somewhat irrelevant. But for those still planning to cast their vote for Bernie, please research the legalities, and not just for your state. Unless your vote is intended only as a protest, whether or not a Bernie has met the requirements necessary for a qualified win is quite relevant.

 

 

By Ashley Richardson

For most Sanders supporters, the last year has been difficult to cope with. The divide between those voting for Green Party candidate, Jill Stein, and those planning to write in Bernie Sanders is becoming a growing concern. Some will vote for Bernie if the DNC replaces Hillary Clinton (unlikely), while others are dedicated to voting Green, regardless. One scandal after another has further revealed the devious nature of the “democratic” candidate, Hillary Clinton, as well the media’s bias unwillingness to cover topics exposing such. More than ever, I’ve resorted to personal research and peer input to sift through information, and while this is good practice, it’s also time consuming and frustrating at times. This election cycle has further destroyed my trust in the United States government as well as the companies I rely on daily.

Some states have “sore loser” laws, dictating that candidates who lost in the primary election cannot then run as an independant in the general election. When I searched these legalities using google, I was provided with the following information:

  “Sixteen states confirmed to Conservative Review that they have sore-loser laws which apply to presidential candidates: Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina,South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia.”

Google even offers this information to anyone who searches for something remotely similar:

 

This information is disheartening, to say the least. For some, this result may be the end of research road and solidify a vote. I personally question any information provided by a website with a clear political bias (conservativereview.com) and continued into the search result from Ballotpedia.com. The information I found there, said something quite the contrary.

 

Ballotpedia.com –

“Ballot access expert Richard Winger has argued that, generally speaking, “sore loser laws have been construed not to apply to presidential primaries.” In August 2015, Winger compiled a list of precedents supporting this interpretation. He argued that in 43 of the 45 states with sore loser laws on the books, the laws do not seem to apply to presidential candidates. Winger claimed that sore loser laws apply to presidential candidates in only two states: South Dakota and Texas.”

We have two conflicting results. Who is to be trusted? Can anyone be trusted?

Most recently, Matt Lieberman of Sourcefed posted a video demonstrating a clear bias in google’s search output, supporting Clinton. An investigation was conducted byRobert Epstein of The American Institute for Behavioral Research, the article and results can be found here.

Obviously it’s too late for Bernie to run as an independent, so the information provided in my example is somewhat irrelevant. But for those still planning to cast their vote for Bernie, please research the legalities, and not just for your state. Unless your vote is intended only as a protest, whether or not a Bernie has met the requirements necessary for a qualified win is quite relevant.

 

 

AN OPEN RESIGNATION LETTER TO JOHN STUMPF, CEO OF WELLS FARGO BANK

AN OPEN RESIGNATION LETTER TO JOHN STUMPF, CEO OF WELLS FARGO BANK

Jan 29, 2017

Brian McKay

August 8, 2016

 

John Stumpf, CEO

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

 

Mr. Stumpf:

 

This will be the first time I pen a resignation letter that details the extensive failures and misgivings of an organization. It will be both an indictment of Wells Fargo and corporate America in general and what I see as general lack of long term vision and positioning this organization for eventual disruption. It is a critique of shareholder prominence and the establishment of our country’s eventual fall from prominence, to which Wells Fargo is now helping to lead the way.

I have worked for some epically shitty companies in the past. My time with Qwest Communications saw the evaporation of shareholder value at a rate never before seen in the United States. It has been several years of contemplation as to which is the worst company for which I have ever been employed and I have finally settled on Wells Fargo because hypocrisy tilted the scales in the company’s favor. The fact that the company’s Vision and Values state that the most important part of the company is its employees while the company is constantly pushing good people beyond their breaking point.

There comes a point in organizations when the quest for quarterly profits and appeasement of Wall Street creates what I call organizational psychosis. Unfortunately, Wells Fargo has become organizationally psychotic. How do I know this? My 5 years and 2 months with Wells Fargo have witnessed nothing but disdain for our customers as our sales representatives are pushed to the limits of absolute futility under the guise of “best serving our customers”. Our “Culture of Caring” is unfortunately a lack of caring for the employees of the company which translates into a lack of caring for our customers. Despite the recent rash of bad press and investigations into our sales practices the sales goals of my own and other departments have been increased to a level which is near impossible. This will only further what is already a massive employee turn-over rate and result in a further lack of service and concern for our customer base. My time in sales has seen the disregard of our customers in the constant push of service people funneling customers to me for products they certainly don’t need with service that has not been performed. The good people I have had the pleasure to work with have been veterans that took care of their customers and cared to make sure they were taken care of. Despite metrics that could not be attained by most, at least a few of us did what was ethical and right in light of an organization steeped in poor service and willing to do anything to make sales goals.

It is degrading for employees to constantly see an organization that only touts its successes while consistently failing to address the existence of the company on multiple top ten lists of the most hated companies in America.

Wells Fargo is the only bank that publishes the numbers of its banking products per customer with its quarterly results. Currently, we have over 6 products (or solutions) per customer and express our desire to have 8 core solutions per customer. We tout this amount as success. The company has claimed that only a few bad actors have established bogus accounts and products for our customers, mostly in the L.A. area. I must interrupt our organizational psychosis to inform you that such fraud is endemic across the entire organization. Our customers receive debit cards they do not want. Daily it is seen that customer profiles have fake email addresses associated with them and are enrolled in all our online banking products even when the customer has indicated no desire to use that service. It seems the numbers we provide every quarter are greatly exaggerated.

I would posit that this letter does not pose any threat of cognitive dissonance within your organization. Wells Fargo is filled with yes men that trumpet shareholder value and the significance of the bank being the most valuable in the world while ignoring the collective discontentment of those at the front line of the organization. As such, the incentives that drive behaviors become more convoluted and impossible to attain at a higher frequency. It is the organization that exclaims its greatness at every moment while ignoring its weaknesses that is soon to fall and open itself to disruption. Our customer base that is victimized will eventually find a home with a smaller and more nimble organization that comes into the industry and offers them more. Eventually the organization will work its way towards its nadir.

Mr. Stumpf, you have received numerous awards for the return on shareholder value you have created while at the helm of Wells Fargo but you have only cowed to the Street while ignoring that which fosters long term growth. I consider such executive leadership to be weak and non-holistic in its nature. Soon Fed Funds rate increases coupled with Wells Fargo’s size will create a situation of diminishing returns. I would not hesitate in predicting that the company plans of cost cutting and reducing employment expenses from 57% of gross revenue will further constrain the responsiveness and the customer focus of the organization.

And so it is with great happiness that I leave Wells Fargo behind after this period of time. I have no doubt that the organization that is now myopic was once great. Upon my hiring, I held out great hope to develop a career, earned my MBA while with the company and performed with consistent excellence. Now I walk away to leave the company to constant turn over in its branches and service centers and hire kids that can’t manage their own finances, let alone those of our customers. All the while the company that claims they are the “competitive advantage” but refuses to foster development, retain them and pushes survival within the organization to the detriment of the company’s reputation, customer service and long term market potential.

You are not alone Mr. Stumpf but representative of the mega banks in general. Small and nimble is coming and fintech is growing. Can you abandon the organization psychosis in order to compete? May you have the fortitude to do so, change your course and actually develop the world class organization the company has claimed to be.

 

Sincerely,

Brian McKay

Pin It on Pinterest