Toronto to Lusaka: The World's Best (and Worst) Business Travel Spots

This summer, London-based news-magazine, The Economist, ranked its best cities for business travel, and three countries dominated the top ten locations.

Canada packed a one-two punch as Toronto (pictured right) and Vancouver snagged the two top spots. Australia's less-visited cities, Adelaide and Perth, came in third and fourth, while U.S. destination Cleveland rounded out the top five. Honolulu, USA and Melbourne, Australia tied for sixth place, while Brisbane, Australia and Pittsburgh, USA took eighth and ninth places. The tenth spot was occupied by the only destination outside of the Canada-Australia-USA trifecta: Vienna, Austria.

The combination of sound infrastructures and low expenses helped these cities to receive the best business travel ratings, according to The Economist's Intelligence Unit. When generating data, the index also incorporated other factors, such as crime rates, efficient transportation, recreation, distance from airports, climate, and hotels. It was cost, however, that clearly caused many popular European cities to be absent from the top of the rankings, due to the robust Euro.

Jakarta, Indonesia, Bogota, Colombia, and Lusaka, Zambia, ranked last, were designated the three least attractive business destinations in the world.

Proposed Program Will Help Green Growth in Ohio

Alternative energy is big news and big business these days, and Ohio is looking to jump on the "greenwagon."

According to an article out today in the Houston Chronicle, Ohio House Speaker Jon Husted proposed the creation of an 11-member Ohio Renewable Energy Authority to oversee use of income taxes used towards growing the renewable energy industry in the state. The proposal will be included in an extensive rewrite of Ohio's energy policy brought before the House next year.

The proposed plan involves no new taxes; the green energy industry would first benefit from taxes paid by public utility companies and would then redirect income taxes paid by employees of Ohio's new renewable companies. A minimum of $10 million a year would be guaranteed after the first 10 years, according to House estimates.
The proposal is an alternative to Governor Ted Strickland's push to require certain amounts of the state's energy to be produced using renewable resources by certain deadlines. Some lawmakers and utility companies feel that the mandates would cause consumers' electricity rates to rise.

Jack Shaner, a spokesman for the Ohio Environmental Council, says the initiative--structured much like former Gov. Bob Taft's Third Frontier high-tech program--can create jobs and address global warming. "From Edison to the Wright Brothers to Kettering, Ohio has a proud tradition of innovation," he said in a statement. "But when it comes to energy, Ohio has acted like a drive-by state, watching other states whiz by on the road to new jobs through green energy."

Fix it Again, Tony

WILLÊTHE NEXT major U.S. automaker expansion come from Fiat or Volkswagen? It could happen. The Euro's strength against the dollar puts European automotive manufacturers in a bind; they want access to the largest single car market in the world, but the export conversion rates are killing their bottom line. (Not to mention that Western European auto workers generally cost more to employ than Americans.) BMW and Mercedes already took the plunge (in South Carolina and Alabama, respectively); Alfa Romeo (a brand belonging to Fiat, the preeminent Italian automotive corporation) has long been planning its U.S. comeback, but lately the climate suggests they'll actually have to start producing here, too, if they want to make money. Volkswagen at one point had a U.S. plant in the Pittsburgh area, but it closed long ago. See this week's article in the New York Times for a full overview.

(One thing that left me wondering: sure, the Canadian dollar is no deal anymore, but isn't Mexico still a cheaper place to make cars to sell in the U.S.? Why would a company not tied down by UAW commitments not choose the cheapest place in which to build? Perhaps it's an image thing: European brands have some cachet to them, and buying a Bimmer made in Hermosillo might cause the customer to question the quality, even though in all likelihood, it would be about the same. Then again, Volkswagen already makes New Beetles in Mexico. The other explanation: it's not really always cheaper to build in Mexico, unless perhaps you plan to export the same vehicle to Latin America as well.)

A Common Trait of Entrepreneurs that May Surprise You

What do Richard Branson and Charles Schwab have in common with the CEO of Cisco and the founder of Kinko's? The answer may be surprising for a moment, but with some thought, it makes perfect sense.

Each of these entrepreneurs is dyslexic and, according to a new study highlighted in the New York Times, part of "staggering" percentage of self-starters that capitalize on their strengths to minimize their weaker skills affected by dyslexia. The study, conducted by a professor at London's Cass School of Business, looked at 139 American business owners across various industries.

Experts assert that dyslexic people are excellent at delegating tasks that they most likely would struggle with because of their learning disability. As such, their verbal communication skills are often elevated to compensate for troubles with reading and writing. In my opinion, this assertion is not a singular characteristic of dyslexic people, but rather a transcendent business strategy--own your strengths and know your limits. I would think this applies to successful people regardless of their shortcomings.

Moreover, people's motivation to succeed can stem from various sources. Sure, a disability often propels people to prove his or her ability to compete and succeed, but so could a desire to improve one's socioeconomic situation, the freedom of being one's own boss, or even a simple thirst for power.

All in all, the New York Times feature is an interesting one that highlights the proven resourcefulness and successes of dyslexic businessmen and women that are both common and commendable.

Environment-1 / Auto Industry-0

The auto industry suffered a critical blow today when U.S. District Court Judge Anthony Ishii ruled that California can regulate greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles. This ruling eliminates one of the blockades to California creating a healthier environment by tightening regulations on tailpipe emissions from cars, trucks, and SUVs.

Automakers sued the state over the tailpipe standards it passed in 2004, requiring them to create cars and light trucks that produce about 30% fewer greenhouse gases by 2016. In the lawsuit, the automakers argued that it was the federal government's responsibility to institute a uniform fuel economy standard, referencing an energy law passed in 1975 giving the U.S. Department of Transportation sole jurisdiction over fuel economy.

This major battle may have been one, but the war isn't over ... yet. In California's crusade for cleaner air another obstacle still remains--a waiver from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to begin implementing the program. California and 14 other states sued the EPA in November, seeking to get the agency to expedite its decision-making process in this matter.

The auto industry definitely makes a good case with its argument for a federally mandated emissions policy, but it should be one like California's that supports emission reductions and a healthier environment for us all.

Your thoughts?