Are you playing to be a sheep?


People accept atrocious conditions, or simply stupidities without questioning.

I’m not going to talk about giving around 50% of what you make in your salary to the government in taxes.

Let’s keep that for another day.

​

Let’s talk about “changing the hour” or the Daily Saving Time thing.

When was the last time that you voted for such a change?

Have you been every asked?

People think that they live in democracies and have right to vote or at least have an opinion.

​

Well… the idea of changing the hour is old. Very old.

​

Benjamin Franklin, as soon as in 1784, suggested that people could save candles by getting up earlier in the summer. He said it as a joke.

​

But then, a New Zealander, George Hudson, an entomologist, in 1895, suggested shifting clocks to gain more daylight in the evening so that he could have more daylight after work for collecting insects.

Con dos cojones! Or “with two balls”... Things like this is why I love NZ…

​

But well… reality is that Germany was “jodida” during WWI and thought that playing with the hours could be a good idea to save energy… the guys were starving.

The allies did the same, because if Germany is doing it, of course, it must be good.

​

After the ward, the measure was abandoned... until WWII, where leaders thought that if bullets are still effective to kill people, “changing the hour” must still be good for saving energy…

After the war, everyone forgot the idea… too much trouble, no real benefits.

​

But then, the energy crisis in the 70s made that the U.S. passed the Emergency Daylight Saving Time Energy Conservation Act in 1973.

Then, countries started to copy Uncle Sam, until today.

​

Today, plenty of studies have shown that the savings in energy are negligible… although that’s not the case for the effect on the health of hundreds of millions of people around the world exposed to a change in habits that they didn’t ask for…

​

We don’t work, eat, sleep or consume energy like 100 or 50 years ago… but here we are.

​

Absurd conventions perpetuate themselves without questioning.

Lazy leaders. Customs. Playing to be a sheep.

​

Things that you do at your company…

Ideas that you have in your mind about money, your career or your personal growth…

Many are just conventions imposed by someone else that probably have more negative effects than good ones.

​

Questioning why is a superpower.

​

This one and many others are explained in the link below.

​Join my mentorship - Only $24.90 - LAUNCHING PRICE​

​

By the way... There is an AI machine that says that you may like what's below.

PD 1: If you liked this email, don't keep it in secret and forward it to a friend. They will thank you enormously one day.

PD 2: If somebody has sent you this email and you want to receive emails like this yourself, visit vicentevalencia.com

PD 3: If you want unsubscribe, click the link below.

​

​

Vicente Valencia

I talk about Personal Growth, Management, Infrastructure and More | 👇JOIN +2k readers 👇

Read more from Vicente Valencia

Most PPP evaluations are designed by committees obsessed with checking boxes. Not with selecting the best partner. The result? Overcomplicated scoring matrices Subjective criteria disguised as science Endless “clarification” rounds A perfect environment for disputes… Sorry. A PPP evaluation is not an academic exercise. It’s a decision. And decisions must be fast, clear, defensible. So… how do you design the perfect evaluation? The 3-Step PPP Evaluation That Actually Works Step 1 — Choose only...

When you spend enough time in Europe, you usually end dealing with a bank. It’s as lovely as a tooth pain. The EU is the bureaucracy hell of the world. A place that tells you even how the cap of a bottle of coke must be… and of course, they did not think about any market testing or user case. What for? Well… Banks. You can’t live without them, but you hate them. Mastodonts with benefits. Shield by government. Too much money invested in lobbies… or finding imaginative solution to hide bribes...

Many people challenge my preferred RFP strategy for PPPs: “Pre-qualify strong consortia, set a minimum technical pass/fail, and award to the best NPV bidder? They’ll just bid low and renegotiate later!” I get it. That tactic has been abused in Latin America for years. But we need to ask: Why has +20% (often +50%, +100%, +200%) become almost inevitable there? Let’s look at the real causes: Why PPP prices skyrocket after award 1) Renegotiation is systemic. In transport PPPs, up to 78% of...