|
|
| |||||||
| From | Message | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 changeYour statement... "The ones with the money and the power to 'create jobs' (and by that I mean the super rich top few in business), as you say, are simply not doing it." Your take is because of restrictive government policies and the tax system." First of all, small business is by far the largest creator of jobs, at least in the U.S. I don't know what the actual percentage is but it is extremely in favor of small business who employ the most people and create the most jobs. What do you think all the talk about "preserving the small business and middle class is all about? The super rich and the extremely large companies have the resources to move to other countries. Small businesses do not. Small businesses are extremely aware of (and feel the effects of) government tax policies, domestics policies, business regulations, government subsidies, mandates and other favoritism's that benefit the larger companies or competitors. The reasons unemployment is high is because government policies are stacked against business... which means small business. Government has been favoring big business (the big donors with lobbyists), and THAT is what you have been objecting to. But the result of all this government regulation, taxation and favoritism towards big business is killing small business who are the real job creators in the real world. When you say things like that above that I quoted, those things are what make me say things like you don't understand economics, business or capitalism. |
||||||
|
changeling 11-Apr-13, 09:41 |
softy |
||||||
|
change And, please explain how that has anything to do with our previous discussion here. Do you have any comment about your misunderstanding of who actually provides the jobs? Did you understand what I am trying to get across? Do you agree with any of it or do you have a counter argument/statement that we can discuss more? |
||||||
|
changeling 11-Apr-13, 18:52 |
softy I do understand your argument about small business. Similar problems here in regard to regulation and tax for them. One of the problems is that when a 'conservative' government comes to power here they tend to favour small business (at least publicly), but by doing so they hammer workers of large industry and services. The last one brought in wage agreements that were so draconian I think it was one of the major reasons they lost the last election. Governments can only push workers so far before a backlash starts. As you are probably already aware disgruntled workers can and do at times vote en masse. Small business owners are usually too far apart (geographically) to make much of a difference. I personally believe that any small business owner employing up to say ten employees should be tax exempt. This would kick start 'lower' investment in the workforce. The problem is that governments always favour big business in terms of concessions and tax breaks. Your (and this country's) lobby system is what really needs targeting. I seem to recall that was one of Obama's promises. |
||||||
|
change "a small business concern as one that is independently owned and operated, is organized for profit, and is not dominant in its field. Depending on the industry, size standard eligibility is based on the average number of employees for the preceding twelve months or on sales volume averaged over a three-year period. Examples of SBA general size standards include the following: Manufacturing: Maximum number of employees may range from 500 to 1500, depending on the type of product manufactured; Wholesaling: Maximum number of employees may range from 100 to 500 depending on the particular product being provided; Services: Annual receipts may not exceed $2.5 to $21.5 million, depending on the particular service being provided; Retailing: Annual receipts may not exceed $5.0 to $21.0 million, depending on the particular product being provided; General and Heavy Construction: General construction annual receipts may not exceed $13.5 to $17 million, depending on the type of construction; Special Trade Construction: Annual receipts may not exceed $7 million; and Agriculture: Annual receipts may not exceed $0.5 to $9.0 million, depending on the agricultural product." From the perspective of my company, these are gigantic companies, but in reality they are small business. These companies provide most of the jobs in America (and probably Australia too) even though large companies often employ thousands. There are many things the government could do, and should do, to jump start the economy and get these companies creating jobs. You mentioned a few. Our current administration is making a great example of what NOT to do in order to get the economy going. They are destroying the economy and any chance of it growing again. They have been SO wrong that it appears they are doing it on purpose. Every tax and spend policy and all the over regulations are killing small business (but not the wealthy people and not the big businesses). As I said before, small businesses do not have the ability to fight these policies and regulations. THAT is where the economy is going bad. |
||||||
|
changeling 11-Apr-13, 21:02 |
That is not as daft as it sounds, there are many small business co ops around. The fear of unionism is moot if you cannot fight to hold on to your small businesses. The difficulty with doing that is of course who actually gets top argue and lobby? Someone has to be voted to do so. Welcome to the bottom of the rung. |
||||||
|
change I say that because there are thousands of small businesses and it seems that it would be hard to come to any consensus with a group that large about what benefits to pursue. There would be so many different goals from so many diverse businesses. And, if you tried to unionize similar companies within similar industries, nobody would agree to any constraints on themselves because they are all in competition with each other. Also, the government would probably shut it down because any consistency in pricing by the group would be looked at as "price fixing" or racketeering, even possibly as being a monopoly. But, your ideas are good and we need more thinking "outside the box" and we especially need to be telling the government. |
||||||
|
changeling 12-Apr-13, 05:14 |
softy |
||||||
| |||||||
