Some of those things are. That's true. However, prior to that time period there was a government that gave a crap about labor. So it's not like there's evidence that the burden of government has really grown.
The Most Disturbing Economic News I've Heard of This Decade.
- Thread starter Cutlass
- Start date
Some of those things are. That's true. However, prior to that time period there was a government that gave a crap about labor. So it's not like there's evidence that the burden of government has really grown.
What's really interesting in that graph is how absent the dotcom bubble is.
Ironsided
Flower of happiness
- Joined
- May 25, 2012
- Messages
- 1,267
If you want entrepreneurs to thrive maybe you should make sure they have some form of safety net? Seems if your business bums out in America – tough luck dude – you blew it. That’s not going to get you a lot of entrepreneurs. Then again talking sense to Americans is mostly futile it seems. Too much Calvin to straighten out I guess.
The people discussing it on the radio thought Walmart had something to do with it. Not much point in being a general retailer in competition. You've either got a nitch, or you're SOL. The decline in enforcement of antitrust laws is blamed in part. With no limits on mergers, acquisitions, and anticompetitive behavior, there's just fewer chances for the independent small business.
Narz
keeping it real
Come on, you're a smart guy, you don't have to wonder.
Narz
keeping it real
My mom was an entreprenuer, she started a children's bookstore. I doubt she would have gone for it if not for my father's stable income.
Her business lasted I believe three years, I think she about broke even.
From a business standpoint companies that don't make a profit are failures but I suspect from a social standpoint they are often very enriching to their communities.
Terrifically so, because those were experiments that needed to be run. We all see good ideas, but we just can not tell if an idea is good enough until we try. When these things pop, it can be really great.
If we exclude deception, the majority of trade in the world is win/win> *I've* got a mug and *you've* got a dollar, after the trade, and that's a better world from both our perspectives. BUT, trade can only create so much new wealth. After that, the major source of wealth creation (creation!) is new products or services, bought with efficiency gains supplying previous products and services. We cannot have this wealth creation without people risking it on 'new ideas' that just need to be shaken out and tested.
If we exclude deception, the majority of trade in the world is win/win> *I've* got a mug and *you've* got a dollar, after the trade, and that's a better world from both our perspectives. BUT, trade can only create so much new wealth. After that, the major source of wealth creation (creation!) is new products or services, bought with efficiency gains supplying previous products and services. We cannot have this wealth creation without people risking it on 'new ideas' that just need to be shaken out and tested.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
Preaching to the choir. I've been a steward for 15 years. they tried to get me to run for President of the local.
What I notice is that the timing of the 1980s jump coincided with the PC boom. There were a zillion new companies making computers, computer components and writing software. When we had the market shock in 87, a lot of the companies were in the rubble.
That and the associated internet and telecommunication booms are the only really new industry in recent memory.
J
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
I dont understand what you mean by this. The bubble burst about where the lines cross.
J
The computer and internet boom had it's origins in the 1970s, but the biggest effect in the 1990s. In the 1980s it did have an increasingly transformative effect on the way the country did business. But it wasn't a one time bump and then over with.
What you actually see in the 1980s is a bounce. Most of the time when an economy has been in recession and comes out of it there's a bounce effect. It's like slamming a basketball into the pavement, it rebounds strongly, then levels off. Reagan got a good bounce. But after that bounce, things immediately went to below average. And it only got worse from there.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
In terms of economic impact, you may be right. In terms of start ups, the 1980s. When IBM made their PC system open architecture, things exploded. It is one of the classic business blunders.
J
The PC was certainly a major part of the economic story over the past 30 years. Wireless communication was another major part of the story.
Personally, I find the fact that they had so little impact on the economy more than a lot worrisome.
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
Notice how the declines happen before the crashes. They ride the bubble a bit but they turn early. I can't help but notice this corresponds to when the government starts taxing more than it spends. It would make sense, as the private sector gets less money to start businesses with.
Cutlass, that's quite a find. I've been talking about it to hella people since you posted this thread.
Economically speaking, who cares? Why should I care about whether a President is "small business friendly"? What exactly does it mean?
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
Most new jobs come from business growth. Small businesses grow the most. Large business hiring is mostly replacement.
J
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
The problem is that small business is often used as a buzz word. If you are going to use small business in an argument, you should specify a size. In the Netherlands, the size of small business is formalised as 50 employees if I am not mistaken, as the Dutch chamber of commerce conducts statistical research on small- and mid-sized businesses and can affect policy decisions made by parliament.
Well, if a company like Walmart is killing off entrepreneurs by delivering more goods at lower prices, so what? I'm not sure why general merchandise should be done by (really) small business anyway.
But is it wrong?
Tarquelne
Follower of Tytalus
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2001
- Messages
- 3,718
I suspect rising inequality. In about the same way a doctor might start thinking "heart disease" or "diabetes" the second an overweight, older man walks into his office.
But there's a plausible connection: If you've got money to play with, you're less likely to need to risk it on something entrepreneurial. Plus, of course, more people* with vested interests - which would include an entrepreneur 5 years into success - to protect from everything entrepreneurial.
*Well ... more dollars, which is what counts.
***
It'd be interesting to try and compare economic-risk taking to the job market. Especially if you could compare the US with a nation possessing a far wider social safety net. "
"You wanna quit your job and open a shop? Ok. Whose parents do you plan on living with in the likely event that it fails?"
BTW - In town here we have a tattoo parlor-cafe. Now that's good entrepreneurial thinking!
***
As a deeper structural thing, I'd be interesting to look at the internet's effect. I know some small businesses thrive because of it. Others say they can't compete with it. I wonder which there are more of. (The last time I talked with a local bookstore owner about it, btw, he was a big Amazon fan: He moved a lot of merchandise through it.)
The graph may show that people are having trouble shifting from a market without the internet to one with the internet. I'd expect a lag between perception and reality.
But there's a plausible connection: If you've got money to play with, you're less likely to need to risk it on something entrepreneurial. Plus, of course, more people* with vested interests - which would include an entrepreneur 5 years into success - to protect from everything entrepreneurial.
*Well ... more dollars, which is what counts.
***
It'd be interesting to try and compare economic-risk taking to the job market. Especially if you could compare the US with a nation possessing a far wider social safety net. "
"You wanna quit your job and open a shop? Ok. Whose parents do you plan on living with in the likely event that it fails?"
BTW - In town here we have a tattoo parlor-cafe. Now that's good entrepreneurial thinking!
***
As a deeper structural thing, I'd be interesting to look at the internet's effect. I know some small businesses thrive because of it. Others say they can't compete with it. I wonder which there are more of. (The last time I talked with a local bookstore owner about it, btw, he was a big Amazon fan: He moved a lot of merchandise through it.)
The graph may show that people are having trouble shifting from a market without the internet to one with the internet. I'd expect a lag between perception and reality.
Tarquelne
Follower of Tytalus
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2001
- Messages
- 3,718
If savings generally come at the cost of bigger cuts to wages, or result in great barriers to entry, or less long-term competition, then it's probably wrong.
It may very well be that general goods of that sort are best handled by Mega Lo Mart, but what you asked is far from a rhetorical question.
I suspect you've got your own ideas. Maybe you could share them.
