“A commonly quoted statistic from the Small Business Administration (SBA) is that 65% of all new jobs are created by small businesses” so says an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal. It also gives the general definition of a small business as “any business employing 500 people or fewer.” Although I wonder if that includes subsidiaries of large multi-nationals whose start-up costs are covered while an entrepreneur’s are not.
The author goes on to reveal that “99.7% of all companies in America meet the SBA's definition of small business”, again, what portion of that are the multi-national subsidiaries mentioned earlier.
His logical conclusion was that “the remaining 0.3% of American companies—big business—create 35% of all new jobs in this country”. We have now run the gamut from any business (regardless of any financial connections) through all companies in the nation to only American companies. Not just apples and oranges, but sliced and diced fruit.
It appears from this that any job creation bill from Congress should focus on our big businesses, those with the ability to properly accomplish this task. After all the SBA says that 56% of all start-ups fail in the first few years.
The current Senate jobs bill, which Sen. Reid says he wants to simplify over this next weekend, is estimated to cost $52 billion and the House version from December was $155 billion. The Senate bill relies on tax breaks and construction projects while the House’s one was construction and state aid packages. That is a lot of our money but it pales in comparison to the funds already held by big business.
Bloomberg is reporting that “A majority of companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index increased cash to a combined $1.18 trillion while simultaneously reducing spending, keeping a jobs recovery on hold.” These are S&P’s, not the Blue Chip, big boys. 256 of these companies added about 4 times the House bill’s cost to their cash reserves in the past year. Does the Senate need to give more incentives when they have socked away nearly the National Debt?
Where did these companies get this money? Why we gave it to them. We the consumer and we the government. We gave it to them for products sold and for services rendered, since every business need to make some profit. That works out to about $1,600 per person that we gave them last year alone and just over $3,800 in all. $1,600 is just under double my Federal Income withholding for last year. And this is not the big guys. This is also money that is NOT going for job creation.
This is money that is not going for investment in alternative energy exploration (a job creator), or high speed rail, or re-localization of agriculture, or recreating our ability make things for ourselves, all good job creators. This money is also not just setting around doing nothing, it has become the plaything of our financial institutions and we saw what they did with such playthings in the past years.
Job creation is not something that the Federal government should pay for.
The author goes on to reveal that “99.7% of all companies in America meet the SBA's definition of small business”, again, what portion of that are the multi-national subsidiaries mentioned earlier.
His logical conclusion was that “the remaining 0.3% of American companies—big business—create 35% of all new jobs in this country”. We have now run the gamut from any business (regardless of any financial connections) through all companies in the nation to only American companies. Not just apples and oranges, but sliced and diced fruit.
It appears from this that any job creation bill from Congress should focus on our big businesses, those with the ability to properly accomplish this task. After all the SBA says that 56% of all start-ups fail in the first few years.
The current Senate jobs bill, which Sen. Reid says he wants to simplify over this next weekend, is estimated to cost $52 billion and the House version from December was $155 billion. The Senate bill relies on tax breaks and construction projects while the House’s one was construction and state aid packages. That is a lot of our money but it pales in comparison to the funds already held by big business.
Bloomberg is reporting that “A majority of companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index increased cash to a combined $1.18 trillion while simultaneously reducing spending, keeping a jobs recovery on hold.” These are S&P’s, not the Blue Chip, big boys. 256 of these companies added about 4 times the House bill’s cost to their cash reserves in the past year. Does the Senate need to give more incentives when they have socked away nearly the National Debt?
Where did these companies get this money? Why we gave it to them. We the consumer and we the government. We gave it to them for products sold and for services rendered, since every business need to make some profit. That works out to about $1,600 per person that we gave them last year alone and just over $3,800 in all. $1,600 is just under double my Federal Income withholding for last year. And this is not the big guys. This is also money that is NOT going for job creation.
This is money that is not going for investment in alternative energy exploration (a job creator), or high speed rail, or re-localization of agriculture, or recreating our ability make things for ourselves, all good job creators. This money is also not just setting around doing nothing, it has become the plaything of our financial institutions and we saw what they did with such playthings in the past years.
Job creation is not something that the Federal government should pay for.
No comments:
Post a Comment