

Nearly Half of US small businesses think economy got worse - startuprules
http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2010/07/26/daily68.html?surround=lfn

======
OpieCunningham
More than half of US small businesses think the economy is better off or about
the same.

~~~
asmithmd1
Your statement is correct but the sentiment of the headline is correct in
portraying that there is a problem in the US economy.

According to government statistics released yesterday the economy has been
growing now for a full year -- why do nearly half of small businesses think
the economy is worse today a year past the end of the Great Recession than it
was a year ago?

Here is more evidence that this recession is different than any other post
WWII recession:

[http://research.stlouisfed.com/fred2/graph/?s%5B1%5D%5Bid%5D...](http://research.stlouisfed.com/fred2/graph/?s%5B1%5D%5Bid%5D=UEMPMED)

~~~
OpieCunningham
Assuming the Gov't statistics are accurate, and nothing in the article or
survey indicates otherwise, you're asking why nearly half of small business
owners believe the economy is worse?

There could be any number of reasons:

\- Because nearly half of small business owners are stupid \- Because nearly
half of small business owners are doing worse \- Because nearly half of small
business owners lack enough knowledge to accurately assess the state of the
economy \- Because nearly half of small business owners watch too much -insert
cable news channel here- \- etc.

All of these things are perceptions. If the statistics indicate positive
growth, it is up to the individual to learn the facts regarding the economy
and adjust their perception accordingly.

My statement was correct and the sentiment of the headline was incorrect in
portraying that there is a problem in the US economy compared to 1 year ago.
The headline was correct in portraying the perception of nearly half of small
business owners, and therefore misleading by failing to portray the majority
of small business owners who do not hold the misperception that the economy is
worse.

------
matwood
Sentiment plays a huge part of any economy. Whether or not it's true, the
overall sentiment is that Obama is bad for business. This leads businesses to
hoard cash, not hire, and in general prepare for the worst. The only thing
businesses, the market and the economy in general hate more than bad news is
unknowns.

~~~
CapitalistCartr
I don't think it's President Obama specifically. The deadliest threat to a
business based economy is uncertainty. The past three years have been awash
with just that, and the past year it seems to be getting worse. People respond
to uncertainty by hoarding.

Specifically, the Federal Government seems to be thrashing about with no clear
message, no clear vision, and no clear plan. Lots of proposed, complex
proposed new laws make things worse, not better. Spending bills to help
businesses that are elaborate or have elaborate requirements, with unclear
goals are an example.

~~~
protomyth
The current administration didn't do themselves any favors by picking such
large legislation, letting congress do most of the writing, and not clearly
communicating how these large programs would bring down unemployment and
reduce the overall cost of owning a business. The whole handling of GM /
Chrysler doesn't inspire confidence. People need to calm in a crisis, but it
seems people from both sides of the isle are more interested in soundbites and
demonizing groups of people.

Big movements don't make people feel easy about stability.

------
alexforster
Nearly half of US small business owners are Republican.

~~~
Unseelie
And the other half? Certainly not Democrats, none of them.

------
forkandwait
The basic fallacy is that individuals' yearly income is large is directly
reflective of whether or not the US economy is in good shape, especially
business owner's yearly income.

Sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't. Especially with large corporations in
the US, when owners take huge cuts for their personal income/ bonuses/ etc
that means that less money gets invested into capital; overall, this is a bad
thing for the economy AS A WHOLE. So, actually, if we siphon more from the top
owners/ earners and force them to reinvest into capital (human and otherwise),
we might actually have a better economy.

(ducking from the HN libertarians...)

~~~
matwood
Who do you think is more likely to spend money in a way that not only
transfers but creates more wealth. The government or a business owner?

As an aside, what do you think top owners/earners do with their money? Hint,
they are not stuffing it in their mattresses.

~~~
forkandwait
To be honest, I trust a democratically run government orders of magnitude more
than I trust business owners.

I think top owners/ earners often buy luxury goods, invest overseas, buy land
(switching ownership of land does nothing to increase capital), and otherwise
aggrandize themselves rather than the community/ nation. I think this is
especially true when said capitalists invest in enterprises with which they
have no personal stake -- e.g., buying Ford stock because it has X rate of
return and Y risk, not because they actually want to make cars.

One note -- socialist like myself hold the highest criteria to be the good of
the collectivity, not an individuals' benefit. On this point I can't really
argue, except to say it is my belief -- maybe merely because I don't come from
a family of successful capitalists.

~~~
matwood
The OP said business owners and top earners. Wikipedia says that in 2006 the
median income in the US was $32,140. I'm going to guess that most here on HN
are making more than that (and some probably much much more). It's easier to
look up towards the people making millions of dollars and miss that
statistically you could also be considered one of those top earners. Are you
ready to give up huge portions of your income to the government and let them
decide how to spend it?

I think the recent hoopla over the financial reform bill and how it shut out
small investors from investing in a startup shows how disconnected the policy
makers are with reality. Are those the people you want making decisions on the
next startup to fund? Even though they revised the bill, they kept the net-
worth requirement of $1M excluding ones primary residence.

[http://www.angelcapitalassociation.org/resources/public-
poli...](http://www.angelcapitalassociation.org/resources/public-
policy/federal-policy-issues/highlights/)

