Quote:Oh please, those regulations are not killing small businesses!! It may be a little extra paperwork but no businessman I've dealt with ever said these filing requirements are making them un-competitive. That's total hogwash. The paper work is an added expense at most, but to think that additional paper work (which only occurs after you have 50 employees) is causing harm to small businesses is just not true--- And really lazy economics!!!
From a micro economic and macro economic standpoint, the problem small businesses have, as I said earlier, is that deregulation has created oligopolies in almost every industry. Do some reasearch on oligopolies. Once a market/industry reaches this level, the squeeze on small companies pushes them out.
That's just the facts, friend. If you want to whine and complain about paperwork, go for it. But you don't understand businesses if you think that what makes or breaks a business is their federal filing requirements.
All that sounds great if you ignore the reality that regulations create the olgopies you and I both hate. Want some evidence look at the energy sector, regulation says we get one power company to choose from based on where you live and what contract your local county/city decided. Regulation means we get one landline provider (granted that's going tl the wasteside since the open and competitive market of Mobile phones emerged.) Regulation means you have one waste company to choose from again decided by your local county or city. Regulation means we all have one standard for healthcare and you have no right to choose not to participate. Regulation means the state reserves the right to not only pick the winners but also the players.
You want more small business? Let's start with ending favorable treatment by huge corporations that have paid for the privilage of participation and smoke competiton before it starts with the weapon of choice, government regulation.
The state won't save you it only enslaves you.
Quote:Welp...
You know the establishment fears trump when he proposes to completely deregulate Wall Street. That sounds like a great idea!!!
He sure is anti-establishment. In reality, his new economic plan is more trickle down economics. There's nothing new or anti-establishment here. This is the GOP's playbook. No regulations,supply-side economics. Great news for the rich, same old garbage for us working clash folks.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articl...egulations
The OP above is post #1 of this thread. Look at the bolded...
Sorry JIB, but you are deflecting. No regulations and supply-side economics is Wall Street friendly. You are ignoring this fact, and I already told you that I like hyperbolic thread topics. You're pathetic attempt to change the topic is boring. So I'm gonna go ahead and say you've conceded this topic.
Either tell me the solution the GOP provides to help small businesses, or the point for you is lost... Oh and by the way, the ACA was only implemented in the last couple years, to say that it hurst small business when small business has been taking a bath for decades is stupid. Sorry, bro, but your wrong.
But please, if you can explain a GOP position, I'll wait for the answer. But your constant deflections are getting tired and boring. Either discuss the topic or move along. Saying that I haven't responded to your whining about the title of this thread is just lame and childish and not productive.
Quote:All that sounds great if you ignore the reality that regulations create the olgopies you and I both hate. Want some evidence look at the energy sector, regulation says we get one power company to choose from based on where you live and what contract your local county/city decided. Regulation means we get one landline provider (granted that's going tl the wasteside since the open and competitive market of Mobile phones emerged.) Regulation means you have one waste company to choose from again decided by your local county or city. Regulation means we all have one standard for healthcare and you have no right to choose not to participate. Regulation means the state reserves the right to not only pick the winners but also the players.
You want more small business? Let's start with ending favorable treatment by huge corporations that have paid for the privilage of participation and smoke competiton before it starts with the weapon of choice, government regulation.
The state won't save you it only enslaves you.
I don't believe the state will save anyone. But the state is there to create a level playing field for all. There must be rules, otherwise the powerful monopolize.
If you can agree with that, we can start having a discussion about the rest. But yes, you're right there are laws that our bought out politicians have implemented that make it hard for businesses. I concede that.
But there were several major peices of legislation that protected smaller business and markets that were also thrown out---this deregulation has killed competition and created the oligopolies as well.
The fact is this: It's not black and out. It's not all free market (because free market means eventual oligopolies and monopolies) but it's also not all state control because that leads to similar gouging of consumers, workers, and entreprenuers...
As someone that spends most of my time reading financial statements and annual reports, I'm well aware that most of the benefits and laws are skewed to larger corporations. Removing laws won't help small businesses. The implementaiton of law that works for small businesses and workers is needed.
The term "business freindly enviornment" in terms of legislation has been around for decades and it means de-regulating. It's helped corporations and multinationals, it's hurted small businesses. I've been witnessing this for a while now. It's just the fact.
Quote:The nature of the market system, is to drive towards monopoly... Bigger companies drive out competition or buy them out... Sherman anti-trust and regulations similar to that that break up and disallow oligopoloy and monopoly is the solution.
Incorrect. Over time innovation and the evolution of society naturally gives rise to shifts in market share favoring new producers. Companies only grow to inordinate size if their level of innovation is ahead of the societal curve. That's distorted when companies go in and buy politicians to artificially raise the cost of the means of production for emerging producers through regulation, taxes, and administrative fees.
Lol, that's a nice pipe dream, jj... It's not reality.
History shows the drive to obligioliy and monopoly. And it's basic fundamental economics taught to first year college students.
Quote:I don't believe the state will save anyone. But the state is there to create a level playing field for all. There must be rules, otherwise the powerful monopolize.
If you can agree with that, we can start having a discussion about the rest. But yes, you're right there are laws that our bought out politicians have implemented that make it hard for businesses. I concede that.
But there were several major peices of legislation that protected smaller business and markets that were also thrown out---this deregulation has killed competition and created the oligopolies as well.
The fact is this: It's not black and out. It's not all free market (because free market means eventual oligopolies and monopolies) but it's also not all state control because that leads to similar gouging of consumers, workers, and entreprenuers...
As someone that spends most of my time reading financial statements and annual reports, I'm well aware that most of the benefits and laws are skewed to larger corporations. Removing laws won't help small businesses. The implementaiton of law that works for small businesses and workers is needed.
The term "business freindly enviornment" in terms of legislation has been around for decades and it means de-regulating. It's helped corporations and multinationals, it's hurted small businesses. I've been witnessing this for a while now. It's just the fact.
You contradicted yourself. You concede that regulation is skewed to help the oligopoly but then cite it as the answer to oligopolies?
The most heavily regulated sector of our economy is the financial sector. Steep curve for those who are in the halls of power to the detriment of competitors and consumers.
Regulation more often than not outlaws competition and innovation. Why? Because most politicians are owned by special interests.
We have just lived through 8 years of the most aggressive regulatory regime in history. The % of GDP consumed by the federal government has never been larger. But the number of new businesses openning is smaller than the number of businesses closing for the first time in history. Where is the diverse constellation of start ups? Where is the outburst of entrepeneurialism?
The free market isn't perfect, but it is essentially based in reality. If someone makes the best widgets in the wrold, that's great. That benefits society. The problem comes in when one widget company can't compete with another widget company, but they made a bigger contribution to a senator to deem their competitor as the "bad widget company" and hurt the consumer. This is an extension of protectionism.
Also, your point presuposes that the regulators have any idea what the heck they are doing. Congress basically admitted that they didn't have any idea what a derivative was before 2006. How were they supposed to write rules about them?
I believe that the regulatory function of the state is to ensure things like reasonably safe food and advertisements that aren't intentionally deceptive. Once you step outside basics like honesty and safety and you start pigeon holing the business model for producers then you have an adverse impact on the number of options available to consumers and cause monopolistic competition.
Each industry is different...
If you want to sit there and complain about Dodd Frank, or Sarbanes Oxley, or any other regular that was created to protect consumers from another financial meltdown, you are wasting your time.
We live in a democratic society that was set up with a strong federal government to protect the interests of the people.
Regulations like the ones on the financial sector are designed to protect against what happened in 2008.
Adjust, I appreciate that you at least concede that the free market isn't perfect, I think I'm rubbing off on you!
Of course it's not perfect, when the goal is profit and profit only, the morality of what is best for the good of the society is of no importance to the market. That's why regulation is needed.
Without government regulation cars wouldn't have seat belts and smog would be a huge problem like it was in the 70s and 80s.
Now, the deregulation of banks on the 90s and ignoring the regulations against monopolies starting I'v the 80s those are things that really affect small businesses.
Quote:You contradicted yourself. You concede that regulation is skewed to help the oligopoly but then cite it as the answer to oligopolies?
The most heavily regulated sector of our economy is the financial sector. Steep curve for those who are in the halls of power to the detriment of competitors and consumers.
Regulation more often than not outlaws competition and innovation. Why? Because most politicians are owned by special interests.
It's not a contradiction to understand that laws, and therefore power, can do harm and they can also do good.
You agree with that, correct? Regulations are merely laws, or conceded power through the government. Intrinsically, they are neither good or bad, merely an instrument used by society.
This is what bothers me about trumps speech, and the gop in general. They push this fear of regulations as if no regulations are better. An intelligent man like you know that's just not true.
Laws are not bad, but they can be. Just like the absence of a law may not be a good thing, either.
Can we at least agree on that much?
Quote:Regulations are merely laws, or conceded power through the government.
This can't be so, for if it were true then gun regulations violate the Constitution.
Quote:This can't be so, for if it were true then gun regulations violate the Constitution.
It can be so, and it is...
This gets back to my discussion about constitutionality.
Quote:I don't believe the state will save anyone. But the state is there to create a level playing field for all. There must be rules, otherwise the powerful monopolize.
If you can agree with that, we can start having a discussion about the rest. But yes, you're right there are laws that our bought out politicians have implemented that make it hard for businesses. I concede that.
But there were several major peices of legislation that protected smaller business and markets that were also thrown out---this deregulation has killed competition and created the oligopolies as well.
The fact is this: It's not black and out. It's not all free market (because free market means eventual oligopolies and monopolies) but it's also not all state control because that leads to similar gouging of consumers, workers, and entreprenuers...
As someone that spends most of my time reading financial statements and annual reports, I'm well aware that most of the benefits and laws are skewed to larger corporations. Removing laws won't help small businesses. The implementaiton of law that works for small businesses and workers is needed.
The term "business freindly enviornment" in terms of legislation has been around for decades and it means de-regulating. It's helped corporations and multinationals, it's hurted small businesses. I've been witnessing this for a while now. It's just the fact.
Give me some examples, I've laid out numerous industries where because of regulation you have monopolies, give me an example where lack of regulation has created monopolies? I'm open to the discussion but when I step back and look at any industry one thing is constant, state interference always leads to a consolidation of power and wealth.
Quote:Give me some examples, I've laid out numerous industries where because of regulation you have monopolies, give me an example where lack of regulation has created monopolies? I'm open to the discussion but when I step back and look at any industry one thing is constant, state interference always leads to a consolidation of power and wealth.
A true free market will always result in a complete monopoly. Even if all parties start on completely equal footing one will get a slight advantage which they will exploit to run their competitors out of business. It's fundamental economic theory and it's also why Roosevelt became known as a trust-buster.
Quote:A true free market will always result in a complete monopoly. Even if all parties start on completely equal footing one will get a slight advantage which they will exploit to run their competitors out of business. It's fundamental economic theory and it's also why Roosevelt became known as a trust-buster.
That's not what I asked, I want an example where a lack of regulation in any industry has lead to a monopoly of power.
Because I can rattle of dozens of industries where the exact opposite has happened.
Quote:That's not what I asked, I want an example where a lack of regulation in any industry has lead to a monopoly of power.
Because I can rattle of dozens of industries where the exact opposite has happened.
Oil, railroads, banking, coal, transit.
Standard Oil is a textbook case of how a single company can take control of an entire market when basic regulations are absent.
Quote:Oil, railroads, banking, coal, transit.
Standard Oil is a textbook case of how a single company can take control of an entire market when basic regulations are absent.
All of those industries are and have been heavily regulated? The railroads where built with massive state sponsored companies. The energy and transportation sector are amoung some of the most heavily regulated industries ever.
And the financial sector is THE most regulated.
Quote:All of those industries are and have been heavily regulated? The railroads where built with massive state sponsored companies. The energy and transportation sector are amoung some of the most heavily regulated industries ever.
Quote:And the financial sector is THE most regulated.
Jesus people, are you being deliberately obtuse? You asked for examples where no regulations=monopolies so I mentioned the trust busting of Roosevelt & I mentioned Standard Oil, both of which were the direct result of companies taking advantage of the lack of regulations to impose a monopoly and effectively destroy the free market.
Quote:That's not what I asked, I want an example where a lack of regulation in any industry has lead to a monopoly of power.
Because I can rattle of dozens of industries where the exact opposite has happened.
Chicago stockyards post-WWI.