Regulations, taxes aren't killing small business, owners say
Politicians and business groups often blame excessive regulation and fear of higher taxes for tepid hiring in the economy. However, little evidence of that emerged when McClatchy canvassed a random sample of small business owners across the nation.
"Government regulations are not 'choking' our business, the hospitality business," Bernard Wolfson, the president of Hospitality Operations in Miami, told The Miami Herald. "In order to do business in today's environment, government regulations are necessary and we must deal with them. The health and safety of our guests depend on regulations. It is the government regulations that help keep things in order...
...McClatchy reached out to owners of small businesses, many of them mom-and-pop operations, to find out whether they indeed were being choked by regulation, whether uncertainty over taxes affected their hiring plans and whether the health care overhaul was helping or hurting their business.
Their response was surprising.
None of the business owners complained about regulation in their particular industries, and most seemed to welcome it. Some pointed to the lack of regulation in mortgage lending as a principal cause of the financial crisis that brought about the Great Recession of 2007-09 and its grim aftermath.
The health and safety of our guests depend on regulations.
I know I can vouch for this. One time I was exiting a business and I almost fell and busted my tail, were it not for the local regulation that was there to grab my arm.
Seriously? A "lie" put to rest with one study, huh? If that's the case, than why don't we pass a million regulations a day? The more regulations, the better for business, right? And hell, the owners say they are looking forward to them, so let's get crazy with it.
Lack of demand is killing businesses. Supply side economics (something Republicans subscribe to) doesn't work.
No need to indulge in absurdisms. Some regulation is necessary, nobody is claiming that regulation for its own sake is worth being pursued.
The health and safety of our guests depend on regulations.
QE is just another top-down approach, IE supply side. Something else I'm not happy with concerning Obama's approach.That is what the QE programs have been. When people get to keep their money, they will spend it. When the government gives other peoples money to Wall Street, as we've seeen, not so much.
History proves that a business will risk harming it's patrons if it could make them money or cause them to lose money.As if his business doesn't care one way or the other about customers, and he would expose them to all sorts of dangers and health risks if left to his own devices? Sure, my comment was absurd. But it was a reply on a forum board, not a quote in a news article.
No need to indulge in absurdisms. Some regulation is necessary, nobody is claiming that regulation for its own sake is worth being pursued.
So you wouldn't think it absurd for the business owner to state this?
As if his business doesn't care one way or the other about customers, and he would expose them to all sorts of dangers and health risks if left to his own devices? Sure, my comment was absurd. But it was a reply on a forum board, not a quote in a news article.
If there was no correlation Obama wouldn't be scrapping the new smog regualtions.
Obama halts controversial EPA regulations.
Obama halts controversial EPA regulation - Yahoo! News
I think he's scrapping for two reasons: 1) even thought the regs. would save money long term by reducing health care costs, they will cost money in the short term by driving up energy bills. Not what you want to be doing when the economy is in need of stimulus. 2) he wants to take the issue away from Republicans. He makes the same mistake he can't seem to unlearn: he gives Republicans what they want and gets nothing but a one finger salute in return.
Lack of demand is killing businesses. Supply side economics (something Republicans subscribe to) doesn't work.
yeah increasing taxes on them is really going to help
The point that you missed is that increased taxes isn't gonna hurt. Andif increased taxes can reduce the gov debt issue, then something good has resulted and nothing bad has resulted so we have a net positive.
The biggest thing harming MY small business is not even the lack of potential customers. I have people call or come into my business every day who want something, but don't make a purchase. The issue is the lack of customers with money.
No doubt. And I guess raising your taxes wouldn't harm you......not that I believe that.
The point that you missed is that increased taxes isn't gonna hurt. Andif increased taxes can reduce the gov debt issue, then something good has resulted and nothing bad has resulted so we have a net positive.
The biggest thing harming MY small business is not even the lack of potential customers. I have people call or come into my business every day who want something, but don't make a purchase. The issue is the lack of customers with money.
I would much prefer a 20% increase in sales and a 20% increase in tax rates, than no increase in either. Not because I want tax rates to go up, but because I want to make more money from the sales increase. A good economy will almost always put more money in our pockets than a cut in taxes.
But more to my point, I guess I didn't make it clear that I am talking about increasing taxes on the rich. Obviously tax increases on middle class people like myself would harm our economy as we are the consumer class - we are the class that accounts for nearly all production and nearly all consumption in the US, and thus our economy is basically the middle class.
i love people like you saying increased taxes won't hurt.
increased taxes won't pay down the debt-its just an excuse for dems to spend more. and raising taxes isn't going to raise demand for your products.
all consumption? and of course you want others to pay more taxes rather than you. its the mentality that politicians pander to because of progressive taxes
You have an interesting view on this. Raising taxes on the uber wealthy won't hurt the uber wealthy -- will in fact benefit them somehow. But raising taxes on corporations will hurt corporations. Hmm.
But honestly Turtle, how can you accuse anyone of being selfish in their position on taxation when you yourself switch from tax scheme to tax scheme betraying the very principles you espoused in the previous one with the one prominent component being that you get a tax cut for yourself?
If there was no correlation Obama wouldn't be scrapping the new smog regualtions.
Obama halts controversial EPA regulations.
Obama halts controversial EPA regulation - Yahoo! News
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?