Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the U.S. Government -- FY2003, page 48, Table 3-4, "National Wealth"
mbs > Almost all Intro texts include a section on types of business, > sales, etc., > they they all show that propritors are numerous, but essentially > irrelevant > when it comes to sales and employment. The one text that used to > go beyond > this basic point was Heilbroner. He noted that ownership of assets, and > thus control of decision making, is more important than sales or > employment. > The last edition of his text indicated that 3600 firms with assets in > excess of $250M (0.018% of all firms) owned 80% of all business assets > in 1990. > > I have tried to update these numbers several times, but I haven't been > able to get all the info necessary. Maybe Eric can help. > > It is easy to get the number of firms by type. It is easy to get firms > with assets in excess of $250M. What I have not been able to nail down > is total business assets in the US. I have found total Corp. assets, but > I have not found proprietor and partnership assets. > > Any ideas Eric? > > Doug Orr > ----------------------------------------------- > > Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 11:57:58 -0700 > From: Eric Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [PEN-L:26609] 1,000 firms run the economy > > Well not quite... > > But data I just put in my spiffy text is: > > Number of firms with 1-99 employees in the US: 4,800,582 (or 98% of all > firms with employees) > Number of firms with 10,000 or more employees: 936 (or 0.002% of all > firms with employees) > > Number of employees working in firms with 1-99 employees: > 40,091,449 (or 36% > of employees) > Number of employees working in firms with 10,000 or more employees: > 29,715,945 (or 27% of employees) > > That is, fewer than 1,000 firms control the labor of more than 25% of all > employees in the US economy. These same firms, of course, control a large > part of the surplus generated within the US economy also. A large > proportion > of workers, however, work for very small firms (less than 100 > employees) but > none of these firms is really very important (economically, politically, > culturally, etc). > > I would never argue a political strategy of pitting "small firms" > again the > giant firms. Rather, I point out the role of these giant firms to > underline > that way that the decisions of a relatively small number of firms > (over what > to make, what sort of jobs to provide, what ad campaigns to run, > etc) has a > really big impact on the whole economy. > > Source http://www.census.gov/csd/susb/susb2.htm. US Census Bureau, > Statistics of US Businesses, 1999 data > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > > >
