Michael Madigan wrote:
> This is why helping small business is the only way we can lower unemployment.

>> That made a good article.

>>> Wow this is a really depressing article for anyone who
>> is underemployed or 
>>> unemployed.
>>>
>>> http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/05/the_strategic_imperative_not_t.html

Hi Michael,

Actually, it depends on how you define small business. In present 
circumstances GM and Chrysler or indeed IBM might be small business 
depending on where you put the cut. Not only that, in order to qualify 
for subsidies some companies would break themselves up into multiple 
units and soak up the cash. Meanwhile, they would continue to treat all 
their employees as day labor, or even piecework employees.

I think the better idea is to have an understanding that business is 
purely about people who have big money getting still more while 
government is about people who don't have any money getting enough money 
- people who, strange as it may seem to some, have a "right to life" 
acknowledged in the Declaration of Independence.

Milton Friedman had a good idea about negative income tax. That would 
even up the game in a hurry. Of course, you would have to precede it 
with capital flight laws but that isn't impossible either. Never mind 
work, there isn't that much work nowadays, machines do the work.

Yes, capital plays a role and should receive some compensation, but not 
all the compensation.
-- 
Regards,

Pete
http://pete-theisen.com/
http://elect-pete-theisen.com/

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Reply via email to