4 ms·

I'm all for simplifying the overhead on companies, but to translate that into creating jobs is a bit of a stretch. If you cut all of the taxes on an existing co

I'm all for simplifying the overhead on companies, but to translate that into creating jobs is a bit of a stretch. If you cut all of the taxes on an existing company they would not simply add jobs to their company. The only way jobs are added is if they're necessary. This usually means an increase in sales/revenue and the need for more resources. To take a modern example, the recent recession caused companies to go on a spree of job cutting. This wasn't because of any change in tax or overhead. It was the result of lost revenue. Increased revenue causes job increases. Not the efficiencies of overhead.

breck 17y ago
> but to translate that into creating jobs is a bit of a stretch. I don't think it's too much of a stretch. It's generally not a good idea (or practiced in reality) to hire people until you have a corporation setup. The largest barrier to setting up a corporation is cost and paperwork time. If you reduced or eliminated those, you would very likely see a lot more corporations spring up and then a lot more jobs created. Even if many of these corporations went bust and the jobs didn't last at these ones, at least you would greatly reduce the time and cost for experimenting with a new company and you'd see the number of successful companies (which add permanent jobs) increase.
- logicalmind 17y ago
  If your barrier to entry is the cost to incorporate, how could you afford to create a job? Surely, in any state in the union the cost of even a minimum wage salary exceeds the cost to incorporate. That's not even considering the salary cost of skilled labor.
  - jbellis 17y ago
    Typically you will only get (even angel) investment _after_ incorporation.
  - fortes 17y ago
    Hiring someone is far more complex than just having the funds to do so. Ignoring all the taxes, there is a lot of paperwork and agencies you have to deal with. I would hire someone right now if it were easier, but I can't afford to hire someone once I factor in the administrative and tax overhead.
  - breck 17y ago
    Sorry I should have been clearer. I was referring to the type of small businesses that start very slowly, as is the case when someone with a current job wants to start a business but doesn't have the money to do so full time. Most people I know who start non-tech businesses fall into this category. It may be a year or two before they are able to support themselves full time. For them, they could use that $1,000+ to pay part time workers to help them grow faster.
loumf 17y ago
Exactly. The easiest way for the government to get people to hire is to start buying stuff from them. It's a buyers market right now and there are many ways for the government to use that for the public good and incidentally to create jobs.
- dantheman 17y ago
  The government cannot afford to buy anything it is worse than broke, it is in serious debt. The amount of unfunded liabilities that are coming down the pipeline are ridiculous.

breck 17y ago

> but to translate that into creating jobs is a bit of a stretch. I don't think it's too much of a stretch. It's generally not a good idea (or practiced in reality) to hire people until you have a corporation setup. The largest barrier to setting up a corporation is cost and paperwork time. If you reduced or eliminated those, you would very likely see a lot more corporations spring up and then a lot more jobs created. Even if many of these corporations went bust and the jobs didn't last at these ones, at least you would greatly reduce the time and cost for experimenting with a new company and you'd see the number of successful companies (which add permanent jobs) increase.

logicalmind 17y ago
If your barrier to entry is the cost to incorporate, how could you afford to create a job? Surely, in any state in the union the cost of even a minimum wage salary exceeds the cost to incorporate. That's not even considering the salary cost of skilled labor.
- jbellis 17y ago
  Typically you will only get (even angel) investment _after_ incorporation.
- fortes 17y ago
  Hiring someone is far more complex than just having the funds to do so. Ignoring all the taxes, there is a lot of paperwork and agencies you have to deal with. I would hire someone right now if it were easier, but I can't afford to hire someone once I factor in the administrative and tax overhead.
- breck 17y ago
  Sorry I should have been clearer. I was referring to the type of small businesses that start very slowly, as is the case when someone with a current job wants to start a business but doesn't have the money to do so full time. Most people I know who start non-tech businesses fall into this category. It may be a year or two before they are able to support themselves full time. For them, they could use that $1,000+ to pay part time workers to help them grow faster.

loumf 17y ago

Exactly. The easiest way for the government to get people to hire is to start buying stuff from them. It's a buyers market right now and there are many ways for the government to use that for the public good and incidentally to create jobs.

dantheman 17y ago
The government cannot afford to buy anything it is worse than broke, it is in serious debt. The amount of unfunded liabilities that are coming down the pipeline are ridiculous.