They always want to equate disappearing startups with lack of labor supply. That just seems completely ridiculous. Lack of labor in startups is a result/effec

They always want to equate disappearing startups with lack of labor supply. That just seems completely ridiculous. Lack of labor in startups is a result/effect, not a cause. Labor, as a general rule of thumb, always follows the money. If Startups were more successful, they'd get more investment and more labor. If you doubt this, just remember what happened when facebook opened up it's app store. Just like that, overnight, thousands of developers and start ups appeared out of no-where. As soon as people smell the money, they'll leave their cushy jobs at google or anywhere else in a heartbeat. It all comes down to opportunity. I mean, just look at the ycombinator and other investor's acceptance rates. They're that low because there's only so many opportunities. When there's too many people chasing too few opportunities, this is the result. The real reasons why start ups are far fewer, is much more complicated: an it has to do with fewer opportunities. Some opportunities are limited legally, some due to market barriers and some are just due to what's currently possible. The solution is to look at all those barriers and see what govt can do to reduce or get rid of the barriers. Look at the industries in most dire need of innovation: transportation, housing, and health insurance (where need is measured by $ opportunity) ~ and all the downstream industries that support these - like manufacturing, raw materials, etc. How many start ups are addressing these needs, and why is it so low?