6 ms·

What Would an Entrepreneur-First Political Platform Really Look Like?

19 points by lincolnq 14y ago

nostromo 14y ago
A little from column D (healthcare not tied to employment, sensible immigration policies), a little from column R (simplifying taxes, relaxing certain SEC regulations, corporate tax amnesty), and a little from column 'completely neglected' (patent reform, internet freedom).
- warfangle 14y ago
  What would be a sensible, simplified tax code even look like? The GOP plan looks disastrous. I'd like us to take a look around the world and see which types of tax codes seem to foster the best business atmosphere. I recall reading somewhere (no time to find a source, unfortunately - waiting for a train) that the biggest predictor of economic success is not tax policy, but effective application of law instead of arbitrary application of law (lookin' at you here, SEC).
  - lincolnq 14y ago
    The "application of law > tax policy" seems like a true observation but may not be causal (just look at the massive amounts of corruption in India... and, come to think of it, pretty much every developing country) That said, I suspect that it is causal on the macro scale. Corruption is rampant in those countries and it turns entrepreneurs off because it's too hard to get anything done without being buddy-buddy with the fat cats. America isn't anywhere near that bad -- it's kind of the opposite, where entrepreneurs fear regulation, more than they fear corruption. From what I've seen, anyway.
- eli 14y ago
  How would corporate tax amnesty benefit entrepreneurs?
  - rprasad 14y ago
    It doesn't. It's a fantasy held by those with large amounts of stock in companies with lots of spare cash lying around in their foreign subsidiaries. The last corporate tax amnesty on repatriated earnings did absolutely nothing to benefit the economy; it actually resulted in a net loss to the U.S. economy b/c the corporations repatrited the money without paying taxes on the repatriated...and did not pay the income out as (taxable) dividends. Many corporations still have this cash lying around.
    - anamax 14y ago
      > it actually resulted in a net loss to the U.S. economy b/c the corporations repatrited the money without paying taxes on the repatriated and did not pay the income out as (taxable) dividends. Many corporations still have this cash lying around. In other words, you think that money that isn't paid in taxes has no benefit to the economy. You're wrong. Even the "cash" still lying around isn't doing nothing, it's being loaned out. Money that was spent (even on salaries) contributed to the economy.
      - rprasad 14y ago
        Sorry for the late reply, but my point was that this money wasn't put back into the U.S. economy in any form, including loans to other companies. They simply moved this money to their U.S. bank acounts, where it remains to this day.
        anamax 14y ago
        > They simply moved this money to their U.S. bank acounts, where it remains to this day. Do you really think that money sits in bank accounts? How do you think that banks pay interest on deposits and expenses?
  - nostromo 14y ago
    acquisitions
flxmglrb 14y ago
Universal single payer health care would cause an explosion of entrepreneurship the likes of which the USA has not seen in a long, long time. In the current situation, anyone with a family or a chronic condition is pretty much restricted to working a BigCorp job unless / until this happens.
- Danieru 14y ago
  I thought you were wrong but then I found this Government of Canada report: http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/061.nsf/vwapj/SEC-EEC_eng.pdf/$file/SEC-EEC_eng.pdf http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/061.nsf/vwapj/SEC-EEC_eng.pdf/$... The important figure is on page twenty. 5.5% of Canadians are self-employed with incorporated businesses compared to only 3.6% for the USA. Assuming this figure corresponds to entrepreneurship then there is definitely significant correlation. Still, as a Canadian I am 95% confident that universal health care is worth it even without an entrepreneurship boost.
  - anamax 14y ago
    > The important figure is on page twenty. 5.5% of Canadians are self-employed with incorporated businesses compared to only 3.6% for the USA. Assuming this figure corresponds to entrepreneurship then there is definitely significant correlation. That's not the only bogus assumption in your argument. You're also assuming that all other things are equal and that they're measuring the same thing. I can look at two adjacent blocks in San Jose and find a much larger difference in entreprenurship measured the same way. Yet, healthcare is exactly the same....
    - richardjordan 14y ago
      Right but on a sample size of countries such regional differences will be ironed out. Neighborhood trends within a country are not the same as national trends being referred to. The larger point remains - a fifty percent higher level of self-employed with incorporated businesses (which is a fairly good marker for entrepreneurship unless you can suggest a better one) in the country with the safety net of health insurance.
te_chris 14y ago
Seems like catching up to the rest of the western world on universal healthcare would go a long way for you guys.
jacques_chester 14y ago
Laissez-nous faire -- Le Gendre. That said, I can't help but wonder if public healthcare would unshackle a lot of employees from their employers. Not that public healthcare is kittens and icecream. Here in Australia we spend a lot of time fretting about waiting lists.
- nl 14y ago
  Here in Australia we spend a lot of time fretting about waiting lists It might be worth pointing out that the waiting lists are typically for elective surgery. This is mostly because our hospitals are overcrowded. There is no single cause of that, but one big problem is that health systems are mostly administered by the states but funded federally. The tension inherent in that model is pretty unhelpful.
  - jacques_chester 14y ago
    Well, yes. But there's also the curious fact that if you set the upfront cost for something to zero, demand is higher than if you set some other price on it. I don't think the vertical fiscal imbalance is the causal thing here. People want as much medical help as they think they can get.
- beagle3 14y ago
  > That said, I can't help but wonder if public healthcare would unshackle a lot of employees from their employers. Living in NYC, I know quite a few people who will not leave a job they hate (to be an entrepreneur or to be an employee unless healthcare is provided for and the prospects of remaining employed are just as good) because of the healthcare uncertainty factor. I had lunch with a friend who is going to freeze (probably close soon after) his startup because his COBRA runs out soon, and he hasn't been able to figure out a reasonable cost healthcare plan. So, I expect it to unshackle a lot of employees, yes. However, whether that will cause a surge in entrepreneurship depends more on culture: Austria (and to a lesser extent) Germany have single payer systems with excellent universal care, but little in the way of startup entrepreneurship. Israel has comparable single payer care, and depending on the metric you choose, the entire country either tops the startup/population density list, or is immediately after Silicon Valley (the part of the US where most startups are concentrated), with everything else far behind.
Clotho 14y ago
Roll back the bankruptcy laws to pre-2005 to reduce the cost of risk.
- richardjordan 14y ago
  This is a big one. The change of bankruptcy laws to benefit huge financial institutions, that then got bailed out by the same tax payers against whom they lobbied to get these draconian changes to bankruptcy laws passed was... well not just shocking... not just a demonstration of how corrupt and off-track our political system has become... not sure what the word is but it goes beyond hypocrisy. I remember growing up outside of the US learning quite explicitly that one of the geniuses of the American system, a key factor in its dramatic success compared to other countries, and a competitive advantage, was its bankruptcy system that allowed people to try things; put in best efforts; but in the worst case scenario get a fresh start. Getting rid of that was insane and I worry about its long term consequences. US entrepreneurs already face additional risks versus their overseas counterparts - like lack of a healthcare system not tied to employers - and taking away a major structural advantage they had is almost certainly going to have a detrimental effect.

19 points by lincolnq 14y ago

A little from column D (healthcare not tied to employment, sensible immigration policies), a little from column R (simplifying taxes, relaxing certain SEC regulations, corporate tax amnesty), and a little from column 'completely neglected' (patent reform, internet freedom).

warfangle 14y ago
What would be a sensible, simplified tax code even look like? The GOP plan looks disastrous. I'd like us to take a look around the world and see which types of tax codes seem to foster the best business atmosphere. I recall reading somewhere (no time to find a source, unfortunately - waiting for a train) that the biggest predictor of economic success is not tax policy, but effective application of law instead of arbitrary application of law (lookin' at you here, SEC).
- lincolnq 14y ago
  The "application of law > tax policy" seems like a true observation but may not be causal (just look at the massive amounts of corruption in India... and, come to think of it, pretty much every developing country) That said, I suspect that it is causal on the macro scale. Corruption is rampant in those countries and it turns entrepreneurs off because it's too hard to get anything done without being buddy-buddy with the fat cats. America isn't anywhere near that bad -- it's kind of the opposite, where entrepreneurs fear regulation, more than they fear corruption. From what I've seen, anyway.
eli 14y ago
How would corporate tax amnesty benefit entrepreneurs?
- rprasad 14y ago
  It doesn't. It's a fantasy held by those with large amounts of stock in companies with lots of spare cash lying around in their foreign subsidiaries. The last corporate tax amnesty on repatriated earnings did absolutely nothing to benefit the economy; it actually resulted in a net loss to the U.S. economy b/c the corporations repatrited the money without paying taxes on the repatriated...and did not pay the income out as (taxable) dividends. Many corporations still have this cash lying around.
  - anamax 14y ago
    > it actually resulted in a net loss to the U.S. economy b/c the corporations repatrited the money without paying taxes on the repatriated and did not pay the income out as (taxable) dividends. Many corporations still have this cash lying around. In other words, you think that money that isn't paid in taxes has no benefit to the economy. You're wrong. Even the "cash" still lying around isn't doing nothing, it's being loaned out. Money that was spent (even on salaries) contributed to the economy.
    - rprasad 14y ago
      Sorry for the late reply, but my point was that this money wasn't put back into the U.S. economy in any form, including loans to other companies. They simply moved this money to their U.S. bank acounts, where it remains to this day.
      - anamax 14y ago
        > They simply moved this money to their U.S. bank acounts, where it remains to this day. Do you really think that money sits in bank accounts? How do you think that banks pay interest on deposits and expenses?
- nostromo 14y ago
  acquisitions

flxmglrb 14y ago

Universal single payer health care would cause an explosion of entrepreneurship the likes of which the USA has not seen in a long, long time. In the current situation, anyone with a family or a chronic condition is pretty much restricted to working a BigCorp job unless / until this happens.

Danieru 14y ago
I thought you were wrong but then I found this Government of Canada report: http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/061.nsf/vwapj/SEC-EEC_eng.pdf/$file/SEC-EEC_eng.pdf http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/061.nsf/vwapj/SEC-EEC_eng.pdf/$... The important figure is on page twenty. 5.5% of Canadians are self-employed with incorporated businesses compared to only 3.6% for the USA. Assuming this figure corresponds to entrepreneurship then there is definitely significant correlation. Still, as a Canadian I am 95% confident that universal health care is worth it even without an entrepreneurship boost.
- anamax 14y ago
  > The important figure is on page twenty. 5.5% of Canadians are self-employed with incorporated businesses compared to only 3.6% for the USA. Assuming this figure corresponds to entrepreneurship then there is definitely significant correlation. That's not the only bogus assumption in your argument. You're also assuming that all other things are equal and that they're measuring the same thing. I can look at two adjacent blocks in San Jose and find a much larger difference in entreprenurship measured the same way. Yet, healthcare is exactly the same....
  - richardjordan 14y ago
    Right but on a sample size of countries such regional differences will be ironed out. Neighborhood trends within a country are not the same as national trends being referred to. The larger point remains - a fifty percent higher level of self-employed with incorporated businesses (which is a fairly good marker for entrepreneurship unless you can suggest a better one) in the country with the safety net of health insurance.

te_chris 14y ago

Seems like catching up to the rest of the western world on universal healthcare would go a long way for you guys.

jacques_chester 14y ago

Laissez-nous faire -- Le Gendre. That said, I can't help but wonder if public healthcare would unshackle a lot of employees from their employers. Not that public healthcare is kittens and icecream. Here in Australia we spend a lot of time fretting about waiting lists.

nl 14y ago
Here in Australia we spend a lot of time fretting about waiting lists It might be worth pointing out that the waiting lists are typically for elective surgery. This is mostly because our hospitals are overcrowded. There is no single cause of that, but one big problem is that health systems are mostly administered by the states but funded federally. The tension inherent in that model is pretty unhelpful.
- jacques_chester 14y ago
  Well, yes. But there's also the curious fact that if you set the upfront cost for something to zero, demand is higher than if you set some other price on it. I don't think the vertical fiscal imbalance is the causal thing here. People want as much medical help as they think they can get.
beagle3 14y ago
> That said, I can't help but wonder if public healthcare would unshackle a lot of employees from their employers. Living in NYC, I know quite a few people who will not leave a job they hate (to be an entrepreneur or to be an employee unless healthcare is provided for and the prospects of remaining employed are just as good) because of the healthcare uncertainty factor. I had lunch with a friend who is going to freeze (probably close soon after) his startup because his COBRA runs out soon, and he hasn't been able to figure out a reasonable cost healthcare plan. So, I expect it to unshackle a lot of employees, yes. However, whether that will cause a surge in entrepreneurship depends more on culture: Austria (and to a lesser extent) Germany have single payer systems with excellent universal care, but little in the way of startup entrepreneurship. Israel has comparable single payer care, and depending on the metric you choose, the entire country either tops the startup/population density list, or is immediately after Silicon Valley (the part of the US where most startups are concentrated), with everything else far behind.

Clotho 14y ago

Roll back the bankruptcy laws to pre-2005 to reduce the cost of risk.

richardjordan 14y ago
This is a big one. The change of bankruptcy laws to benefit huge financial institutions, that then got bailed out by the same tax payers against whom they lobbied to get these draconian changes to bankruptcy laws passed was... well not just shocking... not just a demonstration of how corrupt and off-track our political system has become... not sure what the word is but it goes beyond hypocrisy. I remember growing up outside of the US learning quite explicitly that one of the geniuses of the American system, a key factor in its dramatic success compared to other countries, and a competitive advantage, was its bankruptcy system that allowed people to try things; put in best efforts; but in the worst case scenario get a fresh start. Getting rid of that was insane and I worry about its long term consequences. US entrepreneurs already face additional risks versus their overseas counterparts - like lack of a healthcare system not tied to employers - and taking away a major structural advantage they had is almost certainly going to have a detrimental effect.