Q. I keep hearing people in politics and in economics talk about helping small businesses create jobs I understand why this is important but my question is how does big businesses create jobs if only small businesses is helped ? Does big businesses not need tax cuts to create jobs ? Please don't post answers like big businesses just ships jobs overseas because big businesses has created jobs for americans in the past. Also how does big businesses get consumer spending if only small businesses is helped ?
A. First off, the BULK of American workers work for Small Businesses.
Think of average Small Business owner that Employs just a few people.
They make around $100,000 to $250,000 per year off their Business.
This is Their Income.
Very Small Changes in Regulations, Costs and Tax Laws, have a Significant Impact on those Earnings.
If they Employ 5 People at $50,000 per year, and they LOSE $50,000 in Revenue for the Year, due to Gas, Taxes, Supply Costs, etc.....which will they DO?
1) Keep all 5 employees and just do with $50,000 income? or;
2) Lay off a worker and Hope to Hire them back when things get better?
I tell you, they Choose Option 1.
Just like you and me, their Entire Life is Set up to make a Certain amount per year....
There are 2 ideas afoot:
1) The left that wants to Tax More to help Pay for their Increased Spending on Social Programs. And if they increase the COST of these Millions of Small Businesses to do Business, People will Lose Jobs. Also, it has been Figured out that By Dropping the Healthcare Insurance that Employers Provide, the PENALTIES that the Government will Charge them Saves about $10,000 in COST per Employee.....
2) The right want to LOWER Taxes....they Believe, whether true or not, that IF we were to LOWER the Taxes of the Business owner in my Example by $50,000 a year, they would be INSPIRED to Hire a 6th Worker. That is one more Person that is Paying Taxes on $50,000 of income, and spending that $50,000 on food and such, thus Growing the Overall Economy for everyone's Benefit.
That is the 2 Philosophies in a Nut Shell....I personally believe in #2....but, MORE Americans would Rather have Option 1, because by Raising the Taxes, there is MORE Money for the Government to GIVE To Worker 5 that got Laid Off. I'm not sure WHY that is an Attractive Option, but more than Half of the COUNTRY prefer it.
Thanks for asking.
Think of average Small Business owner that Employs just a few people.
They make around $100,000 to $250,000 per year off their Business.
This is Their Income.
Very Small Changes in Regulations, Costs and Tax Laws, have a Significant Impact on those Earnings.
If they Employ 5 People at $50,000 per year, and they LOSE $50,000 in Revenue for the Year, due to Gas, Taxes, Supply Costs, etc.....which will they DO?
1) Keep all 5 employees and just do with $50,000 income? or;
2) Lay off a worker and Hope to Hire them back when things get better?
I tell you, they Choose Option 1.
Just like you and me, their Entire Life is Set up to make a Certain amount per year....
There are 2 ideas afoot:
1) The left that wants to Tax More to help Pay for their Increased Spending on Social Programs. And if they increase the COST of these Millions of Small Businesses to do Business, People will Lose Jobs. Also, it has been Figured out that By Dropping the Healthcare Insurance that Employers Provide, the PENALTIES that the Government will Charge them Saves about $10,000 in COST per Employee.....
2) The right want to LOWER Taxes....they Believe, whether true or not, that IF we were to LOWER the Taxes of the Business owner in my Example by $50,000 a year, they would be INSPIRED to Hire a 6th Worker. That is one more Person that is Paying Taxes on $50,000 of income, and spending that $50,000 on food and such, thus Growing the Overall Economy for everyone's Benefit.
That is the 2 Philosophies in a Nut Shell....I personally believe in #2....but, MORE Americans would Rather have Option 1, because by Raising the Taxes, there is MORE Money for the Government to GIVE To Worker 5 that got Laid Off. I'm not sure WHY that is an Attractive Option, but more than Half of the COUNTRY prefer it.
Thanks for asking.
At what point does small business become large business as far as taxing by US Government?
Q. Obama wants to give tax breaks to small businesses but charge the heck out of big business. I asked this question in the business section but no answer. Someone here might know the answer. Does it depend on whether or not the business is incorporated, a certain amount of employees, The amount of money it earns or loses, do you know for sure.
A. A small business is a business that is privately owned and operated, with a small number of employees and relatively low volume of sales. Small businesses are normally privately owned corporations, partnerships, or sole proprietorships. The legal definition of "small" varies historically, by country and by industry, but generally has fewer than 100 employees in the United States and under 50 employees in the European Union. However, in Australia, a small business is defined by the Fair Work Act 2009 as one with fewer than 15 employees. By comparison, a medium sized business or mid-sized business has under 500 employees in the US, 250 in the European Union and fewer than 200 in Australia.
The above is from Wikipedia. Now look at what the SBA itself says:
SBA has established numerical definitions, or "size standards," for all for-profit industries. Size standards represent the largest size that a business (including its subsidiaries and affiliates) may be to remain classified as a small business concern. These size standards apply to SBA�s financial assistance and to its other programs, as well as to Federal government procurement programs when there is a benefit available to qualifying as a small business concern. Also, the Small Business Act states that unless specifically authorized by statute, no Federal department or agency may prescribe a size standard for categorizing a business concern as a small business concern, unless such proposed size standard meets certain criteria and is approved by the Administrator of SBA.
To qualify as a small business concern for most SBA programs, small business size standards define the maximum size that a firm, including all of its affiliates, may be. A size standard is usually stated in number of employees or average annual receipts. SBA has established two widely used size standards�500 employees for most manufacturing and mining industries, and $7 million in average annual receipts for most nonmanufacturing industries. While there are many exceptions, these are the primary size standards by industry.
Click on the links (especially the second and third) for more details.
The above is from Wikipedia. Now look at what the SBA itself says:
SBA has established numerical definitions, or "size standards," for all for-profit industries. Size standards represent the largest size that a business (including its subsidiaries and affiliates) may be to remain classified as a small business concern. These size standards apply to SBA�s financial assistance and to its other programs, as well as to Federal government procurement programs when there is a benefit available to qualifying as a small business concern. Also, the Small Business Act states that unless specifically authorized by statute, no Federal department or agency may prescribe a size standard for categorizing a business concern as a small business concern, unless such proposed size standard meets certain criteria and is approved by the Administrator of SBA.
To qualify as a small business concern for most SBA programs, small business size standards define the maximum size that a firm, including all of its affiliates, may be. A size standard is usually stated in number of employees or average annual receipts. SBA has established two widely used size standards�500 employees for most manufacturing and mining industries, and $7 million in average annual receipts for most nonmanufacturing industries. While there are many exceptions, these are the primary size standards by industry.
Click on the links (especially the second and third) for more details.
Computer technicians: how long does your average repair take?
Q. I'm thinking about starting a small computer repair business, servicing small business and residential customers. I understand that this is a difficult question to answer, as some repairs take a few days and others take a few minutes. However, if you were to look at all the repairs in a given month and average the mean time to fix, what are we talking?
A. As an overall average I guess I would say an hour. A lot of problems are immediately apparent and easily fixed and of course upgrades take next to no time. Offset those against the harder to remove viruses or annoying networking issues and I reckon it averages an hour.
I keep hearing people in politics and in economics talk about helping small businesses create jobs I understan?
Q. I keep hearing people in politics and in economics talk about helping small businesses create jobs I understand why this is important but my question is how does big businesses create jobs if only small businesses is helped ? Does big businesses not need tax cuts to create jobs ? Please don't post answers like big businesses just ships jobs overseas because big businesses has created jobs for americans in the past. Also how does big businesses get consumer spending if only small businesses is helped ?
A. THERE IS NO WAY SOMEONE CAN PROOF 100% ANYTHING FOR THIS CLAIM.
THIS IS BECAUSE GOVERNMENT POLICIES KEEP CHANGING AND WE NEVER GET TO KNOW IF ONE POLICY WILL FAVOR EMPLOYMENT OR NOT.
BIG BUSINESS:
big business have the advantage to give stable, standardized and constant employment to people (mostly we are concerned about citizen workers). Thus, it is easier to regulate big businesses since they are already "set up." Big business will only grow (and keep hiring) if the government gives favorable policies to them (tax cuts, tax on imports/exports, lowering min wage etc). Big businesses are more likely to keep unemployment low.
The problem with them, many will argue, is that if they are not "controlled" eventually they will start treating their employees like robots. So they call for harsh laws to keep them in place. On the other hand, workers will want more and more benefits, and they will never be satisfied. If the government grants them these benefits at the financial cost of the big businesses, then the big businesses will no longer find it profitable, and they would move over to some other country (or simply do black market).
**************************************************************************************
SMALL BUSINESS
small businesses help the local economy, and the overall benefits are nothing to compare for the big companies, which achieve much more. The good thing about small businesses is that they are helpful when the economy is not so powerful, because they encourage entrepreneurship, and stimuli for independence. But since they are small, and they are local, they usually are harder to keep an eye on, and enforcing laws becomes more difficult if the government is not strong enough.
in contrast to big businesses, small ones are more sensitive to the changes in government policies and drastic changes in the economy, and they are also very unstable since they are very limited in $. This means that they have greater chances to go bankrupt. Many economist argue that helping the small business will only help those who benefit from the bankruptcies (since those who venture into a small business usually have no idea how to administer their money)
*********************************************************************************
both are essential for an economy, in one way or the other.
I personally think the government shouldn't be helping the businesses at all, but rather, open better policies for businesses to flourish. Quick example of this is the minimum salary, if only businesses were allowed to pay people under the minimum wage, then those businesses could be saved, employment would decrease (at low wages, but hey that's better than having no job at all), and it would stimuli the economy by allowing the money to flow.
THIS IS BECAUSE GOVERNMENT POLICIES KEEP CHANGING AND WE NEVER GET TO KNOW IF ONE POLICY WILL FAVOR EMPLOYMENT OR NOT.
BIG BUSINESS:
big business have the advantage to give stable, standardized and constant employment to people (mostly we are concerned about citizen workers). Thus, it is easier to regulate big businesses since they are already "set up." Big business will only grow (and keep hiring) if the government gives favorable policies to them (tax cuts, tax on imports/exports, lowering min wage etc). Big businesses are more likely to keep unemployment low.
The problem with them, many will argue, is that if they are not "controlled" eventually they will start treating their employees like robots. So they call for harsh laws to keep them in place. On the other hand, workers will want more and more benefits, and they will never be satisfied. If the government grants them these benefits at the financial cost of the big businesses, then the big businesses will no longer find it profitable, and they would move over to some other country (or simply do black market).
**************************************************************************************
SMALL BUSINESS
small businesses help the local economy, and the overall benefits are nothing to compare for the big companies, which achieve much more. The good thing about small businesses is that they are helpful when the economy is not so powerful, because they encourage entrepreneurship, and stimuli for independence. But since they are small, and they are local, they usually are harder to keep an eye on, and enforcing laws becomes more difficult if the government is not strong enough.
in contrast to big businesses, small ones are more sensitive to the changes in government policies and drastic changes in the economy, and they are also very unstable since they are very limited in $. This means that they have greater chances to go bankrupt. Many economist argue that helping the small business will only help those who benefit from the bankruptcies (since those who venture into a small business usually have no idea how to administer their money)
*********************************************************************************
both are essential for an economy, in one way or the other.
I personally think the government shouldn't be helping the businesses at all, but rather, open better policies for businesses to flourish. Quick example of this is the minimum salary, if only businesses were allowed to pay people under the minimum wage, then those businesses could be saved, employment would decrease (at low wages, but hey that's better than having no job at all), and it would stimuli the economy by allowing the money to flow.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment