A govt official came to Seattle to promotoe internaytional trade and had this to say:
The American economy is supported by businesses of all sizes. Economic progress in our new, interdependent world begins with ideas and innovation often in small and medium-sized businesses. Yet ask any small business owner and they will tell you that access to credit is the single most difficult barrier to launching the next successful company.
The story of trade, then, can continue with entrepreneurs who take their ideas to a bank willing to give them a chance. We need new companies to succeed, especially in light of productivity gains in so many sectors during the last few decades.
We need our local and regional banks across the country empowering our entrepreneurs, and the President has charged the Export Promotion Cabinet to work with the Small Business Administration and the Export-Import Bank and the resources of the Department of Commerce to make credit and resources more readily available.
Of course that is nonsense. One needs savings, not credit. It is time to cut back on these govt agencies.
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Half Right
Why Privatization and Govt Contracting Is Wrong
Privatization keeps popping up as a solution to our economic woes, and you may be surprised to learn I am against it. Let's look to wikipedia for a quick synopsis of the pro and con:
Proponents of privatisation believe that private market factors can more efficiently deliver many goods or service than governments due to free market competition. In general, it is argued that over time this will lead to lower prices, improved quality, more choices, less corruption, less red tape, and quicker delivery. Many proponents do not argue that everything should be privatised. According to them, market failures and natural monopolies could be problematic. However, some Austrian school economists and anarcho-capitalists would prefer that every function of the state be privatised, including defense and dispute resolution.
Opponents of privatisation dispute the claims concerning the alleged lack of incentive for governments to ensure that the enterprises they own are well run, on the basis of the idea that governments are proxy owners answerable to the people. It is argued that a government which runs nationalized enterprises poorly will lose public support and votes, while a government which runs those enterprises well will gain public support and votes. Thus, democratic governments do have an incentive to maximize efficiency in nationalized companies, due to the pressure of future elections.
Of course the fundamental problem is that a state defined as a territory with a monopoly on violence has no intrinsic right to exist, since violence is wrong, and one cannot derive good by doing evil. Given that, it has not right to privatize or not. Such a system cannot be reformed, with or without privatization.
Now I would call "corporatization" a process like privatization in which all of the stakeholders are givena share of a governmental entity, for them to do with as they wish, since the government, on its way to extinction, would be turning over its assets to private propoerty owners. For example, the US Postal Service would have all of its assets and liabilities turned over to all those presently working for the system, or otherwise drawing value (pensioners, etc.) The USPO would be told "in 24 months you lose your monopoly of first class mail, and any other association with government." All of the people, assets and liabilities, of the USPO would then be in competition with any and all entities who wish to compete.
The same process would apply to say school districts. All of the assets and liabilities of the district would be deeded to teachers past and present, pro rata, and they would lose their ability to tax and otherwise draw on the community by force.
The result would be more innovation, plus more better cheaper faster on the commodities.
violence....
Friday, June 4, 2010
Employment Good News/Bad News
The good news is employment is way up, the bad news 90% or more is temp census workers. Since these are govt jobs, it gets worse. Mish Shedlock has an undercover video from a census worker, that shows you why USA is fast becoming 3rd world poor.
I guess it's no big deal if census workers cheat on their time cards, but here the supervisors are showing them how. So multiply this hundreds of thousands of times (the number of employees) and it becomes serious money. Sigh.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Footwear Exports Brazil
Brazil taxes exports and this causes problems for Brazilian footwear exports, and a complicated regime of rebates and such make it difficult for small businesses to play. Taxing exports is forbidden by USA constitution, but regulations make it hard for small USA biz to play. Taxes and regulations, either way, govt makes biz hard for the small companies.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Franchising
Well now here is another article from the same source... there is an opportunity to subscribe to this email service out of Hong Kong, and I recommend it. Here is a quote which in a nutshell explains why Hong Kong is getting richer and USA is getting poorer:
Hong Kong’s legal climate couldn’t be more conducive to opening a franchise, according to Robert Esser, Managing Director of Pantry Magic. “The lack of regulations for franchises in Hong Kong has been great. It’s not complex. Our business is governed only by our agreement with our partners,” he says.
Full article here.
Branding
Although I am adverse to spending money as a start-up on brand, logo, image and all that, I am not against it. Obviously it is cheap and easy to name the company after yourself, which can be used forever, as in Boeing, Calvin Klein, Siemens and Gump's. When you grow, after you have grown, I understand branding can be powerful, especially in cross cultural milieu, such as Hong Kong. Here are some points from one legendary Hong Kogn based graphic dsigner:
My client – who are they really?
Who are their audiences?
How is the client perceived?
How do they want to be perceived?
What’s their history?
What makes them unique?
Where do they want to go in the future?
Starting out, even though you may not higher a graphic artists, you might want to copy out and answer those points. It is not too early to start. Here is the whole article.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Loan Possibilities
Monday, May 31, 2010
Solution to Oil Cleanup
I don't know if this is bogus, but it makes sense. My interest is how these guys are marketing their service... by giving away the "intellectual property..." that is the simple idea.
My belief is the crisis in the gulfo de Mexico is being managed to destroy anyone with a economic interest (fishermen, British Petroleum, State of Louisiana) around the oil wells so the bad guys can have it all to themselves, like in Texas.
The world can be a wicked place, and that is good to know.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
One Star Rating for Referring to Telex
Someone gave my book a one-star rating for failing to please. Strange, when one can read the entire book in preview before buying. A particular complaint was that I talked about telex machines. But they are still used by banks, govts and some businesses, although as communication alternatives for first world countries, and primary communication for 2nd and 3rd world countries, usually relating to payments. For the first world a telex can be used as an alternative messaging system if the net is down or to get past people snooping. Sometimes first world banks need telexes to communicate with third world banks. And a telex is legal proof in court (because of its confirmation system) whereas faxes, emails and whatever else is not.
Obama Correct Regarding Monopoly on Violence
The blogosphere has been delirious with a video in which Obama states, inter alia, "You are privatizing something that is what essentially sets a nation-state apart, which is the monopoly on violence" He said this to an interviewer with the Military Times.
I did not think anything of it, since anyone who has been to college learned the definition of the state, as defined by Max Weber, is a territory with a monopoly on violence. And Max Weber is the sociologist and philosopher anyone who goes into law and government studies in depth, so of course Obama, a Harvard Law graduate, would be familiar with the definition, the fundamental organizing principle of the modern state. Further, I would say I can see why he was elected, his argument is exactly right, if you believe in the modern hamiltonian state (I don't). Both Republicans and Democrats subscribe to this view, and Obama was criticizing Republican violation of this principle which threatens the integrity of the monopoly of violence the state enjoys. Another way of of looking at his argument, republican privatization of war is going to wreck the party for everyone. (It looks like the video was made before he was president... I just wish he was this sensible now. Again, I disagree with the sentiments, but he has it exactly right.)
Good readers comment that government can do good, and offer examples, which to me are debatable, but that would be missing the point. The point is the premise of the state is grounded in violence, which begs the question, how come? Of course the reply is something along the lines of "John sleeps securely in his bed at night because hard men stand watch."
Nonsense. First, rare is the assault (but horrible if it occurs). Most people are good. Second, the outcome of most assaults are decided before the state intervenes, and those willing and able to defend themselves have the home court advantage. Finally, as natural disasters show, we are all on our own when things go bad. But people will say state violence is a necessary evil. "Monopoly on violence" is not just aesthetically ugly, it is evil and uneccessary. But I guess I would have to show that. I am working on that argument.
If you want to get into that argument, maybe start with to which Obama refers - Weber's Politics as Vocation. Can you think of a better title for what a Bush, Clinton, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Paul, Cuomo, Biden or any other politician has studied. Read it if you want to know how USA works.
Hurt Locker Producers Try Shake Down Non-customers
If someone does not buy from you something you do not give them, then they are not your customers. The academy awazrd-winning movie Hurt Locker producers are tracking down 5000 people who shared the movie online. I hope they are better at making lawsuits than they are at making movies.