Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-03-2014, 11:21 AM
 
Location: NJ
18,665 posts, read 20,020,619 times
Reputation: 7315

Advertisements

Part of the problem is it is too easy to start a small business. 9 in 10 fail inside 5 years. We'd be better off if most never tried. Small business failures are Accounts Receivable writeoffs at other corps.

Millions know they want to start a business, a tiny percentage actually have the business acumen to successfully run one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-03-2014, 11:32 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,451 posts, read 7,055,255 times
Reputation: 4630
Quote:
Originally Posted by OuttaTheLouBurbs View Post
The ability to start a succesful business has long been an important part of social mobility as well as "the American dream." But now, we see that big business is favored far more than the little guy. Small business has been relegated to niche roles as big industries (food & consumables, homecare products, automobiles, banking, railroads, retail (online and physical), heavy industry, and so forth) have overtaken the market. It's near impossible to open a local retail store and compete with the big boxes-if you open a grocery and a Target opens up nearby, you're screwed. Want to start an automobile company? That's too damn bad, there are enough-there's no local market to serve. But you can always start a grocery store, right? No, forget it; there's a Schnucks a couple blocks down the road. It's pretty difficult to compete with such well-emplaced oligopolies.

While I understand that these businesses have thrived because they've conducted business well, at what cost has this come? What kind of customer-business owner friendships have been forsaken in the name of a 20-cent-cheaper box of Cheerios? What sort of small, friendly environments have been given up for cheaper prices? What kind of community bonds have been surrendered for convenience? Big-box retailers like Wal-Mart dont give a crap about their customers, and hardly see them as much more than a potential resource to be drained. They aren't providing jobs because they care about the community's well-being, they are hiring because they need (easily-replaceable) cogs to run the machine. Businesses are only in it for business any more. While I know that that was what businesses were designed for, they could be much more than that-they could be integral members of the communities they serve. But that's becoming more and more rare as we continue to "progress."

So what should we do about it? I think it is our obligation, as Americans, to support small business in whatever ways we can. We should aim to purchase their products, even if it costs a little extra. We should get to know the people that run them, and give them our support. We should encourage government to give big business far less sway in politics, with our mouths and the ballot. Not only this, but we should encourage big business to live up to our standards. We should show to them that they will only be welcome in a community if they actively participate in it. We must change the way we shop-if we choose local for our suppliers, they will in turn go local, and it will create more demand for small business and this more job opportunities for all. It will enable businesses to shrink their focus on smaller areas and thus dedicate themselves more to their community.

Now before I close this off, let it be known that I'm not screaming "death to big business!" I want them to thrive too. But I want little businesses to thrive more, and if that has to come at the expense of bigger companies, so be it. By their very nature, larger chains are going to be less connected to their community because they serve a larger community and have to spread their focus. Now, I'm not opposed to chains altogether; I will still shop at local, smaller chains that I enjoy and that don't obviously dominate their market. I will take my money to whatever place is at least somewhat rooted in my community, regardless of size; but I feel like smaller businesses will remain more strongly connected to the community than larger ones. Regardless, my money will be spent at places where I feel I can get a return beyond what I purchase. I hope you will all do the same.
And the best way to do that is to lower tax rates and remove burdens on small businesses, including now the ACA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 11:32 AM
 
1,131 posts, read 2,038,255 times
Reputation: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by OuttaTheLouBurbs View Post
But the problem is that greater volume purchases are only available to larger companies. In this manner, it's skewed in their favor. That seems a little unfair.
Volume discounts are not inherently unfair, and they've been a part of business (at both the wholesale and retail level) for as nearly as long as there has been business.

Small businesses which hope to thrive against industry Goliaths purely on a price basis will often find it hard to succeed. In most industries, small businesses that thrive against their bigger competition do so by providing superior craftsmanship and/or service, thereby justifying the higher prices they charge.


That said, there's one place where I believe "volume discounts" for big businesses are unfair: local tax breaks. IMHO, it should be illegal for local governments to negotiate property tax abatements, sales tax rebates, corporate income tax exemptions, etc., with individual businesses when attempting to lure them to their jurisdictions (or keep them for moving to another jurisdiction). Set the playing field, tax-wise, and let the chips fall where they may. It's bad enough for a local small business when a large corporate competitor decides to set up shop in the same market. It's insult added to injury when that new competitor is offered tax incentives that the small local guy lacks the clout to gain for him/herself.

Last edited by madpaddy; 03-03-2014 at 11:55 AM.. Reason: spelling correction
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 11:35 AM
 
6,071 posts, read 6,068,916 times
Reputation: 1916
Both parties don't really give a damn.

Smaller business, smaller campaign contributions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 11:36 AM
 
Location: NJ
18,665 posts, read 20,020,619 times
Reputation: 7315
Quote:
Originally Posted by madpaddy View Post
.


Thatt said, there's one place where I believe "volume discounts" for big businesses are unfair: local tax breaks. IMHO, it should be illegal for local governments to negotiate property tax abatements, sales tax rebates, corporate income tax exemptions, etc with individual businesses when attempting to lure them to their jurisdictions (or keep them for moving to another jurisdiction). Set the playing field, tax-wise, and let the chips fall where they may. It's bad enough for a local small business when a large corporate competitor decides to set up shop in the same market. It's patently unfair when that new competitor is offered tax incentives that the small local guy lacks the clout to gain for him/herself.

Why? It isn't the clout the small guy lacks-he isn't offering as fine of a product. Corps have wisely realized they can sell "jobs" to a state as an asset they own, just as they would sell a building they own.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 11:36 AM
 
Location: Dallas
31,297 posts, read 20,811,244 times
Reputation: 9340
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Part of the problem here is over regulation. .......

I don't know what the answer is here but what I do know is as the government piles on more rules and regulations it becomes more difficult and costly to run a small business.
Exactly! Government regulation is killing small businesses. Obamacare is a perfect example and it's a huge burden on small businesses. But there are many others such are regulations requiring excessive food labeling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 11:38 AM
 
Location: Dallas
31,297 posts, read 20,811,244 times
Reputation: 9340
Quote:
Originally Posted by madpaddy View Post
Thatt said, there's one place where I believe "volume discounts" for big businesses are unfair: local tax breaks. IMHO, it should be illegal for local governments to negotiate property tax abatements, sales tax rebates, corporate income tax exemptions, etc., with individual businesses when attempting to lure them to their jurisdictions (or keep them for moving to another jurisdiction). Set the playing field, tax-wise, and let the chips fall where they may. It's bad enough for a local small business when a large corporate competitor decides to set up shop in the same market. It's insult added to injury when that new competitor is offered tax incentives that the small local guy lacks the clout to gain for him/herself.
Correct. Government should never be in the business of picking winners and losers. But they do it all the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 11:39 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,855,463 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by madpaddy View Post
Volume discounts are not inherently unfair, and they've been a part of business (at both the wholesale and retail level) for as nearly as long as there has been business.

Small businesses which hope to thrive against industry goliaths purely on a price basis will often find it hard to succeed. In most industries, small businesses that thrive against their bigger competition do so by providing superior craftsmanship and/or service, thereby justifying the higher prices they charge.


Thatt said, there's one place where I believe "volume discounts" for big businesses are unfair: local tax breaks. IMHO, it should be illegal for local governments to negotiate property tax abatements, sales tax rebates, corporate income tax exemptions, etc., with individual businesses when attempting to lure them to their jurisdictions (or keep them for moving to another jurisdiction). Set the playing field, tax-wise, and let the chips fall where they may. It's bad enough for a local small business when a large corporate competitor decides to set up shop in the same market. It's insult added to injury when that new competitor is offered tax incentives that the small local guy lacks the clout to gain for him/herself.
I agree with everything you have said, I would prefer that if a state wants to lure business they should lower the tax rate across the board to spur growth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 11:41 AM
 
Location: Dallas
31,297 posts, read 20,811,244 times
Reputation: 9340
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad3 View Post
I just wanted to add that small/medium sized businesses created nearly two-thirds of the nation’s new jobs over the past 15 years. While large corporations only created 1/3 of the new jobs.
Who actually creates jobs: Start-ups, small businesses or big corporations? - The Washington Post


And I love small businesses too, but they have many obstacles to fight. Small businesses often pay twice the tax rate of large corporations, and this hinders them greatly.
Some Small Businesses Pay Tax Rates More Than Double Those Of Large Corporations: Study


So what should we do about it? Vote democrat because republicans only give tax cuts to large corporations.

The republicans will once again try for something like the following in 2016, and at the same time they will not give small businesses a dime.
So what should we do about it? Vote Republican because Democrats only give tax cuts to large corporations.

The Democrats will once again bail out their rich buddies like they have for the past five years and the Democrats will add more and more layers of regulations which are killing small businessses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2014, 12:49 PM
 
59,509 posts, read 27,639,962 times
Reputation: 14406
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
In rural towns though you still have the mom & pop stores.

I love the 2 local hardware/lumber yard stores here.
The prices are a bit more than HD or Lowes or McCoy's but not lots more.
The service though cannot be compared to the big box stores.

My town only has 2 chains..Dairy Queen and Pizza Hut.
The other big stores are regional (supermarket and Dollar Store).
The rest are all mom & pop.
We even have local banks that still close at 3pm Mon-Thurs. Now that's a blast from the past isn't it ?
NOT just rural towns.

EVEN with the "big boys" in town MANY small stores seem to make it. Strip malls are all over they place.

My town just had Domino's close and there are at least a dozen mom & pop sub/pizza store doing well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:33 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top