Small firms say regulation is fastest-growing concern
It’s been exactly three and a half years since Barack Obama was inaugurated, and here are two things that folks on the left have been saying about the economy every day since then: It’s Bush’s fault, and the problem is a lack of aggregate demand.
Here’s what small businesses have to say about the situation:
Chart by Dan Clifton at Strategas Research, via the AEIdeas blog
Keeping in mind that these are what small firms are “most concerned” about, meaning many likely have concerns to varying degrees about all three, a few things jump out at me:
1. In 2005, these three concerns accounted for a little more than one-third of small firms’ biggest worries. Today, they combine for about 60 percent. That suggests to me that these firms have less time and energy to devote to specific concerns about growing their business.
2. After shooting to the top in the second half of 2008, concerns about sales plateaued for about two years. Those concerns have been falling pretty steadily for the past year and a half.
3. Concerns about regulation, which more or less mirrored those about sales from 2005 to the start of 2008, began a steady ascent in 2009 and have almost doubled since then.
4. Concerns about taxes have remained fairly steady over these years.
5. At the beginning of 2009, the sum of concerns about regulation and those about sales was in the neighborhood of 40 percent — pretty much the same as today. But the division between them is starkly different: Whereas there were three small firms concerned about sales for every one worried about regulation then, now the two are dead even. In other words, worries about sales have been gradually replaced by worries about regulation.
6. If current trend lines continue, both taxes and regulation will soon rank higher among small firms’ concerns than sales.
Even if one wants to credit Obama’s “stimulus” package with the decrease in worries about sales — totally ignoring the effects of the Federal Reserve’s ultra-loose monetary policy — this graph clearly shows why improved demand hasn’t shifted the economy out of neutral: Increased regulation has stifled the recovery we might have had.
Small firms are generally credited with the bulk of job creation in this country. So the question this information puts to voters is: Which candidate do you expect to do more about the most pressing problems faced by small firms — Barack Obama or Mitt Romney?
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
575 comments Add your comment
Mary Elizabeth
July 22nd, 2012
6:38 pm
Bear in mind that our Defense Budget is greater than the next 10 countries combined, including the Defense Budgets of Chinat and many European nations – in combination.
Also, bear in mind that the U.S. had a surplus in the year 2000, even with entitlements, (which do need long-range adjustment, but not through privatization of them). France has just lowered its Social Security age to 60 from 62, and in America we are considering raising our S.S. age from 66 to 70, yet the U.S. is still sending Defense Budget funding to France (which was originally designated for the purpose of defense against Russia during the Cold War, now a long past need). Some have even questioned if France may be able to lower its Social Security age because we are still sending defense funds to France – for long past defense needs.
The American people will have to prioritize their distribution of tax funds by their values, i.e. an out of proportion defense budget or a more equitable budget which can accommodate social programs for citizens. Perhaps a return to the Clinton tax rate will help. As mentioned, America did have a surplus in 2000.
MarkV
July 22nd, 2012
6:39 pm
There is always some tension between what can and should be done by the private sector, and what can and should be done by the government, and subject for a rational debate. The least helpful is spewing slogans about liberty, freedom of choice, socialism, communism, Marxism, etc.
In these debates it is usually forgotten that the subject is not a static issue that can be resolved by a dogma. Conditions change. A good example is space flight. In the advent of it, when the will of the people (through elected representatives) was to engage in it, there was no private company that could take on that task. Quite appropriately, the government did. Even then, we should remember, there was a substantial participation of the private sector, but the government was in charge. Now a private company has shown the resources and expertise to go into space. Good for them. The government’s role has been drawn back. If, however, we decide to go, for instance, to Mars, again it will be likely be a government project.
Uh Oh
July 22nd, 2012
6:40 pm
Dusty
It isn’t that you lack cognitive thinking skills and ability to see the entire picture. It is that you do not want to utilize them because you are afraid to get outside of your little partisan bubble. It makes you feel better and provides self esteem for you. It is ok. There are many on the left and right just like you
Mary Elizabeth
July 22nd, 2012
6:41 pm
Corrections: China, not Chinat. Clinton tax rates, not Clinton tax rate.
MarkV
July 22nd, 2012
6:42 pm
Wouldn’t it be nice if Dusty ever told us her recipe for getting the country out of debt she writes so much about?
Uh Oh
July 22nd, 2012
6:44 pm
MarkV
That would be too hard. The talking points remembered and regurgitated only provide so much.
Uh Oh
July 22nd, 2012
6:47 pm
Dusty
Think if it as a “comfort zone” that many on the right and left love to live in. Takes less thought and gives those who live in that world, warm and fuzzies
Dusty
July 22nd, 2012
6:51 pm
Well, I “perceive a demand” and dinner is ready!
In the meantime, I would like (demand) an invention that carries me downtown without rail, road, jet engines and does not reqire an ugly T-SPLOST thumbscrew to finance it. I am sure someone will perceive my demand and put something together quickly,
Just daydream long enough and someone will invent it. Happens every day on this blog! Why liberals invent the cure for bankruptcy every day. Invent more ways to spend money! And they do!
Dusty
July 22nd, 2012
6:56 pm
Mark V
Recipe: eat green figs. Rids you of all excesses!
I don’t have a reference for that.
Dusty
July 22nd, 2012
7:02 pm
OH , someone busted my bubble with babble. AAAAwwwww! How pontifical! Made me even more hungry!
Dinnertime! Chicken and dressing! I wonder if it is one of the 80 thousand chickens who once lived next door to Hillbilly D? Now that’s something to ponder!
MarkV
July 22nd, 2012
7:03 pm
Dusty @ 6:56 pm
I pick them up when they are ripe. Thanks, but no thanks. But don’t let me talk you out of doing it.
Dusty
July 22nd, 2012
8:37 pm
Well, dinner was deeeelicious……..
But I was just reading that a second Spanish region may seek government help. First it starts with a few cities (like in California). Then you end up with “regions” like they have in Spain. The Spanish are afraid they will go down like Greece, Portugal and Ireland.
But they are starting to cut expenses like HEALTHCARE ! They are realizing that the government cannot furnish more than the fundamentals when a country is in DEBT.
If only our liberal DEMOCRATS could get that fact in their heads. When a country is deep in debt, you must cut back to the fundamentals of governance. I hope we don’t have to get like Spain, etc. before realization sets in.
NO, healthcare if not a fundamental of government. It is an addition to government largess which is helpful but not a necessity because there are other forms of heathcare in the private sector.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right
July 22nd, 2012
8:49 pm
Mary Elizabeth, repeating the lie about a surplus during the Clinton years doesn’t earn you Brownie points. That was a politically generated accounting gimmick foisted on us by both sides of the aisle.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right
July 22nd, 2012
8:57 pm
And let’s get this nonsense out of the way regarding “the people can change their government based on their needs and desires at the time”.
They can’t.
In case you Civics 101 rejects missed it, it takes 2/3rds of the states to ratify an amendment to the constitution, and at that, it takes an act of Congress to even get it to the states.
“The people” don’t get to change squat.
Uh Oh
July 22nd, 2012
9:05 pm
“The people” don’t get to change squat.
And on that, we agree
Mary Elizabeth
July 22nd, 2012
9:12 pm
Abraham Lincoln, “The Gettyburg Address,” Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, November 19, 1863:
“It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
G Mare
July 22nd, 2012
10:37 pm
Mary Elizabeth, you said it, my dear, but too few seem to be listening. Reminds me of the song, “Where have all the flowers gone….”
MarkV
July 22nd, 2012
11:06 pm
This is becoming a comedy routine:
“And let’s get this nonsense out of the way regarding “the people can change their government based on their needs and desires at the time”.
They can’t.
In case you Civics 101 rejects missed it, it takes 2/3rds of the states to ratify an amendment to the constitution, and at that, it takes an act of Congress to even get it to the states.
The people” don’t get to change squat.”
So the xxx in the Congress who would get it to the states, and thee xxx that would approve it in 2/3rds of the states, are not people. They must be alien from outer space, or perhaps chimpanzees?
Has that person who wrote the above any sanity left?
G Mare
July 22nd, 2012
11:13 pm
Mark V, did you forget to take your meds? Your last post makes no sense. Maybe you could try a repost? Sorry, I am not trying to be snarky, but please try again.
MarkV
July 22nd, 2012
11:17 pm
We might reformulate the comedy argument submitted at 9:57 pm as follows
The people cannot change their government based on their needs and desires at the time, because people would have to do it according to the Constitution.
Laughter and applause, please.
MarkV
July 22nd, 2012
11:18 pm
G Mare @ 11:13 pm
Do you have any comprehension of the written word?
Dusty
July 23rd, 2012
12:12 am
Mark V
Must you be so incredibly rude? You might have a point if you didn’t bark like dog with rabies. Why do you do that? If you think your intellectual ability is infallible, then get off the blog and go to some genius center. You seem determined to be what is known as ugly. Is there a reason for that?
I think Tiberius is talking about the great difficulty and the number of people it would take to change anything about the Constitution and its amendments..It is a process almost impossible to complete which is probably why it was set up that way. No flip flops everyday because of the long, complicated procedures.. Tiberius has shown that it is almost impossible to meet all the requirements The Constitution rules.
You, MarkV on the other hand, say that no matter how difficult a procedure it is, a great number of people have to procede with it in a legal manner. Your point is that no matter how laborious or lengthy the process, it is instigated and carried out by citizens in various ways. You don’t mention the constrictions to the process.
Seems to me both of you have good reason for what you say. And G Mare was just aksing for more information, not insults.
Blogging is not set up for invectives. If you are trying to pass the “bar” on constitutional law I suggest you go elsewhere or either curb your “impassioned” comments here. You are capable of being pleasant. You have let it slip out a few times.
Techfan
July 23rd, 2012
5:35 am
Kyle, How about a link to the survey? The American Enterprise Institute seems to mention studies by Strategas frequently. When I try to find these study’s methods, questions, etc.. I keep running into the roadblock of Strategas being a subscription only service. You can claim a study shows anything you want, but when you won’t let people look at the study, you have no idea if they are telling the truth. When I found that Dan Clifton was a former employee of Grover Norquist, it made me even more suspect. I’d take the AEI blog with a large grain of salt.
N-GA
July 23rd, 2012
7:14 am
It is articles like this that put the exclamation point on “Bad Journalism!”. Once again we see someone taking a position without having any substance. Just once I would like to see a comprehensive article about specific regulations that should be eliminated! Were these small businesspersons asked “What regulations concern you the most?”? I suspect that the poll-taker avoided asking that question purposefully.
Kyle notes where the chart originated. But we know nothing about what defines a small business, how many were polled, what industries were represented.
And one must remember how people’s concerns change. For example, employees might think that wages are their biggest concern until a lay-off occurs. Suddenly job security is their biggest concern. In that 3-month graph it is interesting to note that “Sales” as a concern has dropped from 33% to about 21%. A HUGE improvement! Hey Kyle, would you conclude that Obama’s policies have helped small business revenues?
Mary Elizabeth
July 23rd, 2012
7:41 am
G Mare, 10:37 pm, July 22, 2012
I well understand why the people do not “hear,” because for three to four decades this nation has been stealthily being changed to serve the interests of the top 1%, and not the interests of the masses. The people have lost faith that their voices count. We must keep telling “the people” what has happened so that they, again, will see and will believe that they DO have the “inherent and unalienable” right, as Jefferson had written, as well as the power, to shape the kind of government which they desire which will “bring them happiness.”
I believe that the kind of government which will bring “the people” happiness will not be a government that serves primarily the interests of the top 1% of this nation. The people have been misled for decades, now. If the people think that Gov. Romney will look after their interests, and not mainly the interests of the top 1%, they continue to be misled. They are mistaken. However, the people do have another choice in November. I hope that they will choose wisely, not only for themselves, but for our great nation, designed to be a nation “of the people, by the people, and for the people,” themselves. Do not lose faith in this great nation.
JDW
July 23rd, 2012
7:53 am
@dusty…”Must you be so incredibly rude?”
You think mark is rude…have you read that trash Tiberius spouts. As for the people changing government…it clearly happens often…if it did not our government would look the same as it did say 50years ago and it clearly does not. Should the people desire change it will happen…why the Cons are trying their best right not…they just don’t appeal to enough people.
MarkV
July 23rd, 2012
7:55 am
Dusty @12:12 am
Dusty,
You would have a point, if the person in question was not Tiberius, one whose rudeness has few matches on this blog. And you have just demonstrated your hypocrisy, in criticizing me, and never Tiberius. As for G Mare @11:13 pm, I have little patience with people, who instead of “asking for more information,” do it in an insulting way (“Mark V, did you forget to take your meds?”)
As for you argument that Tiberius was “talking about the great difficulty and the number of people it would take to change anything about the Constitution and its amendments,” please tell me that you understand the word cannot, as opposed to doing something difficult. There is nothing impossible about meeting “all the requirements The Constitution rule.” It has been done 27 times.
Actually, I suspect that Tiberius had in mind an inane argument that it would be not “people,” but representative of the people who would make it happen, and I do not have patience with that kind of stupidity either.
MarkV
July 23rd, 2012
9:30 am
Dusty @12:12 am
Dusty,
A few more comments. As I have written already, your double standard (a better word than hypocrisy here) is quite appalling, as is your mischaracterization.
What you call “so incredibly rude” was my calling what Tiberius had written “a comedy routine”: and “comedy argument.” And you preach to me about blogging not being set up “for invectives.” Invective? Then what do you call your own sarcasm about my thinking that my intellectual ability was infallible, about my “impassioned” comments, your suggestions about me trying to pass the “bar?” I wonder if you realize how insulting many of your posts are.
One does not have to posses any unordinary knowledge of the Constitution to know that people can, by the difficult but possible process of amendments, change anything in the Constitution. The US is a representative democracy, and people have the power to make decisions. According to the Constitution.
brad
July 23rd, 2012
9:42 am
The right has come to believe that the only path to change is “exercising their Second Amendment rights”.
Dusty
July 23rd, 2012
10:00 am
Enter your comments here
Doug B
July 23rd, 2012
10:09 am
Of course people are worried about regulation. The republican party and it’s propaganda machine, Fox news, is constantly telling them they should be.
I run 2 small businesses. Regulation doesn’t concern me a bit. I bet if you phrased the question differently, like, “what were your biggest problems in the past 12 months?”, you’d get a very different response.
JamVet
July 23rd, 2012
10:10 am
This morning’s big steaming cup of irony:
Must you be so incredibly rude?
Yet, she has spent at least five years of being incredibly rude. And if she had an ounce of dignity, she would freely admit it. (She won’t.) I and many others have witnessed and been the recipient of her endless, unprovoked personal insults on at least two different AJC forums.
Enjoy your witty insult fests here, Dusty.
As ye sow, so shall ye reap.
Toodles…
Dusty
July 23rd, 2012
10:31 am
Sooo..it seems when liberals are subject to their own type of criticism they become very sensitive and tender. MarkV suggests that “a comedy routine” is more insulting than calling someone “stupid”. He cannot realize that his usual routine of “putting people down” is more insulting than saying something is “funny, a comedy”.
Tiberiuis does disagree frequently with liberals. He backs his arguments with factual references. Many liberals use “Bush did it!” as a reference. Mary Elizabeth uses Jefferson and the Gettysburg Address as her much repeated references and her anti-war/defense material… N GA moved to N GA so he could complain about it and the people in a Republican state. Other liberals whine about Kyle saying “you did not give enough material as back ground” even though he lists all his material.
You folks are born complainers and you are backing a presidential candidate who is running this country “into the ground”. He makes a nice speech. Raises a mountain of debt.
Cry me a river, dear folks. You are not a sweet talking bunch. Learn how to debate without invectives (vehement denunciations). You reap what you sow so don’t complain so loudly when it hits you.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 23rd, 2012
10:38 am
Nice to see MarkV finally get it.
JDW, not so much.
Uh oh
July 23rd, 2012
10:41 am
“it seems when liberals are subject to their own type of criticism they become very sensitive and tender”
Mama. He hit me 1st.
Everyone have a great day
Mary Elizabeth
July 23rd, 2012
10:42 am
In response to brad’s post at 9:42 am:
——————————————————————
“Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.” The words of Jesus, recorded in St. Matthew 5:9
“Love never fails.” The words of St. Paul, recorded in his first letter to the Corinthians, I Corinthians 13:8
Dusty
July 23rd, 2012
10:45 am
AmVet is here. My advice to readers: “Hold your nose!”
Uh oh
July 23rd, 2012
10:48 am
“Learn how to debate without invectives”
AmVet is here. My advice to readers: “Hold your nose!”
Some need to heed their own advice, but do carry on
Take care
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 23rd, 2012
10:58 am
And back on topic, from the Heritage Foundation:
“In total, The Heritage Foundation has calculated that the Obama administration adopted 106 major regulations in its first three years. That’s nearly four times the 28 major regulations adopted in the first three years of the Bush administration. Those regulations came at a cost of $8.1 billion, compared to the $46 billion imposed under Obama by the same point in his presidency.”
For you libs out there, this boils down to:
Bush: 28 major regulations costing businesses $8.1 billion
Obama: 106 major regulations costing businesses $46 billion.
Do ya get it now?
MarkV
July 23rd, 2012
11:06 am
Dusty @10:31 am
Not surprisingly, Dusty continues in her usual style – avoiding answering any specific points made by the person whose post she is responding to.
As well as just showing a total confusion of her mind, as shown by the following:
“MarkV suggests that “a comedy routine” is more insulting than calling someone “stupid”.”
Really? And where did I suggest that?
md
July 23rd, 2012
11:11 am
“I run 2 small businesses. Regulation doesn’t concern me a bit. I bet if you phrased the question differently, like, “what were your biggest problems in the past 12 months?”, you’d get a very different response.”
Ok Doug…..then what concerns you? Then we’ll backtrack to see if any regulations are involved.
gm
July 23rd, 2012
11:15 am
We should just let business run wild like the Bush years and have another meltdown, CEO’s are making record profits under Obama, why should we go back?
I wonder what would have happen if the Colorodo shooter had been a muslim, I bet he would have been called a inside terrorist by Bachman, Limbaugh, these idiots are so busy stereotype muslims and people of color but the real killing that have killed more Americans in this country have been white males””””
md
July 23rd, 2012
11:23 am
“We should just let business run wild like the Bush years and have another meltdown, CEO’s are making record profits under Obama, why should we go back?”
As I’ve said before, would one prefer to try to tame a wild horse or ride a dead one?
And please do remember to include the word “some” in that talking point about ceo’s…..folks on the left have a terrible tendency to leave it out. Just an fyi, but a “majority” of corps are NOT sitting on record profits……but that doesn’t sound as threatening does it?
md
July 23rd, 2012
11:25 am
Think Bernanke would prefer to be worrying about slowing an economy down or finding more magic bullets in his arsenal trying to get it going??
md
July 23rd, 2012
11:36 am
“The 70 U.S.-based companies studied hold $1.2 trillion in profits around the world. GE and Pfizer have built up the most money outside the U.S., with $102 billion and $63 billion respectively, according to securities filings. Apple Inc. (AAPL), Google Inc. (GOOG) and Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) were among the companies that increased their accumulated overseas profits by more than 40 percent in 2011.
As U.S.-based companies expand globally, they keep profits overseas, legally out of the reach of the Internal Revenue Service. Lawmakers from both political parties point to the stockpiling as a symptom of a failed corporate tax system, even while they remain deadlocked over whether the U.S. should impose higher or lower taxes on its companies’ global profits. ”
Just an fyi, but “regulations” are keeping that money from entering our system. Think it would be beneficial to our economy to have an extra trillion floating around to be used as capital and TAXED. Instead, 3.5 years of……….nothing.
MrLiberty
July 23rd, 2012
11:37 am
Massive regulation and government intervention into the marketplace and uncertainty. These are the same things that made the first Depression last as long as it did. Then FDR died and so did most of his misguided policies, 10 million men came home to work productive jobs and the private sector was freed up from having to pay for war. The solution in 1945 is as clear today as it was then. End the wars, bring the troops home, slash government spending, release the free market to do what it does best. Unfortunately neither Obama nor Romney have any of that on their agenda.
stands for decibels
July 23rd, 2012
11:45 am
Let’s assume that the study cited was in fact a legitimate exercise and not merely a sort of sophisticated push poll
You’re a lot more charitable than I am.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 23rd, 2012
11:53 am
Two-thirds of likely voters say the weak economy is Washington’s fault, and more blame President Obama than anybody else, according to a new poll for The Hill.
It found that 66 percent believe paltry job growth and slow economic recovery is the result of bad policy.
That’s not hard to figure out.
md
July 23rd, 2012
12:07 pm
“Lawmakers from both political parties point to the stockpiling as a symptom of a failed corporate tax system, even while they remain deadlocked over whether the U.S. should impose higher or lower taxes on its companies’ global profits.”
And need I mention which “side” wants which? And which stance is keeping the money offshore??
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 23rd, 2012
12:09 pm
Off topic, but why would the NCAA take away Paterno’s (and Penn State’s) wins for something which happened off the football field?
Seems a bit petty to me.
More important, how do you undo wins? Do the teams on the other side automatically have their losses reversed as well?
The dumbing down of America continues unabated.