Belmont University

So Why the Long Face, Professor?

For many years I have been the optimist. The enthusiasm that I experienced in my daily interactions with entrepreneurs and aspiring entrepreneurs was contagious. The data that was showing a shift to an entrepreneurial economy gave me so much hope for the future.

However, I have gotten a lot of questions lately about what caused the change from my formerly rosy outlook to what more than a few of you have termed my new personality of "Professor Doom."

I believe that things have gotten seriously off track. Why? My immediate concern is that the inflation genie is out of the bottle. As a result, I believe that we will have at least a few years of difficult times ahead of us. Once inflation takes root, as I believe it now has, there are no quick and easy solutions.

On top of these short-term worries, I have several growing concerns rooted in more macro, fundamental changes
occurring in our society, culture and economy.

First, we never seized the opportunity to create a true shift in our tax policy in this country. We know that lower taxes and a simple tax system help entrepreneurial economies grow. Our tax policy in the US is rooted in the mid-1900s. The role of taxes are to raise the funding needed to provide for the basic constitutional functions of government. But over the past 60 to 70 years taxes have become a major tool used to shape culture and implement social policies. More recently taxes have become a mechanism to direct economic behavior in directions decided upon by politicians and bureaucrats at all levels of government. We now see this at work in the entrepreneurial economy.

Second, for several decades entrepreneurship was growing below the radar in our economy. But as entrepreneurship became more dominant in our economy, politicians and their minions just could not keep their hands off. It grew and prospered so well when they left it alone. But now they are convinced that entrepreneurs cannot possibly do their work without support from governmental agencies bloated with career bureaucrats who have never had to make a payroll. We are quickly headed toward a policy of socialized entrepreneurship.

Third, there are efforts around the globe that seek to change the current economic order. Some of these are economic forces that want to replace the US role as economic leader. If they could achieve this through the power of free markets I would say congratulations and job well done. But many are using noble issues such as environmentalism and social justice as smoke screens to hide their true intentions, which include gaining economic advantage or even crippling capitalism. Those countries that control much of our supply of oil manipulate us like a dealer controls a junkie. They use the power of supply and demand as a means of keeping us dependent.

Lastly, our drift toward socialism over the past several decades has changed our culture from one based on self-reliance to one based on entitlement and dependence. Given the momentum created by the policies of the past few Presidents, and given the platforms of the current two candidates, the growth of government's role in our lives will continue expand. Sustaining our entrepreneurial culture will become increasingly difficult if this trend is not reversed.

I am optimistic that we can turn things around. I just hope we have the wisdom and collective resolve to do so.


|

Comments

It seems like you are just being religious about historical conservative political ideas. We get it, you like small government and think that taxes are evil. The thing is, you don't back it up. Talk about smoke screens.

There are two sides to the coin. Using tax dollars to fix the US health care system would help entrepreneurs immensely. Not only would it provide a healthy work force, but it would also alleviate some of the risk of hanging your own shingle. I know you won't agree with that though because "universal health care is bad". The new deal is hear to stay and that is good for the entire country. As an entrepreneur I am having no problems working within that context.

Oh, and as for foreign control based on oil, maybe we should have paid more attention to the environmentalists for the past 3 decades. But no, being religious about the motives made us blind to the problem. Way to go us!

Governments around the world have a horrible track record when they try to pick winners in the economy. My stance has been developed by looking at the data over time. I don't "like small government". The evidence shows that less government involvement in markets and lower taxes are what spur economic growth.

By the way. I never said I was against environmentalism or social jutice. Nothing coule be further from the truth. It seems that you have drawn an incorrect assumption here. My point was that people use these issues to hide agendas that have very little to do with the environment or the social condition. Perhaps you are "being religious" as you say (a strange choice of wording that you use, I must say) in how you interpret my words.

To your other point -- I don't think universal health care is "bad". The evidence shows that government as the health care provider or even health care payor is inefficient and ineffective over the long term.

Why is there so little outrage about the $500 million in subsidies given for the VW plant in Chattanooga? Manufacturing employment in the US has been going down since 1979 because of worker productivity. Tennessee industrial policy seemed to be working in 1956 but we are doing the same thing,only throwing more money at it, in 2008. From 2001 to 2006, the inflation adjusted annualized rate of growth of personal income from manufacturing was 2.56% versus a background inflation ate of 3%. This subsidy is going to have to be paid mostly from small businesses and other service industry jobs. If all state and local taxes are 8.5% of all personal income, I figure that the taxpayers will have to produce $5.88 Billion to get that much tax money back to the state and local government. This subsidy is the equivalent of buying the first two years of car production of 150,000 cars at $18,000 each. This overreaching for industrial output is also hard on our property rights since Cookeville and Putnam County are using eminent domain to move an unwilling seller off of their planned industrial park.

Tap it in and Comment, Please

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)