Shared publicly  - 
(Thu07) On NPR I heard a Republican candidate (I can't even remember which one--does it really matter?) say that the reason entrepreneurs aren't starting companies is excessive regulation and corporate taxes.

Come again? I've never met an entrepreneur say that she would start a company if it weren't for either of these two factors. In fact, if someone said that to me, I'd respond, "Then you're not an entrepreneur, so stay on the porch."

What could career politicians from either party possibly know about entrepreneurship? But I digress...

If you're not an entrepreneur, when times are bad, you say, "It's too hard to make a sale. It's too hard to raise capital." When times are good, you say, "There's too much competition."

If you are an entrepreneur, none of this matters. You just go for it. Some things need to be believed to be seen. If you come to Silicon Valley and tell people that you can't succeed because of regulation and taxes, be prepared to be laughed at.
Max Hodges's profile photoken todd's profile photoGreg B's profile photoStephen Kershaw's profile photo
I would love to start a company. Regulation and corporate taxes aren't even on my list. At the top of said list: capital, sustainability (family, et al) and healthcare.
He could have stated it more effectively and said with less regulation and lower taxes more companies would survive and ultimately thrive. More regulation does result in a higher entry fee into business though its also true that the entry fee into an internet business is much lower than that of any business venture in history. I believe they both do have an impact on the number of startups. They haven't stopped me ever though they certainly have cost me plenty of #s and wasted time.
I think only experienced freelancers understand the extra tax costs of self-employment so that doesn't hold people back. But I hear the healthcare benefits issue come up all the time from people thinking of doing a startup.
Hear, hear... I've been waiting for someone with credentials to say that.
+Guy Kawasaki absolutely! People start entrepreneurial ventures because they have a drive to do so and often don't stop to think what obstacles they might encounter and deal with any that come as they come. Capital and people are generally top of mind. Even those often take a back seat to passion. Risk and family security as +Vijay Renganathan mention are for sure way up there.
Having lived in Washington D.C. with all it entails, I can assure you there is little understanding of Silicon Valley. When I moved here in the early nineties I was shocked by the entrepreneurial spirit. Nowhere in America is it coded into the cultural DNA like this place. And one more is hard to explain if people don't already get it.
<snip>I can't even remember which one--does it really matter?</snip> What, we all look alike to you now? First to admit there are some serious whacko's out there ... but there are a few of us that aren't so nuts.

Frankly, I think that statement is kind of stupid myself ... it applies more to larger companies where uncertainty is less welcome. Startups LIVE (and love?) and breath uncertainty ... it's half the fun.
Question comes down to whether we would have more entrepreneurs if those 2 items where eliminated. I go for it regardless though there may be others that don't.
How much in taxes does a startup pay while the startup isn't making money?
There is enough uncertainty in a startup business without the necessity of taxes and regulations.
+Guy Kawasaki Out of curiosity, would you say that the situation with healthcare in this country (i.e. how prohibitive the cost is if you don't get it through group coverage, how if you are uninsured you are basically screwed should anything go wrong, etc) does indeed negatively impact enterpreneurship?
I think the major issue is that startups aren't hiring the unemployed masses. No-one is starting a car manufacturing plant in Michigan these days but maybe a carpet cleaning business with a couple retired buddies.
Thank you - I really needed to read that.
The statement is totally dumb. I hate primaries. Little truth there. I'm both an entrepreneur and generally conservative and would never say that would keep me out. You're right, none of that matters. You either do or you don't.
+Michael Brian Bentley Income tax you're spot on, but employment taxes(city/state/fed) are still there, as are other (at this point potential) mandates. Still a BS proposition though.
Interesting thought, does a true entreprenure even consider the market forces, legislation, tax or global market when starting their firm, or is the thing that sets them apart the fact that they don't and all they have is their belief? Ie- there is never a good time to start a company!
+Brad More You're saying that if people paid less personal income tax , they would start more companies? The whole point of entrepreneurship is to have a whopping income tax bill!
Businesses hire based on how much business they have and how much work they need to get done. Whatever the taxes are (which everyone wants to be low) they pay because the businesses are focused on getting the job done and getting more business, not waiting to see what is happening in DC.
if you're a small shop with two ace developers and one of them develops cancer, that's a big problem, healthcare coverage or no, but I'd say the healthcare costs are among the bigger issues.
Speak the gospel, Guy! NOT ONCE have I heard (in the past 13 years in Silicon Valley) an entrepreneur stay on the sidelines due to regulation or taxes. That is complete bullshit. It's all about doing something good, or doing something better. That is it.
So true. People need to hear it. Thanks Guy!
Btw, I love the fact that in the 5 minutes it took me to type out my response on my iPhone, the topic was done, dusted and had moved on, love g+, hate typing slow. 
+Guy Kawasaki Oh, no ... not at all. Just saying in response to +Michael Brian Bentley question on what taxes they pay ... don't forget employers have to pay a portion of fed/state/city WAGE taxes. Income tax lose carry/forward applies, but not FICA,etc.
Those two factors do matter to ideologues and politicians on the campaign trail! Never mind the actual entrepreneurs.
+Catherine B. I can't build a case that health-care costs are a positive, but I've never seen a startup die because of too much health-care costs. Startups die because of a lack of sales. A lack of sales happens because the product is crappy, late, or is a solution in search of a problem.

I'd love to see a company that has a great product with great sales that is struggling because o health-care costs. That's a fundable company.
While I'm starting a business despite regulations and taxes giving me a headache I think there is a point to them causing issues. I know a farmer I want to buy nitrate free bacon from. We have both been waiting MONTHS for the FDA to approve his label. I trust him more then most brand names but he would be fined/shutdown if he sold to me before the wording on the label is finally approved. I think that is a big problem and a sign of regulation messing up a perfectly good business transaction.
I ended a brief conversation with someone today who said that EPA regulations are what have destroyed American businesses and prevented entrepreneurship after I asked him if he breathes air and drinks water and he stood there with his mouth open.
But whoever said health care costs dwarf all was spot on. When I was running my company I paid 100% of healthcare for individual AND family ... cost was BIG, but benefit was BIGGER. Healthcare is a real worry, and removing that worry made the team happier and more productive. Worth every PENNY.
Taxes only matter for companies with a valid revenue model which generates positive EBIT. Healthcare only matters for companies which scale to the point that they have significant employee counts. The vast majority of tech startups (fundable or not) never hit either of these milestones.
Yes though if you pay taxes and are a startup and pay different fees you have less money to get the job done. I understand resourcefulness. It is what I thrive on though money does lubricate the process.
Done, dusted, and reopened for further analysis. 
+Guy Kawasaki I meant more on a personal level--are potential entrepreneurs, in your experience, ever reluctant to commit to a project full-time if that would mean losing that safety net? I ask because as someone who just joined a startup and whose husband is dependent on her for insurance (he's working on his own startup), it has been a huge concern for us. I'm just curious if others have the same fears or if we're just not entrepreneurial enough. ;)
+Catherine B. You're just not entrepreneurial enough :-) Despite taxes, regulations I always go for it. I don't know if that defines a true entrepreneur though I will not let what happens in DC stop me.
Less environmental regulation, sicker employees.
Choices choices.

Unless you subscribe to the non-correlation between environment and health.
Dear politicians: you want to make entrepreneurship easier? Give me universal/single-payer healthcare/dental. Honestly, I'm much more willing to take a risk if I know critical needs are still accounted for.
Lots of people have told me I'm crazy for leaving a strong corporate career path and a six figure salary to start my own company. I keep hearing how bad the economy is and how it would just be better if I play it safe and stay at the job I have had for the last several years and could easily keep for a few more.

If I let these things stand in my way, what the heck would happen when I don't make revenue as fast as I thought I would or nobody wants to use my product? Those are much harder problems to solve than too many taxes.
I keep my business to a one person shop. It cuts down on the amount of regulations I need to deal with. The other business I'm a partner in owes the federal government a years worth of payroll taxes because we haven't made enough money to cover those taxes yet -- we are barely breaking even with the exception of the federal taxes. (Granted not corporate tax, but federal taxes none-the-less.)
+Catherine B. Sure, we/they all have these concerns. Entrepreneurship is not the lack of fear. Entrepreneurship is about charging ahead despite your fears.
+Guy Kawasaki It is really nice to hear someone in a position of influence saying this. I have never heard someone who wanted to start a business say that either - not ever! The U.S. Chamber of Commerce seems to be largely responsible for this ridiculous talking point. I just did a write up on this on my new blog:
Yes. Every entrepreneur needs to get to the point of "is this something I'm capable of" and then with the crap scared out of them and a shred of courage, they charge forward.
Personally in the UK I feel the taxes are a given and should not and do not stifle a truly good idea couple together with a good business plan. What I do think is that governments could give tax breaks to those that have the potential, not every new company (as many are founded on less than solid ground) but those that have stepped up. For too long has this sat at the foot of the VC or early investor to risk too much where a break or two would have greatly aided growth. 
I just love the last 2 paragraphs, i just have to borrow it, lol
Taxes should not slow down an entrepreneur because in order to pay taxes... you have to make money. Taxes are not a "risk" in starting a business. REGULATION can be a barrier to entry, I have run into it during a couple start ups I did back in the 80s when Ray-Gun was President... But... taxes... no... not a barrier to entry.
If someone is an entrepreneur, then absolutely. But I think there are a lot of non-entrepreneurs out there that would consider self employment if the process was less risky and easier. My own opinion is that health care and patent laws are holding back a lot of IT entrepreneurs out there, and I don't think we're remotely close to fixing either of those.
+Roger Weber Your first mistake was using "data". Don't you know all scientists are on the take from the socialists, pushing their pinko agenda? /teaparty
Amen. When you're an entrepreneur and you have a product/service you're passionate about, there's almost nobody or nothing that can dissuade you from executing.
That politician’s statement is kinda like saying my 3-year-old daughter will pass on one scoop of ice cream because she knows there are two scoops left in the tub.
All of the competitors pay taxes and follow regulations. The winners win in spite of those costs. 
I wonder if there are examples in the world where regulations equals to slow-downs, for example comparing Europe vs. USA?. How many people may have moved from Europe to USA because a less regulated environment? or from USA to Europe?
With some friends we are leaving our jobs to fire up our own business. Right now, in the worst possible economic situation, and right here in Italy, which is not making it easier. We just don't care: we want to do it. These words are of great encouragement, thanks +Guy Kawasaki :-)
I think it depends on the industry... My wife was going to expand her biz ( ) to include doing cosmetic services (facials, waxing, etc) as an adjunct to her skin care biz. She took the classes, got her lic (after paying for the state required fees) , set up the shop and realized we did not consider the regulations for the facilities. bottom line is that the fees and regulations are enough extra make it almost impossible to start up a cosmetic biz without contracting to an existing shop.

True, the market is saturated and even without all the oversight and fees there is a good chance that the biz would still fail. In the end, even if the biz took off, we where able to control the costs we have control over, and my wife was able to put in the max hours that she was willing to, it would still take months to start showing a profit.

That said, is working for us and has been bringing in a fairly steady income for the past 8 years. We have to keep an eye on the FDA as they tend to change rules and regulations on our industry, and taxes are always an issue. Overall I think Arizona is pretty friendly place to do business.
Googling for economic growth and regulation produces some interesting reading. Which lead me to wonder, is starting a company (entrepreneurship) different that growing a company to hire more staff?

Clearly different things. Maybe we are all asking the wrong question, along with the unnamed candidate. Is it the entrepreneur starting a company or is it economic growth that matters?
Likewise, my small coffee shop would like to offer Baily's for your coffee drinks, but the liquor license is way to expensive for a coffee shop our size to do that, but we have customers who would love for us to offer it.

There are millions of regulations out there affecting small businesses.
You're right about the startup aspect Guy -- and definitely right about career politicians. However, I know plenty of entrepreneurs who have had to adjust, shrink their ambitions, and in some cases close up shop because of regulations and taxes. It's not Left nor Right, it's just too much government, and what we've got now doesn't make doing business easier -- which is something I expect my ideal government to be really good at.
It depends on the industry. There are plenty of regulatory obstacles which make it very hard to start certain kinds of business. Maybe that Republican had "a friend" who wanted to start a business growing and selling medical marijuana, or a wedding planning service company for homosexuals. Or maybe he felt regulatory pressure trying to pimp out his daughter. ;)

Seriously though, in finance or telecommunications, or biotech there are some ideas which you couldn't get off the ground. The first nation to transform themselves into a biotech augmented super race will dominate the world, and it will be the Chinese, because that kind of research doesn't fly here.

Here in Japan The banks felt threatened by PayPal because they make a lot of money from direct transfers between account holders. So the govt blocked PayPal from allowing people to use their service to send money between two people - telling the public "we have to make sure it's safe".

This kind of protectionism happens all the time here, and probably in any industries all around the world. My friend friend to bring an innovative vacuum pressure elevator to market here, so the existing elevator companies had regulators come up with some new rules which made it impossible for him to sell them here.

If your telecommunications business plan involves licensing radio spectrum or gaining right-of-way to install a new fiber optic network youll quickly understand what that politician was talkimg about. And that idea you had to export computer equipment to Iran? Forget about it!

I think some people here are missing the point. I believe what Guy said was that a true entrepreneur is not going to give up on her idea from the start because of regulation and corporate taxes. That's not saying she'll never bump up against a regulation that hampers her progress.
No, I think some people are missing the point because they don't understand how expensive and atrociously time-consuming it is to deal with start-up regulations in some industries. To open a bar in some stares you need to get a community board to approve your idea before you can get license to sell booze, it can't be xxx meters from a church or place or worship in some states. You have to deal with a dozen different city offices to get all the 30 permits and 20 inspections needed. Not to mention Federal employment and health care issues. The whole process takes about a year before you can even earn your first dollar.

For those who think "a true entrepreneur" doesn't let those things stand in the way of their dreams, I encourage you to google things like "regulation hurts startup" if you need an education on this matter. 
It's difficult for business to move forward without having an idea of what the cost of services & products are. Business (at least in the past) have had to offer good salaries and health benefits to attract the best people. With that cost in question, we are in limbo. Many US industries have migrated overseas.
Politicians don't work in the truth business. The politician's trade is stoking the fire of emotion. Get enough people to nod their heads and you get elected. Get elected enough times and you become a lobbyist.
I'm thinking incandescent versus florescent bulbs right now. Pollutants such as mercury are produced with the later and the Chinese are laxed on pollution - much cheaper. and don't worry about Unions. It's an issue for business.
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) found that the U.S. had higher regulatory barriers to entrepreneurship, greater administrative burdens on small business owners, and higher barriers to competition than a number of other industrialized countries
Details here:’s-problem-with-government-regulation.html

Many people who would be entrepreneurs try and fail due to the regulations. It also depends on where they are. Go to Institute for Justice's website and read about the cases they represent where the regulations are destroying the entrepreneurs businesses. It shouldn't take going to court to start up or keep your business going because of government regulations.
"What could career politicians from either party possibly know about entrepreneurship? But I digress..." Bahahaha!!!!! Ahem. Must. Find. Composure.
I could not agree more. I started my business six years ago amid nothing but caution lights. If regulations and taxes can derail your dreams, you're in trouble. If more politicians actually had experience running a business (never mind risking everything they own to START a business), they might stop demonizing the really successful business-people who go on to produce jobs and wealth for others.
Guy's argument amounts to this: it doesn't matter how costly and time-consuming it is to deal with regulations, or how much additional uncertainly and risk they create for someone trying to get their business off the ground because a "true entrepreneur" will just pony up the money and dig herself deeper and deeper into debt and reducing the amount of precious cash needed in the early stages of a business. A "true entrepreneur" lives for that shit, therefore I'm against the idea of reducing regulatory burdens. 
Successful entrepenuers see what is before them and act accordingly. Those destined to failure are those that either don't see the obstacles or don't respond effectively.

Business is never going to be easy. Pointing fingers at the man seems to me to be another way of saying my plan isn't good enough to succeed or I don't have faith in myself.
+John Murphy what kind of business did you start, some one man service company that is barely regulated at all? You understand that different industries face different regulatory obstacles right?

I think regulation and taxes are the two easiest things to get around or manipulate as a business owner. The real reason is...oh i dunno..lack of money and consumers with money?
It depends on the industry! I think many of you are just thinking along the lines of a business like selling things on eBay. ;) Entrepreneurs wishing to start up "light industries" in Los Angeles must first receive as many as 200 approvals from federal, state, city and regional government authorities!
So check out +Gary Johnson. He's running for president. He built up a one man handy man business into a 1000+ construction company in NM. His company built the plants that made the original 286 chips for Intel.

He then ran for governor because he thought he could bring some business sense to the office of governor in NM. He was elected even though the establishment was against him, and he was re-elected in a 2-1 democratic state.

He's now running for president and running up against the same walls created by the establishment.

He's the most entrepreneurial candidate for president running.
And since Guy started this with an NPR reference. A NPR commentator said if he had to create the perfect candidate Gary Johnson would be that candidate.

To bad the main stream media is mainly ignoring him.
Regulations designed to protect consumers can backfire if the approvals process is so cumbersome or takes so long that entrepreneurs run out of resources before they get approval. Waiting months to hear back on SBIR funding or years for regulatory approvals can exhaust startups’ resources. The root cause of the problem is unbalanced incentives on government. Regulators and politicians face high penalties for under-regulation (i.e., they worry about “what if someone gets hurt by permitting X”). But, these same government officials experience little or no counterbalancing penalties for over-regulation of innovation (the millions of people awaiting healthcare or environmental solutions that are delayed or stymied due to over-regulation). The problem is that everyone can see the failure of lax regulation but few can see the lost opportunity when a regulator says “no.”  Problems  like economic underperformance — or disease and death caused by a lack of entrepreneurial solutions — aren’t as noticeable. 
Considering I'm at an international trade show at this very moment, I think you can assume I'm not just selling odds and ends on EBay. Our business spans three nations and serves approximately 450Mil people.

Success stems from hard work and endurance not ease. 
Well I have several companies and customers in 80 countries but its not the kind of business that is has to deal with dozens of agencies to get countless permits and licenses, which are sometimes denied for various reasons. Being against the idea of making it easier for people to start a business by reducing excessive regulations which burden the startup with costs, delays, risks and uncertainly is one of the dumbest positions I've ever seen debated. 
>success stems from hard work and endurance

Haha, Don't forget that failure stems from hard work and endurance too. There is a silly book called A Millionaire Next Door, and one of the authors wrote an even sillier book called The Millionaire's Mind. They interviewed a bunch of millionaires to figure out how these people got rich. Visibly they came up with bunch of traits. You need a little bit of intelligence, a lot of hard work, and a lot of risk-taking. And they derived that, hey, taking risk is good for you if you want to become a millionaire. What these people forgot to do is to go take a look at the less visible cemetery — in other words, bankrupt people, failures, people who went out of business — and look at their traits. They would have discovered that some of the same traits are shared by these people, like hard work and risk taking. This tells me that the unique trait that the millionaires had in common was mostly luck.
The best thing for an budding business person to do is wait for everything to be in their favor. This would include materials costs, labor costs, healthcare costs, favorable tax codes, import costs, export costs, blah blah blah. Either you believe in yourself and your plan or you don't.

Complaining ad nauseum = whining
National healthcare would go a long way to inspire entrepreneurship, especially with people with families. I've wanted to start a business in the past but I can't afford for my family to even skip a month with no health insurance.
Can you say... "out of touch..."?
Call my cynical but politicians will say whatever they need to say to meet their agenda (get re-elected). Thankfully Canadian corp taxes are currently 16.5% & will go to 15% on Jan 1, 2012

"Stay on the porch" I like that... :-)
Coming from a developing country, we would gladly pay whatever taxes that need to be paid so as long as we see the results. You folks are lucky especially Canada, because your health care is awesome.
+Alejandro Massalin "pls remember that people act rationally according to incentives" so glad this isn't really true. Can you imagine all the stuff that wouldn't have happened in this world if people only acted rationally? Entrepreneurship in and of it's self isn't a rational endeavor. And when it come to taxes the US has a very low effective tax rate. What businesses need above all else is a market. If there's a market there will be business in spite of all other factors. If you can assemble everything you need to reach your market just as well from Singapore as Sweden then good for you. Most people don't have that choice.
now this is something I can agree with.
if it is burning a hole in you, you will build it.
I've been researching this stuff for 9 years now and the more I did, the more I realize that our so called experts are nothing but fools using the media to build their house of cards.
Government intervention in commerce nearly always favors large companies over small, even if that was not its specific intent, for a couple of reasons:

-Increasingly complex and pervasive regulations on everything from labor practices to salt content tend to add a compliance cost burden that is more easily born by larger companies
-Large, entrenched competitors are becoming more facile at manipulating government to create barriers to competition from upstart companies with different business models.

The role of government in throttling entrepreneurship has been evident for years, in the enormous differentials between US and European business startup rates. Historically, the US has had entrepeneurship rates 3-4 times higher than in the large European industrial countries, due in large part to the barriers these latter countries place in the way of business creation. But the US, with its current bi-partisan drive towards a corporate state, may soon be engaged in a race to the bottom with these other countries.
Well, nobody starts venture businesses in Greece, for example. They start "bakery" type businesses. There is an ethic, or a flavor of capitalism, that favors new economy or old economy businesses that makes the difference, and it's not regulation.
I don't think that taxation makes much difference either (although boneheaded accounting that makes a startup tax-unviable might).

The best I can offer about regional differences in entrepreneurship is good/bad capital. In the US there is a belief that investing in a venture to create value is the path to success. In Western Europe somewhat so. In Southern Europe the overwhelming belief is that investing in the position to extract value is the only way.
As an entrepreneur, I agree MOSTLY with your stance, but there are at time when taxes and regulation do get in the way of growth. Then it takes more money to pay lawyers and accountants to find ways to get around both so you can grow the company. :) I swear, with some of the new regs, politicians are the pockets of accountants and lawyers...
+Pavlos Papageorgiou , I think that's a pretty broad brush you are using. To me, there is both creation and exploration of value in investing universally.
Ugh.. autocorrect... should be "creation and exploitation"...
Guy, I just read your post, and haven't read the 107 comments...sorry if this is redundant. I agree that true entrepreneurs won't let excessive government regs and high corporate taxes dissuade them from pursuing their dream, but that doesn't mean that something shouldn't be done immediately to curtail some of the nonsense that goes on in the spirit of "protecting consumers" (see Gibson Guitars link below).

There is plenty that can be done to create a better environment for creating private sector jobs. We're drowning companies in red tape, and serious reforms are needed to help American companies compete in a global marketplace. We may never have a "level" playing field with the likes of the Chinese, but that doesn't mean we need to put Everest in the way of job creators and innovators, either (even if entrepreneurs would channel their passion into moving these mountains...wouldn't it be better if they didn't have to, and could focus more energy on their passions?).
Vu Bui
+Alejandro Massalin I have to agree completely with +Bill Streeter here. Entrepreneurship is not typically a rational venture, and doesn't usually involve rational choices. Most entrepreneurs are huge risk takers, are rebellious and headstrong... and move forward even when all the "rational" people around them are telling them they are crazy to do what they do. And most of them fail, of course. But not because of taxation and regulation. And yes I'm sure there are examples of people failing because of these things... or avoiding starting a business because of them... but most of those people would likely find another reason to fail or avoid anyway.

The number of people who actually avoid taxes etc by moving do lesser taxed states/countries are likely a statistically insignificant number of people. You happen to know someone who did it which may make it seem more significant than it is to you, but unless I could see some hard data supporting it you can't convince me.
That's the punch! Thanks Kawasaki for your very precious idea.

The person who makes excuses can never become an entrepreneur! Thanks once again!!
+Max Hodges Have you ever traveled to a country where they do not enforce regulations on businesses? Try Guatemala. I lived there for 9 years. Yes, it's extremely easy to start any business there (I started a few), and that is admittedly really nice. But take a tour around Guatemala City and see what happens on a large scale when they don't enforce rules about where you can open your factory or your bar or even your brothel. It's an absolute filthy mess. Zoning? Building regs? Fire codes? Health & Safety? Pollution? Who cares.
Hi James I'm not such sn extremist. Nothing in my posts or articles I linked to are so extreme. (did you review them?)
This is a wonderful post, and Guy absolutely nailed it, but does anyone know which Republican said this? I've looked through all the comments and can't find it. am writing a blog post that quotes this, and would like to know if possible.
... but we already have the lowest taxation and regulation America has ever experienced... so I guess he just proved himself wrong
Hi Max, I didn't mean to label you an extremist. My point was to demonstrate that on some level, regulation is good. And maybe not all businesses should be allowed to start. There are down sides to too little regulation too. I re-read your posts and you do make some very good points about over regulation. The system is far from perfect or fair. It's unfortunate but true that not every industry is going to be as accommodating to start-ups as others. Part of being an entrepreneur is also knowing how to pick a fight you think you can win. And in the heaviest regulated industries a lot of that depends on just how much you believe in your dream and how hard you are willing to work at it. Virgin Atlantic is one example that comes to mind. 
I can name at least EIGHT rebugnant candidazes who have said that - so far this year
Thanks +James Goller

Yeah I'm not so idiotic as to think regulations are fundamentally bad or anything, but there is a lot of consensus among government watchdog groups and small business advocacy organizations that much regulation favors big business and imposes formidable costs, delays, uncertainty and risks on start-ups. Also, while some think the politician overstated his case, I think they miss the big picture. Even if a "true entrepreneur", as they call it, were undaunted by excessive regulations, it would certainly be more favorable to her, to others, and to the economy as a whole to reform such regulation when possible.

This is one of those few times with a politician is advocating policy to help small business over big business and people are slamming him. To me, that's just nuts.

I'm guessing many of them simply have no experience starting a company in an affected industry and are ignorant about the topic in general. People may see examples of successful entrepreneurship all around them and think there's no reason for reform, but one thing they don't see is the cemetery -- in other words, bankrupt people, failures, stillborn companies who ran out of resources before they got approval. We don't see the costs and delays which slowed the growth of that start-up. We also don't see the lost opportunity when a regulator says “no.” Problems like economic underperformance — or disease and death caused by a lack of entrepreneurial solutions — aren’t as noticeable.

Regulations targeting large businesses are not always appropriate for entrepreneurs and their investors. We should all welcome efforts toward smarter regulations, process simplification, and bold new ideas for lean government no matter which side of the aisle is advocating them.
+Max Hodges , no it didn't really. It says nothing regarding Taxes (except Tax rebates don't help?! - so now we have low taxes, they don't count - talk about having it both ways) and cries a river over the existence of rule and regulations. I'm in favor of regulation and if we'd of had enforcement too we'd avoid the worst of this financial mess. Lets have at least ONE banker in jail please.
OK maybe that puts it in perspective. Maybe that politician and I are thinking of the regulation reform to level the playing field for start-ups and small businesses, and others here have in mind the kinds of deregulation companies like Enron exploited that resulted in "rolling blackouts" across California.
An entrepreneur is not motivated by a lust for money! Since the beginning, this whole regulation and taxes mumbo jumbo has been a straw man argument that has been framed by a greedy few who are so pathetically uncreative that they even have to pay professional think tanks, marketeers and propagandists to create the talking points and arguments for them! They are too lazy and immoral to succeed on their own without gaming the system They are scavengers... not entrepreneurs!
Greg B
I am an entrepreneur and have worked for some of America's largest companies. I will venture to guess what this so-called 'Politician' is saying: regulations are both barriers to start-ups and drivers of higher costs. Say an inventor creates new vein stint. Some, not all, inventors in this example will see the regulatory burden to large or too complex and/or the costs too high to justify the effort. Not all will see it this way, but it is a barrier nonetheless.

Regulations are a double edged sword; we have to balance the need to protect consumers with the burden regulations impose. Too little regulation puts at risk the consumer, too much creates barriers, higher costs, and liability. This politician is saying this burden is currently too high for small businesses. And I know there are many examples to draw from.
that's the problem.... when a politician that has never been an entrepreneur, in business, never held a position in any level of business, demonstrates they dont know the basic 101's of economics and business, along with business responsibility... they spew out asinine fallacies, motivated by party affiliation.

Its like roman catholic priests giving marital advice... its just asinine.
Add a comment...