Another reason to support small and local businesses…
[The] Society for Human Resource Management [observed that in] the last three months of 2008, 27% of small firms (fewer than 100 employees) reported decreasing total head count, while 45% of large companies (500 or more workers) did. That trend was due to continue into this year, with 11% of small companies anticipating decreasing staff by the end of March, but 34% of large companies planning such a change.
The bigger the badder.
And now for a bit of positive economic news, brought to us by the fearless American consumer:
After falling for a record sixth straight months, consumer spending posted a small increase in January, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce.
DOC said Monday that consumer spending rose 0.6 percent in January, even better than the 0.4 percent gain that economists expected. That follows a 1 percent drop in December when retailers endured their worst holiday shopping season in at least four decades.
The January increase was driven by a 1.3 percent rise in purchases of nondurable goods led by higher spending on food. Durable goods posted a tiny 0.1 percent increase, as Americans again avoided spending on cars and other large items.
I don’t follow. Layoffs are worse at large companies than at small companies, so we should support…small companies? Shouldn’t we be helping out sectors that are getting hit the hardest?
Don’t get me wrong; I’m all about buying small and local. But your stats don’t seem to match your argument.
Or are you saying we should take some kind of “revenge” against big companies for laying people off, even though they’re in most cases just reacting to the worst economy since the impression? I hope that’s not your point. ‘Cause that’s dumb.
Sorry, I had to replace some stuff in the house.
Won’t happen again …
The January uptick might be due to inflation in food prices. One dynamic at work is the general infaltion we’ve seen in food prices caused by the changes in de facto immigration policy. (The twofold effect of this policy shift has been rising food prices and the recessionary effect of the income lost as those jobs have to some extent gone abroad).
It’s apples and oranges. My small company had to lay off 2 people which turns out to be 28% of the staff (and 33% of my department). It’s just such a different thing – for better or worse – than what’s going on at Washington Mutual or Microsoft or any other large company.
It’s apples and oranges. My small company had to lay off 2 people which turns out to be 28% of the staff (and 33% of my department). It’s just such a different thing – for better or worse – than what’s going on at Washington Mutual or Microsoft or any other large company.
Sorry for the double post – something weird happened
Small businesses struggling to stay afloat provide most of the jobs in America.
When Obama and the Dems slam the ‘rich’ usually they only hit small businesses.
The truly ‘rich’ can afford legal advice to avoid the taxes.
@1: Oh, and I meant “DEpression”…sorry. It’s Monday.
Small businesses don’t have gross incomes of $2.5 million, and a net income of $250,000, so they probably got a TAX CUT.
The top tax rate under President Obama is the SAME as the top tax rate under President Reagan.
You know, the guy the Socialist Republicans worship like a god …
@7,
And when the Republicans claim to help small businesses, large corporations and the very rich are the ones who actually benefit. Were you trying to make some kind of point?
9
10
I’m sure you guys are right.
And Wall Street seems to share your confidence in Obama….
I said in 2004 that it probably would end with Dow 6000.
Don’t panic.
Dollar cost average – it was overpriced for a long while.
12
Thanks, I feel better now.
And since I now will be working until I am 86 before I can afford to retire I’ll have plenty of time to dollar cost average.
@7: Not to pile it on, but do you understand the difference between gross (revenues) and net income (a measure of profit)? There are a few different terms for the same basic concepts. Check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue
You’ll see that taxing a business that makes a before-tax profit over $250,000 means that the tax is applied to whatever is leftover after all expenses have been subtracted from the revenues. That means everyone has been paid salaries and bonuses, and the business still has over $250K to report as income. $250K in revenues is not much for many businesses. $250K in profits is pretty fantastic, though, and I would guess that less than one percent of lucky small businesses enjoy such profits. I doubt any small business owner would be put off from taking risks or expanding a business by the idea of paying a higher tax rate on $250K in profits AFTER having already paid him or herself a salary. Dare I say that even Joe the Plumber would, if he understood some basic accounting and actually owned and operated a business, feel more inclined to share the wealth on that $250K profit.
14
Wow Dave,
you should get a show on CNBC
and explain it to American business.
Cause they hate Obama’s tax plan.
I’m sure if you explain it to them they’ll line up for a chance to “share the wealth”.
I’ll never work for a small business again. I have worked for three and each one of them turned out to be crooks of one form or another. They either cheated on their taxes or treated their employees like shit, I rather me an anonymous cog in a big machine (like working at the UW).
#16: Preach it, man. I’ve worked for small and large, and have found that the reason an older small business stayed small tends to be that the owner is a crooked psycho who had to start his own business because he kept getting fired in the corporate world. Exceptions exist but I’ll take employment at the large company, thanks.
@15: Insightful comment, there. “American business,” by which I suspect you mean big business, doesn’t like Obama’s tax plan for other legitimate reasons, but “it” understands accounting. Those who say that the plan will hurt small businesses are either spreading propaganda or they are ignorant.