On the Fourth of July, because nothing says “Liberty!” like a bigger federal subsidy, the Small Business Administration doubled the ceiling on its guaranteed loans to $10 million, the most it has ever offered.
I think you just named the practical problem my work is trying to solve mathematically: policy cliffs create distorted behavior. Ramps are better. Curves may be better still.
And contracting preferences in particular are hard to defend.
I have the least problem of all in exempting small businesses from regulations imposed on larger firms, even if the better answer is to eliminate the regulation altogether. In this case, since eliminating said regulation is not in the cards, the increase in the Code length for small business exemptions is to me a net positive, not a negative. And I suspect most of that would be to you as well.
My final comment is: exactly how much cost and economic drag does the SBA impose on the American people? It strikes me even from your piece that it is much less worse than most of the rest of the federal behemoth.
I’d of course be all for getting rid of it as a part of broad-based deregulation and lower government spending. But other than that, it strikes me as more like discussing foreign aid spending in the context of overall federal spending; i.e. its very small potatoes indeed.
Sure, the goal of perfect competition for allocative and production efficiency DOESN'T at all mean PROTECTING small, inefficient firms (in fact, the best evidence of a healthy economy is a high rate of business bankruptcy!). But, here's my far superior fix to minimize government intervention in free enterprise. My "modest proposal" (with tongue firmly in cheek) is to combine all business-related Departments and Agencies into one, naming it the BBA (BIG Business Agency), and then slash that budget (so we can "drown it in the bathtub" as Norquist said, but about all gov't), because that part of government displays a total bias in favor of our biggest businesses with the most lobbyists and bought politicians in contracting, subsidizing, most in-house lawyers, and 3 times the monopoly power of the Robber Barons! It's much easier to even the playing field by focusing on the current incestuous kleptocracy entrenched since Reagan got in and ended most workplace, consumer, and environmental protections, gave the richest 4 huge unfunded tax cuts (leading to record income and wealth inequalities), and neutered all antitrust law enforcement (and all the biggest mergers ever)!
I think you just named the practical problem my work is trying to solve mathematically: policy cliffs create distorted behavior. Ramps are better. Curves may be better still.
You are of course generally correct.
And contracting preferences in particular are hard to defend.
I have the least problem of all in exempting small businesses from regulations imposed on larger firms, even if the better answer is to eliminate the regulation altogether. In this case, since eliminating said regulation is not in the cards, the increase in the Code length for small business exemptions is to me a net positive, not a negative. And I suspect most of that would be to you as well.
My final comment is: exactly how much cost and economic drag does the SBA impose on the American people? It strikes me even from your piece that it is much less worse than most of the rest of the federal behemoth.
I’d of course be all for getting rid of it as a part of broad-based deregulation and lower government spending. But other than that, it strikes me as more like discussing foreign aid spending in the context of overall federal spending; i.e. its very small potatoes indeed.
Sure, the goal of perfect competition for allocative and production efficiency DOESN'T at all mean PROTECTING small, inefficient firms (in fact, the best evidence of a healthy economy is a high rate of business bankruptcy!). But, here's my far superior fix to minimize government intervention in free enterprise. My "modest proposal" (with tongue firmly in cheek) is to combine all business-related Departments and Agencies into one, naming it the BBA (BIG Business Agency), and then slash that budget (so we can "drown it in the bathtub" as Norquist said, but about all gov't), because that part of government displays a total bias in favor of our biggest businesses with the most lobbyists and bought politicians in contracting, subsidizing, most in-house lawyers, and 3 times the monopoly power of the Robber Barons! It's much easier to even the playing field by focusing on the current incestuous kleptocracy entrenched since Reagan got in and ended most workplace, consumer, and environmental protections, gave the richest 4 huge unfunded tax cuts (leading to record income and wealth inequalities), and neutered all antitrust law enforcement (and all the biggest mergers ever)!
Thanks. I detest government pretty much in all ways, but it is always interesting to find out new ways of incompetence that I had not known of.
How do you extract the government from these socialist activities. Well stated article.