Business Intelligence

Clinton did not leave President Bush with a budget surplus that Bush subsequently turned into a $480 billion deficit. There is a huge misconception about the budget deficit and surpluses and it all gets mixed up in the smoke and mirrors of Washington. Clinton's last budget proposal for 2001, which ended in September 2001, generated a $133.29 billion deficit. The growing deficits started in the year of the last Clinton budget, not in the first year of the Bush administration. Fair is fair here...don't blame any one person for the economic mess this country is in, and might I add, there were a few catastrophe's (9/11 for one in particular) in this nation under Bush's administration that has added to the problem.
Most of all, one needs to remember that the President, although an important political figure, cannot spend this money on their own. They must have the votes from the Congress for spending. So, if you want to be real here, talk to your Congressman.
...

Speaking of long lines, Bank of America who has bought out Countrywide, the nation's leading mortgage company, has also bought out Merrill Lynch. Hmm...can anyone else see that they will soon be in the line for government backing? What happened to the so-called stop on monopolies in the marketplace?
My questions to you are this - I hear stories for both sides of the Fed bailout and have my own opinions on the matter as well, but one thing I have not heard was what would happen if the government did NOT bail out Fannie and Freddie. These two conglomerates hold more than $5 Trillion dollars in mortgages. It is not the fault of the average American homeowner out there that the management of these companies was incompetent.
What happens if the government does not bail out AIG and the others on the block now? I am not saying that the government should be held responsible for the mismanagement of some of these companies, but what about the big picture?
I definitely agree with a cap being put on what any CEO, especially of a failing institution, can receive. Frankly, they should have to pay back what they took!! But, that's a whole other story.
I do not agree that the taxpayer's should have to pay for it either, but what else can be done?? If these companies close on top of an already increasing unemployment rate and a less than blissful economy, what happens then?

1. To an earlier comment - President Bush didn't run up a $400+ Billion dollar deficit. The Congress did. Congress must generate all taxing and spending bills, and the President is usually stuck negotiating and compromising, or risk shutting down the government. If the deficit is too high - vote against the Congress that spends the money.

2. The article seems to recite "facts" that might not be facts. Static analysis assumes that everyone does the same regardless of tax rates - but dynamic analysis shows that people react and change activities based on tax rates. Tax rates of 90% might seem fair by those in favor of redistribution of wealth, but the results show that people stop working (earning) and there is less wealth to tax than if the tax rates stay low.

I firmly belive that McCain's tax policies are more favorable to economic growth, while Obama's tax proposals are designed to be "fair" (as a socialist defines fair) - and will cause an economic down-turn, job losses, small business failures, etc. I hope future articles do a dynamic analysis of the probable results of any tax policies.

Our deficits aren't related to tax policies, but rather a result of over-zealous spending politicians committed to buy votes with other-people's money! Restrain spending!!

First of all, no one should accuse the Brookings Institute of being non-partisan. It's a very liberal think tank (is 'liberal think tank' an oxymoron?). Secondly, whenever taxes have been cut, revenues actually increase because the economy improves. The American people can be trusted to spend their own money. They don't need the tax and spenders to decide how to spend it for them. Spending needs to be cut. Growth in federal entitlements must be reeled in. Both candidates should formulate a real trade policy. Investment in America must be encouraged and some of the money stashed offshore will appear if it's not taxed away.

I am all for tax cuts and control of government, but let's get real here. The Bush Administration ran up a $480 BILLION deficit. How on earth can we pay that off unless we raise revenues?

What are the names of these companies?

As citizens, taxpayers and customers, we deserve to know who is defrauding the American people.

I have found only two names: Xerox and John Deere, both mentioned in this article on the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/24/business/smallbusiness/24sba.html?ref=business

...

read here ...

The soaring prices are affecting the costs of everything from food to housing market crisis. There are also significant issues on local and global environmental impact. While there are many issues, we need to look at our next leader and determine which will have the best course of action going forward?..I recently watch the two video in http://pollclash.com about this issue, Obama and McCain talk about this? ...

The soaring prices are affecting the costs of everything from food to housing market crisis. There are also significant issues on local and global environmental impact. While there are many issues, we need to look at our next leader and determine which will have the best course of action going forward?..I recently watch the two video in http://pollclash.com about this issue, Obama and McCain talk about this? ...

The soaring prices are affecting the costs of everything from food to housing market crisis. There are also significant issues on local and global environmental impact. While there are many issues, we need to look at our next leader and determine which will have the best course of action going forward?..I recently watch the two video in Pollclash about this issue, Obama and McCain talk about this? ...

Well done Keith. I am not suprised that the government is reporting contract awards to large businesses as small. This is just another example of the incompetence of the Bush Administration. Steve Preston was nothing but a Bush lackey with no small business experience, but plenty of experience raising money for Bush's reelection and now this new nominee seems to be more of the same. Small businesses are the only ones keeping our economy afloat right now, but because we do not speak in a unified voice or give large campaign contributions our problems get ignored by both the executive and legislative branches. This guy Chapman seemd to be doing a good job of fighting this problem - we should support him. It is time that small business owners come together and protect our businesses, because obviously the government is not going to help.

Good article and excellent commentary. Thanks for sharing.

The federal government is so eager to come to the aid to bail out the bankers and the Wall Street crowd at the expense of the taxpayers. However, when it comes to issues such as subprime mortgages, hurricane Katrina and other debacles, the feds look the other way. Either bailout the common man along with the rich Wall Street crowd and bankers, or don't bailout anyone.

Franchising is not for everyone. There are too many rules, regulations and costs associated with franchising which may be prohibitive for some persons. Nonetheless, if one wants to operate business with an established name, service or product, then franchising might the the way to go.

It's appalling how the price of gas has increased recently under the Bush administration. Under the Clinton administration, the price of a gallon of gas did not exceed $2.00 a gallon. However, during the last 8 years (and definitely the last 4 years), the price of a gallon of gas has exceeded the pace of inflation!

One would think that the Bush administration (and Republicans in general) would be an advocate for small business; however, that is just not the case. Similar treatment has been given to the VA by the Bush administration, and it's shameful.

The post events of hurricane Katrina were due to neglect by the federal, state and local governments. The federal government neglected to properly administer funding for the levees, and the state and local governments were derelict in evacuating citizens from the hurricane stricken area in a timely manner.

Any business that employs illegal workers, aliens, etc., should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. No excuses - none whatsoever. Comply with the law or be prosecuted.

Any advice to help on tax audit avoidance is a good advice. Thanks for sharing.

Health insurance for the self employed is very expensive because it usually covers one person instead of a group of people. It can be written off as a deductible item on taxes, but that does not mitigate the cost of it.

From personal experience, the best advice I want to give for anyone looking for a good salary with excellent benefits is to take a job with a large company or the federal government (or even state government).

A large company or the federal government offers the best salaries and benefits, unlike small businesses which usually offers low paying salaries and benefits, if any. Remember, there is a reason they're called "small businesses." ...

Small businesses should embrace the internet because it is the great equalizer. The internet puts small businesses on an "equal footing" to compete successfully with large businesses or companies. Therefore, small businesses should unequivocally embrace web technology.

The best way to live with credit cards, if you prefer, is to pay off the balances in full. The best credit card to get is one that has no fee and offers a cash reward.

High speed internet service in the USA is a joke! Other countries such as Japan, Canada, South Korea et al are light years ahead of the United States when it comes to broadband service. These countries broadband service is 100x faster than and much cheaper than broadband service in the USA.

The SBA actually discourages one from securing a business loan because of the arduous process, bureaucracy and other hurdles one has to overcome.

One person, such as Dave Ramsey, does not believe in credit or "borrowing money" as he calls it because he asserts the "borrower is slave to the lender" and does not believe in credit or "debt" as he calls it.

We are heading towards where? Economy slow down!,Global warming!,Crude prices on high!market uder Recession! My God all the bad news are coming thick andf fast what to do with it ? All problems are created by men and we name it development... Are we really Devel;oping or going for destruction ...I need your thougts.Please Reply..

??????????????.
Kurt Stinson
Addiction Recovery Colorado

...

What a great story about Gun Dog Supply and congratulations on your success as well! It's always nice to hear of one of the smaller competitors of a massive chain come out on top! When you started your website, did you immediately sign up for Google or Yahoo! ads and if so, what did you begin your account with? I have checked into these, but get confused on exactly how they work. How did you jump start your website?

Keith,

Thanks for the post. While small businesses being affected the slumping economy present a constant challenge in todays economic arena, small business owners need to adjust to the times. Small business owners are letting external factors, which they have absolutely no control over. Fear and anxiety to adverse times are a natural response in the human body. Small business owners must condition their minds to think outside of the box. If your business is being hurt by soaring gas prices, think of an outside of the box way to increase your customer base - get innovative! Provide a complementary service to your main products. It's all about the mental adjustment in thinking. I read a pretty awesome books that talk exactly about this type of thinking. Check it out.

http://www.readtheanswer.com/index.php?rta=blog ...

A quick Google search revealed Pilot Bank is contributing to this crisis as they refused to fund a number of their obligations. I think the editors should note this when doing a story on John Puffer and Pilot Bank.

"Instead of providing coverage, companies could raise employees' salaries by an equivalent amount to help them pay for it, ALTHOUGH THAT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT." Call me cynical, but I have a hard time believing many companies would raise their employees' salaries if not required to do so by law, thus rendering McCain's "plan" a total joke.

Older workers who are relatively healthy are getting hammered by health insurance. This becomes an issue when you have an office of experienced older employees. McCain's solutions don't seem to offer any relief and could make matters worse for these people. When you shop around, any pre-existing conditions are eliminated, so you are stuck with the existing provider. Costs are out of control. Our premiums went up 30% this year of which only 5% was related to risk, my turning 60. It may be the best in the world, althougth that questionable, but who cares if you can't afford it. I was never for a government program, but soon I will not be able to afford health insurance and have to rely on one and I have no chronic, serious conditions. Part of th problem is the state by state regulation of health care that prevents larger pools of small businesses. The SHOP bill in Congress sponsored by Senators Lincoln, Durbin, Coleman et al seems to offer some relief except that states may opt out.

Oregonia in Protest, I definitely feel for your difficult situation, but blaming illegal immigrant for all your problems is called "scapegoating." Adolph Hitler used it to great effect.

I can tell you that the Federal Government already has laws in place. One of which says that if an employer employs an illegal alien that he(she) can be fined up to 11,000 Dollars per event. I'm familiar with a number of small businesses in the construction indutry that utilize illegals only. If the feds would enforce this law and fined the employers that amount of money, the employers would effectively be paying for the return of the illegals to their homeland. That would free up money in the system (both State and federal) to help the Oregonian in Protest. Frankly Keith, I don't agree that it's either Orwellian or impractical to expect small business owners to uphold the current law. I don't understand why your position is to negate what has worked in the past when our leaders cared more about the people that elected them rather than new, albeit improper voters. I realize that small businesses would have to decide to obey or not to obey. The difference is pretty easy to spot. when a service company or a construction outfit arrives and no one speaks English. It's a pretty good sign that they weren't brought up in our school system. Maybe you could address accountability for small businesses when they hire illegals. Thats a bigger problem than Phony ID cards and americans that fall into the cracks in the system.

I Completely See Eye to Eye with You. I 100% understand where you are coming from, Diane. I am now unable to work after putting in many years with the government. And I have a six year-old daughter who needs medical and dental care -- and I am struggling to get her under the Oregon Health Plan. They actually created a "lottery" for gosh-darned-sake! If you didn't know about this "lottery" until it was too late, you are out of luck. And if you did know about it and you are not randomly selected, you are out of luck. I don't care about me... but every child in the U.S. should receive health and dental care - no exceptions. When I think of all of the money and resources illegal aliens (who don't pay taxes) are getting from those of us who have paid taxes and whatever else the government asks - and then think about how I am FIGHTING to get my daughter some health care and we are surviving on food boxes because "food stamps" are now a luxury too (also consumed by largely the illegal aliens)! -- it makes me sick. I am not proud. At the same time, while I realize this is a travesty and I know something must be done about it... I feel that implementing a system that will further injure innocent Americans is not the answer. I'd love for the U.S. to implement a system whereby if an individual is not a legal resident of our country and abiding by our laws and regulations, they do not get access to our systems, food, shelter, and medical funds. It's only fair... that's what the entire tax system was based on so very long ago, right? I love the overall idea of the new immigration bill. I just don't want anything to be implemented that is going to cause more harm American tax paying citizens. For me, the bottom line is not about business ethics and practices, cheap or free labor. At the end of the day, it's about whether or not we have something decent to eat and when my daughter needs medical attention, she is able to get it. Do you know what happens when you take your child into the emergency room for anything... here in Oregon... if you don't have insurance... you are billed hundreds of dollars. Then when you can't pay it, because you only get $230.00 a month to live on, (not even enough to pay 1/2 month's rent), within a couple of months of that hospital visit -- you are harassed by a collection agency for the money. A couple of months later you are provided with a summons that they are going to take your only money from you to pay that hospital bill. --- When you were forced to go there in the first place because you are unable to get your child any medical insurance. So now, your money can be forcefully taken from you, you become homeless, and God knows what after that! My heart is fluttering with anger and fear right now. Expressing my view about this matter is never easy. It causes terrible feelings to erupt. I was living comfortably in the lower to middle class sector prior to becoming painfully disabled. I had no idea what people were going through regarding poverty and medical needs until I experienced it myself. I once held my head up high and felt that I was a contributing member of society who didn't need anyone's help. Now, well, now I am struggling to even care about life any more. It's nothing but a battle, electric shut off notices, never knowing how we are going to make the rent, barely enough gas to get my daughter to and from school, eating macaroni and cheese every day, (you get the point). I feel disregarded. It shouldn't be this way. What happened to Big Brother and Uncle Sam. I know that if every illegal alien was removed from receiving government resources, my daughter would have medical care today. That's the thing -- most of our American citizens (rich or poor) know this. So why don't we just ABSOLUTELY DEMAND that something be done! Why? Could it really be that the business owners and the rich are so selfish as to not take action because it benefits their pocket books? This is an unacceptable state of affairs. Unbelievable.

Business big or small that has a need for nearly 20 million illegals over a period of 10 years - deserves what it gets. Business,farming, the hotel industry, restaurants, building trades, meat processing, etc etc etc. USED to get along quite well using American labor it was willing to pay a living wage. The problem is NOW they have become so used to cheap labor in never ending waves they can't stand the idea that they might have to cough up the funds to pay for years of being SUBSIDIZED by the taxpayers of the US. Identity scams BEGAN in earnest when we allowed the floodgates to open post Cold War but specifically since NAFTA helped destroy the Mexican economy and sent hordes of workers north. We have always had some Mexican labor in the US but now it is arriving - legally and illegally from all over the world. The COST of all this - which even Alan Greenspan and Milton Friedman called a business subsidy - is in the billions of dollars. The identity theft business has prospered THANKS to the US government and business failing to secure ports, borders, visas, and who gets the PRIVILEDGE of coming to the US. very month, month in and month out, year in and year out, your U.S. senators and House representatives along with President Bush allow 182,000 legal and illegal immigrants to move into America?give or take a few hundred thousand. By years end, they total 2.18 million virtually uneducated, unskilled and lack English language abilities while arriving with a plethora of diseases and other health care needs. Who pays? You do! How much? Each year, you shell out $346 billion in taxes to pay for those immigrants across 15 federal agencies. The Department of Health and Human Services spent $672.9 billion in 2007 according to financial analyst Edwin S. Rubenstein. ?Immigrants are poorer, pay less tax, and are more likely to receive public benefits than American citizens,? said Edwin Rubenstein, reporting on the National Research Council?s new book: ?The New Americans: Economic, Demographics and Fiscal Effects of Immigration.? The Social Contract Winter 2007-08. www.thesocialcontract.com ?Currently Congress considers an expansion of benefits to 400 percent of the poverty line--$83,000.00 for a family of four,? Rubenstein said. ?Approximately 6.7 million children and adults are covered. In 2006, federal expenditures totaled $5.5 billion. About $605 million was spent on immigrants.? Adding to this bombshell cost assessment for legal and illegal immigrants; the ?Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1985? requires hospitals to serve illegal aliens who seek emergency care. Your tax collars pay $167 million for illegal aliens. Drug addiction and alcoholism make up the fastest ?disabilities? illegal aliens claim in our ER hospitals: In 1983: 3,000 cases In 1994: 101,000 cases In 2003: 325,000 cases ?EMTALA givers illegals more than medical treatment. A ?disability? diagnosis automatically qualifies them for immediate cash transfer payments,? Rubenstein said. ?The numbers are staggering.? 127,900 illegals on SSI in 1982 601,400 illegals in 1992 2,000,000 illegals in 2003 In the Southwest alone over 87 hospitals were forced to close courtesy of the flood of use by illegal migrants - an unfunded mandate for the states paid for by citizens losing hospitals and taxpayers paying the bill. Business should quit whining and make sure the dimbulbs in DC deal with the BORDERS and VISA system before they get their shorts in a twist about use of some sort of identity system by business. The rational behind this article is not poor small business having to work harder to make sure they are hiring those here either on a green card or legal residents. This article is about maintaining a free ride by business on the backs of taxpayers on one hand, and depressed wages that result from a never ending stream of cheap labor arriving to take jobs our blue collar and lower class used to do. The Orwellian part of all this is how fast a business type can tap dance in service to a corporate agenda on the backs of US taxpayers.

Your analysis is dead on. I am going to write my congressman and two senators and voice my opinion against these measures.

Any act that would worsen our already troubled unemployment problem, with no way of obtaining immediate "mistake" resolution - should NOT be implemented. With margins of error that wide and innocent, legitimate citizen's livelihoods on the line, a system with little to no error margin must be in place. Being homeless or destitute is bad enough when it comes upon you naturally. But when it's unjustly thrust upon you because of a government error - That's not ok! There should have been IMMEDIATE resolution for that guy who was flagged as a possible illegal.

Then, the scenario is...what is the biggest chunk of budget they can obtain? That is the answer, although not the solution, but a pole.

I think that ultimately, our social security system is in a debacle. With the flood of baby boomers retiring, the government is going to have to leverage in on immigration laws for loss prevention. However, in our current economic situation, I do not think it is a feasable solution to the social security issue. Overall, the events leading up to this is non-effective management of the budget, lack of trained government personnel, and the lack of resources. Do we do the same with Canada?

I am starting to see Texas credit unions make a few business loans, but the commercial lending expertise is just not there yet in most credit unions to deal with a complex loan structure or complex company. What I am seeing is an approach where they simply look at the FICO score of the business owner and make a decision based on that. Credit Unions have a very long way to go before they will be perceived as viable business lenders.

I agree that credit unions are severly limited by regulations to prevent them from being a viable commercial lending force. The banking lobby has been relentless in their opposition of credit unions. Our SBA certified development company (also a non-profit)provides at no cost to the CU, the lending expertise required for making commercial loans. Many CU don't even provide business checking accounts. It is a terrible waste of capital resources for this to continue.

One of the most shocking things about the situation surrounding H.R. 5819 is that this is the second time that we have seen legislation of this nature in the last year. In late 2007, Rep. Velázquez was a major proponent of H.R. 3567. H.R. 3567 passed through the house similar fashion (e.g. it passed through the House after being fast tracked through markup and the Committee.) Additionally, it is important to note that H.R. 3567 was opposed by: the American Small Business League, the White House, the SBA, the NSBA and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. It is my understanding that prior to the Graves amendment Title II of H.R. 5819 and Title V of H.R. 3567 were essentially the same language. The Graves Amendment deviated from the original language by expanding venture capital participation on the SBIR program even more. This legislation is a slap in the face to small businesses across the country. Not only is the legislation bad for small businesses, but this legislation has also exposed the true nature of the Nydia Velázquez. She is not a small business advocate, but a wolf in the pocket of the NVCA and big pharma. I believe it is time for change and it should start with Rep. Velázquez.

I have been a loyal Democrat for many years for many reasons. One crucial reason being that they are usually small business advocates, looking out for the little guy. Unfortunately, It seems money is power and tends to control many legislative decisions. I trusted that Velezquez being from the Democratic party would know better than to push a bill such as H.R. 5819 for obvious personal reasons. If the Democrats don't advocate for positive small business legislation, who will? Supporters of Halliburton? I don't think so. ~ sm, CA ...

WOW, how blatent can you get! So it seems that vc firms and representatives from the biotech industry can just buy legislation that will give them billions in a taxpayer funded give-away. I wonder how much it actually costs to buy your own legislator? Do you think a committee chair costs more? I think that is a great investment. I have to say that I am truly disappointed in the Democrats, so I will add this one to the list...can we get rid of Velazquez?

I am stunned that Velazquez, whose main responsibility is to protect small business, would not only allow but go out of her way to push such legislation. But I guess when you have received thousands of dollars in "campaign contributions" you are almost obilgated to give back in some way. ~ WV ...

From my past experience, I can always tell when bills will do more harm than good when they zip through the legislative process to avoid media attention. This is the second time in less than a year that Velasquez has proposed legislation that could devestate small businesses. Something must be done and must be done quickly. Kay ...

With a record like Velazquez's, I can't think of a reason why she should remain as the Chair of the House of Small Business Committee. She is bad for small business and bad for legislation. Speaker Pelosi should take action and remove her as soon as possible. - Joeseph,CA ...

The fact that Velazquez has pushed not one bill but two bills that would allow venture capital firms to participate in small business programs is disturbing to me. And also, last time I checked, isn't taking bribes a federal offense? - Joe P. CA ...

I am appalled that represenative Velazquez has done absolutely nothing to stop the flow of billions of dollars to fortune 500 corporations. She should be removed from office immediately. - Concerned Small Business Employee ...

It is about time someone in the media exposed Valasquez . I wish a major network would pick up this story. As head of the Small Business Committee - she has found that it does not get the scrutiny of larger committees--she has operated under the radar - and obviously taken contributions that are, in effect, bribes to further the agenda of wealthy investors and big business at the expense of her mandated constiuency. She is one of the worst examples of an opportunist using our government for her own ends. She should be removed from office.

I also wonder about the global warming issue. The Earth's atmospheric composition varies. Although it changes short term, it does not prove that in the long term the same trend will occur. Global warming is a newer trend in science. Yes, we do have the analytical instruments which have the selectivity and sensitivity for gas emission and detection, and they're not more than a little over half a century old.

The price of gasoline has several contributing factors. Not only is there the 18 to 20% gasoline tax per dollar, there are also the cost of logistics and profit margin at sale. The price is also dependant on whom and where the oil reserves are tapped from: domestic verses foreign. Also, the amount on demand for overseas military stationing, and the continued growth in industry in developing countries. Yes, it is really difficult for the smaller businesses to compete on a region to region level, like the trucking company. And, diesel also has a downside to it. As demand is heightened for biofuels, food stock is re-allocated is some of the third world developing countries. I think the greatest problem we have so far, economically, is how to minimize the effect of prices across the market. Hence, research in fuel efficiency, and engines, as well as renewables. In the past the US and G7 have heavily taxed OPEC.

A nice article on the impact of oil costs on small business. This investigates a number of the downstream effects of the increase in a base commodity price across our whole community. In Australia our fuel costs are running around $5.30 USD per gallon ($1.50 per litre). I believe that this is even higher in Europe, so I guess the US has a fair bit of catch up in terms of the present impacts of the new oil economy. What I find quite peculiar in all the economic oil analysis, in particular the reflection on the price spike in the late 70?s is that there appears to be little reference to the root cause of the problem, the stuff is running out! In the last 18 months or so, oil has doubled from ~$50 per barrel whilst global consumption has remained relatively constant. Perhaps this reflects the classic supply/demand problem? I recall (almost grimly) as a lad in the early 80?s that at the time the prediction was we had 20-30 years of oil left, well we are now 28 years past that time and guess what? I really wonder when we are seriously going to start re-engineering our economies to reflect this, let alone the environmental effects and downstream climate change. Sam.

This situation is occuring all over the country. It isn't specific to any industry or location. Without access to capital, no business can survive, muchless grow. Our non-profit co. has been financing small businesses for 30 years, and the problem is universal. Big banks don't want to bother with small companies, and small banks can't justify the higher risk to their stockholders. The alternatives are frequently too expensive or too small an amount to be viable. The toughest loan to fund is a contract loan. Banks don't value the contract as collateral, but the company usually has to front all the expense of performance. We use a variety of federal, state, and local programs to cobble together the necessary funds to service the business, but budgets and rules in these agencies change almost daily. The best advice I can give to an owner is to create a separate entity and tax number asap, establish a credit history for the business as soon as possible, build your asset base by BUYING, not leasing, your permanent equipment and your facility as soon as possible. This will build your asset base faster. Pay attention to your Balance Sheet as well as your Profit and Loss. Lenders look at both statements. Take advantage of free help from organizations like www.score.org and local small business service providers. There are hundreds of local revolving loan funds around the country located inside non-profits like electric co-ops, regional planning districts, etc. There is money out there. You just have to dig for it. The good thing is that are people who will give you a shovel and help you dig.

"So, this means that guests at hotels will actually be able to converse with the staff, since they will be US citizens, and this is a bad thing?" Heaven forbid American tourists come in contact with someone from another country, such as Jamaica, Argentina, or Ireland (where they also speak English, can you believe it?), or they might actually widen their worldview beyond a 5-mile radius from their local shopping mall or the McDonalds where they eat all their meals. The majority of the world bends over backwards to learn English, and I'm sure it's in the hopes of "conversing" with some arrogant, narrow-minded American (such as yourself) checking into a hotel this summer. Is "carry my bags upstairs" or "bring me another cup of coffee" really considered a conversation anyway?

So, this means that guests at hotels will actually be able to converse with the staff, since they will be US citizens, and this is a bad thing?

As a small business owner I have no problem getting help but I pay a good wage with all of the benifits, and H-2B only hurts my business because I have to compete with construction companys paying a low wage to the forgein worker so the bill need to die were it is at!

I am a small business owner (was for 21 yrs) and decided to get out of business because the government controls and read tape was more than I could tolerate, it made why I went into business for myself so unenjoyable that it no longer what I wished to do. Now, 17 people are not working, the community is not collecting taxes, and I am not longer following my dream, all because of government red tape, and their unwillingness to work honestly with small business like mine. Go figure!!

I recently interviewed Carrie Hines, Executive Director of the American Small Manufacturers Coalition for my blog (http://www.allbusiness.com/company-activities-management/management/7124448-1.html), and she commented on this problem. According to her, many small businesses are eligible for an R&D tax credit, but don't have their software set up to capture the information the government requires. The Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), which has centers in all fifty states, sometimes can help with this problem, although MEPs concentrate primarily on technical assistance to improve productivity.

This is an excellent article about small businesses using T1 lines for communications because T1 internet service is the future of internet technology at http://www.1-satellite-tv-facts.com/T1-Internet-Service.html ...

The government right now is more concerned with building "confidence" in the stock market than with anything else right now. Those "in charge" are hoping that today's economic package will get people to spend more money, bringing consumer "confidence." It's all about appearance right now, rather than fundamentals.

Small businesses use credit cards because they are simple and easy. Many are not aware that they might be able to get up to $150,000 per location through another product called a Merchant Cash Advance. Unlike credit cards, the cost of the money is spelled out and can't increase, plus no personal collateral is required. As long as the business accepts credit cards as a form of payment in their business, then this may be a viable option - even owners who have low credit scores. There are several providers out there. One of the largest is called AdvanceMe, Inc. in Atlanta - it has 300 employees and has been around for 10 years.

Try Credit Card Zappers. They got my interest charges and a balance transfer fee reversed. Debt Consolidation companies wouldn't help me unless I had a certain amount of debt.

"Interest on Transaction Fees: Some card issuers not only charge interest on purchases but also on the fees they tack onto the bill." I find this to be a real scam. I was offered a 3.99 interest until payoff, but not only was there a 100 dollar charge for the offer, but the card charges interest on that 100 dollars at the card's default rate of over 20%. I find this crossing a line of truth because the credit card can never truly give me the 3.99 offer it advertised. If the interest charge on the 100 dollar fee was at the 3.99 rate as well, then the card would be meeting the advertised offer, but they took it a step above and beyond and can never meet the advertised offer as a result. Another one that you didn't mention is the Opt out option. Well, I thought it was an option. I tried to opt out of a card once when they raised the rates. I wanted to continue to pay off the card, and I was no longer going to use the card. But the credit card company REFUSED to let me opt out. I contacted the comptroller of the currency located in Texas, and they basically completely took the banks position. They were actually a bit arrogant sounding on the phone as well. All I was asking for was what all banks already offered anyways, which is to opt out and continue to pay off the card at the existing rate. The comptroller of the currency basically chided me and said the banks only offer that as a courtesy even though up until that time I had seen the opt out clause in EVERY credit card that I had ever read the terms on. So basically we treat the banks as God in this country, and that is something that has to be looked at. Good list you created of what to watch out for, however virtually all credit cards do most of what is on the list.

It is my opinion that banks are simply writing off dead beat accounts onto the remaining credit card holders who believe in paying off their debts. It is an odd "buddy buddy" system indeed. The banks can show an increase in credit card business by giving cards to people who have no intent on paying them back, and then the banks simply raise the interest rates on the good guys to offset the losses until the remaining customers are suffocating. I say end the suffocation. Just let everyone catch up by paying down their credit card debts interest free. If people still need to use their cards for emergency purposes, propose a 2-1 pay down. For every two dollars of debt that is paid down interest free, the credit line is reduced by one dollar. Everybody wins when one compares this to the present system in place. I identify, explain and offer other solutions to credit card shenanigans that I think are hurting way too many people on my two protest websites, http://www.credit-card-cap.com and http://www.credit-protector.com ...

What are they this article don't spell enough of them out? What are the upfront disclosures? I would like to know where to find this information. The FTC may publish this information but the article didn't give enough specifics about this. Thanks for the information it will help me to become much more aware when someone is asking me to invest in there business venture.

Knowledge seems to be the common denominator in all of these situations. Knowing your market. Knowing your product. Knowing experts you can trust.

Great tool...Small Businesses like mine can have a more ven playing field by using web 2.0 areas...a big part of it is marketing with web tv, video. We have had great success for our product which is designed for small businesses, doctor offices, dentist, retail, etc just about any business that has waiting times...Thanks for the insight From www.lobbymanager.com ...

I certainly can identify with how difficult it is for small businesses to offer benefits to employees. Several years ago we ran a residential construction company with anywhere from 15-25 employees. We were one of the few framing companies that had legitimate employees (we did not 1099). We offered health insurance, 401K and supplemental insurance. It was common for us to have over 65 employees come and go in one year's time -- we were a revolving door. And for each individual I had to enroll and un-enroll in our benefit programs. It was a paper nightmare. It was expensive to manage, time consuming (which is an extremely valuable asset to a small company) and most of the time the employees didn't care if we had a retirement program or not. Since we had such little participation, we were limited on how much we could contribute. Almost every year we had to take money back out. When we closed our doors on the residential company and moved into the commercial arena, we decided not to offer benefits. We have not had a lot of requests from our current employees, but I know it's coming as we continue to grow. I agree that Congress needs to get involved and make it easier for the small business owner to manage (and pay for) benefit packages -- especially for the gypsy-like trades that have a high employee turnover rate (such as construction).

I would like to think, I'm running a PEG channel. It's programming content, as Congress determines the access. As a proprietor, the business has no way of subscribing in other markets. No servers, just a computer desktop? By law, they adopted certain provisions. To ride the cable providers context and basic tier. If you're the audience, how would you rate the service? It's impossible to determine, if a good has been produced. We're marketing in an area, where income levels are fueling inequalities, layoffs, mergers, set fundamentals and estimations to our local economy. I'm self employed now and carry a price tag of $10,394.29 for health care. Can we make enough, to open a savings account? I've learned that employers have fiduciary responsiblities, to a plan. But certain transactions are prohibited, while we call employment security?

Great points about the importance of getting taxes in order early. I have a fun article called "Making Taxes Dyno-mite" on my site that your readers might enjoy: http://www.thoughtshotconsulting.com It takes readers through some steps to get taxes in order but keeps them entertained along the way.

Court Allows Discrimination Suit Against SAG September 27, 2007 By Lauren Horwitch A California court has cleared the way for a wrongful termination lawsuit against the Screen Actors Guild. The lawsuit, brought by former SAG affirmative action executive Patricia Heisser Metoyer, was dismissed in 2004. In a ruling filed yesterday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the judges ruled 2 to 1 to reverse the summary judgment after finding Metoyer's case has merit and can go to trial. Metoyer filed the suit in 2001 after she was fired for allegedly giving more than $30,000 in union funds to friends, business partners, and her husband's production company. In her wrongful termination suit, Metoyer, an African American, claimed her firing was in retaliation for complaints she had made about alleged acts of discrimination within the guild. Metoyer contended that minority SAG employees came to her soon after she was hired in 1998 claiming SAG senior management was keeping African-American staff members in low-paying jobs and not promoting employees of color. In June 2004, a federal judge dismissed Metoyer's case, stating she had "not presented any direct evidence of discrimination or retaliation," and that she had not presented "specific or substantial circumstantial evidence to demonstrate discriminatory intent." In yesterday's reversal, Judge Dorothy W. Nelson, writing for the majority, called the 2004 opinion "misguided" and said the court in that case "got the law and the facts wrong." Representatives of SAG and Metoyer were not immediately available for comment. To read the ruling, click here.

I completely agree that though personal expertise is lagging, the Internet is helping level the playing field for the small business owner. I have recently come across a new video business directory that is free. It is www.MeetMyBiz.tv The site has just recently launched. I am among the first to join this directory. It seems to be fairly comprehensive for the everyday business owner. Offering a full web 2.0 experience, it appears to be ahead of the curve...at least for now!

You raise a number of objections to the "no match" program. My reply to all of them is, "So, what?" We are a nation of laws, and they must be enforced equally. Each illegal alien has broken not just one law (crossing the border illegally), but dozens--even hundreds. Each time he or she works without a temporary work permit, earns money without paying state and federal taxes, creates or uses falsified documents, drives a car without a license or without insurance, the illegal alien violates a separate law, committing an act for which a citizen or resident alien would be prosecuted without hesitation or leniency. There can be no excuses, no hardship cases, no whining about worker shortages. The law is the law.

This story sounds familiar. President Bush's administration thinks it can put anything past the public and its press (though they've sadly been successful). I remember hearing a news story saying that government-hired men and women going over to Iraq were asked about irrelevant things like their religous beliefs. There was also VP Cheney's Halliburton profiting. There are just so many cases where politicians in Washington talk down to us, undermine us, and take advantage of us. Sadly, we're letting it happen; and, these are only the cases that we know about. Now it's an SBA scandal, what's next?

Do we really suspect that Democrats can cover up the loopholes and ensure that laws currently on the books are enforced? This fact still remains: Big business will always win out over the their smaller counterparts when it comes to government contracts. After all, these big businesses who masquerade as small to cheat the system and gain these government projects support both major parties - Republicans and Democrats. I think we're forgetting the political implications for both sides here. Don't these same businesses fighting for government contracts support the campaigns led by both parties? Therefore, the new Democratic majority will, sadly, lead to more talk, less enforcement, and as you say: paper shuffling. It seems, atleast from my vantage point, that small businesses are just another group in modern society that's going unrepresented in Washington. Isn't this more about two-party rule and it's ramifications as opposed to the percentage of contracts handed out to big and small businesses?

Keith, thanks for this information. Since the web can help level the playing field for small biz to be more like a larger biz, the statistics are surprising. Looks like there are lots of opportunities for people to help SMBs get caught up. This is not a fad, and the tools are only getting better and better.

Sure there are alternatives, Diesel and Hybrids are widely available. And while only a band aid at this point, they can give us a little more time until Electric vehicles can run all day on a charge. Whether or not Hydrogen will ever be widely available is another debate. But why don't we just solve the oil crisis? We have the technology to clone dinosaurs, I saw the documentary called Jurassic Park. Once they die (or we charge people to hunt them) we put them in a pressure cooker and when the bell dings 30 million years later we have oil.