Campaign Finance Reform

[tobetrained]

35 minutes ago, hntnhole said:

This is how the government can and should encourage entrepreneurs to expand the existing base of that particular service/product supply

and this comment is way off thread topic, but I've always thought of either a "distance" tax (applied to physical distance of parts and finished goods/services) as a way to maintain physical communities...which is directly applied to a community redevelopment fund.

But also a some kind of bigger-ain't-better progressive corporate tax system. I'm generally pro-business and pro-competition (in every sense), but I hate massive 1000s-of-employees type companies. They are, almost by definition, anti-competition. In my made-up world, we need a progressive tax system on corporate taxes like personal income. The first $10 million of annual revenue is $0%.

The two items above are about building small and individual businesses.

[hntnhole]

Thanks for your response.  

You may have noticed that often the original topic of BZ's "threads" wanders off into a different, even unrelated subject matter? That's one of the more interesting facets of Breeding Zone, in that it's the contributors and readers that have the freedom to add, subtract, multiply aspects of a thread, all within the confines of what we might call genteel discourse.  

That fact may not be ideal for pedants, but it is nevertheless the case.  

12 minutes ago, tobetrained said:

The two items above are about building small and individual businesses.

Which I did for years, in two different industries, publishing "trade" books, periodicals, business publications.  The actual costs of producing, marketing, selling ads for, all the various aspects were common to each, despite the fact that the actual product of each industry could not be more different.  One result of a "greater good" issue was not resolved by the government, it was resolved by business owners within x industry agreeing to work together to impact certain governmental issues.  

I don't particularly care for "Big Business" either, but then I have not been asked to solve those issues and I rather doubt I will be.  Big Bro business is, by definition, interested in self-preservation first, customer satisfaction second, and skirting the legal requirements as tightly as possible.  That said, Big Business simply is, and the rest of us have to figure out ways to nibble around the edges.  

Again, thanks for your incisive thoughts.  

[tallslenderguy]

1 hour ago, hntnhole said:

I think that's entirely laudable. 

If/when an individual comes up with a new, innovative idea for whatever activity (assuming legality), there's no reason that entity shouldn't receive benefits that other businesses (in the same general area of transacting business) receive.  This is how the government can and should encourage entrepreneurs to expand the existing base of that particular service/product supply, and I see that result as one of the excuses for governments to exist.  In the end, it's not only the general population that may benefit, it's the government to, via taxation, duties, etc.  

It was a franchise company. The owner ("Master Franchise Owner") had the rights to a couple of territories to sell franchises. He was a former bank president, a really good numbers guy, and he hired me for my business management background.  He was close to bankruptcy after the first year, following the parent companies model didn't really work for him. i gave him a few suggestions and he asked me  if i'd run the company and he could do the books, so i became the companies VP.  

He gave me complete freedom to run things, so i used a type of consensus model  where everyone got a say, and i got voted against more than a few times lol. But it worked, it was a 15m a year business when i left. After 20 years, he came to me one day and told me he'd sold the company, back to the parent company.  He also told me it was transferring the next day.  They had stipulated in the purchase agreement that he was to keep the purchase underwraps while he worked out the details for 8 months.  He really was a decent fellow, but myself and those who built the business felt betrayed.  The business was essentially us, the people. 

The new company gave me a very large signing bonus if i'd stay at least a year, which i did no wanting to make a snap judgement. The new owner was an international company with over 200 offices worldwide.  I doubted they'd allow me to use the same  consensus management methods i'd used to build the business, but gave it a shot.  i'd pushed back against the Master Company  because i thought their franchise fees were too high, and that ended up building trust with the franchise owners, and everyone ended up more  successful.   The parent company dismantled the system over the next year, and i watched as each of the people who  worked with me to build the business, left, as  did i after my year was up. 

There's a lot more to the  story, but when i left, i tried to do the same method with a different company.  They didn't like it either and i left after two years, went back to school and earned a BSN, and have been a critical care nurse since then.