As the Founder of a national women's organization of women entrepreneurs, its to our discretion to identify what innovative and creative concept will benefit in starting a business. Its all about the mindset of knowing how important it is to be build your wealth but help create jobs that will help strengthen our economy. We live in a country where "the world is our oyster". We can be what we want, start what we want, make the money we want. I challenge you all that are not and those that are entrepreneurs, take the pledge. I am an Entrepreneur Extraordinaire!
Scott ABCLED.com
Dallas
7/24/10
9:07 AM
First we all must understand that our goal as a small business is to not to let the national chains take over the power control of the world.
We must grow together as a team and work on getting one rule in America changed, because the people spoke. Try to to get a 100 things changed at once, we have no chance. As an outside sales person for LED Action moving signs, I see business all over America that are in towns that are not small business friendly. In fact they are working to kill the small business by not letting them have signs letting the customers driving by their store have an action moving sign on their store or sign pole outside. National chains can run TV ads, it does not matter to them where the ads run, they have locations everywhere and money to spend on the ads, even if it only gets them a 2% return they are happy.
Will everyone in America, just stand there and let the major chains and the Government make rules to help the national chains destroy the small business?
Wait until you are on the national chain black list and cannot get a JOB and small business are a thing of the past, then we will see where you stand.
Scott
Donna M. Floros
Studio City CA
2/22/10
6:02 PM
It would be a great idea if the powers that be wake up and see that we can put America Back To Work. We can create jobs. We have a simple solution. Let the entrepreneurs do what they do best. Circulate the flow of money, and get the economy flowing again. We have the programs ready to go, How much longer do we have to wait to get the financial support that we need?
Frank Ruscica
NYC
2/08/10
3:02 PM
The Jobs Plan We'd Get If Leading Innovation Scholars And Growth Economists Weren't Being Volckerized (i.e., Ignored As Volcker Was Until Recently) would leverage America's advantages to make America the Silicon Valley of the global market for customized education (CE).
Understanding why we'd get this plan starts with knowing that popular online markets for CE can be expected to catalyze the creation of many jobs.
Bill Jacobs
Olney, MD
1/28/10
12:01 PM
I have a good 5 or 6 marketable ideas for products but no way to produce them and no intention of risking capital without an enforceable patent. I'm not risking capital on the patent either because it's a very expensive process.
A government program of profit-sharing that defrays the cost of acquiring a patent might be a terrific spur to job growth.
If patents cost 300 dollars instead of 10,000 in legal costs, you'd end up with an avalanche of ideas, the proceeds of which would pay the extra costs the government would be paying. A limit of these discounted patents could be imposed so each citizen could attempt to patent an idea once every three years. (or other time interval)
Until it becomes affordable, my 5 ideas stay on the shelf in my mind, employing NOBODY. The risks are too high, the rewards, too uncertain.
Paul Hales
Utah
1/26/10
7:01 PM
A major contributor to America's debt is our consumption of fossil based fuels. If we were able to not only curtail the amounts used each year but start mass producing electric cars that are fueled by renewable energy such as wind, geothermal, solar etc.. we would not only be cleaning up our environment in the U.S but reducing our dependence on the import of oil as well. If America is able to emulate what China, of all places, is starting to do with their investing in Green energy, then our citizens would have more jobs producing the power, building the vehicles and batteries, and probably lessening our health costs at the same time. The new electric Tesla vehicle goes from 0 to 60 MPH in 4 seconds. That is similar to a Corvette so loss of power should not be an issue. I am pursuing the mining of rare earth metals that are required for Green Energy. Small part in a big play.
David Britton
Santa Cruz CA
1/25/10
6:01 PM
Our Business Model Abstract: We can improve lives by mobilizing the mentoring power by using public libraries to create a Library Progress Administration. The Library hub infrastructure has the basic facilities, services, and installations needed to create sustainable jobs by mobilizing entrepreneurial mentoring services. We seek underutilized learning space in community libraries to create ecological-entrepreneur job opportunities. By providing access to entrepreneur mentoring and by localizing the innovation process, we can create better communities. We will regenerate our local economy through growing entrepreneur startups. Entrepreneurs can provide the innovations needed to build clean-technology startup organizations. The opportunity is not to build the rare high-risk scaling organization but to quickly build innovative entrepreneurial startups. Startups will help solve ecological and employment problems that threaten our very existence.
Brett Barndt
NYC
1/25/10
6:01 PM
Great to see finally people talking about entrepreneurship with a fine toothed comb. Too much simplistic ideological focus on tax rates, and monetary policy and the needs of the mere owners of money as the only important factors of production have crippled our economy and economic prospects for some time.
I am glad to hear someone at least finally talking about the human inputs that alone make possible turning ordinary money, favorable tax rates and interest rates into anything like a new business.
We've also got to get the unfair political advantages bought by entrenched going concerns who block capital formation around innovation that threatens their out of date business models too! This is major in the energy sector now, where unfair advantages distort IRR calculations for alternative energy, biggest one being the military subsidy taxpayers pay to oil and extractors all over the world to ensure their property rights in foreign hostile, but nevertheless cheap, labor countries, as well as transportation through pirate zones.
None of those real costs turn up in any pump price. Leaving them out therefore distorts IRR calc for kilowatt hour comparisons for new energies. These subsidies and low effective corporate income tax rates also explain the super normal economic rents enjoyed by what is basically a monopoly industry of oligopolies, oligarchs, and their attendant military servants, with no real competition in sight (Well done guys? You won this one. But, we're waking up and we're mad!).
That little problem never gets mentioned in these speeches in the Beltway. Surprise surprise. Don't tell me these people don't know the unintended or maybe fully intended consequences of the whole-system that feeds them.
Those consequences totally disadvantage new entrants in every sector of our economy that has now been overly concentrated into too few corporate shrinking brains' hands. IFIF.org, Businessweek, and Newsweek have all within the last year run articles about 10 yrs of market failure for capital to form around new innovations already funded on campuses by Federal basic R&D $$$ for decades.
While toothless anti-trust appointees by last President (and this President hasn't done anything to fix it either)have made a few people rich, they have stifled innovation to create new opportunity for everybody else. These rankings show that in painful detail.
I don't agree about Professors becoming entrepreneurs. They don't know how to run a business, and I've seen too many at important schools I won't mention piss away valuable money, time, and patents when keys were handed over to them. They don't know how to make the right hires, don't have the industry contacts they need to make deals, and little comes of it! The big licensing money for Federal R&D recipient universities has always come from Detroit and the military sector. Not from Professor run start-ups.
Let them and their students create patents, and let real business people build diverse teams that can convert ideas on paper (even patent paper) into products and sell them to paying customers. I agree that hard sciences can create patents, but even by choosing science, they self select the personal skills and attributes they will have for life, which are not the ones needed to build run and market a complete enterprise.
They are rarely sales people, rarely people people and most of their work is never validated by insight or market research about sellable products in the first place. For all but special high tech products bought by fellow geeks on the cool factor, start-up technologies have to go through a time consuming and costly iterative process lead by people with sales and marketing skills more than science. These people skills, listening skills, workplace knowledge, and conceptual skills are what is needed to figure out what exactly is the sellable product those patents can become, and how it is going to be sold into already entrenched markets. Read Amar Bhide "Venturesome Economy" about the many many many skillsets it takes up and down any enterprise to convert science into business. That conversion is the hard part, where there is a shortage of skills with the right chemistry, especially as our high schools and universities seem to be failing to create truly generative creative minds these days, as definitely was the case in the past. That is the athletic part. The elastic brain part. And that is the part where everybody screws up!
This is work most VCs don't even know how to oversee correctly, since the profile of VCs has changed significantly over the last 15 years to be less experienced operators, to more MBAs with just finance training.
And certainly BODs of established companies prove themselves to be disincentivized by Wall Street quarterly earnings seasons for getting involved in any of this kind of work. Read Clayton Christensen about how time and time again experienced executives at expensive companies ignore the signs and never get on the band wagon for new innovations until the shareholders money has whittled down to nothing! And worse for the wage earners involved!
There is so much to learn to make into more common knowledge, and so many myths to bust. But those myths are well protected by incumbents of both industrial and money nature who try desperately to keep newcomers out of the secrets!
Jonathan Nelson
Phoenix, AZ
1/24/10
11:01 AM
As the job creators, entrepreneurs really are the answer to digging us out of this difficult economic mess. Innovation is critical, but so are tax cuts for small businesses. If entrepreneurs aren't able to create more jobs, we're going to have to cut them, which will put our country in an even more compromising state. Locke's support is great but the government needs to get serious about making changes that will tangibly help America's small businesses.
As the Founder of a national women's organization of women entrepreneurs, its to our discretion to identify what innovative and creative concept will benefit in starting a business. Its all about the mindset of knowing how important it is to be build your wealth but help create jobs that will help strengthen our economy. We live in a country where "the world is our oyster". We can be what we want, start what we want, make the money we want. I challenge you all that are not and those that are entrepreneurs, take the pledge. I am an Entrepreneur Extraordinaire!
First we all must understand that our goal as a small business is to not to let the national chains take over the power control of the world.
We must grow together as a team and work on getting one rule in America changed, because the people spoke. Try to to get a 100 things changed at once, we have no chance. As an outside sales person for LED Action moving signs, I see business all over America that are in towns that are not small business friendly. In fact they are working to kill the small business by not letting them have signs letting the customers driving by their store have an action moving sign on their store or sign pole outside. National chains can run TV ads, it does not matter to them where the ads run, they have locations everywhere and money to spend on the ads, even if it only gets them a 2% return they are happy.
Will everyone in America, just stand there and let the major chains and the Government make rules to help the national chains destroy the small business?
Wait until you are on the national chain black list and cannot get a JOB and small business are a thing of the past, then we will see where you stand.
Scott
It would be a great idea if the powers that be wake up and see that we can put America Back To Work. We can create jobs. We have a simple solution. Let the entrepreneurs do what they do best. Circulate the flow of money, and get the economy flowing again. We have the programs ready to go, How much longer do we have to wait to get the financial support that we need?
The Jobs Plan We'd Get If Leading Innovation Scholars And Growth Economists Weren't Being Volckerized (i.e., Ignored As Volcker Was Until Recently) would leverage America's advantages to make America the Silicon Valley of the global market for customized education (CE).
Understanding why we'd get this plan starts with knowing that popular online markets for CE can be expected to catalyze the creation of many jobs.
I have a good 5 or 6 marketable ideas for products but no way to produce them and no intention of risking capital without an enforceable patent. I'm not risking capital on the patent either because it's a very expensive process.
A government program of profit-sharing that defrays the cost of acquiring a patent might be a terrific spur to job growth.
If patents cost 300 dollars instead of 10,000 in legal costs, you'd end up with an avalanche of ideas, the proceeds of which would pay the extra costs the government would be paying. A limit of these discounted patents could be imposed so each citizen could attempt to patent an idea once every three years. (or other time interval)
Until it becomes affordable, my 5 ideas stay on the shelf in my mind, employing NOBODY. The risks are too high, the rewards, too uncertain.
A major contributor to America's debt is our consumption of fossil based fuels. If we were able to not only curtail the amounts used each year but start mass producing electric cars that are fueled by renewable energy such as wind, geothermal, solar etc.. we would not only be cleaning up our environment in the U.S but reducing our dependence on the import of oil as well. If America is able to emulate what China, of all places, is starting to do with their investing in Green energy, then our citizens would have more jobs producing the power, building the vehicles and batteries, and probably lessening our health costs at the same time. The new electric Tesla vehicle goes from 0 to 60 MPH in 4 seconds. That is similar to a Corvette so loss of power should not be an issue. I am pursuing the mining of rare earth metals that are required for Green Energy. Small part in a big play.
Our Business Model Abstract: We can improve lives by mobilizing the mentoring power by using public libraries to create a Library Progress Administration. The Library hub infrastructure has the basic facilities, services, and installations needed to create sustainable jobs by mobilizing entrepreneurial mentoring services. We seek underutilized learning space in community libraries to create ecological-entrepreneur job opportunities. By providing access to entrepreneur mentoring and by localizing the innovation process, we can create better communities. We will regenerate our local economy through growing entrepreneur startups. Entrepreneurs can provide the innovations needed to build clean-technology startup organizations. The opportunity is not to build the rare high-risk scaling organization but to quickly build innovative entrepreneurial startups. Startups will help solve ecological and employment problems that threaten our very existence.
Great to see finally people talking about entrepreneurship with a fine toothed comb. Too much simplistic ideological focus on tax rates, and monetary policy and the needs of the mere owners of money as the only important factors of production have crippled our economy and economic prospects for some time.
I am glad to hear someone at least finally talking about the human inputs that alone make possible turning ordinary money, favorable tax rates and interest rates into anything like a new business.
We've also got to get the unfair political advantages bought by entrenched going concerns who block capital formation around innovation that threatens their out of date business models too! This is major in the energy sector now, where unfair advantages distort IRR calculations for alternative energy, biggest one being the military subsidy taxpayers pay to oil and extractors all over the world to ensure their property rights in foreign hostile, but nevertheless cheap, labor countries, as well as transportation through pirate zones.
None of those real costs turn up in any pump price. Leaving them out therefore distorts IRR calc for kilowatt hour comparisons for new energies. These subsidies and low effective corporate income tax rates also explain the super normal economic rents enjoyed by what is basically a monopoly industry of oligopolies, oligarchs, and their attendant military servants, with no real competition in sight (Well done guys? You won this one. But, we're waking up and we're mad!).
That little problem never gets mentioned in these speeches in the Beltway. Surprise surprise. Don't tell me these people don't know the unintended or maybe fully intended consequences of the whole-system that feeds them.
Those consequences totally disadvantage new entrants in every sector of our economy that has now been overly concentrated into too few corporate shrinking brains' hands. IFIF.org, Businessweek, and Newsweek have all within the last year run articles about 10 yrs of market failure for capital to form around new innovations already funded on campuses by Federal basic R&D $$$ for decades.
While toothless anti-trust appointees by last President (and this President hasn't done anything to fix it either)have made a few people rich, they have stifled innovation to create new opportunity for everybody else. These rankings show that in painful detail.
I don't agree about Professors becoming entrepreneurs. They don't know how to run a business, and I've seen too many at important schools I won't mention piss away valuable money, time, and patents when keys were handed over to them. They don't know how to make the right hires, don't have the industry contacts they need to make deals, and little comes of it! The big licensing money for Federal R&D recipient universities has always come from Detroit and the military sector. Not from Professor run start-ups.
Let them and their students create patents, and let real business people build diverse teams that can convert ideas on paper (even patent paper) into products and sell them to paying customers. I agree that hard sciences can create patents, but even by choosing science, they self select the personal skills and attributes they will have for life, which are not the ones needed to build run and market a complete enterprise.
They are rarely sales people, rarely people people and most of their work is never validated by insight or market research about sellable products in the first place. For all but special high tech products bought by fellow geeks on the cool factor, start-up technologies have to go through a time consuming and costly iterative process lead by people with sales and marketing skills more than science. These people skills, listening skills, workplace knowledge, and conceptual skills are what is needed to figure out what exactly is the sellable product those patents can become, and how it is going to be sold into already entrenched markets. Read Amar Bhide "Venturesome Economy" about the many many many skillsets it takes up and down any enterprise to convert science into business. That conversion is the hard part, where there is a shortage of skills with the right chemistry, especially as our high schools and universities seem to be failing to create truly generative creative minds these days, as definitely was the case in the past. That is the athletic part. The elastic brain part. And that is the part where everybody screws up!
This is work most VCs don't even know how to oversee correctly, since the profile of VCs has changed significantly over the last 15 years to be less experienced operators, to more MBAs with just finance training.
And certainly BODs of established companies prove themselves to be disincentivized by Wall Street quarterly earnings seasons for getting involved in any of this kind of work. Read Clayton Christensen about how time and time again experienced executives at expensive companies ignore the signs and never get on the band wagon for new innovations until the shareholders money has whittled down to nothing! And worse for the wage earners involved!
There is so much to learn to make into more common knowledge, and so many myths to bust. But those myths are well protected by incumbents of both industrial and money nature who try desperately to keep newcomers out of the secrets!
As the job creators, entrepreneurs really are the answer to digging us out of this difficult economic mess. Innovation is critical, but so are tax cuts for small businesses. If entrepreneurs aren't able to create more jobs, we're going to have to cut them, which will put our country in an even more compromising state. Locke's support is great but the government needs to get serious about making changes that will tangibly help America's small businesses.
Post new comment