Quote from: Spike;222346Mr. Gupta, my Economics Professor at Tacoma Community College 6 years ago (so, you know, you can do the research to prove I'm not making him up...) came to America in the 1970's with nothing but a degree in Economics from some Indian University and 17 dollars by his own account.  When I met him in 2002, he had sold a construction company in Nebraska for millions of dollars he had built from the ground up, had gotten his Master's in Economics and had retired to the west coast and taken a teaching job to keep busy.

Plenty.

Hey, I used to work for a guy named Ali who was a professor of philosophy in Iran in 1978, and seeking political asylum in the US in 1979.  Seems Kohmeinists don't have much use for experts on Enlightenment rationalism, or for atheistic professors.  So he had to leave.  Quickly.  With nothing.

Anyways, he earned enough money to buy some cars in Washington, drove them down to California and sold them for more than he paid for, and eventually flipped enough cars this way to purchase a store.  When i worked for him, he had sold his chain of convienance store and was working as manager -- he'd paid for his four daughters to go to college, had a bunch set aside for retirement, and decided he liked running a store, but didn't enjoy the stress of running several.

So that's two anecdotes.  How many anecdotes make a proof?  Oh damn, I just remembered.  No amount of anecdotes makes a proof.

QuoteIts not immigrant or non-immigrant, but a simple, verifiable fact that the US is one of a very tiny handful of nations that exist... or ever existed, where the dream of attaining wealth is not only available, but viable for anyone willing to work for it.

lol.

Quote from: Spike;222346Its not immigrant or non-immigrant, but a simple, verifiable fact that the US is one of a very tiny handful of nations that exist... or ever existed, where the dream of attaining wealth is not only available, but viable for anyone willing to work for it.

Well, certainly in comparison to all of history and the world, the modern U.S. does pretty well.  On the other hand, my reading has been that intergenerational mobility is no better in the U.S. than in Western Europe or Canada.  This paper was cited in the Wikipedia article on Social Mobility, which suggested that social mobility was actually less in the U.S. and England.  Obviously, I take big grain of salt with that, but offhand I haven't seen a study that refutes it.

Quote from: John Morrow;222172That's a big problem with the whole concept of a "decent living wage"?  Who gets to decide what that means exactly?

I've not been following the dispute closely, but I believe they have suffered a worsening of terms of service and have had their wages reduced in real terms.

Whether sufficiently so to justify the dispute I genuinely don't know, but it's not as simple as a one line quote overheard somewhere would suggest, industrial disputes rarely are.

If folk want to discuss that dispute I can read up on it, but the decent living wage is just one guy's remark, it's not an accurate summary of the grounds for the dispute as I understand them.

Quote from: Spike;222346Its not immigrant or non-immigrant, but a simple, verifiable fact that the US is one of a very tiny handful of nations that exist... or ever existed, where the dream of attaining wealth is not only available, but viable for anyone willing to work for it.  

Leaving aside your other points, that's not actually right, social mobility in the US is not that exceptional compared to other nations and has been declining over recent years.

I appreciate it's an important concept in your nation, but the idea that rags to riches through hard work is a US phenomenon is simply wrong, it reflects a lack of knowledge of social mobility statistics in Europe more than it does an understanding of them in the US.

Looking throughout history, social mobility rates are actually surprisingly stable, essentially the past allowed much more social mobility than people nowadays tend to assume.  Our ideas of the irrevocability of birth in pre-modern societies are largely wrong.

Quote from: John Morrow;222276And why do 60% of small businesses fail in the first year?

Bad financial management, I saw a while back an American commentator arguing for compulsory teaching of basic finance techniques in school, an argument I had some sympathy with under a life skills heading.

Anyway, I know you already covered this, but the answer is a poor grasp of basic financial techniques on the part of most would be entrepeneurs.  Simple as that really.

Quote from: Jackalope;222313Considering the vast majority of new businesses fail due to undercapitalization -- i.e. not starting with enough money -- I would say the number one cause of people not being able to start their own businesses is a lack of money.

Which is pretty funny, if you think about it, since starting your own business is being suggested as a means out of poverty.

"Sorry, you're too poor to get out of poverty."

The majority of businesses started by people with capital fail too though.

I mean, John massively underestimates the advantages that being born into money provide, but new businesses tend to fail due to a lack of financial education more than anything else.  That may be class based, or may not be (I'm not personally persuaded that particular one is, though much else is IMO) but that could be fixed with some fairly simple financial education programs or by the individuals involved looking up some of the excellent free or very cheap advice available to them before they sink their life savings into an ill considered project.

Quote from: Balbinus;222399but that could be fixed with some fairly simple financial education programs or by the individuals involved looking up some of the excellent free or very cheap advice available to them before they sink their life savings into an ill considered project.

You don't understand, B. People feel guilty about succeeding and therefore they sabotage themselves unconsciously.

Quote from: droog;222400You don't understand, B. People feel guilty about succeeding and therefore they sabotage themselves unconsciously.

In my experience, those who succeed on the back of family money tend to persuade themselves quite quickly it's all talent, those who succeed despite a lack thereof or regardless of the fact thereof are too busy working to have time to have guilt issues.

Guilt issues are a luxury of the undeserving affluent.  Everyone else is too busy working for a living, or enjoying their wealth in other ways.

I step away for a few days, and the thread veers off into crazyville.

I'll just make a few points:

The whole free-market anarchy thing is loony and makes no sense.  Such a society would never come about naturally, and couldn't be maintained even artificially through exterior controls - it would always gravitate back towards the problems of capitalism or communism because everyone is not on the same level.  The only way it could possibly work is if we did some heavy-duty genetic engineering to make everyone physically and mentally equal, and added some psychological conditioning on top of it (even then, someone would still have to be in control of it all, wouldn't they).

Almost all businesses that fail do so because of bad management.  People start businesses with no clue of what they are doing.  They fail to do the market research ahead of time and instead sell whatever the owner likes.  They fail to come up with an exit strategy (the first thing anyone starting up a business should do).  They don't plan for cash reserves or expect any downturns in demand.  They don't understand the laws, regulations, and taxes ahead of time.  They pick a lousy location and rent way too much space for what they need.  They invest way too much in inventory and don't understand the concept of proper inventory turnover.  They don't price their products correctly and frequently don't understand elasticity.  They don't hire good staff, and never bother to train the staff they do hire.  They never do any financial forecasting.  They don't understand the difference between profit and cash flow, and frequently ignore cash flow until it becomes a problem.  And a big one for non-new businesses that fail - they fail to understand that you have to keep investing money back into the business, you can't just put a lot of work into it and expect a cash cow once you start making money.

Every moron with a few thousand bucks thinks he can open his own business and get rich quick.  A lot of the time, people try to run businesses they have no work experience in at all (I knew a guy who opened up a retail store despite never having worked in a retail environment - no surprise that didn't last over a year).

As for restaurants, I think every jackass who decides out of the blue he can own a restaurant and sit back and count the money should be forced to watch at least 8 hours worth of "Kitchen Nightmares" (US or UK version).  That should disabuse them of the notion real quick that restaurants are a quick, easy way to rake in money.  They require a ton of talent, hard work, and constant re-investment.

Quote from: jgants;222417As for restaurants, I think every jackass who decides out of the blue he can own a restaurant and sit back and count the money should be forced to watch at least 8 hours worth of "Kitchen Nightmares" (US or UK version).  That should disabuse them of the notion real quick that restaurants are a quick, easy way to rake in money.  They require a ton of talent, hard work, and constant re-investment.

Once I did the research, I have to say, I wondered why anyone gets into the restaurant business. I mean, I understand the "I have 3 million. I will open a high-end restaurant" but the mom-and-pop style? Heck, I might be able to go as far as saying a franchise could be a good investment (depending on the franchise) but that becomes much more a business than what the folks I talked to mentioned as their reasons for getting into restaurants. It is a brutal and incredibly detail oriented business (meaning mostly the health codes in the US).

Bill

Quote from: HinterWelt;222421Once I did the research, I have to say, I wondered why anyone gets into the restaurant business. I mean, I understand the "I have 3 million. I will open a high-end restaurant" but the mom-and-pop style? Heck, I might be able to go as far as saying a franchise could be a good investment (depending on the franchise) but that becomes much more a business than what the folks I talked to mentioned as their reasons for getting into restaurants. It is a brutal and incredibly detail oriented business (meaning mostly the health codes in the US).

Bill

High-end restaurants are just as likely to fail as more mainstream ones.  

The restaurant business is something you get into because you love the work, it's always been like that, even if you're not actually running or owning a restaurant.  The problem is that you get a lot of amateurs getting into the business who maybe have the love part down, but not the work, or even any realization how much work is involved.  You also get a lot of vapid yuppie idiots who see a couple of shows on Food Network and think "oh hay I start restaurant 4 free food yay!", and next thing you know they've burned through daddy's retirement fund.  

The average person thinks cooking for a living is easy, because they've got a head full of TV shows and they figure if they can make a tuna casserole they can hack it in a professional kitchen.  As a result you get a greater than average number of clueless idiots getting into the business, and then failing hard.

Quote from: HinterWelt;222421Once I did the research, I have to say, I wondered why anyone gets into the restaurant business. I mean, I understand the "I have 3 million. I will open a high-end restaurant" but the mom-and-pop style? Heck, I might be able to go as far as saying a franchise could be a good investment (depending on the franchise) but that becomes much more a business than what the folks I talked to mentioned as their reasons for getting into restaurants. It is a brutal and incredibly detail oriented business (meaning mostly the health codes in the US).

Bill

High-end restaurants are just as likely to fail as more mainstream ones.  

The restaurant business is something you get into because you love the work, it's always been like that, even if you're not actually running or owning a restaurant.  The problem is that you get a lot of amateurs getting into the business who maybe have the love part down, but not the work, or even any realization how much work is involved.  You also get a lot of vapid yuppie idiots who see a couple of shows on Food Network and think "oh hay I start restaurant 4 free food yay!", and next thing you know they've burned through daddy's retirement fund.  

The average person thinks cooking for a living is easy, because they've got a head full of TV shows and they figure if they can make a tuna casserole they can hack it in a professional kitchen.  As a result you get a greater than average number of clueless idiots getting into the business, and then failing hard.

Quote from: jgants;222417The whole free-market anarchy thing is loony and makes no sense.

Yes, but that's true of all possible positions on politics.  At least market anarchism is a consistent school of though, something that can't be said of capitalist and communist doctrines.

QuoteSuch a society would never come about naturally, and couldn't be maintained even artificially through exterior controls - it would always gravitate back towards the problems of capitalism or communism because everyone is not on the same level.

Well, actually, such a society is the natural default state of things, and requires suppression by exterior controls (i.e. states) to allow communism or capitalism to flourish.  Nothing gravitates towards capitalism or communism.  Those are incredibly complicated system that require massive governments to support.  They don't occur by accident.

QuoteThe only way it could possibly work is if we did some heavy-duty genetic engineering to make everyone physically and mentally equal, and added some psychological conditioning on top of it (even then, someone would still have to be in control of it all, wouldn't they).

You seem to have decided that market anarchism only works in everyone is equal.  This is not the case, and most market anarchists freely admit that many people would fail, and fail miserably in a free market.

The primary difference between market anarchism and capitalism is this:  when you fail in a free market, that's your fault.  When you fail in a capitalist market, it's hard to say if its your fault, the fault of state-supported owners gaming the system, the fault of market regulations, etc.

Quote from: HinterWelt;222421Once I did the research, I have to say, I wondered why anyone gets into the restaurant business. I mean, I understand the "I have 3 million. I will open a high-end restaurant" but the mom-and-pop style? Heck, I might be able to go as far as saying a franchise could be a good investment (depending on the franchise) but that becomes much more a business than what the folks I talked to mentioned as their reasons for getting into restaurants. It is a brutal and incredibly detail oriented business (meaning mostly the health codes in the US).

Bill

Catering as a career is brutal in the UK too, it's not just your health codes, which I suspect have their equivalents in most developed nations.

Brutally hard work, anti-social hours, average income rates not that great.  Catering and similar fields are hard work.

I definitely agree with J Arcane's post.

Quote from: J Arcane;222426High-end restaurants are just as likely to fail as more mainstream ones.  

Oh, I did not mean to imply that at all. Just, the higher end restaurants, from my research, tend to have a better return on investment. Of course, this is assuming you are not funding a 6 million dollar restaurant with 3 million.

Quote from: J Arcane;222426The restaurant business is something you get into because you love the work, it's always been like that, even if you're not actually running or owning a restaurant.  The problem is that you get a lot of amateurs getting into the business who maybe have the love part down, but not the work, or even any realization how much work is involved.  You also get a lot of vapid yuppie idiots who see a couple of shows on Food Network and think "oh hay I start restaurant 4 free food yay!", and next thing you know they've burned through daddy's retirement fund.  

The average person thinks cooking for a living is easy, because they've got a head full of TV shows and they figure if they can make a tuna casserole they can hack it in a professional kitchen.  As a result you get a greater than average number of clueless idiots getting into the business, and then failing hard.

I love cooking. I raise my own herbs, love shopping the farmers market for fresh produce and meat, have a huge book of recipes. Loving something and making a business of it are two different things. I love writing, gaming and I did the research and that is why HinterWelt has been around for six years and has over 20 products. Passion and your profession should overlap but the business part is every bit as important as the passion part, more so in my opinion.

Bill