Like The Herald Business Journal on Facebook!
The Herald of Everett, Washington
Customer service  |  Subscribe   |   Log in or sign up   |   Advertising information   |   Contact us

The top local business stories in your email

Contact Us:

Josh O'Connor
Phone: 425-339-3007

Maureen Bozlinski
General Sales Manager
Phone: 425-339-3445
Fax: 425-339-3049

Jim Davis
Phone: 425-339-3097

Site address:
1800 41st Street, S-300,
Everett, WA 98203

Mailing address:
P.O. Box 930
Everett, WA 98206

HBJ RSS feeds

Private sector needs a stimulus

SHARE: facebook Twitter icon Linkedin icon Google+ icon Email icon
By James McCusker
To get the U.S. economy back up to speed, we need to concentrate on the private sector. There is a very simple reason for this, and it’s not politics. It’s economics.
The public sector is an important portion of our lives, certainly. We are dependent on it for such critical elements as defense, public safety, education, as well as much of our transportation infrastructure.
From an economics perspective, though, the public sector is almost totally dependent on the private sector for its funding. If the private sector is not healthy, tax revenue for the public sector dries up and the only way to finance public sector jobs is to spend money we don’t have — by borrowing it. We all know how that story ends. Spoiler Alert: If you don’t actually know how it ends, you should not read any news stories that mention California or Greece.
There are some economic policy advantages to providing a boost to the private sector at this time. First, the federal government would not have to come up with cash, something it has little of right now. Businesses, unlike state and local governments, are not accustomed to or expecting direct cash payments. While budget impacts must be considered, a major economic stimulus could be provided without having to write a single check.
Second, the more private sector economic stimulus works, the lower the cost to the federal government and the taxpayers. This is not generally true of public sector stimulus programs, which often require continuing subsidies of tax revenue after the project or program has been completed.
The private sector, of course, covers a lot of ground, from corporate giants with global reach to retail stores, small manufacturing operations, sandwich shops and Internet entrepreneur-wannabes in pajamas. There is a certain sameness to government bureaucracies at every level, but the private sector is as diverse as America itself.
That diversity does present some problems for economic policy makers in general and certainly in our present situation where many larger companies enjoy “Double H” status — Healthy and Hiring — while many smaller companies don’t have an “H” to their name.
One of the problems is the failure rate. Small business, especially new, entrepreneurial ventures, fail at a rate that would discourage all but the most optimistic. And many of us, in our enthusiasm for ventures, either believe that the mortality statistics don’t apply to us, or are blissfully unaware of the unpleasant facts about business startups. A very successful entrepreneur once said to me that his business succeeded partly because, “I was too dumb to know that it couldn’t be done.”
Beyond actual failure, smaller businesses are, more than large ones, more susceptible to a debilitating type of economic disease that leaves them in semi-zombified state — an existence where the business is losing its life force gradually over time, sometimes years, as its profits and financials shrink.
Neither new ventures nor zombie firms are attractive targets for bank lending or economic policy initiatives. Banks have a fiduciary responsibility to their depositors to the taxpayers, and these loans simply present too much risk.
There are undoubtedly small businesses that are good credit risks but can’t get financing. But telling banks to lend more is effective only in that it keeps small businesses on the banks’ radar scopes. When banks are allocating resources, assigning lending officers, and developing marketing , they tend to forget about small businesses, especially when so many firms couldn’t qualify for loans during the recession.
There are some positive economic policies and some small business stimulus programs available even to a federal government that is tapped out:
  • Ensure that the Small Business Administration loan guarantee program is fully funded and scaled to meet the legitimate need for credit. Congresses and administrations of both parties have been both inconsistent and stingy in this fundamental area.

  • Initiate a tax-deferral program that would allow smaller businesses to delay payment of all, or a portion of, their income and payroll taxes. This would have an immediate effect on their cash flow and working capital and would provide a sharp economic boost … without worsening the total federal debt picture.
    Launch an investment tax credit that would kick in immediately, but containing a wind-down period instead of ending with a sharp break,.
    Any or all of these programs would help, but nothing would help more than the administration’s paying attention, encouraging — but not legislating, coercing, or subsidizing — bank lending, and, more generally, recognizing that the private sector is more than a list of its shortcomingss.

    James McCusker is a Bothell economist, educator and consultant..



    Market roundup