What Exactly Was Bush's Record with Small Business?

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

•  
  1

  the entrepraneur

  01/22/09 | Report as spam

  RE: What Exactly Was Bush's Record with Small Business?

  As an MBA grad from a top-10 school, and a business owner, I think it's disgusting for a company to win a contract or bid simply because of their gender or the color of their skin. ... at the end of the day business should be won based on the VALUE you add to a transaction in a competitive environment. The solution is to remove color and gender as an aspect of the business decision, not favor one over another. I'm not a Republican, nor am I protecting Bush The point is - it's an amazing cultural blind spot for us to bash big business and its cronyism and yet maintain naive affirmative action policies that hold back people and firms that really do add value to the economy under the guise of "fairness". If you can sell a widget for USD2.00 and give the same level of service and value as me, and my price is USD2.25 - the winner of the bid should be obvious - regardless if I'm purple or green, or have whatever genitalia.

•  
  2

  ingoodcompany

  01/23/09 | Report as spam

  RE: What Exactly Was Bush's Record with Small Business?

  "Bitterness and antipathy" will continue to abound, even as this nation attempts to turn the corner on anachronistic ways and thinking. The only thing more dangerous today than discrimination is the belief that it no longer exists, and that it doesn't impact day to day business decisions. Wal Mart has destroyed more small businesses than 'affirmative action' could have over its entire life span. And yet the hue and cry of "the entrepraneur' (spelling notwithstanding) continues to echo the bitterness and antipathy of those who fear differences and attempt to restoke the irrational fires of hatred, though the embers of those old ways grow increasingly cold and glow dimmer with each passing day. Even with Affirmative Action virtually dead already, these weak and tired voicings continue.
  
  Affirmative Action should see its full and complete demise at the exact same moment in which that for which it was instituted to compensate vanishes from the American business landscape. 'The Entrepraneur' above provides one more bit of evidence that day has not yet arrived.
  
  Now...as it relates to the intended topic of this thread: Though history may judge certain of President Bush's policies to have been questionable at the least, it should not be overlooked that it was he who fostered perhaps the first legitimately electable minority contender for the Presidency in Colin Powell. Say what you will about President Bush, it is most probable that his unabashed and unquestioned high-visibility placements of the most capable Powell and Rice were perhaps as instrumental in paving the American mind-set for an Obama Presidency as anything else done in recent years. May that not be forgotten.
  
  In much the same subtle way, his successful appointments of Powell and Rice could be equally important to minority and women-owned business leaders who may benefit from that same "paving" of the American mindscape. Because of President Bush, this country came to know two nontraditional high-performance republican leaders in positions of trust crucial to the safety, security and might of this nation, and grew to trust and admire them both. Even after his less than ideal departure from the Cabinet, Powell retains his dignity, along with broad respect, as will Rice as the Bush Administration fades. In future retrospectives, this could prove to be equally valuable for fair play in the small business environments, and contribute to strengthening the entire sector.

•  
  3

  LWeller2

  01/23/09 | Report as spam

  RE: What Exactly Was Bush's Record with Small Business?

  To the MBA - I think you're absolutely right is stating the rewards should go to those to make the effort. But I'm sure you're aware that the business world is very interconnected (this is especially true for government contracts) and favors those who have the connections. Companies/government entities simply prefer to go with those they know or who have been made known to them through their connections. This is one of the main reasons for a sales force - to introduce the company to a prospect and make the prospect confortable about the company. Sure, anyone can try to sell their company in this manner, but they're competing against companies who are very well known and very interconnected. In doing this, you also have to overcome any subconscious prejudice the prospect may have.
  
  The reason for small business set asides it to allow those who don't have a web of historical connections to get their foot in the door.

•  
  4

  LWeller2

  01/23/09 | Report as spam

  RE: What Exactly Was Bush's Record with Small Business?

  What I should have added to the above is that, becaue of connections, many companies have won contracts. They DID NOT win because of their better value offer. In fact, they may have been costlier. Think Halliburton.
  
  There are many, many, many, many, many such examples.
  
  This is the real world and set-asides help to counter it.

•  
  5

  the entrepraneur

  01/23/09 | Report as spam

  RE: What Exactly Was Bush's Record with Small Business?

  The comments on this thread prove my point to a large degree. I empathize with the challenges small businesses face as mentioned above - I've grown a company from nothing to nearly 2mil in annual sales - and I'm well aware of the upperhand existing vendors have. I've grown my business with mostly new market connection because I add value, not because of my race or gender. Again, my point is Affirmative Action and cronyism are two sides of the same coin - they both create an artificial economy based on favoritism and not merit. We need an orthogonal solution not one that perpetuates the cycle. By favoring one party over another you simply give momentum to another group which will later turn into the scapegoat and bane of ills for the underachievement or disadvantage of some other random minority with a loud lobbying voice. The logic of Affirmative Action perpetuates an infinite cycle of taking opportunities from those who are actually competitive and giving it to those who are not. When will it stop? Never. Now it's this race, next it's that sexual orientation, then it's that religious group, then it's people with this cause or preference... And we'll be left in the dust by other economies and cultures that care more about productivity and innovation than those like ours that prefer silly rhetorical games and naval contemplation. Read Friedman's "Flat, Hot, and Crowded" In a flat global economy, Affirmative Action and similar policies will simply further the decline of the American economy relative to those of other growing economies.