ON BUSINESS POLICIES THIS PRESIDENT'S DAY

TAXING TIMES

It's President's Day and the stock markets are closed.  So it's a good time to talk about the three Presidential candidates and their expected policies aimed at Business.  We've already touched on the tax policies planned by the three candidates, but not necessarily their stance on Business.

We know McCain is likely to be pro-Business, not just business with a capital "B", but also small businesses, given his promises to keep the Bush tax cuts intact, and focus on curtailing government spending.

So it's between Clinton and Obama, both of whom have vowed to raise taxes.  With Clinton, one can expect more of a Bill Clinton like approach towards Business, with a more positive bent in general.

Which leaves us with Obama, who many business-folks figure is potentially more anti-business of all three, judging at least from his recent John Edwards like populist rhetoric.

This BusinessWeek article titled "Is Obama good for business?" gives us a closer look.  It starts out with this observation:

"So what would an Obama Presidency look like for business? "It would be a pragmatic, center-left administration," says Democratic political strategist Steve McMahon, who is unaligned with a Presidential candidate this year. "He's been pretty clear that business would have a seat at the table, but business wouldn't be able to buy all the chairs."

Which is unfortunate.

This adheres more to the people vs. business political lens of the sixties than what today's globalising world requires.  It ignores the view that more mainstream folks are heavily invested in corporate America than ever before, via not just mutual funds, but pension plans and union funds.

The article gives a lot more detail on Obama's emerging kitchen cabinet on the business front, and outlines his approach of what I'd term "capitalism with a heart".

But it may be populism that we may not be able to afford in these trying times.

I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, but right now it looks like this is where Mr. Obama and I part company.

And I daresay many of the Independents and moderate Republicans that Obama is hoping will support his candidacy in the General election, may feel the same way.

McCain is the easier choice on this one.

Comments

[Michael Broder]

Michael,

I always appreciate your postings. They always reflect an interesting response to some stimulus you've encountered -- a book, an article, a new gadget, etc. Today's posting made me think about what it means to be pro- or anti-business and I believe the labels do more harm than good. I've just written a reaction to your posting on my own blog

http://blog.competitivesense.com/2008/02/18/pro-or-antibusiness.aspx

[Alex Tolley]

Perhaps if we reframe the issue as not being "pro-business", but "anti-employee"? The US has a very unfriendly attitude towards employees, including workers' rights and discrimination. This posture over the last 40 years has created huge income and wealth inequality comparable to the gilded age. On top of job insecurity, there is the increasing problem of health insecurity too.

Michael, you are a world traveler, aren't you in the least bit curious that Europe has a GDP growth rate equal to the US, yet has much lower income inequality, universal healthcare and higher minimum wages, despite higher taxes and stronger business regulations.

McCain's policies would just continue the current state of US deficit spending, slowly bankrupting the country whilst the very wealthy continue to extract an ever increasing share of the pie.

Look to your history books as to where that leads.