Obama on Small Business

18 July 2012 at 9:57 am 5 comments

| Peter Klein |

President Obama’s gaffe about business creation — “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen” — has been met with the usual reactions. Defenders claim he simply used infelicitous language to describe the vital role of government in providing essential goods, while critics point out, for instance, that he didn’t even get it right on the Golden Gate Bridge (which received no federal money). I actually feel sorry for the guy. It was an pretty dumb thing to say, politically, and may end up hurting him more than Romney’s role in “exporting American jobs” (gag) hurts the challenger.

The idea that no one builds a business on his own, without help from other people, is in once sense trivially true, as Leonard Read never tired of explaining. No one person knows how to make a pencil, let alone a microprocessor. As a defense of government spending on infrastructure (not only roads and bridges, but things like the internet), it falls completely flat. Of course some entrepreneurs profit from government spending on infrastructure — not just directly (e.g., road contractors, engineering companies hired by ARPA, etc.) but indirectly (from lower transportation or transmission cost, net of tax payments). But such anecdotes do not at all “justify” the expenditures. As I once wrote about the internet:

[E]nthusiasts tend to forget the fallacy of the broken window. We see the internet. We see its uses. We see the benefits it brings. We surf the web and check our email and download our music. But we will never see the technologies that weren’t developed because the resources that would have been used to develop them were confiscated by the Defense Department and given to Stanford engineers. Likewise, I may admire the majesty and grandeur of an Egyptian pyramid, a TVA dam, or a Saturn V rocket, but it doesn’t follow that I think they should have been created, let alone at taxpayer expense.

A gross benefit to particular entrepreneurs from a government program does not, by itself, demonstrate net benefits to the taxpaying community. Vague references to spillovers and multipliers may sound good in a press conference, but are no substitute for serious analysis.

Entry filed under: - Klein -, Business/Economic History, Entrepreneurship, Myths and Realities, Public Policy / Political Economy. Tags: .

Summer Readings Macroeconomics QOTD

5 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Brian Saxton  |  18 July 2012 at 11:26 am

    I’m fond of this essay, pointing out that despite the fact that his faithful guardianship prevents your house from being burgled, your dog does not own your house:

    http://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/Jasaydog.html

  • 2. Rafe Champion  |  19 July 2012 at 9:05 pm

    Some would say that cats own houses, dogs just live there:)

  • 3. mikemarotta  |  1 August 2012 at 10:12 am

    It is important to understand that the pencil evolved. In Reed’s own time, a Soviet commissar could, indeed, have taken a Ticonderoga Number 2 and replicated it. But no one could have designed it complete and mature from scratch because no one did. We still speak of “leads” and “stones” – Bleistift in German and lapiz in Spanish – and ignore the fact that the pen-cil is a “little feather.” It is not just the invention, but the evolution that cannot be predicted, planned, controlled, or subsidized. We gush at the latest iPod but forget the failed Adam and lackluster Palm. The first desktop computer (arguably) was the IBM 5100 which its sales engineers apparently expected secretaries to program in APL for word processing. I recently read Jack Kemeny’s Man and the Computer. No one in 1965 saw Visicalc coming… or PowerPoint… or blogs.

    Thus, even if the apologists for government-funded businesses could make a case for DARPA’s role in the Internet, if not for the unplanned (and unplannable) we would still be dialing in at 110-baud via the Ma Bell monopoly … no one’s phone would have a camera…

    Peter Klein’s argument against NASA and all else it implies, is, of course, the “broken window” problem, the unimaginable benefits never brought to market.

  • 4. Karen Wang  |  1 August 2012 at 11:42 am

    If you read the entire transcript, it wasn’t a gaffe. He was referring to the roads and bridges… businesses didn’t build them. The Daily show has a good segment on this grammer problem.

    http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-july-25-2012/democalypse-2012—do-we-look-stupid–don-t-answer-that-edition—grammatical-gaffes

  • 5. Peter Klein  |  1 August 2012 at 10:55 pm

    I haven’t seen the Daily Show piece but have read other attempts to defend the remark on these grounds. I’m sorry, I just don’t buy it. I’ve read the entire transcript and there’s no way “that” could refer to the roads and bridges mentioned a few sentences before, unless the President’s grammar is worse than that of my undergrads.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Authors

Nicolai J. Foss | home | posts
Peter G. Klein | home | posts
Richard Langlois | home | posts
Lasse B. Lien | home | posts

Guests

Former Guests | posts

Networking

Recent Posts

Categories

Feeds

Our Recent Books

Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein, Organizing Entrepreneurial Judgment: A New Approach to the Firm (Cambridge University Press, 2012).
Peter G. Klein and Micheal E. Sykuta, eds., The Elgar Companion to Transaction Cost Economics (Edward Elgar, 2010).
Peter G. Klein, The Capitalist and the Entrepreneur: Essays on Organizations and Markets (Mises Institute, 2010).
Richard N. Langlois, The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism: Schumpeter, Chandler, and the New Economy (Routledge, 2007).
Nicolai J. Foss, Strategy, Economic Organization, and the Knowledge Economy: The Coordination of Firms and Resources (Oxford University Press, 2005).
Raghu Garud, Arun Kumaraswamy, and Richard N. Langlois, eds., Managing in the Modular Age: Architectures, Networks and Organizations (Blackwell, 2003).
Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein, eds., Entrepreneurship and the Firm: Austrian Perspectives on Economic Organization (Elgar, 2002).
Nicolai J. Foss and Volker Mahnke, eds., Competence, Governance, and Entrepreneurship: Advances in Economic Strategy Research (Oxford, 2000).
Nicolai J. Foss and Paul L. Robertson, eds., Resources, Technology, and Strategy: Explorations in the Resource-based Perspective (Routledge, 2000).

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 270 other followers