Steve Case (Chairman and CEO of Revolution LLC) posted an interesting thought piece on entrepreneurial spirit, and it got me thinking (Read it here). The point (I think) is that America was made great because of our inherent nature to encourage the entrepreneurial spirit. And the only way for us to continue to BE great is to restore the ability of that spirit to be successful. He makes an ingenius suggestion that I will revisit later.
Other countries have developed themselves and become competitors—How so? In the same way that we became great--entrepreneurism and capitalism--except there is one big difference. In recent years (decades?) it would seem that we are curtailing the very spirit that made us great, while the rest of the world has caught on by studying our recipe for success. Should things continue, these other nations would gladly pass us by, leaving us in the dust.
Jeff Immelt (Chairman and CEO at GE) took this thought and went one step further. He published a think piece (read it here) that calls out politicians for misunderstanding how business really works. He argues that government regulation makes it very hard for American businesses to compete on the world stage, and that this movement away from capitalism (combined with an outdated tax system) is what is holding America the Great back.
So let’s examine these two thoughts:
One: Entrepreneurs made us great. Lack of support [from the government] for entrepreneurs puts us at risk for failure. Entrepreneurs could help us find new solutions to old problems.
Two: Over-regulation prevents capitalism from being effective, and places those who are over-regulated at a disadvantage from those who are not.
An individual doesn’t need to have an Economics degree to know that Capitalism and Entrepreneurship go hand in hand. One also doesn’t need that degree to see that diminishing the strength of one, negatively affects the other. The over-stepping nature of a highly regulatory government is the culprit for the dampening of our American Spirit.
The “new” thought that I picked up on in both of these articles was the thought that maybe, just maybe, we already know the solution. If we have the resources (strong willed, intelligent minds with a dream of success; entrepreneurs), we can use those to fix the problem (a sluggish, unresponsive government) with just a little effort.
What would happen if we contracted bright new minds from the private sector for 6-12 month positions, to sit in on the political process and help guide solutions for our biggest problems? Let’s bring non-politicos into the conversation of healthcare, infrastructure, taxation, and the environment. Businesses hire consultants everyday to become better at the various aspects of business that they are not already exceptional at. If we view the government as a business, why shouldn't we apply the same logic? What would happen if the government recruited consultants?
Is there any way for innovation and entrepreneurial spirit to exist in an economy that is increasingly taking on socialistic characteristics? I ask genuinely, because this is not what we were taught. I’d love to hear a counter argument! The current argument has always been that without competition, there is no motivating force. If we are all leveled out and equalized, what reward is there for a great idea and a determined spirit? Aside from pure altruism, would people still seek to innovate and be better? I can see an argument that those with drive and ingenuity will overcome any obstacle, even a government structured to redistribute wealth. I guess the question I have is…why put that obstacle there in the first place?
