In February I posted The Entrepreneurial Deficit – a collection of articles and comments on the absence of startups and it s long term impact on the economcy.

Glenn Harlan Reynolds, law professor and writer of the excellent blog Instapundit, expands on the theme in Where are the start-ups? in USA Today.

Excerpts:

In fact, it is yet another sign of a United States that is looking more like Europe: A society in which big businesses have cozy relationships with big government, while unemployment remains comparatively high. If you’re fortunate enough to have a job at one of those government-connected businesses, GE, for example, your situation is pretty good. If you’re a recent college graduate looking for work, your situation is not so great. If you’re a low-skilled worker, your situation is dreadful.

But I wonder if the biggest problem isn’t cultural. Since 2008, this country hasn’t celebrated achievement or entrepreneurialism. Instead, we’ve heard talk about the evils of the “1%” ” about the rapaciousness of capitalism, and the importance of spreading the wealth around. We’ve even heard that work in the public sector is somehow nobler than work in the private sector.

Countries where those attitudes prevail tend not to produce as much entrepreneurialism, so it’s perhaps no surprise that as those attitudes have gained ascendance among America’s political class and media elite, we’ve seen less entrepreneurialism here.

We hear a lot about the role of financial capital in economic development. But just as important — perhaps even more important — is the role of moral and intellectual capital. A country that celebrates achievement and risk-taking is likely to see more economic success than one that does not. And while the economy was lousy under Carter, there was less of this sort of anti-entrepreneurial talk.

HKO

We celebrate the accomplishments of government as if it is the same as the accomplishments of its citizens. It isn’t.

Moral and intellectual capital is less likely to rebound from a mere change in tax policy.  It would require a substantial change in the nature of the relationship between the government and the citizens.

print