A letter from the Boss:

To All My Valued Employees,

There have been some rumblings around the office about the future of this company, and more specifically, your job. As you know, the economy has changed for the worse and presents many challenges. However, the good news is this: The economy doesn’t pose a threat to your job. What does threaten your job however, is the changing political landscape in this country.

However, let me tell you some little tidbits of fact which might help you decide what is in your best interests. First, while it is easy to spew rhetoric that casts employers against employees, you have to understand that for every business owner there is a Back Story. This back story is often neglected and overshadowed by what you see and hear. Sure, you see me park my Mercedes outside. You’ve seen my big home at last years Christmas party. I’m sure; all these flashy icons of luxury conjure up some idealized thoughts about my life. However, what you don’t see is the BACK STORY : I started this company 28 years ago. At that time, I lived in a 300 square foot studio apartment for 3 years. My entire living apartment was converted into an office so I could put forth 100%effort into building a company, which by the way, would eventually employ you. My diet consisted of Ramen Pride noodles because every dollar I spent went back into this company. I drove a rusty Toyota Corolla with a defective transmission. I didn’t have time to date. Often times, I stayed home on weekends, while my friends went out drinking and partying. In fact, I was married to my business — hard work, discipline, and sacrifice. Meanwhile, my friends got jobs. They worked 40 hours a week and made a modest $50K a year and spent every dime they earned. They drove flashy cars and lived in expensive homes and wore fancy designer clothes. Instead of hitting the Nordstrom’s for the lat est hot fashion item, I was trolling through the discount store extracting any clothing item that didn’t look like it was birthed in the 70’s. My friends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I, however, did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into a business with a vision that eventually, someday, I too, will be able to afford these luxuries my friends supposedly had. So, while you physically arrive at the office at 9am, mentally check in at about noon, and then leave at 5pm, I don’t. There is no « off » button for me. When you leave the office, you are done and you have a weekend all to yourself. I unfortunately do not have the freedom. I eat, and breathe this company every minute of the day. There is no rest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. Every day this business is attached to my hip like a 1 year old special-needs child. You, of course, only see the fruits of that garden — the nice house, the Mercedes, the vacations… you never realize the Back Story and the sacrifices I’ve made. Now, the economy is falling apart and I, the guy that made all the right decisions and saved his money, have to bailout all the people who didn’t. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed a decade of my life for. Yes, business ownership has it’s benefits but the price I’ve paid is steep and not without wounds. Unfortunately, the cost of running this business, and employing you, is starting to eclipse the threshold of marginal benefit and let me tell you why: I am being taxed to death and the government thinks I don’t pay enough. I have state taxes. Federal taxes. Property taxes. Sales and use taxes. Payroll taxes. Workers compensation taxes. Unemployment taxes. Taxes on taxes. I have to hire a tax man to manage all these taxes and then guess what? I have to pay taxes for employing him. Government mandates and regulations and all the accounting that goes with it, now occupy most of my time. On Oct 15th, I wrote a check to the US Treasury for $288,000 for quarterly taxes. You know what my « stimulus » check was? Zero. Nada. Zilch.

The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people good paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or, the single mother sitting at home pregnant with her fourth child waiting for her next welfare check? Obviously, government feels the latter is the economic stimulus of this country. The fact is, if I deducted (Read: Stole) 50% of your paycheck you’d quit and you wouldn’t work here. I mean, why should you? That’s nuts. Who wants to get rewarded only 50% of their hard work? Well, I agree which is why your job is in jeopardy. Here is what many of you don’t understand … to stimulate the economy you need to stimulate what runs the economy. Had suddenly government mandated to me that I didn’t need to pay taxes, guess what? Instead of depositing that $288,000 into the Washington black-hole, I would have spent it, hired more employees, and generated substantial economic growth. My employees would have enjoyed the wealth of that tax cut in the form of promotions and better salaries. But you can forget it now. When you have a comatose man on the verge of death, you don’t defibrillate and shock his thumb thinking that will bring him back to life, do you? Or, do you defibrillate his heart? Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate it, not kill it.

Suddenly, the power brokers in Washington believe the poor of America are the essential drivers of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth and this is the type of change you can keep. So where am I going with all this? It’s quite simple. If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, my reaction will be swift and simple. I’ll fire you and your coworkers. You can then plead with the government to pay for your mortgage, your SUV, and your child’s future. Frankly, it isn’t my problem any more. Then, I will close this company down, move to another country, and retire.

You see, I’m done. I’m done with a country that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, will be my citizenship. So, if you lose your job, it won’t be at the hands of the economy; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country, steamrolled the constitution, and will have changed its landscape forever. If that happens, you can find me sitting on a beach, retired, and with no employees to worry about….

Signed, THE BOSS

« The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money. » Margaret Thatcher

1. L’entrepreneur en question ne comprend pas qu’il n’a pas tout créé seul, que sans la société il n’est rien. Ses études, les gens qu’il a rencontrés, les routes qui transportent ses biens, la police qui le protège, les écoles qui forment son personnel… lui ont permis de faire fortune. Il est donc redevable à la société. C’est d’ailleurs pour cela que le vrai entrepreneur (Carnegie, Warren Buffett…) reverse à la société sa fortune à sa mort.
2. Il ne comprend pas qu’indirectement il a profité de la bulle spéculative, qu’il en est un peu coupable : en favorisant le crédit, elle a à la fois favorisé la consommation, donc ses affaires, mais aussi ses propres investissements (beaucoup d’entreprises sont surendettées).
3. Il est normal qu’il paie pour les crimes des autres, de même qu’il paie par ses impôts la police et les prisons. Plus précisément, ce qu’il paie aujourd’hui, ce sont les insuffisances de contrôle d’hier, c’est de ne pas avoir payé assez d’impôts. Puisque la politique de George Bush (pas d’impôts, pas de contrôle…) a amené l’économie dans ce cauchemar, il y a des chances que faire exactement l’inverse rétablisse la situation.
4. L’entrepreneur indépendant ne représente quasiment rien pour l’économie moderne qui est dominée par des oligopoles. Par conséquent mettre en avant le petit entrepreneur pour attaquer une politique de taxation qui, en fait, va servir à remettre sur pied un service public qui profite à tous, et en premier lieu au petit, est au mieux un sophisme. Notre entrepreneur est l’otage de gens beaucoup plus riches et moins entreprenants que lui, qui ne veulent pas payer d’impôts ?
5. Opposer l’entrepreneur qui prend des risques au salarié qui n’en prend pas est stupide. Le salarié prend le risque de se faire licencier, en échange d’un salaire fixe de durée limitée. Quand il y a risque, il doit y avoir assurance. L’entrepreneur, en construisant son entreprise, s’est fait une assurance. S’il n’y a pas de sécurité sociale, le salarié, lui, n’en a pas.
6. L’entrepreneur (j’en suis un) est généralement un asocial, qui a construit un monde à son image : il ne pouvait pas être salarié. L’entrepreneur qui reproche au salarié son mode de vie ressemble à l’oiseau qui reproche au poisson de ne pas voler.
7. Est-ce que payer des impôts va mettre l’entrepreneur au chômage ? Il peut réduire ses coûts en réduisant le salaire de ses personnels ou en utilisant mieux ses ressources productives qu’il ne le fait aujourd’hui, il peut repositionner ses produits (innover) de manière à tirer parti de la crise qui suscite des besoins nouveaux (destruction créatrice). C’est cela mon métier : adapter le modèle économique d’une entreprise à son environnement, ça s’appelle « la conduite du changement ». Et c’est sa capaciété à réussir cet exercice qui juustifie que le patron puisse être patron, suivant les économistes libéraux les plus orthodoxes.
8. Quand on lit le parcours de notre homme on comprend que ce n’est pas une petite crise et quelques impôts qui vont l’abattre. La crise est favorable à ce type d’entrepreneur : parce qu’elle rend les conditions d’existence difficiles, elle ouvre une opportunité aux plus méritants (c’est la thèse du Darwinisme social). N’oublions pas qu’IBM s’est construite pendant la crise des années 30.
9. Finalement, on retrouve là une tactique de Nixon employée par McCain récemment. Elle vise à jeter l’Amérique d’en bas (le petit entrepreneur) à la gorge de celle d’en haut (le riche intello démocrate). C’est verser de l’huile sur le feu.

• Théorie du profit et du risque, et stratégie de McCain.
• Sur les débuts d’IBM : CARROLL, Paul : Big Blues, The Unmaking of IBM, Crown, 1993.