Where the Jobs Are E-Book

John Dearie

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 405

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2013

Beschreibung

A guide to ending America's jobs emergency by accelerating the true engine of job creation--start-ups Four years after the end of the Great Recession, 23 million Americans remain unemployed, underemployed, or have left the workforce discouraged. Even worse, Washington policymakers seem out of ideas. Where the Jobs Are: Entrepreneurship and the Soul of the American Economy shows how America can restore its great job-creation machine. Recent research has demonstrated that virtually all net new job creation in the United States over the past thirty years has come from businesses less than a year old--true "start-ups." Start-up businesses create an average of three million new jobs each year, while existing businesses of any size or age shed a net average of about one million jobs annually. Unfortunately, the vital signs of America's job-creating entrepreneurial economy are flashing red alert. After remaining remarkably consistent for decades, the rate of new business formation has declined significant in recent years, and the number of new jobs created by new firms is also falling. In Where the Jobs Are, the authors recount the findings of a remarkable summer they spent traveling the country to meet and conduct roundtables with entrepreneurs in a dozen cities. More than 200 entrepreneurs participated--explaining in specific and vividly personal terms the issues, frustrations, and obstacles that are undermining their efforts to launch new businesses, expand existing young firms, and create jobs. Those obstacles include a dangerously underperforming education system, self-defeating immigration policies that thwart the attraction and retention of the world's best talent, access to capital difficulties, a mounting regulatory burden, unnecessary tax complexity, and severe Washington-produced economic uncertainty. * Explains how start-ups are different from existing businesses, large or small, and why they represent the engine of job creation * Reveals how policymakers' failure to understand the unique nature and needs of start-ups has undermined efforts to stimulate the economy following the Great Recession * Presents a detailed, innovative, and uniquely credible 30-point policy agenda based on what America's job creators said they urgently need Engaging and informative, Where the Jobs Are reveals with unprecedented precision and clarity the major obstacles undermining the fragile economic recovery, and provides a vitally important game plan to unleash the job-creating capacity of the entrepreneurial economy and put a beleaguered nation back to work.

Leseprobe

Contents

Foreword

Preface

Introduction

Chapter 1: America’s Jobs Emergency

Chapter 2: Not Just Small Businesses . . . New

Chapter 3: On the Road with America’s Job Creators

Chapter 4: “Not Enough People with the Skills We Need”

Policy Recommendations

Chapter 5: “Our Immigration Policies Are Insane”

Policy Recommendations

Chapter 6: “Not All Good Ideas Get Funded Anymore”

Policy Recommendations

Chapter 7: “Regulations Are Killing Us”

Policy Recommendations

Chapter 8: “Tax Payments Can Be the Difference between Survival and Failure”

Policy Recommendations

Chapter 9: “There’s Too Much Uncertainty—and It’s Washington’s Fault”

Policy Recommendations

Conclusion

Appendix: Summary of Recommendations

Afterword

Acknowledgments

About the Authors

Index

Additional Praise for Where the Jobs Are

“Ultimately U.S. growth and welfare rest on entrepreneurship. Dearie and Geduldig vividly analyze what has ailed us recently. They also provide concrete and practical proposals for what needs to be done to promote new U.S. firms. This book should be required reading for all policymakers interested in revitalizing the economy.”

Robert Z. Lawrence, Albert L. Williams Professor of International Trade and Investment

John F. Kennedy, School of Government, Harvard University

“A broad, comprehensive look at what drives the U.S. economy; John Dearie and Courtney Geduldig outline specific policy initiatives to jump-start job creation. Their work is inspired by their first-hand experience in financial and economic policy. They present thoroughly researched findings from a cross-section of those in the know—employers, academics, investors, developmental organizations, lending institutions, and local government leaders. Dearie and Geduldig’s thought-provoking book provides plenty of real-life examples to further the conversation of what could be done to inspire and support a new generation of successful American entrepreneurs.”

Congressman Pat Tiberi (R-OH)

“I started my own construction company when I was 25 years old and have spent my life in business, so I can certainly relate to many of the issues raised in this book. I appreciate Courtney and John sharing their research, analysis and recommendations and hope it helps unleash the tremendous entrepreneurial potential that exists throughout our country.”

Senator Bob Corker (R-TN)

“A thorough and enlightening survey of the state of American entrepreneurship, and a must-read for policy makers (or anyone) interested in restarting the American jobs engine. Dearie and Gelduldig have pulled together a solid set of recommendations—ones I hope will be taken seriously and acted upon.”

David A. Owens, PhD, Director, Executive Development Institute, Owen Graduate School of Management Vanderbilt University

“John Dearie and Courtney Geduldig have written an original, provocative, and persuasive book. It is filled with the wisdom of scores of real entrepreneurs whose experiences since the Great Crash of 2008 explain why our recovery has been so feeble. And they offer a menu of common-sense reforms that just might revive America’s entrepreneurial spirit.”

Robert G. Kaiser, Author of “Act of Congress: How America’s Essential Institution Works, and How it Doesn’t”

“Dearie and Geduldig address head-on the most significant driver of economic growth: new business formation. In the 1840’s the United States and Britain passed laws that for the first time allowed corporate formation without legislative action. This launched the industrial revolution, a 25-fold increase in per capita income, a doubling of human life expectancy, and the creation of the modern world. Where the Jobs Are is a passionate call for action to once again ignite the animal spirits that drive job creation and economic growth. Feeble economic growth and millions of unemployed Americans are proof positive that Dearie and Geduldig’s call must be answered.”

Chris Wright, founder and CEO of Liberty Resources and Liberty Oilfield Services

Cover image: Getty Images

Cover design: Paul McCarthy

Copyright © 2013 by John R. Dearie and Courtney C. Geduldig. All rights reserved.

Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.

Published simultaneously in Canada.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, [phone], fax [phone], or on the Web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, [phone], fax [phone], or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at [phone], outside the United States at [phone] or fax [phone].

The opinions and proposals expressed in this book are the authors’ alone and should not be interpreted as representing the views of the Financial Services Forum or its members, or Standard & Poor’s or McGraw Hill Financial.

Wiley publishes in a variety of print and electronic formats and by print-on-demand. Some material included with standard print versions of this book may not be included in e-books or in print-on-demand. If this book refers to media such as a CD or DVD that is not included in the version you purchased, you may download this material at http://booksupport.wiley.com. For more information about Wiley products, visit www.wiley.com.

ISBN 978-1-118-57324-2 (Hardcover); ISBN 978-1-118-74572-4 (ebk); ISBN 978-1-118-74553-3 (ebk)

. . . there is the dream and the will to found a private kingdom . . . there is the will to conquer: the impulse to fight, to prove oneself superior to others, to succeed for the sake, not of the fruits of success, but of success itself. . . Finally there is the joy of creating, of getting things done, or simply of exercising one’s energy and ingenuity.

Joseph Schumpeter, on the nature and essential character of the entrepreneur, The Theory of Economic Development

Foreword

Before any candidates for Congress are permitted to have their names placed on the ballot, they should have to certify that they have read John Dearie and Courtney Geduldig’s book Where the Jobs Are.

The reason for this is that once elected they will suddenly be confronted with such challenges as assuring the supply of clean, affordable energy, providing health care to the nation’s citizens, preserving the natural environment of our planet, assuring national security, and more—yet none of these can be accomplished without first building a strong economy. And no nation can have a strong economy without producing jobs for its citizens—jobs that both underpin the quality of life of individuals and families, and generate the tax revenues that permit government to fulfill its obligations to its citizenry. Furthermore, an important but often overlooked point is that one can’t be for jobs and be against employers.

But this is just one of the conundrums and misunderstandings that plague those who seek to find—or, better yet, create—jobs. It is occasionally announced by deans at medical school graduations that “half of what we taught you is wrong—the problem is that we don’t know which half.” This caveat has relevance to the beliefs held by many concerning the jobs dilemma. Consider the following beliefs:

Permitting foreign scientists and engineers to immigrate to the United States takes jobs away from Americans.

Start-up companies, which usually fail anyway, are simply too small to make much difference in the overall job market.

The government doesn’t need to invest in research, because corporations will; they realize that if they don’t invest they can’t survive over the long term.

The sole reason unemployment is as high as it is today is that there aren’t enough jobs to go around.

The true unemployment rate today is only a few percentage points above the norm.

The country doesn’t need more engineers; it already has too many.

The problem with U.S. public schools is a lack of funding.

Americans place greater emphasis on engineering and innovation than the citizens of most industrialized nations.

When corporations are taxed, no one gets hurt.

If our nation’s score in judging these beliefs concerning jobs were as good as the alleged 50 percent achieved by professors in our medical schools, we would indeed be fortunate. But, as it happens, all of these statements are wrong.

First of all, scientists and engineers represent less than 5 percent of the U.S. workforce, but they disproportionately create jobs for the other 95 percent. Encouraging talented scientists and engineers, especially those with an entrepreneurial bent, to immigrate to the United States actually creates jobs, not destroys them. The Journal of International Commerce and Economics notes that a few years ago the 700 engineers working on Apple’s iPod were accompanied by 14,000 other workers in the United States alone. In fact, numerous studies have shown that 50 to 85 percent of the growth in the country’s Gross Domestic Product (read jobs) can be attributed to the work of scientists and engineers. Foreign-born scientists and engineers have disproportionately created new companies and won Nobel Prizes for the United States.

Furthermore, the constructive destruction that takes place in a free market is such that most new jobs are created and sustained by relatively new companies that once were very small. Large public companies respond to the pressures of the marketplace—which means that they must seek short-term gains, even at the expense of the long-term survival that frequently comes from investing in delayed-payoff endeavors such as research. A few decades ago stockholders held their shares an average of eight years; today the figure is 18 months and declining.

And while there is indeed a shortage of jobs, as attested to by the 12 million Americans who are currently unemployed, there are also three million job openings waiting to be filled by individuals with suitable skills. Thus, not only is there a jobs shortage, but there is also a skills gap.

Although today one hears a great deal about unemployment being in the 7 or 8 percent range, that figure does not include individuals who have given up searching for a job, are only able to find part-time employment, or are underemployed relative to their qualifications. Taking a more realistic view of the unemployment picture indicates a problem nearly double that about which we read in the newspapers and see on television.

Then there is the perennial argument that there are already too many scientists and engineers in the United States—witness the proverbial engineer taxicab driver. It is certainly true that if the nation does not adequately invest in research there will be too many scientists. If it lets its infrastructure crumble, there will be too many engineers. If we do not plant seeds, we will not need farmers. Microsoft recently opened a new software engineering facility across the border in Canada because U.S. regulations made it too difficult to hire engineers in the United States.

Correspondingly, there will be no shortage of engineers and innovators in the United States because companies will simply move their research and development (R&D) abroad—and follow it with their factories, administrative offices, and logistics hubs. What there will be in the United States is a lack of jobs for nonengineers, nonscientists, and nonentrepreneurs who otherwise would have been the beneficiaries of the work of those job creators who will now be found elsewhere.

Turning to the question of funding the nation’s K–12 public schools, these institutions are already the most highly funded per student in the world, with the exception of Switzerland. The problem is not how we fund our schools; it is how we spend the funds.

Then there is the emphasis American society places on careers in engineering (and innovation). A National Science Foundation study of 93 nations ranked the United States in 79th place in terms of the fraction of all baccalaureate degrees that are awarded in engineering. The nation that we most closely resemble in this regard, in both science and engineering, is Mozambique.

And, finally, when corporations are excessively taxed, everyone gets hurt. The reason is straightforward: firms simply move to where conditions, including taxes, are more conducive to business success.

All of which brings us to the question: Where are the jobs going to be? In this book one finds a highly documented discussion of where the jobs are, and why. This is an issue that will drive the prosperity of individual Americans and the nation as a whole as they are forced to compete in a global economy, the growth of which will increasingly reside outside the United States. Isolationism is not an option; we cannot, as the title of the Broadway show suggested, stop the world and get off.

The authors of this book have traveled far and wide to listen to the experiences of hundreds of entrepreneurs, some successful, some not. The result is a book worthy of reading by anyone who knows someone who has, or would like to have, a job. The reward of doing so is to gain hard-earned experience—without accumulating one’s own scar tissue.

Norman R. Augustinea

aNorman R. Augustine chaired the “Gathering Storm” committee that was established on a bipartisan basis by both the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate to assess the nation’s future competitiveness demands. He is also the retired chairman and CEO of Lockheed Martin Corporation and has attended over 500 board meetings of Fortune 100 companies, as well as serving on the boards of start-ups.

Preface

Persistently high unemployment in the wake of the Great Recession is one of the great economic challenges of our time. Twenty-four million Americans remain unemployed or underemployed, or have left the workforce discouraged. Fewer things are harder on families than the inability to find a job. Unemployment not only threatens the financial security of jobless Americans and their families, but also robs the broader economy of production and wealth creation and produces a wide range of painful and damaging social problems.

In March of 2011, John Dearie, the Financial Services Forum’s Executive Vice President for Policy, and Courtney Geduldig, the Forum’s General Counsel and Managing Director for Government Affairs, came to me and proposed a major initiative on job creation. At that time, unemployment remained above 9 percent, despite the unprecedented fiscal and monetary policy measures taken by Congress, the White House, and the Federal Reserve. Policymakers needed new ideas, my colleagues argued, and the Forum should try to help.

For those not aware of our organization, the Financial Services Forum is a financial and economic policy group comprised of the chief executives of 19 of the largest financial institutions operating in the United States. The group was organized by its founding members to deliberate on the major financial and economic challenges facing Washington policymakers and to offer well-considered potential policy solutions. The Forum is strictly nonpartisan; we do not operate a political action committee, nor do we organize or host fund-raisers for office holders.

I agreed with my colleagues and proposed the initiative to our member CEOs the following month at the Forum’s spring meeting. The members approved the project.

For reasons they explain in the pages that follow, John and Courtney focused their examination of job creation on entrepreneurs and the new companies they launch, and spent the summer of 2011 traveling the nation—meeting, talking with, and listening to the nation’s innovators and job creators.

I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say that the summer was a revelation to my colleagues. I vividly recall them returning from the various roundtables they had organized around the country tremendously excited about the entrepreneurs they had met, what they had heard, particular anecdotes and insights, and the implications for economic policy.

By September of 2011, having conducted roundtables in 12 cities across the country, and recognizing the importance and power of what they had heard and learned—and realizing that too few policymakers back in Washington fully appreciated the unique nature, contribution, vulnerabilities, and needs of start-ups—John and Courtney wanted to do more than simply produce a white paper report to the Forum’s members. So they decided to write a book.

The book you’re holding is the result of that remarkable summer on the road, and amounts to a first-of-its-kind and critically important contribution to addressing the policy challenge of persistently high unemployment. To my knowledge, no one else has invested the time, energy, and resources to travel the nation and methodically assess the challenges and needs of the country’s job creators. Having done so, John and Courtney have produced a book that deserves a great deal of attention from policymakers, the media, businesspeople, and any American interested in how to get, keep, and create jobs.

My sincere hope is that policymakers in Washington and in statehouses and legislatures around the country will read and absorb the major themes and recommendations of the book, and give serious consideration to implementing many of the insightful and thoughtful policy recommendations that John and Courtney propose. While policymakers are a principal audience for this book, the true beneficiaries will ultimately be those Americans—hopefully millions of them—who are more able either to create jobs or to find jobs as a result of this book.

Finally, I think it’s important to note that John and Courtney voluntarily declined any compensation for writing this book. With the intention of supporting American entrepreneurship, all proceeds from this book will be donated to one or more of the start-up incubators and accelerators that John and Courtney encountered during their summer on the road.

This project was the result of John and Courtney’s initiative and passion for public policy that makes a difference in people’s lives. I am fortunate to have both as friends.

Rob Nichols

President and CEO

The Financial Services Forum

Washington, DC

Introduction

We know some of their names—Samuel Morse, Eli Whitney, Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, Walt Disney, Ray Croc, Mary Kay Ash, Bill Hewlett, Sam Walton, Fred Smith, Ted Turner, Oprah Winfrey, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Martha Stewart, Jeff Bezos, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, Mark Zuckerberg. Such people are not notable merely because they amassed great wealth, or because they led corporations of enormous consequence, or because they achieved a kind of celebrity status. Rather, they are illustrious members of the pantheon of American capitalism because they launched iconic companies like Ford, Disney, Hewlett-Packard, Mary Kay, Walmart, Federal Express, CNN, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Google, and Facebook from scratch—in the basement, on the dining room table, in college dorm rooms, in their parents’ garage—forever altering the nation’s economic landscape and creating jobs, careers, and wealth for millions of Americans. They, and countless others like them, are the visionaries, the innovators, the risk-takers—the entrepreneurs.

As people who have spent our careers in various positions within economic and financial policymaking, we certainly knew that entrepreneurship is a marvelous and critically important aspect of our nation’s economy. We understood that new businesses are an important source of the remarkable dynamism and innovation that defines the American economy. We understood that new businesses bring new ideas, new technologies, and new products and services to the marketplace. We knew that new businesses, if they succeed, create new value and new wealth that drives living standards higher and benefits broader society tremendously. We even knew that new businesses—by definition—can create new jobs.

We now know that we didn’t understand the half of it.

Like all Americans, we witnessed with horror the Great Recession of 2008–2009 and its devastating impact on the nation’s labor markets. Between February of 2008 and February of 2010, almost 9 million jobs were eliminated. Just as alarming, in a break from the historical pattern of deep recessions being followed by sharp rebounds, the U.S. economy’s recovery from the Great Recession has been frustratingly sluggish. By early 2011—18 months following the resumption of economic growth—only about a million jobs had been created, less than an eighth of those eliminated during the downturn, and more than 25 million Americans remained unemployed or underemployed. To survive the worst economic contraction in 80 years, American businesses had learned to do more with fewer people.

Then, in the spring of 2011, circumstances worsened. After growing by nearly 2.5 percent in 2010, the U.S. economy seemed to stall. Despite an $800 billion fiscal stimulus signed into law by President Barack Obama two years before, and despite 28 months of short-term interest rates near zero thanks to the Federal Reserve, economic growth dwindled to a barely detectable 0.1 percent in the first quarter of 2011.

Progress in the labor market also stalled. After creating an average of 195,000 jobs in each of the first four months of 2011, job creation fell to just 115,000 in May—and then to 78,000 in July. Over that summer, the economy created a monthly average of only 140,000 jobs. Economists generally agree that sustained monthly job creation of 150,000 to 200,000 is necessary just to keep up with population growth, with much faster growth required to meaningfully reduce unemployment. The unemployment rate, which had fallen a full percentage point from its peak of 10 percent in October of 2009, leveled off in early 2011 and seemed stuck at 9 percent—double the rate in 2007.1

Something was wrong. Despite unprecedented efforts to stimulate growth and job creation, the economy was not responding as expected. Having done what history had taught must be done, policymakers in Washington seemed out of ideas—at a loss for what to do next.

With the hope of generating new policy alternatives, and within the context of our responsibilities at the Financial Services Forum—a Washington, DC–based financial and economic policy group—we launched an effort in April of 2011 to better understand the crippled labor markets in the wake of the Great Recession, what had happened during the recent recession that might explain the halting pace of hiring, and any structural obstacles to growth and job creation that might not have been part of previous post-recession recoveries.

Shortly after we began our investigation, we learned of research that had been conducted within the last few years—first by economists at the U.S. Census Bureau, then at the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation in Kansas City, MO—which had apparently demonstrated that virtually all net new job creation in the United States over the past 30 years has come from businesses less than a year old—true “start-ups.” Moreover, existing businesses, of any size or age, according to the research, shed a net average of about a million jobs each year. Intrigued, we flew out to Kansas City, met with the economists who had done the work, examined the evidence, and were convinced.

Stunned, we realized that policymakers in Washington, focused as they are, and for very good reasons, on the needs and priorities of either large corporations or the small business community, tend to overlook the economy’s true engine of job creation—new businesses. Moreover, because start-up businesses are new, and have leaders who are naturally and intently focused on launching and growing their fragile new firms, America’s entrepreneurial economy has little organized representation in Washington to educate policymakers and advocate on behalf of its needs and priorities. And those needs and priorities, as we came to understand, are unique.

As we continued to investigate new businesses—their role in the economy and recent trends—we also learned that, alarmingly, America’s job creation engine is breaking down. After remaining remarkably consistent for decades, the number of new firms launched each year—and the number of new jobs created by those new firms—has declined precipitously in recent years.

But why?

If America’s entrepreneurs have historically served as the engine of virtually all net new job creation, as the research had demonstrated, what was suddenly in their way? What was causing the drop-off in new business formation and the decline in the number of new jobs those businesses create? We realized that unless these key questions can be answered—and unless those answers can be converted into compelling solutions—the U.S. economy stands little chance of creating the jobs necessary to put millions of unemployed Americans back to work.

After considering a number of alternatives, we decided there was only one way to really get to the bottom of what was happening and find the answers we were looking for—get out of Washington, DC, and talk to America’s job creators face to face.

In April of 2011, we launched an ambitious summer road trip, conducting in-person roundtables with entrepreneurs in 12 cities across the nation. Specific cities were chosen in order to cover both the broad geographic territory of the country, as well as the industrial diversity of the U.S. economy. More than 200 entrepreneurs participated in our roundtables, explaining in specific and vividly personal terms the obstacles that are undermining their efforts to launch new businesses, expand existing young firms, and create jobs. Many more shared their thoughts and ideas by e-mail.

In addition to our roundtables with entrepreneurs, we also convened a fascinating yet sobering discussion among eight noted economists regarding the nature and depth of the recent recession, the extent of the damage to labor markets, changes to the labor markets either caused by or accelerated by the severe downturn, structural obstacles to recovery, and policy alternatives.

Along the way, we also conducted numerous interviews with representatives from every aspect of the entrepreneurship ecosystem—business and entrepreneurship academics; leaders of start-up incubators, accelerators, and facilitators; venture capitalists; angel investors; community development organizations; officials from mayors’ and governors’ offices; and lending institutions. Working with the Kauffman Foundation and Adam Geller of the polling firm National Research, Inc., we also conducted a first-of-its-kind nationwide poll of more than 800 entrepreneurs, which generated results that confirmed and added additional texture to what we learned at our in-person roundtables.

We came away from our summer on the road struck most of all by our nation’s stunning entrepreneurial dynamism. Despite the downward trend in the rate of new business formation in recent years, and despite very challenging economic circumstances, entrepreneurs all across America—driven by a desire to create and build, and enabled by the development of new technologies—continue to launch new companies, build those businesses, and pursue their dreams of independence and wealth. Having witnessed such dynamism and commitment first hand, we are more optimistic about the future of the U.S. economy than ever.

But for that tremendous potential to be fully unleashed, America’s entrepreneurs need help. Given the critical role they play in our nation’s economy as the principal source of innovation, dynamism, growth, and job creation, America’s young businesses need and deserve a comprehensive and preferential policy framework designed to cultivate new business formation and dramatically enhance the prospects of new business survival and growth.

Fortunately, Washington is beginning to listen. On December 8, 2011, Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS) and Senator Mark Warner (D-VA)—himself a successful telecommunications entrepreneur—introduced legislation called the Start-Up Act, which aims to help new businesses by reducing regulatory burdens, attracting business investment, accelerating the commercialization of university research, and attracting and retaining the world’s best entrepreneurial talent. On February 14, 2013, Senators Moran and Warner introduced an updated version of the plan, Start-Up Act 3.0, along with co-sponsors Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) and Senator Roy Blunt (R-MO). Similarly, the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (“JOBS”) Act, enacted in April of 2012, is intended to improve new businesses’ access to financing. Both pieces of legislation are important steps in the right direction. But more progress is urgently needed on many other fronts—and help is needed from both the public and private sectors.

In the chapters that follow, we first document the extraordinary damage to U.S. labor markets caused by the Great Recession and its immediate aftermath. We then explain how and why new businesses account for virtually all net new job creation in America. Most significantly, we recount the findings of the remarkable summer we spent traveling from city to city to meet the nation’s entrepreneurs—listening to them explain in their own words the issues, frustrations, and obstacles that are undermining their efforts to launch new businesses, expand existing young firms, and create jobs. We also present a detailed, innovative, and uniquely credible policy agenda based on what America’s job creators told us they need.

It’s important to emphasize that in highlighting the critical role of new businesses and focusing on their unique policy needs, our intent is neither to glamorize entrepreneurs nor to exaggerate the job-creating capacity of the businesses they launch. Not all new companies create jobs, or even survive. On the contrary, half of all new businesses fail within the first five years and only a few companies among the survivors go on to create hundreds or thousands of new jobs. Indeed, most new businesses launched in America each year are sole proprietorship “Main Street” businesses like restaurants, fitness clubs, construction firms, hair salons, tax preparers, and financial advisors—businesses started by people looking for professional independence, but not intending to hire hundreds of people and never expecting to make millions of dollars. In fact, as Scott Shane, professor of entrepreneurial studies, has pointed out, most entrepreneurs work more hours and earn less money than they would if they worked for someone else.2 Moreover, public policy shouldn’t promote or protect poor business ideas simply because they are new, nor should government pick winners and losers.

But if new businesses account for virtually all net new job creation, and if some fraction of the new firms launched each year go on to create hundreds or even thousands of new jobs, then America needs to get serious about enhancing the circumstances for new business formation, survival, and growth—particularly given the alarming reality that the number of new firms launched each year, and the number of new jobs created by those firms, has declined significantly in recent years.

In August of 2011, a few days after an ailing Steve Jobs resigned as chief executive of Apple, the Wall Street Journal wrote: “When the history of the past 40 years is written, who will be seen as the more consequential figure—the average American President, or a college drop-out who built the first personal computer in a garage and went on to lead the most important company of the 21st century? We’ll put our history money on Steve Jobs. . . There’s a large lesson here about economic growth and its sources. . . Another lesson is that the future belongs to the risk-takers, who sense opportunities when others see only folly or danger.”3

The grim economic circumstances that gave rise to this project have only persisted. Economic growth remains anemic and 24 million Americans—of all ages, backgrounds, education levels, and skills sets—remain either unemployed, underemployed, or have left the workforce discouraged. Without decisive action soon, entire generations of Americans might be left behind in the wake of the Great Recession. The strength and stability of our economy, and the health, vitality, and social cohesion of our nation are at stake.

The job creators have told us what they need. There’s no time to waste.

Let’s get to work.

Notes

1. See Motoko Rich, “Job Growth Falters Badly, Clouding Hope for Recovery,” New York Times, July 8, 2011.

2. Scott A. Shane, The Illusions of Entrepreneurship: The Costly Myths that Entrepreneurs, Investors, and Policymakers Live By (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008).

3. “The Importance of Jobs,” Wall Street Journal, August 26, 2011, Review & Outlook.

Chapter 1

America’s Jobs Emergency

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), nearly 12 million Americans remain unemployed—more than four years after the official end of the Great Recession. To put that figure in perspective, 12.8 million Americans were unemployed in 1933, the worst year of the Great Depression, and 11.9 million Americans were unemployed in November of 1982, the deepest point of the severe 1981–1982 recession. Another eight million Americans currently work part-time involuntarily, while an estimated 4 million have simply given up looking for work. More than four years into the current economic recovery, 15 percent of the American workforce is either without work, underemployed, or has left the workforce discouraged. At the current pace of job creation—a monthly average of just 180,000 new jobs since the beginning of 2012—America will likely not return to pre-recession levels of employment until 2023.1

The economic downturn that began in December of 2007 certainly earned the grim and, by now, familiar moniker “The Great Recession.” According to the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), the unofficial arbiter of recession start and end dates, the recent recession stretched 18 months—until June of 2009—making it the longest period of economic contraction since World War II. The longest post-war recessions had been those of 1973–1975 and 1981–1982, both of which lasted 16 months.

The recent recession was also the most severe post-war downturn, with the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) contracting by more than 5 percent. The next most severe downturn was the 1957–1958 recession, during which GDP contracted by 3.7 percent. At the depth of the recent recession—the fourth quarter of 2008—the economy contracted at a frightening annualized rate of nearly 9 percent.

Perhaps most alarming, the recent recession destroyed 7.5 million American jobs, or more than 5 percent of the pre-recession total. By comparison, the 1973–1975 recession eliminated 2 million jobs or about 2.5 percent of the pre-recession total, while the 1981–1982 downturn destroyed 2.8 million jobs or 3 percent of the pre-recession total.

As Figure 1.1 shows, the damage to U.S. labor markets continued until February of 2010, with an additional 1.3 million jobs eliminated in the eight months following the official end of the recession, bringing the total number of jobs lost since the beginning of the recession to a staggering 8.8 million—wiping out all employment growth achieved over the previous decade.

Figure 1.1 Monthly Job Gain/Loss and Unemployment Rate

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

As Figure 1.2 shows, every other decade since World War II produced employment base growth of at least 20 percent.2

Figure 1.2 Employment Base Growth by Decade

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

After fluctuating between 4 and 6 percent for most of the previous 15 years, the unemployment rate began a steep climb from 5 percent in April of 2008, doubling in just 18 months to 10 percent by October of 2009—breaching double-digit territory for only the second time since World War II.

Policymakers responded to the severe recession and the damage to U.S. labor markets with unprecedented measures. On February 17, 2009, newly inaugurated President Barack Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the principal purpose of which was to save or create jobs. The $800 billion fiscal stimulus provided unemployment relief, subsidies to states, and investments in infrastructure, education, health, and “green” energy. A number of temporary, more targeted programs followed, including “cash-for-clunkers,” “cash-for-caulkers,” tax credits for home buyers, and 99 weeks of jobless benefits.

On the monetary policy side, the Federal Reserve (“the Fed”) also aggressively engaged. In September of 2007, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC)—the Fed’s interest rate setting body—lowered the targeted fed funds rate3 for the first time in more than four years. Over the next 15 months, the FOMC lowered the rate nine more times—ultimately, in December of 2008, to 0-to-0.25 percent, where it has remained for nearly five years.

In November of 2008, the Fed also turned to the power of its balance sheet, launching a program to purchase $600 billion in mortgage-backed securities in an effort to force long-term interest rates lower. Unsatisfied with the economy’s response, the Fed began a second $600 billion program of “quantitative easing” in November of 2010. It would later launch a third.4

For a while, the extraordinary policy response seemed to be working. As Figure 1.3 shows, the economy emerged from recession in the third quarter of 2009, expanding by a weak yet welcome 1.4 percent. Growth continued through 2010, accelerating to 2.4 percent. And as the economy expanded, the nation’s unemployment rate improved, dropping from its peak of 10 percent in October of 2009 to 9 percent by February of 2011.

Figure 1.3 Quarterly GDP Growth

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis.

By early 2011, however, the economy seemed to stall. Growth slowed to a barely detectable 0.1 percent in the first quarter, followed by better but still sluggish performances of 2.5 and 1.3 percent in the second and third quarters—making the nine-quarter recovery the weakest in post-war history. Growth accelerated again in the fourth quarter, but for the year the economy expanded by a meager 1.8 percent. After its initial improvement, the unemployment rate leveled off, hovering at or near 9 percent for most of 2011.

On January 25, 2012, the Federal Reserve, citing slowing business investment and a “depressed” housing sector, announced its intention to keep short-term interest rates near zero “at least through late 2014.” A week later, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) lowered its forecast for economic growth to just 2 percent in 2012 and only 1 percent in 2013.5 And, indeed, the economy expanded by just 2.2 percent in 2012. Sustained growth in excess of 3 percent is generally regarded as necessary to meaningfully reduce unemployment.

More than four years after the end of the Great Recession, the U.S. economy is only scarcely larger than it was in 2007 and economic output is more than 10 percent lower than it would have been had the economy continued on its pre-2008 trend.6 Even worse, only 6.5 million jobs have been created—about 70 percent of the jobs lost between February of 2008 and February of 2010. Moreover, a disproportionate share of the jobs created since economic growth resumed in mid-2009 has been in low-wage and temporary categories such as retail, “leisure and hospitality” (wait staff and bartenders), and “health care and social assistance.”7 Federal Reserve Board Governor Sarah Bloom Raskin lamented this reality in a speech in March of 2013:

[R]ecent job gains have been largely concentrated in lower-wage occupations such as retail sales, food preparation, manual labor, home health care, and customer service . . . There is no simple cure to these conditions, but government policymakers need to focus seriously on the problems, not simply because of notions of fairness and justice, but because the economy’s ability to produce a stable quality of living for millions of people is at stake.8

Moody’s Analytics has projected that 42 percent of the jobs created between 2011 and 2015 will be low-wage, while only 19 percent will be high-wage.

As Figures 1.4 and 1.5 show, the economy’s weak performance since emerging from recession represents a stark break from the historical pattern. Since World War II, U.S. recessions have tended to be brief and recoveries sharp—with the strength of the recovery generally correlated with the depth of the downturn. Given the severity of the Great Recession, the historical pattern would predict a roaring recovery. But over the three years following the recession, the economy expanded by just 6.8 percent. Over the eight other post-war recoveries that lasted three years, the economy expanded an average of 15.5 percent.9

Figure 1.4 Cumulative Change in GDP from Start of Recession

Source: Commerce Department; National Bureau of Economic Research.

Figure 1.5 Cumulative Change in Private Sector Jobs from Start of Recession

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics; National Bureau of Economic Research.

Had the current recovery followed typical patterns of post-recession growth and job creation, growth would have been more than double what it has been and, according to some estimates, as many as 14 million more Americans would be working.10

Identifying likely reasons for the economy’s stunted recovery has preoccupied economists and other observers. Some have argued that the government’s fiscal response, while unprecedented in magnitude, was nevertheless too small given the severity of the recession. Economist Paul Krugman, a Nobel laureate and New York Times columnist, argued even before President Obama was inaugurated that his proposed $775 billion fiscal stimulus package “is unlikely to close more than half of the looming output gap”—estimated at the time by the CBO to be more than $2 trillion in lost production—“and could easily end up doing less than a third of the job.”11 Christina Romer, former chairwoman of President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers and one of the principal architects of the stimulus has since written about the plan: “[O]bviously, it was too small.”12

Conservatives have countered that, on the contrary, the extraordinary fiscal and monetary policy measures taken to date have, in fact, hamstrung the economic recovery by contributing to business and consumer uncertainty and anxiety, weakening the value of the dollar, and by fueling increases in food and energy prices, which cut into consumers’ capacity to spend.13

Other explanations have been offered. For example, as the economy emerged from recession in late 2009, spending by U.S. companies on equipment and technology surged, growing nearly 9 percent in 2010 and 11 percent in 2011. Such purchases—encouraged by historically low costs of capital and temporary tax breaks—enabled companies struggling to maintain profitability to enhance productivity while putting off more expensive hiring.14

Technology may also be causing some companies actually looking to hire to become overly picky—passing over applicants who just a few years ago would likely have been hired to fill the same or a similar job, according to Peter Capelli, director of the Center for Human Resources at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School and author of the recent book Why Good People Can’t Get Jobs. Overwhelmed by the number of job applicants and under pressure to cut costs, many companies have replaced recruiters and other human resources personnel with on-line applications. In addition, eager to reduce or eliminate the costs of training new employees, companies are increasingly using screening software to sift through submitted applications, looking for candidates with precisely the right mix of skills.15 The software incorporates what Cappelli calls employers’ often “ridiculous hiring requirements,” then weeds out as unacceptable any candidate who doesn’t meet the overly specific parameters.16 The practice, contends Cappelli, is contributing to a growing disconnect between employers who claim to have open positions but can’t find suitable candidates, and a bounty of available candidates who could successfully fill those positions with a modest amount of on-the-job training.17

Also undermining the recovery is the inability of millions of would-be borrowers and spenders to take advantage of historically low interest rates engineered by the Federal Reserve because their credit scores have been significantly damaged by plunging home prices, foreclosures, lost jobs, reduced wages, late bill payments, or bankruptcy. African-American households have been particularly hard hit, losing on average half their wealth due to the recession,18 with some reportedly experiencing what has been called a kind of “financial segregation.”19 Many banks, having survived a financial crisis stemming largely from poor underwriting standards, remain reluctant to lend to households with blemished credit histories.20 According to Moody’s Analytics and the credit monitoring service Equifax Inc., nearly 90 percent of all new mortgages in 2011 went to borrowers with high credit scores. Before the recent crisis, mortgages were evenly divided between high-score borrowers and those with lower scores.21

The unusually weak recovery may also have much to do with the nature of the recent recession. Rather than a contraction caused by high interest rates or sharp increases in supply prices, as is more typical, the recent recession was the result of a severe financial crisis sparked by the bursting of a historic housing bubble.

In their 2009 book This Time Is Different, economists Kenneth Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart point out that deleveraging and other balance sheet adjustments made by consumers and businesses—painful adjustments that follow debt-driven financial crises—take time and, therefore, delay and subdue subsequent economic recovery.22 Following financial crises, economies have historically required more than four years to re-achieve pre-crisis levels of output.23 Ms. Reinhart and her husband, economist Vincent Reinhart, have further demonstrated that economic growth rates tend to be lower for as much as a decade following financial crises.24 In half of the 15 most severe post–World War II financial crises they studied, unemployment had not returned to pre-crisis levels within a decade following the crisis.

Whatever the nature of, or reasons for, the subpar recovery—and while the net effects of the extraordinary fiscal and monetary responses to the recent downturn continue to be debated—statistics make two realities undeniably clear: The economic recovery remains weak and fragile, and labor market conditions remain poor. Prior to dipping below 8 percent in September of 2012, the unemployment rate had remained above 8 percent for 43 consecutive months. Over the 60 years prior to the Great Recession, the unemployment rate topped 8 percent only 39 times in total.

The extraordinary jobs crisis has affected Americans of all categories and age groups. As of May of 2013, 6.7 percent of white Americans were unemployed, with Hispanic and African-American unemployment at 9.1 and 13.5 percent, respectively.25

Unemployment among young Americans 16 to 19 years of age, at 25 percent, remains near post-war highs,26 with 22 percent of white youth, 29 percent of Hispanic youth, and an astounding 43 percent of African-American youth out of work.27 A recent study estimates the aggregate economic cost to society of “disconnected youth”—the nearly 7 million young people who are neither in school nor working—to be $4.75 trillion.28 High youth unemployment has led to a “dramatic increase” in the rate of homelessness among those 18 to 24 years old, according to the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness.29

Half of recent college graduates cannot find jobs or are underemployed,30 and half of those who are employed report that their jobs don’t require the degrees they earned.31 A growing number of college graduates are resorting to unpaid internships to acquire experience and build relationships that might eventually lead to gainful employment.32 Because unused skills atrophy, and because reduced salaries lower earnings trajectories, the damage to underemployed graduates’ careers and lifetime earnings could be permanent.33

Older Americans have not been spared. As of May of 2013, unemployment among those 25 to 34 years of age was 7.2 percent, 6.2 percent for those between 35 and 44, and 5.3 percent for those 55 and older. The proportion of Americans in their prime working years, between 25 and 54, who currently have jobs remains at or near the lowest level in 30 years, with 6.5 million Americans in the age group still unemployed.34 The drop has been particularly severe for men, with the percentage of prime-age men with jobs falling to a 60-year low in the spring of 2012, and recovering only slightly since.35 In addition, 3.5 million Americans in their prime earning years, between 45 and 65, during which people build careers and wealth in preparation for retirement, are out of work. Many of these Americans, their skills eroded or outdated, may never work again.36 As Figure 1.6 shows, while rates of unemployment are lower for older age groups, government statistics show that, once unemployed, older workers have greater difficulty finding new jobs and endure unemployment for much longer periods.37

Figure 1.6 Unemployment Rate and Long-Term Unemployment by Age Group

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Long-term unemployment is an especially pernicious aspect of the nation’s current job crisis. As Figure 1.7 shows, more than 4 million Americans, almost 40 percent of those unemployed—more than twice the rate during the severe 1981–1982 recession—have been out of work for more than six months, a third for more than a year. As of May of 2013, the average unemployed American had been out of work for 37 weeks, up from 17 weeks in 2007.

Figure 1.7 Civilians Unemployed for 27 Weeks or More

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Long-term unemployment entails severe and far-reaching implications for the economy, and for society. For example, the skills and knowledge base of idle workers deteriorate over time, making finding work even less likely. Extended unemployment also reduces the economy’s long-term growth potential as the extra production, consumption, and wealth creation that unemployed workers would have contributed is lost.38

Even more serious, from a national and sociological standpoint, those who endure long-term unemployment suffer from higher rates of anxiety and depression,39 substance abuse, divorce, domestic violence,40 and even premature death.41