.
Feedback

Who Built My Business?

Obama is right; I did not build my business alone. He is wrong about who helped.

Pablo Picasso created great art. How much credit goes to his father, an art teacher who trained him? How much to his mother, who handed him his first pencil? How much to the companies that fabricated Picasso’s brushes and pigments?

Derek Jeter and Chipper Jones are future Hall of Fame infielders. Should their plaques at Cooperstown recognize the people who stitched their gloves and manufactured their bats?

Nearly 20 years ago, I unpacked a new computer, sat down and wrote a business plan for the company now known as Palisades Hudson Financial Group LLC. Today Palisades Hudson has around two dozen employees, more than $1 billion in assets that we manage for our clients, whom we also help with all sorts of tax and financial matters, and offices in New York, Florida and Georgia. Our first West Coast office, in Portland, Ore., is due to open shortly.

President Obama was speaking directly to people like me when he made his now-famous remark to entrepreneurs: “If you’ve got a business – you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

The president was not entirely wrong. I did not build my business alone. Where he went astray – where he showed how little he knows about being a business owner, having other families depend on checks you write and decisions you make, and having customers willingly give you money they could just as easily spend elsewhere – is in who deserves to share the credit.

“If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help,” Obama said at a July 13 campaign event in Roanoke, Va. “There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business – you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.”

Before we get to his philosophy, let’s straighten the president’s bent facts.

Government research created the Internet (which grew out of the Defense Department’s Vietnam-era ARPAnet), but not “so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.” The defense contractors and academics who first linked their mainframes were not trying to create an infrastructure that Amazon could use to sell books or movies. British computer scientist Tim Berners-Lee developed the World Wide Web’s basic protocol while studying at CERN, the European Center for Nuclear Research. Marc Andreesen, an American software engineer and venture capitalist, laid the groundwork for Web commerce by building Mosaic, the first commercially successful web browser, and by launching Netscape Communications. Internet profits exist because profit-seeking entrepreneurs saw a potentially useful tool and put it to use.

Yes, I had some excellent teachers. So did everyone else who sat in my classes. We all drew upon the things they taught us in our own ways. Our teachers gave us the tools; what we made with them was up to us.

All of us in business owe a debt to our forebears, all the way back to the people who invented written language, double-entry accounting and the uniform commercial code. But this is a debt that runs from our generation to the ones that preceded us. It is a moral debt, not an economic one. The teachers who taught me were paid for their services at the time they were rendered.

The fact that I profit from what I learned does not create any obligation on my part to share those profits with those who sat next to me in class. They had the same opportunities I did, and my teachers understood that. If I studied hard and got a perfect score on a test, my teachers did not reassign some of my correct answers to less-studious classmates in the interest of fairness.

The president notes that a successful business uses public infrastructure such as roads and bridges. True, but irrelevant. Businesses and their owners pay for such infrastructure just like everyone else, in the taxes, tolls or other revenues that government collects. Businesses rent office space and pay for electricity, too, usually from private parties. This does not entitle those vendors to a share in the profits.

The president also credits “this unbelievable American system that allowed you to thrive.” That system is called capitalism, and it did not “allow” anyone to thrive; unlike other systems, it simply did not prevent us from thriving. Private profit was or is largely illegal in places like Cuba, North Korea and the old Soviet Union. These countries maintained atrocious living standards as a result. Prosperity is more heavily taxed or regulated away in many other places, including much of Europe, and these places experience chronically higher unemployment and lower economic growth as a result.

Obama is arguing that a society that “allows” success is therefore entitled to redistribute it. This would level the playing field with places like Europe through the simple expedient of making us behave more like Europeans.

But in my case, the success the president would redistribute according to his preferences is, as he says, not just my own. It belongs in large measure to the colleagues who have joined me in building a successful business. They share in that success, and to the extent the president believes we owe more to society, there is less for my co-workers – as well as me – to enjoy.

Then there are the future workers I might not hire, the offices I might not open, because the president would leave me less discretion about how to use the cash my growing business generates. He’ll take a bigger share of it out of my hands.

Obama finds it convenient to denigrate entrepreneurs because he is running against one, but I have no reason to think that he was not expressing his true feelings in that speech in Roanoke. I think Obama truly believes that those of us who build businesses are indebted to others who help us. I agree. We just part company on the question of who those people are.

For more articles on financial, business, and other topics, view the Palisades Hudson newsletter, Sentinel, or subscribe to my daily opinion column, Current Commentary.

Ross Revira July 30, 2012 at 06:36 pm
Glenn it would seem that it is you who needs an education on socialism and Marxism. Just look at the totality of his writings and speeches, his immediate family members views, and all the other people he associated with in the last 20 years and the best adjectives used to describe President Obama's environment would have to range from progressive to Marxist. If you don't like his philosophy that is your problem.
Bjorn Olsson July 30, 2012 at 06:45 pm
Also, the use of the word "collective" does not automatically translate into "collectivism." The tea party is a collective of people of people with a certain set of values, for example. It's really just a synonym for togetherness, unity, etc. This is the kind of sport Glenn Beck likes to excel in to fuel his hilarious conspiracy constructs. Look at President Obama's record and show me the marxism. Surely you must know how much flak he is getting from the left for caving in to conservatives on issue after issue?
Bjorn Olsson July 30, 2012 at 06:54 pm
Ross, that is absolute hogwash. Obama's "hope and change" platform was all about putting an end to legislative trench warfare, to strike compromises and to reach out across the aisle, and godness knows the man tried his darndest, especially during the health care debate, bit noone else wanted to play once he was in office. Whenever he would move closer to the GOP, they would move the goal posts. As everyone knows, the Affordable Care Acts is pretty much a conservative construct from ground up, the left got very little of what they wanted.
No single payer health care, banks let off the hook, concentration camp in Cuba still there, no government transparency, drone warfare on Pakistani territory, you name it. Some socialist. Not to mention muslim jihadist... Now it seems he has been forced to more or less give up on the idea of bipartisan compromises and go toe to toe with the GOP on most issues, but still not with a very
Ross Revira July 30, 2012 at 07:06 pm
As much as I would like to make the blind see I cannot. President Obama did not just materialize in 2006 when he was a Senator from Illinois. If I choose to open my eyes only during the night I would believe that darkness lasted for 24 yrs. Try opening your eyes during the day.
Bjorn Olsson July 30, 2012 at 08:01 pm
I'll give it a shot. Meanwhile, can you give any examples of what will happen once Obama comes out as the marxist you say he truly is, deep down? Has he been hiding his true convictions during the term in the White House, waiting for the right moment to pounce?
Ross Revira July 30, 2012 at 09:13 pm
Not at all. Life is not like the movie The Manchurian Candidate. The President and his advisers are smart enough to realize this country is still ,right of center so their approach will be incremental and blunted by a Republican Congress. Read more than the NY Times and watch less of MSNBC. Try it you might like it
Francis T McVetty August 1, 2012 at 12:08 pm
@Mike, please stop posting the DNC talking points, get some ideas of your own! Talk about NOT being able to do something yourself without the help of others fly's in the way of the American dream. We are NOT a collective as the Democrats seem to think. If we lived in Russia, that may have been the case. The stuff you are talking about is PAID for by all. The roads an inter-structures are available to ALL.Paid for with our tax dollars. It is up to the INDIVIDUAL to use or not use.
It is the INDIVIDUAL that invents things. It is within in his/her mind that the ideas are born. The government does not to my knowledge enter ones mind and plant those idea's there. That is the trouble with President Obama, he has been raised with a socialistic attitude. Everything revolves around the government in his mind. The government is the answer! Well in November I do hope that the people will see that it is the individual that makes things work and not the government. The most feared words you will ever hear is : "were the government and were here to help".
Francis T McVetty August 1, 2012 at 12:10 pm
Ross, you meant to tell me there are more sources of the news than those you mentioned? Who would have guessed from reading the posts here.
Lola K August 1, 2012 at 12:50 pm
Of course! There's Fox "News" and The New York Post.
Yehbut August 1, 2012 at 01:29 pm
Thank God for Fox News! Every other "news" organization is in the tank for the dems. Fox is the ONLY one that isn't, and it KILLLS them! :)
Pat Gharet August 1, 2012 at 01:34 pm
Please don't blame God for Fox News.
Cadeyrn August 1, 2012 at 01:57 pm
"Please don't blame God for Fox News." At least they weren't in the tank for Obama.
Bjorn Olsson August 1, 2012 at 03:25 pm
Francis, again, you are wacking a straw man. Obama did not say that someone implanted an idea into an entrepreneurs help. He said that in order to make that idea happen, a business owner needs functioning schools, courts, roads, etc, ie a modern society. You are correct that we all paid for those things, that is exactly what the president said, too.
Walden Macnair August 1, 2012 at 04:00 pm
Fox News - The more you watch, the less you know.
Francis T McVetty August 1, 2012 at 04:27 pm
Walden, wanna bet on that?
The theme with MSNBC is "all the news the DNC wants you to know".
Pat Gharet August 1, 2012 at 04:28 pm
Whatever your opinion of them, God should not be blamed for their existence.
Walden Macnair August 1, 2012 at 04:35 pm
Actually Francis, I'll take that bet. You see Farliegh Dickenson University conducted a survey and found Fox News viewers to be less informed than the general public.
Take a look: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/11/21/fox-news-viewers-uninformed-npr-listeners-not-poll-suggests/
Lola K August 1, 2012 at 04:37 pm
Let us all agree that MSNBC was in the tank for Obama and Fox "News" closed it's eyes to the disaster that was the Bush Administration.
Now let's get back to bickering over nonsense.
Francis T McVetty August 1, 2012 at 04:48 pm
Farliegh Dickenson University, that's a great source . They didn't interview anybody that I know that watches Fox news and that is quite a few. The people that watch the major news networks excluding Fox News can be seen on TV. Watch the Jay Leno show sometime. See how much they know about what is happening not only in our country but across the world. I will debate anyone that watches MSNBC, PBS, or any of the "supposed " network news shows.
Francis T McVetty August 1, 2012 at 04:55 pm
Lola K, how do you know what Fox News was broadcasting? You know because you were told it? The Bush administration on more than ONE occasion told the congress there were problems with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Barney Frank and Chis Dodd said there is NO problem! Well folks, there was a problem, wasn't there? The banks were strong armed to making loans to people that really couldn't handle them. By the way they are starting down that path again. You think that they would have learned from the first time.
Glenn August 1, 2012 at 05:09 pm
The recent Fairleigh Dickinson study mirrors one that was done several years ago by the University of Maryland. In both cases, it was determined that viewers that claim Fox News as the place they get the majority of their news information, both national and international, are more likely to be wrong about the facts than those getting their news from other sources. ABC, CBS, and NBC weren't far behind, however, unlike Fox viewers, they weren't less informed than that portion of the populace that does not regularly watch any news outlet.
Think about that before you start espousing the virtues of Fox News. People who get their information about the country and the world from Fox News are less informed than people who don't regularly watch any news! Fox News has long had a political bent, and they have proudly worn it. ABC, NBC, and CBS do not have a major left leaning, although most people who watch Fox have been brainwashed to believe in the "liberal news media". It is a fact that people who watch those outlets are almost as misinformed as those who watch Fox News regularly. MSNBC, on the other hand, does have a much more liberal and progressive bent, and they also wear that proudly. Most of those who watch MSNBC understand that and take this leaning into account. However, most people who watch Fox News don't even admit that their radical right agenda exists. Who wins the reality check of news watchers? PBS? No, it's those who watch international news like the BBC.
Glenn August 1, 2012 at 05:14 pm
I don't think you can say that the banks were strong-armed into anything. They made billions off of the derivatives created from those loans. And, yes, a large proportion of those loans should never have been made. But, the banks made them with their eyes wide open, then they made huge sums off of them, then begged for a bailout once the fecal matter hit the oscillating wind generator.
If they were strong armed into this mess in the first place, then why are they doing it again?
RivertownsMark August 1, 2012 at 05:31 pm
The banks were no more strong-armed into this than they were forced into issuing credit default swaps where they packaged up garbage, took ne side of the deal and sold the others to institutional investors under false premises. Blaming the crash on some middle-class shlump in California for taking out a no-interest mortgage hawked to him by some shyster talking a mile a minute and then saying the banks were "forced" into it by Barney Frank or whoever is just plain pointing he finger at the victim instead of the victimizer. This crisis was caused by the greed of bankers, enabled by politicians (both Democrat and Republican) in their pockets, plain and simple. Th difference between the two parties now is that one is running for office claiming that the poor bankers are being over-regulated (which should really provoke at least a giggle out of anyone with a pair of eyes and functioning memory) while the other side thinks that some regulation is a good thing.
Walden Macnair August 1, 2012 at 05:37 pm
Strong armed? That's going to be a real hard sell considering they all made millions of dollars on derivatives and sub-prime loans that they new would collapse. The financial institutions throughout the civilized world have proven themselves to be corrupt and dishonest. Now the conservative take is that they need less regulation. How exactly does that work? If I steal for a living, you want to make stealing legal so I don't get in trouble?
Really? Give me a break!
JC Brotherhood August 1, 2012 at 07:11 pm
I don't usually watch Fox news but when I do, its on Comedy Central...
Portia Torte August 1, 2012 at 08:01 pm
Walden: the Democrats pushed the big ugly banks into lending to cretins who could not pay. Why didn't you speak up? Bush did and he was shouted down. Big Democrat donors at Wall Street firms made big bucks.
Teleman August 1, 2012 at 08:06 pm
Why do we always let the people who took out the loans they knew they couldn't ever pay back off the hook? These lowlifes deserve just as much jail time as the politicians that pushed these practices and banks that sold them.
Teleman August 1, 2012 at 08:08 pm
Sick of hearing about "predatory lending"- if you're too stupid to read and understand the basics of a home loan, than you're too stupid to own a home.
RivertownsMark August 2, 2012 at 03:06 am
Being sick of hearing about predatory lending doesn't mean it wasn't predatory. And millions of those "stupid" people have paid the price by losing their homes, credit ratings and savings. Which is just fine by you, I suppose, an appropriate punishment for their punishment. Problem is that their mortgages were packaged and sold off to institutions, with complex derivatives written against them, so that in the end, this mess brought down Bear, and then Lehman, and then the whole economy. That isn't the fault of the poor sucker who is now without a home, but the bank CEO who still has a golden parachute, isn't in jail, and is whining (like you are) that the mean Democrats pointed a finger at him and dared to talk about regulated this bandit industry. Oh, the Dems had a hand in it, alright. BUT, its the Republicans RIGHT NOW who are demanding that the oversight put in under Obama is too toughies on their poor wittle businesses. And they're dumping millions on (another misfiring) bet on Mitt. That's what I am "sick of hearing about", Jenga. The whining from the rich who have come out of the worst recession in sixty years JUST FINE, thank you very much. The rest of us, not so much. You want to be angry with someone, aim it at the villains, not the homeless victim. Seriously.
Anthony August 21, 2012 at 08:16 pm
I wonder what was the change when all he did was continue the bad things and spend more and do more of the worse. How after knowing small business was and is the salvation nothing was done for the small business. Yet the bankers still got stronger and the insurance companies became mandatory and stronger. okay how did any of this help anyone but government and courts?

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Scarsdale Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something