Archive for the ‘USA’ Category
Overall Scores and Ranks IT Industry Competitiveness Index 2011
outubro 6th, 2011 | 
Author: Source: Economist Intelligence Unit
Business Software Alliance
Rank Score / 100
2011 YoY 2011 YoY
1 – United States 80.5 +1.6
2 – Finland 72.0 -1.6
3 +6 Singapore 69.8 +1.6
4 -1 Sweden 69.4 -2.1
5 +1 United Kingdom 68.1 -2.1
6 +2 Denmark 67.9 -0.7
7 -3 Canada 67.6 -3.7
=8 +3 Ireland 67.5 +0.6
=8 -1 Australia 67.5 -1.2
=10 -5 Netherlands 65.8 -4.9
=10 +3 Israel 65.8 +1.5
12 +2 Switzerland 65.4 +1.9
13 +2 Taiwan 64.4 +1.0
14 -4 Norway 64.3 -2.8
15 +5 Germany 64.1 +6.0
16 -4 Japan 63.4 -1.7
17 +5 Austria 61.4 +4.4
18 +1 New Zealand 61.3 +2.5
=19 -3 South Korea 60.8 -1.9
=19 +2 Hong Kong 60.8 +3.3
21 -4 France 59.3 +0.1
22 -5 Belgium 57.7 -1.5
23 +1 Italy 50.7 +2.2
24 +1 Spain 50.4 +3.0
25 +4 Slovenia 48.8 +3.5
26 +3 Portugal 47.1 +1.8
27 -1 Czech Republic 46.1 -0.9
28 -1 Hungary 45.4 -0.7
29 -6 Estonia 45.0 -10.6
30 +5 Poland 44.6 +3.8
31 +11 Malaysia 44.1 +8.5
32 -5 Chile 43.2 -2.9
33 +1 Slovakia 42.1 +0.7
Rank Score / 100
2011 YoY 2011 YoY
=34 -1 Latvia 41.6 -1.0
=34 +10 India 41.6 +7.5
36 -4 Greece 40.7 -2.3
37 -1 Romania 40.4 +0.8
38 +1 China 39.8 +3.1
39 +1 Brazil 39.5 +2.9
40 -3 Croatia 39.0 +0.7
=41 +5 Turkey 38.7 +4.9
=41 -10 Lithuania 38.7 -4.6
43 +4 Bulgaria 38.1 +4.5
44 +4 Mexico 37.0 +5.0
45 -4 Argentina 36.2 -0.3
46 -8 Russia 35.2 -1.6
47 -4 South Africa 35.0 -0.3
48 -3 Saudi Arabia 34.1 +0.2
49 +3 Colombia 33.7 +5.3
50 -1 Thailand 30.5 -1.3
51 -1 Ukraine 28.9 -2.5
52 -1 Philippines 27.9 -0.6
53 +3 Vietnam 27.1 +2.1
54 -1 Egypt 26.3 -0.5
55 – Peru 25.5 -0.5
56 +2 Sri Lanka 25.0 +1.1
57 +2 Indonesia 24.8 +2.0
58 -1 Venezuela 24.5 +0.1
59 +1 Ecuador 23.1 +0.4
60 -6 Kazakhstan 22.8 -3.6
61 +2 Pakistan 22.3 +2.3
62 +3 Nigeria 21.4 +2.6
63 -1 Bangladesh 20.6 -0.5
64 -3 Azerbaijan 20.3 -1.0
65 -1 Algeria 19.5 -0.3
66 – Iran 18.8 +1.7
Posted in 
Quem eclipsará os EUA?
www.valor.com.br
De acordo com Voltaire, o Império Romano caiu “porque todas as coisas caem”. É difícil argumentar contra isso como declaração geral sobre declínio: nada dura para sempre. Mas também não é muito útil. Ao considerar, por exemplo, o predomínio americano no mundo atual, seria bom saber quando a ascendência diminuirá – e se os EUA podem fazer alguma coisa para adiar o inevitável.
À época, comentaristas abandonaram todas as esperanças em relação à sobrevivência do Império Romano por centenas de anos, antes de ele finalmente entrar em colapso. Podem os EUA encontrar seu caminho para um adiamento similar?
Em termos de proporcionar uma estrutura essencial para a discussão desse problema, o novo livro de Arvind Subramanian, “Eclipse: Living in the Shadow of China’s Economic Dominance” (Eclipse: vivendo à sombra da dominação econômica da China) é uma grande contribuição. (Transparência total: Subramanian e eu somos colegas no Instituto Peterson de Economia Internacional, e temos trabalhado juntos em outras questões.)
Alguns anos atrás, algumas pessoas consideravam que o Japão tinha ultrapassado os EUA. A Europa também estava, supostamente, competindo pelo predomínio econômico mundial. Hoje, quaisquer dessas afirmações parecem absurdas.
Individualmente, Subramanian compila um índice de predomínio econômico que deverá tornar-se um foco de conversa em qualquer lugar onde as pessoas querem analisar mudanças na liderança econômica mundial. Não é preciso conhecer nada de economia para ficar fascinado por esse livro – ele trata pura e simplesmente de poder.
Os fatos básicos são incontestáveis. O Reino Unido foi a potência econômica dominante no mundo desde a irrupção da industrialização, no início do século XIX. Mas perdeu sua predominância e foi gradualmente eclipsado pelos EUA, que pelo menos desde 1945 é o líder incontestado entre as economias de mercado.
Os EUA ultrapassaram o Reino Unido em termos de produção industrial logo no fim do século XIX, mas isso não foi suficiente para fazer pender a balança. O predomínio econômico mudou somente quando o Reino Unido passou a incorrer em grandes déficits em conta corrente durante a primeira e a segunda guerras mundiais – o país teve que tomar pesados empréstimos para financiar seus esforços bélicos e as importações foram significativamente maiores que as exportações. Grande parte das reservas mundiais de ouro acabaram nas mãos dos EUA.
Isso ajudou a enfraquecer o papel da libra britânica internacionalmente e catapultou o dólar americano para o primeiro plano – especialmente depois da conferência de Bretton Woods, em 1944, quando foi acordado que os países passariam a manter suas reservas tanto em dólares como em ouro.
Mais recentemente, porém, foi a vez dos americanos de registrar sistematicamente grandes déficits em conta corrente, comprando mais do resto do mundo do que ganham com a venda de bens e serviços no exterior. Nessa dimensão, os EUA parecem destinados a repetir o erro dos britânicos.
Ao mesmo tempo, a renda per capita dos países de mercados emergentes cresceu – assim como seu papel internacional. A China, em especial, tem seguido uma estratégia, no decorrer dos últimos dez anos, que implica incorrer em grandes superávits em conta corrente e acumular reservas cambiais, hoje reportadas em mais de US$ 3 trilhões. Com efeito, o argumento mais provocante de Subramanian é de que a China já superou os Estados Unidos em termos de predomínio econômico – mas nós ainda não despertamos para essa nova realidade.
A história é fascinante e bem contada, mas ainda há muito sobre o que vale a pena discutir. Por exemplo, os britânicos declinaram porque os americanos não puderam ser detidos ou devido a problemas no Império Britânico e no Reino Unido?
Alguns anos atrás, algumas pessoas consideravam que o Japão tinha ultrapassado os EUA. A Europa também estava, supostamente, competindo pelo predomínio econômico mundial. Hoje, quaisquer dessas afirmações parecem absurdas. Em ambos os casos, o sistema de crédito escapou de controle, com excesso de empréstimos para o setor privado no Japão dos anos 1980 e com o excessivo endividamento público durante a década de 2000 na zona do euro.
Analogamente, ainda não está claro se o caminho de desenvolvimento chinês permanecerá tranquilo. Os investimentos fixos, na China, estão perto de 50% do PIB – o que parece ser um recorde mundial. O crédito disponibilizado às empresas estatais e às famílias continua a crescer rapidamente. Não será isso uma versão da causa precisa do descarrilhamento do crescimento japonês?
Sobre a questão central da capacidade de emitir uma “moeda de reserva” que investidores e governos querem manter em carteira, Subramanian tem razão: a China satisfaz muitos dos requisitos. Mas ainda carece de alguns elementos chave, entre eles, plenos direitos de propriedade. Se poder tirar seu dinheiro de um país quando os tempos ficam difíceis é uma preocupação, então a China não é um lugar atraente para manter suas reservas.
Problemas externos por vezes fazem Estados ruir. Mais frequentemente, porém, os grandes problemas são internos – o regime não consegue assegurar crescimento, sua legitimidade declina e as pessoas começam a buscar as saídas (ou pelo menos tirar seu dinheiro do país).
Se os EUA forem eclipsados em curto prazo, será mais provável que isso ocorra devido à sua perda de coesão social e seu cenário político disfuncional. A China pode muito bem entrar em cena para preencher esse vácuo, mas isso é bem diferente de ter condições de desalojar os EUA. (Tradução Sérgio Blum)
Simon Johnson, ex-economista chefe do FMI, é cofundador do blog de economia, BaselineScenario.com , professor da Sloan, no MIT, membro sênior do Instituto Peterson de Economia Internacional e coautor, com James Kwak, de 13 Bankers (13 banqueiros).
Why only small business can save America
http://www.usatoday.com
By Scott Stewart, AP file- Then-President Reagan in January 1986.
By Scott Stewart, AP fil
The bad news is all around us and never seems to end. If it’s not Tea Party Republicans who somehow, shockingly seemed willing to allow the country to go into default before they would accept even the most basic of revenue increases, it’s a president who seems unable to match his legislative ability to his previous soaring rhetoric, sharp mind and historic promise.
And that’s for starters.
Unemployment remains far too high, hovering near 9%. The deficit is all too real and getting bigger. China is emerging as a global power, and taking the lead in creating green energy solutions – the clear, big playing field of this new century.
Here at home, Gen X and Gen Y’ers seem resigned to living in a country that was not as great as the one they were born into, and my generation – Baby Boomers – are only too happy to collect our benefits.
What are we to do?
Entrepreneurship is the answer. Small business to the rescue. Foster startup fever.
In America, small business has always been The Answer. More than 99% of businesses with payrolls in this country are small businesses, according to the Small Business Administration, and those small businesses historically employ more than half of all workers and create 80% of new jobs.
Small business is, and always has been, the engine that moves the country forward. So if the stagnant political class really wants to get this country moving again, and help reassert our rightful place as the most innovative, entrepreneurial, industrious place on the globe, they need to start enacting policies and programs that do one thing – help small businesses and entrepreneurs.
What we need is a comprehensive 21st Century Entrepreneurship Act.
Want to lower the unemployment rate? Cultivate small business startups and you will.
Want more tax revenue? Foster entrepreneurial growth and you will get it.
Want to see America create the Next Big Thing? Help small business and just watch where it leads us.
The last great boom, during the Clinton administration, created more than 20 million jobs, and many of those came from startups that grew. In 1992, hardly anyone had ever heard of the Internet and no one knew what an Amazon.com was. Today that company, started out of Jeff Bezos‘ garage, employs about 30,000 people. In 1992, Starbucks was a regional business with about 100 stores. Today it is a public company worth more than $27 billion, and it has more than 6,500 stores.
Was there ever a better friend to small business, someone who believed in the power of free enterprise, more than Ronald Reagan? As he said in a May, 1988 speech to students at Moscow University: “The explorers of the modern era are the entrepreneurs, men with vision, with the courage to take risks and faith enough to brave the unknown. These entrepreneurs and their small enterprises are responsible for almost all the economic growth in the United States.”
The great economic growth during the Reagan administration was similarly fueled by a commitment to, and fostering of, entrepreneurship.
So what does “promoting small business and entrepreneurship” mean? What does it look like?
I am privileged to be a member of the board of the World Entrepreneurship Forum. This global think tank has spent a lot of time considering what governments can and should do to promote entrepreneurship. They include:
“Reform Regulations: To promote a truly entrepreneurship-centered business climate, reform tax and regulatory environments so as to make it easier, faster, and less costly for entrepreneurs to set up enterprises.
“Create Entrepreneur-Friendly Institutions: Introduce entrepreneurship-friendly support institutions that provide technological knowledge, market information, business know-how, certification services, access to capital, and other essential business support.
“Understand Entrepreneurship: Make it known that entrepreneurs are positive agents of social change, wealth creation, transparency, sustainability, and innovation.”
A comprehensive 21st Century Entrepreneurship Act would include tax reform, and regulatory ease. It would include, as SBA administrator Karen Mills recently wrote, immigration reform so we can again attract the best and brightest entrepreneurs and engineers to our country. It would increase access to capital. It would help more startups start up. It would foster business incubators and programs like Business Matchmaking.
And it would require something that those in Washington have forgotten about, something that cannot be legislated, but cannot be ignored: It would require pulling together for the common good and the promise that is America.
I, like many Americans, am disappointed in both the president and Congress. But I still hold out hope, because I know what is possible, what we can do together. So to our leader, I say: Mr. President, tear down these walls!
Ask an Expert appears Mondays. You can e-mail Steve Strauss at: sstrauss@mrallbiz.com.An an index of Strauss’ columns is here. Steven D. Strauss is a lawyer, author and speaker who specializes in small business and entrepreneurship. His latest book is Get Your Business Funded: Creative Methods for Getting the Money You Need. You can sign up for his free newsletter, “Small Business Success Secrets!” at his website —www.mrallbiz.com. Follow him on Twitter at http://twitter.com/stevestrauss.
Projetos dos EUA oferecem green card para ter crédito
www.valor.com.br
Com a escassez de crédito bancário para novas construções, incorporadoras dos Estados Unidos estão usando um programa do governo americano que concede “green cards” para estrangeiros que invistam pelo menos US$ 500.000 num projeto de construção. Green card é o apelido do documento que confere ao imigrante o direito de residir e trabalhar nos EUA.
A procura vem transformando uma alternativa até então obscura de recursos numa rota viável para as obras. O uso do programa, que existe há 20 anos, quase dobrou no ano passado, para 1.995 candidatos investidores no ano fiscal encerrado em setembro, contra 1.031 no ano anterior.
Em 2006, quando a economia americana ainda estava com força, houve somente 486 candidatos, de acordo com os Serviços de Cidadania e Imigração, do governo americano. O programa se chama EB-5 porque ele representa a quinta categoria de imigração baseada em emprego.
Incorporadoras de projetos aprovados pelo governo americano têm buscado, espcialmente em países asiáticos como a China e a Índia, investidores dispostos a entrar com US$ 500.000 em troca de um green card com validade de dois anos que pode ser trocado por um permanente depois.
A Ásia é um alvo preferencial porque os incorporadores acreditam que o continente tem um grande contingente de ricos investidores interessados em entrar nos EUA. Os latino-americanos que receberam green cards pelo programa são em número bem menor: 136 no ano fiscal encerrado em setembro de 2009, contra 1.979 para chineses (o número de vistos é maior que o de pedidos porque um investidor pode vir com a família).
O programa já foi usado para vários investimentos em projetos de vários setores, da indústria ao turismo. Mas agora, com a economia americana numa fase ruim, as construtoras de imóveis em particular estão adotando o programa em grande número. Talvez o usuário mais conhecido seja a Forest City Ratner, de Nova York, que está usando o programa para o ginásio que está construindo para o time de basquete Nets, que é parte de um projeto residencial maior.
Os construtores, que já disseram estar buscando ajuda para refinanciar um empréstimo e construir a infraestrutura, receberam nas últimas semanas compromissos definitivos de US$ 249 milhões de 498 investidores, de acordo com pessoas familiarizadas com o esforço. Essa quantia, que carrega um custo menor do que o financiamento tradicional, seria difícil de conseguir num banco ou outro credor tradicional.
Geralmente, esses financiamentos são arranjados por meio de uma subsidiária da empresa ou de um intermediário, que coletam o dinheiro dos imigrantes e o disponibilizam às construtoras, na forma de empréstimos.
O Centro Regional da Cidade de Nova York, intermediária que arranjou o financiamento para a arena do Nets, também planeja buscar, por meio do EB-5, cerca de US$ 77 milhões para um projeto parado de mais de US$ 90 milhões de um hotel boutique e lojas em Manhattan, disseram pessoas envolvidas com o projeto. O projeto, a reforma do histórico Battery Maritime Building associado a uma revitalização da orla, foi planejado primeiro pela incorporadora Dermot Co. em 2007, mas foi arquivado quando o mercado de crédito secou no ano seguinte.
No ano passado, ainda sem conseguir levantar um financiamento tradicional, a Dermot procurou o EB-5 para preencher uma lacuna no orçamento. A incorporadora espera começar a captar o dinheiro de candidatos ao green card até o meio do ano.
Embora o governo não quantifique quantos projetos estão na fila do EB-5, uma amostra de projetos anunciados publicamente mostra que outras construções estimadas em centenas de milhões de dólares estão em diferentes estágios de captação de recursos em todo o país.
Membros do Congresso americano gostam do programa e usam-no para aumentar a geração de empregos em seus distritos eleitorais. Em geral, o programa não gerou críticas significativas dos grupos de interesse na área da imigração. Membros de institutos normalmente contra a abertura a imigrantes já disseram que aceitam o programa, dado seu tamanho relativamente pequeno, limitado a 10.000 vistos por ano.
Essa enxurrada de interesse no programa, entretanto, causou preocupações. Até mesmo alguns defensores do programa reconhecem que há potencial para abuso, já que o número de projetos de alto risco começa a crescer.
Os investidores imigrantes só recebem status de residente permanente se o projeto criar pelo menos dez empregos por investidor. Se um projeto não dá certo e os empregos não são criados, os investidores precisam deixar o país depois dos dois anos iniciais e não recebem o green card. Também podem perder o investimento.
Várias incorporadoras e outras empresas envolvidas no setor dizem que os projetos de alto risco podem facilmente receber aprovação, e sobra ao candidato a imigrante – que em geral não tem muitos recursos para auditar os projetos – o ônus de tomar decisões quanto a sua viabilidade.
Austin Is The Best Place To Start A Small Business
http://www.businessinsider.com
Image: elisfanclub via Flickr
Where are the hottest spots to start a small business? With more Americans becoming entrepreneurs than any time in the past 15 years, it’s a burning question without easy answers.
But a combination of factors makes certain metropolitan areas more attractive than others. These cities have strong economies, expanding populations, access to an educated and talented workforce, and are densely packed with like-minded entrepreneurs.
Some are located in states with no corporate income tax and often have a relatively low cost of living and available office space.
A weak economy with massive corporate layoffs are helping to drive the growth in new-business owners. “Many people, even if they still have their jobs, are feeling a little insecure. So they may be building a company of their own after hours as a safety net,” says Penny Pickett, associate administrator for the Office of Entrepreneurial Development at the U.S. Small Business Administration.
Immigrants, Pickett says, contribute “tremendously to this entrepreneurial energy and growth.” Those over age 50 are also major factor. “Many of those people are retiring early, maybe even getting a pink slip, and saying ‘This is what I’ve always wanted to do.’ Maybe their kids are grown and they don’t have as much responsibility anymore,” she says.
This list of the top 10 metropolitan areas for startups is based on Business Journals’ 2011 rankings, with additional reporting by The Fiscal Times. The rankings reflect such factors as population growth, economic strength, gains in private-sector employment and the number of small businesses – defined as private-sector employers with 99 or fewer workers. Numbers for populations and businesses include surrounding areas.
No. 1
Austin, TX
Austin was the leader in the Business Journals ranking for the second year in a row, with gains in three categories: Population (up 20 percent between 2004 and 2009), employment (job expansion of 9.5 percent between 2005 and 2010), and small business growth (up 1.5 percent from 2007 to 2008). The cost of living in Austin is below the national average, and the University of Texas and high-tech industries offer innovation and a largely educated workforce. It is also the “Live Music Capital of the World,” home to the international South by Southwest festival and many musicians, artists, and writers.
Texas has no personal or corporate income tax. There is a state business franchise tax of 0.5 to 1.0 percent, with an exemption for revenues under $300,000. Other state and local business taxes are lower than the national average.
“Even though it was a really tough time to start a new business with such a soft economic environment, I decided to cut way back on living expenses and follow my long-held passion for travelling the world,” says Keith Hajovsky, who last year founded Travel Sherpa Keith, a travel consulting and tour guide company in Austin, after being laid off from a software company.
No. 2
Oklahoma City
Oklahoma City rose from 15th place in last year’s Biz Journals study, due to its 12-month small-business growth rate of 0.4 percent and its third-place ranking in the country for one-year job growth. It offers an affordable cost of living and a high concentration of local investors from the oil and gas industry.
The state has 52 certified “business incubators,” providing assistance for startups that includes affordable lease space and administrative services. “There are a lot of networking resources in Oklahoma City,” says Gary Nelson, CEO of iThryv LLC, which provides financial software and literacy programs. Nelson says the quality of life, revitalized downtown, and cultural activities, along with a talented workforce, has enabled him to maintain a one percent employee turnover rate.
There are tax breaks for qualified manufacturing, research and development, and computer/data processing companies. The state also offers cash rebates for job creation and for companies that are subcontractors to federal prime contractors (the only incentive of its kind in the country).
No. 3
Charleston
Second only to Austin in 2009-2010 job growth, Charleston, SC, encourages entrepreneurship with the New Ideas SC Contest to help develop ideas into viable businesses; winners receive seed funding and access to advisers and venture capitalists. The Charleston Metro Chamber of Commerce recently launched an Entrepreneur Center that offers business development courses, mentoring, networking events, and access to retired or semi-retired executives willing to serve in management positions.
“They know what you will be going into and what could stop you,” says Frisco Thumbtzen, owner of Cajun Kountry Kitchen restaurant, who completed the FastTrac GrowthVenture class in April. “I’d rather be told before I make the mistake.” The city also provides business incentives, such as workforce recruiting and training programs and sales-tax exemptions that reduce startup and annual operating costs.
No. 4
Charlotte
Charlotte’s brisk 18.6 percent population growth over the past five years contributes heavily to a healthy small business environment. The nonprofit Business Innovation & Growth Council works to create an environment that develops high-impact, high-growth entrepreneurs. Matching fund grants are promoted for innovative startups, and the Institute for Entrepreneurship offers counseling and promotional assistance. The state of North Carolina offers tax credits, funds and grants, and among the nation’s lowest effective business taxes and lowest mandatory expenses such as workers’ compensation and unemployment.
No. 5
Seattle
Home of one of the world’s business success stories, Microsoft, and a leading metro area in research and technology, Seattle exudes innovation and intellectual creativity. The area’s clean-tech industry is expected to grow about 1.4 percent annually over the next few years, according to the Puget Sound Regional Council.
Like Texas, Washington has no personal or corporate income tax, and also no state capital gains tax. The state offers a number of business tax incentives for biofuels, research and development, international services, manufacturing, food processing, and the technology and aerospace industries that helped build Seattle’s entrepreneurial environment. There is also a local program offering tax credits and employee training programs for all businesses.
No. 6
Tulsa
Just slightly behind Oklahoma City, Tulsa boasts 26.29 small businesses for every 1,000 residents – nearly 10 percent above the national average. A pro-business environment and low startup costs all contribute to making it an appealing place for entrepreneurs.
Bill Bartmann is the ultimate example of an underdog who created several businesses through necessity. Once homeless, Bartmann turned a foreclosed oil-field pipe manufacturing plant in Tulsa into a successful business in the 1980s. When oil prices sank, so did his company. Last year Bartmann started a new company, CFS II, that focuses on debt resolution – something he has personal experience with.
No. 7
Raleigh
The Raleigh Business & Technology Center is a haven for entrepreneurs and home to the Virtual Business Incubator, a 10-month program to assist with such things as business management, strategic planning, and financial forecasting. As in Charlotte, the state provides incentives for new businesses, and the city of Raleigh has several programs offering grants, incentives and loans. Pickett of the SBA says that even for Internet-based companies the local business environment and support system is crucial. “One of the biggest things is the local network. A lot of times entrepreneurs feel like they’re there alone, and you need that social environment to support your company.” The SBA reports that women- and minority- owned businesses in the area grew by more than 66 percent from 2002 to 2007.
No. 8
Denver
Metro Denver’s population is growing by 46,000 people a year, and the business vibe is youthful and fun. “Colorado is the perfect place to start a company and incubate a business, and I want to be a part of that,” says Henry Schloss, who started Energy House, a 7,000-square-foot shared work space for entrepreneurs, and plans to open 100 similar locations nationwide.
Colorado simplified its corporate income tax structure in 2008. There is a tax credit for businesses that create at least 20 new jobs and pay above-average wages. Training and technology grants are also available.
No. 9
Washington
Strong population growth and public-sector support help encourage new businesses in D.C. Nearly 33,000 private-sector jobs were added there between 2009 and 2010, bucking the national trend. The Washington retail market is also strong, ranked first in the U.S. by Marcus & Millichap’s 2010 National Retail Index, and unemployment is among the lowest in the country at 5.7 percent.
The city is also a magnet for businesses that want to attract highly educated employees; it boasts the highest percentage of postgraduate degrees and double-degree households in the nation. Incentives are available for high-tech companies, supermarkets and nonprofits, and the district offers free startup and employee training assistance.
No. 10
New York
Despite a high cost of living – the biggest drawback for entrepreneurs – metro New York’s ratio of 27.73 small businesses per 1,000 residents is strong. “Size – just being bigger – increases innovation and outcomes,” says Stolarick of the Martin Prosperity Institute. “Density magnifies that effect.” For startups in the city itself, there are a number of small business resource centers, and the New York Public Library and the Citi Foundation sponsor a startup business plan competition for entrepreneurs that awards prizes totaling more than $30,000 to five winners.
This post originally appeared at The Fiscal Times.