Recovery is About Entrepreneurship

Michael Giberson

The Kauffman Foundation offers a video of Tyler Cowen talking about blogging economics and other topics. Cowen wraps up with comments on current economic conditions in the United States:

If there is one point I could get through about the mess we’re in, it’s that even if you think that the government needs to do something proactive, that is a holding action. Recovery is about entrepreneurship.

Coincidentally, Kauffman Foundation president Carl Schramm discusses entrepreneurship and the economy in a profile appearing in the WSJ over the weekend, leading with this quote about “companies too big to fail”:

Carl Schramm doesn’t buy the idea that some businesses are “too big to fail.” That notion, says the president of the Kansas City-based Kauffman Foundation, only creates obstacles for entrepreneurs. Instead, he sees the failure of big companies as the “moment when 1,000 flowers can bloom.”

Both items recommended.

(HT to Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution and Chris Masse at Midas Oracle.)

entrepreneurshipeconomist

April 10, 2009 at 8:20 am

http://dealbreaker.com/2007/05/the-unsurprising-failure-of-et.php#comments

The funny thing is that Carl Schramm is “too big to fail.” He has invented risk-free entrepreneurship by hijacking a $2.5 billion foundation which does not fund innovators nor entrepreneurs (whom/which Mr. Kauffman expressly left the money for), but which increases the sizes of university administrations, funds sycophantic, socialist bloggers who laud Schramm’s insipid writings, while furthering Schramm’s fruitless campaign for a Nobel Prize for socializing entreprnuership and growing government/foundational/MBA/economist bureaucracies to oversee and manage it. While the Fed nationalized the banks, Schramm nationalized the college band on univeristy campuses, giving millions to the state officials overseeing and managing “entreprnuership,” and a couple thousand dollars to bands in business plan competitions.

The Kauffman Foundation has become a vanity press for Schrammenomics, complete with Web 2.0 technologies which empower an army of sycophantic policy-wonk bloggers which Scramm funds with millions upon millions–the very antithesis and opposite of true entreprneurship. For Schramm is a jealous god, and there shall be none others before him; and that is why he never cites Hayek, nor Mises in his book with the juvenile title: GOOD CAPITALISM, BAD CAPITALISM. Nor does he cite Ayn Rand. One can see that Schramm is hoping to replace the works of Nobel Laureate eocnomists and bestselling authors with his dumbed-down, socialistic views of entrepreneurship, which must be managed by Schramm on a dead-man’s dime.

Would Schramm have made it on his own as an entrepreneur? The WSJ article states that he founded a Merchant Bank and a Health Care Service. But it gives names for neither. Why is this? And if they were so successful, why does he need Kauffman’s resources to promote and peddle his lackluster books and socialistic philosophies as the eocnomy crumbles because of “too big to fail,” domineering socialists such as himself?

Check out Deal Breaker and the Kansas City Business Journal:

http://dealbreaker.com/2007/05/the-unsurprising-failure-of-et.php#comments
“It is interesting that Dealbreaker references Carl Shram of the Kauffman Foundation as an authority on ethics. Those of us who live in the Kansas City region know that Carl Schram and been a controversial figure since he was appointed to his post a number of years ago. Board members have resigned in protest of his leadership style and strategic choices. His controversial leadership led to the Missouri Attorney General reviewing the Kauffman Foundation for not staying true to the intent of Ewing Kauffman. The purpose of this review was stated as:

“In light of the public allegations of a departure from Mr. Kauffman’s intent, lack of appropriate oversight by the Board of Directors, and certain instances of conflicts of interest. ” (http://www.ago.mo.gov/newsreleases/2004/kauffmanreport030404.htm#conclusion)

See also this editorial from the Kansas City Business Journal (http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/stories/2003/09/15/editorial1.html)

Ewing Kauffman was famous as an ethical leader. Carl Schramm is not.
–http://dealbreaker.com/2007/05/the-unsurprising-failure-of-et.php#comments

1 thought on “Recovery is About Entrepreneurship”

entrepreneurshipeconomist
April 10, 2009 at 8:20 am

http://dealbreaker.com/2007/05/the-unsurprising-failure-of-et.php#comments

The funny thing is that Carl Schramm is “too big to fail.” He has invented risk-free entrepreneurship by hijacking a $2.5 billion foundation which does not fund innovators nor entrepreneurs (whom/which Mr. Kauffman expressly left the money for), but which increases the sizes of university administrations, funds sycophantic, socialist bloggers who laud Schramm’s insipid writings, while furthering Schramm’s fruitless campaign for a Nobel Prize for socializing entreprnuership and growing government/foundational/MBA/economist bureaucracies to oversee and manage it. While the Fed nationalized the banks, Schramm nationalized the college band on univeristy campuses, giving millions to the state officials overseeing and managing “entreprnuership,” and a couple thousand dollars to bands in business plan competitions.

The Kauffman Foundation has become a vanity press for Schrammenomics, complete with Web 2.0 technologies which empower an army of sycophantic policy-wonk bloggers which Scramm funds with millions upon millions–the very antithesis and opposite of true entreprneurship. For Schramm is a jealous god, and there shall be none others before him; and that is why he never cites Hayek, nor Mises in his book with the juvenile title: GOOD CAPITALISM, BAD CAPITALISM. Nor does he cite Ayn Rand. One can see that Schramm is hoping to replace the works of Nobel Laureate eocnomists and bestselling authors with his dumbed-down, socialistic views of entrepreneurship, which must be managed by Schramm on a dead-man’s dime.

Would Schramm have made it on his own as an entrepreneur? The WSJ article states that he founded a Merchant Bank and a Health Care Service. But it gives names for neither. Why is this? And if they were so successful, why does he need Kauffman’s resources to promote and peddle his lackluster books and socialistic philosophies as the eocnomy crumbles because of “too big to fail,” domineering socialists such as himself?

Check out Deal Breaker and the Kansas City Business Journal:

http://dealbreaker.com/2007/05/the-unsurprising-failure-of-et.php#comments
“It is interesting that Dealbreaker references Carl Shram of the Kauffman Foundation as an authority on ethics. Those of us who live in the Kansas City region know that Carl Schram and been a controversial figure since he was appointed to his post a number of years ago. Board members have resigned in protest of his leadership style and strategic choices. His controversial leadership led to the Missouri Attorney General reviewing the Kauffman Foundation for not staying true to the intent of Ewing Kauffman. The purpose of this review was stated as:

“In light of the public allegations of a departure from Mr. Kauffman’s intent, lack of appropriate oversight by the Board of Directors, and certain instances of conflicts of interest. ” (http://www.ago.mo.gov/newsreleases/2004/kauffmanreport030404.htm#conclusion)

See also this editorial from the Kansas City Business Journal (http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/stories/2003/09/15/editorial1.html)

Ewing Kauffman was famous as an ethical leader. Carl Schramm is not.
–http://dealbreaker.com/2007/05/the-unsurprising-failure-of-et.php#comments

Comments are closed.