Surprise! Bush economy led to accelerated growth of black-owned businesses

posted at 10:12 am on February 9, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

On Monday, Barack Obama told the Chamber of Commerce that he would refuse to return to the economy of a few years ago that didn’t distribute gains fairly, at least according to Obama:

Of course, your responsibility goes beyond recognizing the need for certain standards and safeguards. If we’re fighting to reform the tax code and increase exports to help you compete, the benefits can’t just translate into greater profits and bonuses for those at the top. They should be shared by American workers, who need to know that expanding trade and opening markets will lift their standard of living as well as your bottom line. We cannot go back to the kind of economy – and culture – we saw in the years leading up to the recession, where growth and gains in productivity just didn’t translate into rising incomes and opportunity for the middle class.

Today’s Washington Post tells a different story about the economic expansion that preceded the housing-bubble collapse:

The number of black-owned businesses grew much faster than the national rate during the five years before the recession began, according to data released Tuesday by the U.S. Census Bureau.

The ranks of black firms shot up more than 60 percent from 2002 to 2007, compared with the overall national increase of 4 percent. By the end of the boom, Prince George’s County had the highest share of black-owned businesses – 55 percent – among all large counties in the nation.

Less clear is how those firms fared after the recession hit. The Census Bureau did not offer any information on how minority-owned businesses did after late 2007, when the economic downturn began.

The Left likes to denigrate the economic expansions of the past thirty years as inherently unfair, for a couple of reasons.  First, their aim is the distribution of wealth based on political values rather than productivity, which means they won’t particularly care for any true economic expansion.  But second, dismissing the success of market-based economic policies allows them to argue that such policies are either irrelevant or damaging, when (especially in this case) it was government interventions in the housing markets that set off the chain reaction that nearly collapsed the global economy.

While the Bush economy expanded, though, it did lift all boats, as this Census data shows.  Bush’s tax policies — extended by Obama — allowed for greater investment in small businesses, and black entrepreneurs benefited substantially more than the general population.  That mirrors what happened across the economy as a whole, putting more people in control of their own economic future.

Obama may not want to return to that kind of economy, but a lot of Americans wouldn’t mind seeing it return — minus the government distortions that create and then pop bubbles.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

“Obama Administration Celebrates Black History by Winning the Future” With a little help from Republicans.

Electrongod on February 9, 2011 at 10:15 AM

“Hey Mr. President, what about GE?”

-No comment.

Bishop on February 9, 2011 at 10:16 AM

I’m betting that still won’t be an incentive to many blacks to vote for the repub candidate in 2012.

mchristian on February 9, 2011 at 10:17 AM

But, but, but…Bush is raaaaacist!!

teacherman on February 9, 2011 at 10:19 AM

“…it was government interventions in the housing markets that set off the chain reaction that nearly collapsed the global economy.”

Give the man a Kewpie Doll!

Wino on February 9, 2011 at 10:19 AM

No response yet from Kanye West.

Doughboy on February 9, 2011 at 10:20 AM

But but but didn’t Kanye West, the voice of a generation and a genius say George Bush doesn’t care about black people?

Lay-Z on February 9, 2011 at 10:22 AM

I have often wondered why African countries always seem to turn out like Zimbabwe.

tarpon on February 9, 2011 at 10:23 AM

Only 3 comments left at the article at WaPo, unlike the usual hundreds.

Crickets from the moonbats.

Knucklehead on February 9, 2011 at 10:23 AM

Obama may not want to return to that kind of economy, but a lot of Americans wouldn’t mind seeing it return — minus the government distortions that create and then pop bubbles.

Where do I sign up?

Cindy Munford on February 9, 2011 at 10:24 AM

That evil BOOOSH!!! Giving opportunities to all colors! How dare him!

search4truth on February 9, 2011 at 10:25 AM

First, their aim is the REdistribution of wealth based on political values rather than productivity,

It is important to keep in mind that the govt isn’t distributing anything, it is taking from some and giving to others: redistributing.

Akzed on February 9, 2011 at 10:26 AM

Just some Uncle Toms trying to trick real black people.

flyfisher on February 9, 2011 at 10:31 AM

How could Bush have led to a growth in black-owned businesses? Everyone knows how he felt about that demographic, right Kanye?

ted c on February 9, 2011 at 10:34 AM

This brings to mind a story form the one Tea Party rally I attended. A black gentleman was there waving an enormous American flag. Someone ask him why he was there and he repsonded that he paid $200,000 in tax on his business the previous year and did not want his American Dream to be taken away. His boat was obviously lifed by the rising tide!

Ann on February 9, 2011 at 10:34 AM

Obama believes “there is a point where you’ve made enough money” and “think[s] we should spread the wealth around”. Progressives think wealth is passed around and accumulated by people unfairly thus their “redistribution” garbage. To the extent wealth is created, they somehow think that’s the government’s job.

cartooner on February 9, 2011 at 10:36 AM

It’s a simple misunderstanding of “free markets”. You are free to distribute your wealth to those on whom Obama smiles or the government is free to take your wealth and redistribute it to the same crowd. Your choice.

SKYFOX on February 9, 2011 at 10:38 AM

I look forward to Kanye’ West’s tweets about this!

SouthernGent on February 9, 2011 at 10:40 AM

If we’re fighting to reform the tax code and increase exports to help you compete, the benefits can’t just translate into greater profits and bonuses for those at the top. They should be shared by American workers, who need to know that expanding trade and opening markets will lift their standard of living as well as your bottom line.

Socialist/Marxist boilerplate.

Spread the wealth around.

iurockhead on February 9, 2011 at 10:41 AM


… black entrepreneurs benefited substantially …

“Sthat’s sthe lasths sthtraw, sthsomebody’sth gotta fixth sthist!” – Barney Frank

Tony737 on February 9, 2011 at 10:42 AM

iurockhead on February 9, 2011 at 10:41 AM

Could be perfectly legit or cloaked Marxist sentiment depending on who’s saying it. Unfortunately, the latter is true in this case.

Dark-Star on February 9, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Surprise?

The Republican Party was established on the premise of destroying slavery (and hence, polygamy).

Contrary to current erroneous indoctrination, MLK,jr was a conservative Republican. Want to set the record straight? Participate at your school district’s meeting and demand that biographical fact be a solid point made in public school curriculum during Black History Month and before MLK Day. Those Americans of African descent always found their best leadership opportunities within the Republican Party, even after LBJ’s “Great Society” of American Welfare designed to impoverish Blacks into the ghetto class of taxpayer subsidized gangs. Bring the list of names and appointments to office to substantiate your proposed lesson plan, and bring supporters with you to the administrative meetings.

maverick muse on February 9, 2011 at 10:44 AM

I have often wondered why African countries always seem to turn out like Zimbabwe.
tarpon on February 9, 2011 at 10:23 AM

The same reason Mexico has turned out like Zimbabwe. A lack of freedom. All people when accorded the God given right to freedom have a better chance at success than when thier lives are directed by Government.

chicken thief on February 9, 2011 at 10:46 AM

“Sthat’s sthe lasths sthtraw, sthsomebody’sth gotta fixth sthist!” – Barney Frank

Tony737 on February 9, 2011 at 10:42 AM

Not bad. You forgot the champagne bubbles rising from the letters.

Electrongod on February 9, 2011 at 10:47 AM

When we get the much needed Progressive Caliphate going and everyone gets an assigned business things will run much smoother!!

PappyD61 on February 9, 2011 at 10:47 AM

Morons need not reply that MLK was a communist because he refused to support LBJ’s Vietnam War and the Military Draft.

Goldwater didn’t support LBJ’s Vietnam War Plans, either. A lot of people didn’t buy into LBJ’s decision; in fact, everyone whom LBJ called for advice told him not to touch Vietnam that would be worse even than the Korean “mess”. Listen to his tapes.

maverick muse on February 9, 2011 at 10:48 AM

I have often wondered why African countries always seem to turn out like Zimbabwe.
tarpon on February 9, 2011 at 10:23 AM

The same reason Mexico has turned out like Zimbabwe. A lack of freedom. All people when accorded the God given right to freedom have a better chance at success than when thier lives are directed by Government.

chicken thief on February 9, 2011 at 10:46 AM

Umm…no. If anything, there’s too much freedom, to the point where thugs with ‘African Credit Cards’ are running rampant all over the place. That’s what we call ‘anarchy’.

Problem with Africa is that their homegrown leaders aren’t worth a hoot (the entire continent seems to have run into the Peter Principle), and just plain ignorance. Too often the only semblance of order is maintained by whatever thug commands the most firepower.

Dark-Star on February 9, 2011 at 10:52 AM

This is old news.

As with most things in our traitorous media, this was, at most, a back page non-article in the paper.

cntrlfrk on February 9, 2011 at 10:52 AM

This is how a liberal will respond to this headline.

Economic policies under Bush may have increased prosperity for African-American owned businesses, but it wasn’t a specifically stated priority of the President.

Economic policies under Obama may have destroyed this prosperity, but he cares about the plight of African-Americans.

Asher on February 9, 2011 at 10:53 AM

Morons need not reply that MLK was a communist because he refused to support LBJ’s Vietnam War and the Military Draft.

maverick muse on February 9, 2011 at 10:48 AM

I get a laugh out of people who say MLK and those like him were Reds. If anything, they were the ones playing the commies like fiddles.

They were just desperate for any source of money and backing; most blacks then had about as much use for Communism as a polar bear does for a refrigerator.

Dark-Star on February 9, 2011 at 10:54 AM

Not a good week for dear leader

Heh

cmsinaz on February 9, 2011 at 10:58 AM

Umm…no. If anything, there’s too much freedom, to the point where thugs with ‘African Credit Cards’ are running rampant all over the place. That’s what we call ‘anarchy’.

Problem with Africa is that their homegrown leaders aren’t worth a hoot (the entire continent seems to have run into the Peter Principle), and just plain ignorance. Too often the only semblance of order is maintained by whatever thug commands the most firepower.

Dark-Star on February 9, 2011 at 10:52 AM

To summarize: too much rule-by-man, not enough rule-of-law.

Count to 10 on February 9, 2011 at 11:00 AM

So the narrative must now reflect that since Obama extended (some) Bush economic policies, then Obama gets the credit for this. Indeed, Obama made sure this would happen.

Mintru in action.

Just wait…

catmman on February 9, 2011 at 11:01 AM

I get a laugh out of people who say MLK and those like him were Reds. If anything, they were the ones playing the commies like fiddles.

They were just desperate for any source of money and backing; most blacks then had about as much use for Communism as a polar bear does for a refrigerator.

Dark-Star on February 9, 2011 at 10:54 AM

What about the “Poor Persons Campaign”?

Count to 10 on February 9, 2011 at 11:01 AM

To summarize: too much rule-by-man, not enough rule-of-law.

Count to 10 on February 9, 2011 at 11:00 AM

Fair enough. Frankly, the very concept of rule-by-law seems as lost on Africa as non-theocratic governments do to the Arab nations. Breaking that rule has always required outside influences and once they had to leave it all fell apart…(boy does that sound familiar)

Dark-Star on February 9, 2011 at 11:03 AM

What about the “Poor Persons Campaign”?

Count to 10 on February 9, 2011 at 11:01 AM

Have to admit I haven’t heard/read much about them. I was just speaking of the mainline CR movement. A few people from that time I’ve been able to talk to confirmed my suspicions that once they’d met their goals, the Reds were dropped like a hot potato by most of the movement.

Of course, the white-owned newspapers tried to play McCarthy the entire time, but their efforts failed because not even the racist redneck population was dumb enough to swallow that line.

Dark-Star on February 9, 2011 at 11:07 AM

From wikipedia (ei, with a grain of salt):

Jobs, income and housing were the main goals of the Poor People’s Campaign. The campaign would help the poor by dramatizing their needs, uniting all races under the commonality of hardship and presenting a plan to start to a solution[3]. Under the “economic bill of rights,” the Poor People’s Campaign asked for the federal government to prioritize helping the poor with a $30 billion anti-poverty package that included a commitment to full employment, a guaranteed annual income measure and more low-income housing[4]. The Poor People’s Campaign was part of the second phase of the civil rights movement. While the first phase had exposed the problems of segregation, King hoped to address the “limitations to our achievements” with a second, broader phase[2

Count to 10 on February 9, 2011 at 11:13 AM

This is impossible, since the Lamestream Medial always told me that Bush was a racist and hated blacks…

Nope, don’t believe it for a minute…

Khun Joe on February 9, 2011 at 12:04 PM

Reagan’s tax policies also led to a sixty percent increase in the black middle class, but don’t expect to hear that from the liberal ‘realist’ community.

eaglewingz08 on February 9, 2011 at 12:27 PM

Once again, here’s another golden opportunity for The Race Card to deliberately avoid commenting. If he wasn’t banned, that is.

fossten on February 9, 2011 at 12:43 PM

Reagan’s tax policies also led to a sixty percent increase in the black middle class, but don’t expect to hear that from the liberal ‘realist’ community.

eaglewingz08 on February 9, 2011 at 12:27 PM

Then again, Republicans will continue to try and appropriate Reagan’s policies and legacy.

RDuke on February 9, 2011 at 3:00 PM