| Comment Number: | 522418-05257 |
| Received: | 6/30/2006 11:17:29 AM |
| Organization: | Danielson Enterprises |
| Commenter: | David Danielson |
| State: | CA |
| Subject: | Business Opportunity Rule |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 437 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Dear Sirs: As a Quixtar business owner, I am troubled by your proposed new rules. Quixtar has bent over backwards to comply with your requirements in the past. I am curious as to why you choose to single out this type of business. Have you ever tried building this business? If you had, you would quickly realize it is not a "get rich quick scheme". There is much hard work involved and THAT is why only a few (?) succeed. But how is that any different than any other business? I have had another business. A candy vending business. Do you have any idea or care how many "traditional" businesses start and fail each year? Probably not, because you are a bureaucrat, who probably has never owned a business of your own. You've probably never put up your own money and/or time to build a business. Risk - is an inherent part of business. Everyone who starts a business, with any brains realizes this. The risk in this business, Quixtar is nothing. It costs $45 to start. My candy vending business cost $15,000 to start. So where's the more risk? Why don't you make anyone starting a candy vending business be told all the possible pitfalls etc. that they may encounter before they can start a candy vending business? Or any other business? Why is it you are choosing to single out this one kind of business? How many restaurants open and fail a year? Why? Because they're undercapitalized or didn't realize how much work it is, or just didn't have the abilities to make it work? So why don't you demand that everyone contemplating starting a business be told this exhaustive list of reasons why they shouldn't do so? It's no different. Or is it? Why are you really choosing to single out this one category of business? You are probably the same people who are crying and whining as to why all our business is going overseas. But stupid proposed (and implemented) rules like these are the very reason why. Whatever ever happened to the "land of the free, and the home of the brave"? Sad to say, but because of ideas like this proposed rule, it's had to move to China and Japan and India and Singapore and Korea. Freedom loving Americans don't need busy-body, do-gooders trying to "protect" us from ourselves. If the worst thing I did was to spend $45 starting a business, only to realize I didn't have what it takes to do it, then what have I lost and what have I gained? I lost $45. I gained experience and knowledge and an opportunity to have built a great business for my family. Why don't you require the "Lotto"s to put up in big bright neon flashing signs how slim the chances are of someone really winning anything. Isn't that more than just a little hypocritical? The odds of succeeding through the Lotto are a heck of a lot slimmer than in Quixtar. Could it be because the Lotto is nothing but a poorly disguised form of taxation. One which disgustingly taxes those least able to afford it the most as it plays on their ignorance and belief in getting something for nothing? Whereas a business like Quixtar is free enterprise? We free Americans don't need or want government bureaucrats telling us we're "free" to throw our money and time away on worthless things like the Lotto, but can't invest OUR OWN time and money in a free business of our choosing. It seems you really ought to consider your motives and your thinking before you proceed any further with your proposed rules. Why is it you want to single out this one class of business? Thanks David Danielson