What's the truth about what places are best to start a business in?

[Salem1]

Can someone tell me about this?

why do some people say countries like Canada, Switzerland, Denmark etc. are good places and others say Poland? I myself can't understand why you would want to start a business in Sweden for example, where low-profit stagnance is the name of the game, but apparently this place is pretty good. But I have a mate who works at a toy store in Stockholm central and he said that the foreign company which owns the area (for some reason it got sold out for ten billion sometime) screws with them in whatever way it wants to. The only companies that are really successful that I know of here are the ones with a history (like IKEA) or that have found ways of avoiding the astronomical costs and taxes of starting and running a business in locations where it's lucrative to have one in the first place, like Stockholm (internet). I trust a roulette wheel more than the ability of people in charge to manage money and property properly.

[PointOfViewGun]

Can someone tell me about this? why do some people say countries like Canada, Switzerland, Denmark etc. are good places and others say Poland? I myself can't understand why you would want to start a business in Sweden for example, where low-profit stagnance is the name of the game.

It might have to do with the existing infrastructure and the stability of their economy. As a result there is much less risks to take when starting a new business.

[Darth Red]

I think this conversation is best suited for the Acedemy.

[Claudius Gothicus]

-Previous infrastructure(roads, trains, electric systems, public systems etc.)

-Big or Small corruption(the bigger the bribes the more costly an enterprise becomes)

-Workers Unions and their relationship to the State(if the State is somewhat ''kidnapped'' by workers unions who constantly demand a rise in their wages and other benefits then you have large chance of unproductive and inflation. If on the other hand the relationship capital-work is somewhat institutionalized and balanced then the losses might be bigger than in countries with no regulation whosoever, like China, but the workforce might consume more and the gains can be balanced and pretty big anyways)

-Juridical guarantees, this means the government being somewhat rational and not going on your corporate ass the moment a left-leaning party gains power(like in Venezuela).

-A well educated and consumer oriented society, from where you can recruit productive, malleable and profit oriented workers that buy all of your fancy stuff.

-Good international prices, a cheap value money(this means money being somewhat cheap in accordance to what you can produce and sell), no inflation, flexible and well applied laws regarding the remission of utilities to your bank accounts and other economic factors that determine how easily you will be able to produce and sell.

The aim of many countries then is to find a balance between all of those variables to try to seduce investment that can generate long term jobs, improve the overall productive capacity and well being of the population.

[JP226]

Alot of it has to do with startup times, in the US it takes something like 6 whereas other countries it takes months. And usually that number correlates well with clear cut laws, infrastructure, low corruption etc etc.

[Valentin the II]

There is a measure for that you know: "Ease of doing buisness index"

[Thorn777]

@OP

Part of entrepreneurship is complaining and never telling your true net-worth, at least in private life. I don't know any businessmen who doesn't complain frequently, and it can be about anything related to the business. So while they say these things in Sweden they say it everywhere actually. It always was something that comes with responsibility and salesmanship.

[Adar]

Sweden is a very good place to start companies in (I am working in a small company right now). The problem is that setting up production in Sweden sucks. Basicly you have to take a huge risk when doing so (a few bad employees and your screwed...) and Swedish workers are of course very expensive. In large companies this isn't much of a problem since machinery is expensive and high quality labourers and managers are necessary to maintain the productivity. Basicly you earn more by increasing productivity by 2 % than you earn by paying half the salary.This is why companies like Scania and Sandvik are able to make huge profits despite people claiming that Sweden need to move toward the service sector due to cheap Chinese workers.

The problem is if you want to create a new industry. Lets say for example building scientific instruments (like Biolin Scientific). Then your not stuck with fixed assets (like a truck factory) and there are no skilled labourers available since the industry is new. In this case it is much better to set up manufacturing in Finland, Estonia or Poland since it's cheaper, easier to fire people and they are just as inexperienced as any potential Swedish employee.