[peterangular]

> Is the average business owner any better off?

Obviously anecdotal, but not really IMO. I've bounced back and forth between being in business for myself and working for the man.

Between healthcare, saving for retirement, etc. things are really optimized against someone "pulling themselves up by the bootstraps" in this way. I've listened to the politicians in the US scream how important small business only to vote against that very interest (tax cuts for rich + corporate tax breaks).

I can't get good healthcare unless it's tied to my employment here. The healthcare I get independently is of lower quality for much, much more money out of pocket... Lord help you if you do something stupid and show a profit on your books... etc etc... The first 2-3 rungs of the "small business owner" ladder are missing by design.

If I had a family I would likely never consider being a business owner again due to the health implications, financial risk, and time commitment.

100% the average working Joe is better off.

[mgkimsal]

"small business" to national politicians typically means you employee under 500 people. Almost no one considers "self-employed" or "1-3 people" as "small business" when crafting tax legislation. I certainly consider "self-employed" and "I have a couple folks on payroll" to be "small business", but it's just not in the same league as the local brewery employing 85 people, for example.

Perhaps we need the term "micro business" to gain more traction? I suspect that's where more work is heading.

[sokoloff]

I think micro-business as a term exists (and depending on the exact definition is typically 0-4 full-time employees, including the owner).

[abandonliberty]

Here they're called artisans.