With the lingering slump in the economic cycle the 2012 Olympics being held predominantly in London but also in many other areas of Britain could provide a very valuable anti recession event for the country.

Economists of all stripes often comment that the mood of people affect their willingness to spend money and generate trade and demand. The 2012 Olympics mandate that the people of Britain play host to the world greatest athletes and those who will visit and watch the games.

Already, a sense of pride appearing to be sweeping the country as the realisation that the Olympics is not just a press conference but a living breathing reality which will soon be upon us.

Terrorist events perhaps marred the announcement that the 2012 Olympics were awarded to London and thus to true gravity and commercial aspects of the event was perhaps not fully appreciated at that time.

Baring any similar actions in 2012 the Olympics will generate an influx of tourists, substantial merchandising opportunities and perhaps more importantly a buzz in the economy. Positive events can create positive feelings and thoughts and those in 2012 could represent an anti recession remedy whose affect is far greater than any of the instruments in the UK Treasury’ arsenal.

Should the relatively mild weather experienced this winter continue, the excitement and start of the feel good factors will take place in the early months of 2012.

Given the extravagance of the 2008 Olympics games, London and Britain as a whole have to at least match and probably exceed those celebrations and breath-taking displays witnessed in Beijing.

Should the 2012 London Olympics not have the affect of steering Britain clear of recession, then it is difficult to see what will; perhaps the American Presidential elections in November of that year will do the trick.

Many believe that the quieter business periods brought about by the currently economic problems are an excuse to waste time, ring their hands in despair, blame the Government and then sit quietly playing the latest computer game on their PC.

A ringing phone and communication from a perspective customer becomes an annoyance as they were just about to slay the dragon and kiss the princess on their computer screens.

Not so at my office, we are busier than ever, not with customers but with preparing the groundwork for when business picks up. Accepting the current economic climate and seeing a recession drawing ever closer prevents opportunities to do all the things that in the past which you could not do because you were too busy servicing clients.

Not everything costs a lot of money either. The launching or redesign of a new or existing website, the physical reorganisation of the office or even just throwing out the old box of paper you thought you might use three years ago but are still sitting their.

The motivational aspects of using quiet trading periods for constructive projects are enormous. When we can not to bed happy because we have had good days sales, we can retire instead knowing that we are not wasting time and that the business has moved forward in some way.

One factor about quieter business periods which does waste time and energy is when other companies panic and phone up every person they have access to. Talking phone calls where the person offers you something you have absolutely no interest in is frustrating.

This is particularly so when their suggested product or service involves spending large amounts of money which nobody has in a recession or embarking on discretionary expenditure which everyone is cutting back on.

Memory can not provide an occasion in the last three weeks where the person on the other end of the phone offered a cheaper version of what they were normally selling for.

In essence, caring for a business, one for which the owner has taken risks, made sacrifices and has seen grow from nothing to something does not afford the luxury of wasting time.

Having a mature outlook does entail taking the rough with the smooth and accepting that outside influences can cause slow periods of trade. There are those who will use this as an excuse to waste time and procrastinate and there are those who will plough on and continue to fill their days with measureable accomplishments.

The economy and particularly that which affect small business has become the centre talking point of the American presidential election. The influence of American economic prosperity on UK small business has been witnessed for years.

The FTSE 100 index follows the up and downs of the Dow Jones market like the preverbal sheep and rarely, if even does the influence actually work the other way around.

And so there is the choice between the Republican candidate who believes that by initiating a spending freeze on public finances and tax incentives to larger businesses, the American giants of commercial enterprise will lift the ailing economy and provide prosperity to everyone.

The Democratic ticket on the other hand believes that these larger businesses and their corporate managers who have enjoyed record profits until recently can afford to pay more in tax.

This would enable the newly elected President (if this happens) to provide tax cuts to over 95% of working families.

There is rarely such a clear cut distinction separating two economic policies and the voters in the presidential election, particularly those who own a small business have to decide which of these contrasting policies they believe will work.

The Republican Small Business Policy

An important point that should be borne in mind is that during presidential elections, it is quite possible for candidate to say one thing and whether deliberately or due to unforeseen circumstances, veer from their stated commitments.

For the moment at least, each candidate will be taken at their word.

American big businesses are among the most talented in the world and in pursuit of their own self interest, can create jobs, compete effectively and increase the wealth of the country through innovation and commercial marketing.

It could be argued therefore that the Republican plan provides nourishment to the experts and charges them with doing what they do best.

Those against point to the evidence that smaller businesses enjoy little of the gains bigger corporations make and therefore many in the country and the economy as a whole does not benefit.

The lessons currently being learned from the manner in which big businesses crippled the global markets does not lend itself to a further endorsement of the laissez-faire doctrine.

It may be the self interest that creates an insurmountable conflict whereby large American corporations can not serve both themselves and the wider economy at the same time.

This leaves small businesses to fend for themselves and accept that at any time, the actions of big corporations can render their attempts to trade and be profitable absolutely useless.

The Democratic Policy

Tax breaks for 95% of Americans is the claim, but what will these people do with their allocation of money. Should they decide to save it then the economic kick start the Government would hope for may never materialise.

In fact, saving will provide additional coffers for the big businesses who can then carry on as normal. However in this case, given that small businesses would then have some or increase savings, their levels of anxiety should decrease and their confidence about trading should rise.

Spending some or all of the tax gains would help the entire economy and realise the elusive feel good factors which is current absence from many if not all of the global consumer markets.

Economics aside for a moment, doesn’t this plan seem fairer? More humane? At least if it does not work, then the American people have had a stake in its destination.

In the presidential election, the essence of which party’s antidote will work might be best defined by the fact that the Democrats appear to have had a consistent plan from the start. The Republicans did not even want to talk about the economy and after personal attacks fails, and the Palin affect became a regret, they launched their plans to help small business.

The Democratic plan seems a fairer, more thought out proposal and most of all, it is not Bush Republican.