The Ukrainians are revolting, in a big way: After their president Viktor Yanukovych essentially sided with Putin and gave the European Union the raspberry by withdrawing from the EU association agreement just as it was due to be signed last month, hundreds of thousands of protestors gathered in Kiev, blocked and occupied government buildings, and took down a statue of Lenin.

While Yanukovych has said that government officials could visit Brussels this week to resume talks on the EU association agreement, the protestors are braving the snow and staying put.

Contrast that with Venezuela, with the government incarcerating small business owners in its latest move towards full Communism. Right now, in Venezuela, you will find:

Thousands of Venezuelans have fled the country (with some boosting Miami real estate prices). Following Sunday’s municipal election and its predictable results, a friend snarked, “What Venezuela needs is a few hundred thousand Ukranians.”

It’s unlikely that Venezuelans will rise en masse:

  • Chavismo is still popular among the larger number of uneducated, poor people who may actually believe that raiding electronics stores is a good idea. There’s no equivalent of Putin to hate or fear, in spite of the pervading Cuban presence.
  • Opposition leaders are demonized, de-humanized and physically attacked on the floor of the National Assembly.
  • There’s still a mindset of “every man for himself“.
  • The government controls all propaganda outlets – even using ambulances to post campaign materials.
  • Proceeds from oil still pay for a lot of “freebies”.
  • Venezuela is new to Communism.

And,

So don’t expect millions of Venezuelans to storm downtown Caracas anytime soon.

Last week, when President Obama reverted to the topic of “income inequality,” I was reminded of one of things I used to complain about to God. Why did people who were “worse” sinners than I get the things I’ve always wanted but didn’t have?

Christians are exhorted to keep their eyes on Jesus—the Way, the Truth and The Light–the dispenser of all good things. It is one of the good examples of tunnel vision. Conversely, when one’s eyes are not on the actual source of blessings, but, rather on the perceived blessings of one’s sibling or one’s neighbor, those eyes become blinded by false vision.

You begin to think that God likes others better than He likes you; or you think that God is unfair or that He is really the capricious, randomly-acting god described in other belief systems. Or, you decide that there is no god and that all is fair in “love” and, most especially, in war. You may even begin to believe that those who have been blessed more than you have, got that way by taking your blessings from you. From there, it’s a short road to doing the same– taking what you want by force. Or, perhaps, you will vote for those who promise to do it for you.

More false vision: allegedly, income inequality varies directly with poverty levels. However, no causal chain is ever described and no historical example is ever given for this “calculus” (algebra, actually).

Measuring self against others, whether you come out “better” or “worse,” always leads to folly. If you believe yourself to be better, you become prideful and arrogant—“high and lifted-up.” And if you believe you have come up short, you become angry, bitter, resentful, and, sometimes, violent.

And you become ungrateful.

The Left’s concern for income inequality was always meant to inflame covetousness and all the sins of commission that flow from that source.

Abel knew.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. Her first novel,Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2009; the second edition in 2012. Her new novel, Arlen’s Harem, is due in January 2014. Help her fund it and help keep her blog alive!

Last week, my husband returned from a six month deployment in Afghanistan.  So politics haven’t been on my mind much.  Mostly, we’ve just enjoyed family time.  The separation is hard, but reunion is the reward.

With hubby still cleaning the moon dust off his boots, I got a little curious.  How is it going over there?  And are they talking about it much in the mainstream news outlets?

My husband and I have lived the military life since before 9/11.  Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom have been a constant for us for a long time.  Also, we don’t have cable TV, and I don’t turn on the local news unless a hurricane is on the way.

It’s hard for me to get a feel for what is common knowledge and sentiment outside of the military community.  Now, President Obama has said for a long time that we were gonna be out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014.  So that is probably common knowledge.

But then recently I read that he wants Afghanistan’s President Karzai to sign a Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA) that keeps US troops there until 2024.

Well that’s confusing.  So I started googling.  Here’s what I found.

Apparently, personnel designated as “combat troops” would withdraw under the BSA, but Special Forces and other counterterrorism personnel could remain another ten years.  This semantic hair-splitting allows President Peace Prize to continue claiming that the war will end in 2014.

I also found out that President Karzai might not sign the BSA, and if he doesn’t, then Obama might be forced to withdraw all troopsJust like Iraq.

Here’s some more tidbits that I found:

Duh:  Iran opposes the foreign presence in Afghanistan.

Oh really?  Thomas Jefferson used the Quran to devise the legal, moral and ethical stipulations for the American Constitution.

Good grief:  The US considered spending $4 billion of foreign aid to get Afghan men married.

Oh dear:  Both sides of the Afghanistan conflict are using Syria as a training ground.

And here’s some things I didn’t find:

I didn’t find much in the way of antiwar protests against the potential extension of the Afghanistan War.  I googled various key phrases, and the best thing I found was a HuffPo article (Amusing sidenote: guess which president is featured in the photo of this 2013 article?)  It’s about a handful of diehards that hold weekly protests in Montpelier.  Good for them, at least they are consistent.

I also didn’t find many recent official statements about the Afghanistan War, beyond the claim that it is ending soon.  Mark Levin recently lamented the lack of a definitive mission in Afghanistan, so I wondered whether that was true.

Whitehouse.gov was my first stop.  If you hover the cursor over “Issues,” a list that includes Defense pops up.  Oddly, the only specific subtopic is End of Iraq War.

Clicking on the topic Defense gets you some Guiding Principles.  There, we learn that President Obama’s new comprehensive strategy for Afghanistan

“will ensure that all elements of national power are engaged . . .  in an
effort to defeat al Qaeda to prevent attacks on the homeland and on our Allies
and partners.”

You have to click on the link to the new comprehensive strategy for more information.  There, you will find statements like

“We will achieve these objectives [by] . . . targeting the insurgency, working to secure key population centers, and increasing efforts to train Afghan security forces.”

“we are focusing assistance on supporting the President of Afghanistan and those ministries, governors, and local leaders who combat corruption and deliver for the people.”

So there is a mission, and maybe it is comprehensive, but it’s awfully confusing.  We will defeat Al Qaeda by targeting them?  What does that mean?  As long as we are going after them, that is a victory?  I guess the assumption is that Al Qaeda will give up after we target them long enough.  I wonder how long that is.

I had a look over at the Department of Defense, too.  They included Afghanistan as a specific subtopic in “Top Issues,” but disappointingly it was just a link to a NATO homepage.

What’s my conclusion?  Oh, I don’t know.  I hate forming opinions on policies that place friends and loved ones in harm’s way.  Please do share yours in a comment.  And remember all the deployed personnel in your prayers tonight.  And maybe every night until 2024.

Tea Party Express rally,  Mishawaka, IN

By John Ruberry

A week ago my wife was admitted to the hospital because she was experiencing abdominal pains and a high fever. On Tuesday she had her gall bladder removed.

She’s covered on my employer-based health care plan.

December is that last month of the “good old days” for health care, particularly for married couples.

That’s because ObamaCare kicks in on New Year’s Day.

Next month some employers–fortunately not mine–are dropping spousal coverage on their health care plans–and some others will be charging a $125 monthly fee to cover spouses who can get insurance elsewhere. That’s over $1,000 a year.

If you like your plan–you can’t keep it.

We’ve learned that ObamaCare is part-government takeover of healthcare, and part wealth redistribution. As for the latter, in order to qualify O’care subsidies, it actually makes financial sense for some married couples to divorce.

But my wife and I aren’t even rich!

Now we know what then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi meant when she said, “We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.” 

I was thinking about what else lurks  in that bill as I sat in the surgery waiting room last week. Unless–or I’m being hopeful–until it’s appealed, our collective ObamaCare journey will resemble the trip upriver in Apocalypse Now.  We have plenty of surprises in store for us–none of them will be pleasant.

“The horror, the horror,” as Colonel Kurtz told Captain Williard in that film.

But I want to end this post on a happy note. My wife is resting and recovering at home.

The November jobs report, which featured headlines of 203,000 jobs added and a 7.0% unemployment rate (both seasonally adjusted), featured something for everybody. Whether one is a starry-eyed optimist, a somewhat-hopeful realist, or an eeyore, if one looks hard enough, one can find it this time around.

I’ll start with the essentially-unqualified good, the employment survey. 203,000 seasonally-adjusted non-farm jobs added, with 196,000 of them in the private sector, would be great…if the economy were recovered from the Great Recession. The manufacturing sector made a significant contribution to that, with a 17,000 add. The average hours worked per week per job was a bit ahead of both last month and last year, which allowed the average weekly pay to also increase slightly.

Not all is completely rosy in the establishment survey, however. Jobs that tend to be low paying or less than permanent accounted for much of the seasonally-adjusted increase – restaurants and bars added 17,900 workers, general merchandise stores added 13,800 workers, and temporary help services added 16,400 workers. One would have hoped the seasonal adjustments would have accounted for the additional hires to handle the Christmas shopping season.

That leads me to the household survey. While the seasonally-adjusted labor force participation rate recovered modestly from October to 63.0%, it is still lower than both September, bo 0.2 percentage points, and last November, by 0.6 percentage points. The returning federal workers accounted for nearly half of the 818,000 increase in the number of employed and more than the entirety of the 365,000 decrease in the unemployed.

Once again, there was a significant divergence between the BLS and Gallup’s measures of adult unemployment. While the BLS says adult unemployment fell from a seasonally-unadjusted 6.8% in October to a seasonally-unadjusted 6.4% in November, Gallup says it went up from a seasonally-unadjusted 7.3% in October to a seasonally-unadjusted 8.2% in November. Somebody has to be wrong.

Going back to September using the BLS numbers, to take out the effects of the partial government shutdown, shows almost no improvement. The number of employed increased by only 87,000, while 265,000 departed the workforce.

Lest one thinks it’s all retirees leaving, allow me to give you the LFPR among the 25-54 year olds, the cream of the workforce. It was a seasonally-adjusted 80.9% and not-seasonally-adjusted 81.1%. Outside of last month, the former is the lowest since November 1984, while the latter is the lowest November since 1983.

Tomorrow you get an extra dose of DaTechGuy on an extra station.

UPDATE: I’ll be joining Conservatively speaking on WCRN in the 8 AM hour as well. so make sure you tune in!

At 9 AM I will be on Business, Politics & Lifestyles on WCRN AM 830 till 10 AM.

I don’t actually know if I’ll be hosting or be a guest for Gary Goldman but click that links above and tune in anyway and we’ll both find out. Update: I’ll be a guest)

What I DO know if that at noon I’ll be in Needham at the Money Matters studios for this week’s DaTechguy on DaRadio

We’ll talk to Robert Stacy McCain about the Lunenburg rape hoax and the death of Mandela (including the bits of his life people want to forget).

Then will come the Panel, with me and Joe Mangiacotti returning from his absence Baldilocks from the Magnificent Seven, Janet Aldrich  of CRNews and in the Bob Beckel Chair our old Marxist friend Dominic Nanni.

Jjoin the conversation at 888-9-fedora.

Listen in live on FTR Radio

or via our Tune-in Stream for the Money Matters Radio Network

And of course there are the terrestrial stations

WBNW Concord Ma 1120 AM FLAGSHIP

WPLM 1390 AM Plymouth MA

WESO 970 AM Southbridge MA

Oh and some bad news, due to a stroke in the family of the owners of the Pottery Paintin place we will have to reschedule our live broadcast from there.  Please remember the family in your prayers

**********************************************

Olimometer 2.52

Less than a day to go for this week.

9 $25 Tip jar hits away from the finish line.

Help us end the year strong, by hitting DaTipJar below.

One of the first things that they teach you in Economics 101 is that “Economics (according to the classical definition) is the study of the allocation of scarce resources which have alternative uses.”

In short, “there is no such thing as a free lunch.”  We cannot have our cake and eat it to.

Professors of Economics continually drill into their students two important principles:  (1.) The notion that there are “Opportunity Costs” associated with everything that we do, and (2.) Secondly, that is important to remember the concept of “Trade-Offs.”

Simply put an “opportunity costs” represents the price that one pays when they decide to purchase an item or a material good.  When you make a particular acquisition of a good or a service, you then forgo the next best potential alternative.

For example, if you decide to buy a luxury car, you no longer have that money at your disposal to buy clothing or something else; with the particular purchase of that car, you have forgone the possibility of spending that money in other ways.  Furthermore, instead of buying that luxury car, you could have chosen to go shopping with your wife or significant other (shopping is an activity that pleases this writer’s wife to no end…).  With the money that you spent on that luxury car, you could have chosen to spend it in other ways such as seeing many, many movies or plays.  But, because the study of economics revolves primarily around the question of resource scarcity, you quickly learn that you must wisely choose how you will allocate your limited resources (in this case money).

What always has puzzled this writer is that our national representatives seem to be so clueless when it comes to “basic economic principles.”

Why does it always seem that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats that serve in both Houses of Congress never seem to understand the basic concept of “opportunity costs?”

Every two years or every four years during mid-term and Presidential elections, we listen to the various aspirants for political office tell us how they increase social services, finance costly military expenditures, and reduce federal outlays – all without either raising taxes or strangling businesses with new and costly governmental regulations.  This brings us to the concept of “trade-offs.”

Families make “trade-offs” all the time.  Because time, treasure, and talents are scarce you have to make hard choices with regards to what you may acquire (or cut back on) at a given time.  Families may have to choose between going away on a nice vacation and sending one of their children to music camp.

Why is it that Washington does not understand the principles of “opportunity costs” or “trade-offs” when they are busy passing sweeping new regulations that inhibit economic activity?

Politicians make it seem that all that the Federal Government has to do is tax and spend and that every social problem or ill will automatically vanish.

The saddest thing about this whole political posturing and campaigning that takes place every two to four years is that we foolishly their promises every election cycle!

Shame on us!!!

Did not Benjamin Franklin warn us after the Constitutional Convention of 1787 when asked what type of government that they had given the new country with this reply – “We have given you a republican form of government if you can keep it.”

Did not John Adams state that there was never a democracy in history that did not commit suicide?

Are we not committing suicide with this huge albatross around our necks known as the national debt?  At the time of this writing, our national debt is quickly approaching 17 Trillion Dollars!  Why is it that despite the party that occupies the White House or the party that controls both houses of Congress that our national debt continues to rise unabated?

Perhaps our problem is with the very nature of running for political office itself.

Politicians do what they know they must do in order to get elected.  It is estimated that only 3% of the American population will ever run for political office even once during their lifetime.  It takes the average person running for political office on average two to six election losses before they experience their first political victory.  What then happens by default is that we reward people for their political perseverance and not necessarily for possessing keen economics acumen.

If our children are going to experience anything near like the Spiritual, Social, Political and Economic prosperity that we as people have enjoyed for more than two centuries, then we MUST quickly get a grip and work to get our financial house in order.

WE MUST DEMAND from our would be politicians (dare we say future statesmen and stateswomen?) that they seriously articulate plans to reduce our gargantuan 16 to 17 Trillion Dollar Debt before they every receive our vote.  In this way – and while there is still time – just maybe FISCAL SANITY CAN BE  RESTORED TO OUR REPUBLIC.

Yesterday marked the fourth anniversary of the imprisonment of Alan P. Gross, a subcontractor for the US government’s Agency for International Development. Humberto Fontova points out that,

In Cuba Alan Gross had worked closely with Cuban Freemasons and Cuban Jewish groups. His main contact José Manuel Collera Vento was in fact the “Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Cuba.” Collera was also–SURPRISE!!!–a KGB-trained agent of the Stalinist regime.

Alan Gross made a total of seven trips to Cuba and worked with Cuban Jewish delegations in Havana, Santiago and Camaguey. Every head of every Cuban Jewish group that Alan Gross worked with and befriended him testified against him in “court.”

The witnesses knew they had no choice; either they testified against Gross, or their lives were over.

Alan Gross, 64, has lost over 100lbs during the course of his jail term, and has a large lump growing on his back, which under the “excellent free healthcare” Cubans endure is considered one of the “chronic illnesses that are typical of his age.”

Gross wrote to Pres. Obama this week, asking for his personal intervention,

The State Department on Monday called on the Cuban government to release Gross. In late November, 66 senators, led by Senator Patrick Leahy, sent Obama a letter asking him to “act expeditiously to take whatever steps are in the national interest” to obtain Gross’ release. White House press secretary Jay Carney said in February that Obama has “followed Mr Gross’ case with concern and urges his release”.

Robert Menendez, Marco Rubio, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and Mario Diaz-Balart have written to the White House on Gross’ behalf. Even Jimmy Carter and Jessie Jackson tried and failed.

As Mary O’Grady of the Wall Street Journal reported, Cuba wants “the release of several Cuban intelligence officers convicted in 2001 of spying on the U.S.” in exchange for Gross’ freedom, rather than a ransom.

But Gross is not the only foreigner in Cuba’s jails:

  • Panamanian businessman Nessin Abadi, in his early 70s and owner of the large Audiofoto chain of electronics stores, jailed without charges in Cuba for over a year.
  • Another Panamanian, Alejandro Abood, then 50, was arrested in Havana in 2001. Abood was released five years ago.
  • Stephen Purvis, a British businessman, was detained in Cuba for 15 months. His company, Coral Capital, was behind the Bellomonte Golf and Country Club development, which lost £10.6 million. Purvis spent 16 months in jail and was released last July, along with Amado Fakhre, who was the company’s executive director.
  • Canadians Sarkis Yacoubian, sentenced to nine years in a prison in June, and his cousin and business partner, Krikor Bayassalian, a Lebanese citizen, who was sentenced to four years in prison.
  • Still awaiting trial is another Canadian, Cy Tokmakjian, who was arrested in 2011.

Purvis asserts that “there are many more in the system than is widely known.” The businessmen’s crime? Trying to collect on the moneys they are owed.

Pres. Obama is calling for an updated US policy on Cuba, and has eased travel and remittance rules for Cuban Americans. In exchange for what?

Cuba’s Communist regime continues to oppress its people – with 761 political arrests just last month – it extorts and jails foreigners, and it’s our hemisphere’s go-to place for sex tourism with minors.

Any easement in relations with Cuba is a failure of Obama’s foreign policy.

Last week, I was talking with some friends and one of them brought up the Washington Redskins mascot controversy. When I suggested that the team’s name be changed to the ‘Washington Negroes,’ it brought the house down.

From there, someone brought up the old Roots miniseries and we got to talking about Alex Haley (1921-1992) the author of the book on which the miniseries was based. In 1978, Haley was sued for plagiarism by Harold_Courlander and the plaintiff won. One of my companions wondered why he hadn’t just published the book as a work of fiction in the first place.

It was then that I was reminded of the historical novel The Dahomean, written by Frank Yerby (1916-1991) and published in 1971. Set in nineteenth-century Virginia, the initial scenario has two white farmers deciding what to name their newly-purchased slave. The slave tells them his African name when asked and speaks only rudimentary English–obviously fresh from his seaborne transport.

The rest of the novel consists of the slave’s memories of his life as a free man in Africa–in the Kingdom of Dahomey. It is fantastic–a great work. (At my first reading of the book I was about twelve years old. I didn’t read it again until I was in my forties, curious to see if my fledgling judgment of the book’s quality held up against my adult reading sensibilities. It did and remains my favorite novel.)

Undoubtedly, Haley was aware of Yerby–an accomplished writer at the time of the publication of The Dahomean–and was also aware of how little commercial success The Dahomean had garnered. (In Yerby’s “A Note to the Reader,” he acknowledges basing his fiction on Melville J. Herskovits’ Dahomey: An Ancient West African Kingdom.) Whether the contemporaneous public showed little interest in such a topic or whether Yerby’s publishers did little to promote Yerby’s novel is unknown. But I suspect that Haley didn’t want a similar obscurity for Roots–published in 1976–and, to that end, decided to pawn it off as an autobiography. No one would find out, he thought. He was correct…for a while. But the truth came out, as it always does.

As for The Dahomean, I’ve always thought it would make a decent movie. In this climate of political correctness, however, the production would certainly have to be independently financed because Yerby’s Dahomeans are, indeed, not politically correct.

As for the present-day climate of racial division and blame for the sins of dead ancestors, Mr. Yerby addresses these things for his own time and I’ll let him speak for himself.

The thoughtful reader will observe that the writer has not attempted to make the Dahomeans either more or less than what they were. He is aware that truth is an uncomfortable quality; that neither the racist, the liberal, nor the advocates of Black Power and/or Pride will find much support for their dearly held and perhaps, to them, emotionally and psychologically necessary myths herein.

So be it. Myths solve nothing, arrange nothing. But then, as the protagonist of this novel is driven in the end to put it, perhaps there are no viable solutions or arrangements in life for any of the desperate problems facing humanity in an all too hostile world.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. Her first novel,Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2009; the second edition in 2012. Her new novel, Arlen’s Harem, is due in January 2014. Help her fund it and help keep her blog alive!

 

Update:  (DTG) After reading this post all it reminded me of this one at the Corner.

Update:  (JAO) The URL of my personal blog has been updated.

I was about to start a piece on the latest Obamacare trap when I spotted Charles Davis story at Memeorandum and my Irony detector started exploding.

You need to let the person being interviewed explain why he is terrible, which is more easily done when he thinks you are stupid or on his side.

What I did looked and felt like an entry-level job in the media. And I enjoyed it—I liked going up to any old white guy in a suit and asking him to explain in his own words why he’s destroying the country. I felt as if I had sort of made it, as much as an English major can. I wasn’t living at home, I got to carry a microphone, and my work was broadcast over the radio. To an outsider looking in, I almost looked like a respectable person.

The problem was I wasn’t being compensated for any of that work or my veneer of respectability.

What? I thought it was those “old white guys” who were ruining the country, not the people who sent you to show why they were so terrible?

As the article continues we discover this is not unusual for the left. Mother Jones, the American Prospect, Common Cause, The New Republic, the Washington monthly, Democracy Now! the Nation all liberal lions and foes of the evil exploiters like WalMart were all doing and paying (or not paying) the same.

Some claimed ignorance:

Robert Reich served as labor secretary under Bill Clinton and is outspoken in his support for a living wage. But when I asked him about the trend of entry-level jobs being relabeled “internships” and being stripped of the pay, benefits, and legal rights they once offered recent college grads (by some estimates, half of the estimated 1.5 million interns in America are unpaid), he professed ignorance.

“This is not a topic I’ve given much thought,” said Reich.

At the New Republic back in October they defended it:

Yes, Young Writers Should Give Their Work Away for Free It’s sad but true: There’s no other way to make it

Picture for a moment if Sam Walton or his successors wrote a piece called “Young shelf stockers should give their work away for free…” The howl of outrage led by the publications above would be the only story in the county.

But the excuse that really caught my eye came from the Washington Monthly

“The reason we don’t pay interns is that we’re a small nonprofit operation and we can’t afford it,” explained Paul Glastris, editor of the Washington Monthly. “We think it’s a valuable experience—it certainly was for me, having started in this business as an unpaid intern at the Washington Monthly.”


Oh they don’t pay workers because they can’t afford it
Mr. Glastris let me tell you a story…

This blog started a week after I lost my job. This week we begin our 6th year. In February for the first time I started drawing a regular pay of $305 weekly before taxes when my readers were willing to pay it to cover the mortgage. In November in a leap of faith I brought on seven writers (Marathon Pundit, Linda Szugyi, Baldilocks, Fausta, AP “Lady Liberty” Dillon, Pastor George Kelly and Steve Eggleston). This is something any reader of this blog already knows

What they (and you Mr. Glastris) don’t know is before I extended that first offer I called up several friends in the business to establish what a fair price range per word was for freelance work to see if I could afford it. I had an idea of how much I figured I could raise my weekly goal and still (hopefully) make it. If the cost was beyond what I thought I could afford. The plan would have stopped right there.

Based on what they told me I made my offers based on them delivering a single piece of 250 words once a week. That is what each of my writers are asked to deliver and that’s what they are paid for. It is on that figure that I increased my weekly goal with readers by just over 11% to a whopping $340 weekly to see the market could bear that price and signed each of my writers for a period of three months to see if it can be done.

That is how capitalism works

My exit question for the left is this: If this blog expect to pay its writers a fair freelance wage when I’m barely making my mortgage how is it that you are OK with doing otherwise or needed Mr. Davis’ piece to change your ways?

Update: Stacy McCain got to this story before me and noted some serious irony

Though it does not pay its professionally experienced interns a dime, Salon (which has published my work in the past) has had the chutzpah to run a number of stories on the plight of unpaid workers, such as, “‘Intern Nation’: Are We Exploiting a Generation of Workers?” and “Unpaid and Sexually Harassed: The Latest Intern Injustice.” The company did not respond to a request for comment.

(The saddest part about this? Although it doesn’t pay its interns a red cent, Salon has still managed to lose millions of dollars a year, every year, since the days of 56K-baud dial-up modems. But, hey, stupid liberals get the “glamour” of working for nothing at a money-losing lefty blog whose star writer is Joan Walsh, so there’s that.)

While offering some advice:

as a shameless capitalist blogger, I’m going to suggest readers shop for fabulous savings at Amazon (from which I receive a small commission) and also include a PayPal “donate” button, so readers can pay me for the pleasure of mocking your stupidity.

Full disclosure Stacy McCain was one of the people I consulted with to establish my per-word rate for the writers

Update 2:  Do conservatives do better?  Well Newsbusters does and calls them out: (emphasis mine)

MRC has long paid its interns, and is presently paying $11 an hour. For so-called progressive organizations that demand higher minimum wages across society, it’s hard to fathom the depth of their hypocrisy on unpaid or barely-paid interns — especially when they have top staff making six-figure salaries.

You can’t claim “measly little nonprofit” status with that kind of wage at the top.

Update 3:  Yid with Lid:

As America approached the holiday buying season Mother Jones writers continually attacked Walmart, the country’s biggest retailer for paying some of its workers at the federal minimum wage level $7.25 an hour.  While there are many reasons to disagree with the Mother Jones stance, perhaps the biggest reason was revealed on Monday—even at $7.25 an hour, Walmart is paying 21% more than Mother Jones pays its lowest level employees.  That’s assuming the magazine’s employees are working only 40 hours a week, which according to the report is a big assumption.

We’ll be hearing more from the Lid later today

******************************************************
Olimometer 2.52

It’s Tuesday and we are only $47 toward our weekly goal of $340 to cover the Mortgage and Da Magnificent Seven I mentioned above.

In November we missed our goal by 13% being short both for the mortgage and for the Seven and unlike the liberal sites mentioned above we don’t have liberal interests keeping us going or internet millionaires keeping the spigots open. Our funding comes from the Tip Jar Hitters and readers. If we deliver (and if they can afford it) they hit DaTipjar and we make it, if we don’t deliver or they can’t afford it, we don’t.

It’s that simple.

Help us make it, please consider hitting DaTipJar below.

We are also offering sponsorships of both the Magnificent Seven & Da Magnificent Panel now is an excellent time to jump on board, contact me here for more details