My column tomorrow is about President Obama's recent attacks
on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for 1) collecting money from
foreign affiliates (totaling about 0.05 percent of its budget) and
2) sponsoring ads that criticize Democrats. White House Counsel Bob
Bauer insists the president did not mean to suggest any connection
between those two points, even though he repeatedly put them in the
same sentence, since that would amount to accusing the group of
violating the federal ban on election-related spending by foreign
nationals. Obama admits he has no evidence to support that charge.
But neither does he have any evidence to refute it! Which,
according to presidential adviser David Axelrod, is the whole
point—i.e., the
president feels no compunction about making shit up without
full disclosure, who can say whether the Chamber of Commerce is
violating the law? What is it trying to hide? Yesterday ABC Senior
White House Correspondent Jake Tapper, whose terrier-like tenacity
puts his allegedly dogged predecessor Sam Donaldson to shame,
pressed Axelrod on this line of "text-decoration: line-through;">innuendo reasoning:
TAPPER: So the Chamber says no foreign money is paying for
any of their political activities.AXELROD: And I guess my answer to the Chamber is just
disclose where your money is coming from and that will end all the
questions....TAPPER: Their answer would be why should they disclose. No
one's disclosing.AXELROD: Right, and they have a point there. We tried to
pass a law in the Congress -- every Democrat in the Senate voted
for it, every Republican in the Senate voted against it -- that
said everyone has to disclose....The Republicans
blocked that bill, and the question to them and their allies is:
what are they hiding that they don't want the American people to
see?TAPPER: But you're asking the Chamber to prove a negative.
"Prove that you're not doing such and such accusation."AXELROD: It’s not proving a negative, Jake, because all
you have to do to clear up the questions is reveal who your donors
are from....TAPPER: But there's a difference between the Chamber and
some of these other organizations, right? The Chamber -- we know
what it stands for, we know basically the money is coming from big
business and corporations. These other groups...they have
names like "Americans For Prosperity," we don’t know what
they stand for or who’s behind it. But the Chamber is
different, isn't it?AXELROD: Well, we certainly do know about the Chamber,
that they have foreign affiliates and they do raise money for the
organization that way....TAPPER: But what do you say to people who argue you are
demonizing an organization for a charge that nobody knows if it's
true or not?AXELROD: Well I’m not demonizing the Chamber of
Commerce. I’m simply suggesting to them that they disclose the
source of the $75 million that they are spending in campaigns and
put to rest...the questions that...have been raised.TAPPER: Isn't that like the whackjobs that tell the
president he needs to show them his full long-form birth
certificate so he can put to rest the questions that have been
raised?AXELROD: The president's birth certificate has been
available to people.TAPPER: The long form?
Axelrod conspicuously dodged that last question. What is he
trying to hide?
More on the lopsided, blatantly partisan DISCLOSE Act, to which
Axelrod refers in his second response,
here.
Each Sunday, This Week hits a new low. For sheer inanity, nothing to date has topped Meghan McCain on the show’s roundtable. What exactly does she bring to this? Well, self-parody for starters. Asked about Christine O’Donnell, McCain pronounces:
Well, I speak as a 26-year-old woman. And my problem is that, no matter what, Christine O’Donnell is making a mockery of running for public office. She has no real history, no real success in any kind of business. And what that sends to my generation is, one day, you can just wake up and run for Senate, no matter how much lack of experience you have. And it scares me for a lot of reasons, and I just know (inaudible) it just turns people off, because she’s seen as a nutjob.
I suppose the comments would have more weight if not coming from a celebrity-by-nepotism with “no real history, no real success in any kind of business.” Other than her father and her propensity to bash conservatives, what exactly are her qualifications to discuss much of anything? Ah, but that’s more than enough for Amanpour.
McCain was also a font of misinformation regarding the impact of the Tea Party on younger voters:
MCCAIN: I wrote this out of personal experience. I know how I’m vilified on an absolutely daily basis. No matter what the Republican Party wants to think about this Tea Party movement, it is losing young voters at a rapid rate. And this isn’t going to change unless we start changing our message. …
AMANPOUR: She has a point, right? Young voters are the future. …
WILL: Not a political point. No, 20 months ago the question was, does the Republican Party have a future? In the last 20 months, we’ve had two things happen. A, the Tea Party movement has energized the Republican Party, and the Democrats are trying to hold onto one house of Congress right now. I don’t think that’s the sign of a party that’s in trouble.
DOWD: And I think Meghan’s right, but you have to also make the counterpoint. As Barack Obama won younger voters by 30 points. He as of right now has a difficulty getting any of those voters to a rally who have lost — a great deal are disappointed in what’s happened. …
So Amanpour brings on a political ignoramus, agrees with McCain’s “analysis,” and then must be corrected by two other guests who are too polite to simply say, “She doesn’t know what she is talking about.”
That was topped by Amanpour’s gleeful rooting for the administration’s crusade against political speech. There was this:
AMANPOUR: . . .I mean, where is campaign finance reform? Do you think it’s dead?
WILL: Dead.
AMANPOUR: Dead in the water?
WILL: Stake through it.
AMANPOUR: And you don’t like it all?
WILL: Absolutely wonderful development this year is — is the rolling back …
AMANPOUR: How can that be wonderful for a democracy, I mean, not to know where all of this money comes from and who’s putting it in?
WILL: What — what you’re talking about with the amount of money is speech. And the question is, do you have to notify the government before you can speak on politics?
(CROSSTALK)
AMANPOUR: … Justice Stevens (inaudible) that, you know, money doesn’t speak.
WILL: Well, almost all money in politics is spent on disseminating political advocacy. That’s just a fact. Now, Mr. Biden and — and the narrative from the Democrats has been this is secret money that the Koch brothers are putting into it. Well, get your story straight. Do we not — do we know who these guys are? I mean, some of them are about as anonymous as George Soros.
There isn’t a White House position for which Amanpour won’t vouch. There is no conservative principle that she doesn’t regard with disdain. How can unregulated speech be good for a democracy!? She is stumped.
I’m stumped, too. Amanpour is a ratings and journalistic disaster. It is hard to understand why she was picked for a serious Sunday talk-show-host position and even harder to understand what she is still doing there. The White House is taking an opportunity to clean house. Shouldn’t ABC News do the same?
robert shumake twitter
Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad. Find more iPad Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
Northwest <b>News</b>: Starbucks opens 'boozy bucks' serving beer, wine <b>...</b>
News is a daily roundup of what's making headlines in the Pacific Northwest.
Loopt adds Facebook Places integration | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Loopt adds Facebook Places integration. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
robert shumake twitter
My column tomorrow is about President Obama's recent attacks
on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for 1) collecting money from
foreign affiliates (totaling about 0.05 percent of its budget) and
2) sponsoring ads that criticize Democrats. White House Counsel Bob
Bauer insists the president did not mean to suggest any connection
between those two points, even though he repeatedly put them in the
same sentence, since that would amount to accusing the group of
violating the federal ban on election-related spending by foreign
nationals. Obama admits he has no evidence to support that charge.
But neither does he have any evidence to refute it! Which,
according to presidential adviser David Axelrod, is the whole
point—i.e., the
president feels no compunction about making shit up without
full disclosure, who can say whether the Chamber of Commerce is
violating the law? What is it trying to hide? Yesterday ABC Senior
White House Correspondent Jake Tapper, whose terrier-like tenacity
puts his allegedly dogged predecessor Sam Donaldson to shame,
pressed Axelrod on this line of "text-decoration: line-through;">innuendo reasoning:
TAPPER: So the Chamber says no foreign money is paying for
any of their political activities.AXELROD: And I guess my answer to the Chamber is just
disclose where your money is coming from and that will end all the
questions....TAPPER: Their answer would be why should they disclose. No
one's disclosing.AXELROD: Right, and they have a point there. We tried to
pass a law in the Congress -- every Democrat in the Senate voted
for it, every Republican in the Senate voted against it -- that
said everyone has to disclose....The Republicans
blocked that bill, and the question to them and their allies is:
what are they hiding that they don't want the American people to
see?TAPPER: But you're asking the Chamber to prove a negative.
"Prove that you're not doing such and such accusation."AXELROD: It’s not proving a negative, Jake, because all
you have to do to clear up the questions is reveal who your donors
are from....TAPPER: But there's a difference between the Chamber and
some of these other organizations, right? The Chamber -- we know
what it stands for, we know basically the money is coming from big
business and corporations. These other groups...they have
names like "Americans For Prosperity," we don’t know what
they stand for or who’s behind it. But the Chamber is
different, isn't it?AXELROD: Well, we certainly do know about the Chamber,
that they have foreign affiliates and they do raise money for the
organization that way....TAPPER: But what do you say to people who argue you are
demonizing an organization for a charge that nobody knows if it's
true or not?AXELROD: Well I’m not demonizing the Chamber of
Commerce. I’m simply suggesting to them that they disclose the
source of the $75 million that they are spending in campaigns and
put to rest...the questions that...have been raised.TAPPER: Isn't that like the whackjobs that tell the
president he needs to show them his full long-form birth
certificate so he can put to rest the questions that have been
raised?AXELROD: The president's birth certificate has been
available to people.TAPPER: The long form?
Axelrod conspicuously dodged that last question. What is he
trying to hide?
More on the lopsided, blatantly partisan DISCLOSE Act, to which
Axelrod refers in his second response,
here.
Each Sunday, This Week hits a new low. For sheer inanity, nothing to date has topped Meghan McCain on the show’s roundtable. What exactly does she bring to this? Well, self-parody for starters. Asked about Christine O’Donnell, McCain pronounces:
Well, I speak as a 26-year-old woman. And my problem is that, no matter what, Christine O’Donnell is making a mockery of running for public office. She has no real history, no real success in any kind of business. And what that sends to my generation is, one day, you can just wake up and run for Senate, no matter how much lack of experience you have. And it scares me for a lot of reasons, and I just know (inaudible) it just turns people off, because she’s seen as a nutjob.
I suppose the comments would have more weight if not coming from a celebrity-by-nepotism with “no real history, no real success in any kind of business.” Other than her father and her propensity to bash conservatives, what exactly are her qualifications to discuss much of anything? Ah, but that’s more than enough for Amanpour.
McCain was also a font of misinformation regarding the impact of the Tea Party on younger voters:
MCCAIN: I wrote this out of personal experience. I know how I’m vilified on an absolutely daily basis. No matter what the Republican Party wants to think about this Tea Party movement, it is losing young voters at a rapid rate. And this isn’t going to change unless we start changing our message. …
AMANPOUR: She has a point, right? Young voters are the future. …
WILL: Not a political point. No, 20 months ago the question was, does the Republican Party have a future? In the last 20 months, we’ve had two things happen. A, the Tea Party movement has energized the Republican Party, and the Democrats are trying to hold onto one house of Congress right now. I don’t think that’s the sign of a party that’s in trouble.
DOWD: And I think Meghan’s right, but you have to also make the counterpoint. As Barack Obama won younger voters by 30 points. He as of right now has a difficulty getting any of those voters to a rally who have lost — a great deal are disappointed in what’s happened. …
So Amanpour brings on a political ignoramus, agrees with McCain’s “analysis,” and then must be corrected by two other guests who are too polite to simply say, “She doesn’t know what she is talking about.”
That was topped by Amanpour’s gleeful rooting for the administration’s crusade against political speech. There was this:
AMANPOUR: . . .I mean, where is campaign finance reform? Do you think it’s dead?
WILL: Dead.
AMANPOUR: Dead in the water?
WILL: Stake through it.
AMANPOUR: And you don’t like it all?
WILL: Absolutely wonderful development this year is — is the rolling back …
AMANPOUR: How can that be wonderful for a democracy, I mean, not to know where all of this money comes from and who’s putting it in?
WILL: What — what you’re talking about with the amount of money is speech. And the question is, do you have to notify the government before you can speak on politics?
(CROSSTALK)
AMANPOUR: … Justice Stevens (inaudible) that, you know, money doesn’t speak.
WILL: Well, almost all money in politics is spent on disseminating political advocacy. That’s just a fact. Now, Mr. Biden and — and the narrative from the Democrats has been this is secret money that the Koch brothers are putting into it. Well, get your story straight. Do we not — do we know who these guys are? I mean, some of them are about as anonymous as George Soros.
There isn’t a White House position for which Amanpour won’t vouch. There is no conservative principle that she doesn’t regard with disdain. How can unregulated speech be good for a democracy!? She is stumped.
I’m stumped, too. Amanpour is a ratings and journalistic disaster. It is hard to understand why she was picked for a serious Sunday talk-show-host position and even harder to understand what she is still doing there. The White House is taking an opportunity to clean house. Shouldn’t ABC News do the same?
benchcraft company scam
Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad. Find more iPad Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
Northwest <b>News</b>: Starbucks opens 'boozy bucks' serving beer, wine <b>...</b>
News is a daily roundup of what's making headlines in the Pacific Northwest.
Loopt adds Facebook Places integration | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Loopt adds Facebook Places integration. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
robert shumake hall of shame
robert shumake detroit
robert shumake twitter
Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad. Find more iPad Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
Northwest <b>News</b>: Starbucks opens 'boozy bucks' serving beer, wine <b>...</b>
News is a daily roundup of what's making headlines in the Pacific Northwest.
Loopt adds Facebook Places integration | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Loopt adds Facebook Places integration. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
robert shumake hall of shame
My column tomorrow is about President Obama's recent attacks
on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for 1) collecting money from
foreign affiliates (totaling about 0.05 percent of its budget) and
2) sponsoring ads that criticize Democrats. White House Counsel Bob
Bauer insists the president did not mean to suggest any connection
between those two points, even though he repeatedly put them in the
same sentence, since that would amount to accusing the group of
violating the federal ban on election-related spending by foreign
nationals. Obama admits he has no evidence to support that charge.
But neither does he have any evidence to refute it! Which,
according to presidential adviser David Axelrod, is the whole
point—i.e., the
president feels no compunction about making shit up without
full disclosure, who can say whether the Chamber of Commerce is
violating the law? What is it trying to hide? Yesterday ABC Senior
White House Correspondent Jake Tapper, whose terrier-like tenacity
puts his allegedly dogged predecessor Sam Donaldson to shame,
pressed Axelrod on this line of "text-decoration: line-through;">innuendo reasoning:
TAPPER: So the Chamber says no foreign money is paying for
any of their political activities.AXELROD: And I guess my answer to the Chamber is just
disclose where your money is coming from and that will end all the
questions....TAPPER: Their answer would be why should they disclose. No
one's disclosing.AXELROD: Right, and they have a point there. We tried to
pass a law in the Congress -- every Democrat in the Senate voted
for it, every Republican in the Senate voted against it -- that
said everyone has to disclose....The Republicans
blocked that bill, and the question to them and their allies is:
what are they hiding that they don't want the American people to
see?TAPPER: But you're asking the Chamber to prove a negative.
"Prove that you're not doing such and such accusation."AXELROD: It’s not proving a negative, Jake, because all
you have to do to clear up the questions is reveal who your donors
are from....TAPPER: But there's a difference between the Chamber and
some of these other organizations, right? The Chamber -- we know
what it stands for, we know basically the money is coming from big
business and corporations. These other groups...they have
names like "Americans For Prosperity," we don’t know what
they stand for or who’s behind it. But the Chamber is
different, isn't it?AXELROD: Well, we certainly do know about the Chamber,
that they have foreign affiliates and they do raise money for the
organization that way....TAPPER: But what do you say to people who argue you are
demonizing an organization for a charge that nobody knows if it's
true or not?AXELROD: Well I’m not demonizing the Chamber of
Commerce. I’m simply suggesting to them that they disclose the
source of the $75 million that they are spending in campaigns and
put to rest...the questions that...have been raised.TAPPER: Isn't that like the whackjobs that tell the
president he needs to show them his full long-form birth
certificate so he can put to rest the questions that have been
raised?AXELROD: The president's birth certificate has been
available to people.TAPPER: The long form?
Axelrod conspicuously dodged that last question. What is he
trying to hide?
More on the lopsided, blatantly partisan DISCLOSE Act, to which
Axelrod refers in his second response,
here.
Each Sunday, This Week hits a new low. For sheer inanity, nothing to date has topped Meghan McCain on the show’s roundtable. What exactly does she bring to this? Well, self-parody for starters. Asked about Christine O’Donnell, McCain pronounces:
Well, I speak as a 26-year-old woman. And my problem is that, no matter what, Christine O’Donnell is making a mockery of running for public office. She has no real history, no real success in any kind of business. And what that sends to my generation is, one day, you can just wake up and run for Senate, no matter how much lack of experience you have. And it scares me for a lot of reasons, and I just know (inaudible) it just turns people off, because she’s seen as a nutjob.
I suppose the comments would have more weight if not coming from a celebrity-by-nepotism with “no real history, no real success in any kind of business.” Other than her father and her propensity to bash conservatives, what exactly are her qualifications to discuss much of anything? Ah, but that’s more than enough for Amanpour.
McCain was also a font of misinformation regarding the impact of the Tea Party on younger voters:
MCCAIN: I wrote this out of personal experience. I know how I’m vilified on an absolutely daily basis. No matter what the Republican Party wants to think about this Tea Party movement, it is losing young voters at a rapid rate. And this isn’t going to change unless we start changing our message. …
AMANPOUR: She has a point, right? Young voters are the future. …
WILL: Not a political point. No, 20 months ago the question was, does the Republican Party have a future? In the last 20 months, we’ve had two things happen. A, the Tea Party movement has energized the Republican Party, and the Democrats are trying to hold onto one house of Congress right now. I don’t think that’s the sign of a party that’s in trouble.
DOWD: And I think Meghan’s right, but you have to also make the counterpoint. As Barack Obama won younger voters by 30 points. He as of right now has a difficulty getting any of those voters to a rally who have lost — a great deal are disappointed in what’s happened. …
So Amanpour brings on a political ignoramus, agrees with McCain’s “analysis,” and then must be corrected by two other guests who are too polite to simply say, “She doesn’t know what she is talking about.”
That was topped by Amanpour’s gleeful rooting for the administration’s crusade against political speech. There was this:
AMANPOUR: . . .I mean, where is campaign finance reform? Do you think it’s dead?
WILL: Dead.
AMANPOUR: Dead in the water?
WILL: Stake through it.
AMANPOUR: And you don’t like it all?
WILL: Absolutely wonderful development this year is — is the rolling back …
AMANPOUR: How can that be wonderful for a democracy, I mean, not to know where all of this money comes from and who’s putting it in?
WILL: What — what you’re talking about with the amount of money is speech. And the question is, do you have to notify the government before you can speak on politics?
(CROSSTALK)
AMANPOUR: … Justice Stevens (inaudible) that, you know, money doesn’t speak.
WILL: Well, almost all money in politics is spent on disseminating political advocacy. That’s just a fact. Now, Mr. Biden and — and the narrative from the Democrats has been this is secret money that the Koch brothers are putting into it. Well, get your story straight. Do we not — do we know who these guys are? I mean, some of them are about as anonymous as George Soros.
There isn’t a White House position for which Amanpour won’t vouch. There is no conservative principle that she doesn’t regard with disdain. How can unregulated speech be good for a democracy!? She is stumped.
I’m stumped, too. Amanpour is a ratings and journalistic disaster. It is hard to understand why she was picked for a serious Sunday talk-show-host position and even harder to understand what she is still doing there. The White House is taking an opportunity to clean house. Shouldn’t ABC News do the same?
robert shumake twitter
robert shumake twitter
Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad. Find more iPad Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
Northwest <b>News</b>: Starbucks opens 'boozy bucks' serving beer, wine <b>...</b>
News is a daily roundup of what's making headlines in the Pacific Northwest.
Loopt adds Facebook Places integration | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Loopt adds Facebook Places integration. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
robert shumake hall of shame
robert shumake detroit
Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad. Find more iPad Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
Northwest <b>News</b>: Starbucks opens 'boozy bucks' serving beer, wine <b>...</b>
News is a daily roundup of what's making headlines in the Pacific Northwest.
Loopt adds Facebook Places integration | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Loopt adds Facebook Places integration. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
robert shumake detroit
Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad. Find more iPad Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
Northwest <b>News</b>: Starbucks opens 'boozy bucks' serving beer, wine <b>...</b>
News is a daily roundup of what's making headlines in the Pacific Northwest.
Loopt adds Facebook Places integration | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Loopt adds Facebook Places integration. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
robert shumake twitter
Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad. Find more iPad Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
Northwest <b>News</b>: Starbucks opens 'boozy bucks' serving beer, wine <b>...</b>
News is a daily roundup of what's making headlines in the Pacific Northwest.
Loopt adds Facebook Places integration | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Loopt adds Facebook Places integration. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
how to lose weight fast robert shumake twitter
robert shumake twitter
robert shumake detroit
robert shumake detroit
Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad. Find more iPad Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
Northwest <b>News</b>: Starbucks opens 'boozy bucks' serving beer, wine <b>...</b>
News is a daily roundup of what's making headlines in the Pacific Northwest.
Loopt adds Facebook Places integration | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Loopt adds Facebook Places integration. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
robert shumake twitter
Why do so many people often dive headfirst into starting their own online business or getting into an internet moneymaking scheme, when they would think twice about starting up a business or entering a get rich quick scheme offline? Because there's this persistent myth that the internet is the only place in the world where you can rake in tons of dough with zero investment. Want to make money off affiliate advertising? Sign up for a free webhosting account, build a site using a pagebuilder, slap some adblocks up and watch the money roll in. Want to make money off your photographs? Sign up for a microstock agency and snap pictures with your pre-existing budget point and shoot. Want to sell your graphic design services? Sign up with a crowd-sourcing website, then make a bid on a project using nothing but the image editor that came installed on your computer.
Easy as pie, right? Unfortunately not, and here's why: although it's true that you could technically spend no money at all getting an internet venture started, you won't go very far in terms of revenue. Why? Because the only way to really get anywhere is to invest some money. The reason? An important key to creating a successful online business is to present something as professionally as possible. And guess what? Professionalism costs money.
Let's examine this "professionalism = money" principle with a few examples. Let's say you want to make money from Google Adsense by putting up a website and placing some text ads on it. If you want to make any real money from this site, you can't just build a lame home page using a free web hosting account. You have to buy a domain for your site, get it hosted at a fee-based web host, and-- if you don't have the design skills-- either purchase a template or hire someone to design it for you.
It seems like a lot of trouble to go through, but there's a good reason for it. In order to make a decent amount of income money off of Adsense, you have to attract thousands, if not millions, of visitors a month. The only way you could come close to achieving that type of traffic is to have a site that people will take seriously enough to visit and recommend to other people. If you put out a poorly designed site hosted at a free web host that slathers it in chintzy ads, carves it up into a multitude of frames, and gives it a really long, indistinct URL like www.freewebhost34.com/~username/mywebhost, you'll never see the type of numbers needed to earn a substantial amount of money. So spending money to buy a domain, host your site, and even design it is a must if you hope to earn any kind of decent revenue off Google Adsense.
Let's look at another example-- microstock agencies. People have flocked to microstock in droves, because they believe that all it takes to make money is to just use any pre-existing budget old point and shoot that they have lying around. As a person who's done microstock I can tell you that nothing could be further from the truth. The major microstock agencies have very high technical standards in terms of the images they'll accept into their inventory; any image that falls short of the ideal will get rejected. What this means is that more often than not, when you join an agency you will have to invest in a pricy prosumer camera or DSLR that can take higher quality photos than the one your cheap point and shoot takes. You can try to submit images shot with a 3 year old $150 camera, but trust me-- you'll get nothing but a string of rejections for your efforts no matter how well composed they are.
One last example of this "professionalism= money" principle at work is freelance graphic design. Let's say you're absolutely brilliant with an image editor (in fact, you're the Picasso of computer graphic artists!) You decide to offer your graphic design services to the public, whether through your own portfolio site or as a member of a crowdsourcing website such as 99 Designs. If you want to make money-- real money-- you can't just use whatever OEM software came bundled with your printer or installed with your O/S. You have to invest in a high end graphics application like Adobe Photoshop, because one of the many requirements that clients demand from a professional designer is that the finished piece be delivered in Photoshop's native image format (.psd) so it can be customized to their liking. You could try to run your graphic design business by squeaking by on a generic image editor, but it would be at a huge cost. You'd lose out on scores of potential business opportunities, since you wouldn't be able to produce a .psd for many clients.
Bottom line? True to the entrepreneur's credo, if you want to do well at earning revenue online, you have to spend money to make money, because professionalism demands it. This doesn't necessarily mean that it's impossible to make any money should you not make a small investment, just that you probably won't make nearly as much as you could. So before you even think about starting an internet business or affiliate scheme, be prepared to spend the money you need to get your internet venture off the ground as professionally as possible. Resist the temptation to be a cheapskate, because the money you invest initially could make a huge difference in how much you wind up earning in the long run.
robert shumake detroit
Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad. Find more iPad Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
Northwest <b>News</b>: Starbucks opens 'boozy bucks' serving beer, wine <b>...</b>
News is a daily roundup of what's making headlines in the Pacific Northwest.
Loopt adds Facebook Places integration | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Loopt adds Facebook Places integration. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
robert shumake twitter
Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Watershed debuts Waterproof Bag for iPad. Find more iPad Accessories news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
Northwest <b>News</b>: Starbucks opens 'boozy bucks' serving beer, wine <b>...</b>
News is a daily roundup of what's making headlines in the Pacific Northwest.
Loopt adds Facebook Places integration | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the Loopt adds Facebook Places integration. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
No comments:
Post a Comment