The Advertising Tax Hurts Affiliates

Many of you know that I have a small business publishing websites. Here in Virginia, small businesses like mine have been threatened by an “affiliate nexus tax”. The Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that in order for a state to require a company to collect and pay sales tax, they had to have a physical presence in a state. Many states facing budget shortfalls are trying to get around the Supreme Court ruling by passing laws stating that affiliates (basically advertisers) for a company in their state constitute a presence there, or nexus. As an active member of the affiliate marketing community, I am opposed to any state legislation that would attempt to use affiliates to establish nexus for out-of state merchants.

I depend on my relationships with many out-of-state merchants for my livelihood. I put their advertisements on my website and earn a commission when someone clicks on that link to make a purchase or registers with that merchant. I am not an employee of any of these companies. I do not collect any money. I do not make the transaction. And I do not ship any goods. I simply advertise these offers to consumers for merchants.

This type of business model does not meet the definition of nexus. If bills like this pass in my state, many retailers will terminate their relationships with me and I will lose a large percentage of my income (income that allows me to offer all of the homeschool resources on TheHomeSchoolmom.com for free). That will impact my ability to provide for my family. It will also impact the levels of income tax I pay to the state and the dollars that I spend locally.

In fact, a handful of states that have passed legislation of this type (such as Rhode Island) have publicly admitted that the states never realized the projected revenue and lost many small businesses in the process.

I want the affiliate marketing space to continue to thrive and grow. These types of laws will put small businesses like mine out of business. If your state is considering an affiliate nexus bill, please let them know that you do not support it because it will not bring in additional revenue and it will hurt small businesses in one of the few growing segments of this economy.

Is Atlas Shrugging?

I enjoy reading The Week magazine for its comparison of left and right media coverage of the news. (And while I’m confessing, I will admit that I also enjoy The Daily Show, although more for Stewart’s ridicule of what passes for journalism these days than for his political views.) Every issue of The Week includes a short editorial piece at the end of the publication. This week’s Editor’s Letter discussed the recent decision in Colorado Springs to cut back on virtually all public spending in lieu of increasing taxes to pay for government services.

“In Colorado Springs, says local businessman Chuck Fowler, ‘Atlas is shrugging.’ The city government of that conservative, anti-tax community had a huge hole carved in its budget… When the city proposed tripling property taxes to make up the shortfall, the indignant citizenry said: No way. So Colorado’s second-largest city is now a laboratory in minimalist, Ayn Rand–style government … Is this our country’s future? Quite clearly, our appetite for government services now exceeds our willingness—indeed, our ability—to pay. Even the federal government cannot print money and borrow trillions indefinitely. So do we accept painful tax increases at virtually every level of income—or do we drastically reduce our ambitions, and our expectations?” The Week, Thursday, February 11, 2010 (The Week article link only available to subscribers; Ayn Rand link mine)

Are we expecting too much or paying too little? Can our government continue to meet the demands of our appetites? Should they? What say you?

To Vaccinate or Not To Vaccinate

Now that I have your attention, I will clarify that I’m specifically referring to the H1N1 vaccination, not all vaccinations. In keeping with the fact that I am a moderate (I actually fall at the intersection where the Left/Right axis intersects with the Authoritarian/Libertarian axis on the Political Spectrum Quiz – it says that I am a centrist social moderate, am a slight non-interventionalist and somewhat culturally conservative just in case you were wondering), I fall somewhat in the middle on the vaccine debate. I am not pro-vaccine nor am I anti-vaccine, but I am pro-research. Every vaccine must be weighed individually and an educated decision should be made based on the risks of the vaccine vs. the risks of the disease.

As you might have guessed, my concern with the H1N1 vaccine (which people in my area are rushing out to get in record numbers; the clinics run out of vaccine before they run out of people waiting in line) is that the potential risk from the vaccine may be greater than the potential risk from the virus. Although I have seen plenty of warnings about the risks of complications from H1N1 in certain population groups, I haven’t seen any hard evidence documenting that the flu is as dangerous as we have been led to believe. What I have seen is huge benefits for the pharmaceutical companies that make Tamiflu and the H1N1 vaccinations. And since the vaccine manufacturers have been granted total legal immunity from lawsuits, there is only the guarantee of enormous profits for them to look forward to. As of July, the US federal government had spent about $1 billion on pandemic flu vaccine, with about $7 billion available for more purchases and pandemic countermeasures. When there is that much money to be made on a product that has total legal immunity from legitimate lawsuits, I see huge red flags. If people were dropping dead at the rate of 20-30% of those infected I could possibly see waiving those legal repercussions, but to avoid a run of the mill virus with such a low rate of complications? Even if the vaccine works and poses little risk, there is something foul when Health and Human Services is this friendly with vaccine producers. It’s almost as if the fox were guarding the hen house…

Vaccine makers are rushing to try to fill the vacuum created by low production so that they can be assured of some of the vast profits to be made from the vaccine. And if they miss the boat on getting the vaccine out there in time for human use, there is always another market to tap.

Back to my original point about evidence of complications from H1N1, pregnant women are an example of one of the groups that is said to be at high risk for complications. The CDC seems to be basing the recommendation to vaccinate pregnant women on the fact that an excess of influenza-associated deaths among pregnant women were reported during the pandemics of 1918–1919 and 1957–1958 combined with the little bit of data on H1N1 collected so far (of the 266 H1N1 deaths investigated by the CDC to date, 15, or 6%, were among pregnant women). “In addition, pregnant women infected with H1N1 were four times as likely as sick people in the general population to be hospitalized for it, she said. But the study cautioned that part of that increase may be because of doctors being more likely to hospitalize a pregnant woman than a nonpregnant person with similar symptoms.” (CNN)

Here is what the CDC says:

Pregnant women with novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infection would be expected to present with typical acute respiratory influenza-like illness (e.g., cough, sore throat, rhinorrhea) and fever. Other symptoms can include body aches, headache, fatigue, vomiting and diarrhea. Many pregnant women will go on to have a typical course of uncomplicated influenza. However, for some pregnant women, illness might progress rapidly, and might be complicated by secondary bacterial infections including pneumonia. Fetal distress associated with severe maternal illness can occur. Case reports of adverse pregnancy outcomes and maternal deaths have been associated with severe illness. Ideally, pregnant women who have suspected novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infection should be tested for influenza. However, treatment should not be delayed pending results of testing and treatment should not be withheld in the absence of testing. This is because antiviral treatment is most effective when started as early as possible after the onset of symptoms (i.e. within the first 2 days). Testing is not available in many instances and, when available, results of novel H1N1 testing often take several days. Clinicians should be aware of circulation of H1N1 in their area and not wait for test results to initiate influenza treatment in women who have symptoms consistent with influenza illness. [emphasis mine]

It seems to me that lacking historical evidence, the CDC is basing the entire recommendation on a big collection of “somes”, “mights” and “cans”. They say that the vaccine is safe because it is based on the seasonal flu vaccine, but since this flu is supposedly very different from the seasonal flu, I can only think that the vaccine must also be significantly different. With only a few weeks of testing, I would have to ask myself if the risk of complications from getting H1N1 outweighs the risk of an unproven vaccine.

Watch this video for a very visual testimony to the fact that complications, while possibly rare, do exist. Research the facts, know the motives of those who promote each vaccine, then make an educated, prayerful decision for yourself and your family.

Something To Make You Smile

Thanks to Deanna for sharing on FB.

A Story in Contrasts

This week, I posted a link to this article on my Facebook page, thinking that it was refreshing to finally see someone (a prominent German fashion magazine even) rejecting the distorted image of unhealthy, underweight woman as models. I thought maybe the tide was turning, but alas, it is not. Today on Yahoo news I found this story about Ralph Lauren, who fired Filippa Hamilton for being overweight and not being able to fit into their clothes. Filippa is 5′10″ and weighs 120 pounds, a size that most American woman can only dream about. As if being fired isn’t bad enough, Ralph Lauren published the Photoshop disaster of Filippa that you see to the right.

First Ralph Lauren denied the whole thing, trying to have the photos removed by claiming copyright over them. Kudos to Boing Boing for responding with this claim of fair use:

Sue and be damned. Copyright law doesn’t give you the right to threaten your critics for pointing out the problems with your offerings. You should know better. And every time you threaten to sue us over stuff like this, we will:

a) Reproduce the original criticism, making damned sure that all our readers get a good, long look at it, and;

b) Publish your spurious legal threat along with copious mockery, so that it becomes highly ranked in search engines where other people you threaten can find it and take heart; and

c) Offer nourishing soup and sandwiches to your models.

And so the whole threat of a lawsuit backfired. To no one’s surprise, Ralph Lauren then admitted: “After further investigation, we have learned that we are responsible for the poor imaging and retouching that resulted in a very distorted image of a woman’s body. We have addressed the problem and going forward will take every precaution to ensure that the caliber of our artwork represents our brand appropriately.” Which apparently included firing the model.

Someone needs to send Ralph Lauren executives over to Germany to get a good dose of what’s healthy, and the rest of us need to send a message to Ralph Lauren with our pocketbooks.

I Can’t Imagine Who Would Want To See Their Baby on a Dinner Plate

But Martha Stewart apparently thinks there is a market for babies dressed up to look like dinner. I would make this a full blog post, but honestly I can’t think of anything to say about this creepy costume.

Do What You Enjoy

I’ve been interviewed a few times by reporters interested in how people start entrepreneurial businesses, and there is one thing I always share: Don’t look for a business ideas that have earning potential, take something that you love or in which you are interested and figure out how to make it a business. Is there a need that your interest can fill? Think outside of the box. Marketers trying to sell you the latest “Get rich quick on the Internet” scheme are a dime a dozen (and the schemes usually don’t work), but unless you are doing something you enjoy, it will soon become drudgery and you are likely to give up or at the very least hate it. On the other hand, being creative with your interests can build a business that you love and enjoy for years to come.

Menus4Moms is a great example. Combining my love of cooking and my inclination to organize and plan, I started M4M as a small section of my homeschool website, offering free menus to busy homeschool moms. Word spread and soon that section was getting as much traffic as the rest of the website. Realizing that the menus also appealed to working moms and stay at home moms who don’t homeschool, I decided to move it to its own domain. Since then, Menus4Moms has launched 4 premium menus (Busy Mom Menu, Frugal Mom Menu, Food Ministry Menu – for Angel Food boxes – and Living Gluten-free Casein-free) and has a loyal following of busy moms. Producing the weekly menus and managing the subscribers is work and requires some skill working with websites and scripts, but it is enjoyable and challenging.

I mention all of this because of an article I saw today on Yahoo! Finance about young entrepreneurs who started businesses (most of them while in high school and college) doing something that interested them. Their stories are examples of what I believe is true about starting a business – do what you love (using wisdom and being realistic about the market and your own abilities) and success is easier to come by. Inspiration and creativity naturally follow when you are pursuing your passion, making the dedication necessary to succeed more enjoyable.