<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: HuffingtonPost: Arianna&#8217;s Pink-Collar Sweatshop?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bizzyblog.com/2005/09/12/huffingtonpost-ariannas-pink-collar-sweatshop/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2005/09/12/huffingtonpost-ariannas-pink-collar-sweatshop/</link>
	<description>The Business End of the Blogosphere</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:51:50 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: TBlumer</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2005/09/12/huffingtonpost-ariannas-pink-collar-sweatshop/#comment-2340</link>
		<dc:creator>TBlumer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:50:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/?p=477#comment-2340</guid>
		<description>&lt;p align="left"&gt;As I said: "The couple divorced, apparently amicably, in 1997 and from all indications split their fortune down the middle, leaving Arianna with $30 million plus post-1994 investment growth."

&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align="left"&gt;My memory is that they did split his fortune down the middle, or awfully close to it. Even if I'm wrong about that, I didn't figure in any investment returns from 1994-1997, which should have been substantial.

&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align="left"&gt;The central point, that a lot of unpaid staffers were at the time of the post sweating it out for no pay at an employer who clearly has the money to pay, stands. Whether she's still sitting on $2 million or has $52 million almost doesn't matter. 

&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align="left"&gt;And just imagine if a conservative for-profit business (which HuffPost is supposed to be) tried to take advantage of large amounts of unpaid labor as she is. They would not be getting the sympathetic free pass this Biz Weak person gave Arianna.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p align="left">As I said: &#8220;The couple divorced, apparently amicably, in 1997 and from all indications split their fortune down the middle, leaving Arianna with $30 million plus post-1994 investment growth.&#8221;</p>
<p align="left">My memory is that they did split his fortune down the middle, or awfully close to it. Even if I&#8217;m wrong about that, I didn&#8217;t figure in any investment returns from 1994-1997, which should have been substantial.</p>
<p align="left">The central point, that a lot of unpaid staffers were at the time of the post sweating it out for no pay at an employer who clearly has the money to pay, stands. Whether she&#8217;s still sitting on $2 million or has $52 million almost doesn&#8217;t matter. </p>
<p align="left">And just imagine if a conservative for-profit business (which HuffPost is supposed to be) tried to take advantage of large amounts of unpaid labor as she is. They would not be getting the sympathetic free pass this Biz Weak person gave Arianna.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Truth</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2005/09/12/huffingtonpost-ariannas-pink-collar-sweatshop/#comment-2339</link>
		<dc:creator>Truth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:01:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/?p=477#comment-2339</guid>
		<description>&lt;p align="left"&gt;Many factual inaccuracies here.  Your casual calculation of Arianna's wealth, for one.  In the state of California (where they were married; I know they lived in Washington, D.C. while Michael was in Congress), a spouse is not entitled to the inheritance of her partner.  She is only entitled to half of the income of the partner during marriage.  As Michael's "$60 million" (quoted because it's an estimate) was an inheritance, Arianna would not be entitled to any of it.  To be sure, you received a nice divorce settlement.  I would bet you anything, though, that it was FAR less than $30 million.  

&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align="left"&gt;And it's all downhill from there.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p align="left">Many factual inaccuracies here.  Your casual calculation of Arianna&#8217;s wealth, for one.  In the state of California (where they were married; I know they lived in Washington, D.C. while Michael was in Congress), a spouse is not entitled to the inheritance of her partner.  She is only entitled to half of the income of the partner during marriage.  As Michael&#8217;s &#8220;$60 million&#8221; (quoted because it&#8217;s an estimate) was an inheritance, Arianna would not be entitled to any of it.  To be sure, you received a nice divorce settlement.  I would bet you anything, though, that it was FAR less than $30 million.  </p>
<p align="left">And it&#8217;s all downhill from there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mister Snitch!</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2005/09/12/huffingtonpost-ariannas-pink-collar-sweatshop/#comment-1534</link>
		<dc:creator>Mister Snitch!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Sep 2005 17:44:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/?p=477#comment-1534</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;The celebrity politics of energy&lt;/strong&gt;

Arianna Huffington, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Paul Newman: What they say, and what they do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>The celebrity politics of energy</strong></p>
<p>Arianna Huffington, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Paul Newman: What they say, and what they do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
