Wages & Prices

By Julia A. Seymour | December 17, 2014 | 10:04 AM EST

Although 2014 was an election year, venomous attacks weren’t just in the campaign commercials. Most recently, anti-business attacks came from protesters across the country in the form of #ShutItDown. And there were many other anti-business views presented by the liberal news media, TV programming and left-wing extremists this year.

Attacks on businesses, executives and certain products were abundant this year. They included a propagandist “McMocumentary” that portrayed McDonald’s as heartless, which depicted Ronald McDonald driving over his own sister after she demanded a raise. Industries including agriculture, coal and retail were also under fire.

MRC Business compiled a list of the 10 worst left-wing and media attacks on business from the past year:

By Clay Waters | December 16, 2014 | 1:38 AM EST

An epic example of fanciful, fatuous liberalism featured in the most recent New York Times Sunday Review, a screed from Times food writer Mark Bittman that tried to tie in every single current event into a neat package labeled Republican Evil: "The police killing unarmed civilians. Horrifying income inequality. Rotting infrastructure and an unsafe "safety net." An inability to respond to climate, public health and environmental threats. A food system that causes disease. An occasionally dysfunctional and even cruel government. A sizable segment of the population excluded from work and subject to near-random incarceration. You get it: This is the United States, which, with the incoming Congress, might actually get worse."

By Tom Blumer | December 7, 2014 | 9:52 PM EST

Just before Thanksgiving, Our Walmart and the United Food and Commerical Workers went into high gear in their effort to draw attention to their advocacy of $15-per-hour minimum wage at the nation's largest retailer. Just after the holiday, I pointed to a column by the Manhattan Institute's Diana Furchtgott-Roth, who quickly discovered that many Kroger employees represented by the UFCW earn far less.

It didn't take much additional research to demonstrate that any fair and balanced reporting on the union's Our Walmart activities should note that "thousands of UFCW members, and perhaps even a majority, earn less, and often far less, than $15 per hour."

By Tom Blumer | November 28, 2014 | 1:55 PM EST

In a Tuesday column originally appearing at RealClearMarkets.com (found in more readable form at Economics21.org), the Manhattan Institute's Diana Furchtgott-Roth tore into the hypocrites at OUR Walmart, the union-backed effort to intimidate the nation's largest retailer into paying all employees at least $15 per hour.

In the process, Furchtgott-Roth noted a particularly important fact which I have yet to see reported elsewhere in the organized labor-sympathetic establishment press about the United Food and Commerical Workers (UFCW), one of the primary backers of today's OUR Walmart Black Friday protests. While UFCW demands $15 per hour for Walmart employees, many of its own members at other grocery chains often earn nowhere near that, and, under current contracts, never will (bolds are mine):

By Tom Blumer | November 25, 2014 | 7:10 PM EST

After reading Elaine Kurtenbach's coverage of how Japan's latest dive into yet another recession is affecting young people there, I can only say, "The Keynesian koolaid is strong in this one."

The AP reporter's headline says that the recession was "unexpected," and her first sentence calls it "a surprise." Anyone watching economic events in the country, and I think that's supposed to include her, should have known it was imminent. Kurtenbach, and apparently every other Keynesian koolaid drinker is shocked — shocked, I tell you! — that the recession occurred despite "unprecedented stimulus," and believes that young Japanese really, really want yet another tax increase (bolds and numbered tags are mine):

By Tom Blumer | November 11, 2014 | 8:50 PM EST

Far be it from me to talk a leftist columnist out of an ignorant, self-satisfied position which might, if anything, cause his fellow travelers to hit the accelerator a little less aggressively in future political campaigns.

At the Atlantic on Monday afternoon, Richard Reeves, policy director of the Center on Children and Families at the Brookings Institution, claimed that the left shouldn't be so glum after Tuesday's election results, because "progressive policies are working." His very first graph makes a mockery of his claim:

By Julia A. Seymour | October 21, 2014 | 10:39 AM EDT

Obama has been a champion of equal pay for women, at least according to his administration and the network news media.

The broadcast networks boosted his image on the subject throughout his presidency, from the first bill he signed into law in 2009 to a September 2014 speech mentioning “equal pay.” ABC said Obama waged an “assault” on the pay gap with an executive order over salary disclosures, while CBS said he “boosts equal pay for women.”

By Tom Blumer | October 7, 2014 | 11:28 PM EDT

The dictionary tells us that "a few" is "a small number of persons or things." Though there is some ambiguity in the guidance I have reviewed, it's fair to say that "Generally a few is more than 2."

Not at the Associated Press, where "a few" can apparently be two, at least when it comes to "fact-checking" President Obama's grandiose claims in his Thursday speech at Northwestern University. Thanks to Obama's primary contention that "it is indisputable that our economy is stronger today than when I took office," any economy-related statistic was fair game for the AP's Christopher Rugaber. But the AP reporter chose only to address two nitty-gritty items, while avoiding any attempt to evaluate Obama's core assertion.

By Curtis Houck | October 7, 2014 | 9:09 PM EDT

Ed Schultz used his opening monologue during his MSNBC show on Tuesday to paint Republicans as the “desperate” and “delusional” party in trouble ahead of the midterm elections and informed his audience that “people are better off today than they were four years ago” (before dismissing the struggling wages in the country as “a different thing”).

He began by dismissing the idea that Republicans are better positioned to gain ground in Congress following the midterm elections and strangely bashed The Washington Post and The New York Times for predicting GOP victories. He said The Washington Post was “trying to convince the world” that Republicans will succeed in November while the liberal New York Times apparently “doesn’t seem to get enough of it.”

By Curtis Houck | October 2, 2014 | 10:43 PM EDT

Following President Obama’s speech on the economy on Thursday, the PBS NewsHour offered a 48-second news brief on the subject, in which co-anchor Gwen Ifill offered no opposing viewpoint to the President’s claim in his speech that “by every measure, the country is better off than when he took office.”

The show then played a soundbite of the President, in which he lamented that “millions of Americans don't yet feel enough of the benefits of a growing economy where it matters most, and that’s in their own lives and these truths aren't incompatible. Our broader economy, in the aggregate, has come a long way, but the gains of recovery are not yet broadly shared.”

By Mark Finkelstein | September 21, 2014 | 9:44 AM EDT

Should Fauxcahontas be flattered . . . or furious?  The title of Elizabeth Warren's new book is "A Fighting Chance," a "rabble-rousing" rant by the populist from the Harvard faculty lounge.

So here comes Hillary Clinton, who in a speech this week just happened to say "I want every one of our children to feel that they are inheriting the best of America ... that this country is on your side; that this country will give you the fighting chance, the fair shot you deserve." Pure coincidence? Not when it comes to American's most calculating politician.  Not when Hillary lifts the line from the woman whose name is bruited about as potentially offering Clinton her most serious challenge for the Dem nomination.

By Matthew Balan | September 19, 2014 | 4:59 PM EDT

CNN's Twitter account on Thursday boosted a Rolling Stone article that hyped the far-left Occupy Wall Street movement's latest efforts. The social media post touted, "Think #OccupyWallStreet is dead? Think again. This short-lived occupation is still fighting for five key issues," and linked to Rebecca Nathanson's Wednesday piece on the "five campaigns that OWS-inspired groups have continued to fight for since the movement's presumed conclusion."