see more crazy cat pics

WITH THE SOCIOECONOMIC SITUATION ONLY LIKELY TO GET WORSE BEFORE GETTING BETTER, ESPECIALLY SO IN THE EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT, expect there the likelihood for plenty of "work-from-home" opportunity ads making the rounds of especially the culturally-deprived environments and their residents with few or no realistic job skills ... let alone the fact of their being unable to work in the community for reasons outside their direct control.

That, and overzealous delusion on the part of conservative propaganda as holds dear among its articles of faith the "complete and final" reduction of unemployment numbers to a theoretical nil rate consistent with free-market capitalist models and paradigms (yet unaware that Communist propaganda was forever claiming that their economies had nil unemployment, failing to recognise that such included "make-work" positions to create the aura thereof).

Which should best be approached with caution.

Or, better yet, avoided altogether.

Especially so the "make-work/fake-work" variety such as that promising as much as $8/hour for "easy [and] pleasant" home mailing work; those behind same fail to mention that mailroom services, with their economies of automation and scale, can make short work of high-volume mailings @ significantly and measurably lower costs than using homeworkers.

Which, right there, makes such ads misleading, particularly so considering Basic Principle 3 of the Better Business Bureau Advertising Code:

An advertisement as a whole may be misleading although every sentence separately considered is literally true. Misrepresentation may result not only from direct statements, but by omitting or obscuring a material fact.

Something which should be considered in case you see any "work-from-home" advertisements of the "envelope-stuffing" or "home mailing" model around--and which should be enough to trigger contact to your local Better Business Bureau in the form of an Advertising Review Request.

Especially if the ad includes testimonials which sound suspiciously glowing or otherwise "too good to be true" (which may be the case if it sounds such, as the maxim hath it); such should be considered as a point of challenge, particularly so from the areas of:

• sincerity;
• authenticity; and
• timeliness.

That, and whether the "endorsers" received consideration of any kind to influence the tone and nuance thereof--disclosure of which the FTC requires if such is, in fact, the case. Never mind that the consideration is either in cash, in kind, or a combination of the two.

In any case, even if you have an overzealous desire to avoid going on welfare out of "common sense" or suchlike patsies (including the traditional paranoia about "undermining of the moral fibre"), avoid "work-from-home" offers if you can if you want to avoid being taken unscrupulous advantage of.

Which the weird and unwholesome element hopes will be the case in view of the current job and economic situation. After all, it's the mountebank who profits all the more out of socioeconomic misery and dislocation, or the fears thereof, among especially the vulnerable who otherwise know not where to go.