|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:56 am Post subject: 11 reasons America's a new socialist economy |
 |
|
| Quote: |
ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- Welcome to the conservative's worst nightmare: The law of unintended consequences. Why? Nobody wants to admit it, folks, but the conservatives' grand ideology is backfiring, actually turning the world's greatest capitalistic democracy into the world's newest socialist economy.
A little history: The core principles of conservative economic ideology are grounded in Nobel economist Milton Friedman's 1962 classic "Capitalism and Freedom." Too late to stop President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society, those principles became the battle cries energizing conservatives since Reagan: Unrestricted free markets, free enterprise and free trade; deregulation, privatization and globalization; trickle-down economics and trickle-up wealth to an elite plutocracy destined to rule the new American capitalist utopia. |
1. Dumber than a fifth grader with cognitive dissonance
2. Where did all the leaders go with their moral character?
3. Fed and U.S. Treasury adopted Enron accounting tricks
4. Deregulation creating new socialist housing system
5. Trade deficits outsourced more of America's wealth than jobs
6. Banking system in meltdown, minting penny stocks
7. Ideologues preach savings, but still push spending
8. Warning, the market's under 2000 peak, losing money
9. Inflation and dollars: Is Zimbabwe the new model for the U.S.?
10. Free-market health care failing 47,000,000 Americans
11. Conservative free-market policies inflated oil 300%!
This one is for you OTW because I know how how much you love Congress meddling in our personal affairs and they know what is best for us.
/sarcasm
At any rate, it's probably pretty important that you understand the difference between Capitalismand Corporatism because it seems that is what many lefties seem to confuse. Also, years of high taxes and heavy regulation end up with more corporatism. The Republicans promised to turn the tide except they fell prey to the power of socialism and betrayed their own principles. Unfortunate really.
Socialist Conservatives |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:00 pm Post subject: Re: 11 reasons America's a new socialist economy |
|
|
[b]1. Dumber than a fifth grader with cognitive dissonance
Who? Why?
2. Where did all the leaders go with their moral character?
Did we ever have leaders with moral character?
3. Fed and U.S. Treasury adopted Enron accounting tricks
You're going to need to be more specific.
4. Deregulation creating new socialist housing system
No it's not.
5. Trade deficits outsourced more of America's wealth than jobs
Chinese can't spend American money in China. They have to send it back. I see no problem here.
6. Banking system in meltdown, minting penny stocks
Meh. The US economy is $13 trillion dollars. It will survive.
7. Ideologues preach savings, but still push spending
If Americans are not saving, foreigners are happy to send those dollars back to America for investment.
8. Warning, the market's under 2000 peak, losing money
How much under the peak?
9. Inflation and dollars: Is Zimbabwe the new model for the U.S.?
No.
10. Free-market health care failing 47,000,000 Americans
So what you saying? The government can flub all of the above and yet they'll deliver health care to 47 million properly and efficiently?
11. Conservative free-market policies inflated oil 300%!
I thought war was doing that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:06 pm Post subject: Re: 11 reasons America's a new socialist economy |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
7. Ideologues preach savings, but still push spending
If Americans are not saving, foreigners are happy to send those dollars back to America for investment. |
I'm glad you brought this up. The world likes to preach to America for its spendthrift ways, but who will chastise the developed world for its miserly investing? Western Europe and developed Asia really dropped the ball by investing so heavily into the American market. We'll know who invested what in 6months-1year, because those markets will be doing fairly well.
The global economy is suffering the hangover from a liquidity binge. If America has been doing the bad borrowing, who has been doing the lending? Bad lenders, that's who.
| mindmetoo wrote: |
8. Warning, the market's under 2000 peak, losing money
How much under the peak?
9. Inflation and dollars: Is Zimbabwe the new model for the U.S.?
No. |
MM2 is right. Market indices are not the most accurate measures of fundamentals. Furthermore, US is not Zimbabwe. The US is a productive and innovative economy that is losing dollar hegemony. This is the correction. In a decade or so, the US dollar will recover to its rightful strength, after we all find out the Euro is WAY overvalued (see above). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bryan
Joined: 29 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:30 pm Post subject: Re: 11 reasons America's a new socialist economy |
|
|
| Quote: |
| 3. Fed and U.S. Treasury adopted Enron accounting tricks |
Fed and US treasury shouldn't exist under capitalism. Capitalism is a system without government intervention inflating the monetary system. People would use an objective value for their currency--like gold backed currency.
| Quote: |
| 4. Deregulation creating new socialist housing system |
Deregulation would mean less intervention from the government, and therefore less socialism. The mortgage business is routinely bailed out by socialist policies; Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not genuinely private enterprise.
| Quote: |
| 5. Trade deficits outsourced more of America's wealth than jobs |
Trading with other countries is good, it increases the wealth of a country. If you export your money, you gain wealth in return (a product or service for a better value than if you paid for it). It is a mercantilist fallacy to believe that money exiting your country through a mutually beneficial trade makes you less wealthy. You engage in trade because it makes your life better!
| Quote: |
| 10. Free-market health care failing 47,000,000 Americans |
US does not have free market health care, it's health care system is heavily intervened by the government, with regulatory agencies and government precription drug plans, medicaid, etc distorting the market with billions in taxpayer dollars. The health care sector is at least 50% government socialized in the US, and that is the cause of all of it's problems.
| Quote: |
| 11. Conservative free-market policies inflated oil 300%![/b] |
The cause of high price in oil has nothing to do with free markets. Here are some of the regulatory/socialist distortions that cause gas and oil to be expensive:
Dictatorships and communist countries socialize the oil reserves that were made by capitalist and free countries, and then make them more inefficient and join cartels with political rather than economic interests. That's not capitalism.
Environmentalist restrictions at home and abroad which have effectively limited exploration offshore, in places such as Alaska, and other areas. That's not capitalism.
More... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Private profits, socialized losses. The really stunning development has been the prohibition on naked short selling (which is already a legal grey area) on some key financials. These firms have made billions destroying shareholder value with naked shorts and now they are being protected from the same behavior. Could it have something to do with Hank being a Goldman man? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This weekly audio program is quite interesting/informative. They focus largely on the looming financial crises and the financial crimes and irresponsibility that got us here. It is overly technical sometimes but I strongly recommend it for those interested in financial markets and macroeconomics.
http://www.financialsense.com/fsn/main.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 4:42 am Post subject: Re: 11 reasons America's a new socialist economy |
|
|
| Bryan wrote: |
| Quote: |
| 5. Trade deficits outsourced more of America's wealth than jobs |
Trading with other countries is good, it increases the wealth of a country. If you export your money, you gain wealth in return (a product or service for a better value than if you paid for it). It is a mercantilist fallacy to believe that money exiting your country through a mutually beneficial trade makes you less wealthy. You engage in trade because it makes your life better! |
Indeed. I always find it curious that people railing against trade (under the assumption that the economy is a pizza that can't possibly grow) are also the ones who urge a return to the gold standard, which then invokes a mercantile system by default. Trade no longer becomes a win-win but becomes a game of keeping your gold and trying to take the gold of others.
Seriously, if you can get the Chinese to take slips of paper and ship you computer chairs and tshirts why would you want to change this system? Eventually those slips of paper come back in the form of purchasing things that the Chinese can't move out of the country like office buildings or developing condo projects or industrial parks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:28 am Post subject: Re: 11 reasons America's a new socialist economy |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
So what you saying? The government can flub all of the above and yet they'll deliver health care to 47 million properly and efficiently?
11. Conservative free-market policies inflated oil 300%!
I thought war was doing that? |
There is a free market and then there is the the conservatives' idea of free markets; that is what the OP was referring to. It was a satiric attempt to to label today's conservatives as socialists. They have abandoned everything from their philosophy on government spending and power to sound currency policy.
As for oil, I never suggested that it was 'the war.' The price of oil will continue to increase due to more demand from the BRIC as well as other developing nations.
Also, as conservatives like John McCain have been pressuring Ben Bernanake to keep interest rates low and flushing the market with liquidity, inflationary pressures have hit energy and food (all commodities really) the hardest. This includes oil; do you think a barrel of oil would cost $130~140 a barrel if interest rates were a bit higher, say at 3%? Also the pols have certainly not helped matters either. The further the government gets away from energy policy, the faster the market can develop and bring prices down. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 9:03 am Post subject: Re: 11 reasons America's a new socialist economy |
|
|
| Pluto wrote: |
| This includes oil; do you think a barrel of oil would cost $130~140 a barrel if interest rates were a bit higher, say at 3%? |
Inflation = too much money chasing too few goods. Oil is currently a "too few goods". Still, I'll pay the price if the economy is producing jobs, as it is in Canada.
| Quote: |
| The further the government gets away from energy policy, the faster the market can develop and bring prices down. |
I'll agree there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The further the government gets away from energy policy, the faster the market can develop and bring prices down. |
Is this not an idealistic utopian position? As long as lobbying is legal, won't the boys from the oil patch exert pressure on the gov't for favorable legislation? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:53 am Post subject: Re: 11 reasons America's a new socialist economy |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
Seriously, if you can get the Chinese to take slips of paper and ship you computer chairs and tshirts why would you want to change this system? Eventually those slips of paper come back in the form of purchasing things that the Chinese can't move out of the country like office buildings or developing condo projects or industrial parks. |
Yeah, and the rents go back to China.
America is in massive debt to China. What American consumers, state/municipal/federal government has done is passed consumption for tomorrow to the Chinese for consumption today. In addition, this has placed the United States at a very serious rick of an 1997 AFC style financial crises that could rip apart the value of the dollar.
And anyways, the system is totally unsustainable and is unwinding now. The retrenching of the American economy away from consumption/borrowing and towards production/savings could very well lead to a devastating economic depression in the very near future.
Here is how Peter Schiff explains the situation (I'm summarizing from the lecture he gave, which is linked below):
5 Asians and 1 American are stranded on an island. They divy up the work load. 1 Asian hunts, another fishes, another gets veggies, another gets wood for cooking, and then it comes down to the American. What does he get? The American gets assigned the job of eating.
At the end of the day, the Asians sit down at the table to feed the American, who sunned himself on the beach (a service economy). A modern economist would say the America is key to the equation. Without the American, the Asians would be out of work.
The reality is the Asians are perfectly capable of consuming these products themselves. The best thing they can do is kick the American off the Island and consume the goods themselves.
http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=6G3Qefbt0n4
The island is the Bretton Woods 2 system. The Asians prop up the dollar, hold down the value of their currencies and ergo shift consumption from the people creating things to the Americans. This will change. The Chinese now have massive economic power over the United States, and it is because the current global currency situation is dysfunctional and has been totally abused by the Federal Reserve. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
"We interrupt regular programming to announce that the United States of America has defaulted �
By: Satyajit Das
High levels of debt are sustainable provided the borrower can continue to service and finance it. The US has had no trouble attracting investors to date. Warren Buffett (in his 2006 annual letter to shareholders) noted that the US can fund its budget and trade deficits as it is still a wealthy country with lots of stock, bonds, real estate and companies to sell.
In recent years, the United States has absorbed around 85% of total global capital flows (about US$500 billion each year) from Asia, Europe, Russia and the Middle East. Risk adverse foreign investors preferred high quality debt � US Treasury and AAA rated bonds (including asset-backed securities ("ABS"), including mortgage-backed securities ("MBS")). A significant portion of the money flowing into the US was used to finance government spending and (sometimes speculative) property rather than more productive investments.
The real reason that the US actually has not experienced a sovereign debt crisis is that it finances itself in it own currency. This means that the US can literally print dollars to service and repay it obligations.
The special status of the US derives, in part, from the fact that the dollar is the world�s major reserve and trade currency. The dollar�s status derives, in part, from the gold standard that once pegged the dollar to the value of gold. The peg and full exchangeability is long gone. The aura of stability and a safe store of value based on the strength of US economy and military power has continued to support the dollar. In 2003, Saddam Hussein, when captured, had US$750,000 with him � all in US$100 bills. The dollar's favoured position in trade and as a reserve currency is based on complex network effects.
Many global currencies are pegged to the dollar. The link is sometimes at an artificially low rate, like the Chinese renminbi, to maintain export competitiveness. This creates an outflow of dollars (via the trade deficit that in turn is driven by excess US demand for imports based on an overvalued dollar). Foreign central bankers are forced to purchase US debt with dollars to mitigate upward pressure on their domestic currency. The recycled dollars flow back to the US to finance the spending. This merry-go-round is the single most significant source of liquidity creation in financial markets. Large, liquid markets in dollars and dollar investments are both a result and facilitator of the process and assist in maintaining the dollar�s status as a reserve currency.
The dominance may be coming to an end. There is increasing discussion of re-denominating trade flows in currencies other than US$. Exporters are beginning to invoice in Euro or Yen. There are proposals to price commodities, such as oil and agricultural goods, in currencies other dollars. Some countries have abandoned or loosened the linkage of their domestic currency to the dollar. Others are considering such a move.
Foreign investors, including central banks, have reduced investment allocations to the dollar. The dollar�s share of reserves has fallen from a high of 72% to around 61%. Foreign investor demand for US Treasury bonds has weakened in recent times. Low nominal (negative real) rates on interest and dollar weakness are key factors.
Foreign investors may not continue to finance the US. At a minimum, the US will at some stage have to pay higher rates to finance its borrowing requirements. Ultimately, the US may be forced to finance itself in foreign currency. This would expose the US to currency risk but most importantly it would not be able to service its debt by printing money. The US, like all borrowers, would become subject to the discipline of creditors.
For the moment, the US$ is hanging on � just. This reflects structural weakness in the Euro and Yen based on deep-seated problems in the respective economies. The artificial nature of the Euro is also problematic.
The dollar is also a beneficiary of the "too big to fail" syndrome. Foreign investors, especially central banks and sovereign investors in East and South Asia, Russia and the Gulf, have substantial dollar investments that would show catastrophic losses if the US were to default. The International Monetary Fund ("IMF") estimated that Gulf Cooperation Council (Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and other Gulf States) may lose US$400 billion if they decide to stop pegging their currencies to the dollar.
Every lender knows Keynes� famous observation: "If I owe you a pound, I have a problem; but if I owe you a million, the problem is yours." In history�s largest Ponzi scheme, foreign creditors must keep supporting the US. As the old observation goes: "The only man who sticks closer to you in adversity than a friend is a creditor."
Does any of this matter? Walter Wriston, then chairman of Citigroup, opined that: "Countries don't go broke". In 1982, shortly after this statement, Mexico, Brazil and Argentina defaulted inflicting near mortal losses on Citibank.
Sovereign debt crisis, especially in emerging markets, are characterised by high levels of debt, especially foreign borrowings, poor fiscal policies, persistent trade deficits, a fragile financial system, over-investment in unproductive assets and a sclerotic political system. Arturo Porzecanski (in Sovereign Debt at the Crossroads (2006)) noted that: "Governments tend to default specifically when they must increase spending quickly (for instance, to prosecute a war), experience a sudden shortfall in revenues (because of a severe economic contraction), or face an abrupt curtailment of access to bond and loan financing (e.g. because of political instability). He further observed that: "governments with large exposures to currency mismatches and interest rate or maturity risks are, of course, particularly vulnerable."
Can the status quo continue? The US must ultimately pay the piper. So what must the US do to remedy the problem? In 1989, John Williamson described certain economic prescriptions - the Washington Consensus � that became a "standard" reform package promoted for crisis-wracked countries by the IMF. The controversial, much criticised package includes: fiscal policy discipline; redirection of public spending from subsidies; tax reform; market determined and positive real interest rates; competitive exchange rates; trade liberalization; liberalization of inward foreign direct investment; privatization of state enterprises; and deregulation. Resolution of the problems facing the US requires adopting many elements of the standard IMF economic reform package for emerging markets.
Some elements, such as fiscal and monetary discipline, are politically difficult if inevitable. Reform of farm subsidies must overcome deep-seated resistance.
Markets are restless for action and do not wait. The US dollar has weakened and is likely to fall further.. This helps exporters, tourism and will ultimately attract inwards foreign investment.
Foreign investment has been slow. Weak economic growth and concerns about the US financial system have offset the effects of a lower dollar. Despite this the "closing down sale" of US assets - real estate, companies and infrastructure assets - has begun. InBev, a Belgian based brewer has launched an unsolicited bid of US$46 billion for Anheuser-Busch, the brewer of Budweiser, the quintessential American beer. Abertis Infraestructuras, a Spanish infrastructure company teamed with Citigroup, submitted US$12.8 billion, the largest bid, for the right to lease the Pennsylvania Turnpike for the next 75 years.
Increasing foreign investment is politically sensitive in America. Surveys show that most American would prefer key businesses to remain in American hands. Public concern about investment by Sovereign Wealth Funds ("SWF") reflects this financial xenophobia.
The "adjustment" may be under way. The dry measured economic prose of the Washington Consensus does not capture its human elements. It will require reductions in US real wages and living standards on a scale that those who have not experienced it first hand cannot understand. Just ask the average citizen of many Asian countries (post the 1997/ 1998 monetary crisis), Argentina and any other country that has taken the IMF�s "cure".
In the twentieth century, the US and the dollar overtook Great Britain and the Pound Sterling as the pre-eminent global economic power and currency. A similar epochal tectonic shift in global economic order may be commencing.
However as Warren Buffett in his 2006 annual letter to shareholdershttp://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2006ltr.pdf observed: "Foreigners now earn more on their U.S. investments than we do on our investments abroad � In effect, we�ve used up our bank account and turned to our credit card. And, like everyone who gets in hock, the U.S. will now experience �reverse compounding� as we pay ever-increasing amounts of interest on interest. �. no matter how rich you are, borrowing on top of borrowing is not a great long-term financial plan. I believe that at some point in the future, U.S. workers and voters will find this annual 'tribute' (of interest payment on the debt) so onerous that there will be a severe political backlash � How that will play out in markets is impossible to predict � but to expect a 'soft landing' seems like wishful thinking."
The US faces a challenge to reestablish its economic credentials. Without drastic and radical action, America�s ability to continue to borrow from foreign investors to meet its financing requirement is likely to become increasingly difficult.
The mass hysteria and panic that followed the broadcast of Orson Welles The War of the World played on fears about an attack by Germans. It is interesting to speculate whether a broadcast on a default by the US on its sovereign debt would play on the secret fears of global markets triggering a similar panic. "We interrupt regular programming to announce that the United States of America has defaulted on its debt!" |
When the BW2 system unravels we can expect the US to follow the example of Rome, France, Germany, Argentina and dramatically increase government spending in a 'guns and butter' attempt to keep the economy rolling. This will speed up the end, and not be pretty. There is a limit do how much private losses the government can absorb. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 6:32 am Post subject: Re: 11 reasons America's a new socialist economy |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
Seriously, if you can get the Chinese to take slips of paper and ship you computer chairs and tshirts why would you want to change this system? Eventually those slips of paper come back in the form of purchasing things that the Chinese can't move out of the country like office buildings or developing condo projects or industrial parks. |
Yeah, and the rents go back to China.
America is in massive debt to China. What American consumers, state/municipal/federal government has done is passed consumption for tomorrow to the Chinese for consumption today. In addition, this has placed the United States at a very serious rick of an 1997 AFC style financial crises that could rip apart the value of the dollar.
And anyways, the system is totally unsustainable and is unwinding now. The retrenching of the American economy away from consumption/borrowing and towards production/savings could very well lead to a devastating economic depression in the very near future.
Here is how Peter Schiff explains the situation (I'm summarizing from the lecture he gave, which is linked below):
5 Asians and 1 American are stranded on an island. They divy up the work load. 1 Asian hunts, another fishes, another gets veggies, another gets wood for cooking, and then it comes down to the American. What does he get? The American gets assigned the job of eating.
At the end of the day, the Asians sit down at the table to feed the American, who sunned himself on the beach (a service economy). A modern economist would say the America is key to the equation. Without the American, the Asians would be out of work.
The reality is the Asians are perfectly capable of consuming these products themselves. The best thing they can do is kick the American off the Island and consume the goods themselves.
http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=6G3Qefbt0n4
The island is the Bretton Woods 2 system. The Asians prop up the dollar, hold down the value of their currencies and ergo shift consumption from the people creating things to the Americans. This will change. The Chinese now have massive economic power over the United States, and it is because the current global currency situation is dysfunctional and has been totally abused by the Federal Reserve. |
I'm not sure I really get that analogy... I mean, if 'Asia' had an economy 5 times bigger than the US, that would make sense, but actually the US economy is larger than all of Asia combined. Obviously China cannot consume the stuff they make for export to the States, because most of that stuff is too expensive for the average Chinese. That's why Asia is full of export economies, no?
Even Japan has a big problem in that despite having many world-beating companies like Toyota, the domestic economy is in the doldrums due to lack of consumer spending. That's where the US picks up the slack. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 6:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
The analogy holds, though not perfectly.
You're right, China cannot absorb all of her excesses capacity in short order. Singapore, HK, ROK, Japan can't come close to making up the slack. But the United States is the low hanging fruit in the mix. She consumes what they produce and they consume green paper. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
The analogy holds, though not perfectly.
You're right, China cannot absorb all of her excesses capacity in short order. Singapore, HK, ROK, Japan can't come close to making up the slack. But the United States is the low hanging fruit in the mix. She consumes what they produce and they consume green paper. |
I'm no economist, but I find this whole arrangement quite interesting. They give us a whole bunch of their 'stuff' and we give them green paper -- is this actually some kind of capitalist 'exploitation' in disguise? (not that I have any problem with it  )... I suppose the theory must be that once these export nations get developed enough, they'll finally be able to afford to import more goods and services from countries like the US which were previously too expensive, and the trade will balance out eventually. In the meantime, we just use our higher market prices to suck consumer goods out of them, and rack up a debt.
I know the US gov't is always complaining that China has its currency pegged too low, which is a big reason for the imbalance. But does it really matter? I guess what I'm asking is whether it's actually sustainable, factoring the odd market adjustment (or even small recession) into it. If it's not sustainable, what will the alternative be since China depends on US markets so much? Any thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
