Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

  1. #1
    Veteran Member devilsadvocate667's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    241
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    "In 2003, the most recent year with full international statistics, central banks financed 83 per cent of the US current account deficit, with Asian central banks accounting for 86 per cent of flows. A similar picture is emerging for 2004. Despite a good start to the year, when the private sector was a large net purchaser of dollar assets, central banks came to the rescue again. The People's Bank of China has let it be known that China increased dollar reserves by $207bn (€159bn) in 2004, financing nearly a third of the US current account deficit, estimated at $650bn."

    http://news.ft.com/cms/s/bd52ee06-6d...00e2511c8.html

    Imagine how cult like Bush lovers would have frothed at the mouth, peed on the floor and spewed hate about liberals had this happened during a democrat administration. At least Clinton knew how to be responsible with the economy. Bush and his followers think it's patriotic to owe the nation's soul to the Communist Chinese!


  2. #2
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    Thow in service outsourcing and off-shore manufacturing while you are at it.

    They borrow cuz they like to tax the middle class and the middle class is getting smaller and smaller these days.

  3. #3
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    Good ! I hope that China buys another 200 billion in US gov't bonds with the money they're earning from American consumers buying their super cheap products. That way when Alan Greenspan revvs up the printing presses at the US mint, those 400 billion in T bonds will be worth exactly the same amount as the 200 billion they already own is worth today. However, in the meantime, US consumers will keep adding to their pile of personal possessions of Chinese origin, which from a future Chinese viewpoint they are essentially giving away to us for free !

  4. #4
    Veteran Member devilsadvocate667's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    241
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie
    That way when Alan Greenspan revvs up the printing presses at the US mint, those 400 billion in T bonds will be worth exactly the same amount as the 200 billion they already own is worth today.
    Ummm... sorry to burst your bubble, economics doesn't work that way. Do you have any idea what sort of economic trouble simply printing more money would bring to the US? The value of the dollar is already at historically low rates. Do you know what caused the economic troubles in Germany post WW1? Printing more money was one of the biggest factors.

    Not to mention the fact that the cheap crap Americans are buying (not for free as you think) is making the most successful communist nation strong for decades to come and in fact funding the stength of their military.

    Enjoy your tax "cuts" now. You will pay dearly for them in the future.


  5. #5
    God/dess Casual Observer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boston MA
    Posts
    5,670
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked 144 Times in 74 Posts

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    ^ Actually, China is in a precarious economic situation precisely for the reasons Melonie outlines.

    Their currency is pegged to the dollar. It's really the only way they can attract economic development since their labor costs are therefore unusually and unrealistically low.

    Sure, the US current account and trade imbalances are serious problems, but not compared to the destratification of wealth taking place in China.
    Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.

    William F. Buckley, Jr.

  6. #6
    Veteran Member devilsadvocate667's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    241
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    Quote Originally Posted by Casual Observer
    ^ Actually, China is in a precarious economic situation precisely for the reasons Melonie outlines. Their currency is pegged to the dollar. It's really the only way they can attract economic development since their labor costs are therefore unusually and unrealistically low.
    Oh, I agree that our economies are joined at the hip. However, that does not supercede any negative effects that sending jobs, debt and manufacturing to China will have on the long term economic strength of the US. I realize it was not just Bush driving the nail in the coffin... it's been every president since Nixon. However the issue seems to be amplified under Bush with the tax "cuts" and exponential increases in spending. Melonie was being unrealistic with her excitement. Why? Cause the US has placed far too much of their economic dependence on foreign sources. Sure you'll get lots of cheap crap, but the price you will pay in the long term will be far greater. A much stronger Chinese military, a China in a far better financial position than they were prior to US economic involvement and a US government far more indebted to a nation who we should morally not be supporting. I am mortified by the appeasement of one of the most brutal regimes in world history and the thrill of it merely cause you are gonna get some more cheap possessions that will be worthless in a few years. Selling out America's long term future for some magic beans.

    "Giant sucking sound"? Indeed!


  7. #7
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    I agree of course, but making America financially competitive as a manufacturer is a political impossibility. This would mean scaling back union employee wages and benefits significantly, vastly reducing the de-facto costs of complying with environmental laws by allowing similar pollution levels as China, reducing business and property taxes etc. - not to mention enacting stiff tarriffs on all imported products and increasing the price of the domestically produced products taking their place.

  8. #8
    Veteran Member devilsadvocate667's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    241
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    Or we could just lift the tax breaks and incentives for American business who move manufacturing overseas. The other points you mentioned would be moot if the flood of imports and the totally impbalanced trade defecits with msot nations wasn't allowed to happen. It wasn't an accident that our manufacturing has been sent overseas. It's not even unions to blame. Most union manufacturing jobs are low paying. What was the reason? Greed. American business saw an opportunity in Asia for cheap labor and little regulation. In reality, they saw the opportunity to return to 1800's and early 1900's business practices. I don't blame China or any of the Asian nations for accepting our business. I blame 30 years of piss poor American leadership looking out for the "corporate monined interests" over the best interests of the whole... just like many founding fathers and great American leaders predicted would be the ultimate downfall of the US and democracy.

    There is no easy solution. Because the problem was created by a 30 year series of complex bad decisions.


  9. #9
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    Quote Originally Posted by devilsadvocate667
    Or we could just lift the tax breaks and incentives for American business who move manufacturing overseas. The other points you mentioned would be moot if the flood of imports and the totally impbalanced trade defecits with msot nations wasn't allowed to happen. It wasn't an accident that our manufacturing has been sent overseas. It's not even unions to blame. Most union manufacturing jobs are low paying. What was the reason? Greed. American business saw an opportunity in Asia for cheap labor and little regulation. In reality, they saw the opportunity to return to 1800's and early 1900's business practices. I don't blame China or any of the Asian nations for accepting our business. I blame 30 years of piss poor American leadership looking out for the "corporate monined interests" over the best interests of the whole... just like many founding fathers and great American leaders predicted would be the ultimate downfall of the US and democracy.

    There is no easy solution. Because the problem was created by a 30 year series of complex bad decisions.
    Agreed.

  10. #10
    God/dess Casual Observer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boston MA
    Posts
    5,670
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked 144 Times in 74 Posts

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    hat was the reason? Greed.
    No, outsourcing to cheaper labor markets has been going on for over 300 years. Hell, that's how the US got its start--by undercutting British manufacturers.

    That's all about comparative advantage, which some people refuse to believe exists. China's comparative advantage is in labor--lots of it, at very attractive rates. So for anything that is labor intensive and low- to medium skilled, they have a comparative advantage there. You can pretend it doesn't exist, as the Japanese did until the late 90s, but eventually comparative advantage will catch you, so you have to find your own.

    Making it tougher for American companies to use foreign labor just means those same union workers here will be less able to afford goods that would be more expensive, nevermind the introduction of foreign-owned companies that would roll over the now-uncompetitive American firms. Unions in the manufacturing sector of the US are part of the problem, not the solution; they're far too expensive and not operating with a global mindset. They're also good at putting themselves out of jobs with their collective intransigence toward employment realities.

    News flash for folks: manufacturing is only a quarter of the US economy. We're always going to make stuff here. But is there any better value in having a $10 radio built in Toledo rather than Shengzeng?

    Comparative advantage: stick with what you're good at doing.
    Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.

    William F. Buckley, Jr.

  11. #11
    Veteran Member devilsadvocate667's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    241
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    "No, outsourcing to cheaper labor markets has been going on for over 300 years. Hell, that's how the US got its start--by undercutting British manufacturers."

    You are correct, but the US never really was the outsourcer in high volumes until Nixon.

    "Making it tougher for American companies to use foreign labor just means those same union workers here will be less able to afford goods that would be more expensive"

    That is a problem I've had all along with outsourcing. Outsourcing only creates temporary profits. Paying your workers beyond a living wage, so they have disposable income, insures long term profits. because the workers who build your products can actually afford the products they build. zMuch like Henry Ford created historical wealth for himself by paying his workers the then unheard of $5 a day. Unfortunately he kept wages at $5 a day for nearly 20 years, so it became worthless.

    "nions in the manufacturing sector of the US are part of the problem, not the solution; they're far too expensive and not operating with a global mindset. They're also good at putting themselves out of jobs with their collective intransigence toward employment realities."

    Well, that would be true if union salaries were actually the outrageous amounts republicans fantcize about. The reality is that most union jobs don't pay very well. Case in point; the Levis jobs in CA that were outsourced to China were apprx. $12 an hour. Still hardly a living wage in the US.

    "News flash for folks: manufacturing is only a quarter of the US economy."


    Why is that? OUTSOURCING!

    " We're always going to make stuff here. But is there any better value in having a $10 radio built in Toledo rather than Shengzeng?"

    yes, only large items that are cost prohibitive to import. Appliances, cars, etc... What else to we manufacture here? Not much! You really have to stress yourself trying to find made in America products. believe me, I've tried. I refuse to buy Chinese.

    " Comparative advantage: stick with what you're good at doing."

    And what is America good at? Selling stuff. Who will they be selling that stuff to? They are also good at service. Who will they sell service to?

    What is China good at that the US is not? Only providing cheap slave labor.


  12. #12
    God/dess Casual Observer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boston MA
    Posts
    5,670
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked 144 Times in 74 Posts

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    Outsourcing only creates temporary profits. Paying your workers beyond a living wage, so they have disposable income, insures long term profits. because the workers who build your products can actually afford the products they build.
    This overly simplistic economic model doesn't apply to the post-industrial, gloablized age. It was fine when exports were a tertiary source of profit for companies, but that was then, this is now.

    Well, that would be true if union salaries were actually the outrageous amounts republicans fantcize about. The reality is that most union jobs don't pay very well. Case in point; the Levis jobs in CA that were outsourced to China were apprx. $12 an hour. Still hardly a living wage in the US.
    First off, the ever-popular living wage idea is a neo-Marxist redistributionist fantasy that promulgates the fallacious idea that jobs that have no economic right to exist should pay wages that allow workers to live at an arbitrarily defined standard of living.

    Secondly, $12/hr in the textile business is hugely expensive next to what workers in Bangladesh will produce. Again, the comparative advantage in the US is no longer in textiles; that has been true since the late 70s. People don't like it, but that's reality. So either Levi Strauss Company can continue to produce in the US and be outperformed by competitors with lower labor costs, or they can adjust to the market dynamics that consumers themselves determine; if the country of manufacture of Levi's jeans were so damn important, people wouldn't buy the imported renditions. But they do, because people want lower prices.

    Why is that? OUTSOURCING!
    No, it's the continual evolution and maturation of the American economy. We haven't been an industrial economy since the late 70s, but some people are only now just figuring this out. We have been long since growing into a knowledge- and information-based economy, one which is reliant on America's greatest comparative advantages: innovation, triangulated technology development systems (universities, goverments, and private companies) venture capitalism, and labor market flexibility. These advantages lend themselves to certain lucrative industries--pharmaceuticals, IT products, energy systems, materials development, financial and investment development, biotechnology and medical systems, et al. These are growth industries for our economy because they make the best use of our existing comparative advantages. Pretending that we should be focused on building mufflers and plastic action figures to grow our economy is backward and naively nostalgic.

    What else to we manufacture here? Not much! You really have to stress yourself trying to find made in America products.
    No, you just have to be able to afford them. For example, all the audio gear I've ever owned was built here in the US or the UK, and it wasn't at all cheap, but it was all built by hand and was of the highest quality available. Now, if you're buying audio gear at BestBuy, it's all made overseas to meet a price point. It's not that you can't find things that are made in this country, it's that if you are focused solely on price rather than value, you will race to the bottom with WalMart products--which have their place, don't misunderstand--but high-skill, high-tech, high-knowledge manufacturing is still best done in the US, where we have the intellectual and financial capital to exploit the marketplace here and abroad.
    Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.

    William F. Buckley, Jr.

  13. #13
    Veteran Member devilsadvocate667's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    241
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    "This overly simplistic economic model doesn't apply to the post-industrial, gloablized age. It was fine when exports were a tertiary source of profit for companies, but that was then, this is now."

    LOL! So you think not paying workers a living wage will benefit industry or corporations? The more disposable income workers have, the more products business will sell. It's that simple. Any other explanation on your part is just rhetoric.


    "First off, the ever-popular living wage idea is a neo-Marxist redistributionist fantasy that promulgates the fallacious idea that jobs that have no economic right to exist should pay wages that allow workers to live at an arbitrarily defined standard of living."

    LOL! Yet again, you missed the point and went off on an irrelevant tangent. redistribution? BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHHAAAAAA!!!! Fair wages help CAPITIALISM. As I have stated several times before, the more disposable income people have after meeting necessities, the more they spend. The more they spend, the more profit corporate America and business earns. The more profit business earns, the higher taxes collected will be for government. The more profit a company makes through sales, the more money investors make through higher valued stocks. Do you understand?
    Although, I will say you are very eloquent in your misinformation. History has proven me correct for the majority of the past 100 years.

    "Secondly, $12/hr in the textile business is hugely expensive next to what workers in Bangladesh will produce"

    Of course it is. But in the US workers need a living wage.
    But our argument is becoming circular. But I guess you'll come back with "living wages are for commies".

    "No, it's the continual evolution and maturation of the American economy."

    That is a convenient dodge of reality. Actually, the American economy hasn't matured, it's regressed. Much of the advances of the 20th century are regressing back to the turn of the last century.

    "We haven't been an industrial economy since the late 70s, but some people are only now just figuring this out"

    Why do you think that is? Do I have to keep repeating myself? That was exactly the time outsourcing in excess began.

    "We have been long since growing into a knowledge- and information-based economy, one which is reliant on America's greatest comparative advantages: innovation, triangulated technology development systems..."

    And in the meantime, real wages have dropped every year since (adjusted for inflation). So your utopia and fantasy land is actually hurting Americans in the real world, not a land of rhetoric and possibilities.


  14. #14
    Sitri
    Guest

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie
    Good ! I hope that China buys another 200 billion in US gov't bonds with the money they're earning from American consumers buying their super cheap products. That way when Alan Greenspan revvs up the printing presses at the US mint, those 400 billion in T bonds will be worth exactly the same amount as the 200 billion they already own is worth today. However, in the meantime, US consumers will keep adding to their pile of personal possessions of Chinese origin, which from a future Chinese viewpoint they are essentially giving away to us for free !
    Melonie, are you advocating hyperinflation? That will also increase the interest rate we have to pay for the funds and like a bungee cord, those interest rates will throw us into exponitial decay on the deficit. The only way the current deficit works is because of low interest rates.

  15. #15
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    I've been waiting a week to be able to reply to you Sitri.

    While I don't think that hyper-inflation is in the cards, I definitely feel that an inflation rate which is significantly higher than that of the past few years is definitely around the corner. My reasons for this line of thinking are ...

    #1 - it benefits people owing large amounts of existing debt (like most American consumers and American taxpayers in general) by allowing them to pay off today's debt with 'cheaper' future dollars.

    #2 - it penalizes people with large amounts of existing assets (i.e. very few American savers and mostly central banks like China & the ECB & the BOJ) as the future value of the assets they are holding fall along with the US$'s value.

    #3 - it's already happening on the expenditure side in terms of gasoline, gold & silver, college tuition, and the price of many imported products.

    #4 - it benefits the productivity/profitability of US industries (assuming that wage increases to US workers are held down), while degrading the productivity/profitability of most foreign industries i.e. Japan an Europe. For example, the US$ denominated cost of producing a BMW or Volkswagen has risen some 30% in the past 2 years - however the US$ cost of these cars sold in America cannot be increased that much or they would become virtually unsellable - therfore BMW and Volkswagen are taking it on the chin in terms of corporate profits while Ford and Chevy sales increase.

    The exception of course is Chinese industries as long as the Yuan exchange rate remains pegged to the US$. But to continue doing this the Chinese central bank must continue buying US bonds, knowing they will get shafted due to a drop in their future value. Thus China has a strong and increasing incentive to drop their currency peg, which will allow the Yuan to rise, cause the price of Chinese products imported into the US to therefore rise, eventually reducing sales and improving the US trade balance.

  16. #16
    God/dess Casual Observer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boston MA
    Posts
    5,670
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked 144 Times in 74 Posts

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    So you think not paying workers a living wage will benefit industry or corporations? The more disposable income workers have, the more products business will sell. It's that simple. Any other explanation on your part is just rhetoric.
    Not what I said, though it clearly betrays your complete lack of microeconomic concepts. There's no doubt that people who have more, spend more. What's at issue is whether or not you can extract value as a corporation from employing people in jobs that have no economic right to exist in your own economy.

    A classic example is the well-documented experience of Cypress Semiconductor. They tried for years to stay an all-American company, including their manufacturing. After losing tens of millions of dollars a year in the late 80s, the CEO laid off those workers associated with most of the comparatively high wage manufacturing jobs in San Jose, and started manufacturing facilities in Malaysia and the Phillipenes. Shortly thereafter, the company returned to profitability. Imagine that--making employment decisions based on comparative advantage and labor resource allocation and maximization instead of good intentions and Disneyworld economics.

    It doesn't matter how benevolent you want to be as a corporation to your employees; if you cannot be profitable and flexible in a global marketplace, you will not survive. Paying your manufacturing workers wages that the market does not support does not make them more able to afford your product; it hastens the demise of the corporation. Malden Mills, anyone?

    Fair wages help CAPITIALISM. As I have stated several times before, the more disposable income people have after meeting necessities, the more they spend. The more they spend, the more profit corporate America and business earns. The more profit business earns, the higher taxes collected will be for government. The more profit a company makes through sales, the more money investors make through higher valued stocks. Do you understand?
    Having been a small business owner and employer in very good and very bad economic times, I understand much better than you, clearly.

    By your model--which presumes a domestic, industrial economic vacuum blissfully inured to outside influences or realities--companies like IBM, GM, Motorola, GE, Westinghouse, Ford, EMC, John Deere, Cisco, Caterpillar, et al should all be out of business because they have incorporated global labor markets into their manufacturing production and no one in the US can afford their products anymore. Alas, all of these companies have continued to grow and prosper in the last 30 years--some significantly so. Look at Caterpillar.

    Their union tried to hold them hostage at their main Peoria, IL manufacturing facility by demanding increases in wages, benefits and union positions. Caterpillar saw the writing on the wall with regard to labor markets and global competition and stood firm, hiring non-union workers at an average of $15/hr when the union struck in 1991 and 1994; Caterpiller broke the UAW like a D5 through a china shop. They now have the leverage they need to continue their dominance in the heavy equipment marketplace; in China alone, Caterpillar will do $1 billion in business this year, doubling to $2 billion in five years and all because they keep their eye on the bottom line with regard to their biggest corporate expense--labor.

    But I guess you'll come back with "living wages are for commies".
    Living wage theories are proposed by people who have no understanding of market dynamics. Communist ideology is strictly optional here.

    Actually, the American economy hasn't matured, it's regressed. Much of the advances of the 20th century are regressing back to the turn of the last century.
    Oh. Of course. In 1970, American GDP was just over $1 trillion. In 2003, our GDP was $11 trillion. Between 1970 and 1998, our domestic growth rate annually averaged three percent, and annual exports increased seven percent. This is not regression by any measure.

    Why do you think that is? Do I have to keep repeating myself? That was exactly the time outsourcing in excess began.
    No, that's when American business began to shrug off the shackles of excessive government regulation and operate with renewed innovative freedom. The growth in GDP and exports easily illustrates this.

    And in the meantime, real wages have dropped every year since (adjusted for inflation). So your utopia and fantasy land is actually hurting Americans in the real world, not a land of rhetoric and possibilities.
    For a primer on how labor market dynamics actually work, check out this presentation from a school I'm rather fond of and see if you can't unlearn your notion of just how wages, employment and technology work and why the notion of real wages is of limited value when taken out of a broader economic context.
    Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.

    William F. Buckley, Jr.

  17. #17
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: Thanks to Bush tax cuts, China owns the US

    Look. We are 250 million people. The outsourcing destinations are 2 billion + people. They have a surplus of at least 250 million people to jobs and probably even more.

    They are becoming more educated, more free (unless the liberals keep them in bondage by their own tyrants), and in improving economies.

    More importantly, as their technology grows - their efficiency grows so it is like putting another body on the line - call it a new population by efficiency so it will become 2.5 billion people to compete with.

    There will come a time when nearly every single job in America (unless grounds keeper) will be sent over seas. You cannot beat the billions of people in surplus labor and coming efficiencies.

    The numbers are against us. We are destined for decline.

    The international global corporations will do just fine as they use the WTO/World Bank/what-have-you to whip "governments by the people" into line "by law and treaty."

Similar Threads

  1. Senate shelving vote to extend GWB tax cuts
    By Melonie in forum Dollar Den
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-23-2010, 03:04 PM
  2. Understanding Tax Cuts
    By glambman in forum Dollar Den
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-06-2008, 02:58 PM
  3. One econ prof's explanation of tax cuts.
    By PhaedrusZ in forum Member Boards
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-18-2007, 09:49 AM
  4. for those opposed to gov't tax and spending cuts ...
    By Melonie in forum Political Poo
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 04-05-2005, 03:22 PM
  5. umm .. it appear's that Bush's tax cuts are working !
    By Melonie in forum Political Poo
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-16-2005, 02:19 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •