Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Immigration is Service Offshoring

Recs

12

April 07, 2008 – Comments (20)

Taken from Vox Day's Blog:

Immigration is service offshoring

It doesn't significantly benefit the economy in the UK, nor in the USA either:

While all these factors can be said to point to the advantages of immigration in specific spheres, it is not the same as saying that immigration benefits the country as a whole because some, usually the poor, lose out to the competition; and, as output rises, it is consumed by the larger population. Taking all this into account, the Lords committee is expected to conclude that "the economic benefits of net immigration to the resident population are small and close to zero in the long run".

This key conclusion demolishes the Government's case for large-scale immigration. If it has not been to the economic benefit of the resident population, what has been its purpose?

The truth is that large-scale immigration is of benefit to a relatively small group of business owners in the service industries, which allows them to simultaneously lower their costs as well as increase the size of their potential market. Because service industries can't go offshore to reduce the labor costs due to their location-dependent nature, they want to bring the offshore labor to them. Hence the political pressure for mass immigration. That's why there are Somalis in Minnesota and no doubt some other third world group in Nebraska, in order to help the service industries, they have to be spread out all over the place.

This comes at the direct expense of the much greater part of the citizenry that does not own a service industry operation. It does make the services cheaper, but at the price of lowered wages for everyone and the net effect of the increased supply is also reduced by the increased demand.

20 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On April 07, 2008 at 12:04 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

I feel the same way and I am glad that England is beginning to see the light. Now here is my take on applying this information to this country. So my take on what people are saying is that due to immigration as a benefit to business owners in the service industry  here in the United  States of England formally America is that the lower wages of about 100 million people ( about 1/3 of the future Canadian  American and Mexico Union citizens) no longer have the buying power we had 10 years ago? Are we talking about the ones who come in through the front door? How do the ones who just walk across the north and south Boarders also affect the situation? I know for me it really hurts because a Day Labor from Mexico without documentation earns $2.00 an hour more than I do and they don't have to pay  taxes.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Now I must say that one side benefit of my job did help several people get out debt with the books and web sights I told them about. Many more have gotten help for their love ones who have drug and alcohol problems and what not. Military people who want books on the constitution and history of this country. They tell me about Ron Paul AND so much more.Back on topic.                                    Now whenever I hear a CEO or public relation spin doctor say we pay what the market will bear to me it is a  code word for Slave Labor and that min. wage here in this country is just like the factory worker in China or Vietnam earning $3.00 a day. Oh I do so love this NEW WORLD ORDER and ONE WORLD BANKING.  It just makes me feel all warm and fuzzy!!!!!!!!!!    Lets just start with securing our boarders. Oh, that is right I forgot we don't need to secure our boarders because we are growing into the NEW UNION. OK, so lets fix our finical system then. OH yeah I forgot THE NEW WORLD ORDER is a ONE WORLD BANKING SYSTEM.  Who is the main person running the show?    Oh well, I guess low wages that hurt the country are here to stay. But then again as people get more and more hopeless the crime rate will go up and we can pay more in taxes to cover the crime rate increase. Or is there a 1776 Revolution in the Mix? Time will tell. Rock On.

Report this comment
#2) On April 07, 2008 at 12:16 PM, abitare (31.77) wrote:

Are we talking about the ones who come in through the front door? How do the ones who just walk across the north and south Boarders also affect the situation?

We are talking about both. It has an overall negative effect on the country.  

Who is the main person running the show? 

It is a cartel of people. 

Or is there a 1776 Revolution in the Mix? 

Those who fought in the 1776 revolution paid a very high price for there quest for independence. The primary reason for the 1776 revolution was to gain independence for the Central Bank of England. Things would have to get a lot worse here in the US before there is a 1776 revolution. 

Report this comment
#3) On April 07, 2008 at 12:25 PM, QualityPicks (78.76) wrote:

This article does not apply to immigration in general. So I have many things I want to point out.

What is the difference between an immigrant and somebody born here? Are you saying that if somebody is born here, then, they are no competition for the current labor? Hmm, sure they are. I guess you would then say that nobody should have kids any more.

Immigration helps the country grow period. Further, controlled immigration (read legal immigration) is better, because you get to "pick and choose" the brightest and most desirable people from other countries. The ones that want to excel, the ones that want to work hard. Immigrants have to "earn" the right to be here, unlike people born in the US.

Immigrants consume services and products locally, thus spur the economy the same way as a native person. They need a house, food, medical services, insurance, etc.

Now, illegal immigration is a dual sided sword and much more controversial. We'll get nowhere here I think. But even illegal immigration can have many benefits as it reduces the cost of many things and services you consume in the US. Their illegal status, however, means that we can't control well who is here, who stays, who is good for the economy, etc. On the other hand, the fact that they are illegal means they can easily be "suppressed" and they have to accept lower paying jobs, and are at the mercy of their employers who can easily exploit them.

Anyway, immigrants are competition the same way a local born citizen is competition. This article is one sided and spurs anti-immigration sentiment. Don't like it one bit. What's next? we shouldn't allow competition in US business either because some of them will go bankrupt?

Report this comment
#4) On April 07, 2008 at 1:27 PM, angusthermopylae (38.77) wrote:

I agree with QP:  The article appears to be very one sided.  He also makes a good point about a poor person born here and a legal immigrant.

Addind another point:  Society/the Economy/the Government has to invest a lot of time and effort into an individual for the 18 years until they become a 'productive' member of society.  Schools are the absolute minimum cost (if a kid is never sick, never goes to court, never has a visit by Children's Services.)  Add any other government functions, and the average cost per child goes way up.

Now take an 18+ legal immigrant.  His home country has already invested (some) money.  As soon as they get a job, even minimum wage, they start paying into Social Security, pay taxes, consume products, and generally spur the economy.   If they get a manufacturing job (including construction--they produce homes), then they are actually producing a tangible asset that adds to the overall value of the economy.  Even a service industry job adds to the overall wealth.

(And if anyone complains about how much it costs to support these immigrants, answer this question:  Have you ever complained that taxes are too high?  If you have, then remember that these immigrants are paying right along with you.  If you haven't, then you have my complete approval to complain about immigrants all you want.) 

Illegal immigration is a whole 'nother ball of wax, and my opinions here aren't to be extrapolated; I'll probably write about it another time. 

Report this comment
#5) On April 07, 2008 at 1:38 PM, abitare (31.77) wrote:

Quality,

Thank you for the reply. Unfortunately, it appears you did not read the article. So my reply to you may be in vain as your passions have not allowed you to consider any related facts.  But for the general readers, I will reply.  

What is the difference between an immigrant and somebody born here?

The primary difference is education, language and loyalty. Patriotism is derived from the Latin patria - 'fatherland'. People are mostly loyal to the land of their forebears or "fathers".  People not born in a country are rarely loyal to that Nation state, and rarely pay tribute/taxes the other residence pay out of some morality / duty / coercion based on legal registration. 

Are you saying that if somebody is born here, then, they are no competition for the current labor?

No, read the post completely.  Labor is one facet, the other facet is resource costs. People are net consumers of resources, which are finite.

Immigrants consume services and products locally,

Incorrect, many receive FEDERAL assistance, including housing, and food stamps. 28 million "Americans" receive food stamps this is a burden on the NATION as a whole, it is not a local issue.  Thousands of immigrants are in FEDERAL prisons in the US and in the UK.

thus spur the economy the same way as a native person.

Absolutely, naive, and incorrect, the impact of mass migration on CA is well documented.  Most illegals do not pay income or state taxes, most do not have the education or language skills of a native person. Many immigrants fill the local schools, prisons and hospitals and rarely pay for the services. Most do not have or pay for car or medical insurance.  Most immigrants are rarely loyal to the nation state they are trespassing on.

They need a house, food, medical services, insurance, etc.

Needing and paying for are not the same. There are limited resources available. The reason most of the world lives in squalor and poverty has to do with the LIMITED amount of resources available to support them. The US has a finite amount of resources, the more people, fewer resources available for everyone - it is that simple. FYI – Japan is unique in the cultural ability to maximize the productive capability with limited resources on their resource poor island. Do not confuse Japanese with Latin and African migrants.  Japan has allows almost NO immigration (except for female Thai and Philippine “entertainers”) and they have almost zero crime.

But even illegal immigration can have many benefits as it reduces the cost of many things and services you consume in the US. 

It has a NET NEGATIVE impact on overall country and economy. Please read the article again.....

immigrants are competition the same way a local born citizen is competition. 

No, do not let your OPINION get mixed up with the facts. There are plenty of documented studies to cover the high cost of illegals. History is full of examples of the destruction caused my unchecked mass migration. You can start with the Fall of the Roman Empire. If  you want recent history, ask a Serbian or Palestine what he thinks of foreign migration.

Here are some case studies of the cost of immigration on the US. Since you did not read or understand the first post, I would guess you will not read / understand these: 

The High Cost of Cheap Labor
Illegal Immigration and the Federal Budget
 

The Cost of Immigration -FAIR

Report this comment
#6) On April 07, 2008 at 2:11 PM, abitare (31.77) wrote:

angusthermopylae,

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

The article appears to be very one sided. 

 

Yes, the impact of mass migration and immigration is documented, it is a NET NEGATIVE on a country; there is no need to re-discuss the issue here. FYI- There is still a World is Flat Society, who believes the world is flat, the issue is not closed.  I am sure the immigration discussion will continue despite the facts in opposition to mass immigration.

 

Now take an 18+ legal immigrant.  His home country has already invested (some) money. 

 

Please provide a reference. Immigrants cost more in benefits then they bring in benefits in the US. This is documented in several studies; there is no need to guess or to state an opinion.

 

As soon as they get a job, even minimum wage, they start paying into Social Security, pay taxes, consume products, and generally spur the economy.  

 

Some do, most do not, many are paid cash and receive welfare benefits, again this is documented in several studies, no need to guess or state an opinion.

 

If they get a manufacturing job (including construction--they produce homes), then they are actually producing a tangible asset that adds to the overall value of the economy.  Even a service industry job adds to the overall wealth.

 

Again there are plenty of documented cases of the NET NEGATIVE economic impact of mass immigration.  The US has 28 million people on food stamps and the WORLDS LARGEST PRISION POPULATION, as of 2006, a record 7 million people were behind bars, on probation or on parole. More than 1 in 100 American adults were incarcerated at the start of 2008.[3] The People's Republic of China ranks second with 1.5 million, though China has over four times the population of the US (wikipedia).

 

Do you really think we need extra population to compete for lower paying / skilled jobs?

 

If you have, then remember that these immigrants are paying right along with you

 

LOL. No, I have been paying for 20+ years and have NEVER received welfare.  I went to private schools, I pay health and car insurance. Most are not paying anything near what I am paying. Immigration is a NET NEGATIVE on COSTS, again this is documented, due to the high cost of social services. There is no need to WAG or state an opinion.

 

I can appreciate an educated debate, but provide some references to support your positions.  To make unsubstantiated “feel good” generalizations in order to support a position is a waste of space and does not help in the community learning. Just because it “feels” like the right thing to do or say does not mean it is. The article is a fact based study of the NET NEGATIVE impact of mass immigration/migration. It would make sense if you want to dispute it, break out some fact based studies to counter the article.

Report this comment
#7) On April 07, 2008 at 2:44 PM, camistocks (< 20) wrote:

This is a xenophobic article. 

Immigrants usually go to a foreign country to find work and earn money, and send a part of it back to their families. They don't migrate to get social security. They CONTRIBUTE to the economy.

Immigrants usually do the dirty low paid work that nobody wants to do, like cleaning jobs, construction, care for the elderly, nursing, slaughterhouse jobs, dish washing etc.

The Japanese economy is long term doomed because it is a shrinking society. That's why the stock market is going nowhere. Japan has started to invite people of other origin to address the problem. Furthermore, Japan is controlled by the Yakuza, a criminal organization comparable to the Mafia.

While I can understand somehow if someone from England is complaining about immigrants, I can't see the point for the USA. 

ALL Americans are immigrants or descendants from immigrants!

You come from Ireland, Poland, Germany, Italy, England, Scotland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, France, Russia, etc.

You took the land away from the Indians! 

A big part of your society stems from Africa, whose people you used as slaves. In fact, in Europe we didn't have slaves. There were only slaves in the colonies and in the USA.

Maybe the independence war was about keeping the slaves? 

Today the Mexicans are doing the dirt jobs. 

And btw, it's spelled borders, not boarders. White trash!

Is this the Ron Paul message? No to immigration? 

Report this comment
#8) On April 07, 2008 at 3:21 PM, abitare (31.77) wrote:

 camistocks,
 

This is a xenophobic article.  

No, it is a fact based study. Have you been to London? Or New York? Or Paris? Do you think there are limits on the amount of people the small Island of England should take in? A trillion or a gazillion? What are the limits that the islands can support? Please give some facts.

They CONTRIBUTE to the economy.

Again it is a NET NEGATIVE. Not an absolute negative.

Immigrants usually do the dirty low paid work that nobody wants to do, like cleaning jobs, construction, care for the elderly, nursing, slaughterhouse jobs, dish washing etc.

 

There are 28 million on food stamps and 6 million in prison here in the US. Do you think they should have priority over a migrant worker? 

 

The Japanese economy is long term doomed because it is a shrinking society.

 

Doomed? Really? Have you been there? No, you haven’t. It is a stupid statement.

Japan has a declining birth rate just like most first world countries. The people are living longer. The Japan is a world leading exporter of electronics, cars, computers, TV etc… With ZERO crime and ZERO immigration and ALMOST NO NATURAL RESOURCES to support its economy (except its homogenous population, which “live to work”).

That's why the stock market is going nowhere.
 

Japan had a major credit bubble, that popped. Guess which countries have a credit bubble now that is deflating?
 

Japan has started to invite people of other origin to address the problem.

 

Give me some numbers, besides “female entertainers”

 

Japan is controlled by the Yakuza, a criminal organization comparable to the Mafia.

 

No doubt they have a mafia and corruption. Just like everywhere else in this world. 

I can't see the point for the USA. 

Wait for the unemployment and inflation to climb, then check back.

 

ALL Americans are immigrants or descendants from immigrants!

Australia was a prison colony should they stick will only prison migrants or should they adapt to a NEW and current circumstance. The US had 30 million now we have +300 million, please give me a finite limit of people you want to take in. A trillion? What will be the quality of life? How many people can the US successfully feed? Is there a finite number?

In fact, in Europe we didn't have slaves. There were only slaves in the colonies and in the USA.

The Romans and Greeks did not have slaves? The Moors of Spain did not have slaves? Olaudah Equiano of London?

Maybe the independence war was about keeping the slaves? 

You are to “far behind the power curve” to be able help you here. 

White trash!

LOL! Is this all you have? I have a big tear in my eye! You are a "case in point" that Americans need to spend more on education. Where did you study at?

Is this the Ron Paul message? No to immigration? 

Dr Paul’s message is the law should be up held or changes.

Report this comment
#9) On April 07, 2008 at 3:39 PM, QualityPicks (78.76) wrote:

abitarecatania: My point is that the article is talking only on the bad side of immigration, most likely illegal immigration or non-merit based immigration. I'm talking mainly about the good side of immigration, that is why my response does not relate to the article :) I wanted to present the other side.

Most of the legal immigration is employment or family based.

Employment based immigration requires college degrees, or equivalency in years of experience. These people don't live on food stamps, their salaries are also regulated, so they need to have decent salaries to make sure they are not lowering salaries in the US. These people are also not in jail :) simply because if they did something wrong, they can be deported instead.

There is also investment based immigration. If you invest 1 million dollars in certain areas (based on need), and hire 10 people or so, you can get a green card. I don't think these guys live on food stamps either. 

Then, there is family based immigration. We are talking about sons, parents, or spouses of US Citizens. Brothers and sisters would take more than 10 or 15 years to immigrate. This is not merit based, and of course, the "benefits" of it will be random. But how would you feel if you could not marry a foreigner and/or bring your spouse to the US being a US Citizen? If you have a history of legal problems you will very likely be denied your visa/green card.

There is also a lottery of visas, which is done for diversity purposes. Countries like Mexico, that have many people here, can't participate in these lotteries. These are also not based on merit, and the benefits will be random. Again, background checks are performed on these people, we won't accept any criminals.

As you can see, there are many sides to immigration. And many ways that people immigrate. Legal immigration is controlled in many ways and most of the time is good for the country.

Also, immigrants come to the US because they LOVE this country and they want to live here. They can be as loyal or more loyal than a US citizen, since they made a choice, and they choose the US. On the other hand, US Citizens had no choice, they were just born here. Both, US born citizens and immigrants can be very loyal.

Language, should be learned by immigrants and they should speak it well, no arguments here. 

In summary, I am not saying that you don't have some good points. But I also hated the fact that the story is one sided.

Report this comment
#10) On April 07, 2008 at 3:57 PM, QualityPicks (78.76) wrote:

"Again it is a NET NEGATIVE. Not an absolute negative."

Does your study include illegal immigration or only legal immigration? And, in the case there were no studies that proved immigration is good (I would think there are plenty) and the study you site is correct, Do you think we should not allow ANY immigration then? Or that we should fix the issues, specially with illegal or non-merit immigration?

Report this comment
#11) On April 07, 2008 at 4:08 PM, abitare (31.77) wrote:

Quality,

Thanks again for the reply. I am familiar with the positives of immigration. German scientist helped create the Nuclear weapons we dropped on the Japanese and built the rockets that landed Americans on the moon. (Or in a film studio? J) There are good examples of immigration.

The problem is the welfare state the US has created is unsustainable and is heavily abused. I do not blame someone for trying to improve his “lot in life”. But the social services need to be reduced. The system is to large and will eventually fail.

immigrants come to the US because they LOVE this country and they want to live here.

I love Sweden. Are they going to provided me a citizenship? Why would they? Just because I love it? Europe is crowded already, they do not want extra people competing for jobs and resources. Try and get citizenship to Italy. 20% of Italians work outside of Italy. Do they want non-Italians competing for the few jobs they have available? Maybe if you could build them a rocket ship or nuclear weapon, but that is not most immigrates.

US born citizens and immigrants can be very loyal.

No doubt, France had a mass migration of loyal Algerians following the French defeat in Algeria. How is that second generation of Algerians acting? Gurkhas have served England and others with distinction.

Language, should be learned by immigrants

Why? There is such an influx of migrants that you can get away with not speaking English here.

hated the fact that the story is one sided.

 Mass migration is a NET NEGATIVE, is the summary. The study I am sure will cover the details.  

Report this comment
#12) On April 07, 2008 at 5:16 PM, angusthermopylae (38.77) wrote:

abarectania,

I see your point, from the study.  And, I have to agree that there is a strong point to be made from a purely government cash-flow point of view.

However, I think the debate between you and QP boils down to this:  To an anarchist, a government is a NET NEGATIVE institution; to a (real) communist (are there any around anymore?), all private corporations are NET NEGATIVES; to Greenpeace, every whaler and lumberjack is a NET NEGATIVE.

The numbers, real or not, also encompass a point of view; always remember "Lies, damned lies, and statistics."

I've been watching the immigration debates on TV, the news, the paper, family, even the comics.  Everyone has numbers on their side, and probably a lot of them are correct.   Both sides have champions who are passionate, and (very probably) firm in their belief that they want to do what's best for their country/people/whatever.

Do a simple search on Google News for the UK and immigration, and you get over 3,700 hits; it's a big topic.  And, of course, it seems to impact everyone and their livelihood.  No wonders backs are going up on all sides.

Personally, I'm a little frightened--not by immigration, but by the debate itself.  I really doubt if immigrants will be the cause or reason for the Apocalypse, but the overall tone on both sides makes railroad cars and camps seem completely plausible in the next 10 years.

When all else fails, I just fall back on Keynes old statement:

In the long run, we're all dead. 

Report this comment
#13) On April 07, 2008 at 6:06 PM, abitare (31.77) wrote:

angus,

A simple question, if we can agree on the numbers.

According to the  The Indepent NewsPaper the US has 28 Million going on food stamps.

According to wikipedia there are 6 million in prision in the US.

34 million people, who need employment or more employment. This 34 million is a parasitic burden on the current population.

Can you tell me why we need another +20 million immigrants here? To work? The US prision population is the largest in the world. We need migrants to work here? 

Report this comment
#14) On April 07, 2008 at 7:11 PM, klaracat (27.09) wrote:

Legal immigrants some times have negative impact on economy .People who came in America to reunites with they families(parents to reunites with kids),never work,and have more benefits,that people who work all life.They have subsidized apartments,medical benefits,home health care.
People who granted political asylums,given grant for education.
Ones a month I go to Brighton Beach for shopping,it is best plays to buy Russian food .I see how they complain,because they not aloud pay for caviar,or some deli with food stamps.
Not all illegal wont stay here forever,they goal-make money,go back home,start bissenes.

Report this comment
#15) On April 07, 2008 at 9:28 PM, angusthermopylae (38.77) wrote:

abitarecatania,

I absolutely agree with your numbers.  Again, it's just a matter of philosophy.  Over the last few years, it seems that my views have definitely tended toward the libertarians; I would say that, instead of going on about immigrants, go on about the 34 million "parasitic burden."

True freedom includes the freedom to starve.

    ---Lazarus Long
 

Report this comment
#16) On April 07, 2008 at 11:02 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Hey Aba, Just a short question. If  the immigrant comes here because they just want to work here and then go home then why don't they just work to better reform their country? Something simple like a min. wage? Why have marches and rallies and strikes here instead of their own country?  Just a random thought  that popped into my head and I had to know. My dry humor earlier gets the better of me. Loved the info though. 1776 is closer than you think if I am reading the signs right. This is just the tip of the iceberg and I can smell the change in the air. Things are about to get much worse in the next 3 mos. bush and chaney and rove are from the Nixon white house. I just can't put my finger on it but this is much bigger than we all know. Then there is the rest of the world and the social unrest world wide. I have been told by active and retired military not to worry and they wink. Other  people in the banking  system  say and do the same thing. Its weird. Well time will tell.

Report this comment
#17) On April 10, 2008 at 7:28 AM, abitare (31.77) wrote:

lq, 

Good to hear from you. Sorry for the delyed reply. 

why don't they just work to better reform their country?

The guy with the guns may not care for your reforms. Easier to flee and take advantage of the FREE social services in first world countries. 

Something simple like a min. wage?

The government imposes a minimum anything does more damage then good. What should the "minimum" wage be? Should a minimum wage be the same in London as it is in Norhtern England? 

Report this comment
#18) On April 10, 2008 at 7:34 AM, abitare (31.77) wrote:

angus,

Good quote.

klaracat

"Legal immigrants have some times negative impact on economy" 

It has been proven to be a NET NEGATIVE. It takes away from the quality of life from local population. If you do not understand this. Go to overcrowded China, India, Europe, Africa

Poverty and nationial bankruptcy is almost a guaranted when you have more people then resources to support them. 

 

Report this comment
#19) On April 18, 2008 at 11:22 AM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Hey Aba, Good to see your reply. I know what you are talking about and I agree. Now saying that I like to try and see both sides. Who wins the most in the end. The Bankers. They fund both sides. Keep the boarders open and the bankers win because immigrants use the services to send the money to their country. Pro and Con immigration Money made from groups on both sides to raise money to fight the other side. Although it is not admitted in my humble opinion they also make money off the drug and gun trade.As an uninformed example is in Afghanistan.Leaving out all of the other factors of why we are there one of the unintended consensuses is that the opium drug trade is flowing again.  Under the Bad Bad Talaban all drugs were taken out of the equation and they are now back in.Who profits? Greenies  v Cooperations  and who wins? The Banking system. Bankers don't want peace because they can't make as much money.  If Bill Gates and other CRF members want a global ecomony they need to pay a Global min. wage. I say set the min wage at whatever is the highest one in the world and go from there. The CRF wants to have their cake and eat it also. But then again if you squeeze the poor to much they rebel and there will be uprisings and riots and wars. Then again that is what the bankers of the world want. They can play both sides and make money. Then when the country has to rebuild the bankers make more money off the reconstruction.  Should a minimum wage be the same in London as it is in Norhtern England?  In the United States of England (formally America) it is the same country wide. Should each state be different?( no.) Anyway does it really mater because we the entire world are being controlled be the Central Banks of the World.We listen and believe in the rumors they spread  and most of us follow them blindly like the sheep they call us. I hate being manipulated and so I follow the road less traveled. My tower of belief is still falling down around me and it is taking time to form the new ones. I have realized on thing though. New World Order  (NWO  =  OWN  ) Who own's who is the question. So yes about large scale immigration it does hurt It doesn't significantly benefit the economy in the UK, nor in the USA either: as well as all countries around the world. Rock On.

Report this comment
#20) On April 18, 2008 at 9:17 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement