Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

10 Reasons Why America Will Continue To Dominate The Global Economy For Years
Business Insider ^ | 6-22-2013 | Steven Perlberg

Posted on 06/22/2013 8:04:29 AM PDT by blam

10 Reasons Why America Will Continue To Dominate The Global Economy For Years

Steven Perlberg
Jun. 22, 2013, 7:08 AM

Flickr / Tambako the Jaguar

The U.S. economy is in recovery mode right now.

Sure, investors have been spooked by Fed taper talks, the Bank of Japan's unprecedented economic experiment, persistent jitters out of Europe, and concerns of a credit crisis in China.

But by in large, investors should be pleased with the way things are going domestically, according to a new report from Joseph Quinlan, Chief Market Strategist for U.S. Trust.

We walk you through U.S. Trust's 10 theses that show "what's right with America."

1) The U.S. economy is the largest and most productive in the world - The U.S. accounts for one-fifth of global GDP with only 4.5% of the world's population. America's economy is nearly twice the size of China's in nominal dollars. Plus, the U.S. is one of just a few developed countries with real GDP higher than it was before the crisis, according to the report.

U.S. Trust

2) The U.S. leads the world in manufactured goods - Nominal manufacturing output totaled $1.9 trillion in 2012, a rise of 27% from 2009. Employment in the sector has increased by 500,000 workers since 2010, according to U.S. Trust.

U.S. Trust

3) The U.S. is among the largest exporters of goods and services - Exports since the recession have taken off. In 2012, total exports totaled $2.2 trillion, nearly a 40% rise from 2009 levels, according to the report.

U.S. Trust

(snip)

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Japan; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2014election; 2016election; abortion; carbontax; deathpanels; economy; election2014; election2016; energy; investing; kenyanbornmuzzie; obamacare; opec; partisanmediashill; partisanmediashills; recession; recovery; zerocare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

1 posted on 06/22/2013 8:04:29 AM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: blam

Obama just added ten things to his “To Un-Do List”.


2 posted on 06/22/2013 8:05:39 AM PDT by jiggyboy (Ten percent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jiggyboy
Tapering The Taper Talk ("Fed's next big announcement will be to increase, not diminish QE")
3 posted on 06/22/2013 8:10:31 AM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: blam
cause as bad off as we are... the rest are worse???
4 posted on 06/22/2013 8:26:02 AM PDT by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Things will continue to spiral downward until America repents.

2 CHRONICLES 7:14

If MY people, who are called by MY name, will humble themselves and pray and seek MY face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.


5 posted on 06/22/2013 8:29:40 AM PDT by stars & stripes forever ((Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stars & stripes forever
Many do not want to do so....to our own demise.

“Righteousness exalts a nation”....we have long ago abandoned any resemblance of righteousness...so we are seeing the results of no longer being a nation under God.

6 posted on 06/22/2013 8:34:10 AM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: blam
But by in large, investors should be pleased with the way things are going domestically...

Grammar police! It's "by AND large."

7 posted on 06/22/2013 8:56:31 AM PDT by Right Wing Assault (Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Assault

I thought it was buy in large. Like buy bulk to save in the long run.

: 0


8 posted on 06/22/2013 9:23:09 AM PDT by shineon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: blam

BUNK.

China’s economy has now caught America’s and is growing.

China has a massive closed economy. Yet we send our very own manufacturing there, in 51/49 all-Chinese ventures which eliminate the American worker.

China’s unemployment rate is now (far) lower than America’s.

China, not America is the global economic force, and we are haphazardly making excuses for China’s predatory economic policies, while still sending American jobs there.

What we are doing now, is insane.

BRING BACK AMERICAN JOBS.


9 posted on 06/22/2013 9:26:39 AM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Notice in #2 that we aren't anywhere near the pre-crisis level.


10 posted on 06/22/2013 11:02:06 AM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Notice that #3 focuses only on Exports and ignores that imports are dwarfing exports. That's like claiming your income has grown 10% when your expenses have increased 300% and now vastly exceed your income.


11 posted on 06/22/2013 11:08:34 AM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shineon

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/by-and-large.html

It’s a old nautical term. “Large” means with the wind and “by” means against the wind. In other words, if a ship can sail “by and large” it can sail against the wind or with the wind. In other words, ‘for the most part,’ or ‘generally,’ or ‘on the whole,’ or ‘mostly,’ or ‘usually.’

“Buy in large,” while a good idea, doesn’t usually fit the context of the sentence.


12 posted on 06/22/2013 12:59:19 PM PDT by Right Wing Assault (Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Assault

Nice - thanks


13 posted on 06/22/2013 1:21:09 PM PDT by shineon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN; Toddsterpatriot
...#3 focuses only on Exports and ignores that imports are dwarfing exports. That's like claiming your income has grown 10% when your expenses have increased 300%...

No it isn't. 

International payments always balance, and the total of everything sold to foreigners is always equal to the total of what's bought.  So there's no getting around the fact that Americans export far more goods'n'services than the rest of the world does, and it's even better that we can also sell other stuff so we can import still more.

14 posted on 06/22/2013 1:24:05 PM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama

Balance of payments is an accounting construct, similar to a balance sheet. It does have to balance. But a balance sheet can balance despite you being insolvent. Your debt can far exceed your assets and the difference will appear as negative equity. That a balance sheet balances, does not mean everything is okay.

Similarly balance of payments in international goods will always balance, because every transaction has two sides. But it doesn’t mean everything is good or healthy with the economy. We have a large trade good deficit. Balance of payments is balanced only because we sell a lot of government debt, corporate debt and ownership of our industries to China every year.


15 posted on 06/22/2013 5:11:45 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

Your chart ends in 2009.


16 posted on 06/22/2013 5:14:02 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Your chart ends in 2009.

True, the chart in the article covered 2008 till present.

17 posted on 06/22/2013 5:16:22 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Your chart ends in 2009.

True, the chart in the article covered 2008 till present.

18 posted on 06/22/2013 5:16:23 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama

Old data...

China is now out-exporting America.

And growing.


19 posted on 06/22/2013 5:19:12 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
But a balance sheet can balance despite you being insolvent.

We're insolvent?

Similarly balance of payments in international goods will always balance, because every transaction has two sides.

Excellent! Now you see why the trade deficit is such a silly number to whine about.

But it doesn’t mean everything is good or healthy with the economy.

Well, Obama is President and government grows ever larger, so that is a problem.

Balance of payments is balanced only because we sell a lot of government debt, corporate debt and ownership of our industries to China every year.

Well, if Americans saved a lot more and the government spent a lot less, that wouldn't be an issue.

Giving the government more money, thru higher tariffs, isn't going to reduce government spending, is it?

20 posted on 06/22/2013 5:21:47 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
China is now out-exporting America.

If you believe Chinese government numbers.

21 posted on 06/22/2013 5:23:36 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
"Giving the government more money, thru higher tariffs, isn't going to reduce government spending, is it? "

Tariffs won't increase spending. It takes a vote of congress to increase spending. Congress and Congress alone can increase spending.

But I'd be fine with cutting income taxes or corporate taxes by the amount of the tariff increase so that it's tax neutral.

22 posted on 06/22/2013 5:32:08 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
Tariffs won't increase spending.

And they won't reduce spending. Or increase savings.

23 posted on 06/22/2013 5:41:28 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

Tariffs just punish American consumers so to protect American unions from having to compete with the rest of the world. If an American worker can’t produce more value than some peasant in China... Then perhaps he ought to consider doing something else.


24 posted on 06/22/2013 5:56:51 PM PDT by Ramius (Personally, I give us one chance in three. More tea anyone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Ramius
"Tariffs just punish American consumers so to protect American unions from having to compete with the rest of the world.

No it's the lack of tariffs that punishes Americans. It wipes out American jobs and forces us all to pay for the unemployed.

If an American worker can’t produce more value than some peasant in China... Then perhaps he ought to consider doing something else."

So you're okay with Americans reducing their wages down to $2 a day so as to compete with the Chinese communist slave labor. Your realize that Chinese policies keep their people poor and paid low. But you're going to bring America down to their level.

25 posted on 06/22/2013 6:01:50 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

People can get paid whatever they’re worth according to their productivity. If you think American workers are only worth $2/hr I’m going to have to disagree. I think American workers can compete with anybody.


26 posted on 06/22/2013 6:58:39 PM PDT by Ramius (Personally, I give us one chance in three. More tea anyone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
...doesn’t mean everything is good or healthy with the economy. We have a large trade good deficit...

So the question is whether the trade deficit comes with a bad economy or comes with a good economy--

--and what we know for sure is that a growing trade deficit is followed by more people getting work, and that when the trade shrinks people become unemployed.  We can all have opinions on why it happens but it's not healthy to pretend that things are other than the way they are.

...payments is balanced only because we sell a lot of government debt, corporate debt and ownership of our industries...

Actually no.

This idea of a trade deficit making America poor again conflicts with reality.  If it were true then America's total private net worth would have shrunk when the TD was bigger and grew when the TD fell.  It didn't, in fact the opposite is what happened. 

The fact is that the so-called 'trade-deficit' is the "accounting construct".  If I hire Chinese musicians to write songs that I copyright in my name, and then I pay them with the rights to my new book, it's a trade deficit.   The next year I can cause a trade surplus if a Chinese book company hires me to write and I use my paycheck to buy the rights to songs written my my musician friends.

Both years it's the same work and same products and only the names of the products change; but one year's a deficit and the next is a surplus.

27 posted on 06/22/2013 7:01:07 PM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama
Your chart shows that both the trade deficit and unemployment are strongly related to the economic cycle. But it doesn't show the impact of the trade deficit on employment.

Here's a better chart that shows the unemployment rates that followed in countries that ran big trade deficits vs countries that didn't. from this site

Deficit Spending doesn't work Balancing Trade Does

This article analyzes the trade deficit on an input/output basis by individual industry and determines that over $3 million us jobs are being displaced by Chinese imports.

# of Jobs Displaced by Industry


28 posted on 06/22/2013 8:00:23 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
The above charts are from this article... Growing U.S. trade deficit with China cost 2.8 million jobs between 2001 and 2010
29 posted on 06/22/2013 8:02:05 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama
This idea of a trade deficit making America poor again conflicts with reality. If it were true then America's total private net worth would have shrunk when the TD was bigger and grew when the TD fell. It didn't, in fact the opposite is what happened.

No the trade deficit is not big enough in any given period to see an immediate impact on net worth. It's the combined effect of many years of large trade deficits that will eventually begin shrinking net worth.

"If I hire Chinese musicians to write songs that I copyright in my name, and then I pay them with the rights to my new book, it's a trade deficit. The next year I can cause a trade surplus if a Chinese book company hires me to write and I use my paycheck to buy the rights to songs written my my musician friends."

Show me the trade surpluses with China.

You're example makes it sound like trade is even and one year there's a deficit and the next is a surplus. But that's not the case.

A better example would be that you hire Chinese musicians to write music that you copywrite in your name. China ignores the copy write and produces your song and sells it on the black market. Then the government taxes 90% of the Chinese earnings and song sales and uses that to buy the production company that you had a contract with.

Now they no longer need you, so you're in the unemployment line. Meanwhile, the Chinese production company continues to hire the Chinese music writers and sell to Americans. All the while the Chinese communist government continues to soak up the profits so that they can buy the next target.

Oh and along the way they plant some articles about how China is about to implode.

30 posted on 06/22/2013 9:36:20 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama
Here is a great article in which Robert E Scott lampoons the CATO institute graph that tries to imply that trade deficits cause low unemployment.

e suggests if that relationship was true, then the simple solution to American unemployment would be to eliminate exports and let the trade deficit soar! ROFLMAO. Everyone should be employeed in no time! LOL

That is after all the logical conclusion of the relationship that you and the CATO institute are implying exists. LOL Cato on China trade: Looking glass economics

31 posted on 06/22/2013 9:40:58 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Assault

I didn’t know what it meant, myself. I just knew what the words were.

When I looked it up, that was the first time I knew where it came from. Probably true of 99% of the people who use it.


32 posted on 06/23/2013 3:43:09 AM PDT by Right Wing Assault (Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network; Toddsterpatriot
The U.S. is among the largest exporters of goods and services - Exports since the recession have taken off. In 2012, total exports totaled $2.2 trillion, nearly a 40% rise from 2009 levels, according to the report.

Old data...  China is now out-exporting America.  And growing.

No, they're the latest 2012 data--

US 2012 export of goods'n'services = 2,194.491 Billions of Dollars

China exports 2012 = 2049.185 Billions of Dollars

--and they're also the only data we got.  That "out-exporting America" story isn't data, it's a tired old feeeeling.

33 posted on 06/23/2013 5:23:28 AM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
...payments is balanced only because we sell a lot of government debt, corporate debt and ownership of our industries...

If it were true then America's total private net worth would have shrunk when the TD was bigger

the trade deficit is not big enough in any given period to see an immediate impact on net worth

Wait a second, first, the U.S. is selling a lot of ownership but then "a lot" suddenly becomes "not big enough" for impact.  Let's chuck the vague commentary and stick to hard facts concerning the so-called trade deficit and America's ownership of wealth over the past decade:

 

America got rich when the so-called trade deficit grew, and America was hurt when the deficit fell. 

34 posted on 06/23/2013 5:58:23 AM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama

I’ve heard differently.

So we’ll just disagree at this point.

Either way, we need to pay attention, and address this growing problem.


35 posted on 06/23/2013 6:16:11 AM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
we need to pay attention, and address this growing problem

If in fact we really do need to "pay attention and address" the problem then the first step is to get the facts and get clear on what this problem is.  US Exports of goods'n'services is at an all time high.  That shouldn't be a problem.  Some people say what America does isn't as important as what other countries do, and if say, China exports a lot then it's a problem.

I'm not what we'd call a 'globalist' to the point that how folks in other countries live matters more than how we live.

36 posted on 06/23/2013 7:06:48 AM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama
"Wait a second, first, the U.S. is selling a lot of ownership but then "a lot" suddenly becomes "not big enough" for impact. "

Is that the best argument you have, to twist my words to something I didn't say? I said not big enough to reduce wealth in a single period. It takes many years of trade deficits and lost industries before you will see our net wealth actually declining.

And what your chart shows is that Net household wealth has stagnated over the last 10 years. Nobody is making any progress any more. That alone should be a big red flag!!!

If you really believe that CATO crap about trade deficits leading employment, then do eliminate exports, let the trade deficit go through the roof and put everyone back to work. But you know as well as I that the trade deficits helping employment is a laughable theory.

That chart and argument alone should have you second guessing the credibility of the CATO institute. CATO was founded with a single mission to promote free trade. And they apparently will use any argument no matter how ridiculous to advance their cause.

37 posted on 06/23/2013 8:32:18 AM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama
"Wait a second, first, the U.S. is selling a lot of ownership but then "a lot" suddenly becomes "not big enough" for impact. "

Is that the best argument you have, to twist my words to something I didn't say? I said not big enough to reduce wealth in a single period. It takes many years of trade deficits and lost industries before you will see our net wealth actually declining.

And what your chart shows is that Net household wealth has stagnated over the last 10 years. Nobody is making any progress any more. That alone should be a big red flag!!!

If you really believe that CATO crap about trade deficits leading employment, then do eliminate exports, let the trade deficit go through the roof and put everyone back to work. But you know as well as I that the trade deficits helping employment is a laughable theory.

That chart and argument alone should have you second guessing the credibility of the CATO institute. CATO was founded with a single mission to promote free trade. And they apparently will use any argument no matter how ridiculous to advance their cause.

38 posted on 06/23/2013 8:32:19 AM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: blam
10 Reasons Why America Will Continue To Dominate The Global Economy For Years

I will give you 17,000,000,000,000 reasons it won't.

39 posted on 06/23/2013 8:39:20 AM PDT by catfish1957 (Hey NSA Goon watching FR... Suck this - > |=====>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
...chart shows is that Net household wealth has stagnated over the last 10 years...

Work with me on this.  The left and right vertical axis's of the above Federal Reserve chart are both labeled "Change from year ago", so what we got is the $six trillion is not the amount of wealth, but rather the increase of wealth.  Same with the trade deficit.  Here are the same numbers plotted by the Federal Reserve with total levels--

--and it not only shows (once again) how wealth grows fastest with a bigger so-called 'trade deficit', but it also shows current wealth at an all time high --albeit growing not as fast with a smaller trade deficit. 

The thing is to understand that the half trillion annual trade deficit is not an annual loss of a half $T of wealth.

40 posted on 06/23/2013 9:48:52 AM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama

$42 trillion to $70 trillion, over the last 10 years. Not very stagnant......


41 posted on 06/23/2013 9:56:17 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama

I dunno...

I went shopping, just now.

Walmart seems to have been completely stocked, in Beijing.


42 posted on 06/23/2013 10:29:00 AM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: blam

Our country no longer has the character in her people to dominate anything.


43 posted on 06/23/2013 10:31:50 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
Quick, double the price of oil.

The "everything sold in WalMart is from China" feeling of yours has been debunked. Many times.

44 posted on 06/23/2013 11:46:40 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Oh baloney.

But only increase the price of imported oil.

And imported goods.

Everything made, or mined in America, no tax...

:)


45 posted on 06/23/2013 11:50:53 AM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
But only increase the price of imported oil.

Excellent! How much will I be able to sell my American oil for?

Triple? Quadruple? Sweet!

46 posted on 06/23/2013 11:56:48 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: stars & stripes forever
Things will continue to spiral downward until America repents.

Well, either that or repeal the income tax and corporate tax. I'll bet all the folks that are likely to repent already have.

47 posted on 06/23/2013 12:05:25 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Hey RATs! Control your murdering freaks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER

How about focusing the income taxes and corporate taxes, on companies and people who sell imports.

If you sell domestic stuff, no taxes.


48 posted on 06/23/2013 12:09:29 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

What’s wrong with imports...unless the importing country imposes a tariff on our goods, I wouldn’t support that. However if they do....nail em.

I do think domestic fuels production should be given massive tax incentives. Maybe a tax only on exported product. Ska-rew the “global oil market”.


49 posted on 06/23/2013 12:15:16 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Hey RATs! Control your murdering freaks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
I'm not what we'd call a 'globalist' to the point that how folks in other countries live matters more than how we live.

I dunno...  I went shopping, just now.  Walmart seems to have been completely stocked, in Beijing.

Not completely,   Wal-Mart sells more stuff (Wal-Mart total revenue: $447B) than the total of all of China's imports to the US (total imports from China = $425.6B) and also no sane person here is going to say that all of China's US imports go though Wal-Mart.

Ah, maybe you weren't being serious; if so please forgive me for taking you seriously.

50 posted on 06/23/2013 12:41:32 PM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson