Mmm . . . Socialism
I’m a bit surprised to learn that Education Secretary Margaret Spellings was ringing the alarm bells about the state of American schools by saying that we’re “behind Denmark and Finland” in terms of the percent of younger working-age adults with post-secondary degrees.
Countries like Denmark and Finland are basically poster children for the interrelatedness of social policy concerns, something conservatives are usually keen to deny preferring instead to believe that if we just squeezed teachers harder the schools would be great. But the child poverty rate in Denmark is 2.4 percent and in Finland it’s 2.8 percent. In the United States it’s 21.9 percent. And of course poor children do substantially worse in school than do non-poor children. If we saw a 90 percent drop in the child poverty rate, our educational attainment figures would skyrocket even absent any changes whatsoever in the educational system.
That’s not all there is to know about education in Denmark or Finland, nor is it to say that there’s nothing we can do to improve educational outcomes by reforming the school system, but I do think it’s almost certainly the case that if we ultimately want outcomes as good as they see in Denmark and Finland — and Secretary Spellings seems to think we should want that — that we would need to go far beyond changing the schools and build something more like a Northern European social democracy.
53 Responses to “Mmm . . . Socialism”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
September 16th, 2008 at 9:55 am
So, let’s nominate a presidential ticket in which neither candidate earned a graduate degree; the presidential candidate graduated at the bottom of his class; the vice presidential candidate stumbled through six schools before earning a bachelor’s degree in a borderline academic subject; the vice presidential candidate’s husband did not attend college; and her two oldest children are not bound for college. How do we compete with India, China, Taiwan, Singapore and Korea with those kinds of examples at the top of our culture?
September 16th, 2008 at 10:10 am
I don’t mean to be a concern troll, but I really don’t get where the poverty data comes from when I click through to swivel.com.
Sure there’s numbers, but whose are they? How are they measured, and are they adjusted for currency effects? And New Zealand (16.6) has a higher child poverty rate than Poland (12.7)?
I mean, it’s better to have unsupported views than views that are not-really-supported by qualitative measures that aren’t clear and can’t be checked, but sound good if you don’t click through.
I can’t wait until the election season is over and the partisan bloggers are good again.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:12 am
I’ve been thinking along similar lines. George Will’s love of magical solutions to our inner-city school problems drove me to actually blog about it.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:12 am
“….build something more like a Northern European social democracy.”
I couldn’t agree more….
September 16th, 2008 at 10:13 am
I really like your blog though Matt! It pains me to complain.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Not to rain on your statistics but aren’t you discussing a matter where the homogeneous nature of the two countries has a lot to do with their policy outcomes?
September 16th, 2008 at 10:26 am
Not to rain on your statistics but aren’t you discussing a matter where the homogeneous nature of the two countries has a lot to do with their policy outcomes?
You hear this kind of thing a lot, but what is it really meant by it? Is the worry that all these immigrants, minorities and black people are dragging down the averages by being stupid, poor and culturally different? It’s not as if these European countries did not once have poor people. Black poor people can be helped much as white poor people can. It might be harder, but it’s not as if we’ve actually ever tried in this country.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Poverty? In the United States? Your hypothesis leaves out the very well known fact there is a lot of cake available for consumption.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:41 am
You hear this kind of thing a lot, but what is it really meant by it? Is the worry that all these immigrants, minorities and black people are dragging down the averages by being stupid, poor and culturally different?
Well, first of all, Matt said explicitly that being poor drags down the averages, so yes, that’s one point. Add to that that students who can’t speak English are going to perform worse in English-speaking schools than will English speaking students, so that’s two. You can make the cultural homogeneity argument without being a racist. In fact, our willingness to even TRY universal public education in the face of our cultural and economic diversity is a positive feature of our system vis a vis Denmark, etc.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:47 am
To build a Northern European social democracy, the first thing the government would have to go is deport about 30% of all the people living in America. In Finland, over 90% of the people are from one ethnic group and the second biggest ethnic group are Swedes.
Whenever a progressive writer starts writing about how the U.S. could be like Sweden, Finland, etc you know all of his friends are white and attended private schools. How else could they believe that the U.S. could be like some of the most homogenous countries in the world unless their like was homogeneous.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Denmark and the US are actually quite similar as far as recent immigration is concerned, just take a look at the numbers. And one would think that a society would be able to integrate minorities that have been around for a couple of hundred years. There is no doubt that the US is less homogeneous as far as wealth and income distribution is concerned, but that’s kinda the point.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:34 am
If we saw a 90 percent drop in the child poverty rate, our educational attainment figures would skyrocket even absent any changes whatsoever in the educational system.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:34 am
What can you expect from a country where parents are known to shout at their children, “Don’t you get smart with me!”? We, loosely speaking, respect education only to the extent that we think it’s linked to making more money—and we’ve always got a soft spot (in our skulls?) for the person without much “book learning” corrupting their fine, Merkin, character.
I think we get the educational system they want—not the one we say we want, not the one we’d like to think we want, but the one we really want.
September 16th, 2008 at 11:42 am
A lot of rich people can’t grasp the policy because they believe that poor people do bad in school due to poor genes or something like that. This is just the kind of ignorance rich educated types think they’re always railing against, but I’m sure experts on human intelligence and human genetics would easily be able to opine that they’re dead wrong. The rich end up feeling guilty about their wealth when they’re kids and so they let themselves come to believe the old lies about why people are rich and poor, just like all the plutocrats from yesteryear (who many modern rich people think they are far superior to, morally) subscribed to.
This in turn prevents better policy from getting implemented, and you have the same bad results turn up again. In some respects (but not all), the Europeans are ahead of us in abandoning class distinctions and therefore have an easier time of getting past things like this (but of course, that’s still a simplified way to characterize a complicated problem and several pertinent differences between the U.S. and western Europe).
September 16th, 2008 at 11:43 am
There’s also other cultural differences to keep in mind (though I am normally loathe to return to culturalist arguments) – esp. in Denmark there’s a substantial “stay in your lane” mentality, simultaneously a conservative fantasy and American-conservative nightmare. Basically, there’s substantial social pressure to conform, do what your parents did, etc., which is good for social cohesion and keeps levels of educational achievement high. And that’s good! But it also runs pretty counter to the much-beloved American independent spirit [mythology though it may be] and it’s sort of odd to see Spellings hyping that sort of system.
Also, despite relatively more-draconian immigration regulations in the Bush years, the US has the advantage that when we want highly-educated people in this country we can just import them in large numbers. The fact that we don’t produce them domestically might be a nationalistic concern, but isn’t as much a macroeconomic concern.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Not to stray too far from the main topic, but cost matters. When I attended a state university in the late 70s full-time tuition was about $400 per semester, roughly equal to one month’s minimum wage earnings. I’m under the impression that it’s slightly more expensive these days.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Well, first of all, Matt said explicitly that being poor drags down the averages, so yes, that’s one point. Add to that that students who can’t speak English are going to perform worse in English-speaking schools than will English speaking students, so that’s two. You can make the cultural homogeneity argument without being a racist. In fact, our willingness to even TRY universal public education in the face of our cultural and economic diversity is a positive feature of our system vis a vis Denmark, etc.
If our issues were limited to first generation non-english speaking immigrants, that would certainly be one thing. But some parts of the ‘non-homogeneous’ parts of the society we are talking about have been around for hundreds of years. Ultimately, I think it’s a lot harder to make any kind of ‘cultural homogeneity’ argument without either being racist or failing to take into account the scope of social policy than you think. For example, is modern black american culture this emergent phenomenon which developed independently of American social policy over the last century and a half? I don’t think so. And if the best social policy available can’t fix the problem, then what are you left to argue is the cause? Genetics, right?
It may be true that ‘poverty qua poverty’ is not the issue if you look at it the wrong way. Certainly, if you have a generation of people who grew up in poverty and give them really well paying jobs, it’s unlikely that they’re all going to start doing a great job raising their kids to do well in school. But that doesn’t mean that social policy aimed at bridging this gap by attempting to directly pull children out of poverty wouldn’t yield substantial gains in the long run and delivering a more homogenous society, economically, culturally and educationally.
And none of this addresses the fact that there used to be a lot of really poor people in Denmark, too. Somehow they fixed this problem.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Jake,
Sarah Palin may be less educated than Barack Obama, as you point out, but at least she does not deny the facts of biology to argue that an unborn child is not a human being, but rather a lump of tissue that can be killed without compunction. In the matter of the basic nature of unborn life, Sarah Palin seems to have a better grasp of the biology, and a truer wisdom, than Barack Obama and the chattering classses.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
But the child poverty rate in Denmark is 2.4 percent and in Finland it’s 2.8 percent. In the United States it’s 21.9 percent.
Ah yes. Let’s make up one number in one way and call it “the poverty rate in the United States.” Then make up another number in a different way and call it “the poverty rate in Denmark.” Then pretend that we can say something meaningful about poverty in each country by comparing the two numbers.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
To build a Northern European social democracy, the first thing the government would have to go is deport about 30% of all the people living in America.
Why? This is one of the most absurd things I’ve read on the internets in a long time. You don’t have to deport anybody. In fact, a robust level of immigration-induced population growth makes affording a Nordic-style social democracy easier, (I said “robust” not “unlimited” so please spare me the bullshit about “open borders) because of the boost to economic activity consonant with population growth. All you really need to do is pass legislation establishing and/or bolstering various programs the keep the population healthy and working, along with tax code reform, and you’ve got yourself a Nordic-style social democracy — no fascism, racism or xenophobia required.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Hector, Yes and thank goodness that she evinces so much concern for the actual biologically real children running around this country in poverty. Especially those who end up getting raped and need the state to investigate the case and punish those responsible.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Following up on my last comment:
I expect that there is some genetics-related difference in intelligence between rich- and not-rich-people, on average. But if your looking for the practical differences– for why rich families hold onto their money– I think that’s a lot more attributable to other things, like the invention of money-retention devices like spendthrift trusts, and the fact that it’s just not that brilliant an idea to realize that if you have a lot of money, you should hold onto it. It actually takes rare stupidity to piss all of your large fortune away. Rich kids should consider the fact that they haven’t considered these factors before (or chalked up much to them), and that should be an adequate demonstration for them that every single rich person isn’t some kind of brilliant genius.
Another difference you notice is that a lot of rich people have a more sophisticated speaking style, every-day vocabulary, and even observations than a lot of poorer people. But it’s equally dumb not to notice that this could be the result of having the privilege to have been raised around a lot of people who were well-educated, were smart, and basically had the leisure to think, talk, and learn about a lot of sophisticated things, instead of living in a ghetto. When you’re around more people like that day-in and day-out, naturally you’ll talk more like them, even if you’re not that smart. So if we took a kid who would end up being very unimpresive if they were raised in a lower middle-class environment, and stuck them in a family of millionaires, they might come out sounding- at least to some people- really smart. But you still might not want them running a company for you.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
novakant,
Denmark and the US are actually quite similar as far as recent immigration is concerned, just take a look at the numbers.
According to this OECD chart, as of 2005 the foreign-born share of the population was much higher in the United States than in Denmark, about 13% in the U.S. compared to about 7% in Denmark. Anti-immigrant sentiment in Denmark is very strong and Denmark has some of the toughest immigration laws in the EU. It is much harder for poor people to immigrate under Danish immigration law than under U.S. immigration law.
September 16th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Jasper,
In fact, a robust level of immigration-induced population growth makes affording a Nordic-style social democracy easier, (I said “robust” not “unlimited” so please spare me the bullshit about “open borders) because of the boost to economic activity consonant with population growth.
Sorry, but “robust” is such a vague word to describe population growth (let alone “immigration-induced population growth”) that you’re not saying anything meaningful at all. What kind of magnitude of growth is “robust” supposed to mean? And what is “immigration-induced” supposed to include?
The effect of immigration on economic activity obviously depends on both the rate of immigration and the education/skills/income of the immigrant population.
The idea that a high rate of immigration of mostly poor and poorly-educated immigrants makes “Nordic-style social democracy” easier seems to me absurd.
September 16th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
The idea that a high rate of immigration of mostly poor and poorly-educated immigrants makes “Nordic-style social democracy” easier seems to me absurd.
Mixner: My understanding is that most of the people who do projections on the subject expect economic growth in the United States to slacken over the next half century or so primarily because population growth is likewise slowing. Slow growth translates into less wealth, and a government less capable of paying its bills. The “high rate of immigration” the country experienced in the 80s and 90s certainly didn’t appear to negatively impact prosperity. I reckon a well-educated pool of immigrants is more desirable from the perspective of economic performance than a poorly-educated pool of the same, but both of these would be superior to a sharply reduced flow of immigration if your goal is a robustly expanding economy (immigrants typically arrive at working age, so the economy’s tab for the costs associated with supporting non-working children and/or old people is reduced).
Of course if your goal is a strong GOP, then immigration’s not such a great deal.
September 16th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Jasper,
Leaving race out of it, and leaving aside the pros and cons of Nordic social democracy, you couldn’t simply import Nordic social democracy to the U.S. and expect it to function, without making massive adjustments to the model.
Nordic social democracy functions so well in large part because it grows out of organic cultural traditions in Scandinavia. The moral habits of Swedish or Norwegian culture traditionally place a high value on hard work, the common good, not rising too high above one’s fellows, not taking advantage of the system, etc. This is why the modern Nordic social democracy doesn’t need as many economic incentives to function as we would in America, because moral incentives play a larger role. (I suspect that some of these cultural traits developed in response to the harsh environment). In the United States we tend to me more individualistic and have less regard for the common good. If you imported the Swedish model to Ameirica and did not make adjustments for the different cultural values, you would get many more tax cheats, welfare cheats, and anti-government sentiment than you have in Sweden.
Socialism may work well for Bolivians, and social democracy for Swedes, and in the abstract I have a high regard for them both. However, neither one is a particularly good fit for American culture and tradition.
September 16th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Jasper,
Mixner: My understanding is that most of the people who do projections on the subject expect economic growth in the United States to slacken over the next half century or so primarily because population growth is likewise slowing.
Other things being equal, a bigger national population means a bigger national economy. But it obviously doesn’t mean more wealth per capita. It doesn’t doesn’t tell you anything about standard of living.
If the average level of wealth/education/skills of the population falls as a result of immigration of poor, unskilled immigrants then it may obviously lower the standard of living.
September 16th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Other things being equal, a bigger national population means a bigger national economy. But it obviously doesn’t mean more wealth per capita.
Mixner: It doesn’t have to mean more wealth per capita, but it can mean more wealth per capita (and in the case of the US, usually does). Over the course of the 80s and 90s, for instance, I suspect per capita GDP grew faster in the US than in most other developed countries. This period coincided with relatively high rates of US immigration (at least by rich world standards), with relatively high rates of unskilled US immigration, and with relatively high rates of US population growth.
Indeed, one could probably make similar claims about other (and much longer) stretches of US history. Pretty clearly a country with a smoothly functioning free market economy like that of the United States can grow richer (and not just larger) from the stimulus provided by population growth and immigration. I mean, we’re certainly a lot richer than we were in 1607, or 1900, or 1980…
And I don’t, incidentally, oppose efforts to upgrade the skill-set profile of immigrants to the US. I just don’t think it’s very feasible to do so while simultaneously trying to continue with our de facto prohibition of non-familial semi/un-skilled immigration from neighboring countries.
September 16th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Jasper,
Mixner: It doesn’t have to mean more wealth per capita, but it can mean more wealth per capita (and in the case of the US, usually does).
I don’t see any basis for the claim “in the case of the US, usually does”. Of course, even if immigration of poor and unskilled immigrants had a net positive effect on wealth per capita in the past, that doesn’t mean it does today, especially in light of the increasing importance of education and skills to economic growth.
Over the course of the 80s and 90s, for instance, I suspect per capita GDP grew faster in the US than in most other developed countries.
I’m not interested in what you “suspect” to be true. What are the facts regarding per capita GDP growth in the 80s and 90s in the U.S. compared to other countries? What evidence do you have of the relationship between per capita GDP growth and immigration?
September 16th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Jasper,
And I don’t, incidentally, oppose efforts to upgrade the skill-set profile of immigrants to the US. I just don’t think it’s very feasible to do so while simultaneously trying to continue with our de facto prohibition of non-familial semi/un-skilled immigration from neighboring countries.
You’ll have to explain this one too. Why isn’t it “very feasible” to change our immigration policies to give greater weight to education/skills in determining which applicants to admit and which to exclude?
September 16th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
as of 2005 the foreign-born share of the population was much higher in the United States than in Denmark, about 13% in the U.S. compared to about 7% in Denmark
So you’re trying to tell me that a 4 to 6% difference in the percentage of foreign born citizens is the determining factor in educational performance? Look at your own chart, will ya: several countries there have the similar or even significantly higher percentages of foreign born citizens compared to the US, yet, they’re ahead of the US in education rankings.
September 16th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
What are the facts regarding per capita GDP growth in the 80s and 90s in the U.S. compared to other countries? What evidence do you have of the relationship between per capita GDP growth and immigration?
Mixner: I thought it was pretty common knowledge that the US economy in the last two decades of the 20th century performed well by rich world standards, and generally outpaced that of other developed countries, while simultaneously experiencing higher than average (for rich countries) net immigration levels and population growth. If you’re making a counter claim please say so, and I’ll indulge you with some research. If you’re just casting doubt on this assertion I’ll….manage to muddle through burdened with the knowledge I’ve failed to convert you into a liberal.
September 16th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Why isn’t it “very feasible” to change our immigration policies to give greater weight to education/skills in determining which applicants to admit and which to exclude?
Mixner: I didn’t make such a claim. Please read more carefully.
September 16th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Denmark has had strong immigration restrictionist policies since the beginning of this decade, while Finland has never had more than 2 or 3 percent immigrants in the population.
A recent landmark study by the UCLA Chicano Studies Department found that only 6% of 4th generation Mexican-Americans (i.e., their grandparents were born in America) in LA and San Antonio have college degrees vs. 35% of non-Hispanic whites born in the same years. The Pew Hispanic center recently forecast that the U.S. will have 133 million Hispanics by 2050, an increase of almost 100 million over the half-century.
Progressives don’t actually want an America more equal in human capital or they would be concerned with immigration policy. Instead, progressives want a more unequal population, so they can get government and foundation jobs dealing with the dysfunctions of lower human capital people.
September 16th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Steve Sailer Says:
Brown people are stupid.
September 16th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
(I suspect that some of these cultural traits developed in response to the harsh environment).
Surely that would leave Alaska and Texas as the most collectivist areas of America?
September 16th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
novakant,
So you’re trying to tell me that a 4 to 6% difference in the percentage of foreign born citizens is the determining factor in educational performance?
I’m rebutting your false claim that “Denmark and the US are actually quite similar as far as recent immigration is concerned.”
As for your question above, I don’t know “the determining factor in educational performance” is even supposed to mean. “Determining” of what? Are you suggesting that the educational level of immigrants has no effect on the educational level of the overall population? That idea is absurd on its face. Since immigrants are part of the population (in the U.S., a relatively big part) the educational level of immigrants obviously affects the immigration level of the overall population.
September 16th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Make that last line “affects the educational level of the overall population.”
Matthew, you need comment preview.
September 16th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
James Grieves,
Er, it makes sense on evolutionary-psychology grounds that cooperation is more likely to evolve when the environment is harsh and it is more difficult for individuals to survive on their own. This goes for both economic collectivism on the one, and cooperation between men and women (i.e. monogamous marriage) on the other. For example, traditionally men in certain parts of West Africa, where resources were abundant, were polygamous and played little role in the uprbinging of children. The corollary of this of course is that as society becomes more prosperous, both economic cooperation and sexual morality should become weeker. That is why we have seen, in the modern United States, the rise of both unfettered capitalism and casual sex. Put simply, prosperity has not been very good for human virtue.
September 16th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Jasper,
Mixner: I thought it was pretty common knowledge that the US economy in the last two decades of the 20th century performed well by rich world standards, and generally outpaced that of other developed countries, while simultaneously experiencing higher than average (for rich countries) net immigration levels and population growth.
Did you? I’m not interested in what you thought about common knowledge. What are the facts regarding economic performance in the U.S. vs other nations? Where is your evidence about the relationship between economic performance and immigration?
If you’re making a counter claim please say so,
I’m challenging your claims because I think you’re just making them up. If you have evidence to support the disputed claims, present it.
Mixner: I didn’t make such a claim.
You wrote: “I just don’t think it’s very feasible to [upgrade the skill-set profile of immigrants to the US] while simultaneously trying to continue with our de facto prohibition of non-familial semi/un-skilled immigration from neighboring countries.”
I don’t understand why you think continuing what you describe as “our de facto prohibition … [etc]” affects the “feasibility” of “upgrad[ing] the skill-set profile of immigrants to the US.”
In fact, giving more weight to the educational/skill level of applicants in deciding which ones to admit would tend to strengthen that “de facto prohibition” on unskilled or semi-skilled applicants by making it even harder for them to qualify for entry.
and I’ll indulge you with some research. If you’re just casting doubt on this assertion I’ll….manage to muddle through burdened with the knowledge I’ve failed to convert you into a liberal.
If you’re making a counter claim please say so, and I’ll indulge you with some research. If you’re just casting doubt on this assertion I’ll….manage to muddle through burdened with the knowledge I’ve failed to convert you into a liberal.
September 16th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
I’m rebutting your false claim that “Denmark and the US are actually quite similar as far as recent immigration is concerned.”
Actually they are quite similar, much more so than, according to your chart, Korea (1%) and Australia (24%).
Are you suggesting that the educational level of immigrants has no effect on the educational level of the overall population? That idea is absurd on its face. Since immigrants are part of the population (in the U.S., a relatively big part) the educational level of immigrants obviously affects the immigration level of the overall population.
Well no, not without further qualification and even then it’s awfully hard say how such a comparatively small percentage of terribly diverse people affects the overall education level.
September 16th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Steve Sailer Says: Brown people are stupid.
novakant says:
White people are evil.
September 16th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
novakant,
Actually they are quite similar, much more so than, according to your chart, Korea (1%) and Australia (24%).
They’re not remotely similar. The share in the U.S. is almost double the share in Denmark.
Well no, …
Well yes. It’s mathematical certainty.
not without further qualification and even then it’s awfully hard say how such a comparatively small percentage of terribly diverse people affects the overall education level.
It’s not hard at all. You’d just have to compare the educational level of the native-born population with the educational level of the total population. The difference would represent the effect of immigration on educational level. Since immigration to the U.S. is overwhelmingly dominated by poor people from Mexico and Latin America with little education, immigration almost certainly has a substantial adverse effect on the average educational level of the U.S. population.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
novakant says:
All races ahev equal average intelligence! I don’t care what the research says, I have to believe what it says in my holy book.
September 17th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
I can’t authoratively cite the numbers but Denmark has a substantative population of Turks, Muslims and eastern Europeans. They haven’t been truly a homogenous society for some time now.
October 26th, 2008 at 12:21 am
Perhaps we should let the parents decide where to send their children to school with vouchers. Colleges let students decide where they would like spend their grant and student loan money. Why should a parent have to send their child to a failing school while waiting for the school to improve? The improvement many times never arrives. I think parents should have the opportunity to send their child to the school of their choice. NYC schools spend $13,000 per student. We should let parents decide which school gets that $13,000. The underlying reason for the problems: the teacher’s union. They are concerned about tenure and top heavy union officials to secure their salary. Reduce the federal level, cut the fat and teachers will enjoy a decent salary.
March 2nd, 2009 at 9:17 am
levitraVery interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 11th, 2009 at 9:33 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
March 17th, 2009 at 3:34 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 7:37 am
tramadol
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:22 am
Incredible site!
buy cheap viagra
April 8th, 2009 at 4:26 am
thanks !! very helpful post!
viagra
April 16th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
I bookmarked this site, Thank you for good job!
viagra