What Children Need
Apropos of this post this morning, Sara showed me the Department of Agriculture’s annual study on what people spend on children. There are a lot of difference ins-and-outs of these factors, but to make a long story short, a typical two-parent, two-child middle class family spends between $20,000-$25,000 per year on their minor children. This table sums up some of the estimates:
By contrast, a family of four living at the poverty line has a total income of $21,200 a year which, as you can see, is more than what you need to spend to give middle class kids what they need. And that’s not just a trivia fact — sixteen percent of American children live in households that are below the poverty line. A single-mom working full-time at a job that pays $7.25 (what the minimum wage will be after recent increases full phase-in) earns just $15,080 in a year and conservatives think that’s too much money. Unless we manage to, yes, spread some of the wealth around so that these kids can have their needs met, the idea that we’re going to substitute equal opportunity for worrying about the income distribution is a joke.
94 Responses to “What Children Need”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
October 24th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
So… poor people can’t afford to spend as much on their children as middle class people can? You need a fancy (but somewhat bizarre) table to convince people of that?
October 24th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Hey, what happened to your “Big IDEA” post?
October 24th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
I really, really doubt the amount necessary to buy a child everything he needs to grow up without major problems is anywhere close to the amount the average middle-class family spends on their 16-year-old.
October 24th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
I am with Adam on this. Americans spend a lot of dumb money on kids, even average working-class Americans.
October 24th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
A year of day-care for our two-year old runs $9000 alone.
October 24th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Where do you non-Christians get off, trying to teach US about compassion and generosity?! I mean, we INVENTED this caring and love stuff. And we’ll uncork the holy hand-grenade of Antioch on anyone who says otherwise.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOrgLj9lOwk
October 24th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Two issues in this post, at least for me:
and conservatives think that’s too much money
Speaking only for myself, I don’t think it’s too much money. I think that increasing the minimum wage causes businesses to look to alternate ways to solve the problems, and thus allow them to fire the now-more-expensive employee.
An unemployed single mom is worse off than one that earns $15k.
I recognize that you, Matt, and many of your readers don’t believe that raising the minimum wage causes unemployment. But surely you recognize that, given that I do actually believe that, that “the minimum wage causes unemployment” is a far more empathetic position than “single moms don’t deserve $7.25/hour”
Secondly, spreading the wealth around creates significant opportunities for moral hazard, and thus an ever-expanding welfare program that drains resources that might be used in more productive ways elsewhere.
Again, you and your readers may not agree that handing money to single moms causes a moral hazard. That’s fine. Again, I am comfortable that there is room for discussion and compromise there. But again surely you recognize that “I believe that handing money to single moms causes moral hazard” is a far more reasonable and rational opinion than “single moms and their kids don’t deserve a helping hand.”
October 24th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
“spreading the wealth around creates significant opportunities for moral hazard”
I couldn’t agree more. We’ve been spreading the wealth around to the richest Americans for the past seven years, and look where it’s gotten us. Apparently, the wealthy don’t really do much to stimulate the economy. Let’s give the middle class a chance to show what they can do. They can’t do any worse than the hedge fund managers. And the middle class did a pretty good job of stimulating the economy during the Clinton years. At least they have a good track record.
October 24th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
That’s unfair to conservatives. I think many people would say that someone who can’t do better than minimum wage has no business having kids. We should have a safety net for poor kids whose parents have had bad luck or made poor decisions, but we should also try to keep people out of these situations in the first place. The conservative answer to this, I think, involves abstinence, marriage, church attendance, etc. Progressives need a better response. This is why Obama’s speeches on the responsibilities of fathers are so well received.
Besides, raising the minimum wage is a very inefficient way of getting additional resources to poor kids. Better to expand Medicaid and S-CHIP, school lunch/breakfast, Head Start, etc. People who have lots of kids and only earn minimum wage tend not to be “high functioning” individuals and, even given additional resources, might not spend them effectively. Besides, most people earning the minimum wage probably aren’t parents, so this is totally off track for them.
October 24th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
someone who can’t do better than minimum wage has no business having kids
Ye gods and little fishes!
Am I really hearing this, from the land of the free and the hope of the poor and huddled masses yearning to breathe free?
The right to reproduce was considered so beyond question that it was not even mentioned in the Constitution or its Amendments.
Or did I miss some vital clause?
October 24th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Yet another meaningless comparison. Average spending on children versus poverty line money income. What’s it supposed to be telling us? What happens to the numbers after you account for taxes (including “refundable” tax credits like the EITC)? What happens after you account for non-cash government benefits to the poor like food stamps, housing subsidies and Medicaid?
October 24th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
As one economist put it, the minimum wage is the government’s way of telling people “Unless you can find a job that pays you at least X dollars, you’re not allowed to be employed at all.
October 24th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Good Lord–worst thread in history here. Whatta buncha childless assholes chiefly concerned that “the help” procreate in sufficient numbers only to replenish the supply.
I’d love for you to look at the mind-blowing (NOT!) dimensions of the child tax credit for middle-class folk, while you’re at it.
And: Guy Who Thinks Poor Women Should Be Childless–but you won’t let her get an abortion, will you? Dirtbag.
October 24th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Maybe people shouldn’t have more kids than they can afford?
Personally, my wife and I wanted to have three kids. I was an executive making decent money. But then I got hit with cancer on my 38th birthday. I got over it, but I couldn’t get any new life insurance because the chance of relapse was so high. So I figured that if I have a recurrence and died, I’d rather have my savings and existing insurance cover a widow and two orphans rather than a widow and three orphans. So, we never had that third child.
That’s just common sense, right?
So, why shouldn’t poor people use common sense, too?
October 24th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
So, we never had that third child. That’s just common sense, right?
Well, Steve, it sounds as if you made a thoughtful choice, according to your own lights.
Yet the larger issue is this: what about the children of the “undeserving poor”?
Those who work not, neither shall they eat? Nor their children?
In my homeland, the state is supposed to have the welfare of all children as its consuming responsibility,
yet has no right to inhibit fecundity.
That is a challenging proposition. Yet any modification of either part of this proposition seems to me to be very dangerous.
October 24th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
What this and previous posts about the needs of children miss is that children also need to learn responsibility. The children of poor families must face the consequences of their choice to be born poor, and the state providing basic needs to them simply rewards poor planning (pun intended!) on the part of the unborn. The sooner children learn that they have to look out for themselves the sooner they will become good Republicans. Besides, why should the obscenely wealthy be forced to pay a sum they would hardly notice otherwise just to have it handed to a child without the foresight to see that the parents he or she chose won’t be able to provide for them? It’s just immoral is what it is.
October 24th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
The children of poor families must face the consequences of their choice to be born
Thank you, Jack!
I am slowly beginning to appreciate the saving grace of irony in these pages.
G_und_F
October 24th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Very important post. However, the total inadequacy of one minimum wage job for a family has been addressed to some extent by policy. First, the Earned income tax credit is greater than the payroll tax at very low incomes, so total income plus payroll tax liability is negative.
Second such a family can purchase food stamps for considerably less than their face value amounting to an additional source of income.
There is also low income housing assistance (you don’t have to wait too long if you are willing to live in areas that are about as safe as Baghdad is now). On the other hand, poor people often pay more for goods including food as it is hard to get to cheap stores without a car (and caring for a car is very expensive).
Their situation remains grim and it is disgraceful for such a rich country to allow hard working people to be so poor (believe me a single mother working full time is working very very hard I have kids and they are wonderful but exhausting and I am married). However, your super simple calculation is a bit too simple.
October 24th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
The real problem with being poor in this country is not that you can’t buy enough stuff, it’s that you can’t afford to keep your kids away from other poor people.
That’s the bottom line.
October 24th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
“Yet the larger issue is this: what about the children of the “undeserving poor”?”
Well, let me point out that in my native state, California, the nation’s largest, the total fertility rate (average number of children born per lifetime) for foreign-born Latinas is 3.7 babies each.
Contrast that to 2.2 babies each for American-born Latinas in California, 1.6 for American-born whites, and 1.4 for American-born Asians.
The total fertility rate in Mexico is 2.3 right now. So, what we are seeing is people who can’t afford to have a third or fourth child in their own countries sneaking illegally into our countries to have more children.
But, we’re all paying for this — about half the mortgage money defaulted is in California. And it’s directly related both to the declining earning power of the average Californian and due to the extremes people go to to try to buy their way into a non-barrio neighborhood.
October 24th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
The real problem with being poor in this country is not that you can’t buy enough stuff, it’s that you can’t afford to keep your kids away from other poor people.
Please try to unpack this for me, Steve.
To my mind, you declare:
“the trouble with being poor is that you live with the poor.”
Have I missed something?
If not, then what is wrong with the proposition:
“to help the poor one must help with poor”?
Is this a pleonasm or a tautology?
October 24th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
people who can’t afford to have a third or fourth child in their own countries sneaking illegally into our countries to have more children
I had the impression that fertility is positively correlated with poverty.
What is your evidence that (say) Mexican-American fertility is higher than Mexican fertility?
October 24th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
In terms of material possessions, America’s poor are rich by world standards.
Unfortunately, in terms of behavioral habits (sobriety, diligence, law-abidingness, future-orientation, etc.), America’s poor are well below the world standard.
That’s why America’s non-poor pay a fortune to keep their children away from America’s poor. Parents don’t want their children to acquire the bad habits of the poor.
For example, some of the mortgage meltdown stemmed from working class families buying too much house (frequently in the exurbs) in order to get into a neighborhood and school district where their kids would be less likely to slip into the underclass.
October 24th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
sobriety, diligence, law-abidingness, future-orientation
You are truly grasping my nettle of the “undeserving poor”.
Suppose, for the purpose of the current argument, that you are correct and that many (some?) of the poor of the US are “undeserving”.
What, Steve, might be your remedy to force them to become more “deserving”, pray?
October 24th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
“What, Steve, might be your remedy to force them to become more “deserving”, pray?”
The first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging.
Stop importing foreigners with low human capital.
October 24th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
“What is your evidence that (say) Mexican-American fertility is higher than Mexican fertility?”
I’m glad you asked. Here’s demographer Hans P. Johnson’s 2007 report for the Public Policy Institute of California on “Birth Rates in California:”
Fertility rates are higher in California than in any developed country in the world. This
is partly due to the composition of the state’s population, which includes large numbers of
foreign-born women, who tend to have more children than U.S.-born women. Thus, in addition
to its direct contribution to state growth, migration also plays an important indirect role
in its effect on fertility rates. Among foreign-born Latinas, total fertility rates—a measure
of completed family size—average 3.7 children per woman. In contrast, the state’s lowest
fertility rates are among U.S.-born Asians, who have an average of 1.4 children per woman.
http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/cacounts/CC_1107HJCC.pdf
Meanwhile, the CIA World Factbook lists the Total Fertility Rate in Mexico itself as 2.37 babies per woman.
October 24th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
Stop importing foreigners with low human capital
Here I must be careful how I speak.
It is many years since I worked with Caeser Chavez and the Camposinos in your State.
At that time, it would have been absurd to have accounted such people as being of “low human capital”.
Now you appear to do so.
Was it ever thus, to your mind, Steve?
Or are you claiming that only more recently Mexican-Americans have degenerated?
And even if you do so claim: what might be present your dreadful remedy?
October 24th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Please take my apologies for being emotional.
Yet I cannot help myself from reminding Steve of this Sonnet.
I like to give it the informal title:
“Send us your garbage”
Meiner Meinung nach, it is still magnficent:
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
October 24th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
It is many years since I worked with Caeser Chavez and the Camposinos in your State.
At that time, it would have been absurd to have accounted such people as being of “low human capital”.
Cesar Chavez would have htought of a lot of the illegal immigrants today as being of low human capital. That’s why he worked so hard to keep illegal immigrants out.
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
So your point is that we have to let in unlimited number of poor third world immigrants so that we can live up to some poem? Boy, that is a much better argument than the facts and statistics that Steve can muster.
The real problem with being poor in this country is not that you can’t buy enough stuff, it’s that you can’t afford to keep your kids away from other poor people.
Please try to unpack this for me, Steve.
Poverty is positively correlated with bad habits and irresponsibility. The problem with being poor is that you are much more likely to be round other poor people who are much more likley to be irresponsible and to have bad habits.
October 24th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
OMG–from the worst thread ever to the best kind! Jack, and Gotter und Fischlein (or whatever–I don’t get it, but who cares?): You make me feel brand-new!
Steve Sailer: Why the f*ck are you not a social democrat? Your story is a ready-to-wear 60-second spot for what American health care SHOULD be, and you can’t even see it. Tragic! I mean it. Despite your racism (where the f*ck are you from, dude?)
You’re just f*cking dead to me–because of your willful ignorance and racism and world-historical inability to see that Vincent Foster died for your sins.
October 24th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
Chill, elle loco, chill!
October 24th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Sorry to barge in on your Sixties Nostalgia, but you do know that Cesar Chavez was violently anti-immigration, don’t you? Unlike today’s “progressives,” he understood supply and demand.
In 1979, Chavez bitterly testified to Congress:
… when the farm workers strike and their strike is successful, the employers go to Mexico and have unlimited, unrestricted use of illegal alien strikebreakers to break the strike. And, for over 30 years, the Immigration and Naturalization Service has looked the other way and assisted in the strikebreaking. I do not remember one single instance in 30 years where the Immigration service has removed strikebreakers. … The employers use professional smugglers to recruit and transport human contraband across the Mexican border for the specific act of strikebreaking…
In 1969, Chavez led a march to the Mexican border to protest illegal immigration. Joining him were Sen. Walter Mondale and Martin Luther King’s successor as head of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Ralph Abernathy.
The UFW picketed INS offices to demand closure of the border. Chavez also finked on illegal alien scabs to la migra. Columnist Ruben Navarrette Jr. reported in the Arizona Republic, “Cesar Chavez, a labor leader intent on protecting union membership, was as effective a surrogate for the INS as ever existed. Indeed, Chavez and the United Farm Workers Union he headed routinely reported, to the INS, for deportation, suspected illegal immigrants who served as strikebreakers or refused to unionize.”
Like today’s Minutemen, UFW staffers under the command of Chavez’s brother Manuel patrolled the Arizona-Mexico border to keep out illegal aliens. Unlike the well-behaved Minutemen, however, Chavez’s boys sometimes beat up intruders.
October 24th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
thomasd: Wha??? I’m slain! Are you an Obama operative worried about thos crazee netroots, or something?
Sailer: Cesar Chavez in 1979? Get the f*ck outta here! You didn’t respond to my question. You are objectively opposed to your own situation in society. History books are written about people like you–but way too late to help you in reality. Sad.
October 24th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
I have now read
Sailer-piece
“During his prime, Chavez, a third-generation American citizen from Yuma, Arizona and Navy veteran, was an American labor leader fighting against the importation of strikebreakers from Mexico. But as power and praise went to his head, his image morphed into that of a Mexican mestizo racial emblem, the patron saint of the reconquista of Alta California by la raza.”
Methinks this Gringo doth protest too much.
PS: to “elle loco”
“Götter und Fischlein”
is silly schoolchild literal German for
“Ye gods and little fishes”
which I had assumed to be known in US as an expletive of disbelief.
Not so?
October 25th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Steve Sailer, in another place, wrote:
“From 1965 to 1981, the UFW succeeded in raising wages significantly for stoop laborers in California.”
Thanks, at least, for that admission.
What is the maximum number of hours in a day, Steve, that you have stooped in a commercial Californian field?
I lasted for no more than 4 hours a day. Then my Chicano friends took pity on me and told me, gently, how soft I was.
Vivamos mejor, as Albert Vinicio Baez used to say
October 25th, 2008 at 1:22 am
“From 1965 to 1981, the UFW succeeded in raising wages significantly for stoop laborers in California.”
And then in 1982, the Mexican economy collapsed and the big influx of illegal immigrants began. And wages for stoop labor stagnated as the UFW lost power due to what Marx would call “the reserve army of the unemployed” coming over the border.
October 25th, 2008 at 10:53 am
I have worked in jobs where I dealt almost entirely with poor or near-poor people. They exhibited about the same degree of irresponsibility as rich people. The difference is that the consequences to them were much, much worse. Paris Hilton can inhale the entire coca crop of Bolivia and not lose her job, health insurance, or chance to hang with her friends in rehab. Parisa Garcia will die or go to jail.
Neither the left nor the right gets it on this. Being rich is a matter of choosing the right parents, but being middle – class is to a great extent a matter of learned behavior. The left misses the “learned” part; but the right misses the conditions necessary for the learning to take hold. In order to develop the habits of prudence and diligence, a person has to believe that those habits will produce a reward. Working 60 hours per week at minimum wage will never get even a single person ahead, especially in a world that doesn’t provide vacations or sick leave. A person who can’t look forward to a reward soon will take one, in the form of beer and a quick screw in the backseat if necessary. Believing that you are, yourself, pointless, does tend to produce lots of pointless behavior.
I’m not advocating for crap like ’self-esteem.’ Self-esteem only comes from accomplishment. We can provide easier access to accomplishment along, however, and dampen some of the shocks in life; the kind that are irritating to the rich, insomnia-inducing to the middle-class, and catastrophic to the poor. Universal access to health care is the biggest one, but day care, public transit, and education also. Perhaps if we made it clear to poor people that they were part of society, they’d start acting like It?
October 25th, 2008 at 11:21 am
If foreign-born Californians are so lacking in “sobriety, diligence, law-abidingness, future-orientation”, why
are sofew incarcarated?
“When we consider all institutionalization (not only prisons but also jails, halfway houses, and the like) and focus on the population that is most likely to be in institutions because of criminal activity (men ages 18–40), we find that, in California, U.S.-born men have an institutionalization rate that is 10 times higher than that of foreign-born men (4.2% vs. 0.42%).”
October 25th, 2008 at 11:39 am
A big part of the problem is unwed motherhood and divorced motherhood. You need to get married before you have kids and stay married.
You will essentially be spreading the wealth from people who behaved responsibly to people who didn’t.
October 25th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
If foreign-born Californians are so lacking in “sobriety, diligence, law-abidingness, future-orientation”, why
are so few incarcarated?
Because illegal immigrants tend to be older than the prime criminal years of 18-25.
The problem is that their U.S.-born children tend to have much higher criminal tendencies than the U.S.-born children of non-Latinos.
Steve Sailer: Why the f*ck are you not a social democrat? Your story is a ready-to-wear 60-second spot for what American health care SHOULD be, and you can’t even see it.
I’m not quite certain what you are asking. Are you saying that Steve got a high level of care and everyone should get the level he did, or are you saying that he was screwed by the system and is a poster child for what is wrong with the system? What do you think that Steve’s position should be, considering his experiences?
October 25th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
Long time reader, first time poster.
Just wanted to say “nice post, Karen”. Middle class values are very different from those of the poor. According to Albert Cohen’s Delinquent Subculture Theory, the lower classes seek immediate gratification as opposed to the middle class whose values emphasize delayed gratification and the control of aggressive emotions.
November 22nd, 2008 at 7:25 pm
Hello to be a part of it. Just love the environment here. Outstanding job by the admin and mods and every member here.
Just to start off, I would like to ask first if you’re into those dressup doll games. Because if you do, then imma have to ask you which one is better—Barbie or Bratz games?
Barbie games inspired a lot of other games. Bratz may deny it but the concept of many if not all Bratz games originated from Barbie. Take for example the many dress up games that Bratz fans are so addicted to right now. The ideas of these games all came from Barbie. Who invented changeable clothes, customizable accessories and colourful nail polishes and hair? Barbie did. Who incorporated real like perks like cars, hotels and hot cribs? Barbie did.
On the other hand, Bratz are so popular. There is no question about that. They are loved by kids and adults alike. This is the reason Bratz games are so popular. Whenever there is a new Bratz game, expect the millions of Bratz fans to play it. There is even a war going on between Bratz and Barbie fans. Who’s better? Who’ sexier? Who’s classier?
December 11th, 2008 at 11:58 am
Good afternoon everyone, I am new to this forum. However, I’m interested in everyone’s opinion regarding this website(Salehoo) I have a friend who keeps bragging about how much money he makes with this service. I was looking into purchasing a lot of cell phones and possible some In-Dash stereos. You can also learn about it here: http://about-salehoo.com Thanks in advance!
December 29th, 2008 at 2:06 am
I’m a new member and so I thought to post some Host gator Coupon for a start.
Hostgator Coupon 20% OFF : GREEN
Hostgator Coupon 20% OFF (October): SPOOKY
Hostgator coupon – “HGC25 – $9.94 discount
Hostgator coupon – “jury” – $9.94 discount
Hostgator coupon – “iceishot” – $9.94 discount
Hostgator coupon – “Hostcritique” – $9.94 discount
HostGator Valentine’s Day Coupon
Coupon code – “Heart” – It saves you 20% on your order!
First Month 1 Cent Coupons ($9.94 Off) http://www.bloggingtipsonline.com/terminal/img/1660/z08q1005awez/confused.gif
1. “iceishot” – $9.94 OFF 2. “jury” – $9.94 OFF 3. “webhostingunleashed” – $9.94 OFF
To save upto $ 9.94 on Hostgator Shared Hosting, enter any of the below mentioned:
Hostgator Coupon Code : WEBHOSTING
Hostgator Coupon Code : TURKEY
Hostgator Coupon Code : FINDMYHOST
Hostgator Coupon Code : TOPHOST
Hostgator Coupon Code : HGC25
Hostgator Coupon Code : 404PAGE
Hostgator Coupon Code : HOSTGATOR
Hostgator Coupon Code : WORDPRESS
Hostgator Coupon Code : ICEISHOT
Hostgator Resellers Coupon Code : CO_NR
This hostgator coupon will give you following discount:
* Hostgator Hatchling 1 year: $6.95 x 12 x 20% Off = $16.68 Discount!
* Hostgator Hatchling 2 year: $5.95 x 24 x 20% Off = $28.56 Discount!
* Hostgator Hatchling 3 year: $4.95 x 36 x 20% Off = $35.64 Discount!
* Hostgator Baby 2 year: $8.95 x 24 x 20% Off = $42.96 Discount!
* Hostgator Baby 3 year: $7.95 x 36 x 20% Off = $57.24 Discount!
* Hostgator Swamp 2 year: $13.95 x 24 x 20% Off = $66.96 Discount!
* Hostgator Swamp 3 year: $12.95 x 36 x 20% Off = $93.24 Discount!
Enjoy!!
http://bloggingtipsonline.com/terminal/img/1660/z08q1005awez/confused.gif
February 7th, 2009 at 10:10 am
Does anyone know where I can find free online grant applications?
February 8th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
Hi, I can
February 9th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Wow! Thank you! I always wanted to write in my site something like that. Can I take part of your post to my blog?
February 9th, 2009 at 11:23 pm
my God, i thought you were going to chip in with some decisive insght at the end there, not leave it with
February 10th, 2009 at 10:26 am
To start earning money with your blog, initially use Google Adsense but gradually as your traffic increases, keep adding more and more money making programs to your site.
February 12th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
amazing stuff thanx
February 13th, 2009 at 12:18 am
I usually don
February 14th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Wow! what an idea ! What a concept ! Beautiful .. Amazing
February 16th, 2009 at 10:27 am
I keep listening to the news speak about getting free online grant applications so I have been looking around for the best site to get one.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:44 am
Very nice! I’ve bookmarked this blog. I’ll be coming back here on a regular basis and hopefully I’ll be an asset to this community, at least I’ll try. Hey, when you get a chance, check out my blog at http://www.AutoBlogsOnCrack.com .
February 17th, 2009 at 3:38 am
Hello everyone,
I hope this is the right place to post this – if not I apologize!
Anyway, I’m still new here but I have been a webmaster for almost 3 years. I recently finished a new layout for my on line games site and I’d really like to get some feedback on it from you guys.
Both positive and negative comments will be welcome so don’t hold back !
I put long hours in the header – so specific feedback on it would be great (which character do you like best?)
Thank you!
February 19th, 2009 at 10:33 am
Please, can you PM me and tell me few more thinks about this, I am really fan of your blog…
February 19th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Thank you for your help!
February 21st, 2009 at 11:07 pm
Hi guys
My wife and I have our fourth anniversary coming up soon and I typically get her expensive designer clothes. Unfortunately I recently lost my job and I haven’t let my wife know yet. I was thinking of buying her something from a Replica Handbags store but am afraid that it might be morally wrong?
What do you guys think? Please post honest comments.
February 23rd, 2009 at 7:41 pm
I saved this page to my favourites
February 25th, 2009 at 1:13 am
Funny how blogs, websites, and basically all online activity are ruled by SEO. Search Engine Optimization has become the 2nd god of the internet.
February 25th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
I am now a regular reader of your stuff
February 27th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
Hi nice post, i read your blog from time to time but i was wondering something. I also run a blog on a similar topic, but i get 1,000’s of spam comments and emails every day does that happen to you.. Any ideas to stop it? I currently have commenting disabled but i want to turn it back on.. Thanks!
March 1st, 2009 at 8:32 pm
cialis
Incredible site!
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:24 pm
TheCellFreak.com offers the ability to Search, Listen & Download all ringtones for free. You can also send the ringtones via SMS to any cellphone worldwide for free.
March 4th, 2009 at 6:28 am
Your blog is so informative
March 10th, 2009 at 10:14 am
This blog is great, good job
I just wanna ask a random question, has anyone ever tried making money with Google and their new cash thing they do? Supposedly, so I have been told , there are guys making hundreds of $ a day! The address is here, just dont know if you guys thought it is legit? http://www.googlecash09.blogspot.com
March 16th, 2009 at 2:02 am
I added this page to my Stumbleupon account
March 17th, 2009 at 2:13 am
Another reliable result
March 17th, 2009 at 2:48 am
I want to say – thank you for this!
tramadol
March 17th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
This website is listed at the top of the search engines
March 17th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
I emailed this to my friend
March 18th, 2009 at 12:12 am
I sent this page to my mother to read
March 20th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
thanks !! very helpful post!
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:48 am
tramadol
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 26th, 2009 at 3:50 am
Hello
It took me a long while but I’ve managed to achieve a score of 833,398 in Tetris!
See if you can beat me!
Cheers!
March 27th, 2009 at 12:20 am
I really enjoyed reading this page…I dont usually post but this time I will,Thanks alot
March 27th, 2009 at 11:33 am
Super-Duper site! I am loving it!! Will come back again – taking you feeds also, Thanks.
March 30th, 2009 at 2:46 am
I usually don
April 6th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Wow! Thank you! I always wanted to write in my site something like that. Can I take part of your post to my blog?
April 7th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
haha
April 8th, 2009 at 11:08 pm
There is obviously a lot to know about this. I think you made some good points in Features also.
April 9th, 2009 at 6:31 am
i fear for the downfall of our entire healthcare system…awesome post btw
April 9th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Very interesting site, Hope it will always be alive! viagra
April 10th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
Found your blog in google I bookmarked it and visit several times a week. I really like it.
April 11th, 2009 at 7:03 am
Hey very nice blog!! Man .. Beautiful .. Amazing .. I will bookmark your blog and take the feeds also…
April 11th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
my God, i thought you were going to chip in with some decisive insght at the end there, not leave it with
April 13th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Please, can you PM me and tell me few more thinks about this, I am really fan of your blog…gets solved properly asap.
April 14th, 2009 at 10:13 am
I bookmarked this site, Thank you for good job!
viagra