Jim wrote:
I would guess that the Fed -- led by Dubya's close friend Alan, who
visits the White House more than weekly -- is going to surprise the
financial markets by standing pat on August 10th. (I'll be out of
the country, so I won't be able to stop them.)
The Fed raised the rate today. How
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
The Fed raised the rate today. How committed are they to this course
of action in the next 12-18 months?
All depends on the data that comes out over the next 12-18 months.
They don't have any preconceived strategy; it's strictly a seat of
the pants operation.
Doug
... and make the next POTUS John Kerry a weak president without a
big mandate at the same time.)
Is there a subtle flaw here? If either Kerry or Bush is elected
they will have a big mandate. It just won't be from the people, but
the corporate purchasers. I fear the people's mandate can no
longer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/07/04 2:11 AM
... and make the next POTUS John Kerry a weak president without a
big mandate at the same time.)
Is there a subtle flaw here? If either Kerry or Bush is elected
they will have a big mandate. It just won't be from the people, but
the corporate purchasers. I
Whither the Fed? (Doug Henwood comments on US economy: just 32,000
new jobs, way way below both recent trend and expectations -- and
earlier months were revised down. Is the Fed still committed to a
series of quarter-point hikes -- including one in September -- over
the next 18 months
I would guess that the Fed -- led by Dubya's close friend Alan, who visits
the White House more than weekly-- is going to surprise the financial
markets by standing pat on August 10th. (I'll be out of the country, so I won't
be able to stop them.) This policy will be justified by something
I would guess that the Fed -- led by Dubya's close friend Alan, who
visits the White House more than weekly -- is going to surprise the
financial markets by standing pat on August 10th. (I'll be out of
the country, so I won't be able to stop them.)
blockquoteThe Fed holds its next interest rate
... and make the next POTUS John Kerry a weak
president without a big mandate at the same time.)
Is there a subtle flaw here? If either Kerry or Bush is elected they
will have a big mandate. It just won't be from the people, but the
corporate purchasers. I fear the people's mandate can no longer
Title: a fed worth supporting
U.S. prosecutor
sues Ashcroft
Last Updated Tue Feb 17 14:27:49 2004
WASHINGTON-- A U.S. federal prosecutor in one of the first war on
terror trials is suing Attorney General John Ashcroft, alleging he
was investigated for raising concerns about the war on terror
* The New York Times
February 15, 2004
Fed by Anger, Undercurrent of Nationalism Flows in Serbia
By NICHOLAS WOOD
BELGRADE, Serbia - Alexander Eror, a soft-spoken, 27-year-old
elementary school teacher, does not like to think of himself as a
nationalist.
So, he explained, when he voted
Treasury or Fed Driving Dollar Direction?
Reuters
Sunday, January 11, 2004; 1:07 PM
By Daniel Bases
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The U.S. Treasury Department is officially in charge
of government policy on the dollar, but it is becoming clear to investors
that the Federal Reserve is in control
http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2004/
http://www.kc.frb.org/Publicat/sympos/2003/sym03prg.htm
[for all papers...]
Monetary Policy and Uncertainty: Adapting to a Changing Economy
A symposium sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City
Jackson Hole, Wyoming
August 28 - 30, 2003
Foreword
THOMAS M. HOENIG
President, Federal
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 10:36:29 -0700, Michael Perelman
wrote:
The US approved of the Argentinian peg and disapproves
of the Chinese peg.
Does anyonc sense a policy of expediency?
Not only that, but according to this morning's FT,
Greenspan said that China cannot go on accumulating
ever more
The US approved of the Argentinian peg and disapproves of the Chinese peg.
Does anyonc sense a policy of expediency?
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chico, CA 95929
530-898-5321
fax 530-898-5901
Jim,
Thanks for your response. But if it's in the US' interest to devalue the
dollar relative to other currencies, then why is the US willing to allow
Japan to intervene to prevent the yen from appreciating?
(http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/19/business/19EURO.html - as if China's not
going through
Jonathan writes:Thanks for your response. But if it's in the US' interest to devalue
the
dollar relative to other currencies, then why is the US willing to allow
Japan to intervene to prevent the yen from appreciating?
I would guess that it's because the Japanese economy is in big trouble (and
Jonathan writes: I just can't figure out why there's suddenly a unanimous call for
revaluation. Especially since foreign firms account for such a significant
portion of exports from China (more than half I think).
as should be well-known, the falling dollar boosts the US economy at the expense of
It may also give the Chinese Government some extra bargaining strength in
the controversy over North Korea.
J.
above $340bn by the
end of June from $316bn at the end of March. The surge is viewed by many as
evidence of the undervaluation of the currency.
Mr Greenspan noted that John Snow, the US Treasury secretary, had already
advised the Chinese authorities that they should float their currency.
The Fed
- Original Message -
From: Jonathan Lassen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
What do people make of the nearly unanimous call for China to revalue
the
yuan and/or go off the dollar peg? Industrialists, US senators and now
Alan
Greenspan and EU officials have jumped on the bandwagon.
Cheers,
Ian,
They don't believe so: China has the right to decide its exchange rate
policy and no international agreement forbids that. from:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200307/01/eng20030701_119224.shtml
But they've agreed in principle to gradually phase out capital controls in
the future (as part
- Original Message -
From: Jonathan Lassen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ian,
They don't believe so: China has the right to decide its exchange rate
policy and no international agreement forbids that. from:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200307/01/eng20030701_119224.shtml
But they've
Fed Set to Cut Rates to 45-Year Lows
By Glenn Somerville
Reuters
Tuesday, June 24, 2003; 2:33 AM
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Federal Reserve, seeking to rev up a slow recovery
while keeping price deflation at bay, is universally expected to cut
interest rates to 1958 lows this week
A recession.
And they weren't considered that low against the then background experience.
Gene Coyle
Ian Murray wrote:
Fed Set to Cut Rates to 45-Year Lows
By Glenn Somerville
Reuters
Tuesday, June 24, 2003; 2:33 AM
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Federal Reserve, seeking to rev up a slow recovery
while
Ian Murray wrote:
What was going on in 1958 that necessitated low rates?
It was a golden age. Rates were naturally low.
Doug
until the early 1950s, the fed had no discretion over interest rates.
Rates were kept low beginning with the wartime period to reduce the costs
of debt for the treasury. I suspect that they still felt rather
circumspect about increasing rates at the time. just guessing.
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003
Title: RE: [PEN-L] the Fed
Ian Murray wrote:
Fed Set to Cut Rates to 45-Year Lows
By Glenn Somerville
Reuters
Tuesday, June 24, 2003; 2:33 AM
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Federal Reserve, seeking to rev up a
slow recovery
while keeping price deflation at bay, is universally expected
i have a different question - to which i could, no doubt, look up the
answer - about federal reserve system (and i may well have come across
answer in long forgotten past)...
have reserve banks numbered 12 since system was established in 1913...if
so, have they always been located in same
Missouri is the most puzzling. The have 2 branches. I don't think that
the branches have ever moved.
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 06:06:03PM -0400, Michael Hoover wrote:
i have a different question - to which i could, no doubt, look up the
answer - about federal reserve system (and i may well have
Title: RE: [PEN-L] the Fed
i have a different question - to which i could, no doubt, look up the
answer - about federal reserve system (and i may well have come across
answer in long forgotten past)...
have reserve banks numbered 12 since system was established
in 1913...
yes
Michael Hoover wrote:
if answer to question about number of banks is no, when did it become
12...how many have there been in times past...
Others have answered that it's always been 12 in the same place. My
contribution is this: no place in the U.S. was supposed to be more
than a day's train ride
Why 2 branches in Missouri?
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 07:42:12PM -0400, Doug Henwood wrote:
Michael Hoover wrote:
if answer to question about number of banks is no, when did it become
12...how many have there been in times past...
Others have answered that it's always been 12 in the same
Excerpts from the below NYT article:
1) Traditional company pension plans became commonplace after
World War II and are estimated to be the second-largest source of
income today for elderly Americans, after Social Security. But
employers offer them voluntarily, and over the last decade many
have
I asked only because it might be useful in evaluating the Fed report of
the distribution of wealth. I am not considering making such a trade; the
question was hypothetical.
Although my graduate education was from Berkeley, I did not inhale, so I
did not get a high degree.
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003
In thinking about the Fed study of net worth, do they consider it an
increase in net worth if I trade my defined benefit pension plan for a
401k of equal value?
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael wrote:
In thinking about the Fed study of net worth, do
they consider it an increase in net worth if I
trade my defined benefit pension plan for a
401k of equal value?
Hear this from a 401K stuck fixed income quant. Who gives a shit
to what the Fed studies say. You are a lucky guy
in stock prices and home values, sharply lifted household net
worth -- assets minus debt -- to an average of $395,500 per family in
2001, up 29% from $307,400 in 1998. The dollar figures are all
inflation-adjusted and expressed in constant, 2001 dollar terms.
But the report, by Fed economists
From: joanna bujes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
... Hey everybody, we can't all be white collar professionals and we
shouldn't reduce education to 1) a ticket to the gated middle class or 2)
job training for corporations.
Whay can't we proceed from the following assumptions:
1) we all have to share in
Title: little upward mobility in the US, says Fed economist
Peter Coy/BUSINESS WEEK/NOVEMBER 18, 2002
Less Chance to Rise in Life
While the U.S. prides itself on being the land of opportunity, economists have grown less optimistic about the ability of American children to leap ahead
What real difference would it make if there were immense mobility among
the lower 80%? There would still be a lower 20%.
I suspect the only measure that would be of much general social
siginficance would be the gap between the bottom 10% and the top 1%. If
_that_ changes, then something has
Title: RE: [PEN-L:32011] Re: little upward mobility in the US, says Fed economist
From: Carrol Cox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
What real difference would it make if there were immense
mobility among
the lower 80%? There would still be a lower 20%.
I suspect the only measure that would
I'm aware of the ideological importance of the fact and/or illusion of
mobility, but I think leftists need in addition to have a grasp of its
material reality (and/or unreality). And its ideological importance (as
of any other ideological factor) can't really be estimated theoretically
in any
What's the solution? Mazumder suggests that more access to educational
loans might help. He says many poor people who have children with great
potential can't raise enough money to send them to good schools, so the
children never take home the incomes they're capable of earning.
God, I hate
At 01:47 PM 11/08/2002 -0500, you wrote:
or are idle bums, or they have a victim mentality, and have not taken
the ample equal opportunity available to all, like condoleeza rice,
dinesh d'souza and colin powell have. in which case they deserve to be
poor. screw 'em.
Yeah, like a former friend
In a message dated 11/8/02 10:53:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm aware of the ideological importance of the fact and/or illusion of
mobility, but I think leftists need in addition to have a grasp of its
material reality (and/or unreality). And its ideological importance
--- joanna bujes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote: Whay can't we proceed from the following
assumptions:
1) we all have to share in doing the shit jobs
2) we all do the best we can; for some best
means theoretical physics;
for others, best may be farming, or being a
plumber, or cutting hair.
transformation on the other, are closely bound moments
of world scale capital accumulation.
http://csf.colorado.edu/jwsr/archive/vol6/number1/commentary/index.shtml
*
Then came the hegemony of the corn-fed American empire:
* Published on Friday, July 19, 2002 in the New York Times
My brother -- who is a real estate agent and was a high school buddy and
water polo team mate of N.J. Republican senate candidate Doug Forrester --
says the most bubblicious part of the market is duplex to fourplex, which in
Sacto are selling for as much as 300 times monthly net income. The
oh ye conservative Americans! 100 times monthly rent would be a rental
yield of 12%, wouldn't it? Mug punters in London are still stepping up to
the plate to buy investment properties at yields of 5-6%!
dd
As if refuting the bubble once and for all was not enough, the bumf goes on
to put
What did Cockburn's father say? Don't believe anything until it is officially
denied.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chico, CA 95929
530-898-5321
fax 530-898-5901
September 20: US - NY Fed Calls For CEO Pay Cuts
Location: New York
Author: Tim Jones, RiskCenter Correspondent
Date: Friday, September 20, 2002
New York Federal Reserve President William McDonough has called
on US corporate executives to take pay cuts, saying their salary
packages are bloated
New Release: Financial Markets Center
The Fed Income Inequality: September 13, 2002
New York Fed President William McDonough got people's attention by deploring
income inequality in a September 11 commemorative service at Manhattan's
Trinity Church. Now a Financial Markets Center analysis looks
by the Senate. The twelve regional branches are owned by
their member banks, and their senior officers are chosen by the bank
owners with Washington's approval. The whole system is
self-financing, meaning they don't have to worry about getting
appropriations from Congress; the Fed turns over a $20-25
The New York correspondent of the Swiss journal Neue Zuercher Zeitung (NZZ)
today reports on the recently published Fed paper Preventing Deflation:
Lessons from Japan's Experience in the 1990s.
A couple of days ago the NZZ also reported on a rumour going around that
the Fed could have
Hinrich Kuhls wrote:
A couple of days ago the NZZ also reported on a rumour going around
that the Fed could have directly intervened on stock markets and
could have bought large amounts of stocks
That one's always floating around. RIght-wing bears are particularly
fond of it. Who knows
From: Doug Henwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hinrich Kuhls wrote:
A couple of days ago the NZZ also reported on a rumour going around that
the Fed could have directly intervened on stock markets and could have
bought large amounts of stocks
That one's always floating around. RIght-wing bears
At 12:00 AM 07/31/2002 +, you wrote:
What?! The Federal Reserve is explicitly authorized to take equity stakes
in private enterprise? My God, is there anything the sovereign state of
the Fed is *not* entitled to do?
I'm confused. The Federal Reserve, despite its name, is very much
From: joanna bujes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 12:00 AM 07/31/2002 +, you wrote:
What?! The Federal Reserve is explicitly authorized to take equity stakes
in private enterprise? My God, is there anything the sovereign state of
the Fed is *not* entitled to do?
I'm confused. The Federal Reserve
Carl Remick wrote:
What?! The Federal Reserve is explicitly authorized to take equity
stakes in private enterprise? My God, is there anything the
sovereign state of the Fed is *not* entitled to do?
The big financial dereg act of ca. 1980 authorized the Fed to buy
pretty much whatever paper
markets that are hesitant to provide money to the
companies that need it the most.
The Fed easing is not very effective at the moment, because there are powerful things
working against the Fed, said Jan Hatzius, an economist at Goldman, Sachs. He pointed
to a sharp drop in business investment
Fed provides $50 billion to European banks in US. The NY Fed moves to
NJ. FOMC to reduce interest rates again on Oct 2 or before.
Thursday September 13 10:59 AM ET
Fed Gives $50B to Support Europe Banks
Slideshows
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer
WASHINGTON (AP)- The Federal Reserve
The Fed...has become a highly theatrical enterprise, eager to seize
attention and create attitudes. Where once the puppetmaster was behind
the
scenes concealing the strings, the spinmaster is now out front,
announcing
decisions and reasons for them while the market is open - sometimes
Regarding the prior and current discussion of Fed policy, the high dollar,
etc., please read the attached Jude Wanniski column from today entitled
Greenspan Undermines the AFL-CIO!!, the title of which alone may perk the
interest of some of you.
http://www.polyconomics.com/
[From the NYT]
June 17, 2001
Pitiful, Helpless Giant
Martin Mayer says the Federal Reserve is in for a lot of trouble.
By DIANA B. HENRIQUES
THE FED
The Inside Story of How the World's Most Powerful Financial
Institution Drives the Markets.
By Martin Mayer.
368 pp. New York:
The Free Press
representatives of more oppressed people some voice. Besides it
is better than the blind workings of laissez faire finance capital which
sucks wealth from all over the globe into the belly of the hegemonic beast.
This is not least because, for want of a better issuer of world money, its
Fed issues
.
The study, published by the Federal Reserve this week, found
compelling evidence of a direct link between consumer spending
and the movement of stock prices. Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan,
who proposed the study, has long believed in that link, but its
validity has been questioned both inside
At 10:25 PM 25-04-01, Edwin (Tom) Dickens
wrote:
Ferguson also says that the primary task of central banks is to get
monetary policy right--that is, to pursue policies that effectively
promote the objectives established by their legislatures or parliaments,
such as stable prices, full
Doug Henwood wrote:
It would, of course, be very clever of the Fed to announce their
commitment to transparency just as they were retreating from it. But
until they start acting that way, I'll take Ferguson at his word.
Doug
Ferguson also says that the primary task of central banks
Edwin Dickens wrote:
Ferguson also says that the primary task of central banks is to get
monetary policy right--that is, to pursue policies that effectively
promote the objectives established by their legislatures or parliaments,
such as stable prices, full employment, and maximum sustainable
.
It would, of course, be very clever of the Fed to announce their
commitment to transparency just as they were retreating from it. But
until they start acting that way, I'll take Ferguson at his word.
Doug
They call this inter-meeting rate cut a surprise but why am I not surprised at
all? Sabri
+
Fed Shows It Still Got Game
Commentary. William Pesek Jr. is a columnist for Bloomberg News. The opinions
expressed are his own.
By William Pesek Jr.
Washington, April 18 (Bloomberg
thing just last
Sunday - and both Berry and the WSJ are regularly leaked to by the
Fed. So it's very likely that AG changed his mind only recently.
Doug
Well if it was no surprise to you, you should get a job on Wall
Street! Yesterday's WSJ had an article suggesting a cut was unlikely,
and the Washington Post's John Berry said the same thing just last
Sunday - and both Berry and the WSJ are regularly leaked to by the
Fed. So it's very likely
, and the
Washington Post's John Berry said the same thing just last Sunday - and
both Berry and the WSJ are regularly leaked to by the Fed. So it's very
likely that AG changed his mind only recently.
Doug
It was a total surprise to me. It surprises me that Greenspan and the guys
share my pessimistic view
Tom Walker wrote:
Oh Doug, Doug, Doug, Doug! Did you forget that one of the classic uses of
'leaking' to journalists is to set up 'surprises'?
It makes no sense for the Fed to want to surprise the markets with a
rate cut. Yes, with foreign exchange intervention - that's a case
where a central
--- Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It was a total surprise to me. It surprises me that Greenspan and the guys
share my pessimistic view of the near future of the US business cycle and
so act in such a panicked way. And their information is much, much better
than mine is.
Jim,
Yes Doug,
The risk you mention below exists and it is a serious risk. Indeed, it is
possible that this "surprise" rate cut will hurt their ability to intervene in
the future. Who knows?
At least to me, they look scared and desperate. But maybe, they are!
Sabri
It makes no sense f
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001 15:10:40 -0700 (PDT), Sabri Oncu wrote:
Moreoever I agree with Tom that surprises are usually set up through "leaks" to
the media. I remember seeing many news articles about Iraq' s renewed interest
in arsenal build up in journals such as FT, NYT and the like before Bush
Has anyone ever taken note of how the Fed. is so worried about the
importance of saving and keeping wages down, while at the same time
spending so lavishly on itself. If you have never seen one of the Fed's
palaces, you should treat yourself.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California
Wednesday, March 21, 2001
Will Fed rate cut rescue Michigan?
Quick relief unlikely as recession grips state
( Banner front page headline)
David Coates / The Detroit News
Kevin Hughes gets ready to buy a TV at ABC Warehouse Tuesday. Merchants hope the
interest rate cut will spur
Snap quiz:
1. What is the meaning of this 1/2 point fed rate cut, 4 weeks ahead of
schedule and the euphoric stock market response?
2. Why is the fed "always right"?
3. Is there a danger that over reaction in financial markets could undermine
the impact of the rate cut on the re
Tom asked:
1. What is the meaning of this 1/2 point fed rate cut, 4 weeks ahead of
schedule and the euphoric stock market response?
It may mean that Greenspan shares the intuitive feeling that the US economy
is currently going into a steep recession that I and many others have, and
that it's
Jim Devine wrote:
2. Why is the fed "always right"?
(a) because it has the best information
One of the Feds - either the Board or one of the regional banks,
can't remember which - recently did a study comparing the Fed's own
economic forecasts with those of private forecasters.
There's a document released on November 13th available at the GAO's website
The document # is GAO-01-160
http://www.gao.gov
This report seems to refer to the competitive advantage that the Fed has in
performing services like check clearing. In other words, it seems to call for
more privatization of the Fed's functions.
Lisa Ian Murray wrote:
There's a document released on November 13th available at the GAO's
n interest rates should have
been a non-event. A rational financial market supposedly reacts only to
news -- and last week's move, which had been all but pre-announced by Fed
officials and which newsletters had been predicting for a month, came as no
surprise to anyone. And indeed on the day of th
?
Of course there's a limit -- somewhere. But even with 3.9% unemployment,
there's plenty more (and better) jobs yet to be wrung out of the system.
The question, as I said, is where the limit is. The Fed says that we're
attaining that limit. Since the powers that be are saying that the limit
has
Jim Devine wrote:
In any event, full employment doesn't solve the environmental problem. It
doesn't end the exploitation of labor.
Nor does it put out the cat or let in the dog. Are you then arguing
AGAINST full employment because it doesn't reduce your
I wrote:
Also, can't it be said that within the context of
capitalism, any emancipation won due to fast growth and low unemployment is
at best transitory, since eventually the reserve army will be restored, if
not by Greenspan by the slow-down in accumulation that results from
squeezed
Jim Devine wrote:
No, I'm arguing that we need to go beyond simply being in favor of full
employment. (Bumper sticker summary: "Full Employment is Not Enough!" or
"We Don't Just Want Bread, We Want Roses, Too!") This is especially true
since there are other
Max Sawicky wrote:
We've done that number. It's 126.4
I've never done 126.4. Do you have to raise your hand first?
Tom Walker
On the other hand, Jim, here's this delightful quote from the _New
Republic_, September 1945 ("The Road to Freedom: Full Employment"):
Oh yes, back when TNR was a good magazine.
"Our experience with periods of labor shortage indicates that its first
effect is greatly to increase the
Doug Henwood wrote:
Well, the class war is an aggregate of sorts, and central bankers
like Greenspan are very aware of the balance of class forces. A 3.9%
unemployment rate disturbs their sleep.
Speaking strategically of the class war as aggregate, the advantage goes
to the side who can best
. . . From a working class perspective, the principle
underlying NAIRU -- for example -- could be more accurately called the
"non-advancing emancipation rate of coercion" (NAERC). In the absence of
such a number, it is nevertheless feasible to re-interpret the official
statistics and
Doug Henwood wrote:
Well, the class war is an aggregate of sorts, and central bankers
like Greenspan are very aware of the balance of class forces. A 3.9%
unemployment rate disturbs their sleep.
Tom Walker writes:
Speaking strategically of the class war as aggregate, the advantage goes
to
Jim Devine wrote:
Also, can't it be said that within the context of
capitalism, any emancipation won due to fast growth and low unemployment is
at best transitory, since eventually the reserve army will be restored, if
not by Greenspan by the slow-down in accumulation that results from
On Sun, 21 May 2000, Jim Devine wrote:
I'd say that most workers would also like the idea of "non-inflationary
growth," given the fact that capitalism isn't about to crumble and die. Low
unemployment is great for the working class (after all, a lot of worker who
normally can't get jobs are
I might add that the apotheosis of Alan Greenspan is a fine example of the
extent to which economic policy is now captive to a fetish of the
aggregate. The ONLY question that seems to matter is "is 'the economy' too
hot or not too hot?"
The astrology of fed watching uses the sa
Timework Web wrote:
I might add that the apotheosis of Alan Greenspan is a fine example of the
extent to which economic policy is now captive to a fetish of the
aggregate. The ONLY question that seems to matter is "is 'the economy' too
hot or not too hot?"
The astrology of fed wat
1 - 100 of 179 matches
Mail list logo
