The economic split up between Brazil and the United States

.

Peilthetraveler: Yeah...we spend that on our breakfast every morning!


*****


March 5, 2010

SouthAmerica: I know it. The United States spends over $ 2 billion dollars per day in defense spending alone.

With the compliments of China’s government – they lend the money and the United States borrow it by the trillions of US dollars. Debt lots of debt for the country (USA) and cheap borrowed money for lending to the population that is the way to enslave the entire population of a country – the ironic part is that Americans are not even aware that they are being enslaved by the Chinese one loan at the time.

Today the Chinese holds America by the balls – when you are so deep in debt as the United States is today - you are no longer the master of your own destiny.


*****


Peilthetraveler: I mean brazil could subsidize cotton too if they wanted to.


*****


SouthAmerica: The United States would not have an economic system left if wasn’t for the massive government welfare to Wall Street and to the major banks to keep them from going bankrupt. The US would not have an agriculture system if they also did not receive massive amounts of government subsidies. The US defense industry is also dependent heavily on US government contracts.

It does not matter where you look the United States economy is completely dependent on taxpayers money.

US taxpayer money and money borrowed from China is what keeps the US economic system from total collapse.


******


Peilthetraveler: But I shouldn’t be surprised that a country like brazil that is so corrupt…


******


SouthAmerica: In Brazil the corruption is in nickels and dimes. In the United States is in the trillion of US dollars.

Very few Americans are aware that Hank Paulson accomplished the biggest heist in world history – to the tune of trillions of US dollars.

The sad part is that most Americans don’t have any idea and are not aware that the future already has been stolen from them by a select group of scam artists including Hank Paulson and the Goldman Sachs Mafia Family.


*****


Peilthetraveler: Brazil is asking for trouble though. They dont need a boycott from the US as they would lose 20-25 billion per year in export losses, but it seems like they are really trying to push our buttons.


*****


SouthAmerica: American companies don’t have the balls to start boycotting Brazilian products. Besides that strategy is a two-way street….


*****


Peilthetraveler: Maybe they want to be boycotted so they can tell the world how its the USA's fault that brazil failed as a nation.


*****


SouthAmerica: I don’t know why you can’t grasp this simple fact:

“ Brazil is probably the only country in the world that can be 100 percent self-sufficient, and Brazil could stop 100 percent its international trade and Brazil would be able to survive with a few adjustments.

But the same is not true for the United States or even to Europe as a trading block, since the United States and Europe are heavily dependent on imported sources of energy.”

And the United States is also dependent on borrowing trillions of US dollars from other countries for its economy to stay afloat and avoid a total economic and financial collapse.
.
 
.

Jem: Has latin america been in our pocket since the 50s?


*****


March 5, 2010

SouthAmerica: In a way I would say: Yes…Some countries more than others.


*****


Jem: Like our influence is really going under a substantive change.
If latin america had listend to us they would be 1st world countries by now.


*****


SouthAmerica: I have been documenting the United States decline of prestige and influence in South America for many years on my published articles.

In the 1990’s Argentina’s economic policy was crafted in the United States (Washington) – they followed everything the United States told them to do – Argentina became the poster child for American economic policy around the world.

But today comes to no surprise to anyone that if you follow the brand of American capitalism that eventually will land you in the poor house as it landed the Argentinean economy into complete financial and economic collapse.

The global financial meltdown in 2008 it is just another minor example of what happen to you if you follow the brand of American capitalism. (Based on deceit, smoke and mirrors, artificial data, wishful thinking, and nothing more)


******


Jem: Notice they picked the right industries. If Brazil really had balls or wanted to step up on the stage - they would have picked on our farmers.


******


SouthAmerica: Brazil is picking where it hurts, and where people would pay attention.

Right now the current US government would throw the farmers to the sharks without giving a second thought – in the same way the idiots who are running this country have thrown main-street to the sharks since this economic and financial crisis started.

The mafia that is running this country today is interested only in covering the losing bets made by Wall Street to the tune of trillions of US dollars. Remember these are gambling bets that already went sour and Hank Paulson, and his network of mafia friends from Goldman Sachs are pillaging everything in sight at the expense of the future of the US economy.


******


Jem: SA if you are trying to elevate brazil through rhetoric - you will have to back it with substance.


******


SouthAmerica: The Brazilian economy is in great shape and the future looks outstanding for Brazil – Let me give you a perspective that you can relate to.

Brazil is positioned today in relation to the global economy in the same way the United States was positioned around 1950. Look at the economic growth and prosperity that followed in the US economy in the following 60 years.

Brazil looks even better than the US did because Brazil will not have to spend the massive amount of money that the United States spent fighting a Korean War, a Vietnam War, a Gulf War, an Iraq War, and the kiss of death – the Afghanistan War.

The legacy left behind of financing all these wars is a sky high pile of debt and the enslavement of future generations – the people holding all this debt becomes your new master.


*****


Jem: By the way I like Brazil.


*****


SouthAmerica: I used to like the United States – that country that no longer exists.

I don’t like the carcass of the old country that the scam bags of Wall Street left behind.

I am almost done reading “It Takes a Pillage” – Behind the Bailouts, Bonuses, and Backroom Deals from Washington to Wall Street – By Nomi Prins.

I recommend that you read this book even though every new page that you turn makes you angrier than ever before.
.
 
Quote from peilthetraveler:

Yeah...we spend that on our breakfast every morning!

I wonder how SouthAmerica feels about his country doing something so immoral as withholding royalty payments. I mean brazil could subsidize cotton too if they wanted to. Nobody is stopping them. But they would rather steal americans money to "get even". But I shouldnt be surprised that a country like brazil that is so corrupt and full of crime would do something like that. Cotton isnt even a major export for brazil. Why are they so uptight?

Brazil is asking for trouble though. They dont need a boycott from the US as they would lose 20-25 billion per year in export losses, but it seems like they are really trying to push our buttons. Maybe they want to be boycotted so they can tell the world how its the USA's fault that brazil failed as a nation.
More...

Brazils' newly discovered oil deposits are large enough for
entre' into OPEC. USA could ill afford to piss off its future
petro supplier.
 
.

Part 1 of 2

March 5, 2010

SouthAmerica: Today someone sent me a copy of this report regarding Brazil, Iran and the United States. Here I enclosed a copy of the article and also some of my comments regarding this article.

First my comments regarding this article:

1) The article said: “Though Brazil has existed in isolation for much of its post-colonial history with most of its attention occupied by internal political and economic turmoil, the country now finds itself, uniquely, in a stable enough position to start reaching abroad and developing a more assertive foreign policy.”

My comment: It is obvious to me that who wrote this report it does not have a clue about Brazilian history. He should read the following articles before he gives incorrect information to his readers:

Brazzil Magazine - February 2005
“Brazil, the Original Leader of the Americas – Part I”
Written by Ricardo C. Amaral
http://www.brazzilmag.com/component...-original-leader-of-the-americas--part-i.html

Brazzil Magazine - February 2005
“Brazil, the Original Leader of the Americas – Part II”
Written by Ricardo C. Amaral
http://www.brazzilmag.com/component...original-leader-of-the-americas--part-ii.html

***


2) The article said: “As da Silva famously said earlier this month, "Brazil is part of the G-20, G-7, G-8, G-3. In short, any G they make they have to call Brazil. We are the most prepared country in the world to find the G-spot."

My comment: That is a good one from president Lula.

***


3) The article said: “When Israeli President Shimon Peres arrived in Brazil to get a pulse on da Silva and his Iran agenda prior to Ahmadinejad's visit in late 2009, Sao Paulo state Governor Jose Serra, Brazil's main opposition leader, took the opportunity to invite Peres to his state, where he made a pro-Israeli speech and later condemned da Silva's reception of Ahmadinejad. Serra is already leading Rousseff in polls by 11 percentage points.

Conscious of Brazil's percentage of Jewish population (less than 1 percent of total population) and a sizable number of Brazilians growing leery of da Silva's foreign policy adventurism with Iran, Serra can be expected to hone in on this issue in his campaign.”

My Comment: It seems that the author of this article wants to imply that the Jewish population is important for politicians in Brazil.

The Jewish population is smaller than one million people – I would be surprised if there is even that amount of Jewish people living in Brazil.

What the author of the article neglected to say is that the reality is that more than ten million Brazilians trace their ancestry to the Middle East. We have the largest community of people of Arab descent outside the Arab world.

***


4) The article also said: “Much to Washington's discontent, Brazil made a foray into the Iranian energy market in 2003 when state-owned Petrobras obtained exploration and drilling rights in the Caspian Sea under a $34 million agreement. Petrobras, however, said in November 2009 that it was pursuing an end to its activities in Iran, claiming that their technical evaluation concluded that the project was no longer commercially viable.

Though Petrobras insisted the decision to leave was not made under political pressure, the announcement came as the United States was gearing up sanctions against Iran's energy sector, perhaps shedding a ray of light on Brazil's pragmatism in handling the Iranian portfolio.”


My comment: The reason given on this article for Petrobras to leave Iran’s oil exploration project in 2009 – it is pure bullshit.

Petrobras did not leave the Iranian project because of political pressure from anybody – it is well-known that Petrobras found a ton of oil in Brazil and in early 2009 Petrobras started looking for oil experts around the world to help develop all these new oil fields in Brazil – Petrobras was looking for about 22,000 experts on that field – and Petrobras found out that there is a major shortage of engineers and oil experts around the world.

The only alternative available to Petrobras was to terminate many exploration contracts that they had around the world including the one with Iran to be able to bring all these Petrobras oil technical people to work in the new oil fields in Brazil.


*******************


Brazil, Iran: “A Troublesome Relationship for the U.S.” - Special Edition
STRATFOR - March 4, 2010

Summary

U.S. Undersecretary of State William Burns traveled to Brasilia on Feb. 25 in advance of a trip by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Brazil on March 3. The diplomatic preparation work in which Burns is involved centers on Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva's intensifying long-distance relationship with Iran.

For now, the Iranian-Brazilian love affair does not stretch far beyond rhetoric, but Washington sees a ! growing need to keep Lula's foreign policy adventurism in check, particularly when it comes to Brazil forging nuclear and banking ties with Iran.

Analysis

U.S. Undersecretary of State William Burns, the State Department's point man on Iran, traveled to Brasilia on Feb. 25 to lay the groundwork for U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's visit to Brazil on March 3. Usually, such a visit would not require extensive prep work by an undersecretary, but from Washington's point of view, Brazil has moved up in the list of diplomatic priorities. The reason? Iran.

Getting Keen on Iran

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva has been getting cozy with Iran as of late. On Feb. 24, da Silva came to Iran's defense, asserting that "peace in the world does not mean isolating someone." He also defended his decision to follow through with a scheduled visit to Iran on May 15 in spite of Iran's continued flouting of international calls to curb uranium-enrichment activity and enter serious n! egotiations on its nuclear program. He scoffed at the notion that his trip had turned into a scandal and said when he travels to the Persian Gulf, he is "going to negotiate with Iran and sell things to Iran so that Iran can also buy things from Brazil."

The basic question running around Washington in regards to da Silva's behavior is, "What gives?" The United States has long considered da Silva a crucial ally and bridge to the Latin American left. Sharing a common vision with da Silva for business-friendly policies, Washington has relied on the charismatic Brazilian leader to help balance against the more antagonistic, anti-imperialist agenda espoused by leaders like Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. This is not to say that da Silva was a card-carrying member of the pro-United States camp, but he would take extra care to walk a fine diplomatic line between the United States and its adversaries, like Cuba and Venezuela.

Lately, however, da Silva and his Cabinet appear to be going out of their way to telegraph to the world that Iranian-Brazilian relations are blossoming, putting Brazil within firing range of one of Washington's biggest foreign policy imperatives. Brazilian officials reacted warmly to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's controversial victory in the June 2009 presidential election and were quick to roll out the red carpet for the Iranian president when he paid a state visit to Brazil in November 2009.

Tehran is more than happy to receive such positive attention from Brasilia. Brazil holds a nonpermanent seat on the U.N. Security Council, and U.N. sanctions against Iran require the support of at least 9 of the 15 council members. In addition to having to deal with potential Russian and Chinese vetoes among permanent members, the United States also has to take into account that it will not have the vote of Brazil, which is not satisfied with its temporary seat and is using its foreign policy credentials to seek global support for a permanent seat. Even rhetorical support from an emerging power like Brazil helps Iran in gathering diplomatic fodder to try to prevent a sanctions coalition from amalgamating.

Brasilia's Global Emergence

Da Silva has several strategic motives for publicly playing defense for Iran, most of which have very little to do with Iran itself.

Though Brazil has existed in isolation for much of its post-colonial history with most of its attention occupied by internal political and economic turmoil, the country now finds itself, uniquely, in a stable enough position to start reaching abroad and developing a more assertive foreign policy. Brazil has the political and economic heft to declare itself the regional hegemon, regardless of whether the states in Brazil's immediate abroad are prepared to accept such a reality. In addition to boasting a rapidly modernizing military and a burgeoning energy sector that will place the country among the world's top energy producers within a decade, Brazil has membership in practically every internal grouping that it can find membership in. As da Silva famously said earlier this month, "Brazil is part of the G-20, G-7, G-8, G-3. In short, any G they make they have to call Brazil. We are the most prepared country in the world to find the G-spot."

With an ambitious foreign policy agenda being charted out in Brasilia, da Silva apparently sees some diplomatic benefit in promoting a more contrarian view to the United States.
.
 
.

Part 2 of 2


In addition to getting close to Iran, da Silva made a point recently of staunchly defending Chavez's government as a democracy (while referring to his own country as a "hyper-democracy"), and he continues to press the United States to lift its trade embargo against Cuba. By carving out a more controversial position for itself in the international arena, the Brazilian government is looking to gain some credibility in places like Tehran and Caracas to promote itself as a mediator in their thorny dealings with the United States.

Taking Risks at Home

Despite the overabundance of mediators in the Middle East and Brazil's glaring lack of leverage in the region, da Silva remains fixated on the Iran portfolio. This policy does not come without political risks for da Silva. Within Brazil,! many are puzzled and uncomfortable with the idea of Brasilia publicly aligning itself with Tehran when even countries like Russia and China (who, unlike Brazil, actually have substantial relations with Iran) are taking care to diplomatically distance themselves every time the regime flouts the West's demands to show some level of cooperation on the enrichment issue.

Indeed, da Silva's decision to politically embrace Ahmadinejad when he came to visit Brazil last year had a polarizing effect on the Brazilian political scene. Da Silva is in the last year of his term and his popularity is still soaring, but his Iran policy could be problematic for his chosen candidate, Brazilian Cabinet Chief Dilma Rousseff, in the run-up to the October presidential election.

When Israeli President Shimon Peres arrived in Brazil to get a pulse on da Silva and his Iran agenda prior to Ahmadinejad's visit in late 2009, Sao Paulo state Governor Jose Serra, Brazil's main opposition leader, took the opportunity to invite Peres to his state, where he made a pro-Israeli speech and later condemned da Silva's reception of Ahmadinejad. Serra is already leading Rousseff in polls by 11 percentage points.

Conscious of Brazil's percentage of Jewish population (less than 1 percent of total population) and a sizable number of Brazilians growing leery of da Silva's foreign policy adventurism with Iran, Serra can be expected to hone in on this issue in his campaign. It remains to be seen whether domestic politics in Brazil will lead da Silva to back off his Iran outreach should it prove detrimental to Rousseff's campaign.

The Brazilian business community has not yet reacted strongly to da Silva's diplomatic flirtations with Tehran, but the further da Silva goes in this Iran initiative, the more problems he could create for Brazilian traders who are heavily integrated with the West. Along this vein, it will be important to watch for signs that the United States will seek to retaliate where it hurts Brazil most: In its pocketbook. There already has been talk of restricting access to U.S. financing in the oil and natural gas sector in Washington; and at a time when Brazil has high hopes for the sector, alienating the United States and its high-technology firms could develop into a serious roadblock.

Not Ready to Throw Caution to the Wind?

So far, Washington and others can find comfort in the fact that Brazil and Iran currently do not have much to boast of beyond the diplomatic fanfare. Although Brazil is Iran's largest trading partner in Latin America, the total annual trade! between the two remains small at roughly $1.3 billion (with Brazil making up most of this trade through meat and sugar exports). And since Brazil is already self-sufficient in oil, the country simply does not have a big appetite for Iranian energy exports to support a major boost in this trade relationship.

Although Da Silva may see the strategic benefit for now in promoting himself as an advocate of the Iranian regime, he also seems to be conscious of when to take a step back. Much to Washington's discontent, Brazil made a foray into the Iranian energy market in 2003 when state-owned Petrobras obtained exploration and drilling rights in the Caspian Sea under a $34 million agreement. Petrobras, however, said in November 2009 that it was pursuing an end to its activities in Iran, claiming that their technical evaluation concluded that the project was no longer commercially viable. Though Petrobras insisted the decision to leave was not made under political pressure, the announcement came as the United States was gearing up sanctions against Iran's energy sector, perhaps shedding a ray of light on Brazil's pragmatism in handling the Iranian portfolio.

Da Silva's Cabinet also has shown similar restraint in dealing with Iran's nuclear controversy. Brazil has a modest nuclear power program — complete with two nuclear power plants in operation and one under construction, enrichment facilities and a small reprocessing plant. Iran has tried to claim in the past that Brazil has offered to enrich uranium on Iran's behalf (similar to how it exaggerates Japan's willingness to ensnare itself in Iran's nuclear program); however, Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Morim and local technicians have denied that they would do so, claiming that Brazil does not have sufficient technology to take part in such a deal.

But Washington is not taking chances on Brazil's newfound interest in Iran — hence the U.S. diplomatic entourage that is now making its way to Brasilia. In a tone reminiscent of a parent lecturing a teenager coming of age, U.S. State Department spokesperson Philip Crowley said Feb. 25, "Clearly Brazil is an emerging power with growing influence in the region and around the world, and we believe that with that influence comes responsibility."

How Far Will Da Silva Go?

While most of the Iran-Brazil relationship consists of diplomatic theater, there are two areas of potential cooperation that could be game changers for the United States: banking and nuclear energy. Iran is facing escalating sanctions pressure over its nuclear program. One of the many ways Iran has tried to circumvent this threat is by setting up money-laundering operations abroad to keep Iranian assets safe and trade flowing.

In Venezuela, where Chavez will more readily take on an opportuni! ty to stick it to Washington, and in Panama, where banking transparency is an ongoing concern, Iran has forged ties between local banks and Banco Internacional de Desarrollo CA, a subsidiary of Export Development Bank of Iran (EDBI), to give Iran indirect access to the U.S. financial system. EDBI already has been blacklisted by the U.S. Treasury Department for directly supporting Iran's nuclear weapons program and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The blacklist affords the United States both the ability for sanctions on Americans dealing with these banks and a pressure lever against foreign firms interested in keeping their U.S. assets safe.

Iran has tried a similar banking tactic in Brazil. When Ahmadinejad paid a visit to Brazil in May 2009, Iranian EDBI and Brazilian banking officials drafted a memorandum of understanding that was on the surface a mere agreement to facilitate trade between the two countries. But facilitating banking cooperation could mean a lot of things, including the establishment of Iranian banks in Brazil to evade the U.S. sanctions dragnet. Brazil already is believed to direct most of its trade with Iran through the United Arab Emirates to avoid attracting negative attention, but Iranian banks on Brazilian soil would not be easy to hide and would not be ignored by the United States.

Then there is the ever-controversial nuclear issue. Reports also emerged in the Brazilian press Feb. 26 that Brazil's Office of Institutional Security, which answers to the president, has begun consultations with technicians in Brazil's nuclear program to establish what points can be included in a possible nuclear deal with Iran that could be signed during da Silva's visit to Iran in May. The O Globo report does not specify what points of cooperation are being discussed, but Brazil reportedly is working on a new uranium-refining technique called magnetic levitation, which is being developed by the navy at the Aramar lab in Sao Paulo. The news follows a Brazilian announcement from early 2009 that the country is pursuing uranium enrichment on an industrial scale, with a goal to produce 12 tons of enriched uranium for nuclear power supply.

Brazil not only is working toward self-sufficiency in nuclear power but also may be positioning itself to become a supplier of nuclear fuel for the global market. Such a move could boost Brazil's mediation credentials in dealing with countries like Iran, but would draw ire from the United States and Israel, which do not want to see Iran acquiring additional nuclear fuel unless Tehran first makes concrete guarantees on curbing the Iranian enrichment program. Adding to these nuclear tensions is Brazil's continued refusal to sign an additional International Atomic Energy Agency protocol for strengthened safeguards in the lead-up to a Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference scheduled for May. Brazil maintains that it has enough legal mechanisms to prove the peaceful nature of its program, which Iran will echo in defense of its own nuclear activities.

Da Silva has yet to finalize who all will be accompanying him to Tehran this May as the first Brazilian president to visit the Islamic republic. With da Silva pushing the envelope, STRATFOR will be watching closely to see whether discussions among Iran and Brazilian banking and nuclear officials could transform a relationship resting mostly on paper and rhetoric into a real threat to U.S. interests.


****

STRATFOR is an independent, global intelligence company that provides penetrating analysis of world events.
.
 
nice to see the arrogance among american citizens is alive and strong, despite living in a country that is bankrupt on paper as a result of the said arrogance and delusional stance that america is somehow better than everywhere else - simply because they invented and eat too many hamburgers.

junk culture at its best.


americans are so arrogant they forgot the word BRIC, what those letters stand for, and that there is no letter A in the word BRIC.


roll on tomorrow......

pride goes before a fall.
 
Quote from FredBloggs:

nice to see the arrogance among american citizens is alive and strong, despite living in a country that is bankrupt on paper
More...
That's one way of looking at - the other is that these posts counter-balance SA's continuous stream of propaganda posts that drone on and on about how great Brazil is without ever providing balanced views.

Reading his garbage you might believe Brazil is an up and coming world power when the reality is that they are far far from it and no amount of spin or putting down the US is going to change that reality.

I could go point by point listing what's wrong with Brazil, the stuff that SA never mentions but its not worth my time or effort to get into an internet debate with a one-dimensional cheerleader like SA and frankly Brazil is too insignificant in the big scheme of things to waste time discussing.
 
Quote from southamerica:
SouthAmerica: In Brazil the corruption is in nickels and dimes. In the United States is in the trillion of US dollars.
[/B]
More...

Cut the crap. As corrupt as USA is, Brazil is no angel. It's a third world country with massive corruption, injustice, poverty and hunger. The wealth of the nation is controlled by about 30 families who all live in gated in communities with numerous bodyguards and bullet-proof cars. The government is utter scumbags, and all real Brazilians know & accept this.

Brazil was a better country 10-15 years ago and was actually a good place to live about 40 years ago & prior. Nowdays, it's being turned into a crime ridden sh*thole and is destroying itself. It has significant economic power only because of the Rainforest which the nation has been turning into sugar, coffee & lumber fields. The ecology of the region is being destroyed and it is just a matter of time before serious consequences will be suffered.
 
Quote from GTS:

That's one way of looking at - the other is that these posts counter-balance SA's continuous stream of propaganda posts that drone on and on about how great Brazil is without ever providing balanced views.

Reading his garbage you might believe Brazil is an up and coming world power when the reality is that they are far far from it and no amount of spin or putting down the US is going to change that reality.

I could go point by point listing what's wrong with Brazil, the stuff that SA never mentions but its not worth my time or effort to get into an internet debate with a one-dimensional cheerleader like SA and frankly Brazil is too insignificant in the big scheme of things to waste time discussing.
More...

every journey starts with a step, and every future winner starts behind the current winner.

i wouldnt be living in brazil now thats for sure, but given the potential of this and other bric countries, thats where the money is flowing into - not out. the money is flowing out of america at an alarming rate. most of it has already gone - never to come back in this life time.

i dont think brazil will be THE world power in the way usa was 20-30 years ago, but it will probably be up there like a strong european state is today. of course, the next world power will be china - some would argue it already is. but brazil will be favoured by china over america any day of the week as a trade partner.

china dislikes usa
as does brazil
india and russia will go with whoever is winning - and that aint usa.
problem is, americans dont care, cos they still think they are #1 because fox says so, and they are too complacent to believe otherwise.

i think its time the americans woke up and smelt the (brazilian) coffee - the american goose has been fattened, taken to the slaughter, and is well and truly cooked.
 
Quote from FredBloggs:

i think its time the americans woke up and smelt the (brazilian) coffee - the american goose has been fattened, taken to the slaughter, and is well and truly cooked.
More...
Comments like this really crack me up - yea, let's see what happens to the rest of the world after the american economy collapses....I'm sure every other country will just continue humming along just fine and there won't be a worldwide depression. Keeping telling yourself that enough times and maybe you'll even believe it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top