Mmm...Socialism

The top list is a peculiar mix of mostly unregulated, and uber-regulated states; with not much inbetween. I know the story is about the U.S. falling from First to Sixth this past year, but I wonder how long the U.S. has been top dog.

""US competitiveness is threatened by large macroeconomic imbalances, particularly rising levels of public indebtedness associated with repeated fiscal deficits," the report said."

It's not a problem with capitalism (vs. socialism), per se.

It's more a problem with President Bush's horrific and unconscionable economic policies.

I'm almost surprised we're as high on the list as we are after 6 years of this.

Scandinavian countries have high levels of social trust, excellent legal systems, terrific education, and low taxes on investment (and high taxes on consumption).

Matthew, you really should do your homework, that way you won't look like such an idiot.

Denmark chucked it's socialist gov't several years ago. The current gov't is a coalition of the right-of-center parties. The pro-business gov't has introduced several major reforms of the welfare state.

The Finnish gov't is a coalition of center and left parties, but it has moved away from the socialist past and pursued a moderate platform of tax cuts and and spending reductions.

Switzerland & Singapore are neither Scandinavian nor socialist.

That leaves Sweden, which is in Scandinavia and did have a Socialist gov't until recently. However the upcoming election is expected to elect the conservative Moderate Party.

What was your point again? Oh right, that countries can improve their competitiveness by getting rid of socialists and electing conservative pro-business governments.

Some various quotes from the report;

They heart Scandinavia

"The Nordic countries show that transparent institutions
and excellent macroeconomic management, coupled with
world class educational attainment and a focus on technology
and innovation are a successful strategy for maintaining
competitiveness in small, highly developed economies."

They heart Switzerland

"Switzerland takes the leading position as the world’s
most competitive economy in 2006–2007, overtaking
Finland and Sweden, and replacing the United States,
which dropped to sixth position. Switzerland’s top ranking
reflects a combination of a world class capacity for innovation
and the presence of a highly sophisticated business
culture."

They are slightly dissappointed in the U.S.

"The United States is ranked sixth this year. It remains
a world leader in a number of key categories assessed by
the GCI, such as market efficiency, innovation, higher
education and training, and business sophistication.
However, growing imbalances have dented a number of
macroeconomic indicators, and the levels of efficiency and
transparency underpinning its public institutions do not
match those of the most developed industrial countries."

They think Venezuela needs to get it's act together;

"As in previous years,Venezuela’s overall performance
continues to deteriorate, reflecting a sharp deterioration in
the quality of Venezuelan institutions, especially in combating
corruption, undue influence in decision-making,
and in reducing government intervention.

For all the talk about the social dimension of the government’s “benign” revolution, school enrolment rates are either mediocre or poor, with Venezuela ranking 85, just behind Vietnam,
Suriname, and China at the secondary school level.
Venezuela’s infant mortality rate of 16 per 1,000 live births
is on a par with Albania, and actually higher than that of
Russia or the Ukraine, two countries still recovering from
decades of public health neglect."

I don't see Cuba or North Korea listed in any of the tables, were these countries not studied & ranked?

I agree that "competitiveness" is a bogus concept. Give me real data, not made up measures. (And, no, "how conducive their business climates are to sustaining economic growth" is not a real measure. Economic growth itself is a real measure, but that's not the measure here.) However, one thing to notice about those countries Matthew highlights - they're small. I think there's a real question about scalability.

they're not only small, they're relatively homogeneous, in terms of who really gets to play in those societies. a more apt comparison to one of those countries might be a city or small state in the US.

Note that while Scandianvian countries have low taxes on investment, they directly tax the accumulation of wealth.

When you say the best evidence indicates ... i sthere a study you have in mind or a citation...

Oh right, that countries can improve their competitiveness by getting rid of socialists and electing conservative pro-business governments.

despite all their new (relatively) "conservative pro-business governments" all those countries are still far more socialist than the US. and, oh right, they're ahead of the US.

> Matthew, you really should do your homework, that way you won't
>look like such an idiot.

Um, Kenneth, check the facts yourself before mocking Matthew. The Moderates *did* win the Swedish election but only by moving *left!*. Fredrik Reinfelt's alliance has little in common with the strategy favored by the Moderates in 1992-95 under Carl Bildt. Of course, the Swedish economy has fared quite well this century; my impression is the Moderates are proposing only minor tweaks the current Social Democratic welfare state.
---
As for Finland and Denmark, so what if we have moved slightly to the right in political terms? The basic political and economic system remains the same and we seem to be doing quite well in comparison with George Bush's and Tom DeLay's America... So I don't think high taxes and a cradle-to-grave welfare system necessarily has to be incompatible with reasonably strong economic growth.

: they're not only small, they're relatively homogeneous, in
: terms of who really gets to play in those societies. a more
: apt comparison to one of those countries might be a city or
: small state in the US.

Indeed! For this reason, I think progressives in the U.S. should favor a bottom-up strategy. Rather than trying to drag Texas et al. kicking and screaming into the 21st century (or even 20th century ... ) , the emphasis should be on cities/states rights that allow Democratic bastions to evolve towards universal health care etc.. This is of course already happening to some extent (e.g. California may sign the Kyoto Protocol, Massachusetts is experimenting with universal health care, some liberal states allow gay marriage and so on). But an increasingly conservative, authoritarian federal government will not tolerate "moral deviants" such as Oregonians voting in favor of assisted suicide. Fortunately, this should create a political opening in the Western states as the GOP is moving farther and farther away from Reagan's libertarian states rights principles.

MARCU$

Give me real data, not made up measures.

The irony of Al-bot asking for 'real data' yet again keeps its lustre.

On the micro level, American business is about as nimble as a hippo in a tutu.

Or, you could take it with a grain of salt. For example, Mexico is ranked #31 on the measurement of Health and Primary Education, while the U.S. is ranked #40 and Venezuela is ranked #53.

I know life isn't as great as we like to think around here, but I'm having a hard time believing parents should move to Mexico to make sure their kids get a good education.

Indeed! For this reason, I think progressives in the U.S. should favor a bottom-up strategy. Rather than trying to drag Texas et al. kicking and screaming into the 21st century (or even 20th century ... ) , the emphasis should be on cities/states rights that allow Democratic bastions to evolve towards universal health care etc..

The top-down progressive's retort would be the prohibition on interstate commerce tariffs and regulation at the state level in the U.S. Constitution combined with an emphasis on states' rights would cause a "race for the bottom"--all jobs would relocate to the area with the crappiest social services, all products are regulated only as well as thoseof the least regulated state.

I know life isn't as great as we like to think around here, but I'm having a hard time believing parents should move to Mexico to make sure their kids get a good education.

Sure. Not if you're affluent. If you're "effluent" it's a different story.

I wonder if Matt or anyone for that matter could point to evidence that the US if it tried to implement social democratic policies would end up with Scandinavian-type economies rather than Franco-german type economies...It just seems that people tend to assume that the US govt would be able to execute this transition as well as relatively wealthy, homogenous, well-governed, socially coherent countries like Finland, Denmark et al. instead of messing it up like we did with the prescription drug bill (to name merely the latest giant domestic program screwup)...Wouldnt it make more sense to assume as a default that the US has fundamental constraints that make it more like France or germany than Sweden?

Note to Kenneth: According to the FT, the Swedish Moderate Center-Right won last week on immigration issues and jobs for young college grads, among other issues.

Note to davinboca: that's correct, their position on immigration is to slow the intake of immigrants (they are having big problems with Muslim immigrants in Malmo & other cities), and the jobs for grads policy is to deregulate the hiring procedures and to provide corporate tax incentives for hiring young people. Both of these are conservative positions.

Marcus: what you say about policy is essentially true, the Scandinavian states' policies have shifted only moderately to the right. However, before they did this their "competitiveness" ranking was significantly lower. Your broader point is that there is more to a nation's economy and to the quality of life than just "competitiveness" and that is also true. The question most Europeans refuse to face is whether cradle to grave social welfare state is sustainable. The evidence is doubtful. Get back to me in 20 or 30 years.

Aah, Scandinavia-blogging. Some quick points: Americans can completely discount the shift to right in Sweden. Nya moderaterna (new moderates) has revamped themselves as a social democratic party (unambigous support for the welfare state, successfully attacking the social democrats from the left on unemployment). They are significantly to the left of the Greens in USA.

Most people don't understand the Nordic model. We have a bifurcated economy. It is true that a lot of social services are provided through the public sector, but the private sector has always been open for competition. The private sector also decides wages and salaries, in the sense that it sets the ceiling for wage growth for the public sector (no genuine market there, you know). Scandinavian social democrats dislikes individual wealth, at least if it is excessive, but loves corporate wealth, hence low real tax on investments and all sorts of state subsidies for renewal and development (as long as the profits stays in the company). So, in short, high taxes, lots of subsidized social services (child care, parental leave, health care, education, unemployment benefits, education, pensions, elder care, set up in a way that makes the middle class feel that they get value for tax money) and love for enterprise, as long as the dough stays locked in the corporation. The right is allowed to tinker - so we have vouchers, private health care providers, and so on - but not to change paradigm.

We plod along, quite successfully, if one wants to believe this particular ranking.

The problem with Social Democracy partisans is that they fail to recognize their dependency on a place like the US to help sustain their success. What happens when a Social Democracy doesn't have a consumer vortex like the US to drive their exports and therefore their economy? What happens when a Social Democracy does not have the security guarantee of a country like the US and has to spend money on an independent defense? That is not an argument one way or another as to the superiority of the US model - but a better question is can the Social Democratic model exist independent of a political economy like the US? Social Democracy - for all its advantages - is dependent on the model it claims to refute.

How is over 20% Indian and less than 80% Chinese homogenous? Compared to, say, France, that sounds rather diverse. A lot of countries in the world are homogenous, in part because those we the imperial powers or they were major US allies (Korea). India was once one of the richest nations in the world, yet was also diverse. How much does using diversity vs. homogeneity really tell us besides the role identity has played since in a relatively short period in human history? Taiwan, however, is split along ethnic lines, yet it is rich. It should also be noted that the European countries listed here historically have been more tolerant (for instance, the Danes holding onto their Jewish neighbors' property to watch over it until they were able to return from camps or hiding after the war instead of just taking it) while France and Germany have been notoriously intolerant.

T-bolt, I'm not sure how relevant your point is. Basically you're saying that the Scandinavians rely on exports to the US for growth. Are you criticizing protectionism? Is that really necessary for social democracy or undermine it? Numerous countries, including us, relied partly on export markets to grow, like how we exported to Britain. Is export-led growth thus a bad policy when export markets exist? If export markets disappeared, the only people who aren't hurt relative to before are people who were already cut off, like the Soviets when the Americans and Europeans went protectionist in the 1920's. As long as you import and export, losing an export market will hurt you. You have to have a certain level of domestic wealth for domestic consumption to lead to respectable economic growth. Also, small countries tend to need to be outwardly orientated to grow because their population cannot sustain growth alone, like in Hong Kong and Singapore. Are you criticizing beyond outwardly-orientated, which the somewhat conservative globalization writers like Bhagwati have championed? What is the alternative, Fabianism like India 1947-1991?

We also shouldn't underestimate (or overestimate) the role that having a functioning (as opposed to British or Canadian) socialized healthcare system has on domestic industries' ability to compete internationally.

If it bashes the US... it must be true.

God, Matt. This country is in such decline. And its all because of the Christians !!! (notice I didn't say "jews"!!).

Yes, the Christians are behind this one. Thank Allah we have the Muslims on OUR side!!

I hate Christians more than I hate Jews and Blacks and drug addicts !!!

Allah Help Us !!!

Matt,

As usual you are a GENIUS!!!

I don't generally comment. I usually just read and yell "WOOOPPPP" to myself quietly. But tonight I got goosepimples !!! Cause I love you sooo much Matt. I really do !!!!!!!!!

O. Praise Jesus! I Hate this Country, Matt !! Praise Jesus!!

Halleluhah!! Mahmoud for PRESIDENT !! OMG. I feel it! Pray with me now! Amen. Amen. Say it now. Ahem.

Praise Jesus!! Y'all know, Matt. Jesus and Mohammad were BROTHERS. That's right !! Brothers!! Pray with me now, Mat. PRAY WITH ME BROTHER !!

God loves moohamed, Amen!! God loves me, Mat!! Amen.

Pray with me brther. Islam and Jesus. Together forever.

In ISLAM YOU TRUST !! Amen. Matt... Matt? Did you SING the Islamic Conversion Prayer ??

Matt? Sing with me, Brother. You don't even have to believe. Just say it and you will...

SUBMIT. Just like it says... "Submission". That's what "islam" means. "Submission".

NOW SQUEAL LIKE A PIG MATT !!

LOL... SQUEAL LIKE a PIG !!

GO ON. SQUEAL !!! Oink Oink Oink. Squeal GODAMMIT !! SQUEAL !!

Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink
Oink Oink Oink

Matt,

Take off your PC hat for a moment. Consider that a "person of color" was about to rob you blind, rape your wife, and leave you in jail to take the blame. Now consider that "person of color" was "sorta white".

Now. Stop. Reflect on this possibility.

Now. BLAME BUSH !!!!

hahaha. just kidding. It's all Bush's fault. Or some Repugnican !!

Haha. What a joke. Its all just a funny haha.

LOL.

That stuff NEVER happens. Not in MY America.

Unless the "perp" was an ILLEGAL who's only concern was the RECONQUISTA of the southwest USA.

I never heard of that until the MEXICANS started protesting illegal immigration!!!

WTF ?!? Why didn't the NY Times tell ME about this ??

LOL !!!

STUPID LIBERAL FUCK !!

> What happens when a Social Democracy doesn't have a consumer
> vortex like the US to drive their exports and therefore their
> economy?

While the US certainly is the largest single export market,
it is far less important than the other EU countries. For example, the US share of Swedish foreign trade was 10.6% in 2005 (cource: CIA factbook), but the 2nd..8th most important export markets are all Western European nations. They account for 52% of all exported goods, so the US is a comparatively unimporant market.

> What happens when a Social Democracy does not have the security guarantee
> of a country like the US and has to spend money on an independent defense?

Tell that to the Swedes, who always have got on very well without American "security guarantees".

> Marcus:[...]
> Your broader point is that there is more to a nation's economy and to the
> quality of life than just "competitiveness" and that is also true.

Yes, my argument is you have to make tradeoffs. IMHO, Scandinavia seems to be *sufficiently* competitive although I do not deny the cost of high taxes, government regulations etc..

> The question most Europeans refuse to face is whether cradle to grave social
> welfare state is sustainable. The evidence is doubtful.

I assume you are talking about the impact of low birthrates, which in time will reduce the size of the active tax-paying workforce. I am not that worried about declining PRODUCTIVITY or a shortage of labor; e.g. the Finnish paper industry has been losing jobs since the 1970s thanks to increased automation. What's happening is the jobs are not replaced as the workers retire. The important employers are increasingly in the service sector.

What does worry me a bit is whether the Scandinavian educational system can continue to produce skilled workers ... it seems the Swedish system in particular has constantly been "dumbed down" since the 1960s. The influx of immigrants from Third World countries also strains the system.

MARCU$

Re: Social Democracy - for all its advantages - is dependent on the model it claims to refute.

Even if it is true that Europe's social democracies atre dependent on the US (and I doubt this claim, except perhaps in the military sense during the Cold War) this does not mean that these countries are dependent on the US "model" only on the US as an nation. In other worsd the US would serve the same purposes if it tio were a social democracy, so your point says lesst han you think.

Serial Catowner certainly raises a valid question about the chuckle factor in this report. I think it is fair to say that legitimate questions can be raised about the legitimacy of the methodologies employed to generate the rankings when obviously farcical results emerge.

I think Al asked the key question. What are the actual growth numbers? Economics is not supposed to be a judged sport like gymnastics. The CIA Factbook says the U.S. economy grew 3.5% in 2005. The 2005 GDP growth rates of the five nations allegedly ahead of us in "business climate conducive to sustainable economic growth" are given as follows:

Denmark 3.4%
Finland 2.2%
Singapore 6.4%
Sweden 2.7%
Switzerland 1.8%

The alleged leader in "climate" for growth is dead last among the alleged top six with actual growth at about half the rate of the U.S. and barely above a quarter the rate of the leader, Singapore. But, hey, maybe Switzerland stuck the landing.

The article about this report also noted that government spending and trade deficits were major factors in downgrading the U.S. ranking. Government spending deficits have declined and will continue to do so as the U.S. demonstrates for the third time in 45 years that supply-side economics actualy works.

Trade deficits have been empirically shown over the past quarter century to produce no long-term deleterious economic effects at all. The U.S. has been runing big current account deficits for my entire adult life. Supposed economic savants have been whining about them and predicting imminent doom for that entire time.

Upshot? We can still buy all the cheap imported stuff we want from low-cost producer countries - boosting both our and their standards of living in the process - and they are happy to take our markers. If they were not, we'd have to set much higher interest rates on U.S. Treasury securities. In the event, U.S. Treasuries carry very low rates by world standards, but foreigners like them anyway.

Thw World Economic Forum are a bunch of wankers and their rankings are a load of road apples.

Even if it is true that Europe's social democracies atre dependent on the US (and I doubt this claim, except perhaps in the military sense during the Cold War) this does not mean that these countries are dependent on the US "model" only on the US as an nation. In other worsd the US would serve the same purposes if it tio were a social democracy, so your point says lesst han you think.

Given that the U.S. growth rate has been higher than that of the EU for many years now, I think it is fair to say the U.S. economy would fall well short of its current size had the U.S. been a social democracy of the European sort since the late 40's. A smaller U.S. economy would support lower levels of demand for European goods and services, taking an incremental slice off of European incomes. Both the U.S. and the social democracies of Europe would be appreciably poorer than they are at present had this been the case. Neither would exactly be Haiti or Burkina Faso, to be sure, but things would definitely be thinner and poorer all around.

> Given that the U.S. growth rate has been higher than that of
> the EU for many years now, I think it is fair to say the U.S.
> economy would fall well short of its current size had the U.S.
> been a social democracy of the European sort since the late
> 40's.

It seems like an exaggeration to say the US economy would have fallen "well short" although I'd expect somewhat slower growth with a Canadian-type social model.
---
AFAIK, Canada has been fairly successful despite generally pursuing (by American standards-) center-left policies. I am not saying any system is perfect, though.

MARCU$

Marcus,

Canadian economic success is due in very large part to the huge exports to the US. Where ever the US economy goes, Canada follows. As for the "Canadian-type social model" the previous Liberal gov't spent over a decade whittling it down, and the current Conservative gov't has started to chop even further. The major political debate in Canada is not about more or less socialism, it's about how best to get rid of it.

Re: I think it is fair to say the U.S. economy would fall well short of its current size had the U.S.

I don’t think you can make that statement at all. At least not without offering some sort of solid reasoning to sustain it. While I am willing to grant an argument that nationalizing industry and instituting a command economy a la the old Soviet Union would be damaging to economic growth, I fail to see any evidence that the type of “socialism” we see in Europe (which is really just a matter of strong social safety nets) is deleterious to economic growth. And before engaging in circular argumentation about Europe’s growth rates (which is where we started) recall the firm precept of statistics: correlation does equal causation.

I think "US Competitiveness" is doing fine.

2005 Real GDP growth per capita

US: 2.6%
Sweden: 2.3%
Norway: 1.6%
Germany: 0.9%
France: 0.6%

http://www.bls.gov/fls/flsgdp.pdf

I think T-Bolt's point is deeper than just US-as-export market and US-as-security-provider (though on the latter, Marcu$, you need to go back to the history books - try Gaddis's We Now Know - if the US hadn't had boots in W. Europe during the Cold War . . . . Yes, the Cold War is all behind us now, but when do you think the Swedish system developed?). A more, admittedly overwhelming and nebulous, question is where would the world be in terms of production technology/innovation if not for the "Cowboy Capitalism" of the US? I'm willing to bet that most of the core technologies that make modern economies what they are have been developed and/or most exploited in the US. In a very real way, the US has taught the rest of the world how to do business (and certainly has been the steward of the international trading system in the 20th Century - and, yes, it's been an imperfect steward at times). It's well nigh impossible to imagine what the economic world would look like if not for the US free (non-socialist) market (and because of this impossibility, of course, this argument will be blasted by the socialists, but there it is. It may be a wild counter-factual, but I don't think it's any more bogus than the concept of "competitiveness," which we wouldn't be discussing if there really wasn't something to it, regardless of its lack of precision).

Reality Man wrote:

"Also, small countries tend to need to be outwardly orientated to grow because their population cannot sustain growth alone, like in Hong Kong and Singapore."

You are making my point for me - I am not saying it is bad or good, I am saying that Social Democratic countries need the US' ravenous market for the exact reasons you say. So when partisans extol the virtues of Social Democratic countries, what they need to admit is that somewhere, Social Democrats need a country that has a pro-growth, limited welfare state model that has a dynamic market like the US. Again, this is not a typical 'US model awesome, European model sucks' approach - I am merely saying that Social Democracy is very dependent on a political/economic model it claims to refute, and an evaluation of Social Democracy can't be done without realizing that relationship of dependency.

Are you criticizing beyond outwardly-orientated, which the somewhat conservative globalization writers like Bhagwati have championed? What is the alternative, Fabianism like India 1947-1991?

JonF wrote:

"Even if it is true that Europe's social democracies atre dependent on the US (and I doubt this claim, except perhaps in the military sense during the Cold War) this does not mean that these countries are dependent on the US "model" only on the US as an nation. In other worsd the US would serve the same purposes if it tio were a social democracy, so your point says lesst han you think."

If the US were to convert, all of the accompanying economic consequences would follow - higher taxes and bigger take of GDP to pay for a comprehensive welfare state, rising unemployment due to the disincentives of the welfare state, and so forth. That is the tradeoff with the Social Democratic model - and that is fine, those who adopt are ok with it. But what happens to the US consumer market when that occurs? It ramps down. What happens to business development? It ramps down. All of which is possibly an ok tradeoff, but how does that affect the Social Democracies who trade with the US and rely on its market for exports? With sagging internal demand, European nations don't need another sluggish feature of their economy.

sdasdsadas

barbie oyunları

oyun

oyunlar

hikaye

sex

pornoooooooo

giysi giydir

wmwebtr ödüllü seo yarışması good job

Thanks
Best regards
mirc
mirç
mırc
mırç
mircturk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mirc yukle
mirch
mırch
mirc turk
turk mirc
mırcturk
turkmırc
mırc turk
turk mırc
turkiyemirc
türkiyemirc
turkiye mirc
türkiye mirc
mircturkiye
mirctürkiye
mirc turkiye
mircturk
turkmırc
muhabbet
forum
forum
turkforum
turkiyeforum
mirc
turkmirc
toplist
site ekle
pagerank
turkmirc
turkforum
sohbet
chat
sohbet odaları
bedava sohbet
bedava chat
türk
karar

www.r10.net küresel ısınmaya hayır seo yarışması
www.r10.net küresel ısınmaya hayır seo yarışması
www.r10.net küresel ısınmaya hayır seo yarışması
Sağır Oda
dizi izle
www.r10.net küresel ısınmaya hayır seo yarışması
dizi izle
resim galerisi
haber
forum
küresel ısınma
küresel ısınma
küresel ısınma
r10 seo yarışması
r10 seo yarışması
r10 seo yarışması

thnks regard...

thnkss good..

thnksss.....

thnx.x..

thnkssss....

thnkss... good.

thnks regard...

thnksssss good...

thnkssssss..

thnkssss....

thnkssss forever....

evden eve nakliyat
evden eve nakliyat
evden eve nakliyat
Sohbet
sohbet
mirc
penis büyütücü
sohbet
muhabbet
matbaa
seks
sex
hikaye
hikayeler
sex
porno
Sohbet kanalları
Sohbet odaları
Chat
evden eve nakliye
chat
magazin
chat
Sohbet
tuzcuoğlu

komik video
kurtlar vadisi pusu
aşk şiirleri
bol sohbet
cinsel sohbet
sohbet
sohbet yerleri
bedava oyun
Bol Sohbet
chat
chat
sohbet
sohbet
seviyeli sohbet
göçmen sohbet
mynet sohbet
islam sohbet
yazılı sohbet
yazgülü sohbet
hollanda sohbet
bg sohbet
dost sohbet
arkadaş sohbet
bayan arkadaş sohbet
kızlarla sohbet
avrupa sohbet
alem sohbet
sohpet sohbet
cinsel sohbet
ingiltere sohbet
liseli kizlar
msn nickler
saç ekimi
sağlık bilgisi
mirc inndir
film inndir

Plaket
Seks Shop - Seks Shop - Penis Büyütücü
Plaket
Kostüm
Fotokopi
Matbaa
Fuar
Reklam Ajansı
Evden Eve Nakliyat

thanks ;)

thanks ;)

apps.facebook.com

thank you

thank you

thank you

thank you

thank you

sohbet
chat
sohbet
sohbet
sohbet
chat
hikaye
diziler
facebook
chat
kadın
forex
arkadaş
muhabbet
gebze
webtasarım
toplist
sinema
film
gebze
asansör
felsefe
reklam
webtasarım
face book
face turk
face turk
youtube
sinema
sohbet
muhabbet
chet
çet
arkadaş
palet
trkadin
hikayen
chat
sohbet
sohbet
marmara
gebze web tasarım
gebze webtasarım
sohbet
chat
moda
magazin
yemek tarifi
yemek tarifleri
kozmetik
diyet
Yakışıklı
Yakışıklılar
Anne Çocuk
Filmler
Filimler
Film
Dizi
sohbet
sohbet
chat
chat
diziler
asansör
hikaye
felsefe
reklam
facebook
face book
face turk
pagerank
masaj
masör
sohbet
sex
porno
kadın
youtube
sinema
sohbet
chat
gebze ticaret
kredi
borsa
sohbet
chat
sohbet
Arkadaş

mirc

Thanks Best Regards
mirc
mırc
mırç
mircturk
mirctürk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mırc indir
mirç indir
mirc yükle
mırc yükle
mirc yukle
mırc yukle
mirch
mırch
mirc turk
turk mirc
mırc turk
mircada
mircturkiye
muhabbet
mirc sohbet
mırc sohbet
mirc chat
mırc chat
mırc ındır
mirc ındır
türkçe mirc
turkce mirc
turkçe mırc
turkce mırc
oper mirc
sohbet
forum
chat
online sinema
catlak
türk forum
turk forum
kafkas
kafkasya
ders
siyaset
izmir
karşiyaka
karsiyaka
forum
karsıyaka
sohbet

penis büyütücüler

harbiarkadas.com
harbiarkadas.net
harbiarkadas.org
itirafet.org
ebedava.net
elektronikmarket.net
ameribress.com
clitoriacream.net
superspenisbuyutucu.com
megabress.com
rednightperformans.com
performansartirici.com
penisplus.tv
penispluspenisbuyutucu.com
penispluspenisbuyutucu.net
cinselmerkez.com
aseks.net
erotikcamasirlar.com
vajinatr.com
bakirevajina.com
cinselkozmetik.com
kozmetikmedikel.com
eturknet.com
tecavuz.net
yutuvideo.com
ponotubesex.com
laraperuk.com
sackanagimerkezi.com
peruksa.com
perukmarket.com
aseks.com
aloveshop.com
erotikgiyim.com
geciktiricispreyler.com
geciktiricihap.com
geciktiriciler.com
azdirici.com
bayanuyarici.com
fntazialemi.com
fantaziservisi.om
cinselmazemeler.com
cinselfantaziurunleri.com
erotikdakikalar.com
erotikmarketiniz.com
seksmarketiniz.com
sekshatlari.com
erotikdergiler.com
erotikderginiz.com
penisbuyutucuviprx.com
penisbuyutucuvigrx.com
penisbuyutuculer.com
vigrxpenisbuyutucu.com
sismebebekler.com
sismebebekshop.com
yemekeviniz.com
sanalmarketiniz.com
elektronikmarket.net
ebedava.net
kontortr.com
elaydin23.com
turkcellkontorcu.com
aveakontoral.com
vodafonekontoral.com
toptankontorcu.com
cinselkozmetik.com
bayanpartnerler.com
erkekpartnerler.com
kizarkadaslar.com
yonjaarkadas.com
siberalem-siberalem.com
sexpartnerler.com
sekspartnerler.com
erotikpartnerler.com
gencyuz.com
erkekarkadaslar.com
bayanarkadaslar.com
yemekeviniz.com
sanalmarketiniz.com
baskahaber.com
medikalkozmetik.net
kozmetikmedikal.com
zayiflamavediyet.net
zayiflamahapii.com
zayiflamabandii.com
kilovertr.com
zayiflamatr.net
diyettr.com
toksinbandi.net
botoxtr.com
botokstr.com
selulittedavii.com
selulitgiderici.net
selulitkremii.com
catlaktedavisii.com
catlakgiderici.net
catlakkremii.com

sex shop