The American Spectator

Big J| 7.29.09 @ 7:42AM

Peter,

I agree with your article completely. Punishing success has become the norm, and reduces revenue.

Of course our "economic guru", the wizard of smart, Bob would disagree. No matter. The numbers don't lie.

A flat tax or consumption tax would reduce the size and scope of government, increase production and ultimately increase revenue. Unfortunately, none of these are the goals of our liberal rulers in Washington.

There goal is to keep the class war in full force. Their goal is to "level the playing field" until we are all just as poor as the next guy.

Obama is not doing anything he didn't say he would do: "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

I think he's full of it.

Ryan| 7.29.09 @ 8:18AM

I agree as well, with one caveat - no loopholes. Corporations get the benefit of lower tax rates, but no one gets to carve out exemptions and such for themselves. The tax code needs simplification and the ideas above make a certain amount of sense.

Grzmlyk| 7.29.09 @ 8:24AM

Sratch scratch scratch.

Can't you just hear TrollBob revving up his intellectual indignation, consulting with Moveon.org, assembling GDP and effective tax rate statistics, and working his dander into a proper liberal lather?

How dare the moron, the utter naif, the boob, the intellectually picayune, Lilliputian Peter Ferrara - much to Bob's haughty and eternal consternation - continue to refuse to genuflect before Bob's demonstrably superior knowledge? Bob is a mathematician, after all, and as he will lubriciously tell you (over and over and over again), the only true geniuses in economics are mathematicians - just like Bob)!!

Rescue us morons, Bob!! We're just too damn dumb to realize YOU are the Way, the Light and the Hope!

Please Bob, save the planet: Tell us again how effective tax rate averages over the last 30 years mean none of us ever has to worry about being overtaxed. Tell us again how, no matter what, GDP rises just as surely as the earth revolves arond the sun! That's my favorite bedtime story.

Hey bob: Did you buy that parrot yet? Maybe it can spell your wife a couple of hours a day. She's tired! No doubt she didn't realize her primary role in your marriage would be as a sort of psychological Gunga Din, carrying endless buckets of emotional succor to quench your endless thirst for ego gratification.

Crawk!!!! TrollBob is the smartest person on the planet!!! Crawk!!!

Gill O’Teen ✝✡| 7.29.09 @ 8:50AM

Personally, I don’t think enabling any gum’mint to increase revenue is a good thing. From personal observation it seems to me that all they do with extra money is spend more and more on getting reelected. Nor is it a good thing for 60% of us to pay 0% in taxes. Rather I think that those with no skin in the game should not even be allowed to vote. Last I checked that 60% still enjoy all the benefits of living in this country, such as having the most exceptional military in the world willing to fight and die for our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. So all should have to pay something for these privileges. I know of at least one dumbocrat controlled taxing authority that thinks a 1% of gross earnings tax is a fine policy. Everybody with earned income would have an interest in how the gum’mint keeps its fiduciary responsibilities.

John Navratil| 7.29.09 @ 9:08AM

I generally agree with this but offer the following.

It is hard to argue that the Reagan Republicans are the guys who gave you a big tax cut with an electorate that wants bigger gov't and expects the other guy to be taxed.

I, like Gill O'Teen, agree that everyone ought to have some skin in the game if anyone does. It is amazing how many people complain on the basis of being taxpayers when they are not. (Of course everyone pays some taxes, just not FIT).

The Federal gov't is too big as it is. Revenue neutrality perpetuates it. It's long past time to devolve these "responsibilities" to the states.

TennesseeVolunteer| 7.29.09 @ 9:17AM

I like the sound of it but would this policy also do the following:
- encourage people to continue to work for cash doing yard work, minor construction work etc. along with their day jobs so as not to be over the 60%
- would this encourage couples to not get married in order to stay in the bottom 60%
- would this still encourage the libtards to demonize those in the top 40%
On its face, I would go with it in a minute and I understand no program can be perfect. If we had a country where everyone agreed on the principles of the Founders, it would work darn well but we have a liberal fringe who have an unspoken agenda that is against everything written in the Constitution. Until they are trounced and denounced, i am afraid we leave them too big a hole to scurry through on this. Just saying...

Mike| 7.29.09 @ 9:25AM

This is rich! For months I have been reading the angry posts from conservatives who complain bitterly that 60% of their fellow Americans pay no federal income tax. And dad-gum-it, they are sick of their wealth being transferred to those people. Now, Mr. Ferrara is urging the right to take full credit for this situation because it is the result of good supply side economics. In the ceaseless effort of TAS writers to malign all that the current administration is doing, they don't even stop at completely contradicting themselves. You folks at TAS need to stop writing for a day and read Joe Scarborough's book, The Last Best Hope.

John Navratil| 7.29.09 @ 9:31AM

Tennessee Volunteer - sounds like a Wobegon tax system where all the taxpayers are above average :)

Mike - I believe Mr. Ferrara is saying that 0% is all you get. No negative transfers through refundable tax credits.

Grzmlyk| 7.29.09 @ 9:33AM

I agree with Gill and John - everyone should have skin in the game.

I know the tax code is an irresistable and endless set of political levers and knobs with which to influence both personal and corporate behavior (except for companies run by Bob, who claims that tax policy doesn't influence business decisions), and as such the tax code will always extend to 70,000 pages, but it seems to me simplicity is best for the country and a flat tax would be fair for all. Maybe not politically viable, but fair.

And I echo the sentiments above: If you don't pay, you don't vote.

John Navratil| 7.29.09 @ 9:40AM

Tennessee Volunteer made me think about what Mr. Ferrara said which was: "The new reform should propose taxing ALL of the income of those top 40% once with a 15% flat tax.". This makes that dollar which puts you into the 60%-lie taxed at about $8,000 (assuming the wikipedia published lower income limit for 60%-ile earner is $55,000). That is a big disincentive to make that dollar. Of course, the next one is only taxed at $.15.

Bob| 7.29.09 @ 9:42AM

Big J -- you are right, the numbers don't lie. You'll notice that the hack Ferrara (who is not an economist), uses capital gains as an example and then applies that generic result to taxes in general. He assumes he can pull the wool over all of your eyes because the data simply doesn't support his hypothesis. Here, again, is the data on how marginal tax rates effect government revenues:

http://www.heritage.org/research/features/budgetChartbook/Income-Tax-Receipts-Stay-Constant-Even-As-Tax-Rates-Decline.aspx

Furthermore, GDP is not affected by lower tax rates:

http://www.data360.org/dsg.aspx?Data_Set_Group_Id=230

Ferrara again does not utilize inflation adjusted data and does not recognize the relationship between capital gains and other income taxes. In fact, the economy rose to a greater extent under the tax increases of Clinton, than the tax cuts of Reagan and Bush.

But then again, you guys don't want to actually look at the inflation adjusted data -- you want to believe.

Of course, I do agree that a flat tax would be fairer. But it is important to also get rid of all tax incentives and subsidies and let the market determine proper levels. As you know, I am also in favor of getting rid of the corporate income tax and replacing it with a consumption tax.

owyheewine| 7.29.09 @ 9:55AM

The biggest problem with the flat tax is the name. The proposals are NOT for a flat tax, but a single rate tax, big difference as pointed out in the article. My engineering brain isn't tuned to making up fancy, but politically atractive names, but one is really needed.

Tripp| 7.29.09 @ 9:55AM

Agreed- there's still too much taxation with Mr. Ferrara's plan. That's why we need the Fair Tax- one tax on consumption, no IRS, no corporate taxes, nothing. And a simple prebate for that ol' bottom 60%.

John Navratil| 7.29.09 @ 10:05AM

Bob,

Your first link does not compare tax rate to revenues at all. It compares TOP (not average) income tax brackets to agregate income tax receipt as a percent of GDP. One might as well have labelled it "price of tea in China". Add in a changing GDP, indexing of brackets to inflation, business cycle or any of a number of economic effects and revenues change. This chart is just another way of saying people have a limit to what they will pay in taxes and the government has a limit to what it will receive in income taxes, all adjusting and tinkering aside. There is another, similar, limit which is total gov't revenue is maxed at about 21 - 23% of GDP. Obama wants to spend 28%. The economy will not stand for it.

I couldn't reach you second link for analysis. That's the problem with requiring your reader to do his own data analysis.

Grzmlyk| 7.29.09 @ 10:19AM

John, what about some of the other charts on that Heritage site? Bob always refers folks to that chart and it seems to me right next to that chart are charts that refute Bob's pet claims.

I am no economist - nor do I pretend to be; I am one of the unwashed who would like to be more informed about tax policy - but Bob always asserts we're not paying more in taxes than we have in 35 years. Yet, from my limited grasp, it would seem to me these two charts militate against Bob's favorite arguments.

Can you put these into context (you only need one link, since you can click on the other charts from that one)?

http://www.heritage.org/research/features/budgetChartbook/Federal-Government-Revenues-Have-More-Than-Tripled-Since-1965.aspx

http://www.heritage.org/research/features/budgetChartbook/Total-Tax-Burden-Rising-To-Highest-Level-in-History.aspx

http://www.heritage.org/research/features/budgetChartbook/Taxes-Per-Household-Have-Risen-Dramatically.aspx

Bruce| 7.29.09 @ 10:23AM

I fully agree with Tripp ... the Fair Tax is by far the best alternative. Besides completely replacing the income tax with a consumption tax (not a VAT), it would greatly increase the global competitiveness of products produced in the USA.

Bob| 7.29.09 @ 10:23AM

John, tax cuts have been primarily aimed at the top marginal tax rates. Effective tax rates (the average) has not changed significantly. When the top rates were cut, so were brackets below. So, as a trend analysis, the top rates make a great deal of sense. As to using a percentage of GDP, there is no other way to remove the factor of normal growth. This chart clearly shows that marginal tax rates have little effect on government revenues. The GDP chart (I can reach it) is the other half of the argument that clearly shows the periods in which we had tax cuts did not affect economic growth to any greater extent than any time when we had tax increases. You must use these charts together in order to come to a conclusion.

Regarding that there is a limit to what people will pay in taxes, how would that mechanism work on a macro basis? You would have to use effective tax rates for that analysis and effective tax rates bears little relationship to marginal tax cuts.

Bob| 7.29.09 @ 10:36AM

Grzmlyk -- Regarding government revenues, in the same period of time GDP has grown almost quadrupled in inflation adjusted dollars. In other words, revenues have not kept pace with GDP. You will also notice that during the times of lower taxes you see no difference in the slope of the graph than during times of high taxes. For example, look at revenues during Carter's and Reagan's administrations.

With regard to rising tax burdens, this is a totally different issue and is not related the historical effect of tax cuts on revenues or growth. On this issue, I agree totally with Heritage that if Obama does not cut spending, we will be in trouble in the future. But remember, when viewing this chart that in recessions, GDP declines and thus the percentage of taxation increases even though the real burden remains the same. That's why this chart is a bit misleading.

The last chart does not take into account the growth of GDP and salaries. That chart really needs to be indexed to GDP. Thus, the chart is really misleading.

Grzmlyk| 7.29.09 @ 11:02AM

Thank you for the explanation.

Of course a second opinion would be nice; but I greatly appreciate the lack of contempt and condescension.

I gotta say I don't understand the motives of someone who hangs around a web site with people he thinks are fools. But again, thank you for the civil tone.

I know statistics are incredibly malleable - and therefore, for non-experts - which comprise the vast majority when it comes to economics - we have no choice but to adhere to basic principles and beliefs; hence what you call blind ideology.

Most of us have no choice but to take a large swath of life on faith. The only orientation map any of us has is our pre-existing belief system. We all swim in that pond in one way or another.

My great fear is that the government has grown immensely in my adult lifetime, and the percentage of people on the government payroll - who belong to government unions, by the way - has exploded. The lesser skilled get paid, on average, more than their counterparts in the private sector. Bureaucracy is a cancer on the body politic, and, despite what some charts may show, my experience shows me it's metastasizing.

Rather than treat the cancer , Obama wants it to grow exponentially - he believes the state should be all. This is neither right nor helpful to any of the citizenry.

As Milton Friedman said, if you put government in charge of the Sahara desert, in five years there'd be a shortage of sand.

As this untutored taxpayer sees it, Obama's goal is tyranny. I was not born to serve the state's idea of anything - be it how much money I make (which isn't a great deal), what I eat, with whom I associate, what I drive, what I do with my time, etc.

And yeah, I go with my gut: Less government is better. Taxes are to be kept at a minimum, freedom is good. And the state should serve the public - not the other way around.

Grzmlyk| 7.29.09 @ 11:14AM

By the way, it's always the "other guy" who's the ideologue; no one ever thinks of him or herself as such.

Al Adab| 7.29.09 @ 11:40AM

Grzmlyk, Gill,
If by ideologue you mean one who supports (protects and defends) the Constitution and its principles agaisnt populist demagogues then I'm happy to be one.
Most taxpayers don't remember the rates pertaining in 1980, changed by the GOP (Conservatives controlling) which brought 25 yrs of sustainable growth and prosperity to this country. Of course those "tax cuts for the rich" were constantly assailed by the left and MSM until at long last they succeeded in their goals of regaining control of the government. Now we see the result of power for its own sake.
This headlong rush into tyranny and state control of every aspect of our lives (health, economic, social) represents the end of Constitutional government as we have known it.
On my wall as I write is a painting "Crockett's Last Sunrise" and it causes me to wonder, how do men choose when to stand for Liberty and oppose those forces aimed at their subjugation? Let us all hope our ballots are still enough and we need not make that choice.

ds80| 7.29.09 @ 12:00PM

Mike: what do you find wrong with the bottom 60% of income earners having to pay something?

I think most conservatives in principle disagree with government transfer of wealth, including Reagan's EITC. It remains true however, that while holding our noses at the latter, decreasing marginal tax rates resulted in an increase in revenue. Period.

Oh, and in case anyone missed it, speed-read over it, or skimmed, the best line of the entire article: "Obama is not living in the real world, and he has trouble telling the truth."

Allan| 7.29.09 @ 12:58PM

Bob,

GDP during the Clinton years is full of dot.com and Y2K distortions that are not likely to reoccur. However, the tax increase of 1993 was rolled back by republicans in 1996 so that small slice of data is statistically irrelevant.

Gill O’Teen ✝✡| 7.29.09 @ 1:12PM

Al Adab, I never called you an ideologue. I never called you anything. There is about to be a deal worked out in con-gress to sell out our country, and you are worried that I may have offended you.

Grzmlyk| 7.29.09 @ 1:18PM

John:

Thank you very much. I greatly appreciate your taking the time to explain these charts.

Unfortunately, I'm kinda busy at the moment & I want to take time to digest your input, so I am unable to peruse this just now- I'm sure I will have questions, as I have never been accused of being a genius - particularly when it comes to numbers.

But I look forward to delving into your response, doing more research and reading more of your posts.

Again, thank you.

Grzmlyk

Grzmlyk| 7.29.09 @ 1:20PM

Al Adab:

My only point on the "ideologue" comment is it us generally used as an epithet thrown at people by those who believe they are above ideology - when in fact none of us is above it; one way or another, we are all captives (for both good and ill) if our internal frameworks.

Gotta run.

Patrick M.| 7.29.09 @ 1:35PM

Peter Ferrara, This is such a brilliant, awesome and great idea ... I thought of it in March, 2008! I went more extreme, abolishing the income tax for 85% of Americans....

http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2008/03/fundamental-tax-reform-15-solution.html

"Out solution is less drastic, and it takes us in the direction of a "the rich pay 100%" simple, flat income tax. Abolish the income tax for all but 15% of Americans. The top 10% income tax payers would pay about 95% of the income tax (people making $100,000 or above). the next 5% would pay a fraction of the income tax. The remaining 85% of americans should pay NO income tax. With a simple flat 15% rate there would be a radically simplified income tax. We would have the same simple flat rate for corporate taxes, cap gains, income: 15%. This has huge benefits for the tax system in that it does not reward one type of income over another, making tax avoidance by shifting types of income a thing of the past. In this system, long-term gains over 4 years could be indexed to inflation if that is desired/useful."

Those who argue that we should not take people off the tax rolls, a retort/response: The better way is to rely on sales taxes for that. The point here is that higher taxes on middle and working class is bad policy and bad politics.

Grzmlyk| 7.29.09 @ 1:43PM

Yes, data is easily skewed; that's why it's very difficult to grasp complex systems when one doesn't have the time, skill or triaining to peruse it.

No doubt, I think spending is too high. WAY too high. So what you are saying, then - and exposing my paper-thin understanding of economics further - that Arthur Laffer is dead wrong and that supply side economics are 100 percent wrong. Correct?

Grzmlyk| 7.29.09 @ 1:48PM

Also: the axiom that when you tax something you get less of it, and the more you tax it the less you get.

I quit smoking when taxes on a pack became ridiculous. Just one example. I know a big argument in the 80s about luxury taxes was the unintended consequences of, say, yacht makers going out of business because demand for yachts decreased. In your view, is that accurate, or do you see these the "tax + less of something" as inconsequential in the big picture?

Al Adab| 7.29.09 @ 2:02PM

Gill, Grzmlyk,
Don't misunderstnad. I don't mind being an Ideologue. Believe me Gill, no offense taken and I did not intuit any from you. Fact is you guys are right on point. Sorry for the misunderstnading.

Grzmlyk| 7.29.09 @ 2:09PM

Thanks, Al Adab.

I think those of us who admit to it are more honest than those who claim to be above it!

Bob| 7.29.09 @ 2:10PM

Grzmlyk -- Economics is so complex with so many variables, it is impossible to say that anyone is 100% wrong. However, from a macro standpoint, we don't find any real evidence that supply side economics was effective. Understand, that this conclusion does not negate the benefit of lower taxes based on lower spending. Furthermore, there is significant evidence that we did not see any significant trickle down of capital given the increasing difference between the wealth of the rich and poor. In a theoretical world, Laffer makes sense. But in the real world, it didn't pan out.

With regard to the axiom of taxing something and getting less, again this is complex. The luxury yacht case was an example of offshore competition. The increased taxes make the production of yachts much cheaper to make outside of the U.S. because many of the yachts were exported. If taxation affects competitiveness with other countries, then our country will produce less, but other countries will produce more. The internal effect of that is price related. Some products are price sensitive and others are not. For example, if you tax toilet paper more, production will probably not be affected much because we all need that product. But increased taxation will affect discretionary products. But then again, so will a recession. Normally, the macro sale of products is more related to disposable income than taxation. If your income rises faster than taxation, then you will purchase more, not less, even if the prices are higher. There is no simple answer here.

The truth is that the effective tax rate over time, even when we had excessive marginal rates, varied only between 19% and 22%.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=456

Thus disposable income was not changed much and excessive taxation or tax cuts have never had any significant effect on purchasing. However, recessions, like the one we're going through now, have great effects on output.

Grzmlyk| 7.29.09 @ 2:27PM

Again, thanks for taking the time to articulate your view on this.

So what you are saying is the huge expansion we've seen in government has paidfor by the rising GDP, which itself can be attributed to a great extent to a growing workforce - if I have that right.

Which of course raises the question of what happens when boomers retire in great numbers - another reason illegal immigration is so tolerated.

The effective tax rate is a number I've seen before. However, my perception is that government wants more, more more - ever more. Politics and manipulation of tax code may render the effective rate stable over time, but surely Obama's plans - assuming he were to get everything he wanted - would require the effective rate to skyrocket, would they not?

And wouldn't you agree Bernanke's "exit strategy" is awfully optimistic in terms of controlling inflation?

Laurie Lalko| 7.29.09 @ 3:01PM

Basically agree with what you said except for the bit about taxation and health care. There is a TRUE reform program that is not being looked at that would result in NO taxes on individuals, remove the employer-mandate, and stimulate the economy by phasing government OUT of the health care field where it should not be.
A comprehensive, free market plan exists that transitions those on government programs to a new plan while private business builds what those on Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP need. Then the new government plan is PHASED OUT for private plans. That plan also must support itself (no “deep pockets”) and it is MEANS-TESTED (no free rides on the taxpayer’s dime.)
The plan is catastrophic care that is means-tested with a prevention focus. It would be open to all citizens while more private plans are created. That will happen because regulations are drastically reduced and plans sold across state lines. Private plans also get tax credits to enroll the poor and the sick.
Unlike ALL the UHC plans, ways to get more doctors and nurses is included without bankrupting people.
Please check it out:
http://www.modernconservative.com/freeandfair.php

Dorothy | 7.29.09 @ 3:02PM

TN does not have a state income tax. Only a sales tax (9.75%) that everyone pays, even the poor.
Everyone should pay.

Charles| 7.29.09 @ 3:25PM

Mike| 7.29.09 @ 9:25AM

........ You folks at TAS need to stop writing for a day and read Joe Scarborough's book, The Last Best Hope.

I'd bet Joe wishes that too. A new readership of 12-15 people would double the circulation of his book.

Bob| 7.29.09 @ 4:00PM

Grzmlyk,

The growth in government has come primarily from mandatory spending of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest -- and from the discretionary spending on the military. Together, those items total about 83% of the total federal budget. We boomers will make that much worse no matter who is/was President.

http://www.heritage.org/research/features/budgetChartbook/Mandatory-spending-increased-faster-than-discretionary-spending.aspx

Remember that more than half of discretionary spending is the military (which I really don't consider "discretionary" when we are fighting wars).

Regarding the expansion of government, it has only partially been paid by GDP -- it has also been financed by debt.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

That is the problem -- we have not paid for the growth in government under any recent President except Clinton. And the growth in Clinton's case was primarily due to the timing of the dotcom bubble -- not to his administration's work.

Obama will keep the effective rate rather level, but that means a huge increase in debt -- even larger than we had with Reagan and Bush.

I'm actually with Bernanke on inflation. Inflation is actually a relative measure. Since this recession is worldwide and most governments are using monetary stimulus (in the case of China it is larger than ours), many of the inflation effects are netted out in the next few years. In a changing environment, we are better suited to change with the market than virtually any other country because we don't depend on manufacturing as much as other countries. It takes years to change a manufacturing company because of the time it takes to build/remodel plants.

Long term, however, if we don't control spending, our debt will provide for inflation -- but that should not occur soon. Furthermore, the bank spreads are so large right now (on purpose) that the bad assets will be written down without many further defaults. Bernanke will raise rates when the capital ratios of financial institutions are in line with projected defaults. That will also head off inflation but it will slow the recovery. The bottom line is that if Bernanke does a good job, the recovery could take a number of years, but inflation will not be a big problem.

Grzmlyk| 7.29.09 @ 4:20PM

I promise I'll look at the charts, but I'm logging off in a sec -

Yes, all of that is true, I'm sure, about where our money currently goes but the point is Obama wants more human activity in the public sector and would rather have the govt involved in way more even than it is now - that's going to force him to raise taxes (hasn't this happened in other countries)? beyond historical effective rates irrespective of the comming train wreck of the boomers. Which exacerbates it exponentially.

Hope you're right about inflation. It looks to me (again, admittedly I am ignorant) like Bernanke wants the good times to continue to roll with low interest rates; wants folks borrowing again, buying houses again, consuming on discretionary purchases again - which means we'll continue to spend money (both private and government) we don't have and he'll have a hard time bringing our consumer-driven economy to heel when the time comes to raise rates.

Seems to me inflation is inevitable and that China and others will turn off the spigot cuz they don't want to get paid in inflated dollars and they will no longer need to export to us with their middle class replacing the US consumer need. We don't manufacture anything, which may make us more agile in the short run but it seems to me we're screwed in the long run - eventually the piper will have to be paid, no?

I really gotta go, but I'll read your response later.

CODE RED - TERRORIST ATTACK - | 7.29.09 @ 4:37PM

CODE RED - TERRORIST ATTACK - SWINE FLU VACC.

Go to you tube and listen. Stop the political bull shit, you may well be dead befor the next election.

When will the American Monkies grow up wake up and stand up.

Bob| 7.29.09 @ 4:38PM

Obama made a pledge that he would not raise income taxes on those making $250K or less -- and he will keep that promise even at the expense of a huge debt. He knows that if he breaks that promise he will not be reelected.

Bernanke is NOT Greenspan who bought into supply side hook, line, and sinker. He knows his first job, now that the economy is technically out of recession, is to keep inflation down. He is more like Volcker than Greenspan in that respect. He is more of an academic than Greenspan and less of a politician. Balance is important to him.

If he does that, then China will not be a problem because if our economy doesn't turn around, China will be in deep doo-doo (technical term).

CODE RED - TERRORIST ATTACK - | 7.29.09 @ 4:46PM

CODE RED - TERRORIST ATTACK - SWINE FLU VACC.

Code RED| 7.29.09 @ 4:50PM

EmailPrintText SizeU.S. swine flu vaccine trials set to begin
If the initial trials seem safe, the vaccines will also be tested in children aged 6 months to 17 years. (©iStockphoto.com/Sean Locke)
Related Links
World's 1st swine flu vaccine trials start in Australia
Swine flu (H1N1) More>>Swine flu could eventually affect 40% of Americans: CDCCDC panel to recommend who should get swine flu shotSave swine flu drugs for younger patients, study urgesU.S. expects 160 million doses of swine flu vaccine by OctoberU.S. swine flu vaccine trials set to beginWorld's 1st swine flu vaccine trials start in AustraliaSafety of swine flu vaccine to face tough scrutinyFDA approves seasonal flu vaccine for 2009-2010American Airlines losses point to grim times for industrySwine flu vaccine on track for fall: CDC
Infection NewsPrioritize pregnant women to get swine flu shot, experts sayCDC panel to recommend who should get swine flu shotSwine flu could eventually affect 40% of Americans: CDCU.S. expects 160 million doses of swine flu vaccine by OctoberU.S. swine flu vaccine trials set to beginMany young adults uninformed about vaccinesSafety of swine flu vaccine to face tough scrutinyGuard against swine flu at summer campSwine flu summit focuses on preparednessExperts keep wary eye on Tamiflu-resistant swine fluBy Amanda Gardner, HealthDay Reporter

THURSDAY, July 23 (HealthDay News) -- The United States is readying its first human trials of an experimental vaccine to protect against the H1N1 swine flu virus, officials announced this week.

And in related news, experts at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Thursday said that the virus has not yet mutated to become more dangerous, although they continue to follow its progress globally, the Associated Press reported. Dr. Nancy Cox, chief of CDC's influenza division, called the lack of genetic variation in the H1N1 strain "quite surprising" given the pathogen's quick spread.

In the meantime, two possible vaccines will be tested at eight institutions around the country under the auspices of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), officials said.

The purpose of the trials, said NIAID Director Dr. Anthony S. Fauci in a prepared statement, is to "determine whether the vaccines are safe and to assess their ability to induce protective immune responses. These data will be factored into the decision about how and if to implement a 2009 H1N1 flu immunization program this fall."

The announcement follows Tuesday's revelation that two Australian biotechnology companies have started inoculating adult volunteers in the world's first H1N1 swine flu vaccine trials. Those trials, as well as the trials planned in the United States, hope to produce an effective shot against the virus that has so far killed more than 700 people worldwide.

In the United States, several trials will be conducted concurrently, officials said.

Codex Swine Flu Quarantine| 7.29.09 @ 4:54PM

The announcement follows Tuesday's revelation that two Australian biotechnology companies have started inoculating adult volunteers in the world's first H1N1 swine flu vaccine trials. Those trials, as well as the trials planned in the United States, hope to produce an effective shot against the virus that has so far killed more than 700 people worldwide.

In the United States, several trials will be conducted concurrently, officials said.

"I think the speed with which they [federal officials] got this going is impressive," said one expert, Dr. John J. Treanor, professor of medicine and of microbiology and immunology at the University of Rochester Medical Center, in New York. "They have a really well-organized clinical trials infrastructure that is uniquely posed to do these kinds of studies when there's an emergency situation like there is now."

One of the NIAID studies will try to determine if one or two 15-microgram doses of the candidate H1N1 vaccine are sufficient to provoke an immune response in healthy adults aged 18 to 64 and in people aged 65 and older. Studies will also look at whether one or two doses of 30 micrograms are more effective.

The two-dose regimens will be given three weeks apart. Two manufacturers, Sanofi Pasteur and CSL Biotherapies, produced the vaccines.

If these trials seem safe, the vaccines will also be tested in children aged 6 months to 17 years, according to the NIAID statement.

"The response to the vaccine may vary in different age groups," said Dr. Karen Kotloff, a professor of pediatrics and lead investigator at the Vaccine and Treatment Evaluation Unit at the University of Maryland, one of the medical centers chosen for the trials. In a statement released by the university, Kotloff explained that age could make a difference in vaccine response because "young people have not seen a flu virus like this before," whereas older Americans might have been exposed to H1N1 type strains in the past.

Additional trials will look at concurrent administration of the swine flu vaccine with regular, seasonal vaccine.

"It makes sense to test the combined swine flu and seasonal flu vaccines because there are some populations in whom both vaccines are indicated," Treanor said. "It would certainly be easier to give them at the same time but these trials are mostly focused on making sure they don't interfere with each other in some way and that they still get a good response."

Besides the University of Maryland School of Medicine, other centers taking part in the trials include the University of Iowa; St. Louis

Thom| 7.29.09 @ 5:19PM

Bob said, "The growth in government has come primarily from mandatory spending of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest -- and from the discretionary spending on the military. Together, those items total about 83% of the total federal budget."

Bob want to try those percents again - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_United_States_federal_budget

Within about a decade our Boomer Social programs are going to about double the current Federal spending alone just because of the a doubling of the number of people drawing on the systems. Without regard to the lunacy being projected and voted on now we are going to run annual deficit increases for these programs equal to half or more of the current Defense Budget after we stop playing war. Somebody has got to pay the piper and there isn’t a projection out there for GDP growth that will cover that in the next decade or two. Between the net losses in jobs now, many of which aren’t coming back and the annual net increase in mouths to feed and provide meaningful work for the mandatory spending you mention above will grow to around 3 trillion in unadjusted dollars by 2020 in my estimation. You may not see raising taxes on individuals and Corporations reporting more than 200,000 as a tax increase on the rest of us but in pure economic terms no business pays any form of taxation thus their taxes are passed alone in every product and service making it a consumption tax rather than an income tax. A tax is a tax regardless of how it gets into my wallet. I do not think your rosy projections are going to hold water in all due respect given the damage being done now.

Swine flu willYouBe alive 2012| 7.29.09 @ 6:15PM

Dr. Mercola's Comments:
As I predicted in my first swine flu alert, a fast-tracked swine flu vaccine was promptly ordered, and will be available as early as July. Pharmaceutical giant Baxter claims it has patented technology that cuts the usual vaccine development time in half, to about 13 weeks instead of 26.

Although many governments and health organizations are probably celebrating this feat, you have no reason to join in the festivities. In fact, you have good reason to fear being exposed to this new swine flu vaccine more than the swine flu itself.

You are virtually guaranteed that no safety evaluations will be performed prior to the reckless unleashing of this untested vaccine.

And, making matters worse, your children may be the first guinea pigs in this public vaccine experiment against a previously unseen hybrid of human, bird and pig viruses.

School Children May Face Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccinations

I was hoping mandatory vaccinations would not happen, but it now appears as though that's exactly what we might be facing in the near future.

In the video above, Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) warns that there is a campaign underway to turn schools into virtual vaccination clinics, and children will be the first to be injected with experimental swine flu vaccines.

Part of the reasoning for this is that it appears people over the age of 50 have more cross-reacting antibodies against the current swine flu virus, whereas children who have never been exposed to any of the strains before are more vulnerable.

The Post Gazette recently reported experts saying, "if the new H1N1 flu comes back in force this fall, it might be better to vaccinate children first," because "in the early stages of the epidemic this spring, the new flu strain has caused "explosive outbreaks" among schoolchildren who have no immunity to it."

Again, it's troubling to see health officials using the term "explosive outbreaks" for a flu that in the vast majority of cases has been reported to be very mild.

Such inflammatory language is simply uncalled for.

Making matters worse, they want to target children who have underlying health problems, i.e. the most vulnerable of the group, which means any potential problems with this untested vaccine will have the capacity to do maximum damage.

Why are We Putting Up With the Same Mistakes Again?

The current evolution of public health decisions has disturbing similarities to previous swine flu vaccine catastrophes'. The last swine flu threat emerged in 1976, right before I entered medical school and I remember it very clearly. It resulted in the massive swine flu vaccine campaign.

Vote 2012 if alive| 7.29.09 @ 6:16PM

Dr. Mercola's Comments:
As I predicted in my first swine flu alert, a fast-tracked swine flu vaccine was promptly ordered, and will be available as early as July. Pharmaceutical giant Baxter claims it has patented technology that cuts the usual vaccine development time in half, to about 13 weeks instead of 26.

Although many governments and health organizations are probably celebrating this feat, you have no reason to join in the festivities. In fact, you have good reason to fear being exposed to this new swine flu vaccine more than the swine flu itself.

You are virtually guaranteed that no safety evaluations will be performed prior to the reckless unleashing of this untested vaccine.

And, making matters worse, your children may be the first guinea pigs in this public vaccine experiment against a previously unseen hybrid of human, bird and pig viruses.

School Children May Face Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccinations

I was hoping mandatory vaccinations would not happen, but it now appears as though that's exactly what we might be facing in the near future.

In the video above, Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) warns that there is a campaign underway to turn schools into virtual vaccination clinics, and children will be the first to be injected with experimental swine flu vaccines.

Part of the reasoning for this is that it appears people over the age of 50 have more cross-reacting antibodies against the current swine flu virus, whereas children who have never been exposed to any of the strains before are more vulnerable.

The Post Gazette recently reported experts saying, "if the new H1N1 flu comes back in force this fall, it might be better to vaccinate children first," because "in the early stages of the epidemic this spring, the new flu strain has caused "explosive outbreaks" among schoolchildren who have no immunity to it."

Again, it's troubling to see health officials using the term "explosive outbreaks" for a flu that in the vast majority of cases has been reported to be very mild.

Such inflammatory language is simply uncalled for.

Making matters worse, they want to target children who have underlying health problems, i.e. the most vulnerable of the group, which means any potential problems with this untested vaccine will have the capacity to do maximum damage.

Why are We Putting Up With the Same Mistakes Again?

The current evolution of public health decisions has disturbing similarities to previous swine flu vaccine catastrophes'. The last swine flu threat emerged in 1976, right before I entered medical school and I remember it very clearly. It resulted in the massive swine flu vaccine campaign.

Vote if you survive to 2012| 7.29.09 @ 6:16PM

Dr. Mercola's Comments:

As I predicted in my first swine flu alert, a fast-tracked swine flu vaccine was promptly ordered, and will be available as early as July. Pharmaceutical giant Baxter claims it has patented technology that cuts the usual vaccine development time in half, to about 13 weeks instead of 26.

Although many governments and health organizations are probably celebrating this feat, you have no reason to join in the festivities. In fact, you have good reason to fear being exposed to this new swine flu vaccine more than the swine flu itself.

You are virtually guaranteed that no safety evaluations will be performed prior to the reckless unleashing of this untested vaccine.

And, making matters worse, your children may be the first guinea pigs in this public vaccine experiment against a previously unseen hybrid of human, bird and pig viruses.

School Children May Face Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccinations

I was hoping mandatory vaccinations would not happen, but it now appears as though that's exactly what we might be facing in the near future.

In the video above, Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) warns that there is a campaign underway to turn schools into virtual vaccination clinics, and children will be the first to be injected with experimental swine flu vaccines.

Part of the reasoning for this is that it appears people over the age of 50 have more cross-reacting antibodies against the current swine flu virus, whereas children who have never been exposed to any of the strains before are more vulnerable.

The Post Gazette recently reported experts saying, "if the new H1N1 flu comes back in force this fall, it might be better to vaccinate children first," because "in the early stages of the epidemic this spring, the new flu strain has caused "explosive outbreaks" among schoolchildren who have no immunity to it."

Again, it's troubling to see health officials using the term "explosive outbreaks" for a flu that in the vast majority of cases has been reported to be very mild.

Such inflammatory language is simply uncalled for.

Making matters worse, they want to target children who have underlying health problems, i.e. the most vulnerable of the group, which means any potential problems with this untested vaccine will have the capacity to do maximum damage.

Why are We Putting Up With the Same Mistakes Again?

The current evolution of public health decisions has disturbing similarities to previous swine flu vaccine catastrophes'. The last swine flu threat emerged in 1976, right before I entered medical school and I remember it very clearly. It resulted in the massive swine flu vaccine campaign.

Swine flu will you vote 20012| 7.29.09 @ 6:23PM

News
World
National News
State News
Politics
Business (World)
Business (US)
Technology
Industry
Science
Medicine
Sports
Education
Entertainment
Opinion
Latest Articles
View Topics
View Authors
Features
Latest Articles
View Topics
View Authors
Community
Join Our List
Other Sections
Affiliates
Advertise
Video

Warning: Swine Flu Vaccine Coming Soon
Bill Haymin July 05, 2009By Dr Mercola

www.mercola.com

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/07/04/Warning-Swine-Flu-Vaccine-Coming-Soon.aspx

Specialty drug maker Baxter International Inc. says it's in "full scale" production of a swine flu vaccine. The vaccine will be commercially available in July.

The company made its announcement one day after the World Health Organization declared swine flu a global pandemic.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports 45 swine flu deaths nationwide.

The National Vaccine Information Center will hold its 4th conference in Washington DC October 2-4 of this year: http://www.nvic.org/Events/overview.aspx I will be speaking there as will some of the leading experts in vaccines in the world. Clearly the best vaccine conference in the world and it is only held every few years. If this is of any interest to you I would strongly encourage you to attend.

Sources:

Washington Post June 13, 2009

National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) June 18, 2009 http://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/June-2009/Swine-Flu-Vaccine--Will-We-Have-A-Choice--by-Barba.aspx

Dr. Mercola's Comments:

As I predicted in my first swine flu alert, http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/04/28/Swine-Flu.aspx a fast-tracked swine flu vaccine was promptly ordered, and will be available as early as July. Pharmaceutical giant Baxter claims it has patented technology that cuts the usual vaccine development time in half, to about 13 weeks instead of 26.

Although many governments and health organizations are probably celebrating this feat, you have no reason to join in the festivities. In fact, you have good reason to fear being exposed to this new swine flu vaccine more than the swine flu itself.

You are virtually guaranteed that no safety evaluations will be performed prior to the reckless unleashing of this untested vaccine.

And, making matters worse, your children may be the first guinea pigs in this public vaccine experiment against a previously unseen hybrid of human, bird and pig viruses.

School Children May Face Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccinations

I was hoping mandatory vaccinations would not happen, but it now appears as though that's exactly what we might be facing in the near future.

In the video above, Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) http://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/June-2009/Swine-Flu-Vaccine--Will-We-Have-A-Choice--by-Barba.aspx warns that there is a campaign underway to turn schools into virtual vaccination clinics, and children will be the first to be injected with experimental swine flu vaccines.

Part of the reasoning for this is that it appears people over the age of 50 have more cross-reacting antibodies against the current swine flu virus, whereas children who have never been exposed to any of the strains before are more vulnerable.

The Post Gazette http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09156/975227-114.stm#ixzz0HahlAjDA&C recently reported experts saying, "if the new H1N1 flu comes back in force this fall, it might be better to vaccinate children first," because "in the early stages of the epidemic this spring, the new flu strain has caused "explosive outbreaks" among schoolchildren who have no immunity to it."

Again, it's troubling to see health officials using the term "explosive outbreaks" for a flu that in the vast majority of cases has been reported to be very mild.

Such inflammatory language is simply uncalled for.

Making matters worse, they want to target children who have underlying health problems, i.e. the most vulnerable of the group, which means any potential problems with this untested vaccine will have the capacity to do maximum damage.

Why are We Putting Up With the Same Mistakes Again?

The current evolution of public health decisions has disturbing similarities to previous swine flu vaccine catastrophes'. The last swine flu threat emerged in 1976, right before I entered medical school and I remember it very clearly. It resulted in the massive swine flu vaccine campaign.

However, within a few months, claims totaling $1.3 billion had been filed by victims who had suffered paralysis from the experimental vaccine. Several hundred people developed crippling Guillain-Barré Syndrome after their injections. Even healthy 20-year-olds ended up as paraplegics. The vaccine was also blamed for 25 deaths.

Meanwhile, the deadly swine flu pandemic itself NEVER materialized…

When a vaccine is developed in a mere 13 weeks, you can be virtually assured that it has NOT had the time to be tested in clinical trials to determine safety and effectiveness.

The way I see it, we now stand poised to experience a repeat of the last dangerous swine flu vaccine, which destroyed the lives of hundreds of healthy young boys and girls.

The real kicker, of course, is the fact that if the new vaccine turns out to be a killer, the pharmaceutical companies responsible have immunity from any lawsuits http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2006/01/03/vaccine-makers-getting-inoculated-from-lawsuits.aspx -- something I've also warned about before on numerous occasions.

Absolutely no one stands to be liable if this vaccine turns out to be a health disaster.

Governments Take Unnecessary "Code Red" Attitude to Flu Threat

The U.S. Congress handed over unprecedented power to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) after 9-11, and they're chomping at the bit to exercise it now that the World Health Organization (WHO) has upgraded the swine flu threat to Phase 6, Pandemic status.

But really, the word 'pandemic' only means that a new virus is spreading across the world. It says nothing about its level of physical danger.

So far, the swine flu has claimed a mere 332 lives WORLDWIDE http://www.who.int/csr/don/2009_07_01a/en/index.html (as of July 1), 116 of the deaths occurred in Mexico.

To keep this in perspective, the regular flu (not the swine flu) has allegedly killed 13,000 in the U.S. since January, http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2009/04/28/US-seasonal-flu-kills-13000-since-Jan/UPI-64801240974841/ although there is strong support that these types of figures are grossly exaggerated to increase vaccine sales. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2004/10/30/flu-deaths.aspx However, the fact remains that the regular flu at this point in time is FAR more dangerous than the swine flu, and were you worried about the regular flu before the media started hyping up this exotic new "killer flu"?

Despite the indications that the swine flu is more a pandemic nuisance than a pandemic killer, the U.S. Congress responded to the CDC's public health emergency declaration by handing over one billion dollars to a group of drug companies, including Baxter, to fast track experimental swine flu vaccines that may include whole live, dead, or genetically engineered human and animal flu viruses.

Additionally, nearly all vaccines contain a variety of adjuvants – potentially dangerous chemicals used as preservatives and/or to boost the vaccine's potency by affecting your immune system, http://www.mercola.com/article/vaccines/immune_suppression.htm such as thimerosal. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2005/07/23/mercury-vaccines-part-eight.aspx

But the 'code red' attitude to this phantom threat doesn't end there.

Barbara Loe Fisher warns in her article, http://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/June-2009/Swine-Flu-Vaccine--Will-We-Have-A-Choice--by-Barba.aspx

Flu| 7.29.09 @ 6:24PM

News
World
National News
State News
Politics
Business (World)
Business (US)
Technology
Industry
Science
Medicine
Sports
Education
Entertainment
Opinion
Latest Articles
View Topics
View Authors
Features
Latest Articles
View Topics
View Authors
Community
Join Our List
Other Sections
Affiliates
Advertise
Video

Warning: Swine Flu Vaccine Coming Soon
Bill Haymin July 05, 2009By Dr Mercola

www.mercola.com

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/07/04/Warning-Swine-Flu-Vaccine-Coming-Soon.aspx

Specialty drug maker Baxter International Inc. says it's in "full scale" production of a swine flu vaccine. The vaccine will be commercially available in July.

The company made its announcement one day after the World Health Organization declared swine flu a global pandemic.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports 45 swine flu deaths nationwide.

The National Vaccine Information Center will hold its 4th conference in Washington DC October 2-4 of this year: http://www.nvic.org/Events/overview.aspx I will be speaking there as will some of the leading experts in vaccines in the world. Clearly the best vaccine conference in the world and it is only held every few years. If this is of any interest to you I would strongly encourage you to attend.

Sources:

Washington Post June 13, 2009

National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) June 18, 2009 http://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/June-2009/Swine-Flu-Vaccine--Will-We-Have-A-Choice--by-Barba.aspx

Dr. Mercola's Comments:

As I predicted in my first swine flu alert, http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/04/28/Swine-Flu.aspx a fast-tracked swine flu vaccine was promptly ordered, and will be available as early as July. Pharmaceutical giant Baxter claims it has patented technology that cuts the usual vaccine development time in half, to about 13 weeks instead of 26.

Although many governments and health organizations are probably celebrating this feat, you have no reason to join in the festivities. In fact, you have good reason to fear being exposed to this new swine flu vaccine more than the swine flu itself.

You are virtually guaranteed that no safety evaluations will be performed prior to the reckless unleashing of this untested vaccine.

And, making matters worse, your children may be the first guinea pigs in this public vaccine experiment against a previously unseen hybrid of human, bird and pig viruses.

School Children May Face Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccinations

I was hoping mandatory vaccinations would not happen, but it now appears as though that's exactly what we might be facing in the near future.

In the video above, Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) http://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/June-2009/Swine-Flu-Vaccine--Will-We-Have-A-Choice--by-Barba.aspx warns that there is a campaign underway to turn schools into virtual vaccination clinics, and children will be the first to be injected with experimental swine flu vaccines.

Part of the reasoning for this is that it appears people over the age of 50 have more cross-reacting antibodies against the current swine flu virus, whereas children who have never been exposed to any of the strains before are more vulnerable.

The Post Gazette http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09156/975227-114.stm#ixzz0HahlAjDA&C recently reported experts saying, "if the new H1N1 flu comes back in force this fall, it might be better to vaccinate children first," because "in the early stages of the epidemic this spring, the new flu strain has caused "explosive outbreaks" among schoolchildren who have no immunity to it."

Again, it's troubling to see health officials using the term "explosive outbreaks" for a flu that in the vast majority of cases has been reported to be very mild.

Such inflammatory language is simply uncalled for.

Making matters worse, they want to target children who have underlying health problems, i.e. the most vulnerable of the group, which means any potential problems with this untested vaccine will have the capacity to do maximum damage.

Why are We Putting Up With the Same Mistakes Again?

The current evolution of public health decisions has disturbing similarities to previous swine flu vaccine catastrophes'. The last swine flu threat emerged in 1976, right before I entered medical school and I remember it very clearly. It resulted in the massive swine flu vaccine campaign.

However, within a few months, claims totaling $1.3 billion had been filed by victims who had suffered paralysis from the experimental vaccine. Several hundred people developed crippling Guillain-Barré Syndrome after their injections. Even healthy 20-year-olds ended up as paraplegics. The vaccine was also blamed for 25 deaths.

Meanwhile, the deadly swine flu pandemic itself NEVER materialized…

When a vaccine is developed in a mere 13 weeks, you can be virtually assured that it has NOT had the time to be tested in clinical trials to determine safety and effectiveness.

The way I see it, we now stand poised to experience a repeat of the last dangerous swine flu vaccine, which destroyed the lives of hundreds of healthy young boys and girls.

The real kicker, of course, is the fact that if the new vaccine turns out to be a killer, the pharmaceutical companies responsible have immunity from any lawsuits http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2006/01/03/vaccine-makers-getting-inoculated-from-lawsuits.aspx -- something I've also warned about before on numerous occasions.

Absolutely no one stands to be liable if this vaccine turns out to be a health disaster.

Governments Take Unnecessary "Code Red" Attitude to Flu Threat

The U.S. Congress handed over unprecedented power to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) after 9-11, and they're chomping at the bit to exercise it now that the World Health Organization (WHO) has upgraded the swine flu threat to Phase 6, Pandemic status.

But really, the word 'pandemic' only means that a new virus is spreading across the world. It says nothing about its level of physical danger.

So far, the swine flu has claimed a mere 332 lives WORLDWIDE http://www.who.int/csr/don/2009_07_01a/en/index.html (as of July 1), 116 of the deaths occurred in Mexico.

To keep this in perspective, the regular flu (not the swine flu) has allegedly killed 13,000 in the U.S. since January, http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2009/04/28/US-seasonal-flu-kills-13000-since-Jan/UPI-64801240974841/ although there is strong support that these types of figures are grossly exaggerated to increase vaccine sales. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2004/10/30/flu-deaths.aspx However, the fact remains that the regular flu at this point in time is FAR more dangerous than the swine flu, and were you worried about the regular flu before the media started hyping up this exotic new "killer flu"?

Despite the indications that the swine flu is more a pandemic nuisance than a pandemic killer, the U.S. Congress responded to the CDC's public health emergency declaration by handing over one billion dollars to a group of drug companies, including Baxter, to fast track experimental swine flu vaccines that may include whole live, dead, or genetically engineered human and animal flu viruses.

Additionally, nearly all vaccines contain a variety of adjuvants – potentially dangerous chemicals used as preservatives and/or to boost the vaccine's potency by affecting your immune system, http://www.mercola.com/article/vaccines/immune_suppression.htm such as thimerosal. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2005/07/23/mercury-vaccines-part-eight.aspx

But the 'code red' attitude to this phantom threat doesn't end there.

Barbara Loe Fisher warns in her article, http://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/June-2009/Swine-Flu-Vaccine--Will-We-Have-A-Choice--by-Barba.aspx

Bob| 7.29.09 @ 7:07PM

Thom, if you add mandatory spending plus Department of Defense plus Global War on Terror you get -- let's see -- wait -- 83%. Now what did I say???? Hmmmm.... Oh..... 83%.

Thom, if you could add, you'd be dangerous. Next time take off your shoes and use your toes....

Economic recovery Grave diggin| 7.29.09 @ 7:37PM

Flu Vaccine!

by Dr. Patricia A. Doyle – Pak Alert Press April 26, 2009

I am making a plea to everyone who reads this, please, please DO NOT TAKE ANY VACCINE THAT IS PURPORTED TO ‘PREVENT’ THIS FLU.

Remember 1976 and the so called Swine Flu outbreak that was purported to be a coming pandemic? It only infected recruits at Ft. Dix. Why? Because I believe that the so called Swine Flu virus infected the recruits due to the vaccines they were given. Whether the government developed the Swine Flu 1976 virus and infected the recruits as a means to test the public to see if people would comply with a call to take vaccination against Swine Flu, or the recruits became infected via contaminated vaccine they were given as part of the recruit regimen, that outbreak was as phony as they come. I was one of the people duped into taking a Swine Flu shot and it made me so sick. I was sick in bed for three months after taking the vaccine.

Do not take seasonal flu vaccine if you are told that it could help prevent this brand new Swine Flu variant. It won’t do a thing to prevent this flu. What it will do is serve up new genetic material to the Swine Flu virus that I have dubbed Spanish Flu 2, the Sequel. The Spanish Flu variant will use the gene sequences in the vaccine in humans to develop more of the changes that make the virus more readily infect humans. We do not want to give this virus more human genetic material so that it will infect humans more readily person to person. This is what vaccinated individuals do for pandemic strains.

There is also a safety issue in any experimental vaccine, much like the one in 1976. Some people even feel that such a vaccine for pandemic strain might require more than one vaccination which could actually be a binary set up. The first shot might just add some genetic code that stays dormant in the body until one gets the second vaccine shot which then serves to only cause infection. It could trigger Guillain-barre syndrome, Typhus or some other condition.

Thom| 7.29.09 @ 7:41PM

Bob said, "The growth in government has come primarily from mandatory spending of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest -- and from the discretionary spending on the military. Together, those items total about 83% of the total federal budget."

Bob, take off your shoes and read what you wrote first. You explicitedly excluded about 400 billion from list above which does not then add up to 83%. Try again ....

Grave diggin R us| 7.29.09 @ 7:41PM

Swine flu for a Nation of Pigs

Flu Vaccine!

by Dr. Patricia A. Doyle – Pak Alert Press April 26, 2009

I am making a plea to everyone who reads this, please, please DO NOT TAKE ANY VACCINE THAT IS PURPORTED TO ‘PREVENT’ THIS FLU.

Remember 1976 and the so called Swine Flu outbreak that was purported to be a coming pandemic? It only infected recruits at Ft. Dix. Why? Because I believe that the so called Swine Flu virus infected the recruits due to the vaccines they were given. Whether the government developed the Swine Flu 1976 virus and infected the recruits as a means to test the public to see if people would comply with a call to take vaccination against Swine Flu, or the recruits became infected via contaminated vaccine they were given as part of the recruit regimen, that outbreak was as phony as they come. I was one of the people duped into taking a Swine Flu shot and it made me so sick. I was sick in bed for three months after taking the vaccine.

Do not take seasonal flu vaccine if you are told that it could help prevent this brand new Swine Flu variant. It won’t do a thing to prevent this flu. What it will do is serve up new genetic material to the Swine Flu virus that I have dubbed Spanish Flu 2, the Sequel. The Spanish Flu variant will use the gene sequences in the vaccine in humans to develop more of the changes that make the virus more readily infect humans. We do not want to give this virus more human genetic material so that it will infect humans more readily person to person. This is what vaccinated individuals do for pandemic strains.

There is also a safety issue in any experimental vaccine, much like the one in 1976. Some people even feel that such a vaccine for pandemic strain might require more than one vaccination which could actually be a binary set up. The first shot might just add some genetic code that stays dormant in the body until one gets the second vaccine shot which then serves to only cause infection. It could trigger Guillain-barre syndrome, Typhus or some other condition.

Fundamentalist Flu Rapture| 7.29.09 @ 7:49PM

Flu Vaccine!

by Dr. Patricia A. Doyle – Pak Alert Press April 26, 2009

I am making a plea to everyone who reads this, please, please DO NOT TAKE ANY VACCINE THAT IS PURPORTED TO ‘PREVENT’ THIS FLU.

Remember 1976 and the so called Swine Flu outbreak that was purported to be a coming pandemic? It only infected recruits at Ft. Dix. Why? Because I believe that the so called Swine Flu virus infected the recruits due to the vaccines they were given. Whether the government developed the Swine Flu 1976 virus and infected the recruits as a means to test the public to see if people would comply with a call to take vaccination against Swine Flu, or the recruits became infected via contaminated vaccine they were given as part of the recruit regimen, that outbreak was as phony as they come. I was one of the people duped into taking a Swine Flu shot and it made me so sick. I was sick in bed for three months after taking the vaccine.

Do not take seasonal flu vaccine if you are told that it could help prevent this brand new Swine Flu variant. It won’t do a thing to prevent this flu. What it will do is serve up new genetic material to the Swine Flu virus that I have dubbed Spanish Flu 2, the Sequel. The Spanish Flu variant will use the gene sequences in the vaccine in humans to develop more of the changes that make the virus more readily infect humans. We do not want to give this virus more human genetic material so that it will infect humans more readily person to person. This is what vaccinated individuals do for pandemic strains.

There is also a safety issue in any experimental vaccine, much like the one in 1976. Some people even feel that such a vaccine for pandemic strain might require more than one vaccination which could actually be a binary set up. The first shot might just add some genetic code that stays dormant in the body until one gets the second vaccine shot which then serves to only cause infection. It could trigger Guillain-barre syndrome, Typhus or some other condition.

Swine flu parade.com | 7.29.09 @ 7:54PM

Flu Vaccine!

by Dr. Patricia A. Doyle – Pak Alert Press April 26, 2009

I am making a plea to everyone who reads this, please, please DO NOT TAKE ANY VACCINE THAT IS PURPORTED TO ‘PREVENT’ THIS FLU.

Remember 1976 and the so called Swine Flu outbreak that was purported to be a coming pandemic? It only infected recruits at Ft. Dix. Why? Because I believe that the so called Swine Flu virus infected the recruits due to the vaccines they were given. Whether the government developed the Swine Flu 1976 virus and infected the recruits as a means to test the public to see if people would comply with a call to take vaccination against Swine Flu, or the recruits became infected via contaminated vaccine they were given as part of the recruit regimen, that outbreak was as phony as they come. I was one of the people duped into taking a Swine Flu shot and it made me so sick. I was sick in bed for three months after taking the vaccine.

Do not take seasonal flu vaccine if you are told that it could help prevent this brand new Swine Flu variant. It won’t do a thing to prevent this flu. What it will do is serve up new genetic material to the Swine Flu virus that I have dubbed Spanish Flu 2, the Sequel. The Spanish Flu variant will use the gene sequences in the vaccine in humans to develop more of the changes that make the virus more readily infect humans. We do not want to give this virus more human genetic material so that it will infect humans more readily person to person. This is what vaccinated individuals do for pandemic strains.

There is also a safety issue in any experimental vaccine, much like the one in 1976. Some people even feel that such a vaccine for pandemic strain might require more than one vaccination which could actually be a binary set up. The first shot might just add some genetic code that stays dormant in the body until one gets the second vaccine shot which then serves to only cause infection. It could trigger Guillain-barre syndrome, Typhus or some other condition.

Dead eyed Dick Flu move on.com| 7.29.09 @ 7:59PM

Rumsfeld Tammyflu, money spinner, kill dumb Republicans.org
Flu Vaccine!

by Dr. Patricia A. Doyle – Pak Alert Press April 26, 2009

I am making a plea to everyone who reads this, please, please DO NOT TAKE ANY VACCINE THAT IS PURPORTED TO ‘PREVENT’ THIS FLU.

Remember 1976 and the so called Swine Flu outbreak that was purported to be a coming pandemic? It only infected recruits at Ft. Dix. Why? Because I believe that the so called Swine Flu virus infected the recruits due to the vaccines they were given. Whether the government developed the Swine Flu 1976 virus and infected the recruits as a means to test the public to see if people would comply with a call to take vaccination against Swine Flu, or the recruits became infected via contaminated vaccine they were given as part of the recruit regimen, that outbreak was as phony as they come. I was one of the people duped into taking a Swine Flu shot and it made me so sick. I was sick in bed for three months after taking the vaccine.

Do not take seasonal flu vaccine if you are told that it could help prevent this brand new Swine Flu variant. It won’t do a thing to prevent this flu. What it will do is serve up new genetic material to the Swine Flu virus that I have dubbed Spanish Flu 2, the Sequel. The Spanish Flu variant will use the gene sequences in the vaccine in humans to develop more of the changes that make the virus more readily infect humans. We do not want to give this virus more human genetic material so that it will infect humans more readily person to person. This is what vaccinated individuals do for pandemic strains.

There is also a safety issue in any experimental vaccine, much like the one in 1976. Some people even feel that such a vaccine for pandemic strain might require more than one vaccination which could actually be a binary set up. The first shot might just add some genetic code that stays dormant in the body until one gets the second vaccine shot which then serves to only cause infection. It could trigger Guillain-barre syndrome, Typhus or some other condition.

Robert Rosencrans| 7.29.09 @ 8:02PM

If income or corporate taxes were the only forces in the economy then a quid pro quo relationship between taxes and GDP could be easily established.

There is a more determinate relationship between financial end games and the money supply and interest rates.

The government with the aid of the FED sets treacherous forces in motion with the printing of fiat currency and a mindset of easy credit.

Ludwig VonMises stated, "Easy credit always ends badly."

Here is an article from the Wall Street Journal which explains it in layman's terms.

The main thought is that taxes are a powerful force in the economy, but even more persuasive may be the forces unleashed by monopolistic credit policies.

You can play with the taxes all you want but I wonder if the effect will just lead to another economic situation as the cycle plays itself out.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122688652214032407.html
By GERALD P. O'DRISCOLL JR.

On Nov. 14, 2008, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 8497.31. On Nov. 13, 1998, the adjusted (for dividends and split) close was 8919.59. There has been great volatility, but no net capital accumulation as measured by the Dow in a decade. Other indexes, such as the Nasdaq, tell a similar story. Capital has been invested but as much value has been destroyed as created.

The U.S. cannot afford to have another lost decade. Or to see the dreams of another generation of Americans who had been told to take responsibility for their financial health by investing in the stock market dashed by failed monetary and fiscal polices.

Today, the most urgent task facing President-elect Barack Obama is stabilizing financial markets by instituting policies that foster economic growth and prevent the type of boom and bust cycle that has just wiped out a decade's worth of wealth accumulation.

Mr. Obama's task is made all the more difficult because there has been a perfect storm of bad policies and practices. Laudable goals, such as fostering more homeownership, went terribly awry. Financial services regulation has failed at its most basic task, protecting the soundness of the system. And a dysfunctional compensation system has given corporate managers incentives to take excessive risks with investors' money.

None of the policies and practices that are now widely criticized suddenly appeared in the past decade. But they were kindling for a financial firestorm that needed only an accelerant and a spark. Both were provided by a policy of easy money that came in response to the bursting of the dot-com bubble in 2000-01, the ensuing recession, and the Sept. 11 attacks.

At first Fed easing was in order. The central bank needed to counter the "irrational exuberance" of the dot-com bubble. And by May of 2000 the Fed had done that by raising the fed-funds target to 6.5%. That needed to come down when the bubble burst. Aggressive cutting brought it to 2% in November 2001.

The problem is the rate remained at 2% or less for three years (for a year it was at 1%). During most of this period, the real (inflation-adjusted) fed-funds rate was negative. People were being paid to borrow and they responded by often borrowing irresponsibly.

Consider subprime mortgages. In 2001, there was $190 billion worth of subprime loan originations -- 8.6% of total mortgage originations. In 2005, there was $625 billion worth of subprime originations -- 20% of the total. In the same period, the percentage of subprime mortgages securitized -- loans that were packaged and sold to investors -- rose from just about 50% to a little more than 81%. (These numbers all trailed off slightly in 2006.) The great easing in monetary policy ended (with a lag) when the Fed began raising rates in June 2004.

The subprime saga follows a familiar pattern. Easy credit begets a boom and then the inevitable tightening of credit bursts the bubble. What is not familiar is the scale of the devastation wrought in this boom-bust cycle.

Never before had financial markets evolved such a complex superstructure of interlinked securities, derivatives of all kinds, and special-purpose investment vehicles. Professor Gary Gorton of the Yale School of Management has best described that complexity in his paper "The Panic of 2007," published by the National Bureau of Economic Research. He makes clear that as this system evolved there was not a sufficient guard against systemic risk.

No president could want these events to repeat themselves on his watch. But they could be repeated.

The economy now confronts deflationary forces. If past is prologue the Fed will concentrate on those deflationary forces for too long and rekindle an asset boom of some kind. The fiscal "stimulus" being contemplated by Congress could be another economic accelerant. If both the fiscal and money stimulus efforts kick in just as market forces also kick in, we're likely to see another unsustainable boom that will be followed by a bust.

The incoming administration must think about that possibility because the timing of boom and bust cycles seems to be shortening. The next bust could come five or six years from now -- or about in the middle of an Obama second term. Should that happen, Mr. Obama would be unable to blame Republicans for the mess and would be tagged as the second coming of Jimmy Carter.

To avoid such a fate, Mr. Obama needs to stop the next asset bubble from being inflated by imposing a commodity standard on the Fed. A commodity standard (such as a gold standard) imposes discipline on a central bank because it forces it to acquire commodity reserves in order to increase the money supply. Today the government can inflate asset bubbles without paying a cost for it because the currency isn't linked to the price of a commodity.

With a commodity standard in place, the government would also have price signals that would alert it to the formation of a bubble. Why? Because the price of the commodity would be continuously traded in spot and futures markets. Excessive easing by the Fed would be signaled by rising prices for the commodity. In recent years, Fed officials have claimed that they cannot know when an asset bubble is developing. With a commodity standard in place, it would be clear to anyone watching spot markets whether a bubble is forming. What's more, if Fed officials ignored price signals, outflows of commodity reserves would force them to act against the bubble.

The point is not to deflate asset bubbles, but to avoid them in the first place. Imposing a commodity standard is a practical response to the repeated failures of central banks to maintain sound money and financial stability. What would be impractical is to believe that the next time central banks will get it right on their own.

Mr. O'Driscoll, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, was formerly a vice president at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

FluRiddenYanksInvasionIranOP| 7.29.09 @ 8:04PM

Flu Vaccine!

by Dr. Patricia A. Doyle – Pak Alert Press April 26, 2009

I am making a plea to everyone who reads this, please, please DO NOT TAKE ANY VACCINE THAT IS PURPORTED TO ‘PREVENT’ THIS FLU.

Remember 1976 and the so called Swine Flu outbreak that was purported to be a coming pandemic? It only infected recruits at Ft. Dix. Why? Because I believe that the so called Swine Flu virus infected the recruits due to the vaccines they were given. Whether the government developed the Swine Flu 1976 virus and infected the recruits as a means to test the public to see if people would comply with a call to take vaccination against Swine Flu, or the recruits became infected via contaminated vaccine they were given as part of the recruit regimen, that outbreak was as phony as they come. I was one of the people duped into taking a Swine Flu shot and it made me so sick. I was sick in bed for three months after taking the vaccine.

Do not take seasonal flu vaccine if you are told that it could help prevent this brand new Swine Flu variant. It won’t do a thing to prevent this flu. What it will do is serve up new genetic material to the Swine Flu virus that I have dubbed Spanish Flu 2, the Sequel. The Spanish Flu variant will use the gene sequences in the vaccine in humans to develop more of the changes that make the virus more readily infect humans. We do not want to give this virus more human genetic material so that it will infect humans more readily person to person. This is what vaccinated individuals do for pandemic strains.

There is also a safety issue in any experimental vaccine, much like the one in 1976. Some people even feel that such a vaccine for pandemic strain might require more than one vaccination which could actually be a binary set up. The first shot might just add some genetic code that stays dormant in the body until one gets the second vaccine shot which then serves to only cause infection. It could trigger Guillain-barre syndrome, Typhus or some other condition.

Flu Infested American Gang.com| 7.29.09 @ 8:06PM

Flu infested Dumb down Yanks invades Iran.
Flu Vaccine!

by Dr. Patricia A. Doyle – Pak Alert Press April 26, 2009

I am making a plea to everyone who reads this, please, please DO NOT TAKE ANY VACCINE THAT IS PURPORTED TO ‘PREVENT’ THIS FLU.

Remember 1976 and the so called Swine Flu outbreak that was purported to be a coming pandemic? It only infected recruits at Ft. Dix. Why? Because I believe that the so called Swine Flu virus infected the recruits due to the vaccines they were given. Whether the government developed the Swine Flu 1976 virus and infected the recruits as a means to test the public to see if people would comply with a call to take vaccination against Swine Flu, or the recruits became infected via contaminated vaccine they were given as part of the recruit regimen, that outbreak was as phony as they come. I was one of the people duped into taking a Swine Flu shot and it made me so sick. I was sick in bed for three months after taking the vaccine.

Do not take seasonal flu vaccine if you are told that it could help prevent this brand new Swine Flu variant. It won’t do a thing to prevent this flu. What it will do is serve up new genetic material to the Swine Flu virus that I have dubbed Spanish Flu 2, the Sequel. The Spanish Flu variant will use the gene sequences in the vaccine in humans to develop more of the changes that make the virus more readily infect humans. We do not want to give this virus more human genetic material so that it will infect humans more readily person to person. This is what vaccinated individuals do for pandemic strains.

There is also a safety issue in any experimental vaccine, much like the one in 1976. Some people even feel that such a vaccine for pandemic strain might require more than one vaccination which could actually be a binary set up. The first shot might just add some genetic code that stays dormant in the body until one gets the second vaccine shot which then serves to only cause infection. It could trigger Guillain-barre syndrome, Typhus or some other condition.

Flu infested Zombies USA.com| 7.29.09 @ 8:10PM

Dumb down zombies from america puts the safety of the world at risk from nuclear war.
Flu Vaccine!

by Dr. Patricia A. Doyle – Pak Alert Press April 26, 2009

I am making a plea to everyone who reads this, please, please DO NOT TAKE ANY VACCINE THAT IS PURPORTED TO ‘PREVENT’ THIS FLU.

Remember 1976 and the so called Swine Flu outbreak that was purported to be a coming pandemic? It only infected recruits at Ft. Dix. Why? Because I believe that the so called Swine Flu virus infected the recruits due to the vaccines they were given. Whether the government developed the Swine Flu 1976 virus and infected the recruits as a means to test the public to see if people would comply with a call to take vaccination against Swine Flu, or the recruits became infected via contaminated vaccine they were given as part of the recruit regimen, that outbreak was as phony as they come. I was one of the people duped into taking a Swine Flu shot and it made me so sick. I was sick in bed for three months after taking the vaccine.

Do not take seasonal flu vaccine if you are told that it could help prevent this brand new Swine Flu variant. It won’t do a thing to prevent this flu. What it will do is serve up new genetic material to the Swine Flu virus that I have dubbed Spanish Flu 2, the Sequel. The Spanish Flu variant will use the gene sequences in the vaccine in humans to develop more of the changes that make the virus more readily infect humans. We do not want to give this virus more human genetic material so that it will infect humans more readily person to person. This is what vaccinated individuals do for pandemic strains.

There is also a safety issue in any experimental vaccine, much like the one in 1976. Some people even feel that such a vaccine for pandemic strain might require more than one vaccination which could actually be a binary set up. The first shot might just add some genetic code that stays dormant in the body until one gets the second vaccine shot which then serves to only cause infection. It could trigger Guillain-barre syndrome, Typhus or some other condition.

Flu palgue of the world USA| 7.29.09 @ 8:17PM

Robert Rosencrans| 7.29.09 @ 8:02PM
If income or corporate taxes were the only forces in the economy then a quid pro quo relationship between taxes and GDP could be easily established.
_________________________________

News FLASH GDP will be paid to China, the rest will be used to deal with the dead from H5N1/H1N1/Gov human virus.

America has to die, to pay back it's debt to China your country belongs to China.

Die you bunch of Bastards, the plauge of the world.

Monkies lookingLikeUS ZOMBIES| 7.29.09 @ 8:37PM

Dumb down zombies, brain washed American attack the rest of the world, causing nuclear stand off, with Russia.

Russia forced to use Nuclear attack against a Zombi brain washed monkies who thought they were the only people left on the planet.

US Citizens inMindControl scam| 7.29.09 @ 8:45PM

Dumb down yanks found they have been dumb down over 60 years and suffernig from memory loss, they only know how to kill and hate others and have turned into savages.

Bob| 7.30.09 @ 8:20AM

Thom, get out your fingers and tows. This is a cut and paste from your reference.

* Mandatory spending: $1.788 trillion (+4.2%)
$608 billion (+4.5%) - Social Security
$386 billion (+5.2%) - Medicare
$209 billion (+5.6%) - Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)
$324 billion (+1.8%) - Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending
$261 billion (+9.2%) - Interest on National Debt

* Discretionary spending: $1.114 trillion (+3.1%)
$481.4 billion (+12.1%) - Department of Defense
$145.2 billion (+45.8%) - Global War on Terror

Add these items up and you get $2.41 trillion. 2.41/2.9 is 83%. So why don't you get it, Thom? This is mandatory spending plus military. In case you didn't know, the Department of Defense budget is the military.

iamse7en| 7.30.09 @ 9:41PM

What about those people who fall in the area near or on the 60-40 line? They would work hard to LOWER their income so they don't pay the 15% tax. That effect needs to be addressed.

Otherwise, brilliant. I agreed with all your principles, but when we have a statist in control right now, such pro-growth tax policies seem so far away and pure fantasy. Then I get depressed when I realize that the economy will rebound, and Obama will have all of the state-run media to give all praise to the stimulus package. Obama really is the second coming of FDR. 2nd Bill of Rights included.

ugg| 8.3.09 @ 7:58AM

UGG Boots

UGG Classic Cardy Boots

UGG Classic Short Boots

paul Smith

Paul Smith Bags

Paul Smith Shoes

DVD

DVD

DVD

DVD

supra| 8.3.09 @ 11:19PM

Women Supra Muska Skytop Shoes

wendy| 8.3.09 @ 11:21PM

Women Supra Muska Skytop Shoes White

susan| 8.3.09 @ 11:22PM

supra shoes on sale

toopbags| 8.4.09 @ 2:37AM

Jimmy Choo Handbags

hootoo| 8.6.09 @ 10:31PM

Toshiba PA3290U-2ACA laptop AC Power AdapterToshiba PA3290U-2ACA laptop AC Power

Adapter
Toshiba PA3467U-1ACA Laptop AC AdapterToshiba PA3467U-1ACA Laptop AC Adapter
Toshiba PA3469U-1ACA Laptop AC Power AdapterToshiba PA3469U-1ACA Laptop AC Power

Adapter
Toshiba PA3283U-2ACA Laptop AC Power AdapterToshiba PA3283U-2ACA Laptop AC Power

Adapter
IBM 92P1160 Laptop AC Power AdapterIBM 92P1160 Laptop AC Power Adapter
Toshiba PA3283U-1ACA Laptop AC Power AdapterToshiba PA3283U-1ACA Laptop AC Power

Adapter
HP Compaq PA-1650-02HC Laptop AC Power AdapterHP Compaq PA-1650-02HC Laptop AC

Power Adapter
Toshiba PA3201U-1ACA Laptop AC Power AdapterToshiba PA3201U-1ACA Laptop

AC Power Adapter
Toshiba PA3467U-1ACA Laptop AC AdapterToshiba PA3467U-1ACA Laptop AC Adapter
HP Compaq 316688-001 laptop AC Power AdapterHP Compaq 316688-001 laptop AC Power Aapter

foreverlv| 8.15.09 @ 8:04AM

UGG Ultra Short ,most suitable for you!

jdfj| 8.30.09 @ 3:49AM

Thank you for your work.This is our website.
http://www.toopghd.com

dropshippngwatch| 9.2.09 @ 11:54AM

Replica Watch
Replica Watches
Fake Watch
Sales Replica Watches
Fake Watches
Fake Watch
Replica Watch
Replica Watches
Fake Watch
replica Rolex watches
Replica De Witt Watches
Replica Ebel Watches
Replica Emporio Armani Watches
Replica Fendi Watches
Replica Ferrari Watches
Replica Fortis Watches
Replica Franck Muller Watches
Replica Graham Watches
Replica Gucci Watches
http://www.dropshippingwatch.com

Wedding Dresses| 9.10.09 @ 12:21AM

are located in all major cities such Wedding Dresses
Designer Wedding Gowns
as Shanghai, New York, etc, you may travel to these cities and get one for yourself.

jeans| 9.11.09 @ 10:15AM

high quality jeans
href="http://www.highqualityjeans.com/womens-ed-hardy-jeans-c-30.html">frist class Womens ED Hardy Jeans

jeans| 9.11.09 @ 10:30AM

jeans
top quality Men's Affliction Jeans

asdd| 9.11.09 @ 10:32AM

cheap jordan shoes
top quality Men's popular Air Jordan 1 Shoes

kkjhjkjk| 9.11.09 @ 10:49AM

NBA Shoes
fashion Allen Iverson Shoes

gtdddsd| 9.11.09 @ 10:52AM

polo shirt
Men's popular Polo shirt

fggf| 9.11.09 @ 11:01AM

cheap Polo shirts
high quality Men's Classic-Fit Polo shirts

dsss| 9.11.09 @ 11:29AM

softwares
practical Microsoft Windows XP softwares

gretrf| 9.15.09 @ 3:45AM

Discount Ugg Bootscaught many people's eyes.Also like
Dicounted Ugg Matala Sandal
all very hotsale.do not hesitate,you can have it now.

dfefscrf| 9.15.09 @ 4:12AM

Christian Louboutin High-heeled Shoes
Fashionable Christian Louboutin Sandals

pollor| 10.8.09 @ 12:21PM

We are having our own shipping network which enable us to ship goods for our customers to all parts of the world conveniently.
Cheap High Prada
Cheap Nike shoe

Supra Shoes| 11.17.09 @ 10:51PM

Supra Shoes
Supra Skytop Shoes