• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

The GOP couldn’t organize an orgy in a whorehouse with a fist full of 50s.

Meanwhile over at truth Social, the former president is busy confessing to crimes.

Bad news for Ron DeSantis is great news for America.

Reality always lies in wait for … Democrats.

They were going to turn on one another at some point. It was inevitable.

No Justins, No Peace

“Cheese and Kraken paired together for the appetizer trial.”

The words do not have to be perfect.

Within six months Twitter will be fully self-driving.

When I decide to be condescending, you won’t have to dream up a fantasy about it.

Optimism opens the door to great things.

Stamping your little feets and demanding that they see how important you are? Not working anymore.

When someone says they “love freedom”, rest assured they don’t mean yours.

Ron DeSantis, the grand wizard, oops, governor of FL

It’s always darkest before the other shoe drops.

When your entire life is steeped in white supremacy, equality feels like discrimination.

Take your GOP plan out of the witness protection program.

Jack Smith: “Why did you start campaigning in the middle of my investigation?!”

“And when the Committee says to “report your income,” that could mean anything!

Yeah, with this crowd one never knows.

The revolution will be supervised.

Nancy smash is sick of your bullshit.

I’m sure you banged some questionable people yourself.

🎶 Those boots were made for mockin’ 🎵

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Economics / C.R.E.A.M. / Deficit Hawks

Deficit Hawks

by Anne Laurie|  July 8, 20106:02 pm| 59 Comments

This post is in: C.R.E.A.M., Assholes

FacebookTweetEmail

Tim Eagan is shrill.
__


__

If we can’t get people to start using ‘deficit vultures’ — which would be accurate, if insulting to the avian scavengers who fulfill a useful ecological role — can we at least start using ‘deficit chickenhawks‘ for those who want to attack any expenditures that don’t affect them?
__

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « For the NonBelievers
Next Post: Forget it, Eric »

Reader Interactions

59Comments

  1. 1.

    r€nato

    July 8, 2010 at 6:06 pm

    Welfare for me, but not for thee!

  2. 2.

    Phoenician in a time of Romans

    July 8, 2010 at 6:13 pm

    “Chickenhawk” is also actually slang for a gay predator who goes after teenage boys.

    Using it to refer to right-wingers in general could cause confusion when it comes to talking about the constant supply of right-wingers who are, you know, gay predators who go after teenage boys.

  3. 3.

    Anonymous At Work

    July 8, 2010 at 6:16 pm

    I prefer “Deficit Peacock” as most of them spend more time touting their attitude than doing anything.

  4. 4.

    General Stuck

    July 8, 2010 at 6:21 pm

    It is true that hypocrisy abounds with the blue dogs and wingnuts when it comes to “deficit hawking”. It is also true that progressive dems used the issue during the Bush years to win over the independent vote to get voted back into power.

    It is not the deficit that is toxic to dems, it is the old “liberal tax and spend” label that is, or has in the past become toxic to dems, after a certain point. It was a hard lesson learned by dems to change that image with things like “pay go” and showing concern for wasteful spending. And actions to match it.

    The issue of stimulus and how much, and will it really help to overcome a broken economy deep into self reconstruction from years of conservative economic ideology creating the structural failures we have is not really knowable. I sure don’t know the answer to that. And deficit hawking should never be used to block basic safety net programs like unemployment benefits, food stamps, home mortgage relief, etc…

    Krugman and those like minded economists are on the right side of the argument, but that doesn’t mean they really know where to draw the line on whether more spending will speed up the recovery. And completely ignoring deficit spending, which is borrowing from the Chinese amongst others, can be a political death spiral for dems if the tax and spend meme takes hold.

  5. 5.

    Hunter Gathers

    July 8, 2010 at 6:22 pm

    How about Deficit Bigots, those who believe that we can balance the budget but cutting off aid to ‘those people’. Most of my immediate family falls into that category.

  6. 6.

    Hunter Gathers

    July 8, 2010 at 6:26 pm

    @General Stuck: How is borrowing a shit-ton of money from China at around 3% a bad thing? Christ that’s 2 points lower than my fucking $44,000 mortgage for God’s sake. Oh, I forgot – Whitey will bitch, like he always does. Austerity, here we come!

  7. 7.

    Lolis

    July 8, 2010 at 6:27 pm

    Everyone under 40 better start telling your Congress people that lowering the retirement age is unacceptable.

  8. 8.

    bobbo

    July 8, 2010 at 6:27 pm

    I think either one works, but I’m leaning toward Deficit Vultures, because “Chickenhawks” didn’t really change any hearts and minds the last time we tried it.

  9. 9.

    Sentient Puddle

    July 8, 2010 at 6:29 pm

    I linked this earlier, but I’ll link it again: Krugman.

    They have no credibility.

  10. 10.

    General Stuck

    July 8, 2010 at 6:30 pm

    How is borrowing a shit-ton of money from China at around 3% a bad thing?

    Simply amazing.

  11. 11.

    Scamp Dog

    July 8, 2010 at 6:32 pm

    @General Stuck: The line is to watch is interest rates. When they go up, it’s time to reign in the stimulus.

    Right now there’s no good place to put your money. Businesses don’t want to invest because demand is so low, and besides, they’ve got plenty of idle factories, offices, retail spaces, etc. they don’t bother using.

    Nobody is going to take a chance on a new business, and even the existing ones may go bust and take your money with them, so T-bills it is. And with so many people putting money in them the rates are spectacularly low.

    Once businesses start making money, investors drop out of the government bond market unless the Feds start offering good interest rates. That’s when you know the economy’s working again.

  12. 12.

    karmakin

    July 8, 2010 at 6:33 pm

    @Lolis: No god damnit.

    Lower the retirement age. I want their jobs. Best fucking stimulus you can do.

    Better yet. Make it mandatory.

  13. 13.

    Catsy

    July 8, 2010 at 6:39 pm

    Lower the retirement age. I want their jobs. Best fucking stimulus you can do.
    __
    Better yet. Make it mandatory.

    I am unclear about the mechanism by which you propose to prohibit people from working for pay after a certain age.

  14. 14.

    General Stuck

    July 8, 2010 at 6:40 pm

    @Scamp Dog: Yes, but that still doesn’t answer the question of how much and how to spend stimulus money. Or, whether to invest it in works projects for temporary employment, or into safety net programs. Safety net programs that mainline that money into the economy for immediate stimulus versus slower works projects to do so. And whether either bring about businesses again willing to hire full time employees. It just seems to me that the deep problems in the economy are separate from short term stimulus, and mostly time and hopefully re regulation of the finance world and other industry is the end game. I am not against stimulus spending, if it is targeted properly, but relying solely on one armed economists, even nobel prize winners is risky business.IMO.

  15. 15.

    jwb

    July 8, 2010 at 6:40 pm

    @Scamp Dog: Yes, my sense is that, at this point, the Fed would welcome the appearance of actual inflation because that would mean we were no longer up against the zero bound.

  16. 16.

    Chad N Freude

    July 8, 2010 at 6:45 pm

    @Catsy: Logan’s Run. SATSQ.

  17. 17.

    Sly

    July 8, 2010 at 6:47 pm

    Deficit Cardinals. The appeal of Austerity is purely theological.

  18. 18.

    Chad N Freude

    July 8, 2010 at 6:49 pm

    @Sly: Now we’re back to chickenhawks.

  19. 19.

    Sly

    July 8, 2010 at 6:51 pm

    @jwb:

    If that were the case, the Fed would either buy up trillions in debt securities or increase their inflation projections. They’ve done neither and will likely continue to do neither. It’s easy to understand why once you accept the fact that the Monetarists have never really left the 1970s.

  20. 20.

    Hunter Gathers

    July 8, 2010 at 6:51 pm

    @General Stuck: OK, I’m an idiot. But how else are we going to get employment down?

    More stimulus now, deficit reduction later, say balance the budget in a CBO friendly ten-year window. Austerity measures at this exact moment will completely crush the tepid recovery. The only reason conservatives are pushing for it is because they know that it guarantees that Obama would be a one-termer. I don’t know about you, but the prospect of President Bible Spice outweighs any concern over inflation.

  21. 21.

    AhabTRuler

    July 8, 2010 at 6:52 pm

    …outweighs any concern over inflation.

    El Cid in 5…4…3…2…

  22. 22.

    jl

    July 8, 2010 at 6:56 pm

    Deficit vultures, deficit chickenhawks are both fine.

    I suggest deficit deceitists, which might come handy when a little variety is needed.

  23. 23.

    cleek

    July 8, 2010 at 6:56 pm

    how about “frauds” ?

    or “deficators” ?

  24. 24.

    General Stuck

    July 8, 2010 at 6:56 pm

    I like Krugman, and as economist go, he is about the best imo. Here is a paper he wrote in 1996 about spending in recessions. an excerpt.

    I offer this homily because Ethan B. Kapstein uses an analogy with firefighting to claim that the West, faced with the economic difficulties of inequality and unemployment, has been paralyzed by too much debate over causes (“Workers and the World Economy,” May/June 1996). He seems to believe that economic crises are like house fires, all pretty much the same. In particular, he seems to believe that the economic woes of advanced nations in the 1990s are basically similar to the problems of the 1930s. Deficit spending was the answer then and it is the answer now. Money should, therefore, be spent like water.

    Economic crises, however, are not all the same, and the problems of the 1990s look very little like those of the 1930s.

    Fastforward to now, and the question is, is this recession more like the one in the 90’s or the 30’s? And what that means. I don’t know.

    Shit, this stuff gives me a big headache, I am just about completely ignorant on the subject of economics. But I do have some clue about politics, and I think jumping on a spend at will bandwagon without thinking it through if it will work, could come around to bite dems. Just a not of caution.

  25. 25.

    jwb

    July 8, 2010 at 6:57 pm

    @General Stuck: If I’m following Krugman’s arguments rightly, we’d be better off economically having the government spending money on the craziest of crazy projects right now than do what we’re doing, which is basically nothing—though politics of today certainly mean it would never happen. The biggest problem with crazy spending (besides the political problem of attack ads it would inspire), I think, is shutting it down quickly when the time came. Getting the timing right is almost impossible, which is why most economists, even sane ones, generally prefer to use monetary rather than fiscal policy for tuning the economy to the business cycle. But monetary policy is next to useless once you approach the zero bound. Krugman also claims that deficit spending in current conditions will basically have no long term effect, and might even more than pay for itself.

  26. 26.

    El Cid

    July 8, 2010 at 7:01 pm

    @AhabTRuler: You are correct. The biggest threat this nation faces is inflation, caused by all the spendin’. I don’t give a damn that there ain’t no inflation and nobody sees any comin’ — I damn well just know that we got inflation now and it’s a comin’ and it’s gonna be bad and if we don’t stop all da spendin’ now none of us are gonna be able to afford a loaf of bread, and all your so-called ‘evidence’ and ‘numbers’ and ‘data’ and ‘measurements’ is gonna change my mind a damn bit. So there.

  27. 27.

    General Stuck

    July 8, 2010 at 7:02 pm

    @Hunter Gathers:

    OK, I’m an idiot

    LOL, join the club. My only concern from my ignorance of economics is a political one. People out there know when the permanent job market improves, and the difference with a temporary one. I just think, politically, dems are in more danger right now from the “tax and spend” label than a few points on the unemployment numbers. I am all for pouring as much money as needed into the safety net until the economy self corrects, which it is doing, albeit slowly from a severe meltdown. That money is stimulus and the most direct kind because it gets spent immediately. Or, basically, like everyone else, I don’t have a clue.

  28. 28.

    jwb

    July 8, 2010 at 7:04 pm

    @Sly: It would mean a marked shift in policy if they were to say that. Nevertheless, Krugman suggests they are contemplating it. When I say they would like to see inflation, I mean that the Fed doesn’t really know what to do in current conditions. The Fed wouldn’t like the inflation, but they would think they knew how to handle it. The current situation: not so much.

  29. 29.

    Corner Stone

    July 8, 2010 at 7:05 pm

    @Hunter Gathers: Now is the best time in modern history to be borrowing money.
    Don’t let anyone tell you differently because they don’t know what they’re saying.

    We should be borrowing all the money we can get to finance massive infrastructure overhaul.
    Who’s a better credit risk than the US?

    ETA and on a personal finance note, if you have a relatively secure income then you too should be borrowing money to make investments in tangible items like land or hardware with a long term depreciation table.
    Nobody’s job is 100% (except for right wing scare mongers) but now is the time to take a calculated risk.

  30. 30.

    El Cid

    July 8, 2010 at 7:05 pm

    Deficit carrion flies.

  31. 31.

    El Cid

    July 8, 2010 at 7:07 pm

    I want to be lectured by my fellow Americans on how we have to balance our budgets just like families do when they have 20 year mortgages and 5 year car loans and are paying off student loans.

  32. 32.

    PurpleGirl

    July 8, 2010 at 7:11 pm

    Deficit vultures gets my vote.

  33. 33.

    jwb

    July 8, 2010 at 7:11 pm

    @Corner Stone: Yup, idle construction equipment and workers, low interest money. What’s not to like.

  34. 34.

    General Stuck

    July 8, 2010 at 7:12 pm

    @Hunter Gathers:

    There you have it, Professor Corner Stone has weighed in. We can all be comforted in his expertise.

    Money, it’s a hit
    Don’t give me that
    Do goody good bullshit

  35. 35.

    El Cid

    July 8, 2010 at 7:19 pm

    Remember, deficits can only be reduced by cutting spending, especially social spending.

    Increased revenues due to greater recovery and growth cannot be considered, because that would be, like, cheating — I mean, what fun would it be to pay off deficits and debts by a stronger economy and fuller employment when instead we can bitch at those god-damned lazy bum unemployed to telekinetically create themselves a job?

  36. 36.

    Sly

    July 8, 2010 at 7:19 pm

    @jwb:

    Krugman suggests that they are contemplating small steps. Which is true. The really relevant part of that blog post:

    What would really be effective would be a credible commitment to a higher inflation target, which would reduce real interest rates. But that’s not on the menu, at least not yet.

    Someone at the Fed could make a statement to the effect that higher inflation targets would be a positive step, but the Board of Governors are almost in unison in opposition to such a measure, and Bernanke poo-poo’d the idea when he was up for reappointment.

    The only real guessing game at this point is trying to figure out an unemployment level the FOMC will be comfortable with for the next 5-10 years. They may not be comfortable with 9-10%, but that doesn’t mean they’ll be shrugging off their inflation policies to get it back down to 5%.

  37. 37.

    General Stuck

    July 8, 2010 at 7:29 pm

    @jwb: We are hardly doing nothing. They just passed a highway bill, the first stimulus is still largely in the pipeline, and there are various other appropriation bills like defense that continue government spending which is stimulus. What I would like to see is dems go full metal populist on wingers blocking unemployment benefits, and even upping the anty to increasing them and their payout. If you are arguing for the fastest surest way to inject money into the economy this is the fastest way, and that seems to be what Krugman wants. Infrastructure products are fine and dandy and have the benefit of improving infrastructure, but the stimulus effect is much slower and really wouldn’t put a dent in the monthly employment numbers, at least for permanent jobs, or really temporary that much.

  38. 38.

    Corner Stone

    July 8, 2010 at 7:33 pm

    @General Stuck:

    Infrastructure products are fine and dandy and have the benefit of improving infrastructure, but the stimulus effect is much slower and really wouldn’t put a dent in the monthly employment numbers, at least for permanent jobs, or really temporary that much.

    What?

  39. 39.

    General Stuck

    July 8, 2010 at 7:35 pm

    @Corner Stone:

    What?

    What?

  40. 40.

    Corner Stone

    July 8, 2010 at 7:40 pm

    @General Stuck: Usually your posts have a certain amount of gibberish and incomprehensible blah to them. The sentence I quoted makes me wonder if you’re high or just incapable of forming a coherent sentence.

  41. 41.

    General Stuck

    July 8, 2010 at 7:43 pm

    @Corner Stone:

    The sentence I quoted makes me wonder if you’re high or just incapable of forming a coherent sentence.

    But you’re an idiot. Why should I care what you think? If you want to query something I write, try and do it with more than idiot speak of “What?”

  42. 42.

    El Cid

    July 8, 2010 at 7:45 pm

    @Sly:

    The only real guessing game at this point is trying to figure out an unemployment level the FOMC will be comfortable with for the next 5-10 years

    At this point I wouldn’t be too surprised if official employment got up to even 30, 40% and no one would do much more than whine about the deficit and debt and how lazy everyone is.

  43. 43.

    Sly

    July 8, 2010 at 7:45 pm

    @General Stuck:

    The problem with this argument is that it basically establishes short-term and long-term stimulus as (a) a zero-sum game and (b) that we don’t need much in the way of long-term stimulus.

    For (a), long-term stimulus like infrastructure spending and short-term stimulus like aid to states tend to be self-reinforcing. In you look at the TVA, for instance, it resulted in both short-term employment gains and long-term economic development for the region. Same with the transportation boom that occurred in the NYC metro area in the decades proceeding the Depression. While the bulk of the growth from those projects occurred later as communities took advantage of the infrastructure once it was in place, the government still paid people to build them.

    For (b), its important to remember that along with our short-term unemployment problems we have long-term unemployment problems. While I would say that our short-term ones are more important (if only because they exacerbate the long-term ones), what we really want to avoid in the next few years is that short-term unemployment converting into long-term unemployment. Some of that, I fear, has already happened, and no amount of immediate stimulus will correct it.

  44. 44.

    Sly

    July 8, 2010 at 7:48 pm

    @El Cid:

    I understand your pessimism, but, in all seriousness, if unemployment got up to 40% there would be an absolute revolution in this country.

  45. 45.

    General Stuck

    July 8, 2010 at 7:48 pm

    Does any one think that creating a few thousand temporary jobs will effect this number of unemployed.

    The number of people unemployed because they lost jobs climbed to 4.2 million; that figure has grown by almost one million in a year.

  46. 46.

    Corner Stone

    July 8, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    Shorter Stuck:
    Things aren’t created except what’s created and even then they don’t make much in long term or even really shorter but for the times when they do.

  47. 47.

    General Stuck

    July 8, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    @Sly:

    Some of that, I fear, has already happened, and no amount of immediate stimulus will correct it.

    This is the problem. Outsourcing has depleted severely our manufacturing base long term jobs and short term stimulus will not help that. That is why the first stimulus was mostly long term with R and D into new industries, and the new permanent jobs it will create say in alternative energies. So there is a huge stimulus in this area that hasn’t had time to germinate. Of course, those jobs will likely get outsourced too. So the problem comes down to a degree of protectionism, or all in for the world economy concept. The latter portends poor for our long term jobs. The former has it’s own shortcomings. I don’t know. But we butter do something to keep our decent middle class supporting jobs in this country, or shit will just hobble along forever, and at some point the Chinese will say no more.

    And I am not saying infrastructure projects are bad, just that they are slower in stimulative effect, and political effect for Obama and dems. I am certain that stimulus that is large enough to jump start quickly our 14 trillion dollar economy is possible in theory, but not in political practicality.

  48. 48.

    El Cid

    July 8, 2010 at 7:57 pm

    @Sly:

    if unemployment got up to 40% there would be an absolute revolution in this country

    And as far as I know it’d be in favor of getting rid of all government, and making fundamentalist Christian churches run the country and whatever else. Sort of a maximally retarded popular fascism.

  49. 49.

    jwb

    July 8, 2010 at 8:00 pm

    @General Stuck: Actually, I think the states are the biggest threat. Just watch what happens to the states’ budgets after the elections in November and all our pols have to be more honest about the numbers. It’s going to be horrifying.

  50. 50.

    jwb

    July 8, 2010 at 8:04 pm

    @El Cid: If official unemployment ever approaches 20% you’ll see people in the streets with pitchforks and guns, because the official figure understates actual unemployment significantly.

  51. 51.

    Sly

    July 8, 2010 at 8:10 pm

    @El Cid:

    I’m not talking about a political revolution, like 1932/34. Or even a radical coup, like Russia in 1917. 40% unemployment would lead to a deflationary spiral that is truly unprecedented. I’m talking packs of feral humanoids roaming the decrepit streets of a post-apocalyptic wasteland. Two-Men-Enter, One-Man-Leaves territory. We just wouldn’t have Super Mutants or President John Henry Eden to contend with.

  52. 52.

    General Stuck

    July 8, 2010 at 8:15 pm

    @Sly: Just give me a telepathic dog for company and a six shooter.

  53. 53.

    Mark S.

    July 8, 2010 at 8:26 pm

    @Sly:

    I call dibs on Charon.

  54. 54.

    Ailuridae

    July 8, 2010 at 8:34 pm

    @Sly:

    Or even a radical coup, like Russia in 1917. 40% unemployment would lead to a deflationary spiral that is truly unprecedented.

    Not to quibble but if we get to 40% unemployment regardless of whether its U-3 or U-6 you are talking about then the economy will already be in a deflationary spiral.

  55. 55.

    jake the snake

    July 8, 2010 at 9:35 pm

    @General Stuck:

    Just give me a telepathic dog for company and a six shooter

    .

    I see you sneaking around in the desert looking for Susanne Benton there, Albert.

  56. 56.

    KS in MA

    July 8, 2010 at 9:44 pm

    @El Cid: FTW.

  57. 57.

    El Cid

    July 8, 2010 at 10:08 pm

    @Sly:

    I’m talking packs of feral humanoids roaming the decrepit streets of a post-apocalyptic wasteland. Two-Men-Enter, One-Man-Leaves territory.

    Oh, you mean Mississippi?

  58. 58.

    Yutsano

    July 9, 2010 at 1:10 am

    @General Stuck: I claim the hyperintelligent Welsh corgi.

  59. 59.

    Catsy

    July 9, 2010 at 11:04 am

    @Chad N Freude: Lawl, you win.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • Spanky on Sunday Morning Garden Chat: Exotic Orchids (Sep 24, 2023 @ 6:42am)
  • lowtechcyclist on Open Thread: Exciting News — Andy Kim Is Contesting Menedez’s Seat (Sep 24, 2023 @ 6:24am)
  • satby on Sunday Morning Garden Chat: Exotic Orchids (Sep 24, 2023 @ 6:16am)
  • Betty Cracker on Open Thread: Exciting News — Andy Kim Is Contesting Menedez’s Seat (Sep 24, 2023 @ 6:11am)
  • satby on Sunday Morning Garden Chat: Exotic Orchids (Sep 24, 2023 @ 6:09am)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
What Has Biden Done for You Lately?

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Cole & Friends Learn Español

Introductory Post
Cole & Friends Learn Español

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!