Home » Posts tagged 'inequality' (Page 6)

Tag Archives: inequality

While the leaders of the Fed and other central banks claim that their extraordinary monetary policies haven’t significantly increased inequality, economists with the world’s most prestigious financial agency, the Bank of International Settlements – known as “the Central Banks’ Central Bank” – just released a report showing otherwise.

BIS notes:

Our simulation suggests that wealth inequality has risen since the Great Financial Crisis. While low interest rates and rising bond prices have had a negligible impact on wealth inequality, rising equity prices have been a key driver of inequality …. Monetary policy may have added to inequality to the extent that it has boosted equity prices.

***

Inequality is back in the international economic policy debate. Evidence of a growing dispersion of income and wealth within major advanced and emerging market economies (EMEs) has sparked discussions about its economic consequences. Although there is no consensus on the relationship between inequality and growth, there are concerns that rising inequality may become a serious economic headwind. [Right.]

***

Moreover, the faster rise in remuneration at the very top of the income distribution relative to wage growth in the lower percentiles has been linked both to the rapid growth of the financial sector since the 1980s [correct] and to changes in the social norms that contribute to the determination of executive pay (Piketty (2014)).

***

The share of securities holdings, equity in particular, tends to be even higher at the top 5% or 1% of the distribution. [Obviously.]

Conversely, housing accounts for a higher share in the lowest net wealth quintile, for which low net wealth is in many cases a reflection of high levels of mortgage debt. In a number of cases, net wealth is negative, suggesting that liabilities, in the form of mortgage, consumer and other debt, exceed assets.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

2016 Theme #5: The Systemic Failure of High Finance

January 8, 2016

2016 Theme #5: The Systemic Failure of High Finance

This week I am addressing themes I see playing out in 2016.

A number of systemic, structural forces are intersecting in 2016. One is the failure of high finance to fix the global economy’s systemic problems.

The operative conceit of the past 7 years has been that high finance can fix whatever’s broken in the world’s economies. According to this narrative, all the world needed to boost “growth,” employment and profits was lower interest rates, more liquidity, reverse repos and some other fancy financial footwork.

Once all this high finance generated more borrowing by debt-serfs, property developers, students, corporations buying back their shares and financiers skimming billions from asset bubbles, systemic problems would be dissolved or mitigated.

Cheap credit, asset bubbles and immense profiteering by financiers would heal all wounds and make everything better for everyone, even those at the bottom layer of the economy.

Unfortunately, this isn’t true. High finance and cheap credit have intensified structural problems such as rising inequality, not resolved them.

The implicit promise of the neoliberal project is that liberalizing private-sector markets and credit will magically grease the processes of growth and widespread prosperity.

When economies have the right systems in place–decentralized, somewhat free markets, an entrepreneurial spirit, many unmet needs, idle productive capacity and a credit-starved real economy–freeing up static markets and credit can unleash the productive capacity of the bottom level of the economy.

But in economies dominated by state/private monopolies and cartels, neoliberalism simply funnels the profits of financialization to the few at the expense of the many, and at the cost of heightened instability and insecurity.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

If We Don’t Change the Way Money Is Created and Distributed, We Change Nothing

December 29, 2015

If We Don’t Change the Way Money Is Created and Distributed, We Change Nothing

The only real solution in my view is to create and distribute money at the base of the pyramid rather than to those in the top of the pyramid.

Many well-intended people want to reform the status quo for all sorts of worthy reasons: to reduce wealth inequality, restore democracy, create good-paying jobs, and so on.

All these goals are laudable, but if we don’t change the way money is created and distributed, nothing really changes: wealth inequality will keep rising, governance will remain a bidding process of the wealthy, wages will continue stagnating, etc.

If the money creation/distribution system isn’t transformed, “reform” is nothing more than ineffectual policy tweaks that offer do-gooders the illusion of progress.

Mike Swanson of Wall Street Window and I discuss the The Future of Currencies and CHS’s New Book A Radically Beneficial World (33:21)

Few are willing to admit that the way we create and distribute money at the top of the wealth pyramid necessarily generates increasing wealth inequalitybecause once we admit this, we realize 1) the money system itself is the source of inequality and 2) we have to change the money system if we want to stave off the inevitable rise of wealth inequality to the point that it generates social disorder.

In the current system, money is created by central and private banks at the top of the wealth/power pyramid, and distributed within the top of the wealth pyramid. The only possible output of this system is rising wealth inequality and debt-serfdom for three reasons:

1. Those with first access to nearly free money can outbid savers and serfs who must borrow at much higher rates of interest to snap up income-producing assets. In effect, borrowing unlimited sums at near-zero rates guarantees that those with this privilege have a built-in advantage in buying income-producing assets.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

If We Don’t Change the Way Money Is Created and Distributed, We Change Nothing

December 24, 2015

If We Don’t Change the Way Money Is Created and Distributed, We Change Nothing

The only real solution in my view is to create and distribute money at the base of the pyramid rather than to those in the top of the pyramid.

Many well-intended people want to reform the status quo for all sorts of worthy reasons: to reduce wealth inequality, restore democracy, create good-paying jobs, and so on.

If the money creation/distribution system isn’t transformed, “reform” is nothing more than ineffectual policy tweaks that offer do-gooders the illusion of progress.

Mike Swanson of Wall Street Window and I discuss the The Future of Currencies and CHS’s New Book A Radically Beneficial World (33:21)

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

TPP a Gift to Plutocrats? Canada’s Trade Minister Wrote the Book on Them

December 14, 2015

TPP a Gift to Plutocrats? Canada’s Trade Minister Wrote the Book on Them

As journalist, Chrystia Freeland chronicled global wealth dividers.

Chrystia Freeland’s financial journalist credentials made her a star candidate for the Liberals. Photo: Joseph Morris. Creative commons licensed.

Canada’s new trade minister has sitting on her desk the sweeping Trans-Pacific Partnership, a deal some say will accelerate the gap between rich and poor by protecting corporations’ interests over those of workers and governments.

The winners, say high profile critics, will be captains of global finance and others already so moneyed they’ve earned the moniker plutocrats.

That’s a class of people Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland knows extremely well. Plutocrats is the title she gave her 2012 book about how they are sucking up riches for themselves as income inequality grows. Freeland takes readers into the world of the super-rich, who play by different rules and lead opulent and vastly different lives than the rest of the human race.

The former reporter for the Financial Times goes at the wealthy and powerful hard, pointing out how their success is coinciding with the destruction of “everyone else.”

That puts Freeland in an interesting position, to say the least, as she mulls whether and how to manage passing the TPP, which was negotiated in secret by the recently ousted Conservative government, but endorsed by Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau during the election.

TPP as inequality accelerator

Freeland must be aware of criticism, coming from a range of respected sources, that the TPP will widen the wealth gap in developing countries as well as the U.S. and Canada.

“If the Trans-Pacific Partnership is enacted,” Robert Reich, secretary of labor in the Clinton administration, has warned “big corporations, Wall Street, and their top executives and shareholders will make out like bandits. Who will the bandits be stealing from? The rest of us.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Have We Hit Peak Inequality?

December 14, 2015

Have We Hit Peak Inequality?

These 400 billionaires are wealthier than 190 million of their fellow Americans.

When should we be alarmed about so much wealth in so few hands?

The Great Recession and its anemic recovery only deepened the economic inequality that’s drawn so much attention in its wake. Nearly all wealth and income gains since then have flowed to the top one-tenth of America’s richest 1 percent.

The very wealthiest 400 Americans command dizzying fortunes. Their combined net worth, as catalogued in the 2015 Forbes 400 list, is $2.34 trillion. You can’t make this list unless you’re worth a cool $1.7 billion.

These 400 rich people — including Bill Gates, Donald Trump, Oprah Winfrey, and heirs to the Wal-Mart fortune — have roughly as much wealth as the bottom 60 percent of the population, or over 190 million people added together, according to a new report I co-authored.

That equals the wealth of the nation’s entire African-American population, plus a third of the Latino population combined.

Forbes Magazine Cover

A few of those 400 individuals are generous philanthropists. But extreme inequality of this sort undermines social mobility, democracy, and economic stability. Even if you celebrate successful entrepreneurship, isn’t there a point things go too far?

To me, 400 people having more money than 190 million of their compatriots is just that point.

Concentrating wealth to this extent gives rich donors far too much political power, including the wherewithal to shape the rules that govern our economy. Half of all political contributions in the 2016 presidential campaign have come from just 158 families, according to research by The New York Times.

The wealth concentration doesn’t stop there. The richest 20 individuals alone own more wealth than the entire bottom half of the U.S. population.

This group — which includes Gates, Warren Buffet, the Koch brothers, Mark Zuckerberg, and Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, among others — is small enough to fit on a private jet. But together they’ve hoarded as much wealth as 152 million of their fellow Americans.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Joseph Stiglitz on Canada’s Housing Inequality: ‘It’s Very Disturbing’

November 23, 2015

Joseph Stiglitz on Canada’s Housing Inequality: ‘It’s Very Disturbing’

Ex-World Bank top economist talks unaffordability, the TPP, and being a fiscal ‘black sheep.’

Joseph Stiglitz, winner of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, is the third-most cited economist in the world, according to Research Papers in Economics. Photo by David P. Ball.

Skyrocketing housing prices in Canada’s cities, most dramatically in Vancouver, threaten the cohesion of our society, argues Nobel laureate and former World Bank chief economist Joseph Stiglitz.

The Columbia University professor sat down with The Tyee on Friday at the University of British Columbia for a wide-ranging interview, touching on foreign real estate speculation, the changing field of economics, and how the new Liberal government might soon find its promises to the middle class derailed by trade deals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

That trade deal, billed as “the largest, most ambitious free trade initiative in history,” would allow foreign corporations to challenge participating governments using investor-state dispute settlement hearings — and potentially force taxpayers to reimburse them for any national policies and laws that hurt future profits or don’t grant a company “fair and equal treatment.”

The 72-year-old American author of The Great Divide: Unequal Societies and What We Can Do About Them hasn’t previously discussed Canada’s housing crisis. But the harm and social strife caused by property speculation and empty condos is something Stiglitz knows well.

“It’s the same phenomenon happening in New York,” he said. “We attributed it maybe to Russian oligarchs buying multimillion-dollar apartments in huge buildings… driving up rents, making it unaffordable to live in the city.”

Figuring out the crisis is just one of many inequality-related challenges now facing Justin Trudeau’s government. But if addressed, Stiglitz noted, the rewards will be great.

“There are very significant benefits to creating communities with diversity, diverse incomes and other forms, that cannot exist if we price ordinary people out of our cities,” he said.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

If We Don’t Change the Way Money Is Created and Distributed, Rising Inequality Will Trigger Social Disorder

November 13, 2015

If We Don’t Change the Way Money Is Created and Distributed, Rising Inequality Will Trigger Social Disorder

Centrally issued money optimizes inequality, monopoly, cronyism, stagnation, low social mobility and systemic instability.

If we don’t change the way money is created and distributed, wealth inequality will widen to the point of social disorder.

Everyone who wants to reduce wealth inequality with more regulations and taxes is missing the key dynamic: the monopoly on creating and issuing money necessarily widens wealth inequality, as those with access to newly issued money can always outbid the rest of us to buy the engines of wealth creation.

Control of money issuance and access to low-cost credit create financial and political power. Those with access to low-cost credit have a monopoly as valuable as the one to create money.

Compare the limited power of an individual with cash and the enormous power of unlimited cheap credit.

Let’s say an individual has saved $100,000 in cash. He keeps the money in the bank, which pays him less than 1% interest. Rather than earn this low rate, he decides to loan the cash to an individual who wants to buy a rental home at 4% interest.

There’s a tradeoff to earn this higher rate of interest: the saver has to accept the risk that the borrower might default on the loan, and that the home will not be worth the $100,000 the borrower owes.

The bank, on the other hand, can perform magic with the $100,000 they obtain from the central bank. The bank can issue 19 times this amount in new loans—in effect, creating $1,900,000 in new money out of thin air.

This is the magic of fractional reserve lending. The bank is only required to hold a small percentage of outstanding loans as reserves against losses. If the reserve requirement is 5%, the bank can issue $1,900,000 in new loans based on the $100,000 in cash: the bank holds assets of $2,000,000, of which 5% ($100,000) is held in cash reserves.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Why Is Wealth/Income Inequality Soaring?

October 23, 2015

Why Is Wealth/Income Inequality Soaring?

If conventional labor and finance capital have lost their scarcity value, then the era in which financialization reaped big profits is ending.

Why is wealth/income inequality soaring? The easy answer is of course the infinite greed of Wall Street fat-cats and the politicos they buy/own.

But greed can’t be the only factor, for greed is hardly unknown in the bottom 90% as it is in the top .1%. The only difference between the guy who took out a liar loan to buy a house he couldn’t afford so he could flip it for a fat profit and the mortgage broker who instructed him on how to scam the system and the crooked banker dumping toxic mortgage-backed securities on the Widows and Orphans Fund of Norway is the scale of the scam.

The difference isn’t greed, it’s the ability to avoid the consequences or have the taxpayers eat the losses, i.e. moral hazard. The bottom 90%er with the liar loan mortgage and the flip-this-house strategy eventually suffered the consequences when Housing Bubble 1.0 blew up in spectacular fashion.

Moral hazard describes the difference between decisions made by those with skin in the game, i.e. those who will absorb the losses from their bets that go south, and those who’ve transferred the risks and losses to others.

The too-big-to-fail banks that bought political protection simply shifted the losses to taxpayers. Then the Federal Reserve helpfully paid banks for deposits at the Fed while reducing the amount banks had to pay on depositors’ savings to bear-zero, effectively rewarding the banks with free money for ripping off the taxpayers.

America’s financialized cartel-state system institutionalizes moral hazard. This is one cause of rising inequality, as the super-wealthy are immunized by their purchase of political influence.

The top .1%’s share of the pie has been rising in the era of financialization and institutionalized moral hazard, everyone else’s share has declined:

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Real Trouble Begins When Rising Inequality Splinters the Elites

October 22, 2015

The Real Trouble Begins When Rising Inequality Splinters the Elites

If others in our class are still rising while we’re stagnating, we sense a great disturbance in the financial and political Force.

Rising economic inequality tends to generate political instability for all the obvious reasons: the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, the rich say let them eat brioche and next thing you know, the ungrateful wretches are tearing down the Bastille and a youthful army officer has to restore order with a whiff of grapeshot. After which he launches a war of conquest that kills hundreds of thousands and bankrupts nations.

So yes, economic inequality can generate quite a spot of bother.

Historian Peter Turchin identified “the degree of solidarity felt between the commons and aristocracy,” the sense of purpose and identity shared by the top, middle and bottom of the wealth/power pyramid, as a key ingredient of social unity and political stability.

One measure of this unity of purpose and identity is the degree of inequality between commoners (the lower 90% of American households by wealth/income), the top 10% professional/technocrat class that owns 74% of the wealth and pays almost 80% of the federal income taxes, and the Power Elite aristocracy (the top .1%).

Turchin discusses instability and wealth inequality in his well-researched book War and Peace and War: The Rise and Fall of Empires.

History supports two narratives of rising inequality leading to social disintegration and political instability: one is inequality between the top classes and everyone else, and the the other is rising inequality within the top classes.

When the pie starts shrinking and there aren’t enough slices to satisfy the rising expectations of the top class, the elites splinter in profound political disunity. In other words, when the offspring of the top 10% earn MBAs from respected universities and can only find internships, their parents become extremely dissatisfied with the status quo.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Thousands reject the extractivist logic at the World Bank-IMF meeting in Peru

October 21, 2015

Thousands reject the extractivist logic at the World Bank-IMF meeting in Peru

The annual governors’ meeting of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank opened on October 5 in Peru’s capital city. In the meeting, an estimated 800 representatives from 188 countries were negotiating the shape of the world’s soon-to-be renovated finance infrastructure.

While the international media focused on the official meetings, no news outlets outside of Latin America have mentioned the Plataforma Alternativa conference — a parallel three-day meeting organized under the theme “Belying the ‘Peruvian Miracle.’”

More than 1,200 people attended Plataforma Alternativa’s conference. Dozens of young volunteers zoomed through the marbled hallways of Lima’s Hotel Bolívar, which hosted the conference. Participants represented dozens of organizations and countries as diverse as the Netherlands, China, the United States, Belgium, Zimbabwe, Colombia, Indonesia, Spain, Mexico, the Philippines, Germany, Palestine and Argentina.

On Friday, an estimated 5,000 people marched across 70 blocks in Lima, from Plaza San Martín to the first of three police perimeters around the official conference. Groups at the protest included indigenous feminist organizations, the Lima-based Comando Feminista, Bloque Hip Hop, worker unions, the Peruvian Campesino Confederation, and dozens of others.

Peru reportedly mobilized 20,000 police for this event, many of whom were safeguarding key areas around the city for the 12,000 visitors: from the airport to hotel areas.

The counter-conference was free, open to the public, and streamed online. It featured U.S. economist Joseph Stiglitz, a former World Bank chief economist and an outspoken critic of its policies, as its keynote speaker.

“Inequality is a choice — not the result of inevitable economic laws,” Stiglitz said in his speech after reminding the audience that Latin America has the highest rate of wealth disparity among world regions. At the end of September, Oxfam — one of several organizations in charge of the conference — released a report indicating that, at the current pace, one percent of Latin Americans would be wealthier than the remaining 99 percent by 2022.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Half of world’s wealth now in hands of 1% of population – report

October 15, 2015

Half of world’s wealth now in hands of 1% of population – report

Inequality growing globally and in the UK, which has third most ‘ultra-high net worth individuals’, household wealth study finds

Global inequality is growing, with half the world’s wealth now in the hands of just 1% of the population, according to a new report.

The middle classes have been squeezed at the expense of the very rich, according to research by Credit Suisse, which also finds that for the first time, there are more individuals in the middle classes in China – 109m – than the 92m in the US.

Tidjane Thiam, the chief executive of Credit Suisse, said: “Middle class wealth has grown at a slower pace than wealth at the top end. This has reversed the pre-crisis trend which saw the share of middle-class wealth remaining fairly stable over time.”

The report shows that a person needs only $3,210 (£2,100) to be in the wealthiest 50% of world citizens. About $68,800 secures a place in the top 10%, while the top 1% have more than $759,900. The report defines wealth as the value of assets including property and stock market investments, but excludes debt.

About 3.4 bn people – just over 70% of the global adult population – have wealth of less than $10,000. A further 1bn – a fifth of the world’s population – are in the $10,000-$100,000 range.

Each of the remaining 383m adults – 8% of the population – has wealth of more than $100,000. This number includes about 34m US dollar millionaires. About 123,800 individuals of these have more than $50m, and nearly 45,000 have more than $100m. The UK has the third-highest number of these “ultra-high net worth” individuals.

The report said: “Wealth inequality has continued to increase since 2008, with the top percentile of wealth holders now owning 50.4% of all household wealth.”

At the start of 2015, Oxfam had warned that 1% of the world’s population would own more wealth than the other 99% by next year. Mark Goldring,

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

When the Aristocracy Leaves the Commoners in the Dust, The Empire Is Doomed

October 8, 2015

When the Aristocracy Leaves the Commoners in the Dust, The Empire Is Doomed

We all know the barriers between the commoners and the Elite rise higher every year, despite the claims of the corporate media and the Power Elite aristocracy.

Historian Peter Turchin identified “the degree of solidarity felt between the commons and aristocracy” as a key ingredient of the Republic of Rome’s enormous success. Turchin calls this attribute of social structure vertical integration, a term that usually refers to a corporation owning its supply chain.

In Turchin’s meaning, it refers to the sense of purpose and identity shared by the top, middle and bottom of the wealth/power pyramid. One measure of thisvertical integration is the degree of equality/inequality between the commoners (shall we call this the lower 90% of American households by income?) and the Power Elite aristocracy (top .5%, or perhaps top .1%).

The vertical integration of the Roman Republic’s social strata is striking. In his book War and Peace and War: The Rise and Fall of Empires, Turchin tells this anecdote:

“Roman historians of the later age stressed the modest way of life, even poverty of the leading citizens. For example, when Cincinnatus was summoned to be dictator, while working at the plow, he reportedly exclaimed, ‘My land will not be sown this year and so we shall run the risk of not having enough to eat!'”

Can you conjure up the image of any presidential hopeful in a field actually working to grow food for his/her family?

Turchin goes on to say this vertical integration is a feature of all successful empires:

“(This) lack of glaring barriers between the aristocracy and the commons seems to be a general characteristic of successful imperial nations during their early phase.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Teaching economics for the 21st century

October 6, 2015

Jonathan Dawson, Senior Lecturer Schumacher College

In the economics classroom here at Schumacher College https://www.schumachercollege.org.uk/courses/postgraduate-courses/economics-for-transition, we are drawing on the thinking of Otto Scharmer https://www.presencing.com/ego-to-eco/3-divides(link is external), exploring the three great divides that characterise the times in which we live: separation of self from self (spiritual/cultural alienation); self from others (social divide); and self from the more-than-human world (ecological divide).

Today, the enquiry is on the self-from-others divide, with a strong focus on trends in, and the impact of inequality. Graphs and statistics aplenty as we unpick the complexity of the various trends: Kuznets curve, Gini co-efficients, Palma curves. We explore contradictory trends in the gap between rich and poor across regions and historical periods, seeking out patterns and empirically valid conclusions that may be drawn from them. Picketty rubs shoulders with Friedman.

Trying to disentangle the various assumptions and theoretical frameworks that account for such wildly differing interpretations of the achievements of the just-ended Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/(link is external). Examining different theories by which we can evaluate the appropriateness and likely success of the newly-launched Sustainable Development Goals http://www.sustainabledevelopment2015.org/(link is external).

So far, so good. This looks and feels like an exemplary exercise in the study of heterodox economics of just the sort that economics students around the world have been demanding in ever more strident terms in recent years http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/may/04/economics-students-overhaul-subject-teaching(link is external). Multiple perspectives are opened for exploration and the pretence that there is one single, value-free, objectively correct position is abandoned. We are deep into the realm of values.

And then, we observe that we have spent the entire day talking about inequality and its impacts. There is a general consensus that while we are intellectually stimulated by the material, in some sense perhaps cleverer, we have not been moved by it.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

No Brains In Washington

September 27, 2015

No Brains In Washington

Washington’s IQ follows the Fed’s interest rate — it is negative. Washington is a black hole into which all sanity is sucked out of government deliberations.

Washington’s failures are everywhere visible. We can see the failures in Washington’s wars and in Washington’s approach to China and Russia.

The visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping, was scheduled for the week-end following the Pope’s visit to Washington. Was this Washington’s way of demoting China’s status by having its president play second fiddle to the Pope? The President of China is here for week-end news coverage? Why didn’t Obama just tell him to go to hell?

Washington’s cyber incompetence and inability to maintain cyber security is being blamed on China. The day before Xi Jinping’s arrival in Washington, the White House press secretary warmed up President Jinping’s visit by announcing that Obama might threaten China with financial sanctions.

And not to miss an opportunity to threaten or insult the President of China, the US Secretary of Commerce fired off a warning that the Obama regime was too unhappy with China’s business practices for the Chinese president to expect a smooth meeting in Washington.

In contrast, when Obama visited China, the Chinese government treated him with politeness and respect.

China is America’s largest creditor after the Federal Reserve. If the Chinese government were so inclined, China could cause Washington many serious economic, financial, and military problems. Yet China pursues peace while Washington issues threats.

Like China, Russia, too, has a foreign policy independent of Washington’s, and it is the independence of their foreign policies that puts China and Russia on the outs with Washington.

Washington considers countries with independent foreign policies to be threats. Libya, Iraq, and Syria had independent foreign policies. Washington has destroyed two of the three and is working on the third. Iran, Russia, and China have independent foreign policies. Consequently, Washington sees these countries as threats and portrays them to the American people as such.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Tag Archives: inequality

Content

Post categories

Economic Links

Energy/Resource Links

Environmental Links

Geopolitical Links

Liberty Links

News Links

Other Links

Survival Skills

Post Archives by Category

Post navigation

Latest Posts