Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

rising dollar for 2007 [?]

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • rising dollar for 2007 [?]

    http://www.minyanville.com/articles/index.php?a=11850

    Five Themes You Need to Know for 2007


    Kevin Depew


    1. U.S. Dollar

    In 2007 the U.S. dollar will rise.

    * C'mon. It just can't happen. The dollar is doomed. Everyone knows this, right?
    * Well, one would think that we would know this because we see and hear it every day; in the financial media, in analyst reports, and because even as the Federal Reserve claims to be "fighting inflation," money supply growth has actually been accelerating over the past three months.
    * The rapid stimulation since August that has been able to maintain M2 growth near 5%.
    * So what bizarre factors might interact to cause a rise in the U.S. dollar in 2007?
    * We essentially see two potential paths toward a higher dollar this year.
    * One, and least unlikely, monetary expansion by the Fed actually does begin to tighten and the dollar rises.
    * Two, and more likely, economic activity in the U.S. slows, imports slow and exports rise as U.S. consumers cut back, the dollar rises and the trade deficit declines.
    * Why would this benefit the dollar? See Theme Number Two...


    2. Personal Savings

    The Personal Savings Rate will rise in 2007.

    * Americans have been spending more than they have been saving for 20 consecutive months.
    * This unsustainable behavior will likely change in 2007; rapidly if the economy slows more than expected due to housing.
    * For most Americans housing has been the source of liquidity necessary to consume.
    * As access to mortgage markets diminishes, consumption will necessarily decline.
    * Unlike the Federal government, consumers cannot simply maintain consumption by borrowing forever.
    * Eventually, someone calls in that debt, or servicing it becomes too burdensome.
    * Importantly, debt service is as much psychological as material. In other words, consumers must not necessarily "go the brink" financially before cutting back.
    * So, somewhat paradoxically, heavy debt loads in an expanding economy can seem less problematic than lighter debt loads in a slowing economy.
    * We are beginning already to see signs of a shift in consumer sentiment toward debt loads.
    * Just as condo flipping and real estate speculation, fine living and "how to spend it" shows, flooded television networks over the past five years, now we are seeing a sentiment shift toward debt.
    * The latest reality show? "Maxed Out."
    - In each episode of Maxed Out, finance coach Ayse Hogan gets to the root of what is causing one woman's unhealthy relationship with money. Observing the subject's behavior and putting her on a strict budget, Hogan helps the cash-stressed gal by demonstrating the basic tenets of wealth-building: debt reduction, savings and investment.
    * A larger pool of national savings would reduce demand for foreign capital because we're not buying as many imported goods.
    * With less foreign capital flowing into the country, the gap between what we buy from abroad and what we sell would shrink. In other words, the trade deficit would diminish.
    * And this leads us to Theme Number Three...


    3. Protectionism

    Expect Protectionist policies to worm their way to the top in Washington.

    * Remember the trade deficit, the one that will likely diminish as a natural result of higher savings and lower consumption in the U.S.?
    * Well, far be it from Washington to allow nature to take its course.
    * One of the key things to understand about the trade deficit is it has very little to do with "trade policy."
    * The trade deficit is actually determined by the flow of investment funds in and out of the country.
    * Meanwhile, we're not even out of 2006 and protectionist talk from Washington is rampant.
    * And just a few weeks ago Caterpillar (CAT) CEO Jim Owens warned that international trade "has become a bad word" as a result of a "pronounced shift toward protectionism" in the U.S.
    * Sure, trade policies such as "emergency tariffs" is one way to reduce the U.S. traded deficit, but fewer imports would mean fewer dollars flowing into international currency markets, which means (back to Theme Number One) increasing the value of the dollar relative to other currencies.
    * But wait, wouldn't that make imports more attractive to Americans? It would make imports less expensive for U.S. consumers, but as far as attractive... well, that leads us to Theme Number Four...


    4. Deflation

    Look for deflation to become a key theme by the end of the year in 2007.

    * Deflation gets a bad rap. And we've actually experienced structural deflation for nearly a decade. So what are we so worried about?
    * Because right now the consensus (at least as shown by the increase in asset prices) is that we continue to live in a world with benign, supply-driven deflation, not the collapse in aggregate demand that Fed policymakers fear so deeply, and which is most often associated with the word "deflation."
    * The view least shared by market participants is that the structural deflationary environment we are in, and during which a bout of cyclical inflation has already peaked, is poised to suffer from a collapse in aggregate demand.
    * Of course, just as no one predicted how far consumers would really go during their 25-year consumption binge, we're going to go out on a limb and suggest no one is now accurately predicting how far consumers will go in the opposite direction, which leads us to Theme Number Five...


    5. A Tale of Two Standards of Living

    "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity," wrote Charles Dickens in "A Tale of Two Cities." Man, is it just me or does that sentence resonate loudly today?

    * Well, if it's not just me then that's too bad.
    * The plot of Dickens's novel centers around the years leading up to the French Revolution.
    * The material (as opposed to socionomic) origins of the French Revolution were rooted in fiscal crisis... as are nearly all revolutions.
    * High unemployment, low wages and sharp divisions between classes, from the Clergy (First Estate) to the Nobility (Second Estate) and the middle class and peasants (Third Estate) were all factors in the social unrest that exploded on Bastille Day, considered the beginning of the French Revolution.
    * Are we on the verge of our own "French Revolution"? Not hardly, and that's beside the point.
    * Rather, the theme we are focused on here is that we are operating under economic conditions that are in a relative sense quite similar to those leading up to the French Revolution.
    * Keep in mind that what is important here is that the economic disparity between haves and have nots is growing in a relative sense.
    * Just about everyone's standard of living now is better than it was in 1789. But economic disparity is not about absolute conditions. It is about relative conditions.
    * As we enter 2007, it is worth considering the economic results of popular movements toward a reduction in economic disparity.
    * Whether one believes such movements are worthwhile or justified is also beside the point.
    * What is important is that such movements can produce important and dramatic economic changes, and it's always better to be ahead of economic changes than behind them.

  • #2
    Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

    What to think about here is when nobody wants d0llars, nobody is creating them. IMF had created $80 billion of them not that long ago and the demand that created for d0llars to pay back these loans was quite high. Today the IMF has $10 billion in outstanding loans so the demand for d0llars to pay these loans back is quite low. Russia and Chinese cross border trades used to be conducted in d0llars, these were d0llars that stayed outside of the US, I don't remember the exact figures but I believe it was about $10 billion in trade a few years ago and I believe it will amount to $30 billion this year, all conducted without the d0llar.

    Free trade agreements are basically you give the US products and the US gives you d0llars. What was the last free trade agreement the US was able to come up with? Central America? What happened to the South American free trade agreement? It's dead.

    Natural Gas used to transit across Europe through pipelines in Poland, Ukraine and Georgia and those countries required d0llars for the trade. For the last five years Super LNG tankers have been built that pick up LNG in Russia and sell that LNG for whatever the contract calls for, primarily Euros.

    D0llar heads higher because nobody wants them, supply drops without a doubt which is the real reason the Fed stopped publishing M3. The world plays the game by a different set of rules.
    "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one."
    - Charles Mackay

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

      Originally posted by Tet
      What to think about here is when nobody wants d0llars, nobody is creating them. IMF had created $80 billion of them not that long ago and the demand that created for d0llars to pay back these loans was quite high. Today the IMF has $10 billion in outstanding loans so the demand for d0llars to pay these loans back is quite low. Russia and Chinese cross border trades used to be conducted in d0llars, these were d0llars that stayed outside of the US, I don't remember the exact figures but I believe it was about $10 billion in trade a few years ago and I believe it will amount to $30 billion this year, all conducted without the d0llar.

      Free trade agreements are basically you give the US products and the US gives you d0llars. What was the last free trade agreement the US was able to come up with? Central America? What happened to the South American free trade agreement? It's dead.

      Natural Gas used to transit across Europe through pipelines in Poland, Ukraine and Georgia and those countries required d0llars for the trade. For the last five years Super LNG tankers have been built that pick up LNG in Russia and sell that LNG for whatever the contract calls for, primarily Euros.

      D0llar heads higher because nobody wants them, supply drops without a doubt which is the real reason the Fed stopped publishing M3. The world plays the game by a different set of rules.
      I agree with Tet, here. What the folks at Minyville and others miss that the rules of the game are funamentally changing. Note that the turmoil we saw in the markets mid-2006 was related to dollar selling, itself a side-effect of Russian, Iranian, and Chinese political, military and economic activities. The US is under pressure from the "new order. " The US can negotiate a gradual transition to a new global economic/monetary system that reflects a change in the balance of economic, political and military power or, perhaps, do something politically or militarily stupid, as Galbraith explained as the monetary system transition risk–a geopolitical miscaltulation by the US that causes even US allies to repudiate US foreign policy, thereby knocking out one of the three remaining legs of the bonar stool. The reliance of the US economy on gloabl speculative capital flows (ala Bill Gross's "finance-based economy") does not put the US in a strong position to manage this transition smoothly, as a drastic reduction of speculative capital flows, compliments of global central banks, may have a profound economic and political impact on the US. Wars have been started over lesser offenses.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

        Originally posted by Tet
        What to think about here is when nobody wants d0llars, nobody is creating them. IMF had created $80 billion of them not that long ago and the demand that created for d0llars to pay back these loans was quite high. Today the IMF has $10 billion in outstanding loans so the demand for d0llars to pay these loans back is quite low. Russia and Chinese cross border trades used to be conducted in d0llars, these were d0llars that stayed outside of the US, I don't remember the exact figures but I believe it was about $10 billion in trade a few years ago and I believe it will amount to $30 billion this year, all conducted without the d0llar.

        Free trade agreements are basically you give the US products and the US gives you d0llars. What was the last free trade agreement the US was able to come up with? Central America? What happened to the South American free trade agreement? It's dead.

        Natural Gas used to transit across Europe through pipelines in Poland, Ukraine and Georgia and those countries required d0llars for the trade. For the last five years Super LNG tankers have been built that pick up LNG in Russia and sell that LNG for whatever the contract calls for, primarily Euros.

        D0llar heads higher because nobody wants them, supply drops without a doubt which is the real reason the Fed stopped publishing M3. The world plays the game by a different set of rules.
        Tet,

        I think one of the most repeated "facts" might be the Fed stopped publishing M3 data because it was creating so many bonars. You see something differently as in your examples, but then you wrote, "D0llar heads higher because nobody wants them." I fail to grasp why a lack of demand would lead to a relative increase in value of the bonar. I can see where a lack of supply would lead to an increased value, but as I started this, everyone, whoever "everyone" is, says the US expects to inflate itself out of its debt. Is everything important here obvious to all other than me, or is there more to be said?
        Jim 69 y/o

        "...Texans...the lowest form of white man there is." Robert Duvall, as Al Sieber, in "Geronimo." (see "Location" for examples.)

        Dedicated to the idea that all people deserve a chance for a healthy productive life. B&M Gates Fdn.

        Good judgement comes from experience; experience comes from bad judgement. Unknown.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

          Originally posted by Jim Nickerson
          Tet,

          I think one of the most repeated "facts" might be the Fed stopped publishing M3 data because it was creating so many bonars. You see something differently as in your examples, but then you wrote, "D0llar heads higher because nobody wants them." I fail to grasp why a lack of demand would lead to a relative increase in value of the bonar. I can see where a lack of supply would lead to an increased value, but as I started this, everyone, whoever "everyone" is, says the US expects to inflate itself out of its debt. Is everything important here obvious to all other than me, or is there more to be said?
          Bonars are created through debt, debt is created by demand. I don't see anything the current holders of this debt can roll into and replace their Bonar stashes with, so they continue to hold. Why wouldn't the US simply create money to pay off this debt? History says that's what the US does when we get ourselves stuck like this. More actual real non-debt created money to pay off debt actually makes Uncle Buck stronger, unless of course the Bank of England is allowed to counterfeit the currency again. I doubt the rest of the world allows that to happen this time around now that the rest of the world holds so many of them. This is what Gentle Ben refers to when he talks about helicopters dropping money into the economy. The Two D0llar bill and the Greenback itself are two historical examples of how it's done. I beleve if I remember correctly the US has done this 56 times in the past. History tells me this is what we do again.
          "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one."
          - Charles Mackay

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

            Originally posted by Tet
            More actual real non-debt created money to pay off debt actually makes Uncle Buck stronger, unless of course the Bank of England is allowed to counterfeit the currency again.
            tet, i too [along with jim] fail to see why increasing the supply of dollars ["more actual real non-debt created money"] put into circulation [by paying the debt holders] results in a stronger [i.e. more valuable] dollar. increased supply lowers prices. more dollars => weaker dollars.

            Originally posted by tet
            What to think about here is when nobody wants d0llars, nobody is creating them. IMF had created $80 billion of them not that long ago and the demand that created for d0llars to pay back these loans was quite high. Today the IMF has $10 billion in outstanding loans so the demand for d0llars to pay these loans back is quite low. Russia and Chinese cross border trades used to be conducted in d0llars, these were d0llars that stayed outside of the US, I don't remember the exact figures but I believe it was about $10 billion in trade a few years ago and I believe it will amount to $30 billion this year, all conducted without the d0llar.
            if fewer entities are using dollars or requiring dollars for transactions, and if there is no net change in the quantity of dollars and dollar-instruments sloshing around the globe, then supply is constant and demand down. that implies the dollar weakens.

            you have elsewhere discussed the need for the dollar to "compete" and be "more attractive." in general, products become more competitive by becoming cheaper, not by becoming more expensive. a cheaper dollar makes u.s. goods [e.g. boeing aircraft or catepillar tractors] more attractive.

            alternatively, your argument-- nobody wants dollars so fewer are created - i could take to mean that nobody wants to borrow, so less debt is created. that makes sense. if you mean a slowdown causes debt burdens to be more onerous, so people want to pay down debt, i.e. [gasp] save, then yes i can see that means more demand for dollars. richard russell some time ago wrote about all the debt as representing a net short dollar position, with deflationary implications with a potentially stronger dollar as a result. is that your argument too?

            but if the fed ends up monetizing federal debt [if it isn't doing so already] then that is a net increase in dollar supply and should weaken the currency.

            p.s. i just re-read this thread for what must be the 5th time. i am having trouble following your arguments, tet, and would appreciate it if you would "unpack" them more. how about this? is this what you mean? creating a dollar denominated debt creates demand for dollars to carry that debt - to pay interest and to pay principle. if a borrower borrows in, e.g. euros, that borrower doesn't need to generate dollar income, so the dollar volume needed for transactions is lowered. [this argument can't refer to anything other than transaction volumes, since currencies are convertible. our borrower could generate dollar income and use the dollars to buy euros, for example. but if the borrower generates euro income, that flow no longer needs to pass through the dollar.] the reduction in dollars in transactions represents a diminution in dollar velocity. even if the dollar volumes outstanding is unchanged, the dollars are turning over more slowly. this is equivalent to a diminution in supply, so the value of the dollar rises. is that what you're saying?
            Last edited by jk; January 07, 2007, 04:34 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

              Originally posted by Tet
              Bonars are created through debt, debt is created by demand. I don't see anything the current holders of this debt can roll into and replace their Bonar stashes with, so they continue to hold. Why wouldn't the US simply create money to pay off this debt? History says that's what the US does when we get ourselves stuck like this. More actual real non-debt created money to pay off debt actually makes Uncle Buck stronger, unless of course the Bank of England is allowed to counterfeit the currency again. I doubt the rest of the world allows that to happen this time around now that the rest of the world holds so many of them. This is what Gentle Ben refers to when he talks about helicopters dropping money into the economy. The Two D0llar bill and the Greenback itself are two historical examples of how it's done. I beleve if I remember correctly the US has done this 56 times in the past. History tells me this is what we do again.
              I'm still far from savvy enough to decipher this. The blue above is another way of saying "Green paper $'s"? It is not clear how actually printing more actual paper money results in making the bonar stronger, it still would increase the money supply.
              Jim 69 y/o

              "...Texans...the lowest form of white man there is." Robert Duvall, as Al Sieber, in "Geronimo." (see "Location" for examples.)

              Dedicated to the idea that all people deserve a chance for a healthy productive life. B&M Gates Fdn.

              Good judgement comes from experience; experience comes from bad judgement. Unknown.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

                Originally posted by Jim Nickerson
                I'm still far from savvy enough to decipher this. The blue above is another way of saying "Green paper $'s"? It is not clear how actually printing more actual paper money results in making the bonar stronger, it still would increase the money supply.
                The two d0llar bill in 1971 was a treasury note not an FRN, the Greenback itself issued by Lincoln was a treasury note not an FRN. Kennedy's d0llar was a treasury note not a FRN. This is what I mean by real money, the US has a history of issuing treasury notes, historically when this is done the currency gets stronger not weaker. Greenback issued by Lincoln only got weaker due to European counterfeiting primarily by the Bank of England.

                In the last six months Uncle Buck is buying 9% more gold, 21% more NEM, Uncle Buck is buying twice the amount of Natural Gas, 30% more oil and copper. Looks like if I was a Central Bank I'd be pretty happy holding em.
                "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one."
                - Charles Mackay

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

                  Originally posted by Tet
                  The two d0llar bill in 1971 was a treasury note not an FRN, the Greenback itself issued by Lincoln was a treasury note not an FRN. Kennedy's d0llar was a treasury note not a FRN. This is what I mean by real money, the US has a history of issuing treasury notes, historically when this is done the currency gets stronger not weaker. Greenback issued by Lincoln only got weaker due to European counterfeiting primarily by the Bank of England.

                  In the last six months Uncle Buck is buying 9% more gold, 21% more NEM, Uncle Buck is buying twice the amount of Natural Gas, 30% more oil and copper. Looks like if I was a Central Bank I'd be pretty happy holding em.
                  Thanks for the enlightenment, Special Member Tet, whatever you are, I appreciate your insights.
                  Jim 69 y/o

                  "...Texans...the lowest form of white man there is." Robert Duvall, as Al Sieber, in "Geronimo." (see "Location" for examples.)

                  Dedicated to the idea that all people deserve a chance for a healthy productive life. B&M Gates Fdn.

                  Good judgement comes from experience; experience comes from bad judgement. Unknown.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

                    Originally posted by Tet
                    The two d0llar bill in 1971 was a treasury note not an FRN, the Greenback itself issued by Lincoln was a treasury note not an FRN. Kennedy's d0llar was a treasury note not a FRN. This is what I mean by real money, the US has a history of issuing treasury notes, historically when this is done the currency gets stronger not weaker. Greenback issued by Lincoln only got weaker due to European counterfeiting primarily by the Bank of England.
                    The dollar index was at about 1.20 in 1971 and two years later was about .90.

                    The civil war years showed the highest CPI/inflation ever recorded in the US, and the gold price in 1863 wasn't exceeded until the late 1970s.

                    How do you reconcile those facts with your views?

                    Do you have a link or whatever on that Bank of England counterfeiting and its relative operation size, as compared to greenback creation by the Treasury?
                    http://www.NowAndTheFuture.com

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

                      Originally posted by bart
                      The dollar index was at about 1.20 in 1971 and two years later was about .90.

                      The civil war years showed the highest CPI/inflation ever recorded in the US, and the gold price in 1863 wasn't exceeded until the late 1970s.

                      How do you reconcile those facts with your views?

                      Do you have a link or whatever on that Bank of England counterfeiting and its relative operation size, as compared to greenback creation by the Treasury?
                      There may yet be deflationary portents in the wind. The latest FDI chart, while hardly conclusive, has been increasingly resembling the appearance it had when the dollar put in bottoms respectively in 1997 and 2000. As you can see on the chart, the inflationary downtrend was very strong right up until about May of this year. It has since been ambiguous at best.

                      Moreover, even after the passage of the better part of a year, the dollar is still worth more overall than it was at the bottom ... we've had net deflation since about May 12, 2006. This is far from sufficient to declare the trend will continue to be deflationary from here, but more than sufficient to argue it bears close watching.

                      Finster
                      ...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

                        Originally posted by bart
                        Do you have a link or whatever on that Bank of England counterfeiting and its relative operation size, as compared to greenback creation by the Treasury?
                        Look up the history of the Secret Service, almost every other Greenback after the war is counterfeit, who do you suppose was doing this? The Bank of England offered Lincoln 30% loans to finance the war and Lincoln decided to print Greenbacks instead. Lincoln was quoted as saying, I've got the Southern Army in front of me and the banks behind me and it is the banks that I fear most. Before the war the US has about 10K different forms of currency and after the war there is only one. If I was a central banker I'd have to think the war was a huge success. Lots of players get their portraits on our currency from this time period for this very reason. Grant, Lincoln and Chase all get their portraits on our currency.

                        The War Between the States is a big boost to having a national bank and the Bank of England was an owner of the first two national banks of the United States.
                        "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one."
                        - Charles Mackay

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

                          Originally posted by Finster
                          ...
                          As you can see on the chart, the inflationary downtrend was very strong right up until about May of this year. It has since been ambiguous at best.

                          Moreover, even after the passage of the better part of a year, the dollar is still worth more overall than it was at the bottom ... we've had net deflation since about May 12, 2006. This is far from sufficient to declare the trend will continue to be deflationary from here, but more than sufficient to argue it bears close watching.
                          Your points are well taken and I'm also of the mind we'll get some disinflation as the year progresses. And one of my own short term dollar value indicators is sure not showing the dollar is headed lower.






                          Mostly though, I'm just asking Tet to explain the apparent contrary facts and also get more detail on the counterfeiting.
                          http://www.NowAndTheFuture.com

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

                            Originally posted by Tet
                            Look up the history of the Secret Service, almost every other Greenback after the war is counterfeit, who do you suppose was doing this? The Bank of England offered Lincoln 30% loans to finance the war and Lincoln decided to print Greenbacks instead. Lincoln was quoted as saying, I've got the Southern Army in front of me and the banks behind me and it is the banks that I fear most. Before the war the US has about 10K different forms of currency and after the war there is only one. If I was a central banker I'd have to think the war was a huge success. Lots of players get their portraits on our currency from this time period for this very reason. Grant, Lincoln and Chase all get their portraits on our currency.

                            The War Between the States is a big boost to having a national bank and the Bank of England was an owner of the first two national banks of the United States.

                            I'm aware of the existence of lots of counterfeiting and Lincoln's (in my opinion correct) opinions, but the counterfeiting you noted was after the war. Those Treasury notes were issued starting in late 1861 if memory serves.

                            I'm also aware of the BoE's ownership and influence over the first two central banks, but those were over 20 years earlier than the civil war. Do note that I'm not saying that the BoE didn't counterfeit, just that I question both the timing and quantities, and also and primarily the Treasury note issuance connections you seem to be making.

                            Would you please address the 1971 dollar drop vis a vis the Treasury note issuance?
                            http://www.NowAndTheFuture.com

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: rising dollar for 2007 [?]

                              Originally posted by bart
                              Your points are well taken and I'm also of the mind we'll get some disinflation as the year progresses. And one of my own short term dollar value indicators is sure not showing the dollar is headed lower.
                              I'm not necessarily saying one way or the other; my own indicators are conflicted. As noted elsewhere, it says interest rates appear to be too low for financial conditions, which implies inflation should be heading higher. The FDI itself, however, says we're already into at least a minor deflation. Funny, but it seems to echo the debate going on in the financial media, what with the Fed itself repeatedly insisting we are not out of the woods yet on inflation, while most of the rest of the market saying disinflation is in progress.

                              Originally posted by bart
                              Mostly though, I'm just asking Tet to explain the apparent contrary facts and also get more detail on the counterfeiting.
                              Mostly though, I'm just trying to butt in ... ;)
                              Finster
                              ...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X