Economics

The Secret Message of Stimulus Spending

Even the feds don't believe they can create jobs

|

The idea behind the $787 billion stimulus bill is that government can create jobs by spending money. For now, let's ignore fact, history, and economic theory and assume that government spending can actually create jobs.

In that case, we should expect the government to invest relatively more money in the states that have the highest unemployment rates and less money in the states with lower unemployment rates. So let's check the data.

Using numbers from President Obama's website Recovery.gov and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, this chart plots the amount of stimulus funds spent per person in each state and the corresponding unemployment rate in that state. The solid blue line shows what the allocation of funds should look like if the administration was allocating relatively more money to the states with higher unemployment rates.   

Yet, with a few exceptions, the data show that this is not the case. Many higher-unemployment states are getting far fewer stimulus dollars than lower-unemployment states.

Take Michigan, for instance. Michigan's 15.2 percent unemployment rate is the highest in the country. So far, it has received $403 per person in stimulus funds. That's above the average stimulus per person across all states ($326).  However, it's lower than the $409 per person that the state of Vermont, a state with relatively low unemployment (6.8 percent), has received so far. Michigan's per-person take is also much lower than the $707 per person the District of Columbia received. D.C.'s unemployment rate is 9.9 percent.

Now look at the state with the lowest unemployment rate in the country: North Dakota. It's getting $253 per person with a 4.3 percent unemployment rate. Many other states are receiving roughly the same amount of stimulus funds per person despite much higher rates of unemployment.   

Which suggests that stimulus funds are being allocated without thought to the level of unemployment within states. If government spending could in fact create jobs, then the problem of unemployment could be mitigated by distributing funds to states based on their relative unemployment levels.  

But that's not being done at all. Instead, funds are being distributed randomly, as quickly as possible, among the states. That in turn suggests something else: Even the federal government doesn't believe the myth that government spending can actually create jobs.

Veronique de Rugy is an economist at The Mercatus Center at George Mason University and a columnist for Reason.

NEXT: Queer Victorians

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The chart would be more useful if TARP money were included. We in Michigan got a gigabuck or ten from that pile of money.

    I do realize that once money gets granted/loaned/invested in a company that tracking wheere it was actually spent is nigh impossible, but still …

  2. This article is such crap that I’m amazed that it was published on this website. And I say this as an opponent of the stimulus.

    1. Just by eyeballing the data on that chart, the data do seem to support a linear relationship between Funds/person and the Unemployment rate. There are outliers (DC and Michigan) to be sure, and you may not like the slope of the linear fit, but I bet a linear regression would give a fairly high r squared value.

    2. The conclusion that the federal government doesn’t believe that the stimulus can create jobs isn’t supported by the data. A better conclusion might be that the government thinks it can create jobs in politically well connected states (or districts).

    1. Au contraire, when I eyeball this, I see a pretty freaking low R^2, but more importantly, a slope that is (1) definitely distinguishable from and lower than where it ought to be according to VdR’s criterion, and (2) possibly indistinguishable from zero.

      (That’s once we throw out DC, which we expect a priori to be an outlier, and indeed it is.)

      I can’t disagree with your second point, though.

      1. Basically, if they were spending stimulus money based on unemployment, most states would fall on or very near the line of best fit — it would be a nearly linear relationship.

        Despite my caveat about the line itself being suspect, there seems to be a very weak correlation in the line of best fit between spending and unemployment.

        1. If they were spending stimulus money based on unemployment as they ought to according to a sort of first-approximation toy model, most states would fall on or very near The Line, period.

          Again, a lot of confusion here seems to be from interpreting the line as a fit from a linear regression, which it’s just not. It’s more like a line representing a null hypothesis (“if funds per capita were allocated in proportion to the unemployment rate, the intercept would be zero and the slope would be [whatever value]”). A regression might give evidence that unemployment rates are partly considered in allocation of stimulus funds, but not to the extent that they should be.

          The toy model might be unrealistic, but that’s a different story.

      2. My eyeball is of a minutely positive slope. VdR’s “ought to be” line is rhetorical and unvaluable. A statistically derived line would have been more illustrative of how poor the correlation was.

        I’d also like to know how this chart would look with “blueness” in the last election on the X axis. And what is that state getting shafted at the bottom below North Dakota?

        Also, isn’t “Rhodes Island” in Greece?

        1. A statistically derived line would have been more illustrative of how poor the correlation was.

          Not necessarily. To assess “how poor”, you still need a benchmark to compare to.

      3. Correct, low R^2. Yes the slope shown is exceedingly deceptive and definitely not a linear regression. Having done several thousand linear regressions, my eyeball says the “best-fit” line goes from about 4%,$200 to 13%,$400 (maybe 14%,$400). Not sure of the percentage of construction spending accounted for, but it seems completely reasonable that infrastructure improvement projects in DC are more expensive than in N.D.

        I agree with Frayed Knot’s first sentence though. Pretty sloppy from VdR. Obviously intending to show something, what that is I don’t know. More analysis, please

        1. I also distrust that the slope presented actually represents spending per state if it were a linear function of unemployment; virtually every state has less funding than the line would give it. All in all, extremely misleading, which is a disappointment given that she is probably right to a certain extent.

        2. I also distrust that the slope presented actually represents spending per state if it were a linear function of unemployment; virtually every state has less funding than the line would give it. All in all, extremely misleading, which is a disappointment given that she is probably right to a certain extent.

    2. Yeah if you see a linear relationship, you must be an editor at Science or Nature magazines.

      However, an even better conclusion would be: The government thinks it can create jobs with stimulus but doesn’t know how to do it.

  3. government can create jobs by spending money.

    This claim, in and of itself, pisses me off to no end. “Some people” believe jobs are some sort of commodity widget, which can be conjured up out of thin air by (of all things) government fiat.

    I blame the Degreed Educators.

  4. The line in the graph is suspect. Since it takes the total stimulus spending, and divides by the population adjusted for unemployment, there should be roughly the same number of states above the line as below it. Instead, almost all states are at or below the line.

    The line is beasically saying, “On average, almost every state is below average.”

    Does that line ignore the unspent stimulus money? Or not adjust for the population of states? Something is way off here.

    1. there should be roughly the same number of states above the line as below it. Instead, almost all states are at or below the line

      Isn’t that the point? That there _should_ be roughly the same number of states above the line as below it, but this is not the case in reality?

      1. No. Statistically speaking, the number of states above the line should approximately match the number below the line, no matter what is going on. This means the line itself apparently is being calculated incorrectly.

        What should be happening is that the line of best fit should be sloping up sharply, rather than being almost horizontal if I’m eyeballing this data correctly.

        1. That is, about half the states should be above the average of all states, and about half below the average of all states, no matter what, but if the spending was in places of high unemployment, the states with low unemployment would get little or no spending.

    2. The slope of the line assumes that for every percentage point of unemployment, $50/person should be spent in stimulus money. It is, of course, completely arbitrary, as far as I can tell. I could create another line with a $25/percentage point slope and I bet it would fit the data much better and would still be just as linear.

      1. Given the unemployment rate for each state, if you multiply the value on the line by the population, then add up across the states, it needs to add up to stimulus dollars spent. So the slope isn’t arbitrary.

        The goal here isn’t to take the data as given and fit a line to it. It’s to compare the actual data to where it should lie given certain assumptions.

        1. That makes sense regarding the slope being related to the total dollars spent – I hadn’t thought of that. My mistake.

          However, what set me off what the use of “linear function” as the descriptor of the blue line in the graph. Yes, it’s a linear function, but I can find a linear function that will fit the data quite nicely. In other words, it’s not a sufficient description of what VdR is looking for.

  5. Stop knocking the stimulus bill. At least it’s given Veronique a job!*

    *I apologize if someone else has already pulled this joke, but if I read all of Veronique’s posts on what a pile o’ crap the bill is I wouldn’t have a job.

  6. I’m guessing state populations are seriously skewing the graph. There are less than a million people in Montana, but lots of (for example) miles of Interstate. If you assume repaving, per mile, costs roughly the same all over the country (remember Davis-Bacon), you’re going to see a much higher per capita number.

    1. The Bakken oil field lies under Eastern Montana part of Saskatchewan and most of north Dakota. A large amount of private money is going into the region but also stimulus from Ottawa and Washington as well as Regina Helena and Bismark. Premiere Wall and Governor Schweitzer both see the project as a high priority. Oil has the potential to create a lot of jobs attracting workers from other parts of the country, this throws the numbers out. I don’t think it is a terrible investment I just don’t see why government has to be involved. the project I think is also hoped to create jobs elsewhere and to lower fuel costs. Once again I agree but do not see why the government needs to be involved. One kink is that the buy American clause may impede imports of steel from Evraz in Regina.

  7. the problem with this approach is it displays only spending. spending can never be below 0 by definition, as long as you ignore where the money is coming from. so the line is constrained to pass through the origin. the slope is then dictated by the total spending divvied out over the number of states weighted by their unemployment rates.

    A far more effective way to look at this would be to assume that the funding for the stimulus will fall the same way that the current tax revenues do (per capita, by state) and project NET spending (stimulus dollars – inevitable tax revenues calculated as above) Then we could examine to what extent the spending redistributes taxes from low unemployment states to high unemployment states.

  8. If the purpose of the bill was to stimulate the economy by offsetting private unemployment, they would have written the bill to automatically allocate funds based on unemployment statistics.

    In truth, the idea behind the stimulus is that randomly spending money on anything “stimulates” the economy. Keynes himself once said that the government could just bury money in a mine and then let people dig it up. The jobs created digging up the economy would stimulate everyone else.

    This is nonsense. In order to create wealth, work has to be purposeful. Farmers actually have to plant and harvest food crops, not random plants. The same is true of all other economic activity. People need to do something that other people need doing. Otherwise, the activity destroys wealth.

    The Keynesian nonsense is caused by people focusing on the flow of money as a driver of economic activity instead of looking at it as a side effect. Its akin to someone observing that ants scurry around while collecting food and then leaping to the conclusion that you can cause them to collect more food by poking the mound with a stick because that causes the ants to scurry around more.

  9. on second thought, the whole graph might be total garbage. there is more spending projected than there is spending authorized: an obvious flaw. somethings fishy.

  10. Sort of piling on — but you can lose the constraint that any linear fit pass through the origin. I.e., the gov’t probably “stimulates” states with no unemployment.

    1. I see that domoarrigato made this point above while I was typing. Sorry for “piling on”!

    2. Gah. There may be flaws here, but the straight line is not supposed to fit the data. If it did, there wouldn’t be anything to talk about.

      Right or wrong, the straight line is presented as an ideal corresponding to the assumption that stimulus spending per capita should be proportional to unemployment. It has to pass through the origin, since this ideal implies that there should be no stimulus spending in states with no unemployment (if such existed).

      In reality, of course, a “line of best fit” is not going to pass through the origin (and knowing what we know of politics, we don’t expect it to), which is part of the point.

  11. The administration would merely sidestep the whole argument and claim that sure, not that many jobs were created, but look how many jobs were saved.

  12. get those “jobless recovery” bloody shirts back out!

  13. Sometime this year, we taxpayers will again receive an Economic Stimulus payment. This is a very exciting program.

    I’ll explain it using the Q and A format:

    Q. What is an Economic Stimulus payment?

    A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.

    Q. Where will the government get this money?

    A. From taxpayers..

    Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?

    A. Only a smidgen.

    Q. What is the purpose of this payment?

    A. The plan is for you to use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.

    Q. But isn’t that stimulating the economy of Asia ?

    A. Shut up or you don’t get your check.

    Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the US economy by spending your stimulus check wisely:

    1. If you spend the stimulus money at Wal-Mart, your money will go to China .

    2. If you spend it on gasoline, your money will go to Saudi Arabia .

    3. If you purchase a computer, it will go to India .

    4. If you purchase fruit and vegetables, it will go to Mexico, Honduras or Guatemala .

    5. If you buy a car, it will go to Japan or Korea .

    6. If you purchase useless plastic stuff, it will go to Taiwan .

    7. If you pay off your credit cards, or buy stock, it will go to pay management bonuses and be hidden in offshore accounts.

    Or, you can keep the money in America by:

    1. spending it at yard sales or flea markets, or

    2. going to baseball or football games, or

    3. hiring prostitutes, or

    4. buying cheap beer or

    5. getting tattoos.

    These are the only wholly-American-owned businesses still operating in the US .

    Conclusion:

    The best way to stimulate the economy is to go to a ball game with a prostitute that you met at a yard sale and drink beer all day until you’re drunk enough to go get tattooed.

    1. Too bad most people haven’t figured all this out already – it’s not like this is being said for the first time.

  14. I’m a critic of the stimulus plan, but I have to agree that this article is rubbish. I don’t have a background in economics, but I got a C+ in Statistics 101 ten years ago and I see no basis for these assertions:

    1) That the relationship between spending and unemployment should be linear, as opposed to logarithmic or exponential.
    2) That the relationship, if linear, should be the ratio portrayed by the blue line.
    3) That unemployment rate is the only appropriate factor to allocate funds, consistent with the belief that funds could create jobs. Jobless rate (which is different from unemployment rate), the makeup of prospective employers in the state, cost of living, state- and local-level government actions, etc… can make the usefulness of a dollar different in different states.

    Finally, failing to calculate and disclose the best-fit trend for the data in the graph is unforgivable for a professional.

    IMHO, the feds believe the stimulus spending can create jobs. Those in power then gamed the system to create jobs that benefit their constituents or cronies, rather than for the greatest benefit to the country as a whole. Some just games the system more effectively.

  15. The stimulus is a failure in general but in the context of jobs is a particularly egregious failure. The stimulus did create jobs in the sense it gave people something to do for a time. Dig a hole for the next guy to fill in. A day a week at the post office. Tear up a mile of pavement to repave it. The stimulus packages are failures because they have no metric or measurement for return on investment. There is not any substantive measurements which show people have started careers or meaningful occupations. The stimulus to the economy is drugs to the addict. Just one more dose and I’ll be fine. Just one more hit and I’ll quit. Unfortunately, drugs and the stimulus money coincide in that the pusher requires money from the addict to give more drugs. The addict will try to get that money ANYWAY they can. Similarly, the present administration is going to give more stimulus money only if people promise the currency of votes. Likes drugs, people will not realize the damage of ostensibly “free” money until they hit rock bottom like an addict.

  16. “we should expect the government to invest relatively more money in the states that have the highest unemployment rates and less money in the states with lower unemployment rates. ”

    Why would we EVER expect this? This isn’t how the US government is set up to work.

  17. The article also seems to be built on the abstraction of the federal government as a monolithic entity with a single motivation and a single mind. This is an unhelpful way to conceive the government. Government action is driven by individuals making decisions, with different goals and different means available to pursue those goals.

    Say there are only two states: Hobostan (high unemployment) and Joboslavia (low unemployment). Each has one Representative, each of whom believe that stimulus spending can create jobs, and each of whom try to secure the most spending for their state. The Representative of Joboslavia is a more skilled polician and secures more stimulus money for Joboslavia, even though Hobostan needs it more. Does this prove that the government does not believe stimulus spending creates jobs?

  18. Remember that most of the actual spending in ARRA goes to “State Fiscal Relief,” “Aid to Directly Impacted Individuals” and “Government Investment Outlays.”

    Its purpose is not to save or to create jobs but to provide a lifeline for federal, state and local agencies until the economy magically recovers.

    This doesn’t solve the mysteries in the data: I still don’t understand why Vermont has all this pull. But the allocation of ARRA benefits might make more sense if you see them as rewards to government agencies that have mismanaged their finances, rather than as money thrown directly at unemployment.

  19. Remember that most of the actual spending in ARRA A.S.S.R.A.P.E. goes to “State Fiscal Relief,” “Aid to Directly Impacted Individuals” and “Government Investment Outlays.”

    American
    Structured
    Securities
    Rescue
    Act
    for a
    Prudent
    Economy

    FIFW

  20. The line in the graph is clearly not the correct R-squared line, and is being highly biased by the DC data point.

  21. If the stimulus money is used to hire an unemployed worker to perform some useful work, it’s a job created. If the stimulus money is used to pay a teacher whose job is otherwise eliminated, it’s a job saved. End of the story. Where does the stimulus money come from? They are printed by the Treasury. That’s the magic of goverment intervention. An unemployed worker, like an unfilled airline seat, is a perishable good. It’s always a good thing to print money to put people back to work when the private sector fails to do so!

  22. When viewed as a whole and in context, there is little similarity between Lancome’s and Christian louboutin Shoes’s uses of Christian louboutin Shoes. Lancome does not use the Registered Marks Christian louboutin or Choose Christian louboutin Shoes. Lancome’s Christian louboutin Shoes Wear lipstick does have as its first word of the product name, a word that is identical to Christian louboutin Shoes’s Registered Mark Christian louboutin Shoes. The similarity of the marks ends there.

  23. Wouldn’t a $$ per unemployed person line make more sense than a $$ per unemployment rate line?

  24. I disagree that the plot says nothing about the stimulus. There is a slight upward slope if a best fit line were to be drawn but the best fit of all, I suspect, would be a plot of stimulus money and plurality of votes for Obama in the election.

  25. A great metric would be government $ spent per lost job.

  26. I agree that the graph is flawed for reasons other people have mentioned. However, one thing it does show: Money is not necessarily going to the places that have the most under-utilized resources. This has an impact on the multiplier estimates, because by definition you only get a fiscal multiplier if you are spending hte money to put resources into play (people, materials) which would otherwise be on the sidelines.

    If significant money is going into a state with a 4.8% unemployment rate, it’s likely that the money is simply crowding out private capital and distorting choices. Therefore, the real-world multiplier will be nowhere near the theoretical multiplier calculated by Christina Romer.

  27. I saw a FUNNY, one-minute interview about Stimulus waste on NBC’s Phoenix affiliate.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHHGL1WvNT4

    These guys are really good! Watch the pork roll by as Obama lectures. Go to Stimuluscigars.com. Click on news.

    If I didn’t laugh, I’d cry.

  28. Won’t be long now to see if the stimulous wheels come off !

    Roll on 2010

  29. […] The Secret Message of Stimulus Spending – Reason Magazine – https://reason.com/archives/200…..f-stimulus – first time home buyer To be eligible, buyers cannot have owned a home for the past three years, and the new home has to be used as a primary residence… -http://stimulushomebuyer.info […]

  30. Shoes can make a woman believe she is the most ravishing woman in the world,is no doubt that christian louboutin have done even better.

  31. Whether sandals or boots, Christian Louboutin shoes will let you become attractive.I believe you will like it.

  32. swiss rolex fake grade AAA has also jumped into an international brand. It is worth
    mentioning that

  33. come !come my dear friends

  34. Shoes can make a woman believe she is the most ravishing woman in the world,http://www.highheelssale.com

  35. Christian Louboutin shoes will let you become attractive.I believe you will like it.

  36. When you look at a trade agreement like NAFTA, it’s about that thick (holds his hands about?

  37. Christian Louboutin Online are sweet and sexy mature campus wind and wind combination.
    http://www/clshoesok.com

  38. Shoes can make a woman believe she is the most ravishing woman in the world,is no doubt that christian louboutin heels
    have done even better.

  39. it is interesting and informative article. This has been very helpful understanding a lot

    of things. I’m sure a lot of other people will agree with me.

  40. [url=http://www.lubattery.com]Toshiba laptop battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com]Dell laptop battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com]Ibm laptop battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Compaq-Acer-Sony.html]Compaq laptop battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Compaq-Acer-Sony.html]Acer laptop battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Compaq-Acer-Sony.html]Sony laptop battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Lenovo-Hp-LG.html]Lenovo laptop battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Lenovo-Hp-LG.html]Hp laptop battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Lenovo-Hp-LG.html]LG laptop battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Apple-HP-Compaq.html]Apple laptop battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Apple-HP-Compaq.html]HP Pavilion battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Apple-HP-Compaq.html]Compaq presario battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Ibm-Apple-Acer.html]Apple macbook battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Ibm-Apple-Acer.html]Ibm thinkpad battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Ibm-Apple-Acer.html]Acer aspire battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Toshiba-Acer-HP.html]Acer travelmate battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Toshiba-Acer-HP.html]Toshiba satellite battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.lubattery.com/Toshiba-Acer-HP.html]HP Pavilion dv6000 laptop battery[/url]
    [url=http://www.haopu.com]shredder[/url]
    [url=http://www.haopu.com]binding machine[/url][url=http://www.8658.org]Vibram Five Fingers[/url] on sale,we offer [url=http://www.8658.org]Vibram Five Fingers shoes[/url] at wholesale price,if you wan to [url=http://www.8658.org]buy Vibram Five Fingers shoes[/url],it is [url=http://www.8658.org]cheap Vibram Five Fingers shoes[/url] online.

  41. Shoes can make a woman believe she is the most ravishing woman in the world,is no doubt that christian louboutin
    have done even better.

  42. My only point is that if you take the Bible straight, as I’m sure many of Reasons readers do, you will see a lot of the Old Testament stuff as absolutely insane. Even some cursory knowledge of Hebrew and doing some mathematics and logic will tell you that you really won’t get the full deal by just doing regular skill english reading for those books. In other words, there’s more to the books of the Bible than most will ever grasp. I’m not concerned that Mr. Crumb will go to hell or anything crazy like that! It’s just that he, like many types of religionists, seems to take it literally, take it straight…the Bible’s books were not written by straight laced divinity students in 3 piece suits who white wash religious beliefs as if God made them with clothes on…the Bible’s books were written by people with very different mindsets..

  43. My only point is that if you take the Bible straight, as I’m sure many of Reasons readers do, you will see a lot of the Old Testament stuff as absolutely insane. Even some cursory knowledge of Hebrew and doing some mathematics and logic will tell you that you really won’t get the full deal by just doing regular skill english reading for those books. In other words, there’s more to the books of the Bible than most will ever grasp. I’m not concerned that Mr. Crumb will go to hell or anything crazy like that! It’s just that he, like many types of religionists, seems to take it literally, take it straight…the Bible’s books were not written by straight laced divinity students in 3 piece suits who white wash religious beliefs as if God made them with clothes on…the Bible’s books were written by people with very different mindsets..

  44. Do you want to be more fashion, more charming,just do a little thing. A exciting purchasing is ready to go! Just pay attention to. We are specializing in providing new era hats ,Monster Energy Hats ,one industries hats,rockstar energy hats,Monster Energy Hats which would be your final choice. Just do what you want alonging with your active heart. Our website is persisting on best customer service. Please come and enjoy it!

  45. christian louboutin pumps are beautiful symbol, the red shoes so that you have been dancing, christian louboutin, and christian louboutin sale while people have been walking, keep interest rates until the end

  46. [url=http://www.iclshoes.com]christian louboutin discount[/url]christian louboutin discount[/url] is a very stylish shoes, women’s favorite.

  47. [url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/air-max-shoes-nike-air-max-2009-c-103_81.html]Air max 2009 sale[/url] hot now!special latest [url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/nike-free-c-162.html]nike running shoes[/url],[url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/air-max-shoes-nike-air-max-2012-c-103_177.html]air max 2012[/url],[url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/air-max-shoes-nike-air-max-2010-c-103_113.html]air max 2010 sale[/url] are more popular in 2010 summer.our [url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/lacoste-shoes-c-7.html]lacoste online store[/url] have many style and comfortable [url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com]lacoste mens shoes[/url], most [url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/lacoste-shoes-c-7.html]lacoste shoes sale[/url] are discount,you can get a pair of [url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/lacoste-shoes-c-7.html]lacoste outlet[/url] for your friend and your family.[url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/nike-free-c-162.html]nike free shoes on sale[/url] allow me to slide well on the floor while offering me adequate support in the arch and comfort throughout my feet.[url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/air-max-shoes-nike-air-max-2009-c-103_81.html]Nike Air Max 2009 sale[/url] clearance,[url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/air-max-shoes-nike-air-max-2010-c-103_113.html]air max 2010 sale[/url] low price.as a runner you can choose [url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/puma-shoes-c-137.html]puma outlet[/url],[url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/puma-shoes-c-137.html]puma running shoes[/url].in winter [url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com/ugg-boots-c-2.html]ugg boots outlet[/url] are your best choice.you will like [url=http://www.ecshoesmall.com]mens shoes lacoste[/url].

  48. your topic is interesting! I like it very much! You also can visit my blog. This is nike shox shoes

  49. Thank you, my dear on this important topic You can also browse my site and I am honored to do this site for songs
    http://www.a6rbna.com
    This website is for travel to Malaysia
    http://www.m-arabi.com

  50. Thank you
    http://www.arab75.com/
    Pretty good post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading
    http://www.arab75.com/up/

  51. Thank you for all of the services Tkdmoh

  52. Thank you, my dear on this important topic You can also browse my site and I am honored to do this site for songs
    http://www.iraq3.com
    This website is for travel to Malaysia
    http://www.iraq3.com/vb

  53. Thank you, my dear on this important topic You can also browse my site and I am honored to do this site for songs
    http://www.iraq3.com
    This website is for travel to Malaysia
    http://www.iraq3.com/vb

  54. Thank you, my dear on this important topic You can also browse my site and I am honored to do this site for songs
    http://www.xn—-ymcbk2czfhi8a.com This website is for travel to Malaysia
    http://www.xn—-ymcbk2czfhi8a.com

  55. The ideas you posed in you article are first rate, fresh and revealing. You must continue to produce these kinds of articles in order to enlighten the masses. Thank you.

  56. a thing captivating relating to this shining gold together with cubic zirconia bracelet featuring

  57. As well as crucial to 1st decide on what kind of tiffany jewelry suits your taste. Its compatibility utilizing your functions as well as complexion also matter to a great extent.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.