Wednesday, February 01, 2006

The Internal Welfare Service

I am back from a quick visit with the family and, since I am still off work, I am helping out my dad with his practice. He is a Certified Public Accountant so, as I am sure you can imagine, things are pretty hectic these days. Dad handles the complex stuff and I prepare the individual tax returns for his review.

Tax I was one of my favorite classes in law school, but I walked away from it with the distinct opinion that the Tax Code is a welfare plan for the rich. Now that I am seeing it firsthand in practice, my earlier beliefs are confirmed.

Two returns I prepared yesterday illustrate my point. One client makes over $100K per year, owns rental property and has a kid in college. Another client is a young 20's student who makes $6K per year from the odd jobs she works during her time off from college. The former will get a generous refund and the latter owes more money to the government.

How is this possible?

When the government gives you a deduction or a credit for something that not every other taxpayer gets, then it is subsidizing your lifestyle. For example, families get tax credits for their kids and for tuition paid on student loans. But, if you have no kids and you pay no tuition on a student loan, your taxes subsidize someone else's choices to have those things.

Because the well-to-do client gets deductions for all the "expenses" of operating rental property, the income earned from the rents essentially ends up untaxable. It's a wash. The government encourages property owners to operate at a "loss" by giving them welfare, i.e. deductions, to compensate for that loss. Because the well-to-do client has kids, he gets welfare (called a "tax credit") to subsidize his choice to have a family. The other client? Well, she does not own rental property. She does not have kids. So she owes money to the government from the whopping $6K she made last year.

It is shameful. Why should a single person be penalized for not having kids? Why should someone get welfare for having children? That was their choice and they should bear the responsibility for funding it. Why am I subsidizing someone's rental property? If they are wealthy enough to own rental property, they do not need my help.

Republicans spend an inordinate amount of time complaining about welfare and other "socialist" practices in America but, if they were really sincere about it, they would lead the charge to abolish the Tax Code. No deductions, no credits, no more welfare. As the inane cliche goes, "freedom isn't free", but the rich aren't paying for it. They are too busy collecting welfare.


At 2:13 PM, February 01, 2006 , Blogger bombsoverbaghdad said...

I disagree 100%. The government encourages people to have children and educate them because that's what stable, prosporous societies do. Now that everyone hates even the thought of children, it's coming into question. Parents should be encouraged to have kids and educate them. Tuff luck to those that don't want 'em. Families are the unit of every society.

And America has always been a country in which private property is paramount. I probably spend $12K/year on house repairs. If I couldn't deduct that, I'd be losing money like crazy. It's a system that encourages people to buy homes, and improve those homes, which is good for the people and for the economy--and therefore, the country. It's not about subsidizing anyone. Are you turning commie on me??

At 6:55 PM, February 01, 2006 , Blogger jj said...

Remember what the President said before the election.

"Be careful of these folks who travel around the country making all these big promises, and say, oh, don't worry, we'll pay for it by taxing the rich. You know how that goes. The rich hires accountants and lawyers and you get stuck with the bill. But we're not going to let him raise your taxes. For the sake of economic growth, for the sake of job creation, we will keep America's taxes low." (Applause.)

In other words don't even bother taxing the rich it won't matter.
So we should cut their taxes.

Make sense?

BOB you make a great point about our society encouraging family and an educated population. That is the future of the country.

However the American playing field is slanted in favor of the people who least need the help. The tax system needs to be scraped and redone so those with accountants and lawyers will pay thier fair share.

At 6:57 PM, February 01, 2006 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...


You're the commie, not me. :-)

It's not the government's job to encourage anyone to make babies. I find it extremely difficult to believe that Americans would stop reproducing if the government didn't offer a tax credit. The most overpopulated nations are those who do not get tax credits for babies. Are you telling me that Americans wouldn't have kids and educate them if the government didn't offer an incentive? If that's the case, America is worse off than I thought.

If private property is paramount, then why do you expect the government to subsidize your choice? If your house needs repairs, that's your problem, not mine.

At 7:29 AM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger mrsleep said...

II, welcome back to the promised land :)

A complex topic without simple answers, however initial takeaways tell us that "sometin' just doesn't add up!". If you make under $10K a year and you owe taxes, something is wrong.

The bottom line is the tax code is too complicated.

Without divulging everything about my income (I'll tell you we make north of $100K per year), my boss probably makes $50K more per year than I do. I have two kids in College, and Mother-in-Law I have to support. My boss has 3 kids like I do, of elementary or middle school age. Over a beer on a business trip months ago, he indicated he received an $11K tax refund, while I was basically a net zero between Federal and State.

He has three rental properties, and has a series of personal, family, investment corporations. I don't fully understand all of it, but something doesn't add up.

At 7:50 AM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Stalin the Shark said...

Well, here's my $0.02. I think there's a legitimate government role in advancing socially desirable outcomes, and homeownership and an educated populace are desirable, methinks.

That said, the instruments of the tax code are arguably too blunt to be extremely effective.

From a political angle, you're absolutely spot-on: this is middle-class (and to a large extent upper-class) welfare. However, it's never going to get cut, because these benefits are targeted towards the people who actually vote. That's the reality of the situation.

:-), StS

At 9:31 AM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger bombsoverbaghdad said...

Psuedo-Intellectual Insurgent,


Put down the $5 latte, and let me school you for a second.

Your arguments start with an errouneous premise. Why can't the government encourage family and education? Government gives incentives for a plenty of things. Jail is an incentive not to commit crime, for example. The GI bill is an incentive to join the military. The world is not a bubble. Peope need incentives to do things. It's not that Americans would "stop" having children without tax credits; it's that the tax credits make family life, and thus the country, better.

Regarding homes, what sets America apart is our high rate of home ownership. It gives people and family "roots." It stabilizes our economy. We as a society (not the big bad gov't) have decided that we want home repairs to be tax deductible. Poor people don't pay taxes anyway because they don't have income.

At 9:39 AM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

It's not "why can't the government encourage family and education?" The question is why should it and who should pay for it? If you want to have a family, that's your choice. You pay for it.

This is where we diverge. I believe in a VERY limited government, financially and morally. Freedom of choice means responsibility to pay for your own choices. What you are advocating is welfare for certain classes of persons the government deems worthy. If you believe welfare is okay and you are willing to pay for it, that's fine. I don't.

And working poor people do have income and, thus, pay taxes.

At 11:09 AM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

02 02 06

What about the capital gains tax from the sale of a property? That can be screwy unless you roll the money over to another property, right? And the estate tax? Don't you think those are assaults on the rich?

Glad you are back btw;)

At 11:16 AM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

I don't think the capital gains tax is an assault on the rich given that it is a lower rate than the income tax rate. Why there is a distinction makes no sense. If, as BOB contends, the government really wanted to encourage ownership of private property, there would be no tax on capital transactions at all.

I don't know enough about the estate tax to comment.

At 11:24 AM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

02 02 06

Don't you find the discrepencies in percentages appalling II? I thought you were into the concept of fairness, oh maybe that was F.A.R.,but anyway, it isn't fair to tax me at a higher rate because I make more money. That is bs, as someone who is more of a libertarian I am surprised you don't advocate a flatter tax structure. I really am bothered that my husband and I have a really high tax burden, despite property ownership and those tax advantages. We have no children and reallly pooor people with kids get a child tax credit, which bothers me too. But it does take more money to raise a family and to a degree it is an investment in the growth of the society. In that sense I agree with BOB. But the favoritism towards childrearers is a bit unfair,nonetheless.

At 11:25 AM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

Thanks for sticking up for me MSR! :-) Can you believe Justin would call someone a commie? :-) Especially me.

On a serious note, do you think there should be one flat tax rate or a progressive rate? Why should there be deductions and credits? For anyone?

The girl paid taxes because her parents claimed her as a dependent. Another absurdity in the law. She paid more because she's not the head of a household.

At 11:27 AM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

I wrote the last comment before your last comment came on.

The discrepancies aggravate me to no end. I think there should be one flat rate for all and abolish all credits and deductions. That is a free market. Assume the costs of the choices you make in this world. That goes for businesses and individuals.

At 11:28 AM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

02 02 06

Wait a minute II, she should have gotten a 1098T form to deduct her tuition expenses from her tax burden. If she attends a state university, she likely paid over a thousand dollars for a year of schooling. So that would further reduce her tax burden.I am not understanding how she owed anything. How many deductions was she claiming?

At 11:32 AM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

02 02 06

Okay, so the girl must not have chosen zero dependents then. And I guess the education credit would go to her parents for tuition expenses and not her. Hmmm interesting scenario.
I do NOT like a progressive tax structure at all and am certainly more of a flat tax person. I just don't know how we can implement that on such a wide scale as the USA. Our perceptions need to be changed about the pros and cons of flat tax structures. HOWEVER, I must say that I benefit from many of the deductions for home improvement and loan interest deduction. In that sense, if a flat tax structure changed all of that I might not be living the quality of life that I enjoy right now. So to be quite honest, philosophically I believe in flatter taxes, but am unsure if I would benefit (to the degree that I do) if we had one here.

At 11:40 AM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

Her parents took the tuition deduction because it was much more beneficial to them tax wise than to her. I assume her parents will pay her tax bill.

I too benefit from a great deal of the welfare that the IRS hands out. Home ownership, carryover losses to offset gains, etc. But it still doesn't feel right. :-)

The entire society has grown accustomed to that handout from the government that we don't even call it welfare anymore.

At 1:16 PM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger bombsoverbaghdad said...


You are using facile, dreamy notions in your effort to simplify goverment. Sure, does that tax code discriminate? Yes. But it's something that we as a society have decided. Period.

The quintessential "limousine liberal" wants fairness for all while they enjoy the riches themselves. :-)

MSR and II, how am I a commie?? You family-hating feminists make me want to puke! :-)

Sounds like you guys don't know how to do taxes. :-)

At 1:47 PM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...


Oh, my dear friend, I am waiting for you to explain the facts. How is the tax code not welfare? Or, are you saying it is, but you are okay with giving welfare?

If you are okay with the welfare scheme, you have answered the question about your communist leanings. :-)

It is irrelevant whether "all" have agreed on it. There can be a democratic choice for communism.

At 2:25 PM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger bombsoverbaghdad said...

I am OK with incentives to buy land and raise families. You can call it "welfare" or "macaroni." :-)

Real welfare is damn near criminal to me. Checks in exchange for nothing??? At least property owners and people with kids are contributing to the furthering of society.

At 2:47 PM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

I'll call it macaroni dammit! :-)

Checks for nothing? If the stereotype welfare mother is raising 8 children, and you think it is okay for the government to incentivize raising families, what's the problem? The more babies she makes, the more money she gets. Those highly fertile mothers are ensuring the survival of our species. Not the yuppies with 1-2 kids.

At 3:15 PM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger bombsoverbaghdad said...

Well, the difference is that the stereotypical welfare mother is not WORKING. You have to work to get the tax credits; the welfare mother simply needs to get screwed.

Damn, I'm good! Admit it.

At 3:33 PM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

02 02 06

"MSR and II, how am I a commie?? You family-hating feminists make me want to puke! :-)

Sounds like you guys don't know how to do taxes. :-)"

BOB what are you talking about? I didn't call you a commie, I actually meant that I thought II was influenced by Stalin the Shark and was wondering if she was one, in a joking sort of way. Also read my statements about the tax tables and stuff. I am good with taxes, but admittedly use my CPA cousin to get stuff through the loopholes. So like I said before, although a flat tax is a good theoretical concept, that might just do away with deduction schemes, which would not benefit me. At least I am honest about it. It seems as though I agree with you. I don't get the family hating feminist stuff. I am married happily so what the hell are you talking about?!!! I take more insult in people calling me something like that than I do anything else:( GARRRRRRRH! ;)

Nevertheless, II has distilled her position on the issue and I can see her perspective. We all are benefitting from a welfare state.

At 3:33 PM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

Nope. I won't admit it. You haven't earned it yet. :-)

You said that it is okay for the government to subsidize families. You didn't say that the families have to have working parents to be entitled to subsidies. Are you now qualifying your statement? The government shouldn't subsidize the family in which the woman chooses to be home with her children instead of working? That's not very family values of you. Tisk tisk. :-)

At 3:34 PM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

02 02 06

Yeah, cuz admittedly BOB said he would not be able to live his life without the home improvement deductions. I sympathize...

At 3:53 PM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger bombsoverbaghdad said...


I was just pullin[' your leg.


Well, obviously only working people pay taxes, right? Not qualifying, but stating the obvious. (Did the smog in Cairo affect your brain cells?) :-)

If it were up to me, the tax code would provide incentives for stay-at-home Moms. You know how I am...quite traditional. I like 'em barefoot and pregnant, just like Dr. King did. No need for a competitor; there must be a division of labor. :-) Seriously. That's the way my granddaddy did it, and that's the way I will.

I damn near want to put burkhas on them!!

At 4:20 PM, February 02, 2006 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

Now you're quibbling about the methods by which the welfare will be disbursed. Welfare is welfare, regardless of whether government sends a check or if you take it as a "credit" against taxes you may owe.

At 12:02 PM, February 03, 2006 , Blogger Reign of Reason said...

Well -- for a couple of late comments...

Flat taxes: nope -- don't want 'em. The greater the reward you reap from our social/economic system, the more you should put back into it. Our economic system rewards the stupidest things: pro atheletes, movie stars, etc. Great.. the make a lot of money, but government has a role in seeing to the welfare of ALL citizens. If we leave it to the markets, teachers will draw next-to-nothing for a salary and people who trade paper on wall street will be the "most valuable" members of society.

Captial gains tax: yep, I support it... you bet! Government should favor those who generate their income via LABOR, not sitting on their but letting their money work for them.

Now, before you pounce, I'm in both boats: I have capital investments and own a medium sized aerospace engineering firm... My investment income SHOULD be taxed more.


At 2:04 PM, February 03, 2006 , Blogger Intellectual Insurgent said...

RoR -

I was waiting for your input and expected that response. :-)

Do you think the capital gains rate should be higher than the income tax rate? What about credits and deductions?

At 3:05 PM, February 03, 2006 , Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

02 03 06

I don't get your response ROR. Don't you think that having your money 'work for you' is work? I am working on some financial stuff right now and I think it is a lot of work and the stress is crazy! Labor jobs you don't have to take home; when you own your own business you do, right? I think it is a heart attack maker myself, although I am working on it...In the end, you are assigning more value to labor and I think that is flawed. What about assigning value to those who produce ideas? What aboout assigning value to those who EMPLOY others? That is why I don't feel bad when I accept write offs, I feel like I am contributing to the infrastructure of our society, similar to BOB's argument.

At 7:35 PM, February 03, 2006 , Blogger jj said...

My $.02 may not be worth that much but here goes my rambling.

I have no problem with the rich paying more as a percentage. The price you pay for becoming rich in our great country.

Now it seems as if the wealthy are rewarded for becoming wealthy and having the power and ability to "work" the system hardly a level field.

As to what "rich" is?
Very subjective But when I think of the wealthy I do not think of the people that earn $100,000 - $200,000 I think of the people in the top few percentage points. In other words the very small percentage that has the power to continue to concentrate wealth.

As for welfare the mother having more little money makers is a problem I thought was fixed with welfare reform (may be wrong) if not that needs to be dealt with. However a bigger problem is corporate welfare. The hard working middle class resents people getting welfare (while they bust there butts) so that is where the powers that be point the finger so they may continue recieving much larger amounts.

It seems to be easier to go after the little lazy fish rather than the killer shark. Speaking of sharks are there comments missing or was I seeing things?

At 11:06 PM, February 05, 2006 , Blogger Mahndisa S. Rigmaiden said...

02 05 06

Yes JJ some comments got out of hand and II deleted them.

II: Here is fellow blogger KIpEsquire's take on the Estate tax. I recall you mentioned that you didn't know enough about it to comment, so I decided to pull a libertarian's argument against such an absurdity. Enjoy:)

At 9:45 PM, September 09, 2006 , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who would want to hire this guy to do their taxes. I pay my tax advisor to keep my taxes to a legal minumum. This guy wants to dump his moral view on his clients and make them pay more taxes than they need to.

At 10:15 PM, December 05, 2014 , Blogger oakleyses said...

polo ralph lauren, prada outlet, oakley vault, christian louboutin shoes, cheap oakley sunglasses, tory burch outlet online, true religion, michael kors outlet, coach outlet, prada handbags, michael kors outlet online, chanel handbags, louis vuitton outlet, tiffany jewelry, gucci handbags, burberry outlet online, kate spade outlet, michael kors outlet online, coach outlet store online, michael kors handbags, oakley sunglasses, louis vuitton outlet online, tiffany and co jewelry, longchamp outlet online, ray ban sunglasses, michael kors outlet store, louis vuitton, nike air max, longchamp outlet, red bottom shoes, true religion outlet, polo ralph lauren outlet, jordan shoes, michael kors outlet online, nike outlet, ray ban outlet, christian louboutin, nike free, nike air max, burberry outlet online, kate spade outlet online, louis vuitton outlet, coach outlet, longchamp handbags, louis vuitton handbags, coach purses, christian louboutin outlet

At 10:18 PM, December 05, 2014 , Blogger oakleyses said...

converse pas cher, nike roshe run, hermes pas cher, nike roshe, true religion outlet, ray ban pas cher, north face, nike air force, guess pas cher, mulberry, scarpe hogan, hollister, true religion jeans, ralph lauren pas cher, ralph lauren, sac michael kors, burberry pas cher, hollister, louis vuitton pas cher, michael kors uk, oakley pas cher, air max pas cher, nike free, michael kors canada, louis vuitton, nike air max, sac vanessa bruno, nike air max, chaussure louboutin, north face pas cher, vans pas cher, air jordan, nike blazer pas cher, longchamp pas cher, sac louis vuitton, louis vuitton uk, lululemon, tn pas cher, longchamp, air max, ray ban uk, lacoste pas cher, abercrombie and fitch, timberland, new balance pas cher, barbour, nike free pas cher

At 10:22 PM, December 05, 2014 , Blogger oakleyses said...

babyliss, new balance outlet, replica watches, vans outlet, mcm handbags, celine handbags, beats headphones, nike trainers, nfl jerseys, giuseppe zanotti, jimmy choo shoes, ugg boots, birkin bag, asics shoes, canada goose outlet, ferragamo shoes, insanity workout, nike huarache, chi flat iron, hollister, abercrombie and fitch, uggs outlet, north face jackets, north face jackets, mac cosmetics, soccer jerseys, canada goose outlet, uggs outlet, uggs on sale, bottega veneta, instyler ionic styler, ugg boots clearance, nike roshe, valentino shoes, lululemon outlet, ugg, marc jacobs outlet, ugg outlet, longchamp, ghd, reebok shoes, ugg soldes, p90x workout, soccer shoes, wedding dresses, mont blanc pens, herve leger, canada goose outlet, canada goose

At 10:28 PM, December 05, 2014 , Blogger oakleyses said...

ugg, gucci, canada goose, iphone 6 case, hollister canada, vans, canada goose, swarovski uk, pandora jewelry, air max, ray ban, pandora charms, moncler, timberland shoes, moncler outlet, moncler, canada goose, replica watches, louis vuitton canada, uggs canada, coach outlet, juicy couture outlet, converse shoes, thomas sabo uk, nike air max, juicy couture outlet, ralph lauren, hollister clothing, moncler, hollister, supra shoes, louboutin, toms outlet, oakley, canada goose pas cher, parajumpers outlet, moncler, wedding dress, baseball bats, converse, swarovski jewelry, links of london uk, lancel, moncler outlet, pandora uk, karen millen, moncler, montre femme

At 1:00 AM, September 16, 2015 , Blogger Zheng junxai5 said...

2015-09-16 zhengjx
Michael Kors Outlet Stores Online
canada goose outlet
Kobe Shoes,Kobe 9,Kobe 8 Discount
Coach Factory Outlet Official Coach Handbags Sale
ray-ban sunglasses
Louis Vuitton Handbags Outlet Online
michael kors bag
Coach Outlet Online Coach Factory Outlet
Louis Vuitton Handbags UK For Sale
Louis Vuitton Handbags Official USA Website
timberland boots
ugg boots
Oakley Sunglasses Official Website Cheap Off
coach factory outlet online
nike trainers
toms outlet
celine handbags
michael kors outlet
Hollister UK Clothing Store
Louis Vuitton Outlet Discount Handbags
Cheap Louis Vuitton Handbags Luggage Bags Sale
cheap jordans
hollister uk
michael kors bags
ugg boots sale
Gucci Outlet Online 80% OFF
ugg australia
michael kors outlet
Mont Blanc Pens For Sale
Michael Kors Outlet Online 70% Off Handbags

At 7:11 PM, September 23, 2015 , Blogger ninest123 Ninest said...

ninest123 09.24
oakley sunglasses, tiffany jewelry, tory burch outlet, ray ban sunglasses, ray ban sunglasses, louboutin shoes, michael kors outlet, oakley sunglasses, burberry outlet online, michael kors outlet, replica watches, louis vuitton, louis vuitton outlet, uggs on sale, oakley sunglasses, longchamp outlet, michael kors outlet, burberry, polo ralph lauren outlet, replica watches, michael kors outlet, christian louboutin outlet, oakley sunglasses, nike air max, gucci outlet, louis vuitton, michael kors outlet, ugg boots, tiffany and co, cheap oakley sunglasses, longchamp, longchamp outlet, prada outlet, ray ban sunglasses, louboutin outlet, prada handbags, ugg boots, nike air max, ugg boots, polo ralph lauren outlet, louis vuitton, louis vuitton outlet, ugg boots, nike outlet, michael kors, jordan shoes, louboutin

At 7:16 PM, September 23, 2015 , Blogger ninest123 Ninest said...

instyler, nike air max, oakley, ferragamo shoes, herve leger, jimmy choo shoes, nike huarache, giuseppe zanotti, celine handbags, mcm handbags, hollister, north face outlet, ray ban, beats by dre, hollister, converse outlet, vans shoes, nike roshe, hollister, soccer shoes, lancel, ralph lauren, louboutin, insanity workout, valentino shoes, new balance, wedding dresses, mont blanc, abercrombie and fitch, asics running shoes, reebok shoes, chi flat iron, longchamp, nike air max, nike trainers, north face outlet, converse, p90x workout, soccer jerseys, vans, timberland boots, mac cosmetics, lululemon, ghd, baseball bats, nfl jerseys, birkin bag, nike roshe, gucci, babyliss, iphone 6 cases, bottega veneta, vanessa bruno

At 7:19 PM, September 23, 2015 , Blogger ninest123 Ninest said...

pandora jewelry, marc jacobs, moncler outlet, coach outlet, canada goose, replica watches, bottes ugg, michael kors outlet online, canada goose, pandora charms, wedding dresses, ugg boots uk, doudoune canada goose, canada goose outlet, moncler, karen millen, louis vuitton, moncler, links of london, pandora jewelry, moncler, michael kors outlet, toms shoes, moncler, barbour, ugg pas cher, ugg,ugg australia,ugg italia, louis vuitton, supra shoes, swarovski crystal, juicy couture outlet, montre pas cher, thomas sabo, doke gabbana outlet, ugg,uggs,uggs canada, canada goose, louis vuitton, moncler, sac louis vuitton pas cher, canada goose outlet, swarovski, michael kors handbags, hollister, canada goose uk, juicy couture outlet, moncler, moncler, canada goose, louis vuitton, barbour jackets, pandora charms
ninest123 09.24

At 3:00 AM, October 27, 2015 , Blogger dong dong said...

coach outlet
uggs clearance
Cheap Michael Kors Handbags Outlet
uggs sale
Air Jordan 6 Champagne Bottle
Michael Kors Handbags Clearance Outlet
Designer Louis Vuitton Handbags Outlet
michael kors outlet
louis vuitton outlet stores
coach outlet online
ugg boots
abercrombie store
tory burch sale
Louis Vuitton Online Shop Stores
michael kors bags
toms outlet
michael kors outlet
nike trainers
coach outlet store online
Louis Vuitton Official Site Outlet Stores
ugg boots
ugg boots sale
Louis Vuitton Outlet Stores Usa
Nike Kobe Bryant Basketball Shoes
Abercrombie and Fitch USA Outlet Store
Louis Vuitton Outlet Mall Store
Christian Louboutin Outlet Sale Cheap Online
Oakley Polarized Sunglasses Cheap Outlet Store

At 4:51 PM, January 01, 2017 , Blogger roba. gad3 said...

At 6:35 PM, June 29, 2017 , Blogger raybanoutlet001 said...

louboutin shoes
ray ban sunglasses
mont blanc outlet
coach outlet
dolphins jerseys
kate spade sale
nike outlet
oakley sunglasses
true religion outlet
cheap jordan shoes


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home