Los futures del Dow Jones 28 puntos al alza.
Yields down 3.16%
Oil down 71.20, Au up 1,251, futures cu down 2.7520
Libor igual 0.54%
Euro up 1.1923
Europa down, Asia up.
Martes 08/06/10 Seguimos observando al euro
por admin » Mar Jun 08, 2010 5:41 am
El euro esta en sus niveles mas bajos frente al franco Suizo.
Fitch Ratings le dijo a Inglaterra que que el reto que tienen en el deficit es monumental y que se necesitara una reduccion del deficit mas acelerada de lo planificado en Abril por ese pais. La libra se hunde con esos comentarios.
Europa casi 1% a la baja nuevamente.
El oro sube con los problemas de Europa.
New Zealand podria subir sus intereses.
Fitch Ratings le dijo a Inglaterra que que el reto que tienen en el deficit es monumental y que se necesitara una reduccion del deficit mas acelerada de lo planificado en Abril por ese pais. La libra se hunde con esos comentarios.
Europa casi 1% a la baja nuevamente.
El oro sube con los problemas de Europa.
New Zealand podria subir sus intereses.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Mensajes: 164292
- Registrado: Mié Abr 21, 2010 9:02 pm
por eduforever » Mar Jun 08, 2010 5:59 am
Copper June 08,06:56
Bid/Ask 2.7544 - 2.7589
Change -0.0159 -0.57%
Low/High 2.7362 - 2.7975
Charts
Nickel June 08,06:55
Bid/Ask 8.1790 - 8.2244
Change -0.0703 -0.85%
Low/High 8.1359 - 8.3922
Charts
Aluminum June 08,06:56
Bid/Ask 0.8274 - 0.8320
Change +0.0000 +0.00%
Low/High 0.8184 - 0.8410
Charts
Zinc June 08,06:55
Bid/Ask 0.7355 - 0.7400
Change +0.0113 +1.57%
Low/High 0.7151 - 0.7468
Charts
Lead June 08,06:56
Bid/Ask 0.7013 - 0.7058
Change +0.0091 +1.31%
Low/High 0.6876 - 0.7149
Bid/Ask 2.7544 - 2.7589
Change -0.0159 -0.57%
Low/High 2.7362 - 2.7975
Charts
Nickel June 08,06:55
Bid/Ask 8.1790 - 8.2244
Change -0.0703 -0.85%
Low/High 8.1359 - 8.3922
Charts
Aluminum June 08,06:56
Bid/Ask 0.8274 - 0.8320
Change +0.0000 +0.00%
Low/High 0.8184 - 0.8410
Charts
Zinc June 08,06:55
Bid/Ask 0.7355 - 0.7400
Change +0.0113 +1.57%
Low/High 0.7151 - 0.7468
Charts
Lead June 08,06:56
Bid/Ask 0.7013 - 0.7058
Change +0.0091 +1.31%
Low/High 0.6876 - 0.7149
- eduforever
- Mensajes: 595
- Registrado: Jue Abr 22, 2010 9:50 pm
por admin » Mar Jun 08, 2010 6:00 am
El economista Steve H. Hanke sobre Paul Krugman:
Prof. Krugman escribio en el NY Times el 31 de Mayo que la experiencia y los libros de economia dicen que recortar el gasto cuando se sufre de alto desempleo es una mala idea...
Lo que Prof. Krugman y otros fiscalistas creen que es evidente, no lo es... La posibilidada de que un negativo multiplicador fiscal descanse en el papel central de la confianza y las expectativas de las politicas futuras. Si por ejemplo, un pais con una deficit muy grande y una deuda muy alta... hace un compromiso serio y creible de reduccion de deficit, la confianza aumentara y la economia prosperara, mientras la inflacion, la prima del riesgo y los intereses a largo plazo se reduciran.
Han habido muchos casos de multiplicadores fiscales negativos que se han observado. El Danish discal squeeze entre el 83 y el 86, la estabilizacion de Irlanda entre el 87-89 es notable... Margaret Thatcher
tambien elevo la confianza y el crecimiento a travez de disciplina fisca. Para revivir la economia en 1981, Thatches instituyo un ataque feroz al deficit fiscal Ingles, junto con una aplicacion de politica monetario expansiva. Sus acciones fueron condenadas inmediatamente por 364 economistas distinguidos. En una carta en el Times de London, ellos escribieron uan respuesta Keynesiana " las presentes politicas aumentaran la depresion, causaran una erosion de la base industrial de nuestra economia y amenazara la estabilidad social y politica"... Thatcher fue rapidamente reconocida. Cuando los 364 economistas habian terminado de firmar su condena contra Thatcher, la economia comenzo a florecer. La gente tenia confianza en Inglaterra nuevaemnte, y Thatcher fue capaz de introducir una serie de reformas de libre mercado.
Notable & Quotable
Steve Hanke writing at Cato-at-Liberty.org about Paul Krugman and Margaret Thatcher.
Economist Steve H. Hanke writing at Cato-at-Liberty.org, June 3:
Prof. Paul Krugman asserts in his New York Times column of May 31st that "Both textbook economics and experience say that slashing spending when you're still suffering from high unemployment is a really bad idea. . . ."
While Prof. Krugman and most other fiscalists believe this to be self-evident, it is not. . . . The possibility of a negative fiscal multiplier rests on the central role played by confidence and expectations about the course of future policy. If, for example, a country with a very large budget deficit and high level of debt . . . makes a credible commitment to significantly reduce the deficit, a confidence shock will ensue and the economy will boom, as inflation expectations, risk premiums and long-term interest rates decline.
There have been many cases in which negative fiscal multipliers have been observed. The Danish fiscal squeeze of 1983-86 and the Irish stabilization of 1987-89 are notable. . . . Margaret Thatcher also made a dash for confidence and growth via a fiscal squeeze. To restart the economy in 1981, Thatcher instituted a fierce attack on the British deficit, coupled with an expansionary monetary policy. Her moves were immediately condemned by 364 distinguished economists. In a letter to the Times of London, they wrote a knee-jerk Keynesian (Prof. Krugman-type) response: "Present policies will deepen the depression, erode the industrial base of our economy and threaten its social and political stability." Thatcher was quickly vindicated. No sooner had the 364 affixed their signatures than the economy boomed. People had confidence in Britain again, and Thatcher was able to introduce a long series of deep free-market reforms.
Prof. Krugman escribio en el NY Times el 31 de Mayo que la experiencia y los libros de economia dicen que recortar el gasto cuando se sufre de alto desempleo es una mala idea...
Lo que Prof. Krugman y otros fiscalistas creen que es evidente, no lo es... La posibilidada de que un negativo multiplicador fiscal descanse en el papel central de la confianza y las expectativas de las politicas futuras. Si por ejemplo, un pais con una deficit muy grande y una deuda muy alta... hace un compromiso serio y creible de reduccion de deficit, la confianza aumentara y la economia prosperara, mientras la inflacion, la prima del riesgo y los intereses a largo plazo se reduciran.
Han habido muchos casos de multiplicadores fiscales negativos que se han observado. El Danish discal squeeze entre el 83 y el 86, la estabilizacion de Irlanda entre el 87-89 es notable... Margaret Thatcher
tambien elevo la confianza y el crecimiento a travez de disciplina fisca. Para revivir la economia en 1981, Thatches instituyo un ataque feroz al deficit fiscal Ingles, junto con una aplicacion de politica monetario expansiva. Sus acciones fueron condenadas inmediatamente por 364 economistas distinguidos. En una carta en el Times de London, ellos escribieron uan respuesta Keynesiana " las presentes politicas aumentaran la depresion, causaran una erosion de la base industrial de nuestra economia y amenazara la estabilidad social y politica"... Thatcher fue rapidamente reconocida. Cuando los 364 economistas habian terminado de firmar su condena contra Thatcher, la economia comenzo a florecer. La gente tenia confianza en Inglaterra nuevaemnte, y Thatcher fue capaz de introducir una serie de reformas de libre mercado.
Notable & Quotable
Steve Hanke writing at Cato-at-Liberty.org about Paul Krugman and Margaret Thatcher.
Economist Steve H. Hanke writing at Cato-at-Liberty.org, June 3:
Prof. Paul Krugman asserts in his New York Times column of May 31st that "Both textbook economics and experience say that slashing spending when you're still suffering from high unemployment is a really bad idea. . . ."
While Prof. Krugman and most other fiscalists believe this to be self-evident, it is not. . . . The possibility of a negative fiscal multiplier rests on the central role played by confidence and expectations about the course of future policy. If, for example, a country with a very large budget deficit and high level of debt . . . makes a credible commitment to significantly reduce the deficit, a confidence shock will ensue and the economy will boom, as inflation expectations, risk premiums and long-term interest rates decline.
There have been many cases in which negative fiscal multipliers have been observed. The Danish fiscal squeeze of 1983-86 and the Irish stabilization of 1987-89 are notable. . . . Margaret Thatcher also made a dash for confidence and growth via a fiscal squeeze. To restart the economy in 1981, Thatcher instituted a fierce attack on the British deficit, coupled with an expansionary monetary policy. Her moves were immediately condemned by 364 distinguished economists. In a letter to the Times of London, they wrote a knee-jerk Keynesian (Prof. Krugman-type) response: "Present policies will deepen the depression, erode the industrial base of our economy and threaten its social and political stability." Thatcher was quickly vindicated. No sooner had the 364 affixed their signatures than the economy boomed. People had confidence in Britain again, and Thatcher was able to introduce a long series of deep free-market reforms.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Mensajes: 164292
- Registrado: Mié Abr 21, 2010 9:02 pm
por eduforever » Mar Jun 08, 2010 6:05 am
Europe/Africa/Middle East
INDEX VALUE CHANGE %CHANGE TIME
ESTX 50 € Pr 2,511.03 -18.94 -0.75% 06:36
FTSE 100 INDEX 5,027.45 -41.61 -0.82% 06:37
CAC 40 INDEX 3,387.32 -26.40 -0.77% 06:37
DAX INDEX 5,857.50 -47.45 -0.80% 06:36
IBEX 35 INDEX 8,717.80 -77.50 -0.88% 06:36
FTSE MIB INDEX 18,570.44 -60.74 -0.33% 06:36
AEX-Index 314.21 -3.33 -1.05% 06:36
OMX STOCKHOLM 30 INDEX 969.77 -7.86 -0.80% 06:50
SWISS MARKET INDEX 6,264.52 -26.52 -0.42% 06:36
More Europe/Africa/Middle East Indexes
Asia/Pacific
INDEX VALUE CHANGE %CHANGE TIME
NIKKEI 225 9,537.94 17.14 0.18% 02:29
HANG SENG INDEX 19,487.48 109.33 0.56% 04:01
S&P/ASX 200 INDEX 4,381.20 55.30 1.28% 02:37
INDEX VALUE CHANGE %CHANGE TIME
ESTX 50 € Pr 2,511.03 -18.94 -0.75% 06:36
FTSE 100 INDEX 5,027.45 -41.61 -0.82% 06:37
CAC 40 INDEX 3,387.32 -26.40 -0.77% 06:37
DAX INDEX 5,857.50 -47.45 -0.80% 06:36
IBEX 35 INDEX 8,717.80 -77.50 -0.88% 06:36
FTSE MIB INDEX 18,570.44 -60.74 -0.33% 06:36
AEX-Index 314.21 -3.33 -1.05% 06:36
OMX STOCKHOLM 30 INDEX 969.77 -7.86 -0.80% 06:50
SWISS MARKET INDEX 6,264.52 -26.52 -0.42% 06:36
More Europe/Africa/Middle East Indexes
Asia/Pacific
INDEX VALUE CHANGE %CHANGE TIME
NIKKEI 225 9,537.94 17.14 0.18% 02:29
HANG SENG INDEX 19,487.48 109.33 0.56% 04:01
S&P/ASX 200 INDEX 4,381.20 55.30 1.28% 02:37
- eduforever
- Mensajes: 595
- Registrado: Jue Abr 22, 2010 9:50 pm
por admin » Mar Jun 08, 2010 6:19 am
Obama y sus predicciones sobre la creacion de empleo esta confundiendo a los inversionistas
Obama contribuyo a la caida del Viernes? el Miercoles Obama en uno de sus discursos dijo que despues de haber perdido 750,000 empleos a mes durante el invierno del anio pasado, ahora el pais estaba agregando empleos en cinco de los ultimos seis meses y que el esperaba ver un crecimiento de empleos fuerte en el reporte del Viernes.
Los inversionistas pensando que el presidente conocia las cifras que se darian a conocer el Viernes hicieron que el Dow Jones suba 226 puntos.
Los comentarios bullish del presidente hicieron que todos ajustaran sus estimados para las cifras de crecimiento de empleo al alza en anticipacion a los datos del Viernes. Muchos inversionistas pronosticaron una creacion de 650,000 empleos basados en lo que Obama dijo.
Vino el Viernes y las cifras no pudieron ser mas desalentadores y mucho peor que los estimados mas conservadores o 431,000 y eso fue por que solo se crearon 41,000 empleos en el sector privado mientras los economistas del Dow Jones esperaban 188,000.
Los inversionistas reaccionaron a la noticia y a mas problemas provenientes de Europa y el Dow Jones perdio 3.2%
Podria ser que Obama conocia los numeros y los interpreto como positivos y por eso hizo esos comentarios el dia Miercoles? Probablemente no.
El Fed recibe los datos el dia Miercoles para poder hacer estimados de la produccion industrial, el presidente del Council of Economic Advisers recibe las cifras el Jueves en la tarde antes que todos los demas. Otras agencias las reciben 30 minutos antes de que se de a conocer al publico.
La administracion asegura que ellos no reciben los datos si no hasta el Jueves en la noche y no lo comentan hasta que se hace publico el dia Viernes.
Los inversionistas no entienden por que el presidente hizo esos comentarios el dia Miercoles. Es dificil entender por que hizo aumentar las expectativas.
Una fuente de la administracion nos dijo que el presidente esta conciente de las expectativas del mercado y de los estimados de los economistas independientes que ayudan a poner en su sitio esas expectativas. Nosotros realmente esperamos que asi sea por la integridad de la Casa Blanca y la de los mercados financieros y que Obama no este dando informacion no publica, informacion que mueve a los mercados.
Este tipo de acciones dania la credibilidad del presidente y invita a la pregunta de porque el presidente se embarca en hacer prediciones a corto plazo. Nosotros preferimos que el presidente se dedique a promover politicas que creen empleos en lugar de ponerse a adivinarlos.
Obama's 'Whisper Number'
White House jobs predictions are confusing investors.
Did President Obama contribute to last Friday's stock market dive with a head fake to investors? Last Wednesday, in a speech at Pittsburgh's Carnegie Mellon University, the President said, "After losing an average of 750,000 jobs a month during the winter of last year, we've now added jobs for five of the last six months, and we expect to see strong job growth in Friday's report."
Perhaps assuming that the President might have known something about the Department of Labor's monthly unemployment report scheduled for two days later, investors immediately bid up U.S. stocks. On Wednesday, the Dow gained almost 226 points.
Prior to Friday morning's release of the monthly employment survey by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a Dow Jones Newswires poll of economists projected a net gain of 515,000 U.S. jobs for the month of May. But the President's bullish comments pushed what many call the "whisper number" on Wall Street up even further. Many investors were expecting job gains closer to 650,000 or even higher, based on Mr. Obama's remarks.
Come Friday morning 8:30 Eastern time, the government announced a disappointing increase of 431,000 nonfarm jobs, and the number looked even worse the more that investors studied it. That's because it included only 41,000 new private sector jobs, while economists in the Dow Jones survey had expected 188,000. Almost all of the job growth came from temporary government workers hired by the Census Bureau.
Investors reacted to that news—and more trouble from Europe—by lopping 3.2% off the Dow on Friday. Oddly, instead of acting like someone who had blown a call, Mr. Obama on Friday described the jobs report as positive and said the U.S. economy is growing stronger "by the day."
The episode has left more than a few longtime Wall Street hands scratching their heads. Did the President know the unemployment numbers in advance but somehow interpret them as good news? That seems highly unlikely. The long-standing policy of the Bureau of Labor Statistics has been to hold the jobs data close until their scheduled release on the first Friday morning of each month.
The Federal Reserve receives some of the data Wednesday morning before the release for the purpose of producing estimates of industrial production. The President's Council of Economic Advisers receives the news release on Thursday afternoon, the day before the public release. Various others in government see copies a half-hour early on Friday morning.
On background, an Administration official assures us that the President is not given the employment data until the night before the numbers are made public and that he makes it a point not to comment on the data until it becomes public.
However, Friday's unemployment report might have been particularly jarring to investors who had also been paying attention when the February report was released on March 5. In the days before that release, Administration officials including White House spokesman Robert Gibbs warned that bad winter weather would likely weigh on the employment totals.
The February report was lousy—a loss of 36,000 nonfarm jobs—but it was much better than the consensus estimate of 75,000 jobs lost. Having been conditioned by the Administration to expect the worst, investors in March celebrated an unemployment rate that remained unchanged at 9.7%. The Dow rallied 1.2% on the day of the release.
Flash forward to last week, and it's easy to see why the Carnegie Mellon speech had investors figuring that the markets were about to receive some very good news. It's harder to understand why the President would feed this expectation at Carnegie Mellon. How did the President come to his Wednesday conclusion that we should expect "strong job growth" in Friday's report?
An Administration source tells us that the President is aware of market expectations, as well as the estimates of independent economists that help set those expectations. We certainly hope, for the sake of the integrity of the White House and American financial markets, that Mr. Obama wasn't dropping hints with nonpublic, market-moving information. It seems more likely that he simply made a prediction that proved to be off target; perhaps he was merely engaging in some old-fashioned spin.
Yet even this kind of talk damages his credibility when he's wrong, and it invites the question of why the White House is even getting into the business of making precise, short-term economic predictions. We'd prefer that the President focus on policies that create jobs, rather than guessing about them.
Obama contribuyo a la caida del Viernes? el Miercoles Obama en uno de sus discursos dijo que despues de haber perdido 750,000 empleos a mes durante el invierno del anio pasado, ahora el pais estaba agregando empleos en cinco de los ultimos seis meses y que el esperaba ver un crecimiento de empleos fuerte en el reporte del Viernes.
Los inversionistas pensando que el presidente conocia las cifras que se darian a conocer el Viernes hicieron que el Dow Jones suba 226 puntos.
Los comentarios bullish del presidente hicieron que todos ajustaran sus estimados para las cifras de crecimiento de empleo al alza en anticipacion a los datos del Viernes. Muchos inversionistas pronosticaron una creacion de 650,000 empleos basados en lo que Obama dijo.
Vino el Viernes y las cifras no pudieron ser mas desalentadores y mucho peor que los estimados mas conservadores o 431,000 y eso fue por que solo se crearon 41,000 empleos en el sector privado mientras los economistas del Dow Jones esperaban 188,000.
Los inversionistas reaccionaron a la noticia y a mas problemas provenientes de Europa y el Dow Jones perdio 3.2%
Podria ser que Obama conocia los numeros y los interpreto como positivos y por eso hizo esos comentarios el dia Miercoles? Probablemente no.
El Fed recibe los datos el dia Miercoles para poder hacer estimados de la produccion industrial, el presidente del Council of Economic Advisers recibe las cifras el Jueves en la tarde antes que todos los demas. Otras agencias las reciben 30 minutos antes de que se de a conocer al publico.
La administracion asegura que ellos no reciben los datos si no hasta el Jueves en la noche y no lo comentan hasta que se hace publico el dia Viernes.
Los inversionistas no entienden por que el presidente hizo esos comentarios el dia Miercoles. Es dificil entender por que hizo aumentar las expectativas.
Una fuente de la administracion nos dijo que el presidente esta conciente de las expectativas del mercado y de los estimados de los economistas independientes que ayudan a poner en su sitio esas expectativas. Nosotros realmente esperamos que asi sea por la integridad de la Casa Blanca y la de los mercados financieros y que Obama no este dando informacion no publica, informacion que mueve a los mercados.
Este tipo de acciones dania la credibilidad del presidente y invita a la pregunta de porque el presidente se embarca en hacer prediciones a corto plazo. Nosotros preferimos que el presidente se dedique a promover politicas que creen empleos en lugar de ponerse a adivinarlos.
Obama's 'Whisper Number'
White House jobs predictions are confusing investors.
Did President Obama contribute to last Friday's stock market dive with a head fake to investors? Last Wednesday, in a speech at Pittsburgh's Carnegie Mellon University, the President said, "After losing an average of 750,000 jobs a month during the winter of last year, we've now added jobs for five of the last six months, and we expect to see strong job growth in Friday's report."
Perhaps assuming that the President might have known something about the Department of Labor's monthly unemployment report scheduled for two days later, investors immediately bid up U.S. stocks. On Wednesday, the Dow gained almost 226 points.
Prior to Friday morning's release of the monthly employment survey by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a Dow Jones Newswires poll of economists projected a net gain of 515,000 U.S. jobs for the month of May. But the President's bullish comments pushed what many call the "whisper number" on Wall Street up even further. Many investors were expecting job gains closer to 650,000 or even higher, based on Mr. Obama's remarks.
Come Friday morning 8:30 Eastern time, the government announced a disappointing increase of 431,000 nonfarm jobs, and the number looked even worse the more that investors studied it. That's because it included only 41,000 new private sector jobs, while economists in the Dow Jones survey had expected 188,000. Almost all of the job growth came from temporary government workers hired by the Census Bureau.
Investors reacted to that news—and more trouble from Europe—by lopping 3.2% off the Dow on Friday. Oddly, instead of acting like someone who had blown a call, Mr. Obama on Friday described the jobs report as positive and said the U.S. economy is growing stronger "by the day."
The episode has left more than a few longtime Wall Street hands scratching their heads. Did the President know the unemployment numbers in advance but somehow interpret them as good news? That seems highly unlikely. The long-standing policy of the Bureau of Labor Statistics has been to hold the jobs data close until their scheduled release on the first Friday morning of each month.
The Federal Reserve receives some of the data Wednesday morning before the release for the purpose of producing estimates of industrial production. The President's Council of Economic Advisers receives the news release on Thursday afternoon, the day before the public release. Various others in government see copies a half-hour early on Friday morning.
On background, an Administration official assures us that the President is not given the employment data until the night before the numbers are made public and that he makes it a point not to comment on the data until it becomes public.
However, Friday's unemployment report might have been particularly jarring to investors who had also been paying attention when the February report was released on March 5. In the days before that release, Administration officials including White House spokesman Robert Gibbs warned that bad winter weather would likely weigh on the employment totals.
The February report was lousy—a loss of 36,000 nonfarm jobs—but it was much better than the consensus estimate of 75,000 jobs lost. Having been conditioned by the Administration to expect the worst, investors in March celebrated an unemployment rate that remained unchanged at 9.7%. The Dow rallied 1.2% on the day of the release.
Flash forward to last week, and it's easy to see why the Carnegie Mellon speech had investors figuring that the markets were about to receive some very good news. It's harder to understand why the President would feed this expectation at Carnegie Mellon. How did the President come to his Wednesday conclusion that we should expect "strong job growth" in Friday's report?
An Administration source tells us that the President is aware of market expectations, as well as the estimates of independent economists that help set those expectations. We certainly hope, for the sake of the integrity of the White House and American financial markets, that Mr. Obama wasn't dropping hints with nonpublic, market-moving information. It seems more likely that he simply made a prediction that proved to be off target; perhaps he was merely engaging in some old-fashioned spin.
Yet even this kind of talk damages his credibility when he's wrong, and it invites the question of why the White House is even getting into the business of making precise, short-term economic predictions. We'd prefer that the President focus on policies that create jobs, rather than guessing about them.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Mensajes: 164292
- Registrado: Mié Abr 21, 2010 9:02 pm
por admin » Mar Jun 08, 2010 6:57 am
La popularidad de Garcia baja mientras la economia del Peru mejora.
En su primer mandato que finalizo en 1990 la economia del Peru habia disminuido 10%, la inflacion era de 7,000 por cient y la mitad del pais vivia en zonas declaradas en emergencia debido al surgimiento de las guerrillas Maoistas.
Dos decadas mas tarde, el mandatario bautizado por los Peruanos como Caballo Loco por la inestabilidad de sus politicas preside la economia de mayor crecimiento en Sudamerica, con una inflacion mas baja que la de Switzerland. Durante su primer gobierno, el Peru cayo en default en $14 billones de deuda. Desde entonces Garcia ha retornado al poder en el 2006. Desde entonces el pais ha ganado su primer grado de inversion en su historia.
El exito de la economia no ha ayudado a la aprobacion de Garcia, la cual se hundio a 26% el mes pasado. La hostilidad contra el presidente y el establecimiento politico aumenta la posibilidad de que Ollanta Humala, un aliado de Hugo Chavez tome el poder en las elecciones del proximo Abril dice John Crabtree, un investigados especialista en Latin America de Oxford University.
Este es una peligro muy grande, el producir un ganador populista en el 2011 dice Crabtree el autor del libro "Peru Under Garcia" Una Oportunidad Perdida" acerca de la primera administracion del presidente Peruano. "Mas gente esta desencantada con la democracia en el Peru que en cualquier otro pais en Latin America" agrego en una entreivsta telefonica.
La parobacion de garcia esta en 26% de acuerdo a Apoyo ha bajado de 29% en Marzo y 58% dos meses despues de haber sido elegido.
A pesar de que la economia ha mejorado, la pobreza y la corrupcion ha mantenido el descontento en niveles muy altos dice Eurasia Group un grupo especializado en riesgo politico basado en Washington.
Garcia ha enfocado su politica en la estabilidad macroeconomica y ha demostrado ser un administrador responsable con la esperanza de que el crecimiento se traduciria en lo sectores mas bajos, dijo Kerner en una entrevista telefonica desde NY, pero el no ha hecho mucho para aliviar la pobreza, se ha dedicado a asegurar que el Peru es un buen destino de inversion.
Peru, la sexta economia mas grande de la region esta repuntando mas rapido que sus vecinos de la recesion global. BAC dijo en Mayo que el Peru esta en su propia liga (separado de los demas) despues que su crecimiento se expandio 8.8 por ciento en los 12 meses anteriores a Marzo liderado por la construccion y la manufactura. El IMF pronostica un crecimiento de 6.3% este anio y es la mas alta del Western Hemisferio.
La inversion directa en el pais se espera que llegue a la cifra record de $8.4 billones en el 20100 de acuerdo a BAC. El pais se convirtio en un net creditor en el 2007, sus reservas han subido al record de $35 billones. Cuesta menos proteger la deduda del Peru que la de Brasil.
El sol se ha fortalecido 14% contra el dolar desde que Garcia es presidente, el Lima General Index ha ganado 74% en dolares comparado con 80% de Chile y 95% en Brasil (bolsas)
El crecimiento del Peru se ha visto favorecido por los altos precios de los commodities incluyendo el oro y el cobre, lso cuales son el 75% de las exportaciones, dijo Cesar Ferrari.
Garcia se subio a una buena ola, dijo Ferrari durante una entrevista en Colombia.
Garcia abogado de la Sorbona en Paris ha abandonado su hostilidad contra el IMF y ha mantenido politicas de libre mercado establecidas por Fujimori y toledo.
Ideologicamente ha dado una pirueta de 180 grados.
Fujimori elimino los controles de precios, puso a la moneda flotante y vendio cientos de companias estatales que solo perdian dinero cuando fue presidente entre 1990 y el anio 2000. Toledu su sucesor ayudo a asegurar las inversiones en infraestructura y energia incluyendo Hunt Oil $4 billones planta de gas natural licuado. Toledo tambien inicio los tratados de libre comercio con US, Euroa y China.
Garcia no ha implementado programas sociales como Lula en Brasil para mejorar su popularidad, Brasil ha sacado de la pobreza a 30 millones de personas desde el 2003.
Garcia no contesto el pedido de una entrevista para este articulo.
En el 2008 la pobreza en el Peru era 36.2 por ciento comparado con 25.8 por ciento en Brasil.
Los votantes acusan a Garcia de corrupcion, solo el 14% piensa que su gobierno no es corrupto.
Humala Factor
El fracaso de Garcia de ganar en el voto popular puede amenazar la estabilidad economica y la inversion extranjera si la candidatura de Humala se cristaliza, dice Kerner. Garcia le gano a Humala 52.5 por ciento contra 47.5 por ciento en la segunda vuelta en el 2006.
Humala se opone a los acuerdos de libre comercio y ha amenazado renegociar los contratos mineros.
El apoyo a Humala es fuerte entre los mas pobres de las zonas rurales donde el beneficio economico no se ha sentido, dice Crabtree. Mientras en Lima el 15% de las casas no tienen agua potable y desague, el numero sube al 80% en Huancavelica
Humala de 46 anios, tiene el apoyo del 13% de los entrevistados, Castaneda 22%, seguido por Keiko Fujimori quien ha prometido el perdon a su padre.
BAC dijo que toda preferencia por Humala desencadanera caida en los precios de los activos y salida del capital.
Solo el 22% de los Peruanos dice estar satisfecho con la democracia, el mas bajo entre 18 paises en Latinoamerica.
La desigualdad, la poblacion y la corrupcion son cosas combinadas que crean la demanda por el cambio en amplios sectores de la poblacion, dijo Kerner.
Peru President Garcia’s Popularity Sinks as Economy Booms
By Matthew Bristow and John Quigley
June 8 (Bloomberg) -- When Alan Garcia’s first term as president of Peru ended in 1990, the economy had shrunk by 10 percent, inflation was raging at 7,000 percent, and half the population lived in government-declared emergency zones where Maoist guerrillas were active.
Two decades later, the man Peruvians nicknamed “Crazy Horse” for his unstable policies presides over South America’s fastest-growing economy, with lower inflation than Switzerland. During the first Garcia administration, Peru defaulted on $14 billion in debt. Since he returned to power in 2006, the country won its first ever investment-grade rating.
The economic success hasn’t lifted Garcia’s approval rating, which sank to 26 percent last month. Hostility to the president, and the political establishment, increases the chance of Ollanta Humala, an ally of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, taking power in elections next April to choose Garcia’s succesor, said John Crabtree, a Latin America researcher at Oxford University.
There is a “sizable danger” that the 2011 vote will produce a populist winner, said Crabtree, the author of “Peru Under Garcia: An Opportunity Lost,” about the first Garcia administration. “More people are disenchanted by the way in which democracy works in Peru than in any other country in Latin America,” he added in a telephone interview from Oxford.
Garcia’s approval rating stands at 26 percent, according to an Ipsos Apoyo Opinion y Mercado poll taken May 12-14 for Lima’s El Comercio newspaper. That’s down from 29 percent in March and a high of 58 percent two months after he took office. The poll of 1,200 people had a margin of error of 4.4 percent.
Bubbling Discontent
Even though the economy has performed well under Garcia, poverty and corruption have kept discontent bubbling at dangerous levels, said Daniel Kerner, an analyst for the Eurasia Group, a Washington-based political risk group.
Garcia “focused on maintaining macroeconomic stability and proving that he was a responsible administrator, with the hope that growth would trickle down,” said Kerner in a telephone interview from New York. “He never did much to alleviate poverty, other than try to guarantee that Peru remained a good destination for investment.”
Peru, South America’s sixth largest economy, is rebounding faster than its neighbors from the global recession. Bank of America said in a May report that Peru “is in a growth league of its own” after gross domestic product expanded 8.8 percent in the 12 months to March, led by construction and manufacturing. The International Monetary Fund forecasts growth of 6.3 percent this year, the most in the Western Hemisphere.
Record Investment
Foreign direct investment is expected to reach a record $8.4 billion in 2011, according to Bank of America. The country became a net creditor in 2007, as reserves soared to a record $35 billion. It costs less to protect Peru’s debt against default than it does for bonds issued by Brazil, which share its Baa3 investment grade rating by Moody’s Investors Service.
The sol has strengthened 14 percent against the U.S. dollar since Garcia took office in July 2006, and the Lima General Index has gained 74 percent in dollar terms, compared with 80 percent for Chile’s IPSA index and 95 percent for Brazil’s Bovespa index.
Peru’s fast growth has been driven by high prices for commodities including gold and copper, which account for 75 percent of exports, said Cesar Ferrari, who served as Garcia’s general manager of the central bank from 1987-1988.
“Garcia caught a good wave,” Ferrari said during an interview in Bogota, Colombia.
180 Degree Pirouette
Garcia, 61, a lawyer trained at the Sorbonne University in Paris, has abandoned his former hostility to the IMF and foreign capital, said Crabtree. Instead, he’s maintained the market- friendly policies established by Presidents Alberto Fujimori and Alejandro Toledo.
“Ideologically he has pirouetted around 180 degrees,” Crabtree said.
Fujimori eliminated price controls, floated the currency and sold off hundreds of unprofitable state companies while president from 1990 to 2000. Toledo, his successor, helped secure investments in infrastructure and energy, including Hunt Oil Co.’s $4 billion liquefied natural gas plant. Toledo also initiated talks that led to free-trade agreements with the U.S., the European Union and China.
Popularity Falling
There has been no equivalent under Garcia of the social programs of Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, which have lifted 30 million people out of poverty since 2003 and helped keep Lula’s approval ratings at a record 76 percent, said Kerner. Brazil’s minimum wage has increased more than fivefold in dollar terms over that time, while more than 9 million government-registered jobs were created.
Garcia did not respond to requests for an interview and his press office did not comment for this article.
In 2008, the most recent year for which statistics are available, poverty was 36.2 percent in Peru, compared with 25.8 percent in Brazil, according to the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America.
Voters blame Garcia for corruption scandals within his American Popular Revolutionary Alliance, or APRA, such as the sale of public land at discount prices to party members. Only 14 percent of Peruvians think that Garcia was “free from acts of corruption”, according to the Ipsos Apoyo poll.
Humala Factor
Garcia’s failure to win popular backing may jeopardize economic stability and foreign investment by boosting the expected candidacy of Humala, said Kerner. Garcia defeated Humala by 52.5 percent to 47.5 percent in a 2006 runoff.
Humala opposed a free trade deal with the U.S. and threatened to renegotiate contracts with foreign mining companies that include BHP Billiton Ltd. and Anglo American Plc. As an army lieutenant colonel, he led an uprising in 2000 against Fujimori, seizing the mining town of Toquepala. The event ended without bloodshed, and congress later voted to pardon him.
Humala’s backing is strongest among the poor in the rural Andean highlands outside of the capital, where the benefit of economic growth has been scarcely felt, said Crabtree. Whereas in Lima, 15 percent of homes don’t have access to running water and sewage, that number rises to 80 percent in Huancavelica, a neighboring province, according to a UN study in April.
Humala, 46, had the support of 13 percent of those surveyed by Ipsos, tied with Toledo. Lima’s Mayor Luis Castaneda, with 22 percent support, is the frontrunner. He’s followed by Congresswoman Keiko Fujimori, who has vowed to pardon her father, in jail for his role in paramilitary massacres of rebel sympathizers.
Any advance by Humala in pre-election polls is likely to lower asset prices and spark capital outflows, Bank of America said in a report last month. Garcia is banned by the constitution from seeking two consecutive terms and his APRA party has not yet selected a candidate.
Only 22 percent of Peruvians say they are satisfied with their democracy, the lowest among 18 countries in Latin America, according to a 2009 survey by Latinobarometro, a Santiago, Chile-based pollster.
“Inequality, poverty, corruption--all those things combine to create this demand for change from wide segments of the electorate,” said Kerner.
En su primer mandato que finalizo en 1990 la economia del Peru habia disminuido 10%, la inflacion era de 7,000 por cient y la mitad del pais vivia en zonas declaradas en emergencia debido al surgimiento de las guerrillas Maoistas.
Dos decadas mas tarde, el mandatario bautizado por los Peruanos como Caballo Loco por la inestabilidad de sus politicas preside la economia de mayor crecimiento en Sudamerica, con una inflacion mas baja que la de Switzerland. Durante su primer gobierno, el Peru cayo en default en $14 billones de deuda. Desde entonces Garcia ha retornado al poder en el 2006. Desde entonces el pais ha ganado su primer grado de inversion en su historia.
El exito de la economia no ha ayudado a la aprobacion de Garcia, la cual se hundio a 26% el mes pasado. La hostilidad contra el presidente y el establecimiento politico aumenta la posibilidad de que Ollanta Humala, un aliado de Hugo Chavez tome el poder en las elecciones del proximo Abril dice John Crabtree, un investigados especialista en Latin America de Oxford University.
Este es una peligro muy grande, el producir un ganador populista en el 2011 dice Crabtree el autor del libro "Peru Under Garcia" Una Oportunidad Perdida" acerca de la primera administracion del presidente Peruano. "Mas gente esta desencantada con la democracia en el Peru que en cualquier otro pais en Latin America" agrego en una entreivsta telefonica.
La parobacion de garcia esta en 26% de acuerdo a Apoyo ha bajado de 29% en Marzo y 58% dos meses despues de haber sido elegido.
A pesar de que la economia ha mejorado, la pobreza y la corrupcion ha mantenido el descontento en niveles muy altos dice Eurasia Group un grupo especializado en riesgo politico basado en Washington.
Garcia ha enfocado su politica en la estabilidad macroeconomica y ha demostrado ser un administrador responsable con la esperanza de que el crecimiento se traduciria en lo sectores mas bajos, dijo Kerner en una entrevista telefonica desde NY, pero el no ha hecho mucho para aliviar la pobreza, se ha dedicado a asegurar que el Peru es un buen destino de inversion.
Peru, la sexta economia mas grande de la region esta repuntando mas rapido que sus vecinos de la recesion global. BAC dijo en Mayo que el Peru esta en su propia liga (separado de los demas) despues que su crecimiento se expandio 8.8 por ciento en los 12 meses anteriores a Marzo liderado por la construccion y la manufactura. El IMF pronostica un crecimiento de 6.3% este anio y es la mas alta del Western Hemisferio.
La inversion directa en el pais se espera que llegue a la cifra record de $8.4 billones en el 20100 de acuerdo a BAC. El pais se convirtio en un net creditor en el 2007, sus reservas han subido al record de $35 billones. Cuesta menos proteger la deduda del Peru que la de Brasil.
El sol se ha fortalecido 14% contra el dolar desde que Garcia es presidente, el Lima General Index ha ganado 74% en dolares comparado con 80% de Chile y 95% en Brasil (bolsas)
El crecimiento del Peru se ha visto favorecido por los altos precios de los commodities incluyendo el oro y el cobre, lso cuales son el 75% de las exportaciones, dijo Cesar Ferrari.
Garcia se subio a una buena ola, dijo Ferrari durante una entrevista en Colombia.
Garcia abogado de la Sorbona en Paris ha abandonado su hostilidad contra el IMF y ha mantenido politicas de libre mercado establecidas por Fujimori y toledo.
Ideologicamente ha dado una pirueta de 180 grados.
Fujimori elimino los controles de precios, puso a la moneda flotante y vendio cientos de companias estatales que solo perdian dinero cuando fue presidente entre 1990 y el anio 2000. Toledu su sucesor ayudo a asegurar las inversiones en infraestructura y energia incluyendo Hunt Oil $4 billones planta de gas natural licuado. Toledo tambien inicio los tratados de libre comercio con US, Euroa y China.
Garcia no ha implementado programas sociales como Lula en Brasil para mejorar su popularidad, Brasil ha sacado de la pobreza a 30 millones de personas desde el 2003.
Garcia no contesto el pedido de una entrevista para este articulo.
En el 2008 la pobreza en el Peru era 36.2 por ciento comparado con 25.8 por ciento en Brasil.
Los votantes acusan a Garcia de corrupcion, solo el 14% piensa que su gobierno no es corrupto.
Humala Factor
El fracaso de Garcia de ganar en el voto popular puede amenazar la estabilidad economica y la inversion extranjera si la candidatura de Humala se cristaliza, dice Kerner. Garcia le gano a Humala 52.5 por ciento contra 47.5 por ciento en la segunda vuelta en el 2006.
Humala se opone a los acuerdos de libre comercio y ha amenazado renegociar los contratos mineros.
El apoyo a Humala es fuerte entre los mas pobres de las zonas rurales donde el beneficio economico no se ha sentido, dice Crabtree. Mientras en Lima el 15% de las casas no tienen agua potable y desague, el numero sube al 80% en Huancavelica
Humala de 46 anios, tiene el apoyo del 13% de los entrevistados, Castaneda 22%, seguido por Keiko Fujimori quien ha prometido el perdon a su padre.
BAC dijo que toda preferencia por Humala desencadanera caida en los precios de los activos y salida del capital.
Solo el 22% de los Peruanos dice estar satisfecho con la democracia, el mas bajo entre 18 paises en Latinoamerica.
La desigualdad, la poblacion y la corrupcion son cosas combinadas que crean la demanda por el cambio en amplios sectores de la poblacion, dijo Kerner.
Peru President Garcia’s Popularity Sinks as Economy Booms
By Matthew Bristow and John Quigley
June 8 (Bloomberg) -- When Alan Garcia’s first term as president of Peru ended in 1990, the economy had shrunk by 10 percent, inflation was raging at 7,000 percent, and half the population lived in government-declared emergency zones where Maoist guerrillas were active.
Two decades later, the man Peruvians nicknamed “Crazy Horse” for his unstable policies presides over South America’s fastest-growing economy, with lower inflation than Switzerland. During the first Garcia administration, Peru defaulted on $14 billion in debt. Since he returned to power in 2006, the country won its first ever investment-grade rating.
The economic success hasn’t lifted Garcia’s approval rating, which sank to 26 percent last month. Hostility to the president, and the political establishment, increases the chance of Ollanta Humala, an ally of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, taking power in elections next April to choose Garcia’s succesor, said John Crabtree, a Latin America researcher at Oxford University.
There is a “sizable danger” that the 2011 vote will produce a populist winner, said Crabtree, the author of “Peru Under Garcia: An Opportunity Lost,” about the first Garcia administration. “More people are disenchanted by the way in which democracy works in Peru than in any other country in Latin America,” he added in a telephone interview from Oxford.
Garcia’s approval rating stands at 26 percent, according to an Ipsos Apoyo Opinion y Mercado poll taken May 12-14 for Lima’s El Comercio newspaper. That’s down from 29 percent in March and a high of 58 percent two months after he took office. The poll of 1,200 people had a margin of error of 4.4 percent.
Bubbling Discontent
Even though the economy has performed well under Garcia, poverty and corruption have kept discontent bubbling at dangerous levels, said Daniel Kerner, an analyst for the Eurasia Group, a Washington-based political risk group.
Garcia “focused on maintaining macroeconomic stability and proving that he was a responsible administrator, with the hope that growth would trickle down,” said Kerner in a telephone interview from New York. “He never did much to alleviate poverty, other than try to guarantee that Peru remained a good destination for investment.”
Peru, South America’s sixth largest economy, is rebounding faster than its neighbors from the global recession. Bank of America said in a May report that Peru “is in a growth league of its own” after gross domestic product expanded 8.8 percent in the 12 months to March, led by construction and manufacturing. The International Monetary Fund forecasts growth of 6.3 percent this year, the most in the Western Hemisphere.
Record Investment
Foreign direct investment is expected to reach a record $8.4 billion in 2011, according to Bank of America. The country became a net creditor in 2007, as reserves soared to a record $35 billion. It costs less to protect Peru’s debt against default than it does for bonds issued by Brazil, which share its Baa3 investment grade rating by Moody’s Investors Service.
The sol has strengthened 14 percent against the U.S. dollar since Garcia took office in July 2006, and the Lima General Index has gained 74 percent in dollar terms, compared with 80 percent for Chile’s IPSA index and 95 percent for Brazil’s Bovespa index.
Peru’s fast growth has been driven by high prices for commodities including gold and copper, which account for 75 percent of exports, said Cesar Ferrari, who served as Garcia’s general manager of the central bank from 1987-1988.
“Garcia caught a good wave,” Ferrari said during an interview in Bogota, Colombia.
180 Degree Pirouette
Garcia, 61, a lawyer trained at the Sorbonne University in Paris, has abandoned his former hostility to the IMF and foreign capital, said Crabtree. Instead, he’s maintained the market- friendly policies established by Presidents Alberto Fujimori and Alejandro Toledo.
“Ideologically he has pirouetted around 180 degrees,” Crabtree said.
Fujimori eliminated price controls, floated the currency and sold off hundreds of unprofitable state companies while president from 1990 to 2000. Toledo, his successor, helped secure investments in infrastructure and energy, including Hunt Oil Co.’s $4 billion liquefied natural gas plant. Toledo also initiated talks that led to free-trade agreements with the U.S., the European Union and China.
Popularity Falling
There has been no equivalent under Garcia of the social programs of Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, which have lifted 30 million people out of poverty since 2003 and helped keep Lula’s approval ratings at a record 76 percent, said Kerner. Brazil’s minimum wage has increased more than fivefold in dollar terms over that time, while more than 9 million government-registered jobs were created.
Garcia did not respond to requests for an interview and his press office did not comment for this article.
In 2008, the most recent year for which statistics are available, poverty was 36.2 percent in Peru, compared with 25.8 percent in Brazil, according to the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America.
Voters blame Garcia for corruption scandals within his American Popular Revolutionary Alliance, or APRA, such as the sale of public land at discount prices to party members. Only 14 percent of Peruvians think that Garcia was “free from acts of corruption”, according to the Ipsos Apoyo poll.
Humala Factor
Garcia’s failure to win popular backing may jeopardize economic stability and foreign investment by boosting the expected candidacy of Humala, said Kerner. Garcia defeated Humala by 52.5 percent to 47.5 percent in a 2006 runoff.
Humala opposed a free trade deal with the U.S. and threatened to renegotiate contracts with foreign mining companies that include BHP Billiton Ltd. and Anglo American Plc. As an army lieutenant colonel, he led an uprising in 2000 against Fujimori, seizing the mining town of Toquepala. The event ended without bloodshed, and congress later voted to pardon him.
Humala’s backing is strongest among the poor in the rural Andean highlands outside of the capital, where the benefit of economic growth has been scarcely felt, said Crabtree. Whereas in Lima, 15 percent of homes don’t have access to running water and sewage, that number rises to 80 percent in Huancavelica, a neighboring province, according to a UN study in April.
Humala, 46, had the support of 13 percent of those surveyed by Ipsos, tied with Toledo. Lima’s Mayor Luis Castaneda, with 22 percent support, is the frontrunner. He’s followed by Congresswoman Keiko Fujimori, who has vowed to pardon her father, in jail for his role in paramilitary massacres of rebel sympathizers.
Any advance by Humala in pre-election polls is likely to lower asset prices and spark capital outflows, Bank of America said in a report last month. Garcia is banned by the constitution from seeking two consecutive terms and his APRA party has not yet selected a candidate.
Only 22 percent of Peruvians say they are satisfied with their democracy, the lowest among 18 countries in Latin America, according to a 2009 survey by Latinobarometro, a Santiago, Chile-based pollster.
“Inequality, poverty, corruption--all those things combine to create this demand for change from wide segments of the electorate,” said Kerner.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Mensajes: 164292
- Registrado: Mié Abr 21, 2010 9:02 pm
por admin » Mar Jun 08, 2010 7:04 am
Que desgracia Dios mio, tanto que criticamos a Cuba y Venezuela nuestro pais corre un peligro latente y concreto de convertirse en uno de ellos si Humala gana.
Contra, contra, contra!!!
Todos los Peruanos deberiamos estar educando a nuestros vecinos, familiares y amigos de las ventajas de la democracia.
Realmente es una tragedia que la provincia sea olvidada por los gobernantes, alli es donde esta el recentimiento y los problemas, ellos son los que fueron victimas del terrorismo y ellos son siempre el target de los populistas.
Excepto por Fujimori todos los demas son una tira de brutos. No entienden que por mas libre mercado que haya, si no se ven los frutos en las zonas mas pobres de nada sirve que tengamos grado de inversion, reservas, etc.
Como puede ser posible que el 80% no tenga agua y desague en Huancavelica, cuanto puede costar darles agua y desague, prefiero mil veces ver las reservas reducidas que gente que no tenga ni agua ni desague en nuestro pais.
Igual en Lima cuanto cuesta darle agua y desague a ese 15% de la poblacion, ese no es gasto es una inversion.
A los pobres de que les sirve decir que la economia crecio 8.8%, ellos no pueden llevar eso al banco.
Contra, contra, contra!!!
Todos los Peruanos deberiamos estar educando a nuestros vecinos, familiares y amigos de las ventajas de la democracia.
Realmente es una tragedia que la provincia sea olvidada por los gobernantes, alli es donde esta el recentimiento y los problemas, ellos son los que fueron victimas del terrorismo y ellos son siempre el target de los populistas.
Excepto por Fujimori todos los demas son una tira de brutos. No entienden que por mas libre mercado que haya, si no se ven los frutos en las zonas mas pobres de nada sirve que tengamos grado de inversion, reservas, etc.
Como puede ser posible que el 80% no tenga agua y desague en Huancavelica, cuanto puede costar darles agua y desague, prefiero mil veces ver las reservas reducidas que gente que no tenga ni agua ni desague en nuestro pais.
Igual en Lima cuanto cuesta darle agua y desague a ese 15% de la poblacion, ese no es gasto es una inversion.
A los pobres de que les sirve decir que la economia crecio 8.8%, ellos no pueden llevar eso al banco.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Mensajes: 164292
- Registrado: Mié Abr 21, 2010 9:02 pm
¿Quién está conectado?
Usuarios navegando por este Foro: No hay usuarios registrados visitando el Foro y 41 invitados