The Austrian Economics Wiki - User contributions [en]

User talk:Junker

2011-02-14T21:26:26Z

Junker: /* Ad Panics */

==Ad Panics==
Hallo Junker, sorry I used Undo on your last edit of [[Panics]], but I'm afraid it didn't really help the page. It was a long chunk of text with the contents(?) of the original and a somewhat esoteric quote; it seemed to offer a somewhat different categorization and/or explanation of panics, without context. I suggest to put resources like these (and 'Notes for dev of this sect' :) ) on a Talk page, preferably with a link and why is it useful. Please also note, that [[Financial crisis]] is the master page for the crises and attempts to also list explanations and background information. 'Panics' is more of a quick and dirty list. Thank you for understanding. [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 17:16, 2 February 2011 (CST)
: Thanks. Good work. Sorry I caused it.

Panics

2011-02-02T22:32:09Z

Junker:

Panics

* [[Panic of 1792]]
* [[Panic of 1796–1797]]
* [[Panic of 1819]]
* [[Panic of 1825]]
* [[Panic of 1837]]
* [[Panic of 1847]]
* [[Panic of 1857]]
* [[Panic of 1866]]
* [[Panic of 1873]]
* [[Panic of 1884]]
* [[Panic of 1890]]
* [[Panic of 1893]]
* [[Panic of 1896]]
* [[Panic of 1907]]

etc.

* [[Financial crisis]]
* [[Business cycle]]
* [[Federal Reserve System]]
* [[History of money and banking in the US]]
* [[Suffolk Bank]]
* [[The Panic of 1819 (book)]]

Or see [[Category:Financial crises]]
----

'''Notes for dev of this sect'''

''The Currency Problem and the Present Financial Situation:
Addresses at Columbia University 1907-1908'' Essays (1908)

Contents short
# Introduction: The Crisis of 1907 in the Light of History
# The Modern Bank
# The Stock Exchange and the Money Market
# Government Currency vs. Bank Currency
# Gold Movements and Foreign Exchanges
# The New York Clearing House
# Clearing Houses and the Currency
# American and European Banking Methods and Bank Legislation Compared
# The Modern Corporation

Contents long
* 1. Introduction: The Crisis of 1907 in the Light of History
** by Edwin R.A. Seligman
** McVickar Professor of Political Economy, Columbia University
* 2. The Modern Bank
** by Frank A. Vanderlip
** Vice-President of the National City Bank
* 3. The Stock Exchange and the Money Market
** by Thomas F. Woodlock
** Former Editor of the Wall Street Journal
* 4. Government Currency vs. Bank Currency
** by A. Barton Hepburn
** President of the Chase National Bank
* 5. Gold Movements and Foreign Exchanges
** by Albert Strauss
** J.& W. Seligman & Co.
* 6. The New York Clearing House
** by William A. Nash
** President of the Corn Exchange Bank
* 7. Clearing Houses and the Currency
** by James G. Cannon
** Vice-President of Fourth National Bank
* 8. American and European Banking Methods and Bank Legislation Compared
** by Paul M. Warburg
** Kuhn, Loeb & Co.
* 9. The Modern Corporation
** by George W. Perkins
** J.P. Morgan & Co.

"From another standpoint, however, a distinction may be drawn between financial crises proper and commercial or industrial crises in the larger sense. There may be a financial panic or crisis due primarily to temporary and sudden oscillations in the condition of the money market or in the price of securities. Such oscillations, sharp and sudden though they be, may have but little relation, whether of effect or of cause, to the general commercial and industrial interests. Of this character, for instance, were the original Black Friday in England, in 1745, and its namesake, the famous Black Friday in 1867 in New York, as well as many spasmodic fluctuations due either to political rumors like that which followed the Venezuelan Message of 1895, or to temporary speculative manipulations, like the Northern Pacific "squeeze" of 1901. Of a distinctly different nature are those wider disturbances which are traceable to more general economic causes and which, even though they culminate in acute financial trouble, are followed by an industrial and com- mercial depression of more or less magnitude.

"Into which category is to be put the crisis of 1907; and if in the latter, what were its causes?"

Black Friday(s)
* 1745 UK
* 1867 ny
* 1895 Veneuelan message
* 1901 Northern Pacific Squeeze

Crises, Eng. since mid 18th
* 1763
* 1772
* 1783
* 1793
* 1810
* 1825

US
* 1817
* 1837
* 1857
* 1873
* 1884
* 1893
* 1907

Int'l
* 1837

Other
* south sea 1720
----

User talk:Junker

2011-01-30T01:02:54Z

Junker: /* Cleaned up */

User talk:Junker

2011-01-25T01:05:17Z

Junker: /* Cleaning up */

==Cleaned up==
----

Albert Jay Nock

2011-01-25T01:02:30Z

Junker: /* External links */

'''Albert Jay Nock''' (October 13, 1870 – August 19, 1945) was an influential [[United States|American]] [[libertarianism|libertarian]] author, educational theorist, and social critic of the early and middle 20th century. [[Murray N. Rothbard|Murray Rothbard]] was deeply influenced by him, and so was the whole generation of free-market thinkers of the 1950s.

==External links==
* [http://mises.org/articles.aspx?AuthorId=731 Mises Daily archive for Albert Jay Nock]
* [http://mises.org/store/Search.aspx?m=58 Mises Store books by Albert Jay Nock]
* [http://mises.org/media.aspx?action=author&Id=731 Mises Media page for Albert Jay Nock]
* [http://mises.org/literature.aspx?action=author&Id=731 Mises Literature archive for Albert Jay Nock]
* [http://mises.org/store/Nock-T-Shirt-Heather-Green-P312C43.aspx Nock T-Shirt Heather Green]
* [http://mises.org/daily/4689 "Albert Jay Nock and the Libertarian Tradition" by Jeff Riggenbach]
* [http://mises.org/daily/2717 "Albert Jay Nock: Forgotten Man of the Old Right" by Jeffrey A. Tucker]
* [http://mises.org/pdf/whois/nock.pdf "Who Is Albert Jay Nock?" (PDF) from the Mises Institute]
* [http://delanion.com/main/ajn3602.htm "Progress Toward Collectivism"] - The State of the Union column in ''American Mercury'', February 1936

{{stub}}
[[Category:Libertarians]]
[[Category:Political theorists]]

Austrian Economics Wiki:Commons

2011-01-23T02:29:01Z

Junker: /* Logic category */

<div class="messagebox" style="width:100%; padding:.5em;">Welcome to '''The Mises Commons''', the central discussion board where you can make announcements, propose new ideas, and ask questions of the entire community.

To add a new item, add a <code><nowiki>==Level two header==</nowiki></code> to introduce it.

For discussion related to long-term planning and development, also see the [https://groups.google.com/a/mises.com/group/wiki/topics Mises Wiki Google Group].</div>
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
{{TOC right}}
==Style guide==
I would like to recommend that we use the ''Chicago Manual of Style'' as a basis for a [[MisesWiki:Manual of Style]] rather than the [[wikipedia:WP:MOS|Wikipedia Manual of Style]]. The WP:MOS makes a large number of stylistic concessions in order to appeal to international speakers of English, resulting in a MOS that incorporates a variety of styles. Mises.org uses CMS as its style guide, and I think it makes sense to use it here as well, as most of our readers are Americans. Two things affected are:
*Spelling (use American all the time)
*Punctuation in relation to quotation marks (commas and periods should always appear inside quotation marks)
I'm sure there are others, but these are the ones that come to mind. Thoughts? --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 16:09, 29 November 2010 (CST)
:Yes, keeping the readership in mind, that's probably a sensible idea. You'll have to be patient with me though, as I'm used to writing under British conventions. [[User:Sovereign|Sovereign]] 12:08, 15 December 2010 (CST)

[[Category:Mises Wiki|Commons]]

==New project==
It seems we could use a new project for the organization of small things - checking links, wikification of text, creating stubs, etc. Also needs a way to easily vote on the next page of interest. Ideas? [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 18:05, 2 December 2010 (CST)
:Sounds reasonable. I'll set it up with some ideas at [[MisesWiki:WikiProject Cleanup]]. We'll need to develop more cleanup categories. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 09:38, 3 December 2010 (CST)
::Looks nice already! Thanks. [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 15:03, 3 December 2010 (CST)

==Most wanted Stub==
Below, let's vote on the most desired stub, that is still missing and really, really should be created, with some good content for a start. Please edit this list: anyone can add more candidates to it, and vote for any number of them - but only once on each. Of course, anyone can create the stub(s) in question, too! Once created, the candidates will be removed from the list. [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 15:03, 3 December 2010 (CST)

* [[Free market]]: +2
* [[World War I]]: +0
* [[New Deal]]: +0
:For what it's worth, I've put this section and the one following at [[MisesWiki:Most wanted]]. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 12:54, 6 January 2011 (CST)
:: Most wanted update is better. --[[User:Reserved|Reserved]] 13:29, 6 January 2011 (CST) The question is, why should I make a request to create a stub?--[[User:Reserved|Reserved]] 08:11, 7 January 2011 (CST)
:::"Most wanted", as the name hints, attempts to find the most desired pages to be created or updated, which will be done by whoever feels like it. No need to overspeculate things, Reserved, join the fray and create some content! :) [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 12:19, 8 January 2011 (CST)

==Most wanted update==
Which page badly deserves to be extended? Please edit this list: anyone can add more candidates to it, and vote for any number of them - but only once on each. Of course, anyone can update the page, too! Once sufficiently improved, the candidates will be removed from the list (but can be entered again for another round of updates). [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 15:03, 3 December 2010 (CST)

* [[‎John Maynard Keynes]]: +0
* [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]]: +0
* [[Charity]]: +2
* [[Karl Marx]]: +1
* [[Estate tax]]: +0

It's maybe better to mark sections directly which have to be improved. --[[User:Reserved|Reserved]] 08:27, 7 January 2011 (CST)
:And yes, sections or pages, that need improvement, should be marked directly. This is for the "Most wanted" updates. [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 12:21, 8 January 2011 (CST)

:: Ah, it is only an additional snap-reading method for the caretakers, okay. --[[User:Reserved|Reserved]] 13:10, 8 January 2011 (CST)

== "External links" --> "Links"? ==

Any thoughts on not using WP's convention of calling the links at the end "External links" but instead simply "Links"? My thinking is that in many cases the links are pointing to mises.org pages (such as literature pages, blog posts, etc.) and thus are not strictly "external." Plus, the word is redundant anyway. We could still use "See also" for referring to tangentially related wiki articles. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 10:43, 6 December 2010 (CST)
:I am open to that upon first reflection. I am assuming we would likely continue a "See also" section for other related Mises Wiki article links not mentioned already in the main text. -- [[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 10:46, 6 December 2010 (CST)
::Right. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 10:49, 6 December 2010 (CST)
:Actually, that is a good idea! [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 11:23, 6 December 2010 (CST)

== Positioning links from Mises Wiki to Wikipedia ==

I have been noticing links to Wikipedia main articles in various locations within the list of links to other resources, articles, etc. Perhaps we might suggest that, if the link to the related main Wikipedia entry is included, we make it the final entry in the list. I am thinking the reader is somewhat more likely to be getting a Classical-Liberal (and similar) point of view in the first links indicated, with the general readership-orientation of Wikipedia best fit for the reader's last choice. If this is already the working style, then perhaps someone might confirm. Thoughts? -- [[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 12:02, 9 December 2010 (CST)
:That seems reasonable. Same for other general resources, I suppose. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 12:09, 9 December 2010 (CST)

== Suggested order of closing sections ==

Is there a working rule of thumb for the order of the closing sections? I just added the '''See also''' section on the [[Great Depression#See also|Great Depression]] page, and it seems out of whack.

I am thinking the order should be:

* See also
* Links
* References

Opinions? Input? And are there further sections we should take into account in this discussion? Thanks! -- [[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 20:06, 9 December 2010 (CST)
:WP standard is "See also" then "References" then "Links" (see [[wikipedia:WP:FOOTERS]]). I like links to be last because they are least related to the content of the article. References specifically relate to the article itself; links point the reader outside the wiki and thus (IMHO) belong at the end. I'm okay with putting "See also" below or above references; either way makes sense. Other footer section types might be "Works" (i.e., on the page of a person – include a list of books he's written) and "Further reading" (like "Links" but to hard copy books for which links aren't available and which weren't used as references). Regarding those, I say Works first, and Further reading second to last. So:
:*Works
:*References
:*See also
:*Further reading
:*Links
:Or switch 2 and 3. Other ideas? --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 22:57, 9 December 2010 (CST)

== Article # 400 ==

Don't know if anyone noticed, but our 400th article is on none other than [[Taxation]] !! -- [[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 13:06, 12 December 2010 (CST)
:Yes, great work everyone! I wonder when we can get to 500. :) [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 17:59, 12 December 2010 (CST)
== Guide ==

A guide of articles for newbies to basics of Economics or mises would be great. I don't know where start and it would be great to have that sort of guide/suggestion to start reading some articles. —''unsigned comment by'' [[User:PLj9N|PLj9N]] ([[User talk:PLj9N|talk]]) {{#if:PLj9N|19:22, 12 December 2010}}.
:An excellent idea! As we build the wiki a "reader's guide" of some sort would be quite helpful for others as well, I imagine. Thanks! --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 21:55, 12 December 2010 (CST)

:I second (third?) this. I would also suggest that there be two introductions: one for those completely new to economics (in a similar vein to Murphy's Lessons for the Young Economist), and one that introduces concepts in Austrian economics to those who are familiar with "mainstream" economics. -- [[User:Six|Six]] 23:59, 12 December 2010 (CST)

:Definitely agreed. The wiki itself is meant to be a backbone for educational efforts. One could start a project with a bunch of pages and steal text left and right, concentrating on simple writing. The underlying pages would supply links to more resources and would contain the more difficult and obscure details.

:Add another wanted on the heap: a category for reading lists. [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 09:00, 13 December 2010 (CST)

== Logic category ==

With the key basis for Austrian economics being deductive logic, and a lacking of articles on deductive logic, I'd like to suggest that logic in its general form should be part of the scope of this wiki, possibly cultivated within a 'Logic' category. Naturally, we can make this relevant to economics through examples (rather than the traditional All Men are Mortal example). -- [[User:Six|Six]] 08:26, 13 December 2010 (CST)
:Logic is already part of the scope of this wiki, and it is only logical. :) [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 08:51, 13 December 2010 (CST)
:I put in for the whole area of applied-logics, the a-priori's of old that have lived poorly under the positivists. It seems ASoE was one of the few, or the only, to survive and prosper. LvM wrote of prax as the whole of sociology, of which econ (catallactics) was just a sub-category. As well, several early folk were econ & somewhat-sociologists, e.g., Sumner, Oppenheimer, and Gumplowicz. Some work was done by Aus-phil [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Brentano Franz Brentano]. I seems ASoE shoulda picked up on all that long ago, but BB-Mises-Rothbard had enough to do keeping ASoE alive. Maybe HHH has worked on it. Just an idea. [[User:Junker|Junker]] 20:29, 22 January 2011 (CST)

== Repeat a link if already in references? ==

A minor issue perhaps, but if a link is already used as a reference, is there a working rule of thumb about whether or not to further include it as a separate and distinct link? The question occurred when looking at this entry: [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]]. (At this writing, the Attarian work is mentioned twice.) --[[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 21:08, 15 December 2010 (CST)
:Good catch. In general I think there's no need to link in both places. There may be a few exceptions to the rule; perhaps if the link is essential to the subject it might be permissible to put it in both. For example, if we cite the mises.org pdf of ''Conceived in Liberty'' in the [[Conceived in Liberty]] article, we'd still want to link the pdf in the external links section. But in this case references only is probably fine. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 12:05, 16 December 2010 (CST)

== Creating a new sub-category ==

Tried to create a subcategory of Writings by Author|Chodorov, Frank and I don't seem to be doing it correctly. I supplied the new entry [[Out of Step (book)]] with the sub-category, thinking I'd end up with a red link to create it, but it's not appearing the way I imagined it. Perhaps someone can enlighten? Thanks in advance. --[[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 13:34, 18 December 2010 (CST)
:You needed to create a new subcategory by adding the full category name to the Chodorov work: [[:Category:Writings by Frank Chodorov]]. What you did was simply add the book to [[:Category:Writings by Author]]—the "|Chodorov, Frank" didn't do anything because that is only used for sorting on the category page. In general, my process for creating a new category is to add a nonexistent category to an article, resulting in a red link. Then click the red link to access the about-to-be-created category page. On that page, add the parent category and create. See [[:Category:Writings by Frank Chodorov]] to see what I did there. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 10:54, 20 December 2010 (CST)
::Thanks! Will explore more later. :) --[[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 11:19, 20 December 2010 (CST)

== Mark all copies ==

Please mark all copy text from Wikipedia or elsewhere with

{| style="background-color:#ffffe0;" cellpadding="10"
|-
| style="background:yellow" | || --copy text--
|}
or so.

Code: 
<nowiki>{| style="background-color:#ffffe0;" cellpadding="10"</nowiki> 
<nowiki>|-</nowiki> 
<nowiki>| style="background:yellow" | || text</nowiki> 
<nowiki>|}</nowiki>
--[[User:Reserved|Reserved]] 10:25, 1 January 2011 (CST)
:I'm not sure that such visible notice is necessary. Copies from Wikipedia need simply to be acknowledged. But really only editors need to know which information was copied. So it would be much better to use html comments (<! -- and -- >, without spaces, see the edit window for an example) to indicate this. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 19:02, 1 January 2011 (CST)
:: Such ideals don't exist. Editors start in the state to be a reader. Everything that should be rewritten needs comments. The best place is the direct one. See also the edits of Karmaisking after my ones in [[Austrian School]]. --[[User:Reserved|Reserved]] 04:41, 2 January 2011 (CST)
:::Fair enough. To make this easier, you can use a template I just created, [[Template:Rewrite]]. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 16:22, 3 January 2011 (CST)

::::Fine --[[User:Reserved|Reserved]] 03:58, 4 January 2011 (CST)

== USA-centrism ==

I am wondering if we might consider aiming for a more global perspective in our developing articles. This has been occurring to me as I have been tinkering with [[Net neutrality]], a timely issue in the U.S. as of December 2010 but still with application elsewhere.

After all, at this writing we are billed as "A Global Repository". Further, in presenting praxeological truths that remain true regardless of location or era, a global approach--or at least acknowledgement--seems prudent and consistent.

Of course, I also recognize I can simply take this approach on my own whether or not anyone else "approves," and maybe it is mostly my eyes that have been slow to open, while perhaps most are already doing this. I thought I would at least put the idea out on the table for others' consideration.

Any of you non-USA folks care to chime in? Are readers of Mises Wiki as concentrated in the USA as we might think? Please feel free, all. -- [[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 15:58, 2 January 2011 (CST)
:Do you have specific suggestions on how to aim for this goal? In general I'd leave this to the discretion of the users, let them work on whatever they are interested in. A certain USA-centricity is probably unavoidable (speaking from Europe here). But if you want to make the thought more popular and maybe even coordinate the efforts, you could make an "International" WikiProject. There are even users thinking about writing in [http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/User_talk:Forgottenman#idioms different languages], so it could house them as well.
:Speaking of statistics, the page with the Meetups is the second most visited page, but the number of international visitors (or visitors in total) would be interesting to know... will try to find out more. [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 05:53, 4 January 2011 (CST)
::Pestergaines, thanks for your comments. No, I don't have specific goals, and starting up a WikiProject seems like it would be more than I would like to handle just now. We are still "just getting going," after all. Your thought of leaving it to users' discretion makes the most sense to me in the here and now. My main thought is, for myself, to keep the experiences of others in mind, rather than fall into the trap of my own geo-centrism, if you will. Thx. :) --[[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 13:20, 8 January 2011 (CST)
:::Well, it's still something to keep an eye out for in the long term. (And should it be necessary, the start of a [[MisesWiki:International|page]] is already there. :) ) Have a nice day! [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 13:43, 8 January 2011 (CST)

== What constitutes a minor edit ==

From the [[Help:Wiki FAQ]]:

"...Generally, small formatting changes, adding a link, changing a category, or fixing one or two spelling or grammar mistakes are all considered minor edits. If that describes your edit, check the box. It helps other users keeping an eye on that page that you didn't make a drastic edit.

"Larger edits, like those involving actual content, or substantial reorganization of the article, are not minor edits. Don't check the "This is a minor edit" box when you save; otherwise people might think you're trying to mislead them. For this reason, if you think your edit might be controversial, no matter how big it is, don't call it a minor edit."
--[[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 11:25, 5 January 2011 (CST)
:Is this a question? --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 13:50, 7 January 2011 (CST)
::No. The "minor edit" indicator has been used incorrectly of late, so I thought I would include this here for general review. Sorry to confuse. -- [[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 23:10, 7 January 2011 (CST)

==Argumentation==
I've started a little experiment, an [[Argumentation:ABCT‎|argumentation chain]] for Austrian Business Cycle Theory in the making. Planning to expand it in the next few days, see if you can use for it.

The concept can be expanded for other arguments, of course. :) [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 16:54, 16 January 2011 (CST)
:"No, it can't!"
::"Yes, it can!" (heh) -- [[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 17:17, 16 January 2011 (CST)
:::See? That's what I'm talking about. :D [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 17:22, 16 January 2011 (CST)

Out of Step

2011-01-17T01:09:36Z

Junker: links to book added

{{Italic title}}
'''''Out of Step: The Autobiography of an Individualist''''' (1962) was the last of [[Frank Chodorov]]'s books published during his lifetime. It is a collection of essays, including [http://mises.org/daily/2498 "The Ethic of the Peddler Class,"] [http://mises.org/daily/2500 "Taxation Is Robbery,"] [http://mises.org/daily/3882 "St. Paul and the Communists,"] [http://mises.org/daily/4764 "If We Quit Voting,"] "Isolationism," and "I Watch Westerns."
<ref>Chodorov, Frank [http://mises.org/resources/3084/Out-of-Step Out of Step: The Autobiography of an Individualist]</ref>

==References==
{{Reflist|2}}

===Links===
* [http://mises.org/books/outofstep.pdf PDF Mises.org]
* [http://books.google.com/books?id=NeGFrElEBGAC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:frank+inauthor:chodorov&hl=en&ei=TpIzTZT9LcH38AbA_8npCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=book-preview-link&resnum=5&ved=0CEAQuwUwBA PDF-access-page books.google.com]
* [http://delanion.com/main/oos.htm HTML delanion.com]

[[Category:Writings by Frank Chodorov]]
{{stub}}

Panics

2011-01-16T23:45:52Z

Junker:

Panics

2011-01-16T23:42:40Z

Junker:

2010-11-21T02:53:53Z

Junker: Created page with "Same Junker as at [Mises.org LvMI]. Greetings."

Same Junker as at [Mises.org LvMI].

Greetings.