Politics

The New American Century - Over In Seven Years?

MayorBob.

Posted to Politics on Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 10:57:07 AM EST (promoted by port1080). RSS.

Whatever happened to the American Century?  The 20th century was arguably it as the US emerged as one of two superpowers possessing the ability to end life on this planet with a press of the nuclear button.  The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War was thought by some to mean the 21st century would become a New American Century.  After all, the New World Order meant one economic and military superpower in the world that most of our global neighbors looked to for leadership.  But, some things happened along the way during the first decade of the New American Century - the rise of terrorism; warfare eroding our national treasury; an economy that burps and hiccups along; threats, both real and perceived, from illegal immigration, and so on - which have led to a place where it seems the rest of the world really doesn't approve of US leadership.

This dissatisfaction is most recently outlined by a BBC poll (pdf doc) of over 26,000 respondents from 25 nations (including the US).  The public support for six fundamental US foreign policy initiatives were assessed and all six were found wanting.  The six areas were: the war in Iraq; the handling of detainees at Guantanamo; the Israeli-Hezbollah war; Iran's nuclear program; North Korea's nuclear program; and global warming.  The issue which drove the highest disapproval among the nations of the world was the war in Iraq, with 70% of the world against US policy, with Guantanamo detainees garnering a 67% global disapproval rating.  This is not to say that public approval in the US is high for either of these programs but with 57% of the US public opposed to the war in Iraq and 50% of the US disapproving of Guantanamo, it would seem the world is a bit less disposed to US leadership than looking to the US for more of it.  The nations which seemed to be more firmly in the US corner in the poll were Nigeria, Kenya, and the Philippines.  Most of the industrialized nations of the world were firmly opposed.

So much for world public opinion, but certainly none of the bad choices and misfortunes which have befallen US foreign policy initiatives have lessened the US lead on issues it considers important enough to ask other governments to join in on.  Most certainly it has.  Going back to the call to invade Iraq, the US managed to turn a "Coalition of the Willing" into a "Coalition of the Billing."  On virtually every one of the other five issues polled by the BBC, a majority of the world's governments have expressed uncertainty, if not outright opposition.  Although it's not one of the six polled areas, a recent US foreign policy call went out to the rest of the world to join us in opposition to what we see as a brutal, authoritarian regime looking to hold on.  That regime is the Cuban government of Fidel Castro (or more to the point, the caretakers in Havana maintaining the Fidel deathwatch).  Yet, when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asked our European partners to join with us to marginalize the Cubans, she was icily rebuffed.  It seems, nobody in the European Union (EU), not even the Spanish who have the closest ties to Cuba, are willing to step up and go shoulder to shoulder with the US against Havana.

At this point, EU sensibilities seem to be there is more to be gained by engagement with Havana and less by hostility in terms of securing improved civil liberties for Cuban citizens.  This doesn't sit well with many members of the Cuban American community in the US.  According to US Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R - Florida), the world focuses on the plight of detainees at Guantanamo, winking at injustices occurring in the island nation: "After almost 50 years of this double standard of silence toward Cuba's lack of freedoms, I am not very surprised by the lack of international support."  The US government policy has been to encourage the world to set aside the larger picture and focus on freedom for Cuba.  But, as one human rights advocate put it: "that's not how things work ... They also need to open the whole policy agenda for debate."

< Climate Change As Threatening As Nuclear War? Tick-Tock Goes The Doomsday Clock

The Debate Within Islam: Radical Rhetoric -Vs- Moderate Messages >

Tags: edited by Port1080, written by MayorBob, US foreign policy, global approval, Iraq, Iran, global warming, Guantanamo, Cuba, North Korea (all tags)
Add this story to: newsvine reddit digg delicious

This story: 29 comments (5 from subqueue)
Post a Comment
3

playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

gerrymander.

Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 03:48:06 PM EST

4.50 (astute)

"Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

I bitched about it in the editorial comments, so I might as well expand here: I don't buy into the premise of this story. The problems listed at the outset -- the rise of terrorism; warfare eroding our national treasury; an economy that burps and hiccups along; threats, both real and perceived, from illegal immigration -- are at least half false, and the rest of the sub doesn't support them.

Let's start with the patently false problems, the wartime treasury and the economy. Quick quiz: since the start of the Iraq War in March, 2003, in how many of the 45 reported months has the economy grown?

The answer is 41. The economy is going so well that tax receipts for 2006 revealed a budget deficit -- including wartime expenses, previous tax cuts and the new(ish) misbegotten prescription drug plan -- to be roughly half the January, 2006 predictions. If this continues, the federal budget will be balanced in 18 months. The economy isn't stuttering, and the national treasury is doing just fine.

As for the other two, the data is mixed. It's hard to reconcile an unhappy foreign opinion with an illegal immigration problem. Clearly, the US is doing something right if that many people want to get in so badly.

The only problem which is even vaguely supported in the body of the story is the rise of terrorism; one can credibly tie the policy poll of the BBC to it. Unfortunately, that still accomplishes nothing to advance the working premise of the story. Popular opinions don't count for crap if the net result of the various US policies continue the current trend of post 9/11 terrorism being directed to easier targets like Iraq and Europe.

In order for the 20XX's to fail to be another tale of American ascendance, something shocking would need to happen; extant trends just don't support a unilateral failing.

4

^ 3

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

wetkarma.

Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 04:28:29 PM EST

5.00


The answer is 41. The economy is going so well that tax receipts for 2006 revealed a budget deficit -- including wartime expenses, previous tax cuts and the new(ish) misbegotten prescription drug plan -- to be roughly half the January, 2006 predictions. If this continues, the federal budget will be balanced in 18 months. The economy isn't stuttering, and the national treasury is doing just fine.

Shenanigans.

While I agree with you on the idea that the economy is doing well, you are doing some serious cherry picking of datapoints. The budget was in surplus back in 2001. We ran deficits for 6 years ON TOP OF the 5T debt we have been carry for ages now. To get back net neutral i.e. "balanced" we'd have to at minimum not just balance the budget, but pay down the debt on what was rung up between 2001 and 2006.

Thats around 3T in additional debt.

Memory is a strange bell, jubilee and knell.

5

^ 4

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

gerrymander.

Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 04:55:27 PM EST

none

To get back net neutral i.e. "balanced" we'd have to at minimum not just balance the budget, but pay down the debt on what was rung up between 2001 and 2006.

I'll quibble a bit over your use of "neutral" here, wetkarma. I don't think that the budget surplus of 2001 should be taken as the norm, in light of actual events. Even without the Iraq War, the US still had the end of a business cycle and the 9/11 aftermath to deal with. 2002 and 2003, at least, would have been net debit years, and heavy ones at that. I grant that this still keeps roughly an additional $2T on the minus column.

Overall, however, I concede the obvious: the US has a notably higher debt load than before. That said, the trend still looks pretty good. The US seems to be able to function with the current debt load in roughly the same capacity as it did in the 90s. The Clinton administration surpluses also coincided with the last three years of the business cycle. If we assume mid-2001 as the start of the new 11-year cycle, that means the potential to run budget surpluses for the entire next administration, barring catastrophe [knocks wood].

6

^ 3

If you remember your Greek mythology correctly.

MayorBob.

Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 06:17:33 PM EST

none

Cassandra was doomed to always be right and always be ignored.  Actually, regarding the budget and health of the economy, one of the positive developments of the past year was the election of a Democratic majority in Congress.  Having the executive held by one party and the legislative held by another helps to balance out some of the baser urges politicians have in shuffling around the public's money.  Thus, it wouldn't distress me in the least if a Democrat were elected to be president in 2008 as long as the Republican gain a majority in one house of Congress.

Illegitimi non carborundum.

7

^ 3

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

rEvolution inAction.

Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 12:34:50 PM EST

none

Sure your economy is growing, but it's grgowing at a slower rate than other places. Your military is becoming more and more irrelevant, and because your diplomacy is based on it's threat.. well you see what I mean?

Tipping Sacred Cows

8

^ 7

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

profwhat.

Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 12:50:46 PM EST

none

Sure your economy is growing, but it's growing at a slower rate than other places.

Our GDP is almost three times as big as the next largest nation's (Japan).  As this intriguing (though somewhat inaccurate) map illustrates, individual U.S. states have GDPs roughly equivalent to entire nations.  You are right that our growth rate is not as high as Azerbaijan, Burkina Faso, or China, but that's because those nations are awakening from a long economic slumber, not because we are entering one.  Our growth rate still beats most other industrialized democracies; in fact, taking the EU as a whole, we trounce them in growth, and to be polite, let's just not mention Canada's standing in that race.

So if this is the end of the American Century, I say, keep the ending coming!

9

^ 8

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

rombuu.

Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 01:00:44 PM EST

none

I ran some numbers a few years ago and assumed that Japan would have 20% higher growth than the US over time, and figured that they'd pass the US in GDP in around 120 years.  Of course, predictions out that long are useless and ignore lots of interesting demographic and geographic issues, but still.....

13

^ 8

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

rEvolution inAction.

Sun Jan 28, 2007 at 02:43:37 PM EST

none

Your GDP is smaller than the largest player.

Tipping Sacred Cows

11

^ 7

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

zyxwvutsr.

Sat Jan 27, 2007 at 05:06:40 PM EST

none

Sure your economy is growing, but it's grgowing at a slower rate than other places
The US economy has been growing faster than the economies of Canada, France, Germany, The United Kingdom, and Italy.

12

^ 11

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

rEvolution inAction.

Sun Jan 28, 2007 at 02:42:54 PM EST

none

Those countries are all irrelevant. GDP growth in the US is comparable to the GDP growth in the EU (which everyone notes has been stagnating), and nothing compared to India or China. Also, from a cursory look, it seems that only twice in the last two years (Q3-2005 and Q1-2006) did GDP growth in the US outstrip inflation.

see here  (inflation), and here (GDP growth).

If you want to compare apples and apples.. US to EU.

If anything this new Century is going to belong to China, India and Brazil. Golman Sachs argues for including Russia, but I'm not so certain. They've been showing signs of using wealth as the US does (like a stick) but have suceeded mainly in driving countries away from them and towards other regional powers (Russia is no longer a superpower, rather they are a regional power in three regions due to their unique geography).

Tipping Sacred Cows

15

^ 12

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

zyxwvutsr.

Sun Jan 28, 2007 at 03:25:34 PM EST

none

Those countries are all irrelevant
Those countries represent the largest economies in the world. They are in no way "irrelevant."
GDP growth in the US is comparable to the GDP growth in the EU
GDP growth in the US has been, over the past few years, about double the rate in France and three times the rate in Italy and Germany. US GDP growth has not been stagnating - on the contrary, it's been quite robust.
...from a cursory look, it seems that only twice in the last two years (Q3-2005 and Q1-2006) did GDP growth in the US outstrip inflation
That's quite a cursory glance indeed. US GDP growth outpaced inflation by 1 full percentage point in 2005 and by two percentage points in 2004.

16

^ 15

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

rEvolution inAction.

Sun Jan 28, 2007 at 05:20:24 PM EST

none

One of those countries (Canada) has 1/10th your population, the other three are member states of the European Union.. but sure.. GDP is better than France or Italy.. stay on message, stay on message... WE ARE THE LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE WORLD.. stay on message..

Here's what your own government has to say (from the EU link in my previous post): "The 25-nation European Union (EU), with 460 million residents, is the world's largest economic area."

1 full percentage point... so.. you're super proud of having a 1%? Let's see what your own governmment has to say, here

GDP - real growth rate:                               3.4% (2006 est.)
Inflation rate (consumer prices):                 3.7% (2006 est.)

that's looking like a -0.3% actual growth. (not in 2003 or 2004.. but hey.. shouldn't we be looking at last year?)

Now how about France
GDP - real growth rate:                               2.3% (2006 est.)
Inflation rate (consumer prices):                 2% (2006 est.)
Oh.. This France country that you were talking about having a faster growing economy then.. it's obviously not the one in Europe.

At least you can still say you're beating Italy. they have a -0.7%.. Germany has a +0.5% and Canada has a +0.8%..

But as I said.. those countries are irrelevant. compare to the EU.. 2% inflation vs 2.3% GDP growth.. well shiiiit.. would ya look at that.. the US blows. deal with it.

Tipping Sacred Cows

17

^ 16

Real vs. nominal

Steve Urkel.

Sun Jan 28, 2007 at 05:33:21 PM EST

4.00 (astute)

Real growth rates are adjusted for inflation.  

18

^ 16

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

zyxwvutsr.

Sun Jan 28, 2007 at 05:42:01 PM EST

none

One of those countries (Canada) has 1/10th your population, the other three are member states of the European Union.. but sure.. GDP is better than France or Italy.. stay on message, stay on message... WE ARE THE LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE WORLD.. stay on message..
The message was about GDP growth. You missed that bit. US GDP growth was better than France's or Germany's or Italy's. The size of the population or the size of the economy has nothing to do with it at all.
that's looking like a -0.3% actual growth. (not in 2003 or 2004.. but hey.. shouldn't we be looking at last year?)
My mistake. I take back what I wrote about the GDP growth being a point ahead of inflation. The figures I was looking at were real GDP growth. But, then, so are the numbers in your linked sources. That 3.4% rate for 2006 is on top of the increase in GDP caused by inflation.

Since the balance of your comment is based on that same mistake, we can dispense with it altogether, right?

19

^ 18

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

rEvolution inAction.

Sun Jan 28, 2007 at 06:25:41 PM EST

none

Since the balance of your comment is based on that same mistake, we can dispense with it altogether, right?

Yup, we can go back to comparing the US to it's actual competition.. the EU, China and India.

Tipping Sacred Cows

20

^ 19

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

zyxwvutsr.

Sun Jan 28, 2007 at 07:39:17 PM EST

none

Yup, we can go back to comparing the US to it's actual competition.. the EU, China and India
Sure. First go and read the Goldman Sachs paper. It says that if China does everything right and nothing wrong (vis a vis economic policies and government spending) then their GDP might pass US GDP in 2039. It'll still be better living in the US, of course (or in any of the other G6 nations), because per capita GDP in the US will be three times higher than in China.

More importantly, in order for China to enjoy the vast growth that the BRIC paper sees as possible, it will have to significantly reform its governmental institutions and make its economy more open. So a prosperous China in 2040 would not be the same oppressive and unjust China we know today.

21

^ 20

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

rEvolution inAction.

Sun Jan 28, 2007 at 10:11:38 PM EST

none

Zyx.. are you being deliberately obtuse? I admit I was in error regarding the GDP (wasn't paying enough attention) but you still haven't addressed the point I originally made. The US is No.2 to the EU and several countries will be surpassing you before the midpoint of the century, China and India. Both have massive populations and are just now becoming preferred targets for foreign investment. Both will have some extra problems that the US will not have to face (AIDS pandemic and educating a mainly rural population). But it doesn't matter. The US has traditionaly relied on productivity boosts for the bulk of it's growth, usually through technology, but with the technology base you already have, any gains are smaller.. China and India have been converting from 1960's (in the more civilized areas) to near-current technology. In order to compete with them, the US has to let them do the manufacturing.. so you're going to bankroll their rise to preeminence. At some point the scales will balance out (when wages in China and India start reflecting their economic might) and everyone will turn to the Middle East (with it's 30%+ unemployment rate and the end of the Oil Age on the horizon) and Africa (provided something has been done about AIDS, but since India/China are going to have to deal with their own issues with the disease they would have a bit more experience to offer and would probably have an easier time setting up shop there.. nevermind that they already are starting to do business there).

Tipping Sacred Cows

22

^ 21

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

zyxwvutsr.

Mon Jan 29, 2007 at 04:18:30 PM EST

none

Zyx.. are you being deliberately obtuse?
Have you read the BRIC paper yet?
In order to compete with [China], the US has to let them do the manufacturing...
Before I address the rest of your comment, let me ask you something: who manufactures more, the US or China?

23

^ 22

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

rEvolution inAction.

Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 03:25:36 AM EST

none

No, I can't seem to find it, but I've been following the four countries progress for a few years now.. Brazil looks like it won't live up to the hype for awhile, Russia is under political clouds, but China and India are moving along fine and it's going to start changing even more. Foreign investment is shifting, US currency isn't what it was, and let's face it.. a lot of countries are more likely to do more business with them then you due to political concers.. nevermind proximity.

China exports more, but has a much smaller domestic market. That will grow however, just look at their fridge ownership rate in the last 5 years.

Now address the one point I actually care about. US vs EU. You've been avoiding it.

Tipping Sacred Cows

24

^ 23

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

zyxwvutsr.

Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 08:05:25 AM EST

none

Now address the one point I actually care about. US vs EU. You've been avoiding it
Let's see...you began this by saying that the US economy is growing slower than some other economies. I responded by pointing out that the US economy has been growing quite a lot better than the big EU economies. You then claimed that "GDP growth in the US is comparable to the GDP growth in the EU (which everyone notes has been stagnating)" and I demonstrated that was wrong.

And then you brought up India and China.

25

^ 24

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

rEvolution inAction.

Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 01:52:39 PM EST

none

You're ahead one full percentage point over EU growth,  but you're the ones playing catchup. India and China are playing catchup to the US, coming from much farther behind, but at a much faster rate. By the time the US catches the EU, China will have caught the US. (if you decide to make any calculations, remember to include public debt into account.. US is stiting at 64% of GDP and rising, China has 22%). If you want to stick to just the last couple of years, fine, the US hasn't been doing so bad, better than the EU.. but if you want to look at it long term... well that's when US policies start falling apart. Underfunding of education will lead to a society that only knows how to serve fries to each other. Public debt will eat up more and more of the budget, nevermind dependencies on foreign energy sources which will hold you captive to the military establishment. The US will be forced to try to become an empire, and it will fail.

Tipping Sacred Cows

26

^ 25

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

zyxwvutsr.

Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 09:18:59 PM EST

none

You're ahead one full percentage point over EU growth,  but you're the ones playing catchup
In what sense if the US "playing catchup" with the EU?
If you want to stick to just the last couple of years, fine, the US hasn't been doing so bad, better than the EU
How about look at the last 50 years?
Underfunding of education will lead to a society that only knows how to serve fries to each other
The US is not underfunding education by any reasonable measure.
The US will be forced to try to become an empire, and it will fail
What, do you have a crystal ball?

27

^ 26

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

rEvolution inAction.

Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 09:23:27 PM EST

none

   In what sense if the US "playing catchup" with the EU?

In the sense that they have more people and a larger GDP then you.

   How about look at the last 50 years?

Oh sure, cherrypick a date 2 years after the entire region was destroyed by war..

  The US is not underfunding education by any reasonable measure.

Leaving lotsa children behind.

  What, do you have a crystal ball?

I got two.

Tipping Sacred Cows

28

^ 27

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

MayorBob.

Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 09:27:38 PM EST

none

How about look at the last 50 years?

Oh sure, cherrypick a date 2 years after the entire region was destroyed by war..

Who knew that Europe was destroyed by war in 1955?

Illegitimi non carborundum.

29

^ 28

Re: playing Mark Twain to the story's Cassandra

rEvolution inAction.

Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 01:40:22 AM EST

none

Is it 2007 already? Damn I gotta get back in my Time Masheen..

Tipping Sacred Cows

1

Someone explain Cuba to me

wetkarma.

Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 01:00:46 PM EST

4.00 (interesting)

Seriously -- after the Soviet-Cuban missile crisis, has there been any reason whatsoever for Cuba to be on the radar of US foreign policy concerns?

More to the point what exactly is the Cuban government accused of that makes them worthy of being mentioned in the same breath as N. Korea, Iran, Iraq aka ye olde axis of Evil?

Is Cuba somehow worse than (pick random ex-soviet state....) Belarus? If so, how?

Memory is a strange bell, jubilee and knell.

2

^ 1

Re: Someone explain Cuba to me

rEvolution inAction.

Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 01:24:31 PM EST

4.00 (astute)

Cuba means votes in south Florida.

Tipping Sacred Cows

10

^ 2

Not Just Florida

uncarved block.

Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 09:04:07 PM EST

none

   Cuba is also a great way for Republicans to drum up support among conservatives all over the nation, either by reminding older voters of "pro-Communism" themes, or  introducing New Right readers to the "Democrats coddle dictators" attack. Check out the index of any three conservative pulp bestsellers and check out the Castro entries.
    And the best part? It doesn't cost anything but words, which is a quality politicians love deeply. Even when the Reagan administration was dicking with the rest of South and Central America, Cuba never popped up for consideration. Even after the fall of the USSR, the chance to liberate the island without fear of setting off WWIII apparently was unattractive. (And who knows what Saddam might have not done if Bush/41 had shown a willingness to flex the muscles a bit, eh?) Clinton could have turned it into a bipartisan wedge issue after the 1994 losses, but chose not to-- how could a Republican majority have voted against such a proposal without losing major support among the base voters? And even before 9/11, W and Cheney were already looking at Iraq, not (again, apparently) even one passing thought for "cleaning up" one of the last embarrassments of the Cold War. Why kill the goose that kept laying such golden eggs at election time?
   OK, maybe it wasn't all politics, as the policy of "Castro has to die someday, right?" had a certain appeal. Certainly is interesting comparing the gap between rhetoric and action, though.

Ex ignorantia ad sapientiam; e luce ad tenebras

14

^ 10

Re: Not Just Florida

rEvolution inAction.

Sun Jan 28, 2007 at 02:47:27 PM EST

none

Words cost a lot of money. First you have to pay the writers, then you have to pay the focus groups, then you have to pay for the airtime.. you get my drift.. I hope.

Tipping Sacred Cows

This story: 29 comments (5 from subqueue)
Post a Comment

search »
Poll »
The American Century:
Votes: 14.
Results, Other Polls
Login »
Make a new account
Related Links »
American Century
New American Century
New World Order
rest of the world really doesn't approve of US leadership
a BBC poll
Coalition of the Willing
Coalition of the Billing
she was icily rebuffed
More on Politics
Also by MayorBob
QuickLinks »
Nothing is sacred
The Macy's Thanksgiving Parade gets Rick Rolled.
- Lou
<—————+Ο————>
Yes We Can!
Obama inspires man to redistribute wealth.
- Steve Urkel
<———Ο—+—————>
Bad Candy
It's exactly what it sounds like. Or not. I dunno, I just liked the name.
- JimmyHavok
<—————Ο—————>
Farr off the flying Fiend
Cthulhuesque entity photographed by airplane passenger.
- Steve Urkel
<—————+—Ο———>
John McCain: furriner!
He's a Latin American immigrant! Why the media coverup?
- JimmyHavok
<—Ο———+—————>
Truth and love
New website stands up against hate in California.
- Steve Urkel
<—Ο———+—————>
Worst Endorsement Decision... EVAR
Rifle manufacturer rolls out its newest ad campaign: An endorsement by the Ruby Ridge sniper.
- pO157
<—————+————Ο>
No money for white man's disease
More wackiness from our neighbor to the north! Carleton University Students' Association drops cystic fibrosis charity as a fundraising beneficiary because the disease is not inclusive enough.
- Steve Urkel
<—————+———Ο—>
Submit a QuickLink:
If you'd like to submit your own QuickLink, you'll need to log in (or register) first.

Users own their contributions, all else is © 2006, 2007 Trees and Things, Incorporated.

Powered by Scoop.

Terms of Service

Privacy