Just an average american woman.
by Elaine Ossipov
A new study published in Science magazine, shows that species are moving toward the poles three times faster and climbing higher twice as fast as previously reported in 2003. The study looks at how over 1,500 species of mammals, birds, reptiles, plants and insects have responded to a warming climate over the past 40 years.
NASA has just released global temperature data for June-August 2011, showing that it was the third warmest June-August on record, with the largest temperature departures from normal concentrated at the poles. In the Arctic, where sea surface temperatures in some areas reached record levels in August, sea ice declined to record or near-record levels. The U.S. Geological Survey and videographer Dan Zatz released today (13 September 2011) dramatic videos of walruses hauled-out along the Alaska shoreline of the Chukchi Sea -- leaving little doubt of the epic proportions of the disruption being felt in the region as it rapidly warms.
Just weeks before Arctic sea ice extent reaches a record or near-record annual low, observers estimate that over 20,000 walruses have hauled-out near Point Lay, Alaska. The aerial observers also have spotted dead walruses on their flights over the Chukchi Sea.
(Rick Bookstaber is a senior policy adviser at the SEC. This guest post represents personal opinion from his blog.)
Some of the dominant policy issues of today – immigration, energy, the emergence of China – have their analogues in the great Industrial Revolution.
The key government policies that laid the foundation for the Industrial Revolution in England include supporting the immigration of skilled workers, allowing for private ownership of farm land, weakening the unions of the day (the guilds), and addressing the energy crisis (in charcoal). And contrary policies in Italy and Spain – countries that were far wealthier and advanced than was per-Industrial Revolution England – derailed a similar revolution from occurring in continental Europe.
England would not have been anyone's first bet as the cradle of the Industrial Revolution. When compared to the developed countries of the time, such as Italy, the Netherlands, France, and Germany, sixteenth century England was an also-ran, and had fewer than 4 million inhabitants, compared to 15 million in France, 11 million in Italy, and 7 million in Spain.
We all know the key innovations and developments that sparked the Industrial Revolution:
Textiles. For centuries preceding the Industrial Revolution England produced the best wool in Europe, and from the fourteenth century onward she moved more and more into the production of woolen cloth. Wool and woolen cloth represented the bulk of English exports. Four inventions mechanized textile manufacturing and ushered in the Industrial Revolution: the spinning-jenny, patented by Hargreaves in 1770; the water frame, invented by Arkwright in 1769; Crompton's mule introduced in 1779; and the self-acting mule, which was brought into use till Roberts improved it in 1825. The most famous invention of all, patented by Cartwright in 1785, was the power-loom. And add to these a critical one from America: the cotton gin.
Coal and Iron. Meanwhile, the iron industry had been equally revolutionized by the invention of smelting by pit-coal brought into use between 1740 and 1750, and by the application in 1788 of the steam-engine to blast furnaces. In the eight years which followed this later date, the amount of iron manufactured nearly doubled. Improvements were introduced in puddling, rolling, and other processes. The production of coal increased more than proportionately. The smelting of iron and the use of the steam-engine created fresh demand for coal, so capital and innovation extended to mining, leading to steam pumps, timber roof supports, and safety lamps.
The factory system. Prior to the Industrial Revolution, manufacturing was organized according to the "domestic system". Manufacturing was carried on in houses by a master working with a few journeymen and apprentices, usually in country villages. The implements of manufacture belonged to the master. The raw material—wool, linen, metal, or whatever —was the property of a town merchant or capitalist, who distributed it to the manufacturers in their houses in the villages, paying them for the product and then selling or exporting it. The power spinning machines were too large to be used in a house and required a powerplant of large scale. As a result, the Industrial Revolution led to an increase in the size of plants and a resulting concentration of labor and capital into centralized production centers. Shipbuilding, textile manufacture and the like required plants worth millions of pounds with hundreds of workers. Manufacturing thus moved from the traditional domestic or guild system to what became known as the factory system. The factory system brought with is capital-intensive production methods, power, and laborers into tightly run plants.
Less discussed are the government policies that provided the foundation and then nurtured these innovations:
Investing in infrastructure
The roads in England were in terrible condition at the start of the Industrial Revolution. It took a week or more for a coach to go from London to Edinburgh. Ruts were four feet deep, hardly a mile could be passed without seeing carts broken down.
Infrastructure projects, both by private turnpike companies and by public authorities, covered England with good roads. And even more important that the roads was the development of the infrastructure of the waterways. The first canal was completed in 1761, and within a few years a system of canals gave ready transportation for goods through all parts of the country. The investment in infrastructure, augmented by the introduction of steam engines for both rail and boats, was one of the most critical foundations for expansion of the Industrial Revolution, and indeed for the nineteenth century in general.
Opening immigration for skilled workers
Another policy that enhanced England’s position for industrialization was the influx of skilled immigrant. Persecution in France and Spain and economic difficulties in Spain and elsewhere drove people to more hospitable countries, with England at the top of the list. This immigration was not merely an infusion of labor, but of skilled labor that brought with it new methods of production: Flemish cloth; Walloon weavers, thread-makers and iron smiths; French Huguenots silk-weavers; clocks and metal goods from Normandy and Brittany; Spanish needles; Venetian glass; fine milled paper from Germany.
Not surprisingly, the immigrants were frequently harassed by English craftsmen, who saw in them as potentially dangerous competitors. But the Crown had policies to protect them, and ultimately the English craftsmen learned their techniques and often went on to improve them.
Weakening the guilds
The influx of immigrants could only benefit England to the extent they were allowed to ply their trades. The English government put policies in place that assured this. In England the government – through the action of the Crown – did not permit restrictive practices of the crafts guilds In the cities, guilds also weakened because of the domination of the mercantile class, which controlled the market and the raw material of the craftsmen. Many immigrants did not stay in the cities, because once in the countryside the power of the guilds was dampened further.
In contrast to England, where manufacturing escaped from the controls of the city guilds, thereby allowing skilled immigrant, in Italy the guilds remained dominant, thwarting the few attempts to introduce innovations. Manufacturing remained stagnant in Italy, entrenched in the past. The result was a gradual replacement of Italian goods and services by foreign ones because the English – along with the Dutch and the French – could offer lower prices due to their innovations in production. Italian products were of a higher quality, but Italian manufacturers were constrained by guild regulations to use less efficient, traditional methods. The English and the Dutch swamped the textile market. Their products were inferior, lighter and less durable than the Italian products, but they cost a good deal less.
And not only did Italy lag in efficiencies of production. The guilds led to higher labor costs. Competition lowered wages outside Italy; while within Italy the guild organization kept wages up. Everything points to the fact that, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, Italian wages were out of step with wages in other countries. As a result there was a marked decline in Italian exports along with reduced investment in manufacturing and shipping.
Establishing private agricultural land
Traditionally the agricultural land in England was largely held in commons. Towards the late 1600's the government enacted laws that permitted enclosures, effectively privatizing land. Enclosing agricultural lands provided a scale of production and a level of control by the owners that led the to radically improved the efficiency of agricultural production. Rotation of crops, better fertilizers, drainage, breeding of better livestock (by one contemporary estimate, between the early and late 1700s black cattle increased from 370 pounds to 800 pounds, and sheep from 28 pounds to 80 pounds), were among the characteristics of the new farming, and these were practicable only to those who had some capital, knowledge, and enterprise – all of which came more naturally to larger tracts of land under private ownership.
These improvements led to a cascade of further consolidation because those who continued to work the small farms could not compete and so sold them to neighboring landowners who had already created a production edge through earlier consolidation.
As with most of the other policies, enclosures came with its social costs. A popular piece of doggerel declared that:
The law locks up the man or woman
Who steals the goose from off the common;
But leaves the greater villain loose
Who steals the common from the goose.
Nonetheless, the resulting agricultural revolution played a large part in the industrial revolution.Not only in terms of the production of food to fuel the labor, but in the flow of farmers into the industrial sector.
Overcoming the energy crisis by forcing a move to new energy sources
The Industrial Revolution can be viewed as the control and redirection of energy toward production. But early on this was stymied because of deforestation and the resulting shortage of the primary fuel of the time: charcoal. To give an idea of the shortage, as early as the 1500's and into the 1600's the price of oak (primarily used in shipbuilding) rose twelve-fold, and the price of timber for charcoal increased five-fold.
In the sixteenth century England ordered a governmental inquiry into timber wastage and deforestation and then instituted a number of Acts of Parliament to suppress the cutting of timber for industrial purposes.
As a result, foundries were forced to reduce their activities and England began to use coal for heating and in industrial processes. People were wary of the toxic fumes, but had no alternative. The transport of coal by sea from Newcastle to London increased from 35,000 is 1550 to 560,000 tons a century late. By 1738 a French traveler wrote that coal was "the soul of all English Industries." As it turned out, this energy crisis, by forcing a move toward coal (and helped in that regard by the fact that England was relatively sparsely populated by forests in the first place butr abundant in coal), ended up helping to push England down the road towards industrialization.
Bringing in capital
Capital had not existed in any large amounts in medieval England, and even in the later centuries there was no group that focused on investing capital into industry. Agriculture and manufacturing were carried on with very small capital and usually with the capital each farmer, artisan, or merchant might have of his own. There was no use of credit either from individuals or from banks for industrial development.
But capital was required to buy the new machinery at the heart of the industrial age. These machines were far too expensive for the old cottage weavers. Capital therefore had to be brought into manufacturing. This capital came from various directions.
Capital from Privateering
Privateering, also known as commerce-raiding, was basically government-sanctioned piracy. Strange as it may seem, with the development of England's seafaring capability and the flow of precious cargo from the Americas, privateering became an important source of capital accumulation in England. Indeed, in the three years following the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588, over two hundred English ships were involved in privateering, and over three hundred foreign ships were captured.
Capital from Spain
Meanwhile, Spain, which had an early lead on capital because of the influx of American treasure, enjoyed a period of splendor and economic superiority but lacked the human capital due to a cultural antipathy, even prejudice toward productive labor, to put that capital to good use.
So Spanish merchants turned to foreign producers and provided their capital to the foreign enterprises. A Venetian ambassador remarked, "Spain cannot exist unless relieved by others, nor can the rest of the world exist without the money of Spain."
The capital from the Americas thus provided Spain with purchasing power but ultimately stimulated the development of Holland, England, France, and other European countries.This prosperity, easily funded but inevitably of limited duration, led many to abandon farming and to regard craft and mercantile activities as menial occupations. Instead resources poured into the academies, whose product occupied the clergy and the increasingly bloated government bureaucracy rather than productive industry – and disguised structural unemployment as well.
In 1675 Alfonso Nuñez de Castro wrote:
Let London manufacture those fabrics of hers to her heart's content; Holland her chambrays; Florence her cloth; the Indies their beaver and vicuna; Milan her brocades; Italy and Flanders their linens, so long as our capital can enjoy them; the only thing it proves is that all nations train journeymen for Madrid and that Madrid is the queen of Parliaments, for all the world serves her and she serves nobody.
In short, seventeenth century Spain lacked entrepreneurs and artisans but had an overabundance of bureaucrats, lawyers. As England was building the foundation for the industrial revolution, easy-come-easy-go Spain provided capital even as it sank into decline.
Capital from rescinding primogeniture
The economic way of life in medieval England was framed by two economic realities: Virtually all wealth was in the form of land, and the land could not be sold. Wealth was held in land even up to the seventeenth century it was the universal outlet for savings in England-primarily because there were not many alternative investments.
As late as the sixteenth century, more than 80 percent of production was based on agriculture. What limited industry there was bore little resemblance to the Industrial Age that would follow centuries later. Some towns had specialized industry-brewing, salt making, iron working, paper mills-but this was still not characteristic of the economy as a whole. And because land was the preponderant store of wealth, it was also the source of social stature and political power.
A large landed estate gave its owner great local influence in controlling elections and sharing in patronage and opened the door for him to join the gentry. As early as the time of the Norman Conquest in 1066, land could not be sold or even used as collateral for a loan because feudal lords exchanged it for a knight's military service. A knight could no more transfer his land than he could pass on his military obligation. This this limitation on the right to transfer land carried the weight of law because of another import into England: primogeniture.
Landholders had a right to their land only for the course of their lives, after which the deed was transferred according to the rules of primogeniture, which meant it generally passed to the oldest son. The cost of having capital be literally land-locked capital became increasingly apparent on a practical level as new avenues for wealth and investment opened up. The development of overseas commerce and the increasing involvement of leading merchants in the lucrative business of lending money to the government expanded investment opportunities.
Finally, there were prospects for building fortunes apart from land ownership. The landed gentry had an incentive to extract the wealth from their land to pursue other opportunities, so various artifices were used to circumvent primogeniture.`
The new-found liquidity in the land progressed during the Tudor and early Stuart reigns, resulting in the rapid growth and independence of the English gentry and their servants. Now that land could be used as collateral, it opened up new possibilities for borrowing and lending. An embryonic capital market developed in London, and by the seventeenth century in other cites as well. The end of primogeniture thus helped allow capital to find its way into financing the emerging opportunities of the Industrial Revolution.
Breaking down class barriers for artisans and engineers
In the Middle Ages, science and technology were separate and distinct. Science was philosophy; technology was craft. Science had no interest in technological affairs, and technological developments were the fruits of uneducated artisans. For example, physicians viewed themselves as scientists and philosophers, and so had nothing to do with the surgeons, who were considered technicians and simple artisans.
But developments in ocean navigation, in the watch and clock industry, and in experimental science required increasing numbers of precision instruments which in turn led to a new, superior sort of technician who could interact with the scientists, with both the technician and the scientist engaged in similar problems. It required an elevation in the status of the artisans, engineers and skilled workers, and a partnership between these occupations and the more elite and lettered of science and philosophy. This interaction between the philosopher-scientist and the artisan was promoted by so august a body as The Royal Society of London, which charged some of its members with compiling a history of artisan trades and techniques.
This new attitude, an attitude toward science that placed pragmatism before idealism, that applied mathematics to explaining the real world, and that introduced experimentation and empiricism (along with statistical methods – the experimenters of the seventeenth century endlessly recorded, cataloged, and counted) as an integral part of the scientific process, underlies the inventions of the Industrial Revolution.
The willingness to have science deal with the practical rather than the philosophical, to solve the concrete problems of production, and to team up with the skilled artisans – a partnership across class lines that was unique to England -- was critical for the technological developments behind the Industrial Revolution.
Please follow Money Game on Twitter and Facebook.
Join the conversation about this story »
See Also:
Who ever thought that the 3 titans in Social Networking are stale and can’t adopt fast must have been quite surprised. Facebook continues to roll out changes rapidly and in such a disruptive manner any startup can learn from. Twitter, very similarly continues to innovate at a fast pace.
With Google + recent roll out of their API, they made sure to keep the ball rolling and keep us on the edge of our seats. But how does it all work out for your traffic? The most important question that we as users, marketers, small business or else would like to have answered is:
Which Networks Should You Post To, To Get The Most Out Of Your Time Spent?Buffer this
Kevin Rose, Founder of Digg, conducted a very interesting experiment recently. He posted the same message to Twitter, Facebook and Google+. This is interesting for many reasons. He has a huge following on all 3 networks, which means that a statistical analysis makes absolute sense I believe.
Kevin has:
About one hour after Kevin posted the link that he was testing, the results were the following:
So in a list again:
This is interesting for many reasons. Both Facebook and Twitter drive enormous traffic for Kevin. Google+, whilst still driving great traffic leaps behind substantially, at least in the short run.
Also, Twitter proves its power of spreading fast and in a very short space of time. What surprises me a little here is that Facebook too had such strong engagement even after the first hour.
Get 200% more clicks on Tweets
By Buffering Tweets, they are posted at optimal times giving you 2x more exposure.
Then, about 17 hours later Kevin took another look to see how clicks have changed over time. Here are the updated stats:
Now, obviously the most interesting fact is that Google+ comes back strong and reaches a solid 2,500 clicks. It also shows that the life of a Tweet is a lot longer than I had expected.
Facebook ends up coming out on top with a staggering 8000 clicks. It clearly shows that Facebook has done something right with the new subscription system.
One comment from Kevin I found very interesting. He mentioned that Facebook gives him by far the best follower to click ratio. What I like to ponder here is whether the dynamics of a follower versus a fan/subscriber are the same.
With the analysis of Kevin’s post, he received this ration of click per person on all the people following him on Social Networks:
Now, this stresses his personal findings even further. Also, given that the new Facebook features have only been around for a few days and Google+ only for a few months we could say this will only get more.
Evidently, the dynamics of the various Social Networks are very different. And they are changing very fast too. Yet, here is one thought that would suggest a completely different conclusion of all of Kevin’s findings:
There I said it. Yes, indeed, I propose that given Kevin Rose’s analysis, this could and should be seen as his actual results. It is Twitter which drives the most absolute traffic, not Facebook or Google+. Why? The answer is very simple. The posting frequency is very different between the two networks. Twitter is a lot more agile here and you can post a lot more often.
On Facebook, Dan Zarrella, Social Media Scientist has found that optimal posting frequency is 0.5 updates per day. On Twitter, it isn’t. The optimal frequency for Twitter is 1-4 times per hour. Now say that Kevin would be very conservative and only post 10 times per day. This would be his actual results after one day:
Facebook: 4000 Clicks
Twitter: 50,000 Clicks
Now, how is that? The dynamics of Twitter are such that you can easily Tweet this many times and still see tremendous results. Using the power of Twitter more actively would give Kevin a huge return in overall traffic.
So having presented this, I believe Kevin could easily turn Twitter into his most powerful social network by far.
If Kevin were to have a routine of continually posting 10 great content Tweets with links every day, he would harness the 5,000 clicks per Tweet tenfold.
Without aiming to tell Kevin in any way how he should handle his Twitter account, I believe a routine of a fixed output of 10 daily Tweets with links would even increase clicks over time on each of them. One account that uses Twitter to its fullest power for this is @TweetSmarter. Dave Larson posts dozens of well researched and relevant Tweets each day and receives hundreds of clicks on each of them.
This doesn’t need to take long and can be done by just spending a few minutes each day.
This is the exact technique we are using for the Buffer Twitter account. Every day, we are posting 10 great Tweets and get now an average of 50-100 clicks per Tweet. This means about 500-1000 clicks per day at about 25,000 followers.
Over to you now. Do you think Kevin could actually make Twitter a lot more powerful than now? Could you also make Twitter more powerful with a different Twitter routine for yourself?
Here at Klout, we process terabytes of data every day to help you understand and leverage your influence. We have our own internal metrics to verify that every network is being processed correctly and scoring runs smoothly. We know that processing this data correctly is part of what makes people trust Klout.
This weekend we experienced a bug with our pipeline for processing data for LinkedIn, and this resulted in a score drop for about 0.001% of our scored population which lasted approximately eight hours on Sunday. We know that even though the number of affected users isn’t large, it’s a big deal to anyone who is relying on the score and we take it very seriously.
We’re working to ensure we keep you, our users, updated about any issues we experience and work to resolve them quickly. We’ve setup a dedicated @KloutStatus twitter account, so you can follow the updates as they happen
We’re always working to improve our processes and we have big improvements coming very soon. If you think you can help, we’re hiring.
More Engagement – Better Rankings
There are a whole list of benefits for creating content that engages your audience. You build relationships through interacting. Your links are shared more often through social media. People comment on your blog posts. Your follow-base will stay on your site longer. And above all, Google will start to rank you higher in the search engines; allowing you to expand to a larger audience. These are the most important, I feel. But what needs to take place for this to happen? I’m going to share with you a few tips that I find quite helpful!
Content Is King
Remember, without good content – your site will never go anywhere. You must start to develop and post new and informative information. Writing articles that answer questions and solve problems are key to your success. If you have solved someones problem or answered their exact question; chances are they will not only come back, but tell others about your site.
Good Titles Are Crucial!
Writing compelling titles are more crucial than you may think. Remember, these are the very first words a reader reads when visiting your latest post – if the headline isn’t enticing, they will just click the ‘back’ button in their browser and leave. It is also what a person reads when your link is floating around on social media - your title should be designed to get a reader to click the link; if you fail to do this, you could be missing out on a lot of traffic!
Easy To Comment And Share
We are now living in a society where everybody wants everything right this moment – no waiting. If you want a better chance at readers sharing your link – you must make sharing simple. Install a Plugin on your blog that makes it easy. Shareaholic is one example; there are many others. Nobody wants to take the time to highlight, copy, and paste the URL to their social media page. Though this is simple, a reader many may avoid sharing just because it takes an extra 3 seconds. Get a Plugin and increase your odds.
Call To Action
If you really want someone to share your link – ask them! Most readers will not even think about sharing content unless you remind them. Hint at it or ask politely, but don’t demand it.
Build Relationships With Your Readers
This is the most crucial tip I can give you. Imagine going to a very well-known site and you happened to leave a comment. You were notified that someone left a comment on yours, through e-mail. You go back to the site to check the comment and it was the actual site that commented on your comment and they thanked you for doing so! Is that friendly or what? What are the odds that you will head back to that site in the near future just because of this reason alone? My guess is pretty good. Relationships are very effective. If you show your reader that you care – they will visit and participate more often!
In A Nutshell
The reality is, if you want to have a long-lasting site that is ranked high in the search engines and have a large follow-base; you are going to have to put a little bit of elbow grease in to it. Think of the sites that are not doing this – if you want to stand out from your competition in your niche market, you will need to work a little harder and smarter. Food for thought. Hope this helps!
Brock is the current CEO of Worldline Marketing and owner of How to Sponsor. The company focuses on assisting average people earn a healthy income working from home. He enjoys traveling, hiking, and meeting new people.
Recently we had one of our clients experience what some online professionals call, the Google Sandbox effect. Over the course of almost a month we researched our problem, and the problems of others online, to find out what it exactly was, and what, if anything, we could do about it.
First there is a lot of debate as to if it exists at all. However we can clearly show, with one of our domains at least, that there was an instance of this phenomenon occurring. A website, with a new domain, in a highly competitive niche, first experienced relatively good rankings for a few weeks. Then, suddenly, the ranking dropped across the board to levels well below what would be expected. In the early stages not a single thing could be done about it. We focussed only on links from highly authoritative sources, but there was not a single movement in position for a few weeks. Matt Cutts has already said something cryptic on the matter;
Q: Does the sandbox exist? A: Matt said here comes the audience part? How many feel there is a sandbox? How many feel there is no such thing as a sandbox? SEOs normally split down the line. There are some things in the algorithm that may be perceived as a sandbox that doesn’t apply to all industries. He knows it works to keep some spam out.
Basically, from what we can tell, if you are in a very competitive industry, you will find some keywords are have built in mechanisms to stop a range of spam. These mechanisms kick in to stop “over optimised” sites from showing up in the early stages.
In our experience, this only lasted about 3 weeks. Some people have claimed it can last months, but we guess this would happen with spammy sites, or sites that don’t have much content and are struggling with good quality links. The thing you have to remember with Google is that there are less than a handful of instances where a website has been singled out for punishment, or reprieve. If you are in the sandbox, normal SEO and website behaviour will get you out.
Three key things to getting out;
Related posts:
There are many ways you can be punished by Google. The punishment usually involves your website being removed from the world’s largest Search Engine. Here are a list of ways that Google has found to punish sites either specifically or generally across the board. If your website is completely banned, you can submit your site for reconsideration, if you have addressed the problem.
Related posts:
It's that time again! I have four (4) ARCs of HEART OF STEEL to give away on this blog. No hoops to jump through — you just have to comment before midnight on Sunday, September 25th to enter. But! there is a small catch. 
In fact, there are many different ways how you can actually get traffic online. But in this article we will certainly explore only some of the most widespread ways to get web traffic. And thus you can get this kind of traffic through paid advertising which is clearly known as pay-per-click advertising. Besides, when you actually have PPC advertising, you definitely pay money each time when some persons really click on your ad.
Of course, Google certainly has the most widespread paid advertising program. However, there are some other web sites which offer paid advertising. Well, besides PPC advertising, there are some other ways, for example such as CPI advertising. And with this type of advertising, you definitely pay for the cost per thousand impressions of the ad.
For sure, this is commonly reserved for larger advertisers, thus many various small businesses actually advertise their products and services through pay-per-click. Moreover, there is another way to really get traffic to your web site: through free traffic. And thus when doing a Google search, the white section of search results is free traffic. But it is also known as organic traffic.
In fact, Google certainly decides which pages exactly must appear in the search results based on some complicated Google formulas. In addition, many individuals obviously have no idea how particularly Google decides which results must appear. Well, for many different sites, it is quite essential to get as high in the search results as only possible.
However, a big part of all the searches for any special keyword will definitely come in the first three spots of Google. And finally, getting into those three spots of the search results is very important to the success of your business. Of course, this way you can really get free traffic from the major search engines without paying for it. You should remember this!
Small wonder that every site requires website traffic today as it directly influences one’s online business. There exist many ways to attract traffic and one can take advantage of free traffic which can be driven from this free traffic site.
Possibly Related Posts:
