China said to be buying U.S. mortgages
The China Investment Corp. is set to invest up to $2 billion in mortgage-backed securities because it considers the housing market set for a recovery.
Last Updated: August 17, 2009: 9:17 AM ET
HONG KONG (Reuters) -- China's $200 billion sovereign wealth fund, which suffered big paper losses on stakes in Morgan Stanley (MS, Fortune 500) and Blackstone (BX), is set to invest up to $2 billion in U.S. mortgages as it eyes a property market recovery, two people with direct knowledge of the matter said Monday.
China Investment Corp. (CIC) plans to invest soon in U.S. taxpayer subsidized investment funds of toxic mortgage-backed securities, which it sees as a safer bet than buying into the Federal Reserve's Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF).
Under the Public-Private Investment Plan (PPIP) launched earlier this year, the U.S. government plans to seed a number of public-private investment funds that would combine taxpayer money with private capital to buy as much as $40 billion in toxic securities from banks.
Compared with TALF, the new and smaller PPIP program focuses on safer toxic securities, which must have triple-A ratings from at least two agencies, and are debts guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), sources explained.
"In this case, CIC feels safer to invest and the safer it feels, the more confident it will naturally feel about its investments, as well as in the prospects for the U.S. economy," said one of the sources.
The move comes after the United States and China ended their first annual Strategic and Economic Dialogue late last month, agreeing to lead the global economy out of recession, with China seeking safer investments in the world's leading economy.
"The Chinese government is always trying to seek a more ideal way to invest in U.S. assets rather than purely buying U.S. government bonds all the time," said the source.
"Some might think $2 billion for a $200 billion sovereign fund is not big money, but it can be regarded as an innovative and positive option for Chinese investment."
CIC is in talks with nine designated PPIP managers, which include Alliance Bernstein LP, with sub-advisers Greenfield Partners LLC and Rialto Capital Management LLC; Angelo Gordon and Co. LP, with GE Capital Real Estate; BlackRock Inc.; Invesco Ltd.; Marathon Asset Management LP; Oaktree Capital Management LP; RLJ Western Asset Management LP; Trust Company of the West; and Wellington Management Co. LLP, said the sources.
Choices to be made: CIC is expected to decide this month which of the nine designated PPIP managers it will mandate for its investments in financial products such as mortgage-backed securities (MBS) under the PPIP scheme, said the sources.
The fund is likely to select several, though not all, of the firms, said the sources, who have direct knowledge of the matter but asked not to be identified as the talks are confidential. CIC cannot invest directly in the PPIP.
CIC declined to comment.
Early this year, some U.S. asset managers approached CIC to invest in their funds focused on the TALF, the sources said, but the Chinese declined given the uncertain outlook at the time for U.S. economic recovery.
They noted, however, that these TALF-focused funds performed well in the second quarter as global markets perked up following the long financial crisis triggered by the U.S. property market.
CIC, established by China's Communist government in late 2007, is keen to participate in the PPIP as it expects the U.S. property market to recover gradually late this year, said the sources.
The U.S. Treasury has been informed that the nine designated PPIP managers are in talks to receive CIC money, and supports bringing foreign investors like CIC into the PPIP program, said the sources.
In June, Reuters reported Asia-Pacific sovereign wealth funds, including CIC and Singapore's Temasek, which have been rocked by soured bets on western financial companies, are diversifying into the riskier arena of distressed asset investments.
CIC's $200 billion fund is part of China's roughly $2 trillion of foreign exchange reserves, and the majority of its reserves are in U.S. government bonds.
First Published: August 17, 2009: 8:12 AM ET
- Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/17/2009
怪不得国内的民族主义抬头,的确是有一群卖国贼啊。买一堆垃圾债,他们换取了什么?
中国高成本地成为美帝国的side kick. - posted on 08/18/2009
"有一群卖国贼" has been my suspicion, although I don't have any evidence. Otherwise it is very hard to understand China's financial policy.
Their logic goes like this, if we do not give them our money, they will not buy our goods, then unemployment will destabilize our country.
This is the strangest logic I ever heard. Will you work your limbs off, then give the money earned away to let other to "buy" your fruits of labors? Why would you work to
let others have the free ride? If Chinese government has too much money in their hands, wouldn't it be logic to give them back to Chinese to let them buy the goods?
maya wrote:
的确是有一群卖国贼啊。买一堆垃圾债,他们换取了什么?
中国高成本地成为美帝国的side kick. - posted on 08/18/2009
It's all about government control and government power.
From wiki:
"Mercantilism is an economic theory that holds that the prosperity of a nation is dependent upon its supply of capital, and that the global volume of international trade is "unchangeable." Economic assets or capital, are represented by bullion (gold, silver, and trade value) held by the state, which is best increased through a positive balance of trade with other nations (exports minus imports). Mercantilism suggests that the ruling government should advance these goals by playing a protectionist role in the economy; by encouraging exports and discouraging imports, notably through the use of tariffs and subsidies.[1]
Mercantilism was the dominant school of thought throughout the early modern period (from the 16th to the 18th century). Domestically, this led to some of the first instances of significant government intervention and control over the economy, and it was during this period that much of the modern capitalist system was established. Internationally, mercantilism encouraged the many European wars of the period and fueled European imperialism. Belief in mercantilism began to fade in the late 18th century, as the arguments of Adam Smith and the other classical economists won out. Today, mercantilism (as a whole) is rejected by economists, though some elements are looked upon favorably by non-economists." - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
I think they are exchanging for the legitimacy of the regime and their own interests... - posted on 08/18/2009
中国人不具备创造模式的能力,我想只能是这样的,hbai提出的东西
很有趣。其实一个模式,也是一个集体社会整体的创造能力,有些地
方熵太重,也只能是这样了。
估计这就是G2吧,比G8更G8。
hbai wrote:
"有一群卖国贼" has been my suspicion, although I don't have any evidence. Otherwise it is very hard to understand China's financial policy.
Their logic goes like this, if we do not give them our money, they will not buy our goods, then unemployment will destabilize our country.
This is the strangest logic I ever heard. Will you work your limbs off, then give the money earned away to let other to "buy" your fruits of labors? Why would you work to
let others have the free ride? If Chinese government has too much money in their hands, wouldn't it be logic to give them back to Chinese to let them buy the goods?
maya wrote:
的确是有一群卖国贼啊。买一堆垃圾债,他们换取了什么?
中国高成本地成为美帝国的side kick. - posted on 08/18/2009
In two words, control freaks. That is what it is. Not only the Chinese central government but also the majority of the residents throughout the world, they are all control freaks. They want a central power control aspects of persons' life which they view as threatening. I the case of the Chinese central government, the huge US dollar reserve it controls gives it almost unlimited (limited only by its amount) purchasing power in the international market. Without the practice of its mercantilism, that purchasing power is impossible. The net result is that the Chinese producers and their workers work for the US consumers for little. By volume, the Chinese central government reaps the huge amount of US dollars pouring from the U.S. consumers. It is wealth transfer in international scale.
The ordinary resident control freak idiots are blind to those basic facts.
Some persons must have been wondering: Why do you always have such an air of disdainfulness?
My answer is: what else can I do? - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
In another two words, wealth transfer, that is the gist of almost all the political economical talks. Wealth transfer by government coercive power is robbery by fiat - legalized robbery. It has been practised throughout the world, even across the borders and oceans. Those who aid and abet those robbery policies are just those who have been robbed. - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
Basically, this is a world filled with idiots willingly and gleefully ruled by robbers. Those idiots want more control from the robbers. Those idiots angrily chant: "Give us more regulations! Subsidize our own industry! Tariff those bastard foreign manufacturers! Give us more money! (paper that is ;-) )"
Oh, those idiots!
- posted on 08/18/2009
说了半天,中国的外汇问题的解决方案是什么?
是自由市场,外汇的自由市场。出口者用货换来的外汇,他自己未必需要,因为他
未必需要从中国之外购买东西,他可能只需要本国货币-人民币。若有一个自由的外
汇市场,他可以在那自由外汇市场把他用货换来的外汇换成人民币。进口者手里可
能没有足够的外汇,但有足够的人民币,他可以在自由的外汇市场里用人民币换如
上所说的出口者不需要的外汇,然后再用出口者用货换来的外汇到外国市场购买货
物进口到中国。那样,整个外汇的流动都是在民间的,财富是散布于民间的。而不
是由中央政府控制在中央银行里,然后再“投资”到美国的国债或其他债券里。钱
币是经济的血液,是一个不可缺少的货物交换的媒介。中国中央银行用外汇储备购
买美国国债或MBS,只帮助美国政府去攻打伊拉克的人们 和帮助美国的房屋购买者
们获得本来获得不了的贷款。那丝毫帮助不了中国的那些其工作的产品换来了那么
多的外汇的生产者们。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
卖国贼?哪里有什么国?卖的是中国那些具体生产者们的血汗,换来的是中央政府里
的那些具体的政客官僚们自己的威权和其他政治经济利益。由于大众们的愚昧无知,
那样的出卖就一直在延续着。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
很多学者和不学者傻鄙们痛恨自由市场,他们不知道:自由市场是经济自由的基础之
一,经济自由是政治自由的基础之一。没有自由市场,就没有经济自由。没有经济
自由,就没有政治自由。没有经济自由和政治自由,民主就是一个骗人的空壳子。
那些学者和不学者傻鄙们追求的政治自由和民主是没有任何基础的乌托邦,他们实
际都是傻鄙。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
你们听听一些傻鄙民主斗士们平常提出的主张,例如“言论自由”、“宗教自由”、
“民主”等,你们听过他们提出“经济自由”、“自由市场”吗?很少。因为他们
的多数是从骨子里不信任自由市场的。那样的民主斗士们全是傻鄙。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
他们为何不信任自由市场?因为他们根本就不懂关于自由市场的那些道理,而且(更
重要的)他们根本就不想去学懂。他们折腾来折腾去,纯粹是瞎折腾。;-) - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
那些傻鄙们批起共党政治专制,批得义愤填膺,一个一个的都是世界级别的道德专家。
但一涉及有关经济的问题,他们就傻眼了。他们说的关于经济政策的主张全是他们
从马克思那里学来的。他们是政治上的民主斗士道德专家,同时是经济上的马列思
想好学生。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
那些傻鄙们被我这样的话激怒之后,就攻击他们完全不懂的经济学,他们说经济学是
一门dismal science,里面的那些数学模型、理性假定等都是不基于现实的。当我
告诉他们我说的经济学原理不是基于那些模型和假定时,他们的恼羞成怒的程度是
你们可以想象的。 - posted on 08/18/2009
当伟大领袖奥主席的医疗“改革”彻底成功之后,假以时日,国有化的医疗系统就是
最后的系统(因为在一个领域的政府强行管治必定扩展到其他相关领域),那时,由
于对于免费产品的需求是无限的(那样的人类本性是无法改掉的),任何医疗需求的
满足都要排队等候,可能要排数月的队,在排队期间一些患者已经可能死掉了。到
那时,那些只要求政治自由、痛恨自由市场的傻鄙们,他们活也活不舒服(因为要排
队等候医疗)、死也死不痛快(因为要在排队等候医疗中慢慢地死去)。他们连命都没
有了,还有什么政治自由?祈祷老天,快让伟大领袖奥主席如愿吧! - posted on 08/18/2009
前贴里所说的“对于免费产品的需求是无限的”还可以被放松,放松成“对于其价格
被政府强制定在低于自由市场决定的价格的产品的需求是无限的”。
一个6岁女孩问我:“Since the economic crisis is so bad, why doesn't president
Obama write a law to forbid it?” 我的回答是:“He could write any law but
his law cannot make 2+2 equal to 5. 2+2=4 is a law that president Obama
can never change. Newton's law he can never change either. Some other laws
he can never change either.” 这故事不是我瞎编的。 - posted on 08/18/2009
伟大领袖奥主席经常发表讲话,讲话里多次提到联邦政府要fight this recession,
还提到联邦政府为了“fight this recession” 多次向经济里注入 “capital”。
他说的“capital”是money and credit. 若从直接的角度说,那些被注入的money
and credit 来自子虚乌有 (out of thin air)。若从一个曲折的角度来说,那些被
注入的money and credit 并不来自子虚乌有,而是来自现在持有美元货币的那些人
们,因为他们持有的那些货币的购买力迟早要大大地缩水。原因是,若他们持有的
美元货币在未来不缩水,美国联邦政府为了偿还现在欠下的天文数字的债(它当作所
谓的“capital”注入经济了),它就要收惊人的所得税,那是要遇到强大的政治阻
力的(甚至会引起革命)。就是说,从这个曲折的角度来说,奥主席注入经济的那些
所谓“capital”是跨越时间的财富转移,把你我这样的持有美元货币并准备继续持
有下去的人们的财富 通过通货膨胀和通货膨胀必定带来的纸币购买力下降(只是迟
早的问题) 转移到现在的 其他人们的手里。基本不存在 现在的人们花未来的人们
(子孙后代)的钱的问题,因为子孙后代成熟高税率的承受力和我们一样是有限的。
现在的美国联邦政府的挥霍,它花的财富不来自我们的后代(我们的后代还未到创造
财富的年龄),而是来自我们这些现在正在制造服务的人们。
那就是经济里面的简单的道理,就是那样的简单道理,多数人(包括多数所谓的经济
学家们)是完全不明白的。如我前面所说的,整个就是现有的财富转移(可能需要时
间的维度)。而现有的财富的转移正是那些对经济完全无知的傻鄙们要求的。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
豆大师该改行去脱口秀:)你实在cute得紧.... - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
我抽象地痛骂那些故意不学无术 又故意胡说八道的傻鄙们,我骂得让他们心悦诚服。
我是讲理的。;-) - posted on 08/18/2009
先知无名大师一人独口秀也单调,我再承hbai那一线说一例吧:
前一段时间写赤道国的洪堡,自然读了不少洪堡。洪堡穿安弟斯山到
赤道国,山前有些抬骄子的人。洪堡个人不能接受坐在单人背的椅骄
子上的服务,以为有古罗马奴隶的恶习(洪堡本人一直是反奴隶制的
,这个影响了达尔文)。这样别人不是成权他,而是恨,因为抬骄子
的缺了挣钱的机会,这怎么行?又要说,此山道亦骄夫们所开,尚新
。洪堡的鞋子都走坏了,依旧走完了一截恶路。
抬骄子的不记得是不是原住民了,可国内名山道上似曾相识。
提一下。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
Seriously, you should keep your promise and confine him to a single thread, or he will crap on every place he's got his nose in and pretty soon it will become a giant outhouse here.
maya wrote:
豆大师该改行去脱口秀:)你实在cute得紧.... - posted on 08/18/2009
我在costco买了一个家具,买回来就整箱放车库里了,自己无力搬到地下室去。由于
我不能接受雇佣别人让别人承受那负重之苦(以为有古罗马奴隶的恶习),那家具在
车库里呆了数年了,直到今天。就是因为我的心肠太好了。;-)
xw wrote:
先知无名大师一人独口秀也单调,我再承hbai那一线说一例吧:
前一段时间写赤道国的洪堡,自然读了不少洪堡。洪堡穿安弟斯山到
赤道国,山前有些抬骄子的人。洪堡个人不能接受坐在单人背的椅骄
子上的服务,以为有古罗马奴隶的恶习(洪堡本人一直是反奴隶制的
,这个影响了达尔文)。这样别人不是成权他,而是恨,因为抬骄子
的缺了挣钱的机会,这怎么行?又要说,此山道亦骄夫们所开,尚新
。洪堡的鞋子都走坏了,依旧走完了一截恶路。
抬骄子的不记得是不是原住民了,可国内名山道上似曾相识。
提一下。 - posted on 08/18/2009
抬单人轿子,那是很不人道的一种职业。一人因为有钱就坐在别人的后背上,那是极
端的不平等,不仅是字面的,而且是实质的。政府应该严厉禁止。政府严厉禁止之
后,要解决那些原来抬轿人们的生计,发给他们生活所需的钱,使得他们不必在去
干那极其不人道的抬单人轿子的事。或,政府严厉禁止后,那些原来抬轿的人们自
然会去干其他工作,只是收入比抬轿低。政府的功能之一就是维持人道,原来抬单
人轿子的人们是不懂什么是人道什么是不人道的,他们只懂多赚钱。只有政府才懂
多赚钱而抬轿子是不人道的、少赚钱而不抬轿是人道的、或不干活而收政府救济是
人道的。 - posted on 08/18/2009
有人说:眼看着那么苦的抬轿之人,不白给他钱救济他,却只按当时的市场价付给他
服务费在坐在他的后背上,那是极其不人道的。人道的做法是白给他钱,自己徒步
爬山。
你看看:那就是道德家们的所为,他们把自己的价值判断加给别人。不合他们自己
的道德判断的就是不人道的。那还没有什么关系。有关系的是:那些道德家们用政
治行动来要求政府把他们的道德判断强加(用政府的强制力强加)给别人(纳税人们)甚
至 那些抬轿之人,那就是侵略。那就是那些道德家们的侵略。这个世界倒霉就倒霉
在那些道德家们太多那个事实上了。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
那些道德家们对于经济学的原理一无所知,但他们的阶级感情却是无比的深厚。这世
界里的人们倒霉就倒在那样的道德家的口里手里了。那些道德家们的ends确实是高
尚的,但他们用具体的政治行动让政府采取的means 是世上最荒谬的means, 因为那
些道德家们是除了道德之外一无所知的白痴废物。我一眼就能辨别出那样的阶级感
情无比深厚的道德家白痴废物。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
谁若试图恭维我,称我为一个道德家,我的回答是:“你他妈的才是道德家呢!你们
全家都是道德家!” ;-) - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
就是因为真的经济学者指出了某些 试图达成某些高尚的ends 的 means 是荒谬的,
他们遭致那些白痴废物道德家们的围攻和谩骂,他们被称作没有心肠(heart)的冷血
动物。若真的照着那些白痴废物道德家们(包括他们的鼻祖之一马克思)提出的那些
means去达成他们那些高尚的ends (我对那些ends 绝对没有反对意见),你们自己就
可以想象后果是什么了。也不用想象了,看看苏联中国朝鲜等地方的人们的生活就
知道了。我若会画漫画,我就把那些白痴废物道德家们画成一个猪心,一个硕大无
比的猪心脏。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
那样的猪心白痴废物道德家们无能力如我这样抽象地讲道理,他们见到我如此深入浅
出的精辟道理后,他们感到一种无能为力的(impotent)恼羞成怒,他们唯一可做的
就是对我指名地做人身攻击。我的痛骂是抽象的痛骂,我从来不人身攻击任何具体
的个人。我对那样的做具体人身攻击不讲理的人是从来不客气的。我这些话就是对
那样的人们的无情鞭打。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
白痴废物们都自然而然地成了有一颗肥大的心的无脑道德家。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
我现在主要是痛打反共人士里面的 那些完全不懂也不想学懂经济学原理的道德家们。
共党,还有什么值得被痛打的,已经被痛打得完全没有模样了,加上那些白痴反共
道德家们持续的对共党的政治专制的谴责批判,更不需要我再去痛打了。那些白痴
反共道德家们恨死我了。;-) - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
关于奥主席,请他继续胡搞吧,你们不是都很喜欢他和他的政策吗?祈祷老天让奥主
席成功吧! - posted on 08/18/2009
no name wrote:
抬单人轿子,那是很不人道的一种职业。一人因为有钱就坐在别人的后背上,那是极
端的不平等,不仅是字面的,而且是实质的。政府应该严厉禁止。政府严厉禁止之
后,要解决那些原来抬轿人们的生计,发给他们生活所需的钱,使得他们不必在去
干那极其不人道的抬单人轿子的事。或,政府严厉禁止后,那些原来抬轿的人们自
然会去干其他工作,只是收入比抬轿低。政府的功能之一就是维持人道,原来抬单
人轿子的人们是不懂什么是人道什么是不人道的,他们只懂多赚钱。只有政府才懂
多赚钱而抬轿子是不人道的、少赚钱而不抬轿是人道的、或不干活而收政府救济是
人道的。
坐轿抬轿不是自由市场经济吗?为什么要求政府来强行干预?难道不怕在一个领域的政府强行管治必定扩展到其他相关领域? - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
若说奥主席(或委内瑞拉的查维兹)是居心不良的匪徒,那是很不公平的,因为谁都不
是那两人肚子里的蛔虫。可以批判的只是他们推行的政策 那样的means 是否能 达
成一些人们揣测出来的 那两人的高尚的 ends. 经济学得原理告诉我,那两人推行
的政策那样的means 是完全不能达成 一些人们揣测出来的 那两人的高尚的 ends
的,而且达成的恰恰是相反的 - 是死亡和饥饿和贫困。 - posted on 08/18/2009
根据我一贯的主张,我那个帖子明显是一个 (poor) satire.
行人 wrote:
no name wrote:坐轿抬轿不是自由市场经济吗?为什么要求政府来强行干预?难道不怕在一个领域的政府强行管治必定扩展到其他相关领域?
抬单人轿子,那是很不人道的一种职业。一人因为有钱就坐在别人的后背上,那是极
端的不平等,不仅是字面的,而且是实质的。政府应该严厉禁止。政府严厉禁止之
后,要解决那些原来抬轿人们的生计,发给他们生活所需的钱,使得他们不必在去
干那极其不人道的抬单人轿子的事。或,政府严厉禁止后,那些原来抬轿的人们自
然会去干其他工作,只是收入比抬轿低。政府的功能之一就是维持人道,原来抬单
人轿子的人们是不懂什么是人道什么是不人道的,他们只懂多赚钱。只有政府才懂
多赚钱而抬轿子是不人道的、少赚钱而不抬轿是人道的、或不干活而收政府救济是
人道的。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/18/2009
有人会说:连自然科学都未必做得出如此斩钉截铁般的判断,你怎么知道奥主席的政
策若成功了带来的将是死亡饥饿和贫困?你似乎很有冒犯天神的 hubris 的意味呀!
我的回答是:不是我有hubris, 而是你无法合乎逻辑地讲理地一步一步地推翻我所
说的那些道理。你若能合乎逻辑地讲理地一步一步地推翻我所说的那些道理,你那
就是对我的最大帮助。那些无能为力的恼羞成怒的具体的个人攻击,只是反映了做
具体的攻击者的 impotence 而已。 - Re: China said to be buying U.S. mortgagesposted on 08/19/2009
no name wrote:
根据我一贯的主张,我那个帖子明显是一个 (poor) satire.
Thanks, guess I need a bit more sense of humor. - posted on 08/21/2009
no name wrote:
Some persons must have been wondering: Why do you always have such an air of disdainfulness?
My answer is: what else can I do?
Buy Hong Kong dollars/stocks half a year ago. (Remember my suggestion to buy Silver one year ago on CND :-)
Currency of mainland China, Taiwan, or Hong Kong is undervalued with respect to US $, due to their governments' merchantilist policy. But HK $ is the likely one to be forced to be repriced in near future, because it allows free flow of capitals and Hong Kong people are smarter capitalists than those in Taiwan and mainland.
Thanks for your postings.
Please paste HTML code and press Enter.
- zt
- #1 maya
- #2 hbai
- #3 no name
- #4 maya
- #5 xw
- #6 no name
- #7 no name
- #8 no name
- #9 no name
- #10 no name
- #11 no name
- #12 no name
- #13 no name
- #14 no name
- #15 no name
- #16 no name
- #17 no name
- #18 no name
- #19 maya
- #20 no name
- #21 xw
- #22 tar
- #23 no name
- #24 no name
- #25 no name
- #26 no name
- #27 no name
- #28 no name
- #29 no name
- #30 no name
- #31 no name
- #32 no name
- #33 行人
- #34 no name
- #35 no name
- #36 no name
- #37 行人
- #38 hbai
(c) 2010 Maya Chilam Foundation