07-15-2014 12:26 PM
1,900 ... 5152535455 ...
tools
  1. Mooncatt's Avatar
    I don't see how making produce prices increase just to pay regular citizens to do jobs they don't want to do makes it better than it is now. Supply and demand, if their is an increase in prices on an item, then the demand falls for it and then the farmers lose money and have to lay off workers (American citizens) to offset costs.

    Posted via VZW Moto X on the Android Central App
    It's not that they don't want to do the job, it's that they don't want to do it at those wages. By your logic, every fast food worker, retail clerk, telemarketer, janitor and more should be replaced with illegal aliens because those aren't jobs most Americans WANT to work at.
    cdmjlt369 likes this.
    02-13-2014 05:01 PM
  2. palandri's Avatar
    If you listen to Fox news, they'll try to make you believe Obama is advocating birth control for solar panels.
    02-13-2014 05:50 PM
  3. pappy53's Avatar
    If you listen to Fox news, they'll try to make you believe Obama is advocating birth control for solar panels.
    What has Fox News got to do with illegal aliens( undocumented Democrats)?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    02-13-2014 05:53 PM
  4. palandri's Avatar
    What has Fox News got to do with illegal aliens( undocumented Democrats)?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I give up. What's the punch line?

    Just a little humor, like your comment about undocumented democrats
    02-13-2014 05:56 PM
  5. Mooncatt's Avatar
    If you listen to Fox news, they'll try to make you believe Obama is advocating birth control for solar panels.
    Remember folks, to spay and neuter your solar panels.
    palandri likes this.
    02-13-2014 07:28 PM
  6. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    Hmm...

    My question is: why are we (like always) singling out and making a scapegoat of ONE SINGLE PERSON? I didn't vote for, nor vote to re-elect, Obama. Search these forums for posts I've written in the political area and you can satisfy yourself I'm no Democrat. But again, we're going to just blame Obama for everything?

    Eisenhower created the CIA, and he and others created the NSA and all the other intelligence agencies. Eisenhower approved Operation Ajax. Presidents since then, as well as Congresses since then, have approved, gone along with, or at a minimum rolled over on all the crap that has since occurred. This includes operations throughout Europe, Eastern Europe, and the Middle East, as well as throughout Central- and South America. Bush Sr. wanted to implement the Clipper Chip, for goodness' sake! Remote-controlled craft have been in existence since at least the 1950s thanks to the U.S. Air Force; drones or things like drones have existed for who knows how long. Drones in the modern sense were all approved by Bush Jr. and again, right along, all of this has been funded by Congressional approval. I could continue, but it's all much the same thing on many of these topics.

    Now Obama is President, so we just blame him for everything. Just like we blamed GWB for everything. Just like we blamed Clinton for everything. See a pattern here?
    Anyone who campaigns and spend millions while saying the whole time that they will change Washington and fix the debt. Yes. They should be blamed. I also agree Congress and senate should too

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    02-13-2014 08:09 PM
  7. GadgetGator's Avatar
    It's not that they don't want to do the job, it's that they don't want to do it at those wages. By your logic, every fast food worker, retail clerk, telemarketer, janitor and more should be replaced with illegal aliens because those aren't jobs most Americans WANT to work at.
    That's a nice dodge, but the point remains....if produce goes up, than all the prices go up on those fast food products. Demand falls. People get laid off, less hours, or not hired to begin with. BTW, I think people born and raised here would have to be paid MUCH more then those fast food jobs. Why work in a field doing back breaking jobs when you could make the same money in an easier fast food or retail job? Additionally, many of these jobs are in very sparsely populated areas where people don't want to live and won't want to relocate to. Whereas the migrant worker will and is willing to make tradeoffs to do so...like multiple families all living in the same room for instance. You'll need to solve all those issues before you can start talking about U.S. citizens jobs being cut into, because until those things are addressed, they simply aren't being cut into. Wage, living conditions, location. Those are key.
    A895 likes this.
    02-15-2014 02:15 AM
  8. _Zguy__'s Avatar
    Why not import all the Vietnamese kids that will assemble shoes for Nike for cents on the hour. Americans wouldn't do that work without significantly increasing prices. Sure that is an extreme but It shows how dumb the idea that the low wage workers are. The fact that Americans won't relocate or are unwilling to do work for a living shows the system has failed.

    And I hate all the PC world avoiding the word illegal, aliens and the undocumented talk. If a convict escapes jail can it be called an undocumented release?
    02-15-2014 11:36 AM
  9. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    Its funny how leftist argue that wages are too low and in a relative discussion will say" illegals do these jobs that citizens won't do for those wages." So are you against low wages or not? Can't have it both ways.

    Sent from my XT1060 using AC Forums mobile app
    02-15-2014 01:17 PM
  10. nolittdroid's Avatar
    Its funny how leftist argue that wages are too low and in a relative discussion will say" illegals do these jobs that citizens won't do for those wages." So are you against low wages or not? Can't have it both ways.

    Sent from my XT1060 using AC Forums mobile app
    Its not hard to understand simple perspective. Or common sense. The ability to recognize why illegal immigrants will put up with jobs that citizens look down upon is not rocket science. The same snobbery exists in many sectors. This has absolutely nothing to do with wanting fair wages for fair labor worked.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    02-15-2014 01:35 PM
  11. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    You can't argue about fair wages and then turn around and say let the illegals stay because they will do the jobs for less pay. All this talk about income inequality. And it absolutely does have to do with a fair wage .

    Sent from my XT1060 using AC Forums mobile app
    02-15-2014 01:46 PM
  12. GadgetGator's Avatar
    Its funny how leftist argue that wages are too low and in a relative discussion will say" illegals do these jobs that citizens won't do for those wages." So are you against low wages or not? Can't have it both ways.
    Conversely those on the right insist that minimum wage should not go up (despite the fact that prices for everything else has increased!) and that jobs will be cut and economy will suffer if we do. So per that logic, REDUCING the minimum wage should create even more jobs? And if we pay people nothing at all we will be overflowing in jobs???

    Jobs is not the only issue. You have to be able to make a LIVING with the jobs provided. Unlimited jobs at zero dollars an hour won't do anything to help the economy of anyone other then the 1% running the factories!

    It's really illogical how so many people cannot see that. More money in more hands equals a better economy for everyone. It doesn't trickle down, but it most assuredly trickles up.
    msndrstood and rexxman like this.
    02-15-2014 06:40 PM
  13. nolittdroid's Avatar
    You can't argue about fair wages and then turn around and say let the illegals stay because they will do the jobs for less pay. All this talk about income inequality. And it absolutely does have to do with a fair wage .

    Sent from my XT1060 using AC Forums mobile app
    Sure you can....when you remember that many illegal immigrants are used to substandard pay and benefits. If you can actually explain the part about income equality, I'd like to hear what you think. If not I'm done explaining the obvious for those whom use to be obtuse.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    02-15-2014 06:50 PM
  14. Mooncatt's Avatar
    More money in more hands equals a better economy for everyone. It doesn't trickle down, but it most assuredly trickles up.
    That shows a complete misunderstanding of how money works. Money flows to those that manage it well, and away from those that don't. Artificially stopping that stifles advancement and innovation, and thus the economy. Simply putting more money in more hands just means more will be wasted.

    Sure you can....when you remember that many illegal immigrants are used to substandard pay and benefits. If you can actually explain the part about income equality, I'd like to hear what you think. If not I'm done explaining the obvious for those whom use to be obtuse.
    The only reason they settle for so little is because A) It's more than they made back home, and B ) The farmers are getting cheap labor and and don't have to deal with things like payroll taxes, unemployment insurance, workers comp, etc. If the illegals demanded even our minimum wage and the farmers made to cover everything like they would for legal employees, then the illegals have lost their competitive advantage. The farmers would simply then turn to legal workers.
    02-15-2014 07:23 PM
  15. GadgetGator's Avatar
    That shows a complete misunderstanding of how money works. Money flows to those that manage it well, and away from those that don't. Artificially stopping that stifles advancement and innovation, and thus the economy. Simply putting more money in more hands just means more will be wasted.
    Wow. Classism at it's finest (worst). It's you who misunderstands how money works. How is money "wasted"? Spending it in the marketplace to all the stores, restaurants, and other businesses is what keeps things going and keeps other people employed at those locations. Your idea of what works doesn't, because it is not in balance. Right now most of the money is flowing into too few hands and THAT is what stifles the advancement, innovation and economy. Most of our economy is service and retail oriented. If all those little people who you think don't manage money well, don't have money to spend, how do you think the economy stays afloat? If people can't pay their bills, cannot afford to eat, cannot afford to buy things, how does our economy stay afloat?
    msndrstood likes this.
    02-15-2014 07:47 PM
  16. GadgetGator's Avatar
    Some additional thoughts:

    In all this silly talk of people's jobs being stolen from illegals, I stop and wonder why these same conservative types never seem to worry about robotics taking people's jobs. THAT is the real threat going forward. As technology progresses, more and more jobs will be automated. A robot never sleeps, never ask for vacation time, never ask for higher wages. It is a business owners dream worker. If the shift to automation doesn't affect you, it most assuredly will effect your kids and grandkids. Where will THEY work? Something to think about and keep in mind next time you shake your fist at those horrible illegals coming across the border. If you do that, then maybe your priorities are misplaced???
    02-15-2014 07:53 PM
  17. Aquila's Avatar
    Some additional thoughts:

    In all this silly talk of people's jobs being stolen from illegals, I stop and wonder why these same conservative types never seem to worry about robotics taking people's jobs. THAT is the real threat going forward. As technology progresses, more and more jobs will be automated. A robot never sleeps, never ask for vacation time, never ask for higher wages. It is a business owners dream worker. If the shift to automation doesn't affect you, it most assuredly will effect your kids and grandkids. Where will THEY work? Something to think about and keep in mind next time you shake your fist at those horrible illegals coming across the border. If you do that, then maybe your priorities are misplaced???
    I wouldn't call this a threat to anything other than to an old and stagnant paradigm that is so welcome to die. None today mourns the loss of the cobbler, the printer nor the Pony Express. The world SHOULD move on and we should do everything possible to take the focus of human activity as far from useless manual processes as possible so that focus can be placed on more important things, such as scientific discovery, knowledge exploration, innovation towards the purposes of creating a sustainable civilization, improving the quality of life for all sentience and solving the actual problems of the world, not the made up distractions invented solely to perpetuate the profitability of the status quo for the entrenched elite. This is illustrated very well by oil. Why, given the perception of shortage and looming crash, do we encourage and reward behaviors that waste as much as possible?

    The entire notion that people NEED to work for "a living" is insane when you think about how much we could accomplish with technology and how ridiculous the illusion of scarcity that drives our society today is on anything other than a surface argument of those pandering to the fearful. Why couldn't they "learn" for a living, or "create" for a living or why does "a living" need to be a concept? We've no shortage of resources to produce, transport and serve an abundance of food, clothing, heat, homes, whatever the globe over. The only reason we have "shortages" is because it creates conflict. There are psychological needs for people to be productive and for their productivity to be recognized and valued, however there is no reason to spend the bulk of one's waking time doing trivial tasks for only the purpose of securing sustenance, given how easy it would be to award such recognition and purpose through contributions in areas of talent or interest to the individual, as opposed to a current societal pressure to take any job based on the whims of the employer rather than the needs of the employee, the neighborhood or the market.

    The market does indirectly influence hiring patterns, but the actual relationship of employee to employer to occupation is hinged on much more complex factors that are often at odds with the maximum benefit to society. A simple example is a world leading 35 year old mathematician who is unable to work in any of the top mathematical fields because of a felony arrest when they were 19. No security clearance and/or unable to pass an invasive background check means the resume of the individual is not considered, a lesser mind is put into the position, less is accomplished, the entire world's progress in mathematics suffers. How different would our society be if people were encouraged to invest their precious time in things that they were passionate about?

    The things we worried about in the 2nd century are arguments that are silly given today's technology and we should always assume the same will be said of our futile activities today in the not too distant future. Therefore, it would be both wise and practical to view today's challenges as opportunities to improve technology to systemically solve the root issues of what holds us back from a future that is inevitable and only delayed by petty squabbling and those who cling to 15th century notions of trade and are either too ignorant or selfish to call out their influences on our modern society and lack of progress for what they truly are: a farce of the worst kind, one self perpetuated solely by the will of those who willingly buy into and even double down on the old ways despite the obvious conflict with both their own and humanity's interests.
    02-15-2014 08:33 PM
  18. Mooncatt's Avatar
    Wow. Classism at it's finest (worst). It's you who misunderstands how money works. How is money "wasted"? Spending it in the marketplace to all the stores, restaurants, and other businesses is what keeps things going and keeps other people employed at those locations. Your idea of what works doesn't, because it is not in balance. Right now most of the money is flowing into too few hands and THAT is what stifles the advancement, innovation and economy. Most of our economy is service and retail oriented. If all those little people who you think don't manage money well, don't have money to spend, how do you think the economy stays afloat? If people can't pay their bills, cannot afford to eat, cannot afford to buy things, how does our economy stay afloat?
    I'm kinda glad this came up around this time of year. If you're in that U.S., look around at all the income tax refund sales going on. Look at how many places have people on hand to do your taxes for you so you can spend your money before having a chance to think it over. Why do they do this? Because it works. When people get extra money that they see as "free" like tax refunds, minimum wage increase, handouts, lotto winnings etc, they don't treat it well. They don't use it to better their lives, they go out and blow it on toys and junk. New cars they can't afford, new electronics, fancy dinners, trips... the list is nearly endless, and rarely is any of it needed or at the least needed in such extravagance.

    You never hear people say they're going to start a retirement fund, college fund, pay off debt, start an emergency fund, or other more sensible uses of the money. In the rare case they pay off debt, they usually don't change their spending habits and wind up right back where they were with nothing to show for it later on. They don't do this because they don't know how to handle money and they want to keep up with the Joneses.

    Oh sure, the business would love to take your money and it'll net them profit today. But after the money is gone, then what do you do? You're not stimulating the economy in any real lasting way. Saving your money and spending wisely will help you get ahead, which is what helps the economy long term. Not staying perpetually in debt. It's not the only solution and there's a lot the government can do (or not do) to help as well, but that's for another debate all together.
    02-15-2014 09:13 PM
  19. Aquila's Avatar
    I'm kinda glad this came up around this time of year. If you're in that U.S., look around at all the income tax refund sales going on. Look at how many places have people on hand to do your taxes for you so you can spend your money before having a chance to think it over. Why do they do this? Because it works. When people get extra money that they see as "free" like tax refunds, minimum wage increase, handouts, lotto winnings etc, they don't treat it well. They don't use it to better their lives, they go out and blow it on toys and junk. New cars they can't afford, new electronics, fancy dinners, trips... the list is nearly endless, and rarely is any of it needed or at the least needed in such extravagance.

    You never hear people say they're going to start a retirement fund, college fund, pay off debt, start an emergency fund, or other more sensible uses of the money. In the rare case they pay off debt, they usually don't change their spending habits and wind up right back where they were with nothing to show for it later on. They don't do this because they don't know how to handle money and they want to keep up with the Joneses.

    Oh sure, the business would love to take your money and it'll net them profit today. But after the money is gone, then what do you do? You're not stimulating the economy in any real lasting way. Saving your money and spending wisely will help you get ahead, which is what helps the economy long term. Not staying perpetually in debt. It's not the only solution and there's a lot the government can do (or not do) to help as well, but that's for another debate all together.
    I was in 95% agreement until the 2nd to last sentence. Our entire society and economy is unfortunately built on debt and if it ever stops growing, it'll crash. I won't mind that other than the immediate (and sometimes catastrophic) inconveniences of an economic crash because it means we can try to rebuild in a smarter way. It's a horrible idea for individuals to become massively indebted, but if people as a whole ever stop we'll have to create a new way of thinking about money. The 5% was that while the rash of spending from taxes is not going to create any jobs, if it doesn't happen the economy will shed jobs due to "lost" revenue. So it's essentially plugging a hole in the side of the boat?
    02-15-2014 09:20 PM
  20. Mooncatt's Avatar
    I was in 95% agreement until the 2nd to last sentence. Our entire society and economy is unfortunately built on debt and if it ever stops growing, it'll crash. I won't mind that other than the immediate (and sometimes catastrophic) inconveniences of an economic crash because it means we can try to rebuild in a smarter way. It's a horrible idea for individuals to become massively indebted, but if people as a whole ever stop we'll have to create a new way of thinking about money. The 5% was that while the rash of spending from taxes is not going to create any jobs, if it doesn't happen the economy will shed jobs due to "lost" revenue. So it's essentially plugging a hole in the side of the boat?
    If we could flip a switch and say tomorrow no new debt was allowed, yes it would lurch the economy. That of course wouldn't happen tomorrow, but steering people to living a debt free life over time would smooth the transition and result in more purchasing power due to saved interest of those debts. Living debt free only delays some purchases, or modifies what you want to spend it on (like buying a used car instead of new). I'm not opposed to all debt, just the perpetual debt and people worshipping their FICO score.
    02-15-2014 09:49 PM
  21. NoYankees44's Avatar
    That's a nice dodge, but the point remains....if produce goes up, than all the prices go up on those fast food products. Demand falls. People get laid off, less hours, or not hired to begin with. BTW, I think people born and raised here would have to be paid MUCH more then those fast food jobs. Why work in a field doing back breaking jobs when you could make the same money in an easier fast food or retail job? Additionally, many of these jobs are in very sparsely populated areas where people don't want to live and won't want to relocate to. Whereas the migrant worker will and is willing to make tradeoffs to do so...like multiple families all living in the same room for instance. You'll need to solve all those issues before you can start talking about U.S. citizens jobs being cut into, because until those things are addressed, they simply aren't being cut into. Wage, living conditions, location. Those are key.
    I am assuming you don't support minimum wage, because you just made a great argument against it.

    If illegal immigrants are granted amnesty, they will have to be granted minimum wage.


    That's a nice dodge, but the point remains....if produce goes up, than all the prices go up on those fast food products. Demand falls. People get laid off, less hours, or not hired to begin with. BTW, I think people born and raised here would have to be paid MUCH more then those fast food jobs. Why work in a field doing back breaking jobs when you could make the same money in an easier fast food or retail job? Additionally, many of these jobs are in very sparsely populated areas where people don't want to live and won't want to relocate to. Whereas the migrant worker will and is willing to make tradeoffs to do so...like multiple families all living in the same room for instance. You'll need to solve all those issues before you can start talking about U.S. citizens jobs being cut into, because until those things are addressed, they simply aren't being cut into. Wage, living conditions, location. Those are key.
    02-17-2014 03:52 PM
  22. GadgetGator's Avatar
    The entire notion that people NEED to work for "a living" is insane when you think about how much we could accomplish with technology and how ridiculous the illusion of scarcity that drives our society today is on anything other than a surface argument of those pandering to the fearful. Why couldn't they "learn" for a living, or "create" for a living or why does "a living" need to be a concept? We've no shortage of resources to produce, transport and serve an abundance of food, clothing, heat, homes, whatever the globe over.
    I'm confused by this paragraph. Are you suggestion that people no longer work for a living and somehow they still eat, have heat, electricity, transportation, healthcare, and Android phones? How? I guess I need more explanation to understand what you are getting at here.
    nolittdroid likes this.
    02-18-2014 12:29 AM
  23. Mooncatt's Avatar
    I'm confused by this paragraph. Are you suggestion that people no longer work for a living and somehow they still eat, have heat, electricity, transportation, healthcare, and Android phones? How? I guess I need more explanation to understand what you are getting at here.
    Sounds almost like he described the human existence from WALL-E.
    02-18-2014 12:49 AM
  24. Aquila's Avatar
    Sounds almost like he described the human existence from WALL-E.
    I'm gong to fail a little here, but I haven't seen this yet. I keep meaning to watch it and never do.


    I'm confused by this paragraph. Are you suggestion that people no longer work for a living and somehow they still eat, have heat, electricity, transportation, healthcare, and Android phones? How? I guess I need more explanation to understand what you are getting at here.
    I mean that we have the resources, today, to build cheaper and more energy efficient homes (in terms of production resources) that could easily shelter all those without homes. They won't be wood and bricks and no contractor would be able to charge $200,000 to make them, but it can be done for $5,000-10,000 depending on the cost to transport materials. We have an over-abundance of food, it's just in the wrong places and so we throw away more food per day than could feed the entire globe's hungry 4x over. That and we spend a huge amount of time and energy creating food that is of almost no nutritional value when we could easily keep everyone feeling well fed and healthier for far less. We destroy crops because there is "no market" for them and ask people to donate $1.00 to starving children. Clothing doesn't cost $100 per polo shirt to make, that cost is closer to about $4 in materials and an average of $0.12 in labor. The rest is transportation and various taxes, fees and markups for profit. If we want the entire world to have access to clothing, it seems as simple as optimizing distribution networks to lower transportation, eliminating most of the taxes and fees and perhaps letting the poorest countries and/or populations have a break on the margins while they handle more important business than working for 3 weeks to afford 1 shirt. Energy is obvious, all we have to do is augment (and then phase out of) our oil consumption and use local reusable resources to power minimum loss energy generators. The entire illusion of scarcity exists because it is profitable for it to do so. There is no real shortage of any basic resource, some resources are just not in ideal places. It's easy to imagine these things being addressed and conquered in the same way that each American doesn't wake up each day to plant or pick their own crops, kill or salt their own pig, etc.

    Essentially that most of the meaningless manual - repetitive processes and most low end things that we think we need human interaction for could be 95% or 100% replaced by automation with no adverse impact to the outcome. Things like: flipping burgers, stocking shelves, loading and unloading trucks, building homes, building roads, driving cabs, mending clothes, making clothes, etc, etc, enter huge list of things here. Then, most of the things that we do simply for the sake of perpetuating the existing system, such as tax preparation, the stock markets, making a new commercial for Nike, the entire direct to consumer pharmaceutical marketing wing... I'm sure we can all think of more. I by no means think humans are fully replaceable in the workforce, but in the future I believe that humans will be able to augment the workforce by providing the primary thing that machines cannot (at least not yet) - creative thought and strategy.

    If we reshaped our economic and political structures to actually exceed the basic needs for all humans (something we have the resources, but not the pressure to do) and 75% of jobs became meaningless - would you still want those 75% of people to go get a meaningless job? Or could we find something more useful, fulfilling and productive for them to do? If food, shelter and other basic needs are easily met without any requirement of wasting 40 or 60 or 80 hours per week on something that can be automated, what's the argument for not doing that? We obviously need to rethink our societal interdependence and it's interplay with money, especially a bank owned debt driven society to have a chance of meeting the demands of the future.

    All this takes is consensus that anyone starving or exposed to the elements because of poverty or bad luck - or really whatever reason - is a stupid problem to have. If we made a simple decision that poverty wasn't going to exist, it could be gone tomorrow. Once that's done, once there is no rat race for basic sustenance, how much more productive or creative can the masses of people become when not stressed out to the point of madness? Would some people be lazy? Yeah, probably. Should we care and is that a reasonable cost for freeing the rest of the people from chains that sap all of their time, energy and humanity just to survive? IMO, it's worth it and it's not as radical as it might sound. It's just as simple as thinking about things that were difficult for us 150 years ago - (preserving food and refrigeration? Fresh fruits and vegetables across the country?) and how silly it is to have some people still struggling with those basic needs - and then thinking about what those things will be 150 years from now and working to maximize the utility of the list of the future.
    nolittdroid likes this.
    02-18-2014 03:51 AM
  25. Mooncatt's Avatar
    I'm gong to fail a little here, but I haven't seen this yet. I keep meaning to watch it and never do.
    It's not really an important plot point, but I don't want to spoil it for you either if you're still wanting to watch it. Let's just say the human Utopia isn't all it's cracked up to be.
    02-18-2014 08:52 AM
1,900 ... 5152535455 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Should there be another category for Games?
    By Basis in forum Android Games
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-21-2010, 09:22 PM
  2. Should I be upset about this dirt under my screen.
    By rem_kujawa in forum HTC EVO 4G
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 07-06-2010, 08:12 PM
  3. Should I be disappointed? Screen color availability!
    By TREOpalooza in forum HTC EVO 4G
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-31-2010, 01:56 PM
  4. Should GMail be telling me how many new?
    By dgalanter in forum Verizon Droid Incredible
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-09-2010, 04:46 PM
  5. Should I be worried about the LED?
    By solideliquid in forum Motorola Droid
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-28-2010, 09:30 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD