Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY
Sign in to follow this  
Nolder

Stupid things rich people do

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, CUBAREY said:

"Like saying "doesn't everyone have a maid?" or some other such thing. I hope that makes more sense now."

 

HMM? Don't we all have a maid? Where I come from they are usually called a mother or a wife! :ohmy:

 

 

"Maybe he likes Neal Stevenson?"

 

Well that is another stupid thing that rich people do!

 

1.) Maids are amazing. 

 

2.) I like Stevenson! Having only read Anathema, it wasn't bad. A more classically written (and lyrical style) with pretty much the exact same theme/overal plot is The Glass Bead Game/Magister Ludi (depending on your translation).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Nolder said:

It's well beyond the point.

 

Let's be blunt: food stamps are charity.

It may be a forced charity through taxation but that's another matter altogether.

So when people are on charity others expect them to act with a certain...decorum since they are on someone else's dime.

When you read stories about people on food stamps buying cakes, cigarettes, alcohol, etc it just brings to mind the homeless guy who asks you for $5 to buy a sandwich and then comes out of the store with a 40oz.

People feel taken advantage of. And while we know that's not all people on welfare there are certainly enough doing it to make it a legitimate concern.

The problem is, most of the stories are bullshit, fake news, misinformation. 

SNAP cards literally do not let you buy anything but food. Cigs/Aclohol can only be bought by proxy (selling your card for cash) which is Fraudulent use of said card. (And anyone calling in every month for a replacement card should automatically get flagged for Fraud)

Food is food. If someone wants to waste there handout/charity on 1 meal what's it to you, if they starve the rest of the month?

What if they're celebrating that they are going off of food stamps by splurging what they had left on there card?

If you go shopping and find $50 in steak on sale for $5, you're seriously going to punish someone on food stamps by not being able to buy a good amount of meat really cheap?

 

This is nothing more than False outrage and entitlement (Entitlement of those with money wanting to feel superior to those without money) of a program people who haven't been on it, don't even understand. Specially once you consider to get the biggest benefit (without children) is to actually have a job!

Edited by SinisterDeath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nolder said:

Where do you live again?

Minnesota.


Snap is a federal program. (States can supplement it)
And I do know for a fact EBT cards in California work the exact same way.

 

Some people also don't realize Cash Aid piggy packs onto EBT cards. Which means if you ever see someone with an EBT card buying non-food items, they have Cash Aid, which is a different program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Nolder said:

 

Let's be blunt: food stamps are charity.

 

Well, this is a separate discussion, but actually, direct cash payments are the most effective both in terms of outcome and value-for-taxpayers of government assistance. The economy would be much better off if more direct assistance was offered to individuals instead of billions of dollars a year in corporate welfare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tyzack said:

 

Well, this is a separate discussion, but actually, direct cash payments are the most effective both in terms of outcome and value-for-taxpayers of government assistance. The economy would be much better off if more direct assistance was offered to individuals instead of billions of dollars a year in corporate welfare.

^
Food Boxes is going to lead to massive government inefficiency and ultimately great more government jobs costing us more money while getting less done. :wink:

 

Seriously though, I wish I could find the story of Republicans living on food stamps trying prove people get too much money, and somehow doing such a laughable job of proving the point that there were consistences galore. (like using food they already owned to prove it) I know such a story existed... but hell if I can find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SinisterDeath said:

Minnesota.


Snap is a federal program. (States can supplement it)
And I do know for a fact EBT cards in California work the exact same way.

 

Some people also don't realize Cash Aid piggy packs onto EBT cards. Which means if you ever see someone with an EBT card buying non-food items, they have Cash Aid, which is a different program.

I haven't heard of Cash Aid but maybe that's the program I see people going to the grocery store and getting free money for. The register says EBT but maybe it's wrong I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Nolder said:

I haven't heard of Cash Aid but maybe that's the program I see people going to the grocery store and getting free money for. The register says EBT but maybe it's wrong I don't know.

http://ehsd.org/cash-aid-medi-cal-calfresh-food-stamps/

 

Most people don't know about it so they just blatantly assume It's EBT, and are buying things they don't need.
So when you see that they take cash out and use it to buy Cigs/Booze, that's technically against the rules and is fraudulent behavior.. I don't believe the register allows them to buy booze directly with the card.. but I could be wrong. (state by state)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, SinisterDeath said:

^
Food Boxes is going to lead to massive government inefficiency and ultimately great more government jobs costing us more money while getting less done. :wink:

 

Seriously though, I wish I could find the story of Republicans living on food stamps trying prove people get too much money, and somehow doing such a laughable job of proving the point that there were consistences galore. (like using food they already owned to prove it) I know such a story existed... but hell if I can find it.

 

It's also about the dignity of buying your own food; of having agency over your own life.

 

There was a great section on this during the Pod Save the People live show last week in DC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I haven't heard of Cash Aid but maybe that's the program I see people going to the grocery store and getting free money for. The register says EBT but maybe it's wrong I don't know."

 

 

In Florida and New Jersey the two states that I am aware of the same ebt card used for Food assisstnce program is used for general aid payments. The General Aid Program is much more the classical welfare payment. Of course even these payments come with strings and at least Florida and New Jersey such money is not meant to be used either for tobacco or alcohal. There is a feature in the General Aid program that permits you to withdraw cash from an atm much like you would using a debit card that is tied to a ckecking or savings account so people do use General Aid for unpermitted expenses. There are also schemes that are quite common (again at least in New Jersey and Florida) where small retailers have been known to charge EBT cards for food items but have allowed the users to take an equal or slightly less amount in unpermitted goods. Further and unfortuantely these are not fake or bulshit stories, fraud in these programs is still a significant issue although somewhat less then when the food assisstnce program used Food stamps which quickly became an easily tradeble "currency".

 

 

 

"Food is food. If someone wants to waste there handout/charity on 1 meal what's it to you, if they starve the rest of the month?"

 

Well since these people do not simply starve but turn to other alternatives like food banks it is a concern. Especially for people like my family that does in fact give a considerable of cash and time to make that the Food banks in our nearby communities actually have enough to the necessary extra aid to truly needy families. Not that i 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CUBAREY said:

Further and unfortuantely these are not fake or bulshit stories, fraud in these programs is still a significant issue although somewhat less then when the food assisstnce program used Food stamps which quickly became an easily tradeble "currency".

 

Thing is, those stories claim that this behavior is non-fraudulent and acceptable within the program, That's why they are bullshit and fake news. Even some of the lobster stories were shown to be photoshop!

 

No one denies fraud exists in the system. Everyone wants to combat it. But, and this is the largest thing.

Some of us don't want to punish everyone on it to catch a few (Yes a few, not all) who are using it fraudulently.

People scam food banks, they scam everything possible.. Because they can. Everyone accepts that there's going to be risk in giving away handouts. You can mitigate it, you can't fully prevent it.

 

But I guess some people never grew out of the grade school methodology of punishing the whole class because of one student's miss deeds. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"But I guess some people never grew out of the grade school methodology of punishing the whole class because of one student's miss deeds. :wink:"

 

I do not claim that everyone in the programs carryout fraud. The Everyone, not the majoirty but yes a significant portion. I think to downplay the fraud and mismanagement of such programs only serves to validate the claims of their critics. I do not mind giving a handout (even when some of it is abused) but I would rather it be a handup instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SinisterDeath said:

http://ehsd.org/cash-aid-medi-cal-calfresh-food-stamps/

 

Most people don't know about it so they just blatantly assume It's EBT, and are buying things they don't need.
So when you see that they take cash out and use it to buy Cigs/Booze, that's technically against the rules and is fraudulent behavior.. I don't believe the register allows them to buy booze directly with the card.. but I could be wrong. (state by state)

I'll tell you what I see every single time I go to the grocery store.

Someone goes up to the register, buys a few items (milk, eggs, frozen dinner), and gets ~$50 cashback as if the grocery store is an ATM.

What they then use that cash for...who can say?

That's the point though isn't it? It's unaccountable.

 

6 hours ago, Tyzack said:

 

It's also about the dignity of buying your own food; of having agency over your own life.

 

You shouldn't be dignified when you're at the mercy and charity of others. You don't have agency when you're dependent on what others give you. This is an absolute breakdown of the American value of self reliance and it's taken a lot of propaganda to get this far. It used to be an absolute shameful thing to be a charity case, to the point where people would much rather skip a meal than ask others to provide for them. This is a much more utilitarian value to have than to make dependents feel dignified.

 

5 hours ago, SinisterDeath said:

No one denies fraud exists in the system. Everyone wants to combat it. But, and this is the largest thing.

Some of us don't want to punish everyone on it to catch a few (Yes a few, not all) who are using it fraudulently.

Would you be for putting into place extremely harsh sentencing for those who are caught abusing welfare systems? I'm talking 10+ years prison time for a single infraction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tyzack said:

Hand up > hand out

thats not what we’re talking about 

Food stamps and other modern day welfare subisidies are maintenance programs. I have no problem with the government making sure that noone staves but I think that the old addage applies. Give a starving man a fish he eats for a day give him a fishing pole he can feed himself indefinately. Today our programs are their to see that people do not strave not see they that they get out of poverty. I think that is a fundamentally inefficent and immoral policy.

 

 

"You shouldn't be dignified when you're at the mercy and charity of others. You don't have agency when you're dependent on what others give you. This is an absolute breakdown of the American value of self reliance and it's taken a lot of propaganda to get this far. It used to be an absolute shameful thing to be a charity case, to the point where people would much rather skip a meal than ask others to provide for them. This is a much more utilitarian value to have than to make dependents feel dignified."

 

In the past people also did not believe that they were "entitled" to be helped and acknowledged that the help was not given with strings but that those giving the aid had a perfect right to expect that those strings would be observed.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Tyzack said:

 

1.) Maids are amazing. 

 

2.) I like Stevenson! Having only read Anathema, it wasn't bad. A more classically written (and lyrical style) with pretty much the exact same theme/overal plot is The Glass Bead Game/Magister Ludi (depending on your translation).

 

 

I've loved everything of Stephenson's that I've read.  My favorite so far is probably Quicksilver, which I'm still in the middle of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, CUBAREY said:

Food stamps and other modern day welfare subisidies are maintenance programs. I have no problem with the government making sure that noone staves but I think that the old addage applies. Give a starving man a fish he eats for a day give him a fishing pole he can feed himself indefinately. Today our programs are their to see that people do not strave not see they that they get out of poverty. I think that is a fundamentally inefficent and immoral policy.

Considering Food Stamps has requirements that you are employed, or seeking employment. You can't even stay on it indefinitely if you don't have kids/disabled/elderly. (3 months for 3 years)

Even then there formula for benefits is such that if you have no income you get less benefits then if you actually worked. 

Basically if you work 20 hours a week at federal minimum wage you get the maximum benefit. If you work 40 hours a week at minimum wage you get about half of that. Anything more it starts tapering down to nothing. Below 20 hours you may get an emergency amount of SNAP, but you start to qualify for other programs entirely as SNAP is not meant for the Homeless/those who have no job/not looking/been looking to long.

 

https://eligibility.com/food-stamps

https://eligibility.com/food-stamps/do-the-employment-requirements-for-eligibility-apply-to-everyone

 

12 hours ago, CUBAREY said:

In the past people also did not believe that they were "entitled" to be helped and acknowledged that the help was not given with strings but that those giving the aid had a perfect right to expect that those strings would be observed.

Yet, conservatives feel entitled that people on snap need to eat bread and water. 

This game of false outrage and entitlement gets us nowhere.

 

In the past aid was was donated by the community to those in need. IF the community felt those people were in need and met there criteria

"Oh, lets help out Bob and Sally with there 2 kids, he's between jobs right now, so lets help him out!"

 

*Spits*
"Man, look at those slobs, walking around town in there ratty ass clothes, why the hell do they have 5 kids? And why doesn't Ted find a good job? Hell he doesn't even go to church like a good Christian!"

 

This is my problem with community Aid like what many conservatives espouse as the best thing ever. It does nothing for those who fall between the cracks. Where as something like SNAP is blind towards judging people on Race/Religion/Creed. Something Churches, and Communities often fail at.

 

 

 

Also;
It's a Misnomer to think everyone on Food Snaps loves being on it, and in no way ever wants to leave so they can work less just to keep getting handouts.

People who have actually been on it, want to get off of it.

No one likes being beholden to the government every month and wait for there minor stipend to get some food to last until the next month. Hell many recipients wait well after the first of the month to avoid being in the massive crowd rushing the stores, to avoid getting looked down by all the hotty totties in town as "oh, it must be Food Stamp day". There's still plenty of your precious shame for being on it.

 

It still amazes me how many people expect others to be shamed, when in need, and actively shame those who need it, and yell at them for not being shamed enough.

And then complain when we have Homeless Vets, or Disabled people living on the streets saying "Why don't you use these programs we have for you!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"

 Below 20 hours you may get an emergency amount of SNAP, but you start to qualify for other programs entirely as SNAP is not meant for the Homeless/those who have no job/not looking/been looking to long."

 

Those restrictions are also there only for people between 18-49. Further exactly why would we give aid to someone who is not looking for work but is able bodied?

 

"Yet, conservatives feel entitled that people on snap need to eat bread and water. "

 

That bread and water statement is even below you! However, yes since I am paying for the benefits through forced taxation I think it should be limited to people who merit the help.

 

 

" And why doesn't Ted find a good job? "

And why exactly should I be paying for his food if he is able bodied and neither working or looking for work?

 

 

 

"People who have actually been on it, want to get off of it."

 

That statement is as overbroad and erronious as:

 

 

"everyone on Food Snaps loves being on it, and in no way ever wants to leave so they can work less just to keep getting handouts."

 

 

Further and most important my basic problem with Food Stamps and other welfare programs is that it does in fact disencentivises getting ahead. As you said your stipends are drasticly cut even if you get a few more hours of work or increase yuour income a little bit.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, CUBAREY said:

Those restrictions are also there only for people between 18-49. 

Which is your able bodied population.

11 hours ago, CUBAREY said:

Further exactly why would we give aid to someone who is not looking for work but is able bodied?

Sometimes there's this concept of emergency help/funds/snap.  But that is typically outside of the normal scope of SNAP. The whole not-working able bodied on food stamps is generally what conservatives act like every recipient is.

 

Things get more complicated once you introduce children to the mix, where other employment rules go out the window.

Hell given the cost of child care these days, a stay at home mom/dad might be the more economical solution to working a minimum wage job just to pay for child care. :wink:

 

11 hours ago, CUBAREY said:

That bread and water statement is even below you!

Below? Talk about more False Outrage! Triggered much? :tongue:

Seriously though, given that Trump and Friends are seriously talking about a dried Food Box to replace SNAP it would not surprise me in the least if some conservatives think even that is too much. (not including those who say they shouldn't get any at all)

 

The Conservative narrative for the last decade on this has literally been, "

Quote

We want you to be shamed, feel like an absolute loser who doesn't deserve any help, and we want to make sure you eat only "poor people" food. No fresh meat or veggies for you!

 

Trumps box plan is the conservative culmination of that ideology.

(Save the babies! But don't feed them once they are outside the Uterus!)

 

11 hours ago, CUBAREY said:

And why exactly should I be paying for his food if he is able bodied and neither working or looking for work?

Who said Ted isn't working? The statement was "Why doesn't Ted find a good job"?

That can mean all kinds of things, but generally find a good job means stop working at McDonalds, or Stop working Part Time. You confused this with the statement "Why doesn't Ted find a Job?" Which leaves no question as to his employment status.

 

Moreover, given my pitiful examples of how things were back in the conservative rose tinted days of yore.

 

But, given your response, this clearly means you're part of the crowd who doesn't want to help Ted, because Ted and his Family look too poor, and we can't be helping those things out! After all, they'll just live on your hand outs!

 

12 hours ago, CUBAREY said:

"People who have actually been on it, want to get off of it."

 

That statement is as overbroad and erronious as:

It lacked a Qualifying statement.

Your statement.

12 hours ago, CUBAREY said:

"everyone on Food Snaps loves being on it, and in no way ever wants to leave so they can work less just to keep getting handouts."

Used the Qualifier "Everyone" which more strongly denotes "All" "Every", where as mine just used "People" which can broadly mean anything, from some, all, most, whatever. Erroneous (Erroneous is spelling it Erronious), yes, but not over broad unless you willfully interpret it as meaning All just to quibble on semantics.

 

But what I literally meant was Most people on it, don't want to remain on it. and I stand by that statement as neither too broad, or erroneous. Far less so than the conservative narrative of all/most love being on it.

 

12 hours ago, CUBAREY said:

As you said your stipends are drasticly cut even if you get a few more hours of work or increase yuour income a little bit. 

Did you miss the part where if you're getting the maximum benefit and work less hours, you actually get less money as if you earned more?

The part where you can only get it for 3 months, every 3 years as an able bodied adult with no children?

 

image.thumb.png.537d4758d4ccd617fa3058531c3e4c53.png

image.thumb.png.9e1fac40796ed15d5625d097494620e6.png

 

This gives us some real data to work with.

The first one shows that 45% are households with Children, the remaining are not. About 25% are Able Bodied workers receiving SNAP.

It also shows that even those welfare queens with children, are earning income.

 

And $150 for a single person is a tight budget these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Sometimes there's this concept of emergency help/funds/snap. "

 

Again why would  you give aid to an able bodied person between 18 and 49 who is not working and not trying to find a job? 

 

"The whole not-working able bodied on food stamps is generally what conservatives act like every recipient is."

 

Actually I thought that the conservative stereotype of a SNAP recepient was the welfare mother who has 6 kids from six different fathers none of which bothered to marry her or actively support their children.

 

 

 

 

"Used the Qualifier "Everyone" which more strongly denotes "All" "Every", where as mine just used "People" which can broadly mean anything, from some, all, most, whatever.

 

Sorry but my logic 101 professor taught me that when you make a general statement about a group you are logicly deeemed to be talking about the entire group unless otherwise specified. So when you say "people which" you can be inferred to be talking about all such people. 

 

Again both statements were overbroad since some people who are on it do not want to get off it and some people who are on it do not love being on it.

 

"Did you miss the part where if you're getting the maximum benefit and work less hours, you actually get less money as if you earned more?

The part where you can only get it for 3 months, every 3 years as an able bodied adult with no children?"

 

I was referencing the program condition that if you go from working 20 hours to 40 the stipend gets cut in half.
 

"But, given your response, this clearly means you're part of the crowd who doesn't want to help Ted, because Ted and his Family look too poor,"

 

Actually being a somewhat reasonable person I would mind giving aid if Ted and his family did not look at least somewhat poor. Also I think you intentionally misintrept what some conservatives say about the poor. People do not object that the poor look poor. We object to giving aid to people who do not clean themselves and their clothes and make themselves as presentable as possible. Small clue when you go for a job interview even for a menial job you dress cleanly and make sure you do yourself are clean. Impressions count. In the case of poor people who get aid I expect them to attempt to look clean (I am not talking about the homeless) and might find it somewhat hard to fathom if they are dressed as well or better then myself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2018 at 2:21 PM, CUBAREY said:

I was referencing the program condition that if you go from working 20 hours to 40 the stipend gets cut in half.

That's a non issue.

 

150/2 =75.

 

7.25*40=290+150 aid=440

7.25*80=580+74 aid=655

 

Even poor people can math.

 

Throw children in the mix it gets complicated.

 

Due to daycare costs, it can cost a 2 adult household more money to send kids to daycare, then to have one work full time and the other stay home.

 

On 2/24/2018 at 2:21 PM, CUBAREY said:

Again why would  you give aid to an able bodied person between 18 and 49 who is not working and not trying to find a job?

Emergency funds usually means someone that lost there job, there house and all there money, no access to unemployment insurance.

So when They get emergency access to snap it's atypical and not permanent.

 

They may also have been given access to community funds for this, as well as GA to help them out while they get back on there feet.

 

On 2/24/2018 at 2:21 PM, CUBAREY said:

Actually I thought that the conservative stereotype of a SNAP recepient was the welfare mother who has 6 kids from six different fathers none of which bothered to marry her or actively support their children.

Yes. Notice how she qualifies as an able bodied non disabled worker?

 

Mine just covered more than just the barefoot and pregnant welfare queen, it includes the non working bum playing video games all day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Due to daycare costs, it can cost a 2 adult household more money to send kids to daycare, then to have one work full time and the other stay home."

 

I and my sisters were "latch kids", from the age of 5. daycare is a middle class luxury which most working class people do no enagage in except when the daycare is an elderly granmother or other relative.

 

 

"That's a non issue."

 

? What? 

 

 

"

Emergency funds usually means someone that lost there job, there house and all there money, no access to unemployment insurance.

So when They get emergency access to snap it's atypical and not permanent.

 

They may also have been given access to community funds for this, as well as GA to help them out while they get back on there feet."

 

We were talking about SNAP AID. your three month in three year example. Again losing one's job does not mean one can not look for work. 

 

As to General Assistance I am aware of who gets it and under what conditions. That still does not answer the question why someone deserves government AId if the are able bodied have no job, are not looking for a job (even if its futile) or getting some type of training that will ehance their ability to get a job.

 

 

"

Mine just covered more than just the barefoot and pregnant welfare queen, it includes the non working bum playing video games all day."

 

Sure execept your example is not the conservative stereotyupe of the wlefare recipeint (in this case SNAP).

 

Also note that the Welfare Queen as you stated qualifies for SNAP (and not the 3 month in 3 year emergency stipend) as do any able bodied people who have qualifying depenendants. So a rather significant number of people always qualify for snap even if they are abled bodied. Most adults between 18-49 have minor children, so they automaticly are eligible for SNAP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't think of a better thread for this:

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pablo-escobars-hippos-keep-multiplying-and-colombia-doesnt-know-how-to-stop-it/

 

This story has been my favorite story for years. I know evasion species are horrible, and these hippos pose a threat to the local ecosystem but...I dunno...I love their story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Posts

    • Yes but there is opening yourself to channel and then there is a quick unintentional use.  If you notice before Rand became a channeler, fully aware of what he was doing and willing try to embrace the power, all you get are the side effects from channeling (the taking chances etc,,) but not the filth feeling.  After book 1, when the using the power and the side effects happened near the same time, all he gets is the filth.  The difference is he knows he can channel and needs to embrace the source to channel.  Just like the women who are starting to channel never seem to notice the warmth of touching the female half until they survive the side effects and become aware what they are doing.  A wilder like Nyn, had she stayed in the Two Rivers, never would of felt the feeling of opening herself to the source since she had built up a block, so it might have to do with you have to open yourself up to the power to feel the good or bad.     In one of Rand's lives in book 2 I believe he was a member of the Queen's guards and was lucky, he thought later he understood why but he didn't care.  He was suffering from touching the male half but was basicly a wilder and it was never said he was feeling the filth.  So I think a lot has to do with someone who channels but doesn't really know it or is never trained how to do it aren't fully opening themselves up enough to feel the filth or warmth.  They are incapable of doing anything more then a quick touch of the surface.   It's possible Rand would of started to feel nausea when he accidently channeled and not probably not understand why.  But there seems to be a difference between inadvertently channeling and intentionally channeling.
    • You can make it by heating sweetened condensed milk for a long time, or substitute another caramel sauce
    • https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/02/20/pew-research-1-in-10-u-s-voters-in-2020-election-will-be-foreign-born/   Muh Russian influence. LOL! We are giving out country away and not enough people care. I suppose one thing follows the other though doesn't it?
×