Letter to the Editor: we're running out of things to tax
Thursday, October 14, 2010
To the Editor:
I retired 12 years ago and my pension has been fixed since that time. Since we moved to Shoreline in 2006 our home taxes have increased about 65 per cent. I also find our utility bills and cable television bill have an additional 6 per cent tax added. King county is proposing an increase in our sales tax and Bill Gates Sr. is supporting an income tax for the "rich folks". It seems strange that the "rich folks" definition always ends up with anyone who apparently has anything that can be taxed. Additionally our state legislature earlier this year spent an inordinate amount of time grappling with a $2.8 billion deficit by raising taxes and advertising that they were making very difficult cuts. The present 2009-2011 budget is $4 billion higher than the 2007-2009 budget. I would hope that there can be some restraint on government spending in the future at all levels because those of us who have worked all our lives and retired with some savings and property are going to run out of things to be taxed.
R.A. Davis
Shoreline
Posts
33 comments:
The main thing that "rich folks" have that "poor folks" don't have, and that is usually taxed, is property.
There is all kind of property. The richest folks tend to have more property than what they need to live in-both size and amounts of property. Poor folks, like me can barely afford to pay a 1500 dollar monthly mortgage payment on a tiny 1000 square foot home.
"Very rich folks" often are able to avoid paying property taxes on the extra properties.
I would love to get the figures for how much of our tax deficits (for the most essential services) would be eliminated if ALL persons paid the SAME percentage of tax on property value, AND paid the SAME percentage of tax on ALL income (for those above poverty lines, of course). Plus, if the rich (say over 200,000 income-after payroll, of course-was also taxed a tiny bit more to the state, as so many more people are needing to go on food stamps in order to survive and avoid landing in a tent city. Living alongside a main arterial, breathing exhaust fumes is bad enough for the typical poor person.
Is anyone aware of the income and property ownership disparity!? It is getting waaaaaay out of hand. If we allow things to get any worse. We will end up with more of what we already have: "Wealthier" folks who turn their backs on the poorer folks with rhetoric and politics that clearly convey "It's their fault, they need to pull themselves up by the boot straps, but please don't ask me to donate time or funds to help the situation. I work hard for my money"
Meanwhile, the poorer are treated as slaves of the richer while they work very very hard for 10, 12, maybe 15-20 dollars per hour. Many of these folks have graduated from colleges!
I know we can get to being a real community that gives all a hand up first, and a hand out as a temporary fix. This way we won't even have to keep talking about the rich, the poor, taxes on and on and on. Takes so much needless energy away from a quality life.
Only in America do the 'poor' own houses and pay property tax. The tax and spend liberals like Patty Murray have distorted words like 'poor' and 'racist' to the point that they no longer resemble their true meaning. Now, if you make less than $200k a year, you are 'poor' and if you disagree with that, you are 'racist'.
Gimme a break. Lets get rid of these tax and spend liberals and try to get back to some semblance of fiscal responsibility. We've been taxed enough.
Anon 11:41
I'm trying to understand your logic here. Are you saying that because some "poor" own homes and may be making less than 25K per year, or less, you should not have to pay extra taxes on income over 200K in order to help the rest of the poor who are in tent cities and YWCA's and
without food and in need of basic health services?
How much will you net this year, if I may ask? What basic needs are you unable to afford this year?
JEDH, I'm saying you're not poor. You have a house and you pay FAR more rent than I can afford. I think it's safe to assume that you have a computer and internet access, and most likely a couple TVs, cable, a car or two, ect.
You are not poor, because I am not poor and I don't have nearly as much as you do. And I don't want the government handouts that you apparently want.
You want to understand my logic? Here it is: I am sick and tired of tax and spend liberals taking what little money I DO have and WASTING it. Patty Murray and her masterful pork barreling is a great example. If I could keep a little bit more of my money, I would be less 'poor' than I am now...and so would you! And if our government was more responsible with the money they DO get in tax revenue, we'd have no trouble providing for the people who are ACTUALLY poor!
We're being nickled and dimed to death. Mr. Davis might not consider himself poor, but he just wants to keep a LITTLE BIT MORE of the money he does get. So he wont BE poor.
It's the wasteful spending of Democrats like President Obama and Senator Murray that needs to come to an end so that we CAN help more people rise out of poverty. Simply taxing me to give to you...make no sense. We need to create opportunities...not more scams and schemes.
This is absurd...from my point of view, YOU are the rich one here. So lets just cut out the middleman...why don't you just write me a check, Mr. Homeowner.
And to answer your question, I don't make *ANYTHING*...I am unemployed. I spend 20+ hours a week volunteering here in Shoreline. I live in a tiny house and pay less than $1000 a month rent.
AND I AM NOT POOR. I don't need help from the government...I worked and I saved my money and I'll do just fine if you just keep your hands off of it until I can find a job.
I decided I just can't go to bed without explaining this to you in detail.
I want a job. I want to earn a living and be productive. I need the government to get out of my way so I can do that. How is the government getting in my way? How is a property tax preventing me from getting a job? I'll tell you.
If Mr. (or Mrs, I'm not sure) Davis wants to buy a car...or help his children buy a house...or if he wants to take a trip...or just take his beautiful wife out to dinner...those things create opportunities FOR ME. Because I need people to buy cars if I want a job in the auto industry. I need people to buy houses if I want a job in the construction industry. I need people to take trips if I want a job in a hotel and I need people to eat at restaurants if I want a job in a restaurant.
If Mr. Davis...and millions of people like him...can't afford to do those things and create demand, then it robs ME of the opportunity to go out and get a job and be productive and rise out of poverty.
If Mr. Davis can't do those things because YOU taxed him too much, then YOU are the problem. You are MY PROBLEM. You are the reason I don't have any opportunities available to me. I DO NOT WANT a handout. I want OPPORTUNITIES. I do not need the government to manufacture opportunities for me...even if they could...and they can't. Otherwise I'd have a job because Sen. Murray and President Obama wasted BILLIONS on a jobless pork barrel 'stimulus' that did no one any good.
I need the private sector to create jobs and the private sector can't do that unless there is DEMAND...unless Mr. Davis buys a car and buys a house for his kids and takes a trip and takes his beautiful wife out for dinner. The governments don't run the construction industry, the restaurant industry, the hotel industry, or even the auto industry. The private sector...where I want a job...does.
So please...if you want me and the other 9.6% of us who DONT HAVE JOBS to rise out of poverty...then LEAVE US ALONE and let us keep our money and spend it and create demand and create jobs!
@ anon above:
Ok, so you are in a very tough spot-don't make income, but have some sort of other savings that is being taxed and want to keep from being taxed while you need as much of the reserves to pay for your basic needs?
I'm curious what kind of reserves you pay taxes on because, unless you have quite a lot, there is usually nominal to zero tax (especially if you make no income). The last time, I made under poverty line amount of income, I paid nearly no tax because of tax credits and such. It sounds like you may be doing OK, except for the strain of being unemployed -which is difficult for anyone who needs a job to pay bills and sustain themselves, and for some, to maintain self esteem/self respect.
Keep in mind, ALL senators, bring home the bacon. Check out the latest Sea Weekly article. Patty Murray has done a very respectable job of getting very appropriate pork that I doubt anyone would say was unreasonable.
It's Rossi's group that concerns me- Pork, without full disclosure and transparency, on top of trying to confuse people about what their real intent is regarding pork. I'd rather vote for a sincere candidate than one who confuses folks and leads them, via rhetoric and baseless propaganda, to believe that all Dems or non Repubs, over tax and spend.
What about all the corporate handouts that the non Dems give to major corporations that are not in any need whatsoever.
At least my local taxes go to many needs. As far as being overtaxed, it happens occasionally. I said NO to LFP Prop I because I think a 38% hike in taxes is unreasonable. Who wouldn't think so?
The biggest tax scam to be concerned about is the US military related spending. Try to compare your taxes that go towards Patty Murray's little tiny needed WA state pork requests (that all come back to your state) with over 51 percent of your future income taxes (when you get your long awaited job-hope it comes soon) going towards military expenditures.
Apparently the last "tax thrify?" Repubs of the "super conservative?" leadership in WA DC think that it was perfectly reasonable to pile on more military spending. But, an oil war is enough of a need for some folks, I guess, to put the US in debt to China for maybe eternity.
anon:
Sounds like you are saying that we all need to keep the rich richer in order to create jobs that keep the rest of us a little better than poor or poorer. I don't buy any of that Glen Beck, Tea Party philosophy. And it sounds like, maybe, you care more about Mr Davis' ability stay wealthy enough to buy elections, too.
I agree with you, that most people should be able to start a business (a small business that will create more opportunity than larger ones).
I also agree that government does not really create substantial opportunity for jobs. They are supposed to be there to govern in order to prevent any kind of excess or abuse, and to help keep society reasonably healthy.
The Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Neo Con, Tea Party, Ayn Rand, Libertarian, Big Corporate as persons philosophy just begs for oversight/regulation (also known as government), which apparently has just about been lost in DC over the last 3 decades of mostly extreme right influence.
Again, hope you get a great job soon. And, your next employer just may be someone who, has a lovely average looking wife(or no spouse at all), bicycles around town, has a 10 yr old car, cannot afford to go on a big trip just yet, so goes on day hikes to the local mountains, enjoys local points of interest, and somehow seems to be able to pay all taxes, but, of course, reluctantly pays that 51% of the federal income taxes that go towards that military spending. Good night.
Maybe this example explains it better, the average HOUSEHOLD income in Shoreline is $52,000 per year.
The average salary at the City of Shoreline is $72,000 per year, that is $20,000 more per individual employee than the households they "serve."
On RealtyTrac there are about 390 houses being sold that were foreclosed, and 175 houses just closed - yep, they were property owners (past tense).
The City of Shoreline employees formed a political action committee for the Yes on Prop 1 property tax SIX WEEKS before the city council passed it and are the primary donors to it, most of them don't even live in Shoreline.
JEDH said: "Ok, so you are in a very tough spot-don't make income, but have some sort of other savings that is being taxed and want to keep from being taxed while you need as much of the reserves to pay for your basic needs?"
You just don't get it. It's not just about me, I'm not that selfish to think it's just about me. It's about the economy. I explained to you how it works and how job creation works. And you just don't get it. I want EVERYONE to be better off. I want EVERYONE to have opportunities and I want EVERYONE to be able to go out and buy a car or buy a house for their kids or take a trip or go out to eat. It's not just about me because I don't live in a vacuum, unaffected by everyone else.
I just want the taxing and spending to stop so the economy has a chance to recover. I just want people like Mr. Davis to have a little bit more of HIS OWN MONEY so he can take his lovely wife out to eat.
You keep trying to figure out what 'I am saying' and you won't bother to just read what I am saying. There is no hidden message. There is no coded racist message. I'm very clearly saying what I mean. Can you not just take it at face value? Quit trying to re-interpret my words to fit your weird partisan slant. What I am saying isn't Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal. It's just plain American.
JEDH said: "I also agree that government does not really create substantial opportunity for jobs. They are supposed to be there to govern in order to prevent any kind of excess or abuse, and to help keep society reasonably healthy."
So you want the government to take our money to...keep society healthy? It's not working, in case you haven't noticed. As our taxes have gone up, our society has gotten worse and less healthy. Between Bush taxing us and the Democrats taxing us, look where we are at. People like me are just begging the government to get the heck out and ALLOW the economy to recover. That means become healthier for all of us.
It sounds to me like you are just hyper-partisan and care nothing about the economy or the health of society unless it falls into your liberal philosophy. Take a step back from the politics and look at what is happening in our community. People who once had houses...now don't. More people are BECOMING POOR thanking to your liberal ideas on taxation. Back off for a minute and realize that the ideas you're espousing are making people worse off.
I've actually been on the fence about Prop 1 because there are certain aspects of it that I care a lot about, such as the senior center. But this discussion has made up my mind. As much as I'd hate to see the senior center close down, we have to make a stand somewhere. This excessive taxation has got to stop and the citizens have got to be allowed to come out of their economic bunkers and re-establish the economy. Without a vibrant economy, we can have nothing else.
Bwahaha "It's just plain American" seriously? As if the other person's opinions aren't. Man when this type of phrase and jargonese like "economic bunker" start getting thrown out there you know someones drank the koolaid, and really there's no point in discussing things further.
Increasing property taxes at a time when home foreclosures are running at an all time high is either incredibly short-sighted or just plain cruel.
At almost any other time in the 22 years I've lived in Shoreline, I would have voted in favor of Prop 1 without much thought. But we can't keep taxing people who are already losing their houses. It just makes no economic sense. That's the bottom line here.
...and here come the insults. You can tell when someone has nothing intelligent to say. Laugh all you want, but the people who are struggling to make their house payments aren't laughing. Those of us looking for work aren't laughing. If you think I've 'drunk the kool-aid' because I point out that the economy is in bad shape, and that raising taxes in a poor economy is a bad idea...I don't know what to say. Why don't you call me a teabagger next. Yeah, that's sure you win you the arguement...
When you count in Innis Arden, Richmond Beach, The Highlands, etc., etc. - I find it really hard to believe that the average family income in Shoreline is $52,000. Where did that number come from?
Average household income is courtesy of the US Census and King County.
You fail to realize that there are very few households in the neighborhoods you cite due to in part to: not all of the Highlands is in Shoreline, the large size of the lots, and thus the small number of households.
The City of Shoreline also has the same information on their website, it is easily confirmed if you go and search for it - it is used to determine what is affordable in terms of housing cost.
Shoreline ain't Medina.
I would honestly like to know where that data could be found. I tried to navigate my way around the US Census site but couldn't find the date.
Can someone tell me where to find it? I am seriously and honestly curious.
Okay, I did just find the per capita household median income for King County and it states that for 2008 (the last year available) that the household income was $70,193. That's quite a difference. There are a lot of pretty poor areas, poorer than Shoreline, in King County.
Where does the $52,000 come from?
Ah, now I see on the US Census for 2000 (10 years ago) Table DP-3, that the median household income for Shoreline was $52,000 HOWEVER the median family income was $62,000.
Looks like a little misinterpretation of 10 year old data.
Am I wrong? Should I be looking elsewhere?
The median income for a household in the city was $51,658, and the median income for a family was $61,450. Males had a median income of $40,955 versus $33,165 for females. The per capita income for the city was $24,959. About 4.4% of families and 6.9% of the population were below the poverty line, including 6.1% of those under age 18 and 7.3% of those age 65 or over.
Source: US Census
King County data is skewed by other MSRAs (while you are at, define what a MSRA without looking it up). Then explain the difference between median and average household income, again, without looking it up and why it makes a difference. Finally, do you know what the difference between household and family income is? I would presume you haven't had a course in demographics if you don't know the answers without googling them.
The above is what the Washington State Housing Finance Commission applies in determining household income, don't like it, too bad, that is the law. Developers use the same data all the time. Don't like the data being ten years old, want to pay for a census every five years?
It is not misrepresentation of the data at all.
Key take aways - for your comprehension:
Average City of Shoreline Salary - $72,000 annually
Average City of Shoreline PER CAPITA Income - $25,000
Back to the Anon-JEDH dialog aways above. What is/are the tax plan/s you believe would solve the unemployment problem and create good opportunity for all. If your ideas make sense. Hey, I'll vote for them.
I am not in Shoreline, so Prop I is not what I am or was referring to, but rather the full scope of your tax issue. And, just to remind you that I did say I voted NO on LFP Prop I. After fully researching this 38% initial tax increase, I decided this particular added tax was inappropriate at this time. This might be one thing we may agree on. Since you don't own a home Prop I may not affect you as fully as it would have for homeowners-unless your landlord is willing to risk losing tenants by raising the rent-and some are.
But, since you are annoyed with me trying to understand what you mean, and I still don't know what your tax issue is, please disregard this whole comment, unless you can be much more clear using numbers, and can stating what taxes are needing reform. I'm all for making improvements. I think we agree with that, too.
Be glad you don't live in any of the parts of Europe where taxes are MUCH higher than here. Funny thing is, all those that I have know who live there say they have lots of opportunity and think United Statesians are making life too hard for everyone but the "rich".
JEDH said, "Be glad you don't live in any of the parts of Europe where taxes are MUCH higher than here. Funny thing is, all those that I have know who live there say they have lots of opportunity and think United Statesians are making life too hard for everyone but the "rich"."
Haha, right.
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&language=en&pcode=teilm020&tableSelection=1&plugin=1
There is the EU's unemployment rate. It currently stands at 10%. So much for for the opinions of your anti-American friends.
I don't see how you can NOT know what my tax issue is. I've spelled it out very clearly. We are taxed too much and it is stifling growth and as a result we have European style unemployment rates.
My tax plan is to cut taxes across the board, and cut spending across the board. At the city, state, and federal level. Pretty simple. The economy is tough and I don't know a SINGLE PERSON or entity who isn't cutting back and making adjustments to their spending to compensate...umm, except for the government. It's time that the government learned to cut back and make the same sacrifices that WE THE PEOPLE have. Politicians who want to raise taxes are always asking us to make sacrifices. Well, this time we're asking the government to make sacrifices. If that means some government services need to be cut back or eliminated, that's okay. That needs to be done. Because that's what WE THE PEOPLE have been doing in these tough economic times.
You're going to get a massive demonstration of that across this country on election day. People are absolutely fed up with the ongoing march of the Tax and Spenders and they are going to be shown the door.
Wow, Anon @ 5:25, you are kind of snotty to someone who is really trying to get the facts. Are you trying to tell me that you don't know what an MSRA is or that you don't feel that it's worth your time to explain it?
Assuming that I don't know the difference between household and family income when I obviously noted the difference certainly shows your disdain for anyone who may question you.
As far as what developers quote for median income in Shoreline when I did do research on both Google and Bing I found developer websites quoting anywhere between $61,000 and $81,000 so I assume that they are just using what just helps the sell.
So much for a rational attempt at factual discussion here. It looks like you can't keep your negative emotions in check to let an intelligent discussion follow through. Too bad.
@Anon 7:23
The discussion has not ended, then. It sounds like taxes don't have everything to with opportunity and unemployment rates if much higher taxed countries don't also have much higher rate of unemployment. Again, I don't understand your logic or why you conclude that taxes are to blame- or only to blame- for unemployment. Are you saying that taxes alone are to blame???
Can you think of anything else that may be to blame in addition to taxes. With taxes being your pet peeve shown in this thread, I understand if you have trouble coming up with other reasons for a lack of opportunity. I challenge and dare you to give it a try.
Until very very recently, our unemployment rate was half of the EU's. The EU rate is historically around 10%. America's is historically under 5%.
Sounds like you need to do a little research to better understand the issues we're talking about.
JEDH, for a quick reference, you can check my math here:
USA: http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=74&c=us&l=en
France: http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=74&c=fr&l=en
Germany: http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=74&c=gm&l=en
Spain: http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=74&c=sp&l=en
ect...
So as you can see, high tax rates and high unemployment are related. Personally, I don't want EU style taxes and unemployment, and ironically, neither does the EU. While we move towards the statist model that Obama and Murray love, the EU is desperately moving away from it.
Want to try another tack? Or are you ready to admit I'm right?
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/08/09/wall_street_journal_unemployment
These are not the EU countries where my acqaintances live, but I will look these up. I have this link above for you to comment on. It is a single case example of what I am talking about in general. It has pretty exact figures. I hope you don't mind that it is not from something like the Wall Street Journal exclusively. It sounds like you would totally agree with WSJ opinion.
It's not an opinion, it's a fact. Look at Greece, for instance. A generation of statist policy has led them to the point of breaking.
Look, I've been around internet discussions like this long enough to know that I'm not going to change YOUR mind. That's not what I'm trying to do here. I'm trying to show the other people reading this that you are wrong, and I think I've accomplished that.
The simple fact is that for decades, the socialist policies of Europe has kept their debt and unemployment rates very high compared to America. Your friend's anecdotal evidence notwithstanding. You believe in liberalism, that is clear, and you'll continue to believe in liberalism no matter what facts I present. That's just how liberals are.
I'm a moderate that graduated from a midwestern college in the 80's with a degree in economics. I don't have a 'pet peeve' with taxes. I understand that you raise taxes and interest rates in good economic times and you lower taxes and interest rates in bad economic times. This isnt theory, it's how the world works. Some folks believe the solution is to raise taxes, no matter what the economy is like. Other folks think we should always cut taxes, no matter what the economy is like.
I'm not either one of those folks. I have some experience in this field and I know what it takes to control...that's the key word, control...economic growth. And you don't do it by taxing people at a time when the economy is in the tax. It should be a no-brainer that you don't raise property taxes when home foreclosures are at an ALL TIME high, but apparently some people can't even understand that basic economic truth. And they can't be convinced of it, no matter what. Because they understand partisan politics and they don't understand economics.
When the economy gets going again and people aren't losing their houses, I'll be fighting with conservatives and explaining the same thing to them that I am to you. I'll be in favor of raising taxes and I'll use the exact same explanation as to why that I'm using here. Because these are the facts and folks who are unencumbered by partisan blinders...EI most of the moderate voting public...can see it.
Those are the people I hope are still reading this. They are the ones I am trying to convince. Because I'll never convince you.
Thanks for the opportunity.
tax = tank, EI = IE...this message board is really terrible...wish I could correct my errors. Sorry if that's in any way confusing.
If your "facts" were convincing, I would be convinced. I do agree with you that Spain has awful unemployment, right now. To learn all of the reasons why would take more research on my part. But, come on, how do you explain Sweden, Finland and Norway, being at around 3-6% on the end of those graphs (they only go to '09, of course)???
Why not comment on the link I sent you, too.
I'm not going to argue with you forever, JEDH. I came back to just say this:
I voted for Obama. If he had spent his first two years focused on the economy and job creation...instead of a political payoff thinly disguised as a 'stimulus' and a wretched health care overhaul...the economy would be back on track and the Democrats would have a majority in Congress for the next 20+ years. An unbelievable opportunity...to both fix the economy and show that Democrats are still actually Democrats and not statists...was squandered by Obama and Pelosi and Reid, ect. I mean...this was a golden opportunity. This economy could have been fixed.
Now, the only solution that I see...and that the rest of the country sees...is to take a hard right turn to the tax-cutters. We have to fight one group of extremists with another group of extremists. That's the only way to fix things...unless we want to look like Greece and Spain for the next 20 years. Democrats have NO ONE to blame but themselves for this monumental partisan overreach.
And now it's coming back to bite...everyone. I don't especially like extremists of any stripe, but we have no choice now. We have to fight the statists in the White House and Congress somehow, and this November you're going to see how. Left wingers and right wingers are their own worst enemies because they both asked for this. Bush created Obama and Obama is creating Sarah Palin or whoever...so congrats on that.
I would rather see moderates in control...that can work with each other and understand what needs to be done when the economy is poor and when the economy is good...but the days of Tip O'Neill are apparently over. So now it's a swing from one extreme to another...because it's necessary.
A real leadership needs to emerge from one party or the other, and whichever party figures it out first will control American politics for a generation. Or longer. But so far, it doesn't look good for either side. I had hoped Obama would do it, but we elected Martin Luther King and got Al Sharpton. So this time around, I...and the rest of America...will put our HOPE for CHANGE in the Republicans.
And in 2012, who knows what will happen. Things might be so bad that a third party will arise, and that would be the worst thing of all, because then we'll have completed our transition into European-style crap governments and we'll have power-sharing and coalitions and a dozen parties and no real direction, just like they have.
So stop being a partisan and wake up and see what the country REALLY NEEDS. It isnt higher taxes all day, every day...and it's not lower taxes all day, every day.
What we need is two parties, both moderate, that can work together and help America do what needs to be done.
You are either part of the problem or part of the solution. I don't know who is going to be part of the solution, but I know who is part of the problem. This year, it's the Democrats.
I just wrote a long post and it got eaten.
I'm done here. I'm not going to keep arguing with you. It's a shame we have to keep swinging between extremes...first Bush and now Obama. Both parties are their own worst enemies and the electorate is now faced with fighting extremism with extremism. Bush created Obama and Obama is in the process of creating Sarah Palin or whoever.
I voted for Obama and if he'd spent the last two years focused on a real stimulus...instead of a political payoff thinly disguised as a 'stimulus' and a health care overhaul that no one wanted right now (right now), then the economy would be recovering, and Democrats would control Congress for the next 20+ years. The Democrats squandered a golden opportunity, so what is going to happen in November is ENTIRELY their fault.
The electorate has no choice but to fight the left's extremism with the right's extremism because the days of rational politics...the Tip O'Neill days...are apparently over.
I don't know if the far right is part of the solution, but we have to take a chance because the far left is currently the problem.
LOL...I guess my long post didn't get eaten...*sigh*
This isn't the sort of forum I'm used to arguing in...it's pretty poor.
I've said about all I can say on these issues.
Post a Comment