Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8789 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 09-19-2017 6:39 PM
351 online now:
Coragyps, Coyote, halibut, JonF, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat) (6 members, 345 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Porkncheese
Happy Birthday: AdminPhat
Post Volume:
Total: 819,118 Year: 23,724/21,208 Month: 1,689/2,468 Week: 198/822 Day: 73/69 Hour: 0/5

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
222324
25
2627Next
Author Topic:   The Giant Pool Of Money. Implications
ringo
Member
Posts: 13622
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 361 of 391 (818126)
08-23-2017 4:29 PM
Reply to: Message 359 by Phat
08-23-2017 4:21 PM


Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
Phat writes:

If the wealthy own or control 90+% of everything and benefit the most from corporate profits, why not hold their feet to the fire also?


It isn't who benefits from corporate profits that matters. It's who benefits from taxes. The 90+% use the roads most, have the most children in schools, etc. Why should they be beholden to a bunch of rich bastards for those things? Why not give them the dignity of paying their own way?

Phat writes:

The alternative is to tax the middle class at higher rates so that they essentially have little more than the working class.


Your insistence on being above the working class pisses me off.

Phat writes:

Yes, some of us had it easier than others, but by excluding the responsibility of the rich to contribute you are forcing the middle class to become overburdened. Don't you see that?


No, I don't. The working class is more overburdened than the middle class.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 359 by Phat, posted 08-23-2017 4:21 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 362 by Phat, posted 08-23-2017 5:32 PM ringo has responded
 Message 363 by xongsmith, posted 08-23-2017 11:48 PM ringo has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 9739
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 362 of 391 (818127)
08-23-2017 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 361 by ringo
08-23-2017 4:29 PM


Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
Your insistence on being above the working class pisses me off.
So you would have it that there were only two classes? Rich and working?

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
"as long as chance rules, God is an anachronism."~Arthur Koestler

This message is a reply to:
 Message 361 by ringo, posted 08-23-2017 4:29 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 366 by ringo, posted 08-24-2017 11:35 AM Phat has responded

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 1800
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 4.6


(1)
Message 363 of 391 (818135)
08-23-2017 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 361 by ringo
08-23-2017 4:29 PM


Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
Somehow I missed this the first time through:

Ringo stated

It isn't who benefits from corporate profits that matters.

How he could come to that conclusion, when the 0.01% are EXACTLY the ones benefiting.

Then Phat asks:

So you would have it that there were only two classes? Rich and working?

That IS what the 0.01% want. Even of the 2% below them.

Edited by xongsmith, : river city P


- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 361 by ringo, posted 08-23-2017 4:29 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 367 by ringo, posted 08-24-2017 11:40 AM xongsmith has not yet responded

    
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11701
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 364 of 391 (818152)
08-24-2017 11:21 AM
Reply to: Message 356 by ringo
08-23-2017 3:41 PM


Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
Life isn't fair, but offering minimum wage for a menial job is.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 356 by ringo, posted 08-23-2017 3:41 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 368 by ringo, posted 08-24-2017 11:44 AM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded
 Message 373 by NoNukes, posted 08-25-2017 2:44 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11701
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 365 of 391 (818153)
08-24-2017 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 357 by Modulous
08-23-2017 3:48 PM


Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
But in English that is what force can mean.

Sure, but it can mean more than that too.

The need to pay for food, rent/mortgage, healthcare etc is pretty strong. A person might not be forced to work a particular job, but in general they are forced to work. And if all the salaries are basically the same for that job then they are forced, by this circumstance, to accept that salary or thereabouts. That circumstance is influenced heavily (but not exclusively) by large companies with their large influence on the job market.

That's business - if you're in a position where you cannot negotiate then that is your fault not your potential employer's.

But now you understand Phat was not talking about physical coercion.

I understand that you think he wasn't talking about physical coercion...

I haven't heard from him about it, he just acknowledge my reply.

We need to work together to negotiate a bigger slice of the pie using the leverage of negotiating in a bloc rather than independently. This is just as much 'just doing business' as anything the corporate world gets up to. So you are no longer 'lost' at the word 'force'?

I agree with you, but I don't know what Phat meant - so I'm still lost on him.

Also, I wouldn't use the word force in that context, so no, I'm not really on board with the semantics. With the principle, sure, do what you gotta do.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 357 by Modulous, posted 08-23-2017 3:48 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 370 by Modulous, posted 08-24-2017 4:55 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13622
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 366 of 391 (818154)
08-24-2017 11:35 AM
Reply to: Message 362 by Phat
08-23-2017 5:32 PM


Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
Phat writes:

So you would have it that there were only two classes? Rich and working?


How do you distinguish yourself from the working class?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 362 by Phat, posted 08-23-2017 5:32 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 369 by Phat, posted 08-24-2017 4:22 PM ringo has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13622
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 367 of 391 (818155)
08-24-2017 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 363 by xongsmith
08-23-2017 11:48 PM


Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
xongsmith writes:

How he could come to that conclusion, when the 0.01% are EXACTLY the ones benefiting.


But they're not.

You should have read the whole post: It's who benefits from the taxes that matters. Who drives on the roads? Or rides buses on the roads or bicyles on the roads or walks on the roads? Who sends their children to the schools? Who uses the libraries? Who uses the sewers?

Edited by ringo, : Removed superfluous words and words.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 363 by xongsmith, posted 08-23-2017 11:48 PM xongsmith has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13622
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 368 of 391 (818156)
08-24-2017 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 364 by New Cat's Eye
08-24-2017 11:21 AM


Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
New Cat's Eye writes:

Life isn't fair, but offering minimum wage for a menial job is.


But minimum wages aren't just for "menial" jobs. They're for wherever the employer can get away with exploiting his workers. And they bring all wages down.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 364 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-24-2017 11:21 AM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 9739
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 369 of 391 (818180)
08-24-2017 4:22 PM
Reply to: Message 366 by ringo
08-24-2017 11:35 AM


Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
  • I have no debt
  • I have a savings account
  • I make more than I need to live on

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    "as long as chance rules, God is an anachronism."~Arthur Koestler

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 366 by ringo, posted 08-24-2017 11:35 AM ringo has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 371 by ringo, posted 08-25-2017 11:41 AM Phat has responded

      
  • Modulous
    Member
    Posts: 7429
    From: Manchester, UK
    Joined: 05-01-2005
    Member Rating: 4.0


    (1)
    Message 370 of 391 (818186)
    08-24-2017 4:55 PM
    Reply to: Message 365 by New Cat's Eye
    08-24-2017 11:32 AM


    Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
    Sure, but it can mean more than that too.

    Well that's English for you. Fortunately the context of a word is helpful in understanding its usage. I haven't heard Phat incite violence before, and given he was talking about unionising, it seems pretty clear what it meant in its context.

    That's business - if you're in a position where you cannot negotiate then that is your fault not your potential employer's.

    It's the fault of neither, it's just the nature of the system.

    I understand that you think he wasn't talking about physical coercion...

    I haven't heard from him about it, he just acknowledge my reply.

    Well he 'Cheered' my post, seems like endorsement that I had the correct interpretation of his words to me. My interpretation was consistent with his character, and his other comments on this subject. I think I have a good case that he was using the word 'force' just like most other English speakers do all the time.

    Also, I wouldn't use the word force in that context, so no, I'm not really on board with the semantics.

    When communicating with English speakers you still need to anticipate that they may use words differently than you. Besides which:

    quote:
    And being forced to face shutting your business down or else having to do something as benign as baking a cake (that you're going to get paid for), isn't as bad as telling someone that you won't sell them that cake because they belong to a protected class.

    Message 569

    quote:
    By maybe-believing? Nah, you're just trying to force your usage again.

    Message 447

    quote:
    It's like if we were coworkers and every time we had a minor disagreement about something you ran to the boss to get them to implement a decision so you could force me to comply with your way.

    Message 346

    quote:
    I'm not saying that the public options shouldn't exist, I just don't like being demonized for having the opinion of not wanting to be forced into them.

    Message 37

    quote:
    The women who say they want to perpetuate it have been coerced by the patriarchal societies that they are forced to live with.


    Message 757

    quote:
    You can be forced to overcome your addiction without changing your mind.

    quote:
    if I'm forced to make a decision and the best means available aren't enough for me to consider my thoughts critically, then I don't call that critical thinking even if the best I can do at the time.

    Message 218

    But either way - I think the most natural and obvious reading of Phat is one of talking about making someone do something against their will using peaceful means such as cooperating with one another and selective witholding of labour. Phat's 'cheer' seems to concur. English seems to be on my side. As do some of your own previous posts.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 365 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-24-2017 11:32 AM New Cat's Eye has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 374 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-25-2017 3:41 PM Modulous has responded

        
    ringo
    Member
    Posts: 13622
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005
    Member Rating: 2.4


    Message 371 of 391 (818247)
    08-25-2017 11:41 AM
    Reply to: Message 369 by Phat
    08-24-2017 4:22 PM


    Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
    Phat writes:

    I have no debt
    I have a savings account
    I make more than I need to live on


    And why is that? Do you work harder than the non-union cashier at the supermarket down the street?
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 369 by Phat, posted 08-24-2017 4:22 PM Phat has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 372 by Phat, posted 08-25-2017 2:19 PM ringo has responded

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 9739
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.6


    Message 372 of 391 (818254)
    08-25-2017 2:19 PM
    Reply to: Message 371 by ringo
    08-25-2017 11:41 AM


    Union 101
    And why is that?
    Because I belong to a union, thank God!

    Do you work harder than the non-union cashier at the supermarket down the street?
    Not necessarily. What difference does it make? We would invite them to join the union also, except that their employer tries to actively prevent us from talking with them about it.

    If all of the cashiers were in the union, it would be the same as the working class uniting with the middle class, which is apparently what you hope to achieve.

    Without a union, the employers simply continue to hire more help at cheap-as-possible rates and fire them rather than promote them excepting the few who become managers.

    We have discussed unionism before. Our last contract was, in fact, one of the top grocery contracts negotiated in the entire country. We helped bring the bottom closer to the top wage bracket. The only sad and telling thing was that few of the workers even bothered to vote.

    Today's generation only looks to the paycheck at the moment rather than planning long term for their livelihood and health care, it seems.


    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    "as long as chance rules, God is an anachronism."~Arthur Koestler

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 371 by ringo, posted 08-25-2017 11:41 AM ringo has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 385 by ringo, posted 08-26-2017 11:38 AM Phat has responded

      
    NoNukes
    Member
    Posts: 9912
    From: Central NC USA
    Joined: 08-13-2010
    Member Rating: 3.3


    Message 373 of 391 (818255)
    08-25-2017 2:44 PM
    Reply to: Message 364 by New Cat's Eye
    08-24-2017 11:21 AM


    Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
    but offering minimum wage for a menial job is.

    Now on this, I can agree. Offering minimum wage for any job is fair.
    It is also fair for the labor market to organize and to negotiate a higher wage.

    But the combination of minimum wages, and "right to work" laws that deny the ability for workers to negotiate is an unfair combination. It is particularly so when society has to pick up the difference by offering things like SNAP to employees.

    Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


    Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

    I was thinking as long as I have my hands up theyre not going to shoot me. This is what Im thinking theyre not going to shoot me. Wow, was I wrong. -- Charles Kinsey

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson

    Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

    I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 364 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-24-2017 11:21 AM New Cat's Eye has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 376 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-25-2017 7:06 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

        
    New Cat's Eye
    Member
    Posts: 11701
    From: near St. Louis
    Joined: 01-27-2005
    Member Rating: 2.4


    Message 374 of 391 (818257)
    08-25-2017 3:41 PM
    Reply to: Message 370 by Modulous
    08-24-2017 4:55 PM


    Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
    Holy shit, you dug up posts of mine from over three years ago?

    Wait a minute... Did you query the database directly or something? Select all messages submitted by me that contain the word force?
    Or did you find that through Google?

    'Cause if you're using database administrator privileges to try to score debate points against me then I'm going to stop replying to you.

    Well that's English for you. Fortunately the context of a word is helpful in understanding its usage.

    Sure, this context is workers forcing their employers to share wealth.

    I haven't heard Phat incite violence before, and given he was talking about unionising, it seems pretty clear what it meant in its context.

    I never thought that Phat meant inciting violence, but his meaning isn't that clear to me.

    It's the fault of neither,

    Cool, fault is a strong word - I meant that it is "more your fault than there's"; not in the sense that you alone are solely culpable, but in the sense that the onus is on you to establish your position in a negotiation and not your employer's.

    it's just the nature of the system.

    Okay.

    Well he 'Cheered' my post, seems like endorsement that I had the correct interpretation of his words to me.

    Oh, I hadn't seen that. I can accept that you've accurately reflected Phat's meaning.

    I think I have a good case that he was using the word 'force' just like most other English speakers do all the time.

    Mostly? It totally depends on the context...

    When communicating with English speakers you still need to anticipate that they may use words differently than you.

    I get that we need to be speaking the same language, but I don't have to use a word in a way that I don't want to.

    In that sense, if you want to talk about forcing the employers, then no I'm not on board.

    Besides which:

    So first off, that was weird - digging up old shit like that.

    Secondly, I do try to be consistent within a thread, but not so much across threads.
    And I am capable of changing my mind, so I wouldn't expect consistency over time on the order of years.

    Now, context is important, and I'm gonna address this, but before I do:

    When I talk about force, I look at it in the sense of consent. If it is consensual, then I prolly won't have a problem with it. If it isn't, then I prolly will. It's about people having to go against their will, not having a choice in the matter, it being involuntary, when it starts becoming more like coercion than convincing - that's when I don't like it.

    Sure, the word can be used to describe consensual and voluntary actions - I just prefer not to use it that way.

    So:

    quote:
    And being forced to face shutting your business down or else having to do something as benign as baking a cake (that you're going to get paid for), isn't as bad as telling someone that you won't sell them that cake because they belong to a protected class.

    Message 569

    The broader context is this:

    quote:
    You mentioned opposing "forcing businesses to serve gay people" as being a vileness, but honestly I think that point is more moot than mine.

    Obviously, nobody is going to force people to bake cakes. And being forced to face shutting your business down or else having to do something as benign as baking a cake (that you're going to get paid for), isn't as bad as telling someone that you won't sell them that cake because they belong to a protected class.


    Forced, as in "against their will", to choose between X and Y. This is consistent with my current usage.

    Further context:

    quote:
    And even if they do have to stop participating and not have their doors open to everyone, because they can't serve the gays, then they're still not actually forced into shutting down their business, because they can still go the members-only route.

    Opening up your doors to everyone doesn't mean that the people can't try to make your business unsuccessful. If you're being a dick then I get to cuss you out loudly on my way out the door.

    I agree that going the legal route to shut the business down is pussy way to go about it, though. But I see where they're coming from.


    Going the legal route of making these business serve people against their will, that is, forcing them to do it is worse than talking to them about it in person and persuading them that they should serve the people willingly, that is, convincing them to do it.

    Now, you could say that convincing them forced them to do it - but that is just not how I want to use that word because I think the distinction is important.

    quote:
    By maybe-believing? Nah, you're just trying to force your usage again.

    Message 447

    The broader context of that, including from previous messages is:

    As I've said, belief in god is binary.

    I don't agree with that. You can maybe-believe or kinda-believe...

    Then you'd be a theist.

    By maybe-believing? Nah, you're just trying to force your usage again.

    In that context, the other person was trying to prevent me, against my will, from use the phrase "belief in god" as something other than being binary. So yeah, force.

    quote:
    It's like if we were coworkers and every time we had a minor disagreement about something you ran to the boss to get them to implement a decision so you could force me to comply with your way.

    Message 346

    That broader context:

    Well, it is a bit hyperbolic, but I don't think that it's completely inapt. And its the approach, or the mentality, that I am calling totalitarian - not the laws.

    It's like if we were coworkers and every time we had a minor disagreement about something you ran to the boss to get them to implement a decision so you could force me to comply with your way.

    It's that approach of running to and using an authority to force your dissenters into compliance rather than working with them and coming to an agreement that I find distasteful.

    Again, I'm against making somebody do something against their will instead of persuading them to want to do it.

    quote:
    I'm not saying that the public options shouldn't exist, I just don't like being demonized for having the opinion of not wanting to be forced into them.

    Message 37

    From that same message:

    quote:
    I suspect you folks on the left realize that you can't really win the hearts and minds of those with different opinions than yours', so you're so big on public enterprises because know that the only way to get them on board is by force through government. I consider that immoral.

    Again, I'm arguing against making poeple do something against their will instead of convincing them to do it willingly.

    quote:
    The women who say they want to perpetuate it have been coerced by the patriarchal societies that they are forced to live with.


    Message 757

    Okay, that one I did use the word more loosely - not typical of me tho.

    quote:
    You can be forced to overcome your addiction without changing your mind.

    No link to context, not sure - I was prolly thinking something along the lines of loosing access to the substance, which would force you against your will to quit.

    quote:
    if I'm forced to make a decision and the best means available aren't enough for me to consider my thoughts critically, then I don't call that critical thinking even if the best I can do at the time.

    Message 218

    Context:

    The example we are given is the fork in the road where we have to decide whether to take the one with the bridge or otherwise. We are forced to think critically.

    The difference between us seems to me to be that:

    For you, if you're forced to make a decision and you're using the best means available, then you're considering that critical thinking.

    For me, if I'm forced to make a decision and the best means available aren't enough for me to consider my thoughts critically, then I don't call that critical thinking even if the best I can do at the time.

    In the hypothetical situation, you are literally forced against your will to make a decision - that is consistent with my usage not yours.

    But either way - I think the most natural and obvious reading of Phat is one of talking about making someone do something against their will using peaceful means such as cooperating with one another and selective witholding of labour.

    That's fine - as I said: If you're "forcing" people by negotiating, then to me that's just doing business. It's when you start getting into coercion that I start having a problem with it.

    So regarding "We need to force these corporations to share more of the wealth!", no, I'm still not on board. I think it would be better to persuade them to willingly share the wealth over forcing them to do it.

    Phat's 'cheer' seems to concur.

    That's the most convincing evidence.

    English seems to be on my side. As do some of your own previous posts.

    I disagree that my previous posts are on your side. Regarding English, a wise man told me:

    quote:
    When communicating with English speakers you still need to anticipate that they may use words differently than you.

    Next time you dig up old shit from over 3 years ago I'm not gonna reply to it so if that's what you're looking for then don't waste your time.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 370 by Modulous, posted 08-24-2017 4:55 PM Modulous has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 375 by Phat, posted 08-25-2017 4:54 PM New Cat's Eye has responded
     Message 380 by Modulous, posted 08-25-2017 9:05 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 9739
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.6


    Message 375 of 391 (818260)
    08-25-2017 4:54 PM
    Reply to: Message 374 by New Cat's Eye
    08-25-2017 3:41 PM


    Re: Hollowed Out Middle Class
    NoNukes writes:

    Offering minimum wage for any job is fair.
    It is also fair for the labor market to organize and to negotiate a higher wage.

    But the combination of minimum wages, and "right to work" laws that deny the ability for workers to negotiate is an unfair combination. It is particularly so when society has to pick up the difference by offering things like SNAP to employees.

    I totally and fully agree!

    NCE writes:

    ... in the sense that the onus is on you to establish your position in a negotiation and not your employer's.

    Negotiations involve both sides. There is no onus on any one side.

    if you want to talk about forcing the employers, then no I'm not on board.
    Are you anti union, then? Because we will call a strike if necessary to protect our position. The alternative is to accept less than what we collectively determine our value to be. We prefer negotiations and voluntary compliance but will use some force(non-violent) if necessary. After all, nobody gets to tell the CEO's what to pay themselves!

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    "as long as chance rules, God is an anachronism."~Arthur Koestler

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 374 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-25-2017 3:41 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 378 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-25-2017 7:27 PM Phat has responded

      
    RewPrev1
    ...
    222324
    25
    2627Next
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017