If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(wtopnews.com)   Bond denied for man described as "biggest tax cheat in U.S. history"   (wtopnews.com) divider line 226
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

18070 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Mar 2005 at 9:30 PM (9 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



226 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2005-03-16 10:38:09 PM  
Here's my problem with taxation in America: it's not fair. How so? I believe that all people should be treated equally. $200 million in taxes on $450 million in profits? That's not the tax rate I pay! Why is it that the more you make, the higher the percentage the government takes? The whole idea of percentages is that no matter how much you make, you're paying your fair share into the pot.

Yes, I have heard the argument that the rich benefit from the goverment services more, and should therefore pay more. Ummm, with equal percentages, they would pay more!

No, I'm not rich. Yes, I realize the major funding shortfall fair taxation would cause. Perhaps it would force our government to reconsider how it spends our money.
 
2005-03-16 10:40:09 PM  
Forty-Three

Great skiing and fast skiing. Recently found a great trail out off of Goldstream by Fox...

There are a few from FAI around here. Not surprising as the internet usage is so high in AK!
 
2005-03-16 10:41:18 PM  
OwnTheRide

No, I'm not rich. Yes, I realize the major funding shortfall fair taxation would cause. Perhaps it would force our government to reconsider how it spends our money.

Want to know what would really force the government reconsider how it wastes^Wspends money? Abolish taxation and make the politicians depend on either their own money or on donations from the citizens to fund their programs. That'll remind them in a hurry that their authority comes solely from the people, and that the people have every right to tell the government to get fukked if it steps out of line.

Yes, I know it sounds cool in theory. But since this is FARK, and I'm just a blue-eyed programmer cat with a taste for sedition and petty tax evasion, that's fine with me.
 
2005-03-16 10:43:20 PM  
Did they send Irwin R. Schyster after the guy? He'd hit that low down tax cheat with the Write Off and make him pay.
 
2005-03-16 10:43:27 PM  
My hat is off to you Mr. Bond. Why isn't Gerorge W. defending him he is a rich man being taxed too much, shame on you GW.

/I pay my taxes
 
2005-03-16 10:44:15 PM  
moosen

manfred, etc

do you have to like paying taxes to live here? do i have to agree with everything government does to live here?


It's called representative democracy. Don't like the taxes? Tell your congressmen.

Let me ask you a question. Are you willing to admit that you like at least some of the government services? Then you'll be paying taxes. Don't be such a drama queen over a few dollars. I doubt if you are really paying that much anyway. In fact, perhaps you are getting more in services than you pay? For many Americans, this is true.
 
2005-03-16 10:44:30 PM  
OwnTheRide
The whole idea of percentages is that no matter how much you make, you're paying your fair share into the pot.

What do you propose? VAT? Federal sales tax?


Programmer Cat
That'll remind them in a hurry that their authority comes solely from the people, and that the people have every right to tell the government to get fukked if it steps out of line

The part I bolded is some stuff I wish I heard out of more people. Please remember that sentiment when the SCOTUS reads its decisions this summer.
 
2005-03-16 10:45:01 PM  
The_Y2P_Problem

Did they send Irwin R. Schyster after the guy? He'd hit that low down tax cheat with the Write Off and make him pay.

Aw, fukk, I remember that guy! I can't fukking believe it; I didn't even watch WWF wrestling as a kid, and I remember that guy.

/had a little brother who watched that crap and thought it was real until he was 18.
 
2005-03-16 10:49:08 PM  
So since I'm they let met choose between a giant douche and a turd sandwitch, I have to let them mug me every year and whenever I buy something?

Well, what would you propose? And what are you willing to do to implement whatever it is you propose?

I'm not trying to deny anyone the right to biatch. I'm just calling them on the lack of realistic thinking of said biatching.

No one is "mugging" you. As pointed out before, there are options. If those options do not seem attractive to you, well...why is this the country's problem?

Just to clarify: I think the Government is WAY, WAY too fast and loose with the spending. But for God sakes people, I don't believe you can sprinkle magic pixie dust on Washington and remove taxes while still keeping everything static.

Just another way I'm getting tired of the right in this country: look at me, I'm a victim, my taxes are too high. Hell, I agree that they are, but this fist shaking and chest clutching is goofy to the extreme.

BTW, The_Pole_Of_Justice: please procreate quickly as to repopulate your political affiliation with sane people again.

Heh. Sorry, but I'm leaving the country and moving to a place where people don't automatically rail against society every time something doesn't make 'em unhappy (check my profile if you're dying to know more about that.) Yep, I'm actually TAKING MATTERS INTO MY OWN HANDS.
 
2005-03-16 10:49:48 PM  
linewalker

What do you propose? VAT? Federal sales tax?

I don't know about him, but here's how I think it ought to be:

1. Citizens delegate limited authority to the city, pay X% of their income over $25,000 in taxes to the city, where X is between 1 and 9.9%.

2. The cities delegate limited authority to the state, and pass Y% of the monies they collected from the citizens upward to the state.

3. The states delegate to the federal government the authority to maintain a military defense and deal with foreign nations. The states forward to the federal government Z% of the monies they were given by the cities, which in turn received the money from the citizens.

Authority must come from the individuals, otherwise both the government and the society are unjust at their roots and doomed to eventual destruction.
 
2005-03-16 10:51:04 PM  
manfred i've already admitted that some taxing isn't just tolerable, its necessary. that's not my point.
 
2005-03-16 10:51:15 PM  
Er, that should read "doesn't make 'em happy."

/I are smart.
 
2005-03-16 10:53:46 PM  
The_Pole_Of_Justice
Heh. Sorry, but I'm leaving the country and moving to a place where people don't automatically rail against society every time something doesn't make 'em unhappy (check my profile if you're dying to know more about that.) Yep, I'm actually TAKING MATTERS INTO MY OWN HANDS.

I know, I know... but if there were more of you around I'd actually throw my hat into the elephant's ring instead of calling both sides morons. I swear it's Tweedle-Dee and Twendle-Dumb these days.


Programmer Cat
Authority must come from the individuals, otherwise both the government and the society are unjust at their roots and doomed to eventual destruction.

Interesting tax scheme, almost fedualistic in nature... more on that later. Ok: so how does The People give authority to a group aside paying taxes?
 
2005-03-16 10:56:24 PM  
I for one say ignore the ones who drank the Rand flavored Kool Aid.

Can someone name one fairly advanced society with the minimalist tax base these clowns advocate?
 
2005-03-16 10:57:49 PM  
Um Yeah
Can someone name one fairly advanced society with the minimalist tax base these clowns advocate?

Supposedly Hong Kong, but I haven't taken the time to research it... hmm, that sounds like a job for Firefox's tabbed browsing!
 
2005-03-16 10:58:17 PM  
I would propose that government should be extremely local / confederal.

We should pay taxes for local police, firemen, roads, and maybe local schools. A federal government could have use in setting standards of currency, weights and measures, but other than that I don't really see the point of a huge centralized government.


Yes, I know the Articles of Confederation didn't work, but what our federal government has become is would make the founders roll over in their graves.
 
2005-03-16 10:59:46 PM  
Churchy LaFemme

Recently found a great trail out off of Goldstream by Fox...

Hmmmm. I may have to look for that. I just found one that starts at the base of Gold Hill Rd, passes a hundred yards from my cabin and goes all the way to Ester. Makes skiing to work super easy (A moose took a crap all over my trail the other day though, somewhat delaying my commute.) I had grand plans to get a mob together and ski to the Golden Eagle, but I don't think that will materialize before breakup.

Time for me to go. Perhaps there'll be a fark ski-party someday.
 
2005-03-16 11:00:43 PM  
linewalker

I swear it's Tweedle-Dee and Twendle-Dumb these days.

I thought it was Tweedledee vs. Tweedledum back when Bush Sr. was running for reelection against Bill Clinton, but I wasn't old enough to vote in 1992.

I voted for Clinton in 1996 because Dole pissed me off with his whole "nightmares of depravity" schtick about movies.

Interesting tax scheme, almost fedualistic in nature... more on that later. Ok: so how does The People give authority to a group aside paying taxes?

Now that I think of it, I just turned the authority end of feudalism backward. Instead of the king delegating authority to the nobility, who in turn delegated it to whomever, I've got the individual people delegating authority upwards.

As for how individuals express their consent to be governed to the government: taxes are payed on election day. If you don't pay your taxes, you are not a citizen, cannot vote, and cannot run for public office. If two thirds of the people of a given city refuse to pay taxes and vote, then the people currently in charge must leave office immediately as the majority of the governed have, by their actions, withdrawn their consent.
 
2005-03-16 11:01:30 PM  
I know, I know... but if there were more of you around I'd actually throw my hat into the elephant's ring instead of calling both sides morons. I swear it's Tweedle-Dee and Twendle-Dumb these days.

Heh...yeah, I knew I was in trouble when people starting calling me "liberal." If I'm liberal, then Bill Clinton is the farking Dali Lama.

I stopped calling myself a Republican some time in 2002. Too embarrassed. My politics have not changed.

I went with the Reps because they seemed a lot more realistic and pragmatic. Then I started hearing about this "Contract with America" bullshiat, and started getting progressively more disgusted with Rush "I whine for a living" Limbaugh and his unholy spawn, and slowly realized that the Right was now every bit as childish, blinkered, and bed-wetting as the left. The only real difference is that they get their panties in more of a twist when the bill shows up.

I haven't totally given up on the Republican party (and, hopefully, you won't either,) but until the current drama queens run out of gas, I'm getting the Hell out of Dodge for the sake of my sanity.

/end long, pointless threadjack
 
2005-03-16 11:01:53 PM  
Suburban Post-Modernist
We should pay taxes for local police, firemen, roads, and maybe local schools. A federal government could have use in setting standards of currency, weights and measures, but other than that I don't really see the point of a huge centralized government.

But what would fund the federal government?

Yes, I know the Articles of Confederation didn't work, but what our federal government has become is would make the founders roll over in their graves.

The Articles of Confederation gave Congress (which was only one body, not the two we have now) the power to directly order the States to do things but not individuals, which was the reason why it failed. Version 2.0 has the states and the federal governments regulating individuals at the same time. Not apples and oranges, but different enough.
 
2005-03-16 11:03:51 PM  
Um Yeah

I for one say ignore the ones who drank the Rand flavored Kool Aid.

And I for one say that you shut up and do something useful. Start by spit-shining my boots.

Talk all you like about "Rand-flavored Kool-Aid", but considering that Rand fled Soviet Russia to come to the US and had a pretty damned good idea of just how bad things could get when the government was allowed to do whatever the fukk it liked, I'd say that Rand's ideas are worth considering instead of simply dismissing them as "Kool-Aid".
 
2005-03-16 11:06:18 PM  
Jesus H. Crispety-crunchety Christ on a fukking Harley-Davidson with a bottle of vodka in each hand and Mary Magdalene in a rhinestone-studded g-string riding pillion... I can't fukking believe that I mispelled "paid" in that post...
 
2005-03-16 11:07:06 PM  
She was also an ugly skank and more or less batshiat. I had the displeasure of actually reading some of her garbage, you?
 
2005-03-16 11:08:10 PM  
linewalker
Actually they failed because the Fed couldn't coin it's own currency, or hold up an army or do very much of anything without a 9/13 majority. But this is besides the point.

What would fund the federal government? A government that small could make the money by selling off census data to marketing companies.


In reality, and non-idealistically, I'm in favor of lowering sales/income/property taxes and raising inheritance taxes dramtically. You should only get what you earn.
 
2005-03-16 11:09:49 PM  
"I support our troops"
 
2005-03-16 11:10:25 PM  
/read Rand, only had a sip of Koolaid...

little known fact, Rand hated Libertarians more than Marxists...
 
2005-03-16 11:10:28 PM  
Programmer Cat
I voted for Clinton in 1996 because Dole pissed me off with his whole "nightmares of depravity" schtick about movies.

Don't remind me, ick...

Now that I think of it, I just turned the authority end of feudalism backward. Instead of the king delegating authority to the nobility, who in turn delegated it to whomever, I've got the individual people delegating authority upwards.

I know, it's pretty funky and I've never heard of it before. It might have legs if it was built from the ground up.

As for how individuals express their consent to be governed to the government: taxes are payed on election day. If you don't pay your taxes, you are not a citizen, cannot vote, and cannot run for public office.

Alright, what rights do you gain from citizenship aside voting and the capacity to take office?

If two thirds of the people of a given city refuse to pay taxes and vote, then the people currently in charge must leave office immediately as the majority of the governed have, by their actions, withdrawn their consent.

Not bad, instant results from the populace... but what do we do while waiting for a new government to be formed? What if the new guys don't have a clue on how to run the show? (side note: that's why the Senate elections are done on a rolling basis, that way even if all of the House and Senators up for election are replaced someone still knows how to turn on the lights)


The_Pole_Of_Justice
I haven't totally given up on the Republican party (and, hopefully, you won't either,) but until the current drama queens run out of gas, I'm getting the Hell out of Dodge for the sake of my sanity.

Well, I've never been a total Republican... I'm a real nut when it comes to individual rights so I've tended to disagree with the majority of the GOP for years in that area. It's a bit of a brightline test for me. But the Democrats aren't much better, hence I'm f'ed. Tim Penny (MN-D, 1st District 82-94) was one politician I got along with... too bad he retired after he got sick of the Hill.
 
2005-03-16 11:10:33 PM  
Um Yeah

She was also an ugly skank and more or less batshiat. I had the displeasure of actually reading some of her garbage, you?

Yes, she had a face made for radio, but she was a writer, not a fukking fashion model. Writers don't have to be prettty, though these days it probably helps. As for being more or less batshiat -- I wouldn't know, to be honest. I never met the woman; she died when I was still a kid. And yes, I've read most of her work. I started with Atlas Shrugged, dug into her non-fiction, read The Fountainhead, and then started reading Nietzsche and Aristotle.
 
2005-03-16 11:12:05 PM  
no crap taxes are high in Canada. I went up to Vancouver for the weekend, and it cost $10 for a pack of smokes, and beer was crazy expensive. Not like I would drink budweiser anyways (why would anyone with granville island brewery), but it was $22 for a 12 pack. And the exchange rate is horrible too (1.25CAD for 1USD)
 
2005-03-16 11:13:57 PM  
Programmer Cat

As for how individuals express their consent to be governed to the government: taxes are payed on election day. If you don't pay your taxes, you are not a citizen, cannot vote, and cannot run for public office. If two thirds of the people of a given city refuse to pay taxes and vote, then the people currently in charge must leave office immediately as the majority of the governed have, by their actions, withdrawn their consent.

Sounds like a system that is destined to turn to anarchy. It could work if the mindset is something along the lines of "I like this system, so I'll pay my taxes" vs "I don't like this system, so I won't pay my taxes as protest, as is my right, under the system". But, in reality, there won't just be those two mindsets, there will also be other ones that would just break the system, such as, "I like this system, but since it looks like enough others like the system as well, I will pretend to protest it so that I can get out of paying my taxes".

That will eventually, if not quickly, depending on how responsible the majority is, lead to the system failing and an attempt at forming a new system that will "work". The people who believe in the system will be baffled at how each system based on the "pay your taxes if you approve" thing will fail, even if the people, as a majority, seem to approve of it.

Because of this, there will be no stability, and lack of funds will result in a failure of the critical parts of society, including law enforcement. This will lead to anarchy, until society gets fed up with it and enforces a more "traditianal" system again.

Simply put, I don't think it could work.
 
2005-03-16 11:17:43 PM  
Programmer Cat:

So you'd have nobody paying any taxes, and everybody basically fending for themselves? Who would pay for roads, schools, airports, police etc? without this type of infrastructure creating a stable economy you would most definately not have the opportunity to be making as much money as you are now. So actually your taxes are allowing you to earn your money in the first place
 
2005-03-16 11:17:58 PM  
Suburban Post-Modernist
Actually they failed because the Fed couldn't coin it's own currency, or hold up an army or do very much of anything without a 9/13 majority. But this is besides the point.

Hamilton, Madison, Jay, Marshall, Scalia, Kennedy, and Rehnquist disagree but those guys are/were total Constitution nuts.

In reality, and non-idealistically, I'm in favor of lowering sales/income/property taxes and raising inheritance taxes dramtically. You should only get what you earn.

I'm not necessarily hot about the former, but I like the latter.
 
2005-03-16 11:18:25 PM  
Programmer Cat

So did you read her stuff?

Nothing more than wooden two dimensional characters and pathological selfishness under a thin veneer of intellectual masturbation.
 
2005-03-16 11:18:59 PM  
linewalker

Don't remind me, ick...

Sorry. I'll behave now.

I know, it's pretty funky and I've never heard of it before. It might have legs if it was built from the ground up.

I have to admit that I pulled it out of my ass while working on background shiat for that novel I've been working on. In a society where religion is considered a plague that nearly destroyed humanity and government is held in only slightly higher regard, just how do people organize themselves without settling for the State of Nature as either Hobbes or Locke envisioned it? What I posted before was a rough idea; there are still some bugs in it.

Alright, what rights do you gain from citizenship aside voting and the capacity to take office?

You don't "gain" rights by virtue of citizenship. You have the rights of self-ownership (life, liberty, property, and pursuit of happiness) by virtue of your human nature. The privileges that come with citizenship -- suffrage, opportunity to seek public office, jury duty -- are privileges that come from the responsibility to contribute to the government onto which you've delegated the authority to defend your rights by force. If you ignore your responsibility and opt for the state of nature, then you don't get to participate in civil government.

Not bad, instant results from the populace... but what do we do while waiting for a new government to be formed? What if the new guys don't have a clue on how to run the show? (side note: that's why the Senate elections are done on a rolling basis, that way even if all of the House and Senators up for election are replaced someone still knows how to turn on the lights)

Fill the positions by lottery. Anybody who has held citizenship in the past may be "drafted" to help keep the system running until special elections can be arranged. Of course, this depends on a greater knowledge of civics than is expected of people today when they finish their schooling, so it's not a system that can just be dropped in as a replacement for the mess we're dealing with now.
 
2005-03-16 11:21:04 PM  
Ah, I was looking for a word in my last post, but couldn't remember it (one of those "on the tip of your tongue" things).

A more eloquent way of putting the first sentence of my 2nd last paragraph:

Because of this, there will be no stability, and lack of funds will cause the infrastructure to fail.

/learning things would be better if you could remember it all, when you needed it... blek
 
2005-03-16 11:24:00 PM  
Um Yeah

So did you read her stuff?

Idiot child, did I not say that I read Atlas Shrugged, The Fountainhead, and her non-fiction? If you're not going to pay attention, then at least polish my steel-toed motorcycle boots so they'll be nice and shiny for spring.

Nothing more than wooden two dimensional characters and pathological selfishness under a thin veneer of intellectual masturbation.

So, insisting on the right to personal sovereignty while accepting the responsibility to treat others as sovereigns and interact by trade instead of force is "pathological selfishness"? Go waste somebody else's time, troll. I'm tired of feeding you, and if you're an American then you probably need a diet anyway.

/still a bit stocky himself, but has only 30 pounds left to lose.
 
2005-03-16 11:27:29 PM  
Orlphar, if asked to choose between an intrusive government that exceeds its constitutional bounds (and allows some people to vote themselves publicly-funded bread and circuses) and anarchy, then I would choose anarchy. Given a third choice, however, I would choose neither intrusive government nor anarchy, but reform meant to strip the government of authority that, according to the Constitution and the opinions of the Framers, the government shouldn't have had in the first place.

Personally, I agree with the Discordians: the imposition of order only leads to an escalation of chaos.
 
2005-03-16 11:29:55 PM  
Programmer Cat
What I posted before was a rough idea; there are still some bugs in it.

Check out some econ or polysci professors online. Shoot them an e-mail and they might be amendable to hammering out the idea; wouldn't hurt to do some research, eh?

You have the rights of self-ownership (life, liberty, property, and pursuit of happiness) by virtue of your human nature.

Are there any public services? If so, are they available to everyone or only citizens?

Fill the positions by lottery. Anybody who has held citizenship in the past may be "drafted" to help keep the system running until special elections can be arranged.

Well, what happens when the lottery produces a leadership surprising similar to the rejected leadership? How about when the leadership won't give up its power? (and yes, our education system currently sucks)
 
2005-03-16 11:31:25 PM  
Well you said you started on them, then you display no actual evidence of having read said crap.

If you want to define

A government is the most dangerous threat to man's rights: it holds a legal monopoly on the use of physical force against legally disarmed victims.

As standing up for being individuals then fine, you are just as ignorant and blind as her.

You actually want to go back when exactly?

The gilded age? Wild West? A Feudal system?

And she actually tries to define altruism as some kind of character flaw.

I cant wait for you to send out copies of your book, only for them to be spat and returned to sender.
 
2005-03-16 11:33:07 PM  
Capitalist1:

It is impossible to "cheat" the government of taxes. Taxes are
levied at the point of a gun, like a mugging except without recourse to the police because the police are helping the muggers.


Shhh, hush now with that freedom talk-
You will get alot farther on Fark repeating the old faithful Socialist Statist slogans taught in government schools.
For example see below:

No, they're part of the social contract. Don't want to pay taxes, don't live or transact business in this country.

rrlaw2004 [TotalFark]

Thank you kronicfeld. You beat me to it. If you dont like the system, nothing requires that you remain in it. You are more than welcome to try the more socialist approach of our neighbors to the north and across the atlantic.


Yeah I love you gays "social contract": surender upyour propety to the theive-- um, government, or they kill you!
Some contract
 
2005-03-16 11:33:15 PM  
I think my libertarian-leaning uncle put it best:

"Paying taxes is like getting a prostate exam. Yeah, we all know it's a good thing, and that we have to do it to avoid bad things... but if you expect a smile and a thank you afterwards you have another thing coming."
 
2005-03-16 11:36:16 PM  
CanSomeonePleaseKilltheChristmasShoes
You will get alot farther on Fark repeating the old faithful Socialist Statist slogans taught in government schools.

*sigh* Note my references above to our patriotic and most certainly American Founding Fathers. Apparently you hate their philosophy. Why do you hate America?

so that's what it feels like to appeal to emotion
 
2005-03-16 11:37:38 PM  
linewalker

Well, what happens when the lottery produces a leadership surprising similar to the rejected leadership? How about when the leadership won't give up its power? (and yes, our education system currently sucks)

Well, in the society I'm using as my setting, killing a politician who abuses his power isn't considered murder but justifiable homicide. That society also has a fourth branch of government that exists solely to keep the other three in line.
 
2005-03-16 11:39:17 PM  
Um Yeah

I cant wait for you to send out copies of your book, only for them to be spat and returned to sender.

Well, I wasn't planning to send you a free copy. If I ever get good enough to publish, you can damned well buy a copy.
 
2005-03-16 11:39:28 PM  
Programmer Cat
Who watches the watchmen?
 
2005-03-16 11:40:06 PM  
Programmer Cat
That society also has a fourth branch of government that exists solely to keep the other three in line.

The People?
 
2005-03-16 11:41:24 PM  
Programmer Cat

I agree that an anarchy-based system doesn't imply a bad one, and can even be better than the current system. But, it can also be a lot worse. It all depends on the people. If, somehow, an anarchaic system could be maintained while also keeping crime low, then I'd be willing to try it, at least, and if I like it, I'd be willing to support it.

But, most likely, just judging from the crime rate without anarchy, you'd be trading one bad thing, an over powerful government that makes rules and decisions that it shouldn't and takes your money to enforce the rules and carry out the decisions, for many bad things. People would be able to take your money and make decisions about you without your consent, and it would be up to you to protect yourself. It would be like gang warfare on a national level, because most people would help out their friends and family, if they needed it, and disputes would be one group against another.

The current system is not the best, and I'll even say that it's getting worse in the US. But I definately think that it's a long shot away from being the worst, even with Bush leading it.
 
2005-03-16 11:42:14 PM  
PC, ill wait for it to get remaindered and use it as toliet tissue.



As for the rest,those pining for the pre civil war America. screw em.
Let them go the Timothy McVeigh and Unabomber route.
 
2005-03-16 11:42:34 PM  
Suburban Post-Modernist

Heh, very astute.

quis custodiet ipsos custodes
 
2005-03-16 11:43:07 PM  
linewalker

The People?

Aside from the people, I meant. Explaining a science-fantasy setting is too much of a threadjack, and since it's twenty minutes to midnight where I am, I'm going to sign off. If you're interested, find my public email address and I'll tell you more.
 
Displayed 50 of 226 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report