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.

(Huffington Post)   Dept. of Education discovers that Sallie Mae is filled with such chaos and failure that they're afraid if they actually levied a fine against them it would create a void in the universe that you could drive all the jobless grads through   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 63
    More: Interesting, Department of Education, Sallie Mae, no fines, National Consumer Law Center, debt forgiveness, federal student loans, wage earners, Education Secretary Arne Duncan  
•       •       •

1457 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Dec 2013 at 8:51 AM (30 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



63 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-12 08:54:49 AM
Abolish Sallie Mae and let education become affordable again.
 
2013-12-12 09:02:58 AM

BMFPitt: Abolish Sallie Mae and let education become affordable again.


Affordable for the rich, you mean.
 
2013-12-12 09:14:28 AM

StoPPeRmobile: BMFPitt: Abolish Sallie Mae and let education become affordable again.

Affordable for the rich, you mean.


It already is affordable for the rich. I want loan subsides to stop driving costs through the roof for people whose parents can't just pay out of pocket.
 
2013-12-12 09:16:44 AM

BMFPitt: Abolish Sallie Mae and let education become affordable again.


Then stop paying ITT Tech and Hollywood Upstairs Internet College?
 
2013-12-12 09:28:48 AM
farking sickening.  The mass collusion to fleece an uninformed nation (I mean seriously, let's cut education for decades and see what happens!) is only going to further kill our overall economy.  My generation was told "you have to go to college to get a job," so we did and now there's no jobs because the Baby Boomers only give a shiat about short-term acquisition of cash.  Where is the money going to come from in our consumer-based economy?  Cause the rich are farking hoarding it all, and laughing as they blame us for the issues.  Can't wait for more of these scumbags to die off, hopefully a diet of caviar, champagne, and orphan souls increases the risk of heart attack.
 
2013-12-12 09:29:12 AM

mutterfark: BMFPitt: Abolish Sallie Mae and let education become affordable again.

Then stop paying ITT Tech and Hollywood Upstairs Internet College?


Are you saying that you think I didn't say that?

Are you saying that you think the same laws of economics that apply to them don't apply to other schools?
 
2013-12-12 10:17:57 AM
Shiat.....

You know, I used to have my loans through Direct Loans but they gave them to SM.  I had no choice in that matter.  I'm on an Income Based plan with them now and I haven't had any issues.  Hope it stays that way.
 
2013-12-12 10:24:38 AM

BMFPitt: mutterfark: BMFPitt: Abolish Sallie Mae and let education become affordable again.

Then stop paying ITT Tech and Hollywood Upstairs Internet College?

Are you saying that you think I didn't say that?

Are you saying that you think the same laws of economics that apply to them don't apply to other schools?


Honestly wasn't sure, but my post fails as a joke or an argument.
I don't think that sallie mae alone is responsible for the rise in tuitions. I also fail to see how simply abolishing the program solves anything. Politics hates a vacuum as much as nature does.
 
2013-12-12 10:45:28 AM

ckccfa: My generation was told "you have to go to college to get a job," so we did and now there's no jobs


Now that you've had a college education, you should understand that in order to get a well paying, middle class job it's necessary, but not sufficient, to go to college.
 
2013-12-12 10:50:23 AM
No lie, I'm on the phone on hold with fedloans and I'm getting a kick out of these replies.
 
2013-12-12 11:10:39 AM

BMFPitt: I want loan subsides to stop driving costs through the roof


[citation needed]
 
2013-12-12 11:15:04 AM

mutterfark: I don't think that sallie mae alone is responsible for the rise in tuitions. I also fail to see how simply abolishing the program solves anything. Politics hates a vacuum as much as nature does.


Sallie Mae as shorthand for all the federal loan programs, is responsible for the vast majority of educational inflation.

And of course, if the politicians abolished it just to replace it with something similar, that won't do anything.

The real question is how to wean off of federal loans.  Maybe start by requiring private lenders to make 10% of any federal loan, and jack that up by 10% per year until we're out of the business.  Gives schools time to figure out how to make themselves a better value.
 
2013-12-12 11:21:09 AM

BMFPitt: StoPPeRmobile: BMFPitt: Abolish Sallie Mae and let education become affordable again.

Affordable for the rich, you mean.

It already is affordable for the rich. I want loan subsides to stop driving costs through the roof for people whose parents can't just pay out of pocket.


And people who can't pay out of pocket will just trade chickens and unicorn farts for education.

You should be given the Nobel Memorial Prize for common sense thinking.
 
2013-12-12 11:27:03 AM

impaler: BMFPitt: I want loan subsides to stop driving costs through the roof

[citation needed]


Notsureifserious.jpg
 
2013-12-12 11:27:24 AM

BMFPitt: Sallie Mae as shorthand for all the federal loan programs, is responsible for the vast majority of educational inflation.


The reason there is high demand for college education, is because you can't get a job without it.

Making loans more expensive won't make college cheaper, it will make it more expensive.

innovationandgrowth.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-12-12 11:36:31 AM

impaler: BMFPitt: Sallie Mae as shorthand for all the federal loan programs, is responsible for the vast majority of educational inflation.

The reason there is high demand for college education, is because you can't get a job without it.

Making loans more expensive won't make college cheaper, it will make it more expensive.


The free availability of loans available has served to subsidize the artificial inflation college tuition been able to maintain.

Sort of like health care. There needs to be some sort of cost control that occurs if the government is going to be involved.
 
2013-12-12 11:37:34 AM

Bazzlex001: There needs to be some sort of cost control that occurs if the government is going to be involved.


There is cost control - it's called "paying for your loan." It isn't free money.

If we were talking grants you would have a point, but we aren't, and you don't.
 
2013-12-12 11:42:40 AM

BMFPitt: StoPPeRmobile: BMFPitt: Abolish Sallie Mae and let education become affordable again.

Affordable for the rich, you mean.

It already is affordable for the rich. I want loan subsides to stop driving costs through the roof for people whose parents can't just pay out of pocket.


Abolishing loans won't keep prices from rising, and it definitely won't help poorer people pay for college.  Or are you just going on about government loans, and not private ones?  Because I can't even think of a good argument in favor of private loans.
 
2013-12-12 11:54:26 AM

impaler: Bazzlex001: There needs to be some sort of cost control that occurs if the government is going to be involved.

There is cost control - it's called "paying for your loan." It isn't free money.

If we were talking grants you would have a point, but we aren't, and you don't.


Hmmm. Grants subsidize tuition rates. Loans subsidize grants at least to the extent of what they don't pay in tuition and fees (a significant portion).

Clearly there's something I am missing about how repaying a loan forces colleges to not artificially inflate tuition rates. Please enlighten me, taking into account the rate of inflation for the last thirty years and how our tuition rates compare to other first world countries.
 
2013-12-12 12:02:06 PM

Bazzlex001: Clearly there's something I am missing about how repaying a loan forces colleges to not artificially inflate tuition rates


Because if a college degree is inflated above it's value, no one would pay for them. Loans are means of paying for them.
 
2013-12-12 12:07:58 PM

impaler: Bazzlex001: Clearly there's something I am missing about how repaying a loan forces colleges to not artificially inflate tuition rates

Because if a college degree is inflated above it's value, no one would pay for them. Loans are means of paying for them.


Hahaha. You could have legitimately kept that up for longer. If you're not a troll, you must be one of those Fark Independents I have heard so much about.

Do me a favor. Google the housing bubble and let me know how your argument that people don't buy things that are above their value works out. Then let me know what happened to housing prices once the bubble burst and loans were no longer made available to everyone to subsidize the artificially inflated prices of homes across the country.
 
2013-12-12 12:16:31 PM

Bazzlex001: Google the housing bubble and let me know how your argument that people don't buy things that are above their value works out.


Why did people take out loans they couldn't afford? Because they thought "house prices always go up." Which was stupid and unsustainable.

The bubble burst preceded the "loans no longer available."

Now if people are using liar loans, or sub-prime loans for higher education, or are extending their debt with a 'high education equity loan" (not a real thing, but would have to be for a valid comparison) and have bundled those bad loans into "education loan backed securities" (again, not a real thing) that were errouniously stamped with a AAA rating, you might have a point, but that's not happening, and you don't.
 
2013-12-12 12:25:02 PM

impaler: Bazzlex001: Google the housing bubble and let me know how your argument that people don't buy things that are above their value works out.

Why did people take out loans they couldn't afford? Because they thought "house prices always go up." Which was stupid and unsustainable.

The bubble burst preceded the "loans no longer available."

Now if people are using liar loans, or sub-prime loans for higher education, or are extending their debt with a 'high education equity loan" (not a real thing, but would have to be for a valid comparison) and have bundled those bad loans into "education loan backed securities" (again, not a real thing) that were errouniously stamped with a AAA rating, you might have a point, but that's not happening, and you don't.


To the first two, that's my point.

To the final and almost completely erroneous point, student loans are made available, in similar quantities, to people who were only qualified for sub-prime loans prior to the housing crisis. So we are extending loans (which are at this point a bad investment because there are no cost controls on tuition rates. The money should be getting more bang for its buck) to people who are not qualified for them in the HOPE that they someday will be. Yeah. That's going to work out just dandy, let me tell you.

In summary. Loans and grants are overwhelmingly good things. But for them to exist the government needs to price negotiate with public institutions, otherwise as more money becomes available tuition rates go up. And as tuition rates go up, a larger portion of the money available comes in the form of loans that have no guarantee of being paid back because the returns on the certificate they are paying for are diminished.
 
2013-12-12 12:40:01 PM

impaler:[citation needed]

Well how about any ECON 101 book.  Or if books are too hard, here:
http://www.openmarket.org/2012/04/30/student-loans-drive-up-tuition- cr eate-demographic-time-bomb-and-higher-education-bubble/

impaler: The reason there is high demand for college education, is because you can't get a job without it.


Yet there is huge demand for education that can't get you a job.

Making loans more expensive won't make college cheaper, it will make it more expensive.

Making loans more expensive or harder to get for degrees that don't result in good jobs is a feature, not a bug.

austerity101: Abolishing loans won't keep prices from rising, and it definitely won't help poorer people pay for college.  Or are you just going on about government loans, and not private ones?  Because I can't even think of a good argument in favor of private loans.


Why would you want to outlaw private loans?  I mean aside from your economic illiteracy.

impaler: Now if people are using liar loans, or sub-prime loans for higher education


Actually a significant portion of college loans are just as bad as a 2007 Las Vegas subprime mortgage.

,and have bundled those bad loans into "education loan backed securities" (again, not a real thing) that were errouniously stamped with a AAA rating, you might have a point, but that's not happening, and you don't.

You know how I know you don't understand what Sallie Mae is?
 
2013-12-12 12:43:41 PM
Thanks BMF. My troll-fighting club was growing low in durability from overuse.
 
2013-12-12 12:44:44 PM

BMFPitt: You know how I know you don't understand what Sallie Mae is?


Sallie Mae issues securities?
 
2013-12-12 12:51:03 PM

BMFPitt: impaler:[citation needed]

Well how about any ECON 101 book.


Yeah, supply and demand.

The need for a college education to get a good job is increasing, so there is increasing demand for a college education. Saying loans are the cause of increased demand needs some qualifier (i.e. citation). None is given.
 
2013-12-12 12:56:37 PM
Allow student loans to be forgiven in bankruptcy again and fine the college in question the remaining amount on the loan. Things will straighten themselves out pretty quickly after that.
 
2013-12-12 12:59:41 PM

raerae1980: Shiat.....

You know, I used to have my loans through Direct Loans but they gave them to SM.  I had no choice in that matter.  I'm on an Income Based plan with them now and I haven't had any issues.  Hope it stays that way.


They didn't give them to Sallie Mae, they let Sallie Mae's collections department- which is soon to be a separate legal entity- service them.

You still have Federal Direct Loans. In fact, the only way you could be on an income based plan is if 100% of your loans were Direct Loans.
 
2013-12-12 01:03:32 PM

themindiswatching: Allow student loans to be forgiven in bankruptcy again and fine the college in question the remaining amount on the loan. Things will straighten themselves out pretty quickly after that.


I'm not sure why you'd have to fine the college because Sallie Mae let a student borrow $25,000 a year in living expenses.
 
2013-12-12 01:06:37 PM

impaler:Sallie Mae issues securities?

https://www.salliemae.com/about/investors/debtasset/slmsltrusts/

But even without those, federally guaranteed loans function the same way, without even the pretense of quality.

impaler: The need for a college education to get a good job is increasing, so there is increasing demand for a college education.


Supply is increasing to meet demand.  Prices are increasing because lots of cheap money is available.

If mortgage rates went to 1%, or to 6% tomorrow, what do you think would happen?

Saying loans are the cause of increased demand needs some qualifier (i.e. citation). None is given.

No, seriously, you should read up on basic economics.  The idea that subsidies and cheap loans drive up prices is as controversial as the theory of gravity.
 
2013-12-12 01:16:39 PM

mutterfark: BMFPitt: Abolish Sallie Mae and let education become affordable again.

Then stop paying ITT Tech and Hollywood Upstairs Internet College?


Any schools accepting federal loans should be barred from any form of advertisement. Simple as that.
 
2013-12-12 01:17:30 PM

BMFPitt: impaler:Sallie Mae issues securities?

https://www.salliemae.com/about/investors/debtasset/slmsltrusts/


Oh. Well that is a real thing then.


BMFPitt: Prices are increasing because lots of cheap money is available.


That money has been available for decades. Saying it is THE cause of the education cost increase, while completely ignoring how the need for a college education keeps increasing over that time, is wrong-headed.
 
2013-12-12 01:18:29 PM
BMFPitt:
No, seriously, you should read up on basic economics.  The idea that subsidies and cheap loans drive up prices is as controversial as the theory of gravity.

You shut your mouth, sir. Sh** stays on the ground because Jesus wants it on the ground!
 
2013-12-12 01:28:38 PM

impaler: BMFPitt: I want loan subsides to stop driving costs through the roof

[citation needed]


Not really a citation, but here's what happened to housing prices when everyone dumped free money in because they could just turn around and sell them as "AAA" to some sucker.

I see no reason why guaranteeing the returns would fail to do something similar in the college market.  (Not an economist)

www.ritholtz.com
 
2013-12-12 01:28:43 PM

what_now: themindiswatching: Allow student loans to be forgiven in bankruptcy again and fine the college in question the remaining amount on the loan. Things will straighten themselves out pretty quickly after that.

I'm not sure why you'd have to fine the college because Sallie Mae let a student borrow $25,000 a year in living expenses.


To discourage shiat like degree mills, mainly.
 
2013-12-12 01:32:18 PM

meyerkev: I see no reason why guaranteeing the returns would fail to do something similar in the college market.


Bubbles form from speculation. Unlike "things," degrees are non-transferable. You can't speculate it will increase in value and sell it to someone else for a profit.
 
2013-12-12 01:33:29 PM
they're afraid if they actually levied a fine against them it would create a void in the universe that you could drive all the jobless grads through

There's always Double Secret Probation.
 
2013-12-12 01:34:00 PM

impaler: BMFPitt: impaler:Sallie Mae issues securities?

https://www.salliemae.com/about/investors/debtasset/slmsltrusts/

Oh. Well that is a real thing then.


BMFPitt: Prices are increasing because lots of cheap money is available.

That money has been available for decades. Saying it is THE cause of the education cost increase, while completely ignoring how the need for a college education keeps increasing over that time, is wrong-headed.


I would think that demand for a college education increased (probably especially after the economic recession in the late 70s and early 80s).  Increased demand caused prices to increase.  Easy access to loans probably helped facilitate that process.  But it almost doesn't matter.  You almost need a college education just to get by.  Imagine if everyone needed to run a 8.00 40-yard-dash to be even moderately successful.  Most of us could do that, right?  Now imagine if that changed to a 4.50?  Now, normally very few of us could do that, but suppose you were able to buy a head-start to help decrease your time.  With a requirement of 8.00, demand would be low, keeping costs down.  But with a 4.50 requirement, demand would skyrocket, causing a huge surge in price.

For better or worse, demand for a college degree is largely inelastic, since it's virtually impossible to maintain  one's existence without one (or, at the very least, it is made to appear virtually impossible).
 
2013-12-12 01:36:39 PM

themindiswatching: Allow student loans to be forgiven in bankruptcy again and fine the college in question the remaining amount on the loan. Things will straighten themselves out pretty quickly after that.


It would make for an interesting experiment. I wonder how long it would take before the first discrimination lawsuit was filed because a college wasn't willing to, in effect, cosign a loan for somebody wanting to pursue an undergrad major in Black Studies?
 
2013-12-12 01:54:48 PM

impaler: BMFPitt: impaler:Sallie Mae issues securities?

https://www.salliemae.com/about/investors/debtasset/slmsltrusts/

Oh. Well that is a real thing then.


BMFPitt: Prices are increasing because lots of cheap money is available.

That money has been available for decades. Saying it is THE cause of the education cost increase, while completely ignoring how the need for a college education keeps increasing over that time, is wrong-headed.


This is where BMF and others were missing impaler's discrepancy, his argument: Exactly HOW MUCH of the rise in college tuitions is due to subsidies pushing up the average money per capita of college demand (as BMF et al suggest is the driving factor), and HOW MUCH of that rise is instead due to other factors, like the fact that states have been cutting higher education spending over the past few decades as if it were a damned fire sale? Impaler sounds in the camp suggesting that the latter is far more important.

And the data suggests that he's right. Subsidies aren't the driving factor in soaring tuitions, declining state and federal government education spending is.
 
2013-12-12 01:59:34 PM
Oh dang it, those links aren't quite the ones that prove it's the driving factor. Lemme search for them a bit more...
 
2013-12-12 02:00:39 PM

jjorsett: themindiswatching: Allow student loans to be forgiven in bankruptcy again and fine the college in question the remaining amount on the loan. Things will straighten themselves out pretty quickly after that.

It would make for an interesting experiment. I wonder how long it would take before the first discrimination lawsuit was filed because a college wasn't willing to, in effect, cosign a loan for somebody wanting to pursue an undergrad major in Black Studies?


I think you'll see a lot more combined BA/MA or BA/PhD programs in the majors with fewer job opportunities, and they'll be a lot harder to get into as well.

/college will usually pay tuition once you reach masters or PhD levels in exchange for TAing or working in a professor's lab.
 
2013-12-12 02:08:07 PM
Ah, found it!!! Here's a very detailed report, covering - among other things - how declining state education spending is almost certainly THE major driver in tuition growth, or at least far moreso than any sort of subsidy-driven inflation.
 
2013-12-12 02:14:53 PM

impaler: BMFPitt: Sallie Mae as shorthand for all the federal loan programs, is responsible for the vast majority of educational inflation.

The reason there is high demand for college education, is because you can't get a job without it.

Making loans more expensive won't make college cheaper, it will make it more expensive.


I get what you are saying, but there's quite a few of us with degrees that can't find jobs. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
 
2013-12-12 02:15:25 PM

BlastYoBoots: This is where BMF and others were missing impaler's discrepancy, his argument: Exactly HOW MUCH of the rise in college tuitions is due to subsidies pushing up the average money per capita of college demand


Best as I can tell, he is demanding that 0% is due to cheap loans.

And the data suggests that he's right. Subsidies aren't the driving factor in soaring tuitions, declining state and federal government education spending is.

Increasing subsidies aren't a factor because declining subsidies are?

Also, your link seems to be focusing on the last few years.  Tuition inflation has been going on for decades.

And it's just as bad at schools who never had any direct state subsides as those who used to have a lot.
 
2013-12-12 02:25:26 PM

BMFPitt: BlastYoBoots: This is where BMF and others were missing impaler's discrepancy, his argument: Exactly HOW MUCH of the rise in college tuitions is due to subsidies pushing up the average money per capita of college demand

Best as I can tell, he is demanding that 0% is due to cheap loans.

And the data suggests that he's right. Subsidies aren't the driving factor in soaring tuitions, declining state and federal government education spending is.

Increasing subsidies aren't a factor because declining subsidies are?

Also, your link seems to be focusing on the last few years.  Tuition inflation has been going on for decades.

And it's just as bad at schools who never had any direct state subsides as those who used to have a lot.


Impaler wasn't saying that it was 0%; he was saying that it's disingenuous to pretend that subsidies are the driving factor. In fact, you dont even know if it's a SIGNIFICANT factor without supporting data. There are ways to statistically narrow down how much of the cost rise COULD potentially be the result of subsidies, as opposed to spending levels compared with attendance and population growth. Show us them.

The reason we eye your assertion that it's a "major factor" with suspicion is that, well, asshole Republicans tend to dismissively tout it as the major factor regardless of evidence, because it means they get to blame "entitlement" money spent on the poor for cost growth, and then cut it and other education spending as mercilessly as they can manage. So forgive us if we shift the burden of proof onto you.
 
2013-12-12 02:28:03 PM

BlastYoBoots: impaler: BMFPitt: impaler:Sallie Mae issues securities?

https://www.salliemae.com/about/investors/debtasset/slmsltrusts/

Oh. Well that is a real thing then.


BMFPitt: Prices are increasing because lots of cheap money is available.

That money has been available for decades. Saying it is THE cause of the education cost increase, while completely ignoring how the need for a college education keeps increasing over that time, is wrong-headed.

This is where BMF and others were missing impaler's discrepancy, his argument: Exactly HOW MUCH of the rise in college tuitions is due to subsidies pushing up the average money per capita of college demand (as BMF et al suggest is the driving factor), and HOW MUCH of that rise is instead due to other factors, like the fact that states have been cutting higher education spending over the past few decades as if it were a damned fire sale? Impaler sounds in the camp suggesting that the latter is far more important.

And the data suggests that he's right. Subsidies aren't the driving factor in soaring tuitions, declining state and federal government education spending is.


(ignoring for a moment that state and federal education spending is a subsidy)

And what enables them to increase tuition? The fact that the costs are foist to the least savvy debtor who doesn't have to prove creditworthiness pretty much at all. The debtors have no way to predict whether they can afford the debt, nor can they discharge it if they can't. If you got rid of student loans costs would drop like a rock. It may take a bankruptcy, but eventually supply meets demand where tuition is affordable. The really good question is what do we do about a generation of workers that lacks professionals, engineers, scientist, etc... That's a pretty bleak picture.
 
2013-12-12 02:41:58 PM
It really boils down to what we want a college degree to represent in our society and economy. Do we want it to be a piece of paper that simply indicates you have a working brain stem and managed not to drink yourself to death in your 5 (or 6 or 7) year stay at college? AKA you need a degree to get any job, i.e. Pretty much what we do now. If so, than it makes absolutely no sense to lend kids so much money to get a basically worthless piece of paper that doesn't even come close to ensuring that loan will ever be paid back. I mean how many hundreds of millions in student loans are outstanding right now?

Or should a college degree represent some sort of actual academic or technical accomplishment? Which means not every job would require one (which is ridiculous, how many people are working in fields completely unrelated to their BS in political science or literature?), but if you actually had one it would mean something and might be worth the money they're lending people now for their worthless sports management or communications degrees.

I also don't see why education loans are the Goodfellas of loans "Fark you, pay me". If I get a 100k loan to go to college and my degree never allows me to pay that back in my lifetime, Sallie Mae says "Fark you, pay me." If I borrow 100k to start a business, and it fails, hey it happens, I file bankruptcy, my credit takes a hit, but everyone writes off the loan as a bad investment. Isn't an education loan that doesn't result in an education that allows the loan to be paid back an equivalently bad investment?
 
2013-12-12 02:49:42 PM
Oh, and BMFPitt, I don't think you read the second half of the link! Here's what it has to say about the last three decades, not just the last few years:

"For at least the last quarter-century, state and local funding for higher education has been dropping, and tuition has been increasing. Per-student revenue from state and local governments fell by $2,600, after adjusting for inflation, between 1987 and 2012. During that same period, per-student tuition increased by $2,600. In other words, the entire increase in tuition at public colleges and universities over the last 25 years has gone to make up for declining state and local revenue, leaving no additional funding available to improve programs and services or fund costs that are rising faster than the rate of inflation such as employee health care.

This trend has meant that students have assumed much greater responsibility for paying for public higher education without those institutions receiving more money to fund quality improvements. In 1987, public colleges and universities received 3.3 times as much in revenue from state and local governments as they did from students. They now receive about 1.1 times as much from states and localities as from students.
"

In a few words, (1) suck it, and (2) show me the data if you disagree.
 
Displayed 50 of 63 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report