Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(The Hill)   Rand Paul criticizes GOP tax plan stating it doesn't leave enough for those at the top to create jobs for those in the middle who will not see a reduction in taxes   ( thehill.com) divider line
    More: Murica, congressional GOP leaders, Taxation in the United States, GOP tax plan, GOP tax group, latest ObamaCare repeal, Paul Senate Dems, Rand Paul Randal, warrantless wiretapping program  
•       •       •

1323 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Oct 2017 at 5:30 PM (2 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-10-02 03:54:49 PM  
Fuck the poor!
Youtube 3B1IQYD4Uew
 
2017-10-02 04:08:00 PM  
STFU Rand. The only proof I need that God doesn't exist is your continued existence.
 
2017-10-02 04:25:55 PM  
Ummm, unless you've found another article, that's not what Rand says at all. He gave a (surprisngly) accurate argument against it, that 30% of middle class could get a hike, which would not by good for our economy if the bulk of spenders lost a chunk of disposable income.
 
2017-10-02 04:33:17 PM  
Rand Paul needs to fight for more middle class tax cuts, because with his preferred Obamacare repeal, there's no way in hell that those middle class families will be able to afford health insurance.
 
2017-10-02 04:34:21 PM  
Companies will hire workers they don't need if they can keep more of the profit.

If we can keep more of the profit we promise to make less profit.
 
2017-10-02 04:45:27 PM  
This is a chart I ginned up last week when they came out.  It's rough - it used the GOP standard deductions, but because last week's  plan didn't include brackets, I had to use Donnie's campaign proposed brackets.  Donnie's standard deductions were more generous than the GOP's, so if anything, this is optimistic.  It shows for all  annual incomes from 10000 to 170000 the change in taxes owed for a filer with 2 exemptions at single, head of household (which is being abolished and folded into single) and married.  This is the hidden alligator in that sewer - 22% of returns last years were HoH, and they get hit hard at every income range.

So, Donnie and the GOP are balancing the revenue losses from this plan on the backs of the single parents.  (I have not read the study above, so treat my chart as a W.A.G.) It also doesn't take child tax credit, because no info on that was released other than the increase would be "bigly", so imagine any dependents are 17 or older, like a single parent with an early birthday junior in high school, or older.

Grey - change in taxes for filer at Married with 3 exemptions (one child)
Orange - someone who could file Head of Household under the old plan, with two exemptions
Blue - single with one additional exemption (not the actual taxes for single and former HoH are equal now, this is to show the difference between what's paid under current and proposed plans.)

img.fark.net
 
2017-10-02 05:04:52 PM  

rwhamann: [img.fark.net image 850x430]


This, folks, is why you label your farking axes. Ain't nobody gonna make sense of this shiat.
 
2017-10-02 05:09:16 PM  
LOl, yeah, it was ginned up fast.  Wonder if I can get excel to label them better.

img.fark.net
 
2017-10-02 05:33:25 PM  
Yeah, under the proposed changes to deductions alone, I'd be looking at about a 5k increase (from about 20k to about 25k).
 
2017-10-02 05:35:08 PM  

rwhamann: Ummm, unless you've found another article, that's not what Rand says at all. He gave a (surprisngly) accurate argument against it, that 30% of middle class could get a hike, which would not by good for our economy if the bulk of spenders lost a chunk of disposable income.

This is a GOP tax plan? Possibly 30% of middle class gets a tax hike? I hope the final details are better than this.


But in the end, of course, he'll vote yes.
 
2017-10-02 05:41:00 PM  
The greatest flaw in the GOP's tax logic is that it requires the top earners to actually SPEND their money in America.
 
2017-10-02 05:42:24 PM  
Balkanized GOP.
 
2017-10-02 05:43:17 PM  

Bowen: But in the end, of course, he'll vote yes.


Yeahhh, you're probably right.  Dammit.
 
2017-10-02 05:43:29 PM  
I would have thought he'd be against it for not having the IRS issue refunds in Bitcoin or something.
 
2017-10-02 05:48:08 PM  
Me too.  Not nearly enough tax breaks for automation.  There's no way American can compete with Asia if it doesn't modernize it's manufacturing capability on the backs of those whose livelihoods these tax cuts are ultimately eliminating.
 
2017-10-02 05:55:27 PM  
FTFComments: "Sam Rock26 minutes ago
Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center is a uber lib organization..
It was founded by Democrats.
It is funded by Democrats.
It is ran by Democrats"

It is correct.....Musta forgot that one.
 
2017-10-02 05:57:36 PM  
The record earnings and record profits are not great enough to continue to sustain the generosity of the benefactor class. How much longer can they be expected to continue to share pieces of their pie if you don't make their pie bigger and bigger?
 
2017-10-02 05:59:46 PM  

rwhamann: LOl, yeah, it was ginned up fast.  Wonder if I can get excel to label them better.

[img.fark.net image 850x431]


I like getting ginned up fast. Quitting time is martini time.
 
2017-10-02 06:00:54 PM  
The rich do not "create" jobs out of their benevolent largesse.

Demand for goods and services combined with the ability to purchase them does. The rich can only demand so many yachts, mini giraffes, and private jets. The middle classes are where the demand is. Raise their wages, and the rich benefit just as much without having to worry about being put up against the wall.
 
2017-10-02 06:07:09 PM  
Hahahaha! They're going to end up accomplishing absolutely nothing!
 
2017-10-02 06:07:25 PM  

rwhamann: Ummm, unless you've found another article, that's not what Rand says at all. He gave a (surprisngly) accurate argument against it, that 30% of middle class could get a hike, which would not by good for our economy if the bulk of spenders lost a chunk of disposable income.


Correct. The headline dishonestly misrepresents the article, which is unprecedented on Fark.

Submitter, you should be ashamed of yourself for lying about Senator RAND PAUL's opposition to the tax plan, when he really opposed it because it did not properly obfuscate the tax increase on the middle class.
 
2017-10-02 06:10:11 PM  
let me guess, one of those eliminated deductions is for mortgage interest, which hoses the coast states where home prices are higher.

As someone who is using property ownership/rental income as a retirement strategy, color me unamused...
 
2017-10-02 06:12:37 PM  

Dimensio: rwhamann: Ummm, unless you've found another article, that's not what Rand says at all. He gave a (surprisngly) accurate argument against it, that 30% of middle class could get a hike, which would not by good for our economy if the bulk of spenders lost a chunk of disposable income.

Correct. The headline dishonestly misrepresents the article, which is unprecedented on Fark.

Submitter, you should be ashamed of yourself for lying about Senator RAND PAUL's opposition to the tax plan, when he really opposed it because it did not properly obfuscate the tax increase on the middle class.


What misinterpretation? Paul said "This is a GOP tax plan? Possibly 30% of middle class gets a tax hike? I hope the final details are better than this." He doesn't say whether or not better means more or less middle class get a tax increase. Based on his history one can only assume by better he means more of the middle class get tax increases.
 
2017-10-02 06:14:02 PM  

max_pooper: Dimensio: rwhamann: Ummm, unless you've found another article, that's not what Rand says at all. He gave a (surprisngly) accurate argument against it, that 30% of middle class could get a hike, which would not by good for our economy if the bulk of spenders lost a chunk of disposable income.

Correct. The headline dishonestly misrepresents the article, which is unprecedented on Fark.

Submitter, you should be ashamed of yourself for lying about Senator RAND PAUL's opposition to the tax plan, when he really opposed it because it did not properly obfuscate the tax increase on the middle class.

What misinterpretation? Paul said "This is a GOP tax plan? Possibly 30% of middle class gets a tax hike? I hope the final details are better than this." He doesn't say whether or not better means more or less middle class get a tax increase. Based on his history one can only assume by better he means more of the middle class get tax increases.


The joke is that I was saying that his opposition to the proposal is based upon it being too blatant in increasing taxes on the middle class, as though he would prefer that the bill keep middle class tax hikes less easy to notice.
 
2017-10-02 06:15:07 PM  

PawisBetlog: let me guess, one of those eliminated deductions is for mortgage interest, which hoses the coast states where home prices are higher.


Yes.  That and state tax deduction.

As someone who is using property ownership/rental income as a retirement strategy, color me unamused...

How does that effect you?  AFAIK you can only deduct mortgage interest for your primary residence, not for investment properties.
 
2017-10-02 06:18:33 PM  

shroom: PawisBetlog: let me guess, one of those eliminated deductions is for mortgage interest, which hoses the coast states where home prices are higher.

Yes.  That and state tax deduction.


   The plan reported on last week specifically calls out the mortgage interest deduction as safe, but said nothing about property taxes.

As someone who is using property ownership/rental income as a retirement strategy, color me unamused...

How does that effect you?  AFAIK you can only deduct mortgage interest for your primary residence, not for investment properties.


   Mortgage interest and taxes on rental properties (like Trump and his progeny "own" and "manage") are normally deducted from income to lower profits.  You're probably safe.
 
2017-10-02 06:20:21 PM  

shroom: PawisBetlog: let me guess, one of those eliminated deductions is for mortgage interest, which hoses the coast states where home prices are higher.

Yes.  That and state tax deduction.

As someone who is using property ownership/rental income as a retirement strategy, color me unamused...

How does that effect you?  AFAIK you can only deduct mortgage interest for your primary residence, not for investment properties.


Ditching the mortgage interest deduction is likely to cause the housing market to take a big dump.
 
2017-10-02 06:25:53 PM  
Gooolyyyyy I'm one of them thar liburtarians and as Anne Rando stated in her book, The Libertarian Bible And Science Fiction Bonanza, only the wealthy can create them thar jobs from whole cloth!  But only if you gosh darn commies will stop asking them to pay for the civilized society that stops them from being lynched in the streets!
 
2017-10-02 06:28:47 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: shroom: PawisBetlog: let me guess, one of those eliminated deductions is for mortgage interest, which hoses the coast states where home prices are higher.

Yes.  That and state tax deduction.

As someone who is using property ownership/rental income as a retirement strategy, color me unamused...

How does that effect you?  AFAIK you can only deduct mortgage interest for your primary residence, not for investment properties.

Ditching the mortgage interest deduction is likely to cause the housing market to take a big dump.


On the one hand, good, I'm looking for a nice home and those are expensive.

On the other, FML, I sell siding and windows to contractors and people who are underwater in their mortgages don't remodel.
 
2017-10-02 06:32:17 PM  
What an asshole
 
2017-10-02 06:40:23 PM  
"almost 30 percent of taxpayers with income between about $50,000 and $150,000 would see their taxes increase..."

Keeping in mind the median household income in the US is $59,000. Eliminating deductions hurts  middle class tax payers who have investments or own real property ie: farmers and entrepreneurs. And this plan seems custom designed to force cuts to Medicare and Medicaid which will overwhelmingly harm the lowest wage earners. By any measure this is a huge tax cut for the most wealthy that the GOP is asking the rest of us to pay for.
 
2017-10-02 06:55:17 PM  

rwhamann: shroom: PawisBetlog: let me guess, one of those eliminated deductions is for mortgage interest, which hoses the coast states where home prices are higher.

Yes.  That and state tax deduction.

   The plan reported on last week specifically calls out the mortgage interest deduction as safe, but said nothing about property taxes.

As someone who is using property ownership/rental income as a retirement strategy, color me unamused...

How does that effect you?  AFAIK you can only deduct mortgage interest for your primary residence, not for investment properties.

   Mortgage interest and taxes on rental properties (like Trump and his progeny "own" and "manage") are normally deducted from income to lower profits.  You're probably safe.


as another poster mentioned, housing values will be impacted, which will impact me x5, but if as you mention they aren't going to kill the deduction everywhere, then I'm probably less impacted.

I plan to wait until they finish slow-cooking this turd before I stick my nose out to smell how bad it is...
 
2017-10-02 07:01:20 PM  

PawisBetlog: as another poster mentioned, housing values will be impacted, which will impact me x5, but if as you mention they aren't going to kill the deduction everywhere, then I'm probably less impacted.

I plan to wait until they finish slow-cooking this turd before I stick my nose out to smell how bad it is...


Indeed.

https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/business/read-the-complet​e​-republican-tax-plan-released-wednesday/2560/

Quote "In order to simplify the tax code, the framework eliminates most itemized deductions, but retains tax incentives for home mortgage interest and charitable contributions. These tax benefits help accomplish important goals that strengthen civil society, as opposed to dependence on government: homeownership and charitable giving. "
 
2017-10-02 07:10:58 PM  

rwhamann: PawisBetlog: as another poster mentioned, housing values will be impacted, which will impact me x5, but if as you mention they aren't going to kill the deduction everywhere, then I'm probably less impacted.

I plan to wait until they finish slow-cooking this turd before I stick my nose out to smell how bad it is...

Indeed.

https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/business/read-the-complete​-republican-tax-plan-released-wednesday/2560/

Quote "In order to simplify the tax code, the framework eliminates most itemized deductions, but retains tax incentives for home mortgage interest and charitable contributions. These tax benefits help accomplish important goals that strengthen civil society, as opposed to dependence on government: homeownership and charitable giving. "


I want to go on record by saying that arguments for "simplifying the tax code" are a lot like arguments for "States rights": Bullshiat being peddled by liars and racists in order to cheat you out of your money and freedoms. Even in the current political environment I'm staggered that an argument as stupid as "simplify the tax code" is convincing anybody.
 
2017-10-02 07:31:32 PM  

Voiceofreason01: rwhamann: PawisBetlog: as another poster mentioned, housing values will be impacted, which will impact me x5, but if as you mention they aren't going to kill the deduction everywhere, then I'm probably less impacted.

I plan to wait until they finish slow-cooking this turd before I stick my nose out to smell how bad it is...

Indeed.

https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/business/read-the-complete​-republican-tax-plan-released-wednesday/2560/

Quote "In order to simplify the tax code, the framework eliminates most itemized deductions, but retains tax incentives for home mortgage interest and charitable contributions. These tax benefits help accomplish important goals that strengthen civil society, as opposed to dependence on government: homeownership and charitable giving. "

I want to go on record by saying that arguments for "simplifying the tax code" are a lot like arguments for "States rights": Bullshiat being peddled by liars and racists in order to cheat you out of your money and freedoms. Even in the current political environment I'm staggered that an argument as stupid as "simplify the tax code" is convincing anybody.


If you saw the Paul Ryan appearance at a plant in Illinois it appears nobody is fooled. He kept saying you can do your taxes on a post card. They kept asking how does that at save me money? Crickets
 
2017-10-02 07:33:59 PM  
Why does the GOP perpetuate this myth that rich people are job creators who pay their worker's salaries out of their own pocket?
 
2017-10-02 07:46:31 PM  

PawisBetlog: let me guess, one of those eliminated deductions is for mortgage interest, which hoses the coast states where home prices are higher.

As someone who is using property ownership/rental income as a retirement strategy, color me unamused...


Even though it seems even the GOP is to chicken to touch them, mortgage interest and property tax deductions should go.

Same with state and local income and sales tax deductions.

But they need to be phased out because they can be pretty damned significant to far too many people to try and find individual solutions. You get 90% of these deductions in 2018, 80% in 2017, and so on.

And I would offset that with decease in tax rates for brackets under about $200,000 with a goal of being revenue neutral.

With that as an adjusted baseline I would consider where I would want the final tax rates to go.

Also: fark your low rate passthrough tax. That is complete BS. It is also being largely ignored and the primary benefit Trump will receive.
 
2017-10-02 07:53:41 PM  

PawisBetlog: rwhamann: shroom: PawisBetlog: let me guess, one of those eliminated deductions is for mortgage interest, which hoses the coast states where home prices are higher.

Yes.  That and state tax deduction.

   The plan reported on last week specifically calls out the mortgage interest deduction as safe, but said nothing about property taxes.

As someone who is using property ownership/rental income as a retirement strategy, color me unamused...

How does that effect you?  AFAIK you can only deduct mortgage interest for your primary residence, not for investment properties.

   Mortgage interest and taxes on rental properties (like Trump and his progeny "own" and "manage") are normally deducted from income to lower profits.  You're probably safe.

as another poster mentioned, housing values will be impacted, which will impact me x5, but if as you mention they aren't going to kill the deduction everywhere, then I'm probably less impacted.

I plan to wait until they finish slow-cooking this turd before I stick my nose out to smell how bad it is...


We are talking about itemized deductions. Mortgage interest on rental properties are not itemized deductions, they are business expenses. The only think that I saw in the proposal that could screw a person owning a few rental properties would be long term changes to depreciation, but they are giving you a big bonus up front anyway. If you have higher income you may also stand to benefit from the passthrough tax rate.

And to the other person, you can deduct mortgage interest on two personal properties and property taxes on as many as you want.
 
2017-10-02 07:54:29 PM  
First there was TARP,  now we have TRFT!

Will TRFT pass?
Will congress left TFRT make America Great Again?
What's TRFT you ask?

Tax
Reductions
For
Trump
 
2017-10-02 08:00:32 PM  

Voiceofreason01: rwhamann: PawisBetlog: as another poster mentioned, housing values will be impacted, which will impact me x5, but if as you mention they aren't going to kill the deduction everywhere, then I'm probably less impacted.

I plan to wait until they finish slow-cooking this turd before I stick my nose out to smell how bad it is...

Indeed.

https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/business/read-the-complete​-republican-tax-plan-released-wednesday/2560/

Quote "In order to simplify the tax code, the framework eliminates most itemized deductions, but retains tax incentives for home mortgage interest and charitable contributions. These tax benefits help accomplish important goals that strengthen civil society, as opposed to dependence on government: homeownership and charitable giving. "

I want to go on record by saying that arguments for "simplifying the tax code" are a lot like arguments for "States rights": Bullshiat being peddled by liars and racists in order to cheat you out of your money and freedoms. Even in the current political environment I'm staggered that an argument as stupid as "simplify the tax code" is convincing anybody.


Simplifying the tax code is always something people should be looking to do. It gets way too messy over time.

However the idea has long been abused by the GOP.

The tax code will never be simple because society isn't simple, but it could be made simpler to the benefit of regular people. For example, in Canada we just eliminated a bunch of child related credits from the tax return and rolled up with benefits not on the tax return turning them into a single child tax benefit. That is simpler and, with an income based grind down, concentrates benefits with poorer people. That is great (we could argue some specific rules and policies, but the broad change is what I am speaking of).

It is the kernel of truth all the big lies use to get traction with those less familiar with the issues.
 
2017-10-02 08:32:16 PM  

CthulhuCalling: Why does the GOP perpetuate this myth that rich people are job creators who pay their worker's salaries out of their own pocket?


Because their rubes believe it.
 
2017-10-02 08:33:54 PM  

Empty Matchbook: The greatest flaw in the GOP's tax logic is that it requires the top earners to actually SPEND their money in America.


And it also ignores that demand is driven from the bottom, not created by the top. Giving "job creators" more money will not create more jobs if nobody can afford to buy more of their product.
 
2017-10-02 08:45:59 PM  

rwhamann: LOl, yeah, it was ginned up fast.  Wonder if I can get excel to label them better.

[img.fark.net image 850x431]


Maybe I'm just brilliant, but your chart was obvious before the axis labels.

Hint: I'm not brilliant.

Good job, despite the votes in support of the post insulting your chart.
 
2017-10-02 09:08:13 PM  

Voiceofreason01: I want to go on record by saying that arguments for "simplifying the tax code" are a lot like arguments for "States rights": Bullshiat being peddled by liars and racists in order to cheat you out of your money and freedoms. Even in the current political environment I'm staggered that an argument as stupid as "simplify the tax code" is convincing anybody.


oh, I 100% agree.  I was quoting directly from the stated plan, to back up what I said about the mortgage tax deduction.  This is a very bad plan, and a naked giveaway to GOP bases - the rich and married evangelicals with a bunch of young kids.  And it's on the backs of single parents, liberals in high cost states and to a lesser extent, singles. It will not be good for our country, because it hits the middle, the upper middle and lower upper classes hard, and will cut household discretionary spending. I'll be increasing IRAs, real estate investing and anything else I can do, when I was seriously considering buying a brand new American car next year (Focus RS), as a play thing, and getting work done on my house. The exact thing American businesses and workers need people with discretionary income to do.
 
2017-10-02 09:15:18 PM  

monoski: Voiceofreason01: rwhamann: PawisBetlog: as another poster mentioned, housing values will be impacted, which will impact me x5, but if as you mention they aren't going to kill the deduction everywhere, then I'm probably less impacted.

I plan to wait until they finish slow-cooking this turd before I stick my nose out to smell how bad it is...

Indeed.

https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/business/read-the-complete​-republican-tax-plan-released-wednesday/2560/

Quote "In order to simplify the tax code, the framework eliminates most itemized deductions, but retains tax incentives for home mortgage interest and charitable contributions. These tax benefits help accomplish important goals that strengthen civil society, as opposed to dependence on government: homeownership and charitable giving. "

I want to go on record by saying that arguments for "simplifying the tax code" are a lot like arguments for "States rights": Bullshiat being peddled by liars and racists in order to cheat you out of your money and freedoms. Even in the current political environment I'm staggered that an argument as stupid as "simplify the tax code" is convincing anybody.

If you saw the Paul Ryan appearance at a plant in Illinois it appears nobody is fooled. He kept saying you can do your taxes on a post card. They kept asking how does that at save me money? Crickets


Somebody should inform Paul Ryan (and/or his rubes) that if you don't own a business and you don't want to itemize your deductions, most people could file a 1040EZ right now, which is one side of one piece of paper.  Fold it in half, and that's pretty close to a postcard right now.

Also, the IRS is also already perfectly capable of figuring most people's taxes and just sending it to you to to sign.  This of course is illegal because H&R Block and Intuit have paid Paul Ryan & co. millions of dollars to keep it that way.
 
2017-10-02 09:18:33 PM  

rwhamann: This is a very bad plan, and a naked giveaway to GOP bases - the rich and married evangelicals with a bunch of young kids.


And even that second part's not true.  The plan proposes to eliminate personal exemptions.  At $4,000 deduction each, that pretty screws anyone with more than two kids.  Jim Bob Duggar may be doubling his standard deduction, but he now has $84,000 less in personal exemptions than he does currently.
 
2017-10-02 09:47:38 PM  
Unemployment is like 4%.  We don't really need jobs....
 
2017-10-02 10:04:22 PM  

shroom: rwhamann: This is a very bad plan, and a naked giveaway to GOP bases - the rich and married evangelicals with a bunch of young kids.

And even that second part's not true.  The plan proposes to eliminate personal exemptions.  At $4,000 deduction each, that pretty screws anyone with more than two kids.  Jim Bob Duggar may be doubling his standard deduction, but he now has $84,000 less in personal exemptions than he does currently.


More than one, actually. One kid is a wash; two kids is about $5,000 more in taxable income (and between $600-$1200 more in taxes).

Honestly, if I had to guess, I'd say that is the one provision that might not make it into the final bill, unless the child tax credit is significantly increased.
 
2017-10-03 07:45:35 AM  

qorkfiend: More than one, actually. One kid is a wash; two kids is about $5,000 more in taxable income (and between $600-$1200 more in taxes).

Honestly, if I had to guess, I'd say that is the one provision that might not make it into the final bill, unless the child tax credit is significantly increased.


So, since I'm back into work, I was able to pull up my spreadsheet again.  According to the tax plan, the child tax credit will be "significantly" increased.  So, I guesstimated it would increase from $1000 per child to $1500.  If so, then most married couples with 4-6 do better, but marginally, up to around six figures.  So again, the base is protected.
 
2017-10-03 04:31:57 PM  

Pincy: Empty Matchbook: The greatest flaw in the GOP's tax logic is that it requires the top earners to actually SPEND their money in America.

And it also ignores that demand is driven from the bottom, not created by the top. Giving "job creators" more money will not create more jobs if nobody can afford to buy more of their product.


It's amazing how we're getting more socially progressive and economically regressive.

We're on our way to being the poorest country that allows gay marriage.
 
Displayed 50 of 52 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report