Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Why is there no massive influx of people into socialist countries?

Posted 1 year ago on May 29, 2013, 5:50 p.m. EST by Forward (-2)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Just wondering. I mean, if it's so awesome, people would be flocking to it; right?

88 Comments

88 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by TheWall (12) 1 year ago

I have a strong feeling you have NOT done alot of travelling outside the U.S. At least not in the last 25 years. You should travel to scandanavia. It is very nice. Better standard of living, better food(love Polsers), cleaner air, prettier women, compassion for their fellow citizens.

I have done ALOT of travelling all over the world. If you talk to people in other countries, the U.S. is suprisingly quite low on their list of places they would like to move to.

I think the fable of the U.S. being so desirable is more relevant to 1965, not 2013.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 1 year ago

Actually, many Chinese people still want to move to the US, although they move to other countries as well.

[-] 2 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

Interesting. Perhaps it was just another lie fed to us by the main stream media..

[-] 0 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

lame stream......lame stream.......

I always thought it was called the lazy river, but i guess I wrong.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

I agree. No one was protesting when i was in Sweden visiting family in 2011

~Odin~

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

Of all the countries of the world, Miami has by far the most beautiful women.

[-] 0 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

That's funny.

[-] 2 points by Buttercup (1067) 1 year ago

There are lots of immigrants to Canada and European countries (from non EU countries) that have strong social programs and social policy. I presume that's what you mean by 'socialist'. Canada, Italy, Spain, all have higher per capita immigration rates than the US. Sweden and some other Nordic countries have seen big increases in immigration. Sweden in particular is known and recognized as having a very good standard of living, strong social policies, egalitarian (by US standards) and democratic socio-economic and political structure. Which is actually causing some social unrest there because their social/economic system can't keep pace with their liberal immigration policies and 'influx' of immigrants.

We are not the only country in the world that people immigrate to. Despite the hysterical rantings of Fox news or other various tea party right wing idiots.

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by Buttercup (1067) 1 year ago

The point is many people are immigrating there. This is causing stress on the economic system. A massive influx of immigrants causes stress to any economic system.

Sweden is more accustomed to being mostly culturally homogenous. The criticism has been made that not only the influx has put stress on the system, but racism/nationalism/culturism plays a part as well. I do not know. But that critique is out there.

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by tommylee (-5) 1 year ago

Do you believe these countries should switch to privatized systems like US?

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Did you get my PM, tommylee?

[-] -2 points by tommylee (-5) 1 year ago

Yes. Thank you for the heads up about DKAtoday, but I still feel he shouldn't be trolling this site.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Well, it wasn't really about DK as much as it was explaining who and what 'trashy' is.

[-] 0 points by tommylee (-5) 1 year ago

OK. But even if this 'thrasy' user is a troll so what? I searched the forum and some people call him a right wing shill, some even say he's a paid agent. Still, so what? The only thing he can do is write comments and posts, both of which can either be ignored or debated. If we attack him or others we think is him with name calling, then it just makes us trolls who destroy our own site. Proper polite debating is the only legitimate way to address another user here. If a person is a known troll, then ignoring him or her is the best medicine. Name calling just makes us look bad.

And, what's with this right wing name calling? Occupy is opened to all political persuasions. It says so on the front page of this site and was always clear in GA. Occupy is not about widening the gulf between left and right wings, it's about bringing these people, the 99%, together on common grounds. The latest surveys show 5% of Occupy protesters are right wingers. We need to increase this number, not decrease it.

Anyhow, one of the funny things is that many of these people who attack 'thrasy' and other users are the reason some people have left the site.

This was posted one year ago:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/only-one-day-one-these-forums-and-im-outta-here/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/only-one-day-one-these-forums-and-im-outta-here/#comment-709533

I noticed shooz was attacking many users and did a quick forum search with his name. Many posts like the above one came up. It's no surprise. Who wants to be on a forum where profanity and gratuitous attacks compromise a large part of comments and postings?

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Whoa, tommy, don't attack the messenger, I just wanted to give you a heads up. And I never said Trashy was a troll, I merely explained that 'trashy' is short for the user formerly known as Thrasymaque.

[-] 0 points by tommylee (-5) 1 year ago

I'm not attacking you! I was just providing arguments for my position. Thank you for the heads up. I have to say, I find it sad that long time users here don't understand that they are letting the people they call 'trolls' win if they, themselves, soil their own forum with name calling. Debate, ignore, or report to the moderators. The only legitimate ways to deal with what one calls a 'troll'.

As for Thrasymaque, I found most of his postings interesting. Many are on anarcho-syndicalism which is a part of Occupy. I don't see why people call him a right wing shill or a troll. It seems to me he's an anarchist like most early occupiers. This one stood out:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/why-and-how-ows-must-change-or-onto-anarcho-syndic/

[-] 2 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

Thrasy is a very clever guy who says a lot of good things, and then mixes it up with a lot of divisive crap

~Odin~

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

I'm thinking tommylee IS Mr. T. At first I thought he was, then I didn't. But now I'm back to thinking he is.

What would be nice is if there was less divisiveness on the forum in general. Mr. T isn't the only person here that's divisive, as you know.

I agree completely with this statement: "Occupy is not about widening the gulf between left and right wings, it's about bringing these people, the 99%, together on common grounds."

In fact, I believe Mr. T said those exact same words the other night. So, . . . . .

[-] 1 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

Yes i think it is Thrasy too. I aksed him in my last comment.

He has always said some good stuff, and not "widening the gulf...." is one of them, but like i said he mixes it up with a lot of divisive crap

Good Night

~Odin~

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

'night, Odin.

See you tomorrow.

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by tommylee (-5) 1 year ago

OK, he's extremely clever, perhaps brilliant, but still, so what? Just ignore the divisive crap and debate the good stuff if you find it worthwhile. Calling him names just makes this site look bad.

To be honest, I saw more division coming from the people attacking him and others by calling them right wing shills. I don't understand this. Is the idea to divide Occupy between left and right wings? From the GA's I attended, and from the front page of this site, I always understood Occupy as being open to anyone from any political affiliation as long as they were interested in the revolution. A recent survey showed that 5% of Occupy protesters were right wingers. We need to increase that number, not decrease it. People are complex! They can't easily be boxed in a right wing or left wing box. This type of partisan politics is what I find the most divisive. On top of that, Occupy doesn't support left wing parties, so I really don't understand this.

[-] 1 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

From my many exchanges with Thrasy, I have come to the conclusion that he is no friend to the the success of this movement

I too believe that deepening divisions between the left and the right is not a good idea, as their are many people to the right of center that we can bring to our side as they too have gotten screwed

And i don't ever remember calling Thrasy any names

~Odin~

Are you him?

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by Forward (-2) 1 year ago

Those are not socialist economies. Not even close.

[-] 2 points by Buttercup (1067) 1 year ago

Agreed. I couldn't come up with a socialist economy. So I tried for something close. Some countries with strong social policy.

A socialist economy has never existed. There were hints of it in Argentina after the debt crisis there in the 1990's. Workers looking for work began operating shuttered factories and businesses and began running them cooperatively. I think later on the IMF and right wing neoliberals moved in on them though.

There's the Mondragon in Spain. And I think in some of the Nordic countries (Sweden is one I think) employees are required, by corporate governance laws I believe, to have some ownership stake in the company they work for. But those are still mixed economies. But an entire socialist economy. No.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

People seem to like Canada,. .

[-] 1 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

As you mentioned in another post, we do not have a true form of capitalism, .. and to answer your question as to why socialism has not worked .. because it is not a true form of Socialism , but a corrupted version also ..

The Future of Mankind will be governed by a Socialism style system.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/socialism-is-the-future-of-mankind/

1 points by Forward (31) 5 hours ago

Any true believer in anarchism or liberalism could give the answer to this. Capitalism protects individualism. When the individual spends all their time providing for other, they cannot build themselves up, thusly they would never be in a position to do anything aside from supporting the status quo. When the individual has the time and resources, they can achieve a higher level of existence, setting the bar higher, and create a roadmap for others to achieve the same.

The problem with our current system is that it is not true capitalism. Not when institutions have the power to create artificial levels of value and curb the potential of others in a way that prohibits individual growth. Such as the Fed devaluing the dollar in favor of assets and laws that favor certain entities and/or individuals over others. Our current system is close to Mussolini's definition of Fascism.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply permalink

[-] 0 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

Socialism has failed time and time again in the past though. The paris commune, the soviet union, cuba, 1968, ect. Socialism may sound nice, but it fails to treat individuals like individuals. It says that individuals are too ignorant to make up thier own minds, so we'll together all these people and make the majority rule.

also, there is such a thing as "Individualist anarchism". Oscar Wilde, anyone?

[-] 0 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

At the time of the fall of the Soviet Union there were many Soviet Billionaires.. that was not a true socialism .. Cuba as far as I know is a dictatorship ..again not a true socialism example.. As I mentioned earlier above, there is not true uncorrupted socialism in the world , ..

Capitalism keeps the masses ignorant.. for it is the masses that are the greatest danger to the capitalist empire .. and it is Capitalism that says people can not make group decisions .. that they need a leader to make the decisions for the masses .. when in fact the masses can make better decisions than any one individual ever could..

[-] 0 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

Collectivism keeps the masses ignorant. Both Capitalism and Socialsim are collectivist ideologies that focus on the Majority as opposed to the individual.

Individual Sovereignty is far superior to any system currently in existance. People should rule themselves.

[-] 0 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

It's a nice thought.. and if you were the only person on the planet , I would agree with you .. but unfortunately this planet has nearly 7 billion people .. and we must find a way to regulate our existence to live amongst one another .. and still find the freedoms we desire .. but those freedoms will not include exploiting wealth off of another persons hard work as we so much of in the extreme piles of wealth collected by wall street .. surely you agree they did not work for such a huge pile of wealth .. it was stripped away from the citizens of the country and of the planet.. that is the capitalism you seem to defend and consider to be righteous . I do not.

[-] 0 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

Individuals have the capability for cooperation, as long as it voluntary.

[-] 0 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

absolutely

[-] -1 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

Forced cooperation is immpossible and doomed to failure. If cooperation cant be met, then it shouldnt be met.

[-] 0 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

Co-operation will be rewarded.

[-] 0 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

Maybe, but I will always be voluntary.

[-] 0 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

Do you not want to be rewarded ?

[-] 0 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

You sound like religious person: do what I say and you will be rewarded.

[-] 0 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

You are not being cooperative !

[-] 0 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

That's your problem, not mine.... ;)

[-] 0 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

no it's your problem .. uncooperative people will not be rewarded ..

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 1 year ago

All of the welfare states are being invaded, wtf are you talking about?

[-] 0 points by Kavatz (464) from Edmonton, AB 1 year ago

I hear Detroit is booming.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22264) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Demolition?

[-] 1 points by Narley (294) 1 year ago

Nope, gunfire.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22264) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Parts of Minneapolis is like that - 4th of July every night - with the small arms fire punctuated with the occasional shot-gun blast.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Sounds like every night hereabouts, heheheh.

On the 4th, we have the pleasure of not only small arms and the occasional shotgun blast, but also random bursts of high-calibers and assault rifles. And every year a buddy of mine ends his fireworks celebration with a quarter stick of dynamite. Truth.

Ah, life in the city. Gotta love it.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22264) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Does keep things interesting.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

That's one way of putting it. ;-)

Glad to see you back, by the way. Hope you're feeling better.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22264) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Thx - though not really feeling better just checking in.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

I see. I did notice you here yesterday, but not for long apparently.

[-] 1 points by Narley (294) 1 year ago

I saw a news report tonight that Detroit will be considering banning street fairs and carnivals because of late they always end up with gang violence. To be fair though, this problem isn’t just Detroit. It’s everywhere these days. What a sad state of affairs we have.

I think it odd that we are so concerned about foreign terrorists, when is reality gang related violence have overtaken a lot of cities. If half as much attention were given to controlling gang violence as foreign terrorists we might just make a difference.

[-] 0 points by Forward (-2) 1 year ago

Detroit has much to be proud of

[-] 1 points by Kavatz (464) from Edmonton, AB 1 year ago

Let's hear it. Please elaborate.

[-] 1 points by Kavatz (464) from Edmonton, AB 1 year ago

Is this about Detroit?

[-] 0 points by Forward (-2) 1 year ago

I was thinking, A co-op restaurant while I'm here out west. The government fees seem to be under $2000 and with the rebuilding projects here, I'm sure I could find a low rent building for it. Now to find 2-3 other people with the same thought....

[-] 0 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

Restaurants have a very low profit margin, make sure the people you are going to find really love what they do....

[-] 0 points by Forward (-2) 1 year ago

I like making things. Things that make people happy. Now if I could expand that to help others help themselves. If I could expand that to promote healthy eating. If I could expand that to promote organic foods. If I could expand that to promote my vision of healthy capitalism.

...

[-] 2 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

I applaud your efforts in "making things...that make people happy," and promoting "organic foods" and "healthy eating"

But capitalism still requires unlimited growth, hence infinite resources on a finite planet

And our planet is showing the severe signs of the stress we are putting on it

It's time to think of a new economic system that breeds sustainability and humanitarianism, not degradation and exploitation

Change is scary, but no more so than the alternative if we just settle for tweaking the system or do nothing

~Odin~

[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 1 year ago

I've heard this before.

"But capitalism still requires unlimited growth, hence infinite resources on a finite planet"

And I'm wondering if there is any proof or if it is a symptom of no justice.

I do understand the psychological aspect that we have relating to corruption.

[-] -1 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

I don't see how 'capitalism' which requires unlimited growth, hence the continued plundering of our planet can be made into a sustainable system

And it is only natural for people to want something different after they have endured the corrupted version of capitalism that we have had for so long

'They' brought on this crisis, and it is only in times of crisis that systemic change is possible

We should take advantage of it in searching for a system that will take us into a new era of sustainablity

~Odin~

[-] 0 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 1 year ago

Still need proof capitalism requires unlimited growth.

"But capitalism still requires unlimited growth, hence infinite resources on a finite planet"

I ask because Indigenous Americans had a capitalist system in the northwest , and they had a sustainable society in most ways. They also had the Potlatch.

[-] 2 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

I'm not familiar with the the "capitalist system" the "indigenous Americans" had in the northwest, but I am ready to learn and emulate them if they were able to have a sustainable system simultaneously

The capitalist system in this country is based on quarterly profits which in turn encourages more and more production and consumption, hence the plundering of our natural resources

~Odin~

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 1 year ago

The capitalist system in this country is based on quarterly profits which in turn encourages more and more production and consumption, ...

this is only tolerated because it is one way to keep "economic activity" moving ....

the government is extremely scared that "economic activity" will slow down and the economy will crash ... so instead they find themselves supporting corruption, thievery, waste... anything that moves money ...

our survival imo... depends on developing a structure that shares ....

and... for starters... I believe if we can develop something where "sharing" also is profitable... all will embrace it with open arms ....

[-] 1 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

Protecting that "corruption, thievery and waste" is probably a big reason why the bankers who caused the 2008 near melt-down are not in jail, as anyone who came into replace them would see how bad things are

Any economic system we look at to replace what we have will have to take into account the human condition,

But it will also have to rely on a change of ethos where people learn to again respect people who put other people's well-being before profits

~Odin~

Note: I'm busy doing outside work so my comments could be better

[-] 3 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 1 year ago

But it will also have to rely on a change of ethos where people learn to again to respect people who put other people's well-being before profits...

agree... and when we realize that we can in fact tax those who harm... and reward (incentive) those that help ... we will be halfway there...

[-] 1 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

Perhaps more than "halfway" there. We're kindred spirits...;-)

~Odin~

[-] 0 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 1 year ago

Okay, tax cycles, investment and profit make our system growth dependent. I posted on the potlatch here a while back.

Did you know that in the Lakota language, there is no word for me or I? Only we and us.

It is a psychological paradigm which is survival and evolution oriented. From that position, capitalism made risking time and and chance of cultural resource logical on an individual level.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/end-farm-animal-antibiotics-fight-for-organic-food/#comment-961082

http://occupywallst.org/forum/capitalism-is-a-great-success-really/#comment-975138

http://occupywallst.org/forum/end-farm-animal-antibiotics-fight-for-organic-food/#comment-961082

[-] 1 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

I am far from being an expert on political or economic systems,

But anything that puts us onto a path to something better than we have, and which takes into account the 'human condition', is a humane system and a sustainable system, I am ready for

I am very reluctant at this point though to believe that any form of capitalism can do that

~Odin~

[-] -1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 1 year ago

Practically, if we first assure justice and a constitutional federal government, something we are supposed to have anyway by using our first constitutional right, Article V, and we decide, life liberty and the pursuit of happiness just are not consistent with capitalism, we can in theory use Article V again make it a socialist nation.

With justice, corporations and the MIC can be stopped. Things will look much different then AND, no one has to try and change America that believes in capitalism. Fix America, and the issue of capitalism will quickly recede.

[-] 1 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

What about the people that believe that capitalism has run its course

~Odin~

[-] 0 points by tommylee (-5) 1 year ago

Capitalism has run its course, but that doesn't mean we need to wait for a full blown revolution. We can start building coops now. We can create community driven projects ourselves. Take the example of healthcare, if all who want free health care paid by the government get together and create a coop health insurance practice, they would achieve the same goal for themselves. It's not perfect, but it's a start. And, if these coops work wonderfully, then people will gravitate towards them making the country more socialized bit by bit. We can start now!

It's our job as occupiers to start creating the new world, we can't just talk about it. If it makes sense then people will come.

[-] 2 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

I agree, we can start on a lot of initiatives now, and whatever route we take, it can be implemented in steps

The corrupt system may well create a lot of obstacles for us in trying to progress on this course

I have repeatedly said in past comments that we should set ourselves on a 'path' to something much better than the unfettered capitalism we have now

The problem with this slower approach is the continued degradation of our environment though

~Odin~

[-] 1 points by tommylee (-5) 1 year ago

I don't consider this the slower approach. I can't think of anything that would be faster apart from an armed revolution, and, in that case, I don't think our new world would last very long. The only way to create a better world is to do it from legitimate effort, without using force or violence, especially if that world is to be anarchist in nature.

There are many groups working on environmental issues, but it's complex! Many positions I hear are extremely reductionist and simple, like that GMO's are inherently bad. We need to past this and realize that everything must be tested on a case by case basis.

I truly believe that if our solutions work they will be accepted by the others in society. People gravitate towards what works and helps them become more prosperous.

Let's also not forget we have a lot of power over the 1% who corrupt business. We can decide not to purchase their products. We can create our own coop factories to create our own products. We just need to pool our efforts together. Protesting is good as it helps get our message across. But, I believe it's now time for action. Proof is in the pudding. If Occupy can't start or help others start anarcho-syndicalist coops, then it basically means the idea is not feasible. It's time to put the anarchist theory to the test.

[-] 0 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 1 year ago

The social structure is one thing, the corruption of the people is another.

"Capitalism has run its course, but that doesn't mean we need to wait for a full blown revolution. We can start building coops now. We can create community driven projects"

That corruption is moral, spiritual and intellectual. If that can be overcome, yes, but if not, then justice might be needed simply to enable co-ops.

[-] -1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 1 year ago

They will realize that it was the lack of justice that made capitalism seem so bad. Or, they may decide that justice does not matter and then decide to work for another ART5 where a change to socialism is proposed.

If the re-creation of justice does not stop the problems and the appear to be rooted in capitalism, many will realize and join.

At least war can be stopped with ART5. The nation is so unconstitutional with regard to that and environment it's ridiculous.

[-] -2 points by Forward (-2) 1 year ago

So in a socialist society, cars don't break, people stop using toilet paper, perpetual motion machines create energy....?

More academic nonsense.

You are taking a quote by an economist that has been dead for years and using that to justify your position.

[-] 1 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

It may be easier for you to argue your point with me by misrepresenting mine, but it is disingenuous

We have the chance to severely slow the degradation of our planet by looking for alternative more sustainable products, and a change of ethos. We should pursue those avenues much more than we are

But the chief impediment to the very needed change of course is the capitalist system

We will never live in a Perfect World though

~Odin~

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Not being an economist by any stretch, I think the problem began when businesses changed their priority from "creating a quality product" to "increasing profits for the shareholders every year." Regardless of any other considerations.

The way its become, if a business made $10 million dollars profit last year but only $9 million this year, the business considers that a million dollar LOSS. Wrong! It's nine million dollars PROFIT.

[-] 2 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

You don't have to be an "economist" to know things are fucked-up

~Odin~

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

True, of course. It does seem to me that at least part (a big part?) of the problem came when the focus shifted from the consumer to the shareholder.

[-] 1 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

True....and from the employee to the shareholder

It's our job to see that they readjust their priorities with some friendly 'in your face' persuasion

I know we can count on your help...;-)

I'm going out now, see you tonight

~Odin~

[-] -1 points by Forward (-2) 1 year ago

You can call it spin or whatever you like. The fact is that you are maintaining a stark line between philosophy and reality, and arguing from the philosophic side. I'm not interested in conversation pieces, I want tangible results.

[-] 1 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 1 year ago

And you can also call it "whatever you like" too, but

The donkey goes before the cart and the "tangible results" come after the change

~Odin~

[-] -1 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

i quoted Plutach once. how long has he been dead for?

[Removed]