Let’s face it. The big four main Australian banks have really been copping it of late. A senior industry representative (unfortunately I cannot now locate the reference for just which of the Big Four Thieves he was representing) has claimed this is just populist bank-bashing. In other words, there isn’t really anything in it.
What a load of crap.
I am an ex-banker. It has been years since I got out but even back then they were rapacious in their fee-gouging and things have gotten considerably worse.
The BFT have decided that they need to back off a bit. They have announced intentions to remove a fee. But exactly what fee are they proposing to do without? Answer: the fee for early mortgage loan exit. This is supposed to be a reduction on the impost on Australians who are already paying ludicrous levels of bank fees. What’s more, this is somehow supposed to increase competition in the industry. What utter A-grade crap!
Oh give me a frigging break. Just how many people are charged that particular fee? What proportion of their overall fee base does this actually represent? Infinitesimal, that’s what.
This is a nothing response. The Big Four Thieves will continue to gouge the Australian public to the tune of multi-billion dollar profits. It is basically legalised theft.
When the banking industry was de-regulated, the intention was not to create an oligopoly that seemingly answers to nobody other than shareholders, and what shareholders are going to be complaining about their dividends from multi-billion dollar profits? Other industries had regulation forced on them. When will our government act in the interests of all Australians and introduce appropriate regulation to make the banks act in an economically and socially responsible manner?
And that's my rant.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
I HATE agreeing with Joe Hockey
If there is one thing that I really, REALLY, hate, is being forced to find myself on the same side of an argument as the likes of Joe Hockey. But, like Hockey, I find the behaviour of the major Australian banks simply unconscionable. However it should also be remembered that back when Hockey was a junior finance spokesman, he publicly put the banks ‘on notice’. The reality of course is that they didn’t take any notice of him then and shall be taken even less notice of him now.
It must be remembered that the major Australian banks are making quite literally billions per year in profits. These profits come largely from the seemingly never-ending scale of fees being introduced. The basic operations are traditionally funded by the difference between interest received and interest paid to depositors. But for the last couple of years the banks claim that the cost of raising funds is so high now that they cannot afford to pass on the full extent of any cuts interest rates by the Reserve Bank of Australia. Yet, just as the oil companies play silly buggers with petrol prices at the pump, the banks are equally as quick to pass on the entirety of any increase in interest rates. Until now that is. Now that the Commonwealth Bank of Australia has passed increased rates by more than the latest rate increase by the RBA.
The bottom line is that the banks are allowed to get away with such behaviour for several reasons. Deregulation of the banking industry years ago, freed the banks from the last of such regulation that could have controlled such behaviour. The Commonwealth Bank used to be a publicly-owned asset (note – contrary to public perception, CBA staff were not public servants as they were not paid from the public purse). However following the privatisation of the CBA, like all the other banks, the CBA has to look after the interests of and respond to shareholders. Thus the minor curbing effect the CBA used to have on the market is now gone. Finally, government has absolutely no power to force the banks into line.
Sure, there is plenty of rhetoric, but the Coalition proved unable to stop the banks (Malcolm Turnbull’s boast of 2008 that the banks were scared of them has been proven the load of shite that anyone with half a brain knew it to be). The current Labour government seems unable to do so either.
It must not be forgotten that the recent Global Financial Crisis was caused by a poorly regulated banking sector. That Australia came through the GFC in pretty good shape was no thanks to the Australian banking sector. As the banks have now well and truely shown themselves to be the school ground bullies we all suspected they were, the time has come to really draw a line in the sand. While other sectors were being forced into greater regulation of their activities, the banks were given less.
What is needed now is a re-introduction of a degree of regulation. Please note that I am not advocating governmental control of interest rates that was the logical extenstion of Hockey’s recent public announcements. However legislating that banks are not allowed to exceed the prime rates as determined by the RBA is not an unreasonable thing. Legislation forcing them to pass on all of any rate reductions in prime is similarly reasonable.
Clearly the banks are not prepared to act in a socially and economically acceptable manner, therefore the school principal needs to step in.
As I said, I really hate being on the same side of an issue as Joe Hockey, but in this instance his basic principle was right on the money.
And that’s my rant.
It must be remembered that the major Australian banks are making quite literally billions per year in profits. These profits come largely from the seemingly never-ending scale of fees being introduced. The basic operations are traditionally funded by the difference between interest received and interest paid to depositors. But for the last couple of years the banks claim that the cost of raising funds is so high now that they cannot afford to pass on the full extent of any cuts interest rates by the Reserve Bank of Australia. Yet, just as the oil companies play silly buggers with petrol prices at the pump, the banks are equally as quick to pass on the entirety of any increase in interest rates. Until now that is. Now that the Commonwealth Bank of Australia has passed increased rates by more than the latest rate increase by the RBA.
The bottom line is that the banks are allowed to get away with such behaviour for several reasons. Deregulation of the banking industry years ago, freed the banks from the last of such regulation that could have controlled such behaviour. The Commonwealth Bank used to be a publicly-owned asset (note – contrary to public perception, CBA staff were not public servants as they were not paid from the public purse). However following the privatisation of the CBA, like all the other banks, the CBA has to look after the interests of and respond to shareholders. Thus the minor curbing effect the CBA used to have on the market is now gone. Finally, government has absolutely no power to force the banks into line.
Sure, there is plenty of rhetoric, but the Coalition proved unable to stop the banks (Malcolm Turnbull’s boast of 2008 that the banks were scared of them has been proven the load of shite that anyone with half a brain knew it to be). The current Labour government seems unable to do so either.
It must not be forgotten that the recent Global Financial Crisis was caused by a poorly regulated banking sector. That Australia came through the GFC in pretty good shape was no thanks to the Australian banking sector. As the banks have now well and truely shown themselves to be the school ground bullies we all suspected they were, the time has come to really draw a line in the sand. While other sectors were being forced into greater regulation of their activities, the banks were given less.
What is needed now is a re-introduction of a degree of regulation. Please note that I am not advocating governmental control of interest rates that was the logical extenstion of Hockey’s recent public announcements. However legislating that banks are not allowed to exceed the prime rates as determined by the RBA is not an unreasonable thing. Legislation forcing them to pass on all of any rate reductions in prime is similarly reasonable.
Clearly the banks are not prepared to act in a socially and economically acceptable manner, therefore the school principal needs to step in.
As I said, I really hate being on the same side of an issue as Joe Hockey, but in this instance his basic principle was right on the money.
And that’s my rant.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Burning the Koran?
It beggars belief that a so-called Christian pastor in the USA is going to hold a bonfire, burning copies of the Koran, supposedly to remember the Sept 11 attacks.
Exactly how is that going to achieve anything positive? All it will do is further inflame the very people on both sides who need little incentive to cause trouble as it is. Did militant extremists of the Islamic faith commit an atrocity in the attack on the World Trade Centre? Yes. Should that be condoned by any sane, rational person? No. But how does attacking the entire Islamic faith by burning the Koran do anything other than stir up more bigotry and intolerance?
Intolerance. That is what lies at the heart of this matter. This stunt is saying 'the terrorists were Islamic extremists, therefore all of Islam is to be reviled.' And these are Christians behind this stunt? What is this - a return to the values of the medieval Crusades? I suggest this pastor go and have a closer read of Christ's teachings in the New Testament.
here is a question for these redneck, right-wing extremists in the USA - what about those Muslims have have aided the War on Terror, or whatever we are supposed to be calling it these days?
A friend of mine is unashamed of her Sunni Islamic faith. She is from Iraq. "Uh oh," the redneck ratbags will be already thinking. "She is an Iraqi Muslim from the same sect as Sadam Hussein - she must be a bad one.
A reality check: my friend's father was an opponent of Hussein's and was murdered for his trouble; my friend worked as an interpreter for the US troops invading Iraq to topple Hussein; my friend was then forced to leave her homeland due to the death threats she received from Hussein's die-hard supporters. Did the USA do anything to repay her support? Nope.
A thoroughly modern and independent person, not to mention being a talented poet, my friend was persecuted again on her return. She refused to wear the burka because there is no basis for it in the Koran. She believes she should be allowed to leave the house without having to be accompanied by a male member of the family. Ironically, she did enjoy those 'freedoms' during the Hussein days. But with the conservative Shi'ite faction now largely in control, she was forced to leave her homeland yet again.
According to these right-wing ratbags in the US, my friend is on the Islamic faith and is therefore 'bad'. She is to be lumped in with the rest of of the Islamic world and symbolically burned by burning the Koran. Yet is my friend somehow a one-off? I very much doubt it.
Have any of these idiots given any thought to the idea that such a stunt could just encourage the militants and the moderates together in a unified front: the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Should the events at the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon be simply forgotten? No. Thousands of innocents were killed and rescue workers are developing all sorts of health problems from their exposure to all sorts of materials in the rubble. But is this blatant agitation of hate even remotely warranted? NO.
All this really demonstrates is the power of far-right conservatives have over so much of the political agenda in the USA. Sadly, Australia has its own right-wing elements determinedly heading in the same direction, forming a bloc of gross intolerance that is every bit as bad as the extremists they claim to e opposing.
That's my rant.
Exactly how is that going to achieve anything positive? All it will do is further inflame the very people on both sides who need little incentive to cause trouble as it is. Did militant extremists of the Islamic faith commit an atrocity in the attack on the World Trade Centre? Yes. Should that be condoned by any sane, rational person? No. But how does attacking the entire Islamic faith by burning the Koran do anything other than stir up more bigotry and intolerance?
Intolerance. That is what lies at the heart of this matter. This stunt is saying 'the terrorists were Islamic extremists, therefore all of Islam is to be reviled.' And these are Christians behind this stunt? What is this - a return to the values of the medieval Crusades? I suggest this pastor go and have a closer read of Christ's teachings in the New Testament.
here is a question for these redneck, right-wing extremists in the USA - what about those Muslims have have aided the War on Terror, or whatever we are supposed to be calling it these days?
A friend of mine is unashamed of her Sunni Islamic faith. She is from Iraq. "Uh oh," the redneck ratbags will be already thinking. "She is an Iraqi Muslim from the same sect as Sadam Hussein - she must be a bad one.
A reality check: my friend's father was an opponent of Hussein's and was murdered for his trouble; my friend worked as an interpreter for the US troops invading Iraq to topple Hussein; my friend was then forced to leave her homeland due to the death threats she received from Hussein's die-hard supporters. Did the USA do anything to repay her support? Nope.
A thoroughly modern and independent person, not to mention being a talented poet, my friend was persecuted again on her return. She refused to wear the burka because there is no basis for it in the Koran. She believes she should be allowed to leave the house without having to be accompanied by a male member of the family. Ironically, she did enjoy those 'freedoms' during the Hussein days. But with the conservative Shi'ite faction now largely in control, she was forced to leave her homeland yet again.
According to these right-wing ratbags in the US, my friend is on the Islamic faith and is therefore 'bad'. She is to be lumped in with the rest of of the Islamic world and symbolically burned by burning the Koran. Yet is my friend somehow a one-off? I very much doubt it.
Have any of these idiots given any thought to the idea that such a stunt could just encourage the militants and the moderates together in a unified front: the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Should the events at the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon be simply forgotten? No. Thousands of innocents were killed and rescue workers are developing all sorts of health problems from their exposure to all sorts of materials in the rubble. But is this blatant agitation of hate even remotely warranted? NO.
All this really demonstrates is the power of far-right conservatives have over so much of the political agenda in the USA. Sadly, Australia has its own right-wing elements determinedly heading in the same direction, forming a bloc of gross intolerance that is every bit as bad as the extremists they claim to e opposing.
That's my rant.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Don't ask Borders for anything!
It is a general occurrence in business that if a store does not have a particular stock item available, said store will make at least some attempt to order it in. That is, unless it is the Borders chain.
A while ago I made inquiries about a particular title listed in their database. By pure chance, it was that store's manager who assisted me at that time. He confirmed that they did not have it in stock, despite it being a recent release by a major publisher. However he assured me that they could order it in for me when I was ready and gave me a coded discount card towards the purchase as an apology for not having it in stock. Because he made the attempt and offered me a discount, I did not go looking for it anywhere else.
Today I attempted to redeem that discount voucher in ordering said title. Only now I was told that Borders do not order anything from anyone, but only move stock between stores. Obviously that is a load of codswallop else they would soon have quite empty stores. Or do they have fairies in the bottom of the garden who magic stock in at night while everyone is asleep? Perhaps they rely on publishers and distributors being psychic?
I was momentarily dumbfounded. You DON'T order stock for customers???
The 'assistant' (what an oxymoron as they did anything but assist me) confirmed it - no, they do not order anything for anyone. I was instead basically told to go online and sort it out for myself.
Was I trying to order a rare seventeenth century manuscript or a copy of Mein Kampf, translated into Swahili and printed on elephant hide? Nope, just an anthology from a major publisher that is already in their database.
A few minutes ago I lodged a complaint about this experience on their website. An automated response came rocketing back, thanking me for my inquiry and informing me that my nearest store could assist with information about pricing and availability. Uh uh - no they don't. Because that means actually looking it up and they no longer provide such an exotic service.
A book store that refuses to help a customer obtain a book? Have you ever heard of such a thing?
A while ago I made inquiries about a particular title listed in their database. By pure chance, it was that store's manager who assisted me at that time. He confirmed that they did not have it in stock, despite it being a recent release by a major publisher. However he assured me that they could order it in for me when I was ready and gave me a coded discount card towards the purchase as an apology for not having it in stock. Because he made the attempt and offered me a discount, I did not go looking for it anywhere else.
Today I attempted to redeem that discount voucher in ordering said title. Only now I was told that Borders do not order anything from anyone, but only move stock between stores. Obviously that is a load of codswallop else they would soon have quite empty stores. Or do they have fairies in the bottom of the garden who magic stock in at night while everyone is asleep? Perhaps they rely on publishers and distributors being psychic?
I was momentarily dumbfounded. You DON'T order stock for customers???
The 'assistant' (what an oxymoron as they did anything but assist me) confirmed it - no, they do not order anything for anyone. I was instead basically told to go online and sort it out for myself.
Was I trying to order a rare seventeenth century manuscript or a copy of Mein Kampf, translated into Swahili and printed on elephant hide? Nope, just an anthology from a major publisher that is already in their database.
A few minutes ago I lodged a complaint about this experience on their website. An automated response came rocketing back, thanking me for my inquiry and informing me that my nearest store could assist with information about pricing and availability. Uh uh - no they don't. Because that means actually looking it up and they no longer provide such an exotic service.
A book store that refuses to help a customer obtain a book? Have you ever heard of such a thing?
Thursday, July 22, 2010
What's the deal, Danny?
I have a confession to make. I am a fan of boxing. I freely admit that it speaks to something primeval in me, not to mention admiring the skill, strength, guts and stamina that make up a successful fighter. However boxing has long had a reputation of shady dealings, arising from dodgy things in the past like fixed matches.
The future of boxing in Australia, at least, has been dealt a telling blow.
Last ni
ght saw a title fight between IBO cruiserweight title holder, Danny Green and Paul Briggs. The fight was mired in controversy from the outset with it being banned in New South Wales. Briggs was returning to the ring after a three year layoff and NSW authorities deemed him medically unfit to take part. Authorities in Western Australia took a different view, claiming that the medical scans they viewed show no reason to disallow the fight.
Less than thirty seconds in to the fight, Green’s glove little more than brushed Briggs’s head. But Briggs went staggering down, to be counted out with the win on a Technical Knock Out going to Green.
The crowd present were far from impressed, pelting Briggs and his minders with pretty much everything they could lay their hands on. Back in the ring, Green took the microphone amidst loud boos from the crowd. But Green got them somewhat back onside by shouting defiance in the ring, describing Briggs as ‘less than a canine’. He seemed genuine in his anger.
Things have taken a decidedly murky turn today.
For a start, after his apparent anger in the ring last night against Briggs, today Green has come out claiming that he did strike a blow that legitimately hurt Briggs. Having repeatedly seen the blow in slow motion, I find that decidedly hard to believe.
The really concerning thing however, is what has now been revealed by sports betting agencies. A sudden major betting splurge came out on a first round knockout. TAB Sportsbet smelled a rat and suspended betting. Today, that agency announced that it will be refunding money to people who lost on the fight. That is the first time I have ever heard of bookies refunding money like that!
There is yet another issue. This was a title fight for an international title belt. So just how does someone who has not fought for over three years, get a first-up crack at a title shot? What was this – a bad (worse?) version of Rocky?
The evening’s fights were put together and promoted by Green’s own promotion company which makes things look even more suspect.
Some big names from Australia’s boxing past have made some telling comments today. Legendary trainer, Johnny Lewis, described Australian boxing as being ‘raped’ last night, saying the punch that put Briggs down, wouldn’t have dented a Sao (a brittle Australian dry biscuit/cookie). Multiple title holder, Jeff Fenech, was similarly unimpressed, saying it was shameful and describing Green as getting what he paid for. “He paid for a knock-out win.”
The final, telling word for the moment came from Johnny Lewis. This stalwart of Australian boxing now says he would rather encourage youngsters to go and play football instead.
To butcher Shakespeare, something stinks in Denmark, my friends – worse than my socks in summertime.
The future of boxing in Australia, at least, has been dealt a telling blow.
Last ni
ght saw a title fight between IBO cruiserweight title holder, Danny Green and Paul Briggs. The fight was mired in controversy from the outset with it being banned in New South Wales. Briggs was returning to the ring after a three year layoff and NSW authorities deemed him medically unfit to take part. Authorities in Western Australia took a different view, claiming that the medical scans they viewed show no reason to disallow the fight.Less than thirty seconds in to the fight, Green’s glove little more than brushed Briggs’s head. But Briggs went staggering down, to be counted out with the win on a Technical Knock Out going to Green.
The crowd present were far from impressed, pelting Briggs and his minders with pretty much everything they could lay their hands on. Back in the ring, Green took the microphone amidst loud boos from the crowd. But Green got them somewhat back onside by shouting defiance in the ring, describing Briggs as ‘less than a canine’. He seemed genuine in his anger.
Things have taken a decidedly murky turn today.
For a start, after his apparent anger in the ring last night against Briggs, today Green has come out claiming that he did strike a blow that legitimately hurt Briggs. Having repeatedly seen the blow in slow motion, I find that decidedly hard to believe.
The really concerning thing however, is what has now been revealed by sports betting agencies. A sudden major betting splurge came out on a first round knockout. TAB Sportsbet smelled a rat and suspended betting. Today, that agency announced that it will be refunding money to people who lost on the fight. That is the first time I have ever heard of bookies refunding money like that!
There is yet another issue. This was a title fight for an international title belt. So just how does someone who has not fought for over three years, get a first-up crack at a title shot? What was this – a bad (worse?) version of Rocky?
The evening’s fights were put together and promoted by Green’s own promotion company which makes things look even more suspect.
Some big names from Australia’s boxing past have made some telling comments today. Legendary trainer, Johnny Lewis, described Australian boxing as being ‘raped’ last night, saying the punch that put Briggs down, wouldn’t have dented a Sao (a brittle Australian dry biscuit/cookie). Multiple title holder, Jeff Fenech, was similarly unimpressed, saying it was shameful and describing Green as getting what he paid for. “He paid for a knock-out win.”
The final, telling word for the moment came from Johnny Lewis. This stalwart of Australian boxing now says he would rather encourage youngsters to go and play football instead.
To butcher Shakespeare, something stinks in Denmark, my friends – worse than my socks in summertime.
Abbott losing race to a non-starter?
My oh my. How interesting and embarressing are the latest polls in the Australian election race.
Firstly, new Prime Minister Julie Gillard has an approval rating of 52% over the man she deposed, Kevin Rudd (21%). That was a surprise.
How much would Opposition leader, Tony Abbott, like to have a lead like that? But the same poll showed that Abbott, with an approval rating of only 24% is actually less popular than the man he knifed in the back, Malcolm Turnbull with 29%. Abbott ties for second place with the man that I confidently expect will eventually be putting himself forward as the ‘saviour’ of the Liberal Party, Joe Hockey.
This is simply priceless – Tony Abbott is coming second to a man who, when he was leader, ran the approval ratings down practically into negative figures!
The Mad Monk clearly is the Weakest Link, so get off our fecking island!
Firstly, new Prime Minister Julie Gillard has an approval rating of 52% over the man she deposed, Kevin Rudd (21%). That was a surprise.
How much would Opposition leader, Tony Abbott, like to have a lead like that? But the same poll showed that Abbott, with an approval rating of only 24% is actually less popular than the man he knifed in the back, Malcolm Turnbull with 29%. Abbott ties for second place with the man that I confidently expect will eventually be putting himself forward as the ‘saviour’ of the Liberal Party, Joe Hockey.
This is simply priceless – Tony Abbott is coming second to a man who, when he was leader, ran the approval ratings down practically into negative figures!
The Mad Monk clearly is the Weakest Link, so get off our fecking island!
Monday, July 19, 2010
Chuck ruins Fromelles ceremony for me
I began drafting this post while watching 'Remembering Fromelles'. For those outside Australia and England, Fromelles was the first action that Australian troops took part in on the Western Front, World War 1, accompanied by a lesser force of British troops.
I have previously posted about the events of Fromelles.
Many of the dead were not recovered, being left behind in the German lines after the attack failed. The Germans, on re-taking their lines, buried the Allied soldiers they found there, in a mass grave.
The location of that grave was missed in the years after the War when the War Graves Commission were relocating other such remains to War Graves Cemeteries. It remained unknown until the efforts of amateur Australian archaeologists, particularly those of Lambis Englezos, who would not rest until the site was researched and excavated. Many of those remains were now identified and moved to a newly commissioned War Cemetary.
The last set of remains to be interred were those of an unknown soldier on the 94th anniversary of that disastrous battle (the brainchild of a British General who was as happy to slaughter 'colonial' troops as he was his own). That single coffin was placed on a restored WW1 horse-drawn carriage and moved on its last short journey to the new cemetery.
Along that short trip, groups of soldiers fell in behind the carriage, forming a procession.
Now here is where I get cranky. Near the eventual head of that procession was Prince Charles, his chest resplendent with all his medals for doing nothing during a brief peacetime service in the forces. I said the procession fell into step behind the carriage - all except Charlie Boy that is. He managed to be entirely out-of-step with everyone else. Striding out next to him was Australia's Governor General and she had no difficulty managing to march in step, but not our Chaz. Then the procession moved into slow-time, admittedly not always the easiest pace to do. But by now Prince Pratt looked like he was stoned while on a country ramble, gawking at the scenery, his hat flopping around in his hand.
Frankly, Chuck, if you couldn't be arsed even pretending to show a modicum of respect to both your countrymen and mine, then, please, just fuck off (yep - I am seriously pissed off).
And that, ladies and gents, is theoretically our next head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, blah blah blah. If ever there was a need for an argument for an Australian Republic, look no further than the heir to the throne: all the brains of a maggot but not nearly as good looking.
I have previously posted about the events of Fromelles.
Many of the dead were not recovered, being left behind in the German lines after the attack failed. The Germans, on re-taking their lines, buried the Allied soldiers they found there, in a mass grave.
The location of that grave was missed in the years after the War when the War Graves Commission were relocating other such remains to War Graves Cemeteries. It remained unknown until the efforts of amateur Australian archaeologists, particularly those of Lambis Englezos, who would not rest until the site was researched and excavated. Many of those remains were now identified and moved to a newly commissioned War Cemetary.
The last set of remains to be interred were those of an unknown soldier on the 94th anniversary of that disastrous battle (the brainchild of a British General who was as happy to slaughter 'colonial' troops as he was his own). That single coffin was placed on a restored WW1 horse-drawn carriage and moved on its last short journey to the new cemetery.
Along that short trip, groups of soldiers fell in behind the carriage, forming a procession.
Now here is where I get cranky. Near the eventual head of that procession was Prince Charles, his chest resplendent with all his medals for doing nothing during a brief peacetime service in the forces. I said the procession fell into step behind the carriage - all except Charlie Boy that is. He managed to be entirely out-of-step with everyone else. Striding out next to him was Australia's Governor General and she had no difficulty managing to march in step, but not our Chaz. Then the procession moved into slow-time, admittedly not always the easiest pace to do. But by now Prince Pratt looked like he was stoned while on a country ramble, gawking at the scenery, his hat flopping around in his hand.
Frankly, Chuck, if you couldn't be arsed even pretending to show a modicum of respect to both your countrymen and mine, then, please, just fuck off (yep - I am seriously pissed off).
And that, ladies and gents, is theoretically our next head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, blah blah blah. If ever there was a need for an argument for an Australian Republic, look no further than the heir to the throne: all the brains of a maggot but not nearly as good looking.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
