Support NeoGAF

[BeesEight]

So if the US formaly withdraws from the TPP it would still be able to pass with the remaining countries (but the US does have to formally withdraw). So in that case we would still be able to sign it, and perhaps we should since we really could use some diversification from the US economy.

You know, I could come around to this thinking.

I know I've always heard that we've relied far too much on the American market. I just don't think anyone seriously considered it being an issue before.

 

[diaspora]

Isn't the tribunal the only reason why Canada was able to win its softwood lumber fight from like a decade ago?

Yes. The tribunal prevents the US from unfairly fucking Canadian companies and vice versa.

 

[Silexx]

Isn't the tribunal the only reason why Canada was able to win its softwood lumber fight from like a decade ago?

Bingo. I was just about to say this.

 

[DopeyFish]

Isn't the tribunal the only reason why Canada was able to win its softwood lumber fight from like a decade ago?

I thought the lumber stuff never resolved itself

Also TPP with no US would probably a good idea

Just need to remove the shit for the US corporations

We would have to accept no manufacturing jobs returning at that point.

 

[Sean C]

1) Apparently that's why Steven Blaney is running: specifically to stop Maxine Bernier. According to people I know in the CPC, his stances are all being taken solely with Quebec in mind, which is why he's pandering so hard to those voters on stuff like hijabs and supply management. It's horribly cynical, but it shows how much the rest of the caucus apparently dislikes Bernier.

Isn't that kind of meaningless since it's ranked balloting?

 

[Zips]

The voting system has to change to protect us from a far-right victory happening at some point.

As it is right now, with the conservative party able to win majorities with a minority of votes, and that party being the only right wing one we have, it is only a matter of time.

The far right is on the rise around the world, and though one hopes it will subside in time, it will be pushing for power in Canada as long as the trend continues.

Electoral reform is even more incredibly important now.

 

[Lexxism]

Apparently if NAFTA goes away, US-Canada still have a free trade agreement already ratified from 1989.

So if NAFTA goes down, free trade still exists... But mexico is taken out of equation and the tribunals go away.

Not bad if you ask me.

Yeah, I remember reading this from The Star. Unless Trump wants that too.

 

[gabbo]

Yeah, I remember reading this from The Star. Unless Trump wants that too.

He probably equates them

 

[matthewwhatever]

My only problem with Sheer is that he's a blank slate. While that can be a good thing, no one really knows about Sheer as a politician since he was speaker for the entire time.

Scheer recently voted alongside Brad Trost against the trans rights bill -- the only two CPCers to do so. I think it's pretty clear where Scheer stands, even if he's not as vocal about it as Trost is.

I thought the lumber stuff never resolved itself

Also TPP with no US would probably a good idea

Just need to remove the shit for the US corporations

We would have to accept no manufacturing jobs returning at that point.

We had a ten-year agreement with the U.S. on softwood lumber that only just expired last year (with a year long grace period ending a few weeks ago). Considering it's been an issue for a century, I'd say ten years of quiet on that file is pretty impressive.

Isn't that kind of meaningless since it's ranked balloting?

From the point of view of spiting Bernier, no. If Bernier runs unopposed in Quebec, he gets the bulk of those 7,800 points. If Blaney splits the Quebec vote with Bernier, it becomes significantly harder for Bernier to win.

After witnessing the Vancouver market over the last several years I'd lean toward supporting the CMHC getting out of the business of backstopping mortgages. At this point at the very least my default view is that the government backing of mortgages seems harmful and I'm interested to hear an explanation from the alternative view point as to why exactly the Canadian government should be continuing to take on housing market risk instead of the banks and what the benefits are to Canadians here. The current set of policies seem like an experiment from another era that is clearly no longer having the desired effect.

From Chong's webpage


I definitely agree that this would make housing more affordable for Canadians in some areas of Canada. What we've seen in hot markets such as Toronto and Vancouver is that since banks are carrying zero risk, they have an ability to set extremely low interest rates and are happy to lend to anyone, including people that are over extending themselves and really shouldn't be buying a home. The effect of this lax lending has been a spiking of housing prices as everyone is able to get massive mortgages. The entity taking on all the risk here unfortunately is not the banks but the Canadian government. If the housing bubble bursts spectacularly, it will be Canadians, not banks, that will have to pay to bail everyone out.

If the CMHC stops backstopping mortgages, then the risk will have to be borne by the banks. This means that interest rates will rise and the banks' will be a great deal more careful about who they lend to and how much. With a much lower pool of buyers with less money available to spend, the price of housing will fall.

In my opinion the recent moves from the new Liberal government toward starting to share risk with banks is one of the best policies I've seen from the new government in this first year and I'd like to see this continue. I'd rather see the CMHC involved in funding public housing than subsidizing private mortgages.

I'm always concerned about the spectre of some US style housing bubble collapse as well. I think the way we have to guard ourselves here is with tough regulations to ensure that private lenders aren't lending to people that can't afford it.

I wasn't aware he was proposing to strengthen the OFSI as well, so that improves my opinion somewhat.

That said, if it plays out the way you're describing -- banks raise interest rates because they don't want to take on as much risk -- it'd still be pretty devastating to a lot of people. Household debt levels in this country are ridiculously high. While that's undeniably bad and something that needs to be addressed somehow, it means that many (most?) people wouldn't be able to handle a sudden rise in interest rates. (There was a study just recently to that effect, in fact, that showed even a point rise in mortgage interest rates would put a majority of homeowners in Canada underwater.) In essence, you'd be cooling off housing markets in two cities at the expense of everywhere else in the country, which doesn't seem like very good policy to me. I don't disagree that we need to make housing more affordable in Toronto and Vancouver, but we also need to make sure that people who own houses now can continue to afford them.

 

[DopeyFish]

He probably equates them

Free trade isn't exactly an issue. Free trade where there's a massive deviance in labour costs is. Canada-US trade is need driven while Canada/US-Mexico is profit driven.

Canada isn't a big issue to the USA due to manufacturing also leaving in spades... We kind of share mostly the same issues with free trade.

Actually... If CUSFTA stays in place... We will probably act as a proxy between European and American markets which could be a massive economic boom.

But yeah, this is trump we are talking about

Now that I think about it... Maybe trying to get a free trade agreement with every individual country would be a novel idea. Play the world against themselves. Make yourself open for market centralisation. Hmmm.

 

[maharg]

This is the first I've ever heard of the original FTA still being somehow in effect post-NAFTA. I'd definitely like to see something really authoritative say that it would be before I buy it.

 

[matthewwhatever]

This is the first I've ever heard of the original FTA still being somehow in effect post-NAFTA. I'd definitely like to see something really authoritative say that it would be before I buy it.

NAFTA supersedes the original FTA. Anyone saying otherwise is engaging in wishful thinking.

 

[Tiktaalik]

I wasn't aware he was proposing to strengthen the OFSI as well, so that improves my opinion somewhat.

That said, if it plays out the way you're describing -- banks raise interest rates because they don't want to take on as much risk -- it'd still be pretty devastating to a lot of people. Household debt levels in this country are ridiculously high. While that's undeniably bad and something that needs to be addressed somehow, it means that many (most?) people wouldn't be able to handle a sudden rise in interest rates. (There was a study just recently to that effect, in fact, that showed even a point rise in mortgage interest rates would put a majority of homeowners in Canada underwater.) In essence, you'd be cooling off housing markets in two cities at the expense of everywhere else in the country, which doesn't seem like very good policy to me. I don't disagree that we need to make housing more affordable in Toronto and Vancouver, but we also need to make sure that people who own houses now can continue to afford them.

These are all valid points. The fact that we feel handcuffed because Canadians have foolishly taken on so much debt is indicative of how bad the situation has become. The CMHC getting out of the market immediately could be a traumatic shock and it would be better to slowly reduce the amount of exposure the CMHC has to private mortgages over time.

The most effective way for Vancouver and Toronto to cool their housing markets independently of the rest of the country would be to simply to raise property taxes. This of course would be insanely unpopular and would be the death knell to any municipal government. We most notice high prices in Toronto and Vancouver but the results of low interest rates and lax lending practices exists across Canada. It is likely that prices all over Canada are similarly inflated from actual reasonable valuations, but because they're not so obviously eye watering as Toronto and Vancouver we don't notice and consider this normal.

Of all the things we can spend our money on I don't know why making it "cheaper"[1] for buy a house should be a priority at all. What about all the people that will never be able to afford a house and will rent for life? Why should their tax dollars go to prop up the real estate industry? It's baffling to me. This just isn't something we should be spending money on. Let's divert all these funds and effort to creating more affordable rental housing for people who can't even afford to rent.

[1] we know now of course that this policy isn't actually making housing cheaper.

 

[DopeyFish]

NAFTA supersedes the original FTA. Anyone saying otherwise is engaging in wishful thinking.

But the CUSFTA hasn't been repealed. If NAFTA is repealed, CUSFTA becomes the acting trade agreement between the US and Canada.

 

[thefil]

Partner and I are both in US under NAFTA and both our visas expire in early 2017. also need to sign a new 1 year lease in a few weeks.

STRESSED

 

[Ether_Snake]

So my dad says Trump is planning to bring back all US car manufacturing from Canada back to the US, using tariffs. I've seen this nowhere, I'm guessing it's bull but wouldn't surprise me if it was true. Canada could do nothing to prevent that. Plus he'd probably approve Keystone to pretend it makes up for it.

 

[CazTGG]

But the CUSFTA hasn't been repealed. If NAFTA is repealed, CUSFTA becomes the acting trade agreement between the US and Canada.

The (Canadian) Bill of Rights hasn't been repealed either. Doesn't change the fact that it's superseded by another form of law (read: Charter), not to mention that it's more likely that we'll see another agreement that supersedes NAFTA instead of reverting back to the CUSFTA.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Partner and I are both in US under NAFTA and both our visas expire in early 2017. also need to sign a new 1 year lease in a few weeks.

STRESSED

In this respect, actually, renegotiating NAFTA wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Most of those job classifications are pretty out of date, so reviewing and updating them to make sure they reflect modern realities would be a major step forward.

In every other respect, of course, dramatically altering NAFTA would be pretty bad for everyone on both sides of the border.

These are all valid points. The fact that we feel handcuffed because Canadians have foolishly taken on so much debt is indicative of how bad the situation has become. The CMHC getting out of the market immediately could be a traumatic shock and it would be better to slowly reduce the amount of exposure the CMHC has to private mortgages over time.

The most effective way for Vancouver and Toronto to cool their housing markets independently of the rest of the country would be to simply to raise property taxes. This of course would be insanely unpopular and would be the death knell to any municipal government. We most notice high prices in Toronto and Vancouver but the results of low interest rates and lax lending practices exists across Canada. It is likely that prices all over Canada are similarly inflated from actual reasonable valuations, but because they're not so obviously eye watering as Toronto and Vancouver we don't notice and consider this normal.

Of all the things we can spend our money on I don't know why making it "cheaper"[1] for buy a house should be a priority at all. What about all the people that will never be able to afford a house and will rent for life? Why should their tax dollars go to prop up the real estate industry? It's baffling to me. This just isn't something we should be spending money on. Let's divert all these funds and effort to creating more affordable rental housing for people who can't even afford to rent.

[1] we know now of course that this policy isn't actually making housing cheaper.

Actually, it really is only Vancouver (+ Victoria) and Toronto. Growth everywhere else in Canada is pretty reasonable.

That said, I want to be clear that I otherwise mostly agree with all of this. I mean, as a homeowner myself, I'm obviously in favour of buying over renting, but I'd be fully in favour of anything that makes affordable housing more widely available.

 

[eBay Huckster]

say i'm an american citizen in his 20s with >1 year of skilled work experience in NOC 2011 skill level A, a master's degree in the field the work experience is in, exemplary language scores, the whole nine yards

but i also have a kidney disorder that prescription medication alone has staved off which might get me flagged as "medically inadmissible"

how fucked am i?

(am i better off talking to actual immigration lawyers about this?)

 

[gabbo]

say i'm an american citizen in his 20s with >1 year of skilled work experience in NOC 2011 skill level A, a master's degree in the field the work experience is in, exemplary language scores, the whole nine yards

but i also have a kidney disorder that prescription medication alone has staved off which might get me flagged as "medically inadmissible"

how fucked am i?

(am i better off talking to actual immigration lawyers about this?)

Are you asking how good your odds are of immigrating?

 

[eBay Huckster]

that and "are there even any options available to me?"

 

[gabbo]

Since immigration is one area I'm not up to speed with, this might help answer some questions:
Are you Eligible? from our Immigration website.

 

[PumpkinSpice]

but i also have a kidney disorder that prescription medication alone has staved off which might get me flagged as "medically inadmissible"

As long as it's not likely to need dialysis you're probably fine. There's a medical component to getting PR but if you're just on a prescription it shouldn't be a deal breaker.


Do we actually need a "moving to Canada" OT?

 

[eBay Huckster]

thing is, it's gonna need dialysis/a transplant down the road, just not in the immediate future (next 5 years, maybe next 10 - or even longer, because these medications weren't supposed to have lasted me this long)

 

[killer rin]

As long as it's not likely to need dialysis you're probably fine. There's a medical component to getting PR but if you're just on a prescription it shouldn't be a deal breaker.


Do we actually need a "moving to Canada" OT?

I was just thinking that myself

 

[MMarston]

I was just thinking that myself

Moving to Canada |OT| You're in our swamp now.

 

[mdubs]

Cool. I don't know why the fuck mdubs kept bringing up that example then. Must be some sort of "gotcha" attempt or something.


This is getting beyond stupid. My very final attempt 'cause I'm running out of ways to repeat myself:
The government should not prevent people from expressing their religious beliefs in a peaceful, legal, non-threatening, non-harmful, unsafe way. People should be all equally free to wear whatever the fuck hat or accessory they want so long as it does not conflict with other rules that are applied to non-religious people. A Christian dude wants to wear a cross at his public government job? A Jewish man wants to wear his yarmulke? A Muslim lady wants to wear a headscarf? Who cares. It doesn't hurt anyone and doesn't interfere with their ability to do their job. A Muslim woman wants to wear a burqa that hides her entire face and body, muffles her voice, and wants to work with the public, and it's been determined that this is inconvenient and interferes with her job? Then she gotta take it off, or we should allow anyone to wear a potato sack over their head.
A Sikh wants to wear a turban under his helmet? If the military says "eh whatever, they're still well-protected and it causes no risk", then cool. If a non-Sikh says "turbans look cool, I wanna wear one too", then they should say "all right, since it's OK for him it's OK for you too" and not "nuh-huh, you don't have a sincere mystical belief about the sacredness of this object, no turban for you". Either the turban is harmful/unsafe, and should be banned for everyone, or it's totally fine, and should be allowed for everyone.

The "justification" should be one that involves harm, safety, or practicality. Does it interfere with your work/activity, does it create health or safety risks, does it actively cause harm? No? Then cool, wear what you want. Yes? Follow the rules like everyone else.

Clear now?

Now we're getting some clarity - you do in fact believe that the relgious have some sort of right not to be constrained arbitrarily by the government.

The 2a right's purpose is to protect against the sort of targeted arbitriness that could result from assessments made by the government about who can wear or do what in what situations. Since you do believe that the government has to have some good reason for preventing someone from wearing something, I think you would agree then that 2a does have a purpose in preventing subtly targeted measures by the government to target one group by virtue of targeting everyone (such as the propose ban on face coverings at citizenship ceremonies). This is what it's meant to do: To prevent the government from arbitrarily impinging on a group's ability to practice through balancing with other relevant interests. It forces the government to really justify itself to impinge on a religious right because of the intrinsic value that the beliefs have to people. My take away is actually that you pretty much agree with the way things are now. As a side not I'm not sure why you're getting mad about discussing this, it's an important and useful topic in our society to think about, and I think we've had a pretty respectful discussion otherwise about it.

 

[maharg]

thing is, it's gonna need dialysis/a transplant down the road, just not in the immediate future (next 5 years, maybe next 10 - or even longer, because these medications weren't supposed to have lasted me this long)

You should probably just consult an immigration lawyer. It doesn't seem impossible that you could get a free/cheap short consult with one or more to decide if it's worth pursuing or not.

 

[Laevateinn]

Moving to Canada |OT| You're in our swamp now.

I became obsessed with moving to Canada after my first election (2004). It is actually one of the reasons I got a Ph.D. In truth, it's kind of a shame because those of us for whom moving to Canada would be beneficial it's probably rather difficult to emigrate. Whereas for people like me where all I would need is a reason to be there it's probably better for me to stay so that I can vote for the right people and donate to the right causes.

All that aside, I love Montreal and would definitely consider moving there if your dollar wasn't shit or I wasn't being buried in student loan debt.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Now we're getting some clarity

Yay, I'm glad the 35654th time was the charm.

My take away is actually that you pretty much agree with the way things are now.

Uh, no, since it appears that Scotsman wasn't allowed his ceremonial knife (but Sikhs would be)...

As a side not I'm not sure why you're getting mad about discussing this, it's an important and useful topic in our society to think about, and I think we've had a pretty respectful discussion otherwise about it.

I was getting annoyed because I feel like I'm repeating myself ad nauseam. I don't even know what part of my last post somehow shed more light vs the previous ones, and based on the snippet above I'm not even sure if it even worked... -_-

 

[Divvy]

It begins continues

 

[gabbo]

It begins continues

Where was this?

 

[crimzonflame]

It begins continues

I have no doubt in my mind that this will continue to grow.

 

[Divvy]

Where was this?

Toronto

 

[Mr. Giggles]

It begins continues

Anyone joining this type of "movement" is only doing so out of racism. I would love to see the "economic anxiety" bullshit reasons given that the country is suffering at the moment because of the conservatives past actions

Also given that even white Canadians are very aware of their immigrant roots these organizations Have very little to hide

 

[kitschykitty]

Toronto

If I see one of those it's going straight in the trash

 

[Royal_Phalanx]

Jumping on here to ask about my chances of moving to Canada in the future (been there for a visit and loved the country) to escape the shitshow that is the UK and to get a better quality of life (was thinking of moving country even before the referendum). Want to become a web/software developer. Don't have the required experience now but hope to be at that point in a couple of years assuming the rules don't change. These jobs are in NOC skill level A, and I have nothing else to stop me from getting a visa so qualifying for Express Entry is a feasible goal to aim for. Do companies typically give sponsorships to workers in tech with a year or two of experience? Was hoping to work in the EU a couple of years ago too, but that door may well be closed soon, so looking at my options.

 

[Mr.Mike]

Anyone joining this type of "movement" is only doing so out of racism. I would love to see the "economic anxiety" bullshit reasons given that the country is suffering at the moment because of the conservatives past actions

Also given that even white Canadians are very aware of their immigrant roots these organizations Have very little to hide

Yeah, this is what really bothers me about young Canadian Trump supporters (and there are at least a few). Obviously they're not desperately hoping he'll bring back their old jobs or whatever, so what part of him are they enthralled by?

I'm getting closer and closer to joining the CPC to vote against this. And I do actually like at least one candidate from what I've seen so far.

If things go well we might have a situation where most feel like they have multiple political parties to choose to vote for that they actually really like. But there's also a path we might go down where the weird nativist moves we saw from the CPC last election are doubled down on instead of repudiated, which would be a real shame since the possibility of an actually really great political landscape was within reach. (Also maybe the NDP would need to replace Mulcair to get people to really feel good about it, but at least I don't see them going evil on us)

 

[Morrigan Stark]

It begins continues

Ewwwwww

 

[Apathy]

Moving to Canada |OT| You're in our swamp now.

I would trade swamp with tundra

 

[mf.luder]

Toronto

Fucking filth. I'll rip down each one I see.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Fucking filth. I'll rip down each one I see.

If I ever see a similar thing in Montreal, I'll definitely do the same.

 

[Silexx]

While I'm not going to dismiss the prospect of Trumpism creeping in Canadian politics, I think that the Liberals at least have the right idea in going strong on their "middle class" messaging because those are the people they need to reach and doing so without needing to meddle in racially divisive rhetoric.

 

[Complex Shadow]

Toronto

what the hell. so gross.

 

[Vamphuntr]

It begins continues

This is why I feel laws on free speech and hate speech are important and what we have here in Canada is a good thing. I know a lot of people here on GAF believe you should be able to say everything you want no matter how awful it is. I remember having an argument about this on GAF years ago and people would say that let people says their hateful remarks and they will be publicly humiliated for it. It obviously doesn't work, a racist and misogynist bully is now POTUS. Laws can help saying what we should accept as a society and prevent normalization and trivialization of hatred.

It's so sad that there is a movement along some part of the population thinking that their whole life is going to hell because of people different than them. Kicking all poor people, all immigrants, all muslims and all homosexuals out or working to remove the same protections everyone is allowed under the law they have won't make your life better. You won't automatically get a better job, magically solve your personal issues or become filthy rich because of this.

My life is a continual disaster of epic proportions, my problems and pain never stops and I never lashed out against minority groups. I have to wonder what these people suffered to be like this. Considering all I have endured I think I don't wanna know. My parents are really racist people though and they never successfully tainted me with it. I guess all I have left is some basic human decency.

 

[matthewwhatever]

I'm getting closer and closer to joining the CPC to vote against this. And I do actually like at least one candidate from what I've seen so far.

I told a hardcore social conservative today that I knew of people who were thinking about joining the CPC to vote for Chong. Her response had much swearing, and lots of references to him being a closet liberal.

At the CPC debate yesterday, Chong was booed for calling climate change a threat, while Trost was cheered for calling it a hoax. I think that the hardcore social conservative's thinking on Chong might be a little pervasive in that party, at least among certain types.

 

[Smiley90]

Does anyone here have any idea when we might see C-6 go into effect? I can see it's been moved to second reading:

http://globalnews.ca/news/2967829/senate-looking-to-change-controversial-citizenship-law/

https://openparliament.ca/bills/42-1/C-6/?tab=mentions

It's very relevant to me as I'm on the path to citizenship and it becoming law would shorten the time I have to wait before being eligible to apply for citizenship by ~2 years... But I have no idea about the timescales for something like that.

Quoting myself just to see if anyone's got any input on this, thanks!

 

[Mr.Mike]

I told a hardcore social conservative today that I knew of people who were thinking about joining the CPC to vote for Chong. Her response had much swearing, and lots of references to him being a closet liberal.

At the CPC debate yesterday, Chong was booed for calling climate change a threat, while Trost was cheered for calling it a hoax. I think that the hardcore social conservative's thinking on Chong might be a little pervasive in that party, at least among certain types.

I do sympathize that the CPC going further left would leave the social conservative crowd without a party to really call their own. Tthey'd be an awkward part of the party that the rest it tries to hide behind the curtains so it can win elections. ( I imagine there are communist members of the NDP in a similar situation).

But the Progressive Conservative faction has also always been part of the CPC (I mean, it's only been 13 years), and the climate change denial is getting increasingly ridiculous.

 

[BeesEight]

This is why I feel laws on free speech and hate speech are important and what we have here in Canada is a good thing. I know a lot of people here on GAF believe you should be able to say everything you want no matter how awful it is. I remember having an argument about this on GAF years ago and people would say that let people says their hateful remarks and they will be publicly humiliated for it. It obviously doesn't work, a racist and misogynist bully is now POTUS. Laws can help saying what we should accept as a society and prevent normalization and trivialization of hatred.

It's so sad that there is a movement along some part of the population thinking that their whole life is going to hell because of people different than them. Kicking all poor people, all immigrants, all muslims and all homosexuals out or working to remove the same protections everyone is allowed under the law they have won't make your life better. You won't automatically get a better job, magically solve your personal issues or become filthy rich because of this.

My life is a continual disaster of epic proportions, my problems and pain never stops and I never lashed out against minority groups. I have to wonder what these people suffered to be like this. Considering all I have endured I think I don't wanna know. My parents are really racist people though and they never successfully tainted me with it. I guess all I have left is some basic human decency.

I've had a lot of arguments with Americans over hate speech laws. Canada is not alone in them though. America is more the anomaly.

While I'm certainly not going to be lax about racial nationalism creeping into Canada (hell, I've experienced enough shit going to Pride), we are a different country and our society has better safeguards against a Trump from taking over.

I mean, remember that Harper was essentially suppose to be a similar horror. He did campaign on repealing same-sex marriage. For one, the social climate in Canada is already a lot more liberal than America. We have anti-hate speech laws. Our media is still held up to some standards. We have better protections in place for minorities already that can't be attacked from parliament. I also think our multi-party system helps diffuse radicalism. At the very least, one thing I've learned is that Canadians are far, far more likely to strategically vote to keep problem candidates out than (progressive) Americans are.

That said, if we can get electoral reform through I'll feel a little better. And, of course, I'm repudiating Trump's bigoted bullshit whenever I get the opportunity. I'm sorry to hear that you have such personal problems though. I'm sure you have more to offer than basic human decency (not to say that decency isn't good to have of course!). Have you looked into getting help with some of your issues?

 

[Ether_Snake]

I am 100% certain that whoever ends up running the CPC will model his campaign on Trump's to a T.