UKGAF thread of Politics and Britishness.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sir Fragula said:
Forget Greggs, go to Marks and Spencers and buy their Sweet Chilli Chicken with Firebang Rice.
may do this. marks and spencers sell really good slippers and my i've almost worn through my current pair.

SLIPPERS CREW ASSEMBLE!
 
Anyhoo, speaking as someone almost entirely ignorant of politics (but with a growing interest), I've always found this PM-sharing thing Brown and Blair have going on a bit dodgy. They say it was always their plan to have a go each, how is it ok to have a PM noone voted for? You would think if a current PM steps down there should be a new election right away. Apparently this is the 6th time this has happened, as well. Not cool!

Please correct me on this, those of whom who live in the UK.

Westminster system of Government (used in UK, NZ, Canada etc). Not sure if different in the UK but this is what we have in NZ. In the UK its still First Past the Post but in NZ its Mixed Member Proportional like Germany.

2 votes per person
- 1 vote local MP (like house of representatives for those in US)
- 1 vote party

2 categories of MPs
- Electorate MPs (elected by your local MP vote)
- List MPs (elected by Number of Party Seats Gained which is calculated by Total Seats - Electorate Seats and the divide the answer by the proportion of the votes the party has got)

The Prime Minister is whomever leads the Ruling Party. Sometimes a Party may not be able to get past the threshold and thus form coalitions with another party. Largest Party is the Senior Member of Coalition and Everyone else are Juniors. In this Case the PM is the member of the Senior Member.

Prime Ministers are not voted by the people, they are voted in by Party Caucus'

- Majority vote usually, none of the filibuster type stuff the US has.

Oh and the UK has 2 houses like the Senate and the Representatives House. House of Commons and House of Lords. I have no idea how the House of Lords work.


When is the last date that the election can be called anyway? It has to be soon, surely?
June 3rd

Personally I'd vote Lib Dem if I was in the Uk and were centre-left. Labour has gone too authoritarian lately.
 
Sausage Roll + Custard Tart = Awesome Cheap lunch (If i take crisps and a penguin to college or something).

As for politics i knows a lot less than i'd like to. All i know is something about Cameron gets me really fucking riled up. I hate that man.
 
Fuck New Labour.

I'm voting Lib Dems!

Also I didn't realise how far the ID cards have come already, I already got some ads on Facebook the other day... *sigh*

"Want to prove your age? Why not get one of our amazing ID cards which put all of your information into one place!"

The Tories/Lib Dems better scrap it if they get into power.
 
The episode of Absolute power which dealt with ID cards was pretty funny. I think TV could use a program like that or drop the dead donkey again to get the simple folk like myself interested in politics. I'd have to admit my current interest is driven by watching the west wing, but I feel that's like someone running up to Thom Yorke and saying "I love your music, creep is such a great song!".
 
moojito said:
The episode of Absolute power which dealt with ID cards was pretty funny. I think TV could use a program like that or drop the dead donkey again to get the simple folk like myself interested in politics. I'd have to admit my current interest is driven by watching the west wing, but I feel that's like someone running up to Thom Yorke and saying "I love your music, creep is such a great song!".

Watch The Thick Of It instead.
w1xxmd.jpg


It is uncanny how each season will depict something that has yet to happen in the political media circus, but often does.
 
Voting Tory because i don't want Labour anymore but i think a hung parliament would be worse.

I'm not a Tory apoligist or a Toff just fed up with the Labour government and if they get back in i can see them going the way of the Tories 92-97 - crumbling away with a tiny majority.

ps. would head to greggs for some greasy sausage fun but its raining in Cardiff. (as ever)
 
...and as I go to bed tonight knowing I'll have kimchi and rice again for lunch tomorrow I just want to say this: kiss my ass you Greggs eating motherfuckers. I hope you choke to death on your sausage rolls. :|
 
industrian said:
...and as I go to bed tonight knowing I'll have kimchi and rice again for lunch tomorrow I just want to say this: kiss my ass you Greggs eating motherfuckers. I hope you choke to death on your sausage rolls. :|

I'm eating one right now. T'is delish.:lol
 
Falch said:
Also, in the current parliament, there are five Sinn Fein MPs who refuse to take the oath of allegiance to the Queen and as a result are not entitled to vote.

So basically, if you vote in Sinn Fein, you're asking to not be represented?

I bet they would if they were in a close enough hung parliament!
 
I'm most jealous of our American cousins, they actually had someone good to vote for. We've a power hungry incumbent bully, a slimy limp-wristed Blair2.0 and an ineffectual meandering lightweight. I wish not a single one of them power.

Thankfully, I've already voted with my feet and buggered off out of the country. I could sure do some Pizza Express doughballs though.

Edit: Or a poppy-seeded roll.
 
Orgun said:
Wait, The Thick of It is a series? I've seen the film with those characters but didnt know there was a series :)

In The Loop had the same actors playing different characters, apart from Peter Capaldi and the other one I forget. they played teh same people.
 
I couldn't vote Tory, their support comes mostly from people whose mindset I just can't share. I saw a "I've never voted Tory before, but we need to mend our broken society" billboard on our way to lunch, and it just irks me; "broken society" is such an empty term, utterly, utterly hollow. I've not seen anything else from them to convince me that they've any more substance than simply latching on to slogans the right wing tabloids have been lazily slinging about.

Of course, there are plenty of people who will see that billboard and think "YES, absolutely!", but I just can't get on board with that Daily Mail groupthink.

Opposition don't win elections, the party in power lose them. Precisely what is happening here. It's depressing me that people are bored of pulling lever A, so they're just going back to pulling lever B. I just wish the level of political discourse in this country was of a higher calibre, instead we've ended up with the politics we deserve, two main parties sniping at each other until one goes down and it's the other parties turn... It's enough to turn you to greasy, processed, miscellaneous meats wrapped in pastry made from pauper skin; this thread is ample proof.

As little time as I have the Tories, I don't think I can vote Labour either, so will probably vote Lib Dem, if only to lend support to a third wheel. Then again, I may reach the voting booth and just get so fed up that I'll just spoil the ballot.
 
People (or the papers) talk about Brown being a bully, but in this interview Cameron gave Nick Robinson regarding Lord Ashcroft was pretty confrontational. I thought he was going to get out of his chair and punch the reporter or something! Very surprising.

I didn't get as much of a "I'm so on top of this, don't you worry about it" vibe more than a "how dare you question me?!" one.
 
Meus Renaissance said:
Not all of us can afford M & S meals
It's on sale - £2.50!

Someone mentioned not wanting a hung parliament. A hung parliament would be fucking amazing. We *need* some weak leaders for a change. We need people who have to build consensus, cross party support to push their agendas. A hung parliament would be the greatest thing to come out of this election, just pay no heed to the scaremongering bullshit you hear against it.

The best hung parliament would be Lab/Lib, as they will pretty much guarantee some form of basic Proportional Representation [or alternative votes...] gets put in. Why's that good? Well it will almost certainly prevent another Tory government from taking office.
 
Kentpaul said:
Free college and free healthcare is all i care about.
Lucky for you, you're on the right side of the border.

I'll never understand why prescription costs, tuition fees etc. aren't standardised across the Union. Might as well devolve Westminster into an English parliament and everyone do their own thing.
 
SmokyDave said:
Lucky for you, you're on the right side of the border.

I'll never understand why prescription costs, tuition fees etc. aren't standardised across the Union. Might as well devolve Westminster into an English parliament and everyone do their own thing.

Fuck that, make London a republic and cut off the rest of England.
 
industrian said:
Most people forget that it was the Conservative votes that took us to war.

http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2003-03-18&number=118

It's the Government's job to present the case for war, as they are the only ones who had access to the intelligence etc.

The way the Iraq affair was conducted single-handedly meant I could never vote for another term of this administration.

Brown being a few hotels short of a Monopoly set and seemingly living in his own fantasy land just hammered that home more. He is no more suited to being PM than a blind man being a taxi-driver.

At the moment I'm undecided, but edging towards the Lib Dems as the best of a bad bunch.
 
SecretBonusPoint said:
Watch The Thick Of It instead.
http://i36.tinypic.com/w1xxmd.jpg[IMG]

It is uncanny how each season will depict something that has yet to happen in the political media circus, but often does.[/QUOTE]

The West Wing makes you want to become a politician, The Thick of It makes you want to burn politics to the ground and start a fresh. I think he is looking for something from the former category.
 
SmokyDave said:
Lucky for you, you're on the right side of the border.

I'll never understand why prescription costs, tuition fees etc. aren't standardised across the Union. Might as well devolve Westminster into an English parliament and everyone do their own thing.

The Scottish Government get a block sum from the UK Government and they can spend it how they want. Those powers are devolved. Why not vote for a party that would do this?

Scotland doesn't actually have free prescriptions yet though. Only Wales does.
 
I'm glad this thread is up. I browsed the first four pages and outside Chinner's first post summoning the political parties and some other posts made by others, I have no idea what anybody's talking about.:lol The more I read the more I'll learn I guess.

I've been meaning to ask some questions about the UK, to get some perspective about a couple of things. In comparison to the United States, how high's your national debt? Are you guys currently running on a federal deficit? For those that have a good grasp of the politics in the UK and the US, Chinner said that the Tories are more conservative than the Labor party, but are they as conservative, more conservative, or about the same as the Republicans in the US?

Thanks in advance.
 
Dax01 said:
I'm glad this thread is up. I browsed the first four pages and outside Chinner's first post summoning the political parties and some other posts made by others, I have no idea what anybody's talking about.:lol The more I read the more I'll learn I guess.

I've been meaning to ask some questions about the UK, to get some perspective about a couple of things. In comparison to the United States, how high's your national debt? Are you guys currently running on a federal deficit? For those that have a good grasp of the politics in the UK and the US, Chinner said that the Tories are more conservative than the Labor party, but are they as conservative, more conservative, or about the same as the Republicans in the US?

Thanks in advance.

The UK is in massive levels of debt, and this is pretty much what the election campaign will be based on. It needs to be gotten rid of, and the Conservatives want to make cuts immediately, and the other parties want to wait until the economy is more stable.

I'm guessing the conservatives here are considerably more to he left than the Republican party. Both Labour and the Conservatives are generally centre right these days.
 
Dax01 said:
I'm glad this thread is up. I browsed the first four pages and outside Chinner's first post summoning the political parties and some other posts made by others, I have no idea what anybody's talking about.:lol

I've been meaning to ask some questions about the UK, to get some perspective about a couple of things. In comparison to the United States, how high's your national debt? Are you guys currently running on a federal deficit? For those that have a good grasp of the politics in the UK and the US, Chinner said that the Tories are more conservative than the Labor party, but are they as conservative, more conservative, or about the same as the Republicans in the US?

Thanks in advance.

Hi Dax,

Our national debt is very high, like yours, because of spending over the last decade and of course the recent financial collapse and our huge dependency on the financial sector that cost us billions in bailouts and stimulus plans. This is a major political issue and much of the upcoming election is being fought around how best to cut the deficit, with Labour positioning themselves as investing in the economy and cutting later and slower, and the tories promising quick cuts to public spending. To compare directly, your deficit is 94.27% of GDP for 2010 or $14 trillion, whereas our is currently 71.95% of GDP or £1.05 trillion in total, but given the strength of the pound compared to the dollar (the pound is weak) there is a greater need for us to cut as we don't want our currency to collapse, plus our recovery is slower than yours as we only just pulled out of the recession with 0.1% growth in the last quarter of the year.

The Conservatives are less conservative than your republicans, they just ran an ad campaign saying that they will 'cut the deficit, but not the NHS' in stark contrast to the republicans who just broke down in tirades of 'THIS IS SOCIALISM' over Obama's very moderate but needed reforms. They still believe in the glory of the free market and love running down public services, but they are to the left of what you are used to with your conservatives. Also they aren't as tied to the christian church as the religions right are, so you don't get much of that bullshit over here.
 
SecretBonusPoint said:
Watch The Thick Of It instead.
w1xxmd.jpg


It is uncanny how each season will depict something that has yet to happen in the political media circus, but often does.

when the whole hoon hewitt heresy broke out my first thought was "didn't this just happen in the last episode?". i mean they're usually pretty prophetic but that was a whole new level of uncanny, especially with the slow trickle of whiplashed support for brown.
 
If you want a summary of how fucked UK economy is here is a good piece by John Lanchester for the LRB (London Review of Books)

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v32/n05/john-lanchester/the-great-british-economy-disaster

Put all these things together, and the state we’re in doesn’t look peachy. The imminence of the general election doesn’t help. Broadly speaking, the circumstances are such that it shouldn’t much matter who wins the election, not in economic terms. The economic realities are harsh and are likely to determine most of what the new government does. Labour have promised to cut the deficit in half within four years. They haven’t spelled out how they are going to do it, and until recently Gordon Brown was talking about ‘Tory cuts versus Labour investment’ – which, given what he must know about what the figures mean, is jaw-droppingly cynical. The reality is that the budget, and the explicit promises of both parties, imply a commitment to cuts of about 11 per cent across the board. Both parties, however, have said that they will ring-fence spending on health, education and overseas development. Plug in those numbers and we are looking at cuts everywhere else of 16 per cent. (By the way, a two-year freeze in NHS spending – which is what Labour have talked about – would be its sharpest contraction in 60 years.)

Cuts of that magnitude have never been achieved in this country. Mrs Thatcher managed to cut some areas of public spending to zero growth; the difference between that and a contraction of 16 per cent is unimaginable. The Institute for Fiscal Studies – which admittedly specialises in bad news of this kind – thinks the numbers are, even in this dire prognosis, too optimistic. It makes less optimistic assumptions about the growth of the economy, preferring not to accept the Treasury’s rose-coloured figure of 2.75 per cent. Plugging these less cheerful growth estimates into its fiscal model, the guesstimate for the cuts, if the ring-fencing is enforced, is from 18 to 24 per cent. What does that mean? According to Rowena Crawford, an IFS economist, quoted in the FT: ‘For the Ministry of Defence an 18 per cent cut means something on the scale of no longer employing the army.’ The FT then extrapolates:

At the transport ministry, an 18 per cent reduction would take out more than a third of the department’s grant to Network Rail; a 24 per cent reduction is about equivalent to ending all current and capital expenditure on roads. At the Ministry of Justice an 18 per cent reduction broadly equates to closing all the courts, a 24 per cent cut to shutting two-thirds of all prisons.
 
i'm confused by the economy and debt.

we have had years of big spending increases, with relatively managable debt. Now its massive all of a sudden.

Is that purely gaps in tax raising, or is it primarily due to bailing out banks etc?

If the latter, I thought most of that was buying up bad loans etc, and in theory that'll get paid back over the years?
 
Dax, I'd probably go as far as to say that our Conservatives are even less conservative than the Democrats on the majority of issues.
 
mrklaw said:
i'm confused by the economy and debt.

we have had years of big spending increases, with relatively managable debt. Now its massive all of a sudden.

Is that purely gaps in tax raising, or is it primarily due to bailing out banks etc?

If the latter, I thought most of that was buying up bad loans etc, and in theory that'll get paid back over the years?

Bank bailouts are part of it, then hugely reduced tax revenues thanks to the recession, increased government outlays through way more unemployment benefits being paid out, hugely expensive stimulus packages of various kinds: direct stimulus, VAT cut, cash for clunkers. Then that's on top of the government debt before the recession which wasn't insubstantial; Brown/Blair/New Labour inherited a deficit of 43.76% of GDP in 1997, which they reduced to 38.41% in 2006 though this was more down to the large economic growth as spending increased, and then in 2007 we invested heavily in the NHS bringing it up to 44.80%, which is manageable but quite large, but with the impact of the recession it becomes huge.

Note: Some people will argue that those figures are on the low side as national debt numbers do not include all PFI contract costs and pension liabilities which will require borrowing in the future.
 
industrian said:
Are you American or do you have your browser's spell checker set to American English?

And that's Manpower. I worked for my local government before moving to Korea, and I knew a bunch of clericals who were contracted to us by them. All the smart ones negotiated proper contracts with the government once they had proven themselves.

I'm British, but my Browser is Yankee Doodle - how do I change it? :D

Had a feeling it was Manpower, but they do it because they can.
 
Pensions could be a political timebomb waiting to go off.. the unions are pissed that the likes of BA, Royal Mail and the Train networks are imposing changes in terms and conditions for old and new staff alike now -- the government are neatly paving the way for cheap redundancies by changing the redundancy compensation scheme too -- but there's gonna be a real standoff when pensions come under fire. We're an aging population, that doesn't help either.

Couple of items in the news today -

Virgin Money are sniffing around the possibility of buying some RBS branches from the government... Virgin Airlines, Virgin Megastore, Virgin Radio, Virgin Trains, Virgin Galactic, Virgin Banks? If it meant recouping some of the cost in bailing RBS out that might turn into a positive story for the government if it comes to fruition.

Oh and Sarah Cameron is pregnant. I find the timing of this incredibly dubious. Yes, I actually believe they may have been counselled to have a baby at this particular time. Tin hat I know... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8580571.stm
 
Empty said:
Bank bailouts are part of it, then hugely reduced tax revenues thanks to the recession, increased government outlays through way more unemployment benefits being paid out, hugely expensive stimulus packages of various kinds: direct stimulus, VAT cut, cash for clunkers. Then that's on top of the government debt before the recession which wasn't insubstantial; Brown/Blair/New Labour inherited a deficit of 43.76% of GDP in 1997, which they reduced to 38.41% in 2006 though this was more down to the large economic growth as spending increased, and then in 2007 we invested heavily in the NHS bringing it up to 44.80%, which is manageable but quite large, but with the impact of the recession it becomes huge.

Note: Some people will argue that those figures are on the low side as national debt numbers do not include all PFI contract costs and pension liabilities which will require borrowing in the future.

I think my main issue regarding debt is that the debt burden we have had in the past decade has been sustainable, but, at some point we need to recognise that the government cannot keep spending and increasing the public sector so much (look at Greece). Obviously this is the Tories' main argument but Im not entirely convinced that Labour will be trigger happy with spending if they were re-elected. Its almost a non-issue. As you say when the economy grows again the deficit will fall. Once the "good times" return and people and politicians put on the rose-tinted glasses again the deficit will just fade into the background as a major political issue.
 
Dax01 said:
I'm glad this thread is up. I browsed the first four pages and outside Chinner's first post summoning the political parties and some other posts made by others, I have no idea what anybody's talking about.:lol The more I read the more I'll learn I guess.

I've been meaning to ask some questions about the UK, to get some perspective about a couple of things. In comparison to the United States, how high's your national debt? Are you guys currently running on a federal deficit? For those that have a good grasp of the politics in the UK and the US, Chinner said that the Tories are more conservative than the Labor party, but are they as conservative, more conservative, or about the same as the Republicans in the US?

Thanks in advance.

I've posted this in another thread before but here's our former PM, John Major, discussing the debt level. It's probably the most interesting he's ever been: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xt285WpM-os
 
Yes, I actually believe they may have been counselled to have a baby at this particular time. Tin hat I know...

I believe they wanted a kid anyway but I'd be surprised if the timing of this wasn't "inspired".
 
ghst said:
when the whole hoon hewitt heresy broke out my first thought was "didn't this just happen in the last episode?". i mean they're usually pretty prophetic but that was a whole new level of uncanny, especially with the slow trickle of whiplashed support for brown.

Not that prophetic, give the Private Eye a read every now and then and you'll see that they report on this kind of shit in EVERY issue.
 
Dax01 said:
I'm glad this thread is up. I browsed the first four pages and outside Chinner's first post summoning the political parties and some other posts made by others, I have no idea what anybody's talking about.:lol The more I read the more I'll learn I guess.

I've been meaning to ask some questions about the UK, to get some perspective about a couple of things. In comparison to the United States, how high's your national debt? Are you guys currently running on a federal deficit? For those that have a good grasp of the politics in the UK and the US, Chinner said that the Tories are more conservative than the Labor party, but are they as conservative, more conservative, or about the same as the Republicans in the US?

Thanks in advance.

Our Tories are less conservative than your Republicans. However, this is only because the British population is more liberal than America's and most of us are highly protective over our culture (Mostly the NHS and BBC) that any mention of any cuts will generate a large out roar from the paper's and general public.

Most don't really believe them when they say they won't cut it for a numerous reasons: All you have to do look at Thatcher's reign in the 80's: As I said in the OP, she knocked the shit out of the unions (I know in the US unions are not generally viewed in a positive light), and she butchered allot of British industry basically forcing us to rely on finance and banking as our main revenue. The Tories also let the NHS go to shit.

In particular, one of the main reasons why nobody doesn't believe the Tories when it comes to the NHS, is that last year while your health care wars were raging on, Daniel Hannan, a Tory MEP, went onto Fox news and completely rubbished the NHS and advocated American style health care. Cameron eventually and poorly denied everything he said, but it makes everyone feel uneasy.

The fear, which I think someone mentioned above, is that most of the younger generation (teens, people in their early 20s like me) weren't alive during the 80s and didn't know how bad things got when the Tories were in power. This has given the Tories (I suspect) a boost from the younger population, and that most of the younger generation are anti-labour/left. I wish someone would do research into it cause it's genuinely interesting question.
 
There would be genuine riots if they scrapped the NHS - from the public, from the Doctors and all the support staff it hires. Not to mention the Unions.
 
defel1111 said:
I think my main issue regarding debt is that the debt burden we have had in the past decade has been sustainable, but, at some point we need to recognise that the government cannot keep spending and increasing the public sector so much (look at Greece). Obviously this is the Tories' main argument but Im not entirely convinced that Labour will be trigger happy with spending if they were re-elected. Its almost a non-issue. As you say when the economy grows again the deficit will fall. Once the "good times" return and people and politicians put on the rose-tinted glasses again the deficit will just fade into the background as a major political issue.

I think it will, and unfortunately the re-regulation of the banking industry which is far more important long term, seems to have been forgotten in the obsession over talking about the debt, like that's the only issue facing the economy. I certainly agree that if Labour win the next election they won't be able to spend as much going forwards, as i could attribute much of Brown's inability to cut during the good times and reduce the structural deficit (that part which exists when the economy is strong) to a) military expenditure thanks to Afghanistan and Iraq (we are the 4th biggest spender on the military in the world which is insane) and b) bringing public services like the NHS up to scratch after years of neglect; things which won't be needed to be focused on going forwards (hopefully), though certainly they have been very wasteful in other areas too.
 
Chinner said:
The fear, which I think someone mentioned above, is that most of the younger generation (teens, people in their early 20s like me) weren't alive during the 80s and didn't know how bad things got when the Tories were in power. This has given the Tories (I suspect) a boost from the younger population, and that most of the younger generation are anti-labour/left. I wish someone would do research into it cause it's genuinely interesting question.

I wasn't alive when Thatcher was in power, and I live in Scotland, and no one I know of a similar age remotely want the Tories in power. Most here seem to support Labour, the Lib Dems or the SNP.

Maybe an England thing. I know from living here all my life that you get drummed into you as a kid that Thatcher was the devil, and to never vote Conservative.
 
What I find so frustrating is that Im genuinely fiscally conservative and socially I mix between liberal and conservative views. I wish that the conservative party wasnt filled with so many old fashioned, antique teapots. I like Cameron, Boris Johnson, William Hague (although Im not a fan of Osbourne) but, as a post above said, people my age (20) dont remember Thatcher or John Major, and dont have the inherent dislike towards the Tories that many older people have. With any luck in a few decades there will be a conservative party I can feel completely comfortable voting for.
 
Chinner said:
The fear, which I think someone mentioned above, is that most of the younger generation (teens, people in their early 20s like me) weren't alive during the 80s and didn't know how bad things got when the Tories were in power. This has given the Tories (I suspect) a boost from the younger population, and that most of the younger generation are anti-labour/left. I wish someone would do research into it cause it's genuinely interesting question.

Equally you could say that many people who were too young to remember/weren't alive etc see/have seen the Tories as outdated/untrendy as it was undeniably fashionable to vote Labour in the late nineties onwards.

Being under a Labour government for 13 years and constantly hearing how bad the tories were for this country could also cause younger people to have second thoughts about voting Tory.
 
jas0nuk said:
I apologise if you are offended that I implied you had forgotten about the 45 minute claim, but you surely accept that all MPs, Labour and Conservative, voted for the war on the merits of the "sexed up dossier" which painted Iraq as a huge threat to the welfare of the UK. The real question is why high-ranking Cabinet figures such as Jack Straw, who knew that the legality of the war was questionable, did not speak up. I suspect it is because he was more interested in his career - he would have had to resign if he went against Blair.

the evidence for Iraq was blatently cherry-picked and misleading even then. If they believed that dossier than it shows poor judgement that led to the deaths of thousands. they all bear responsibility for it.
 
as i said above about the young generations. I dunno, just saying what I see from I've seen. Not very conclusive, but as I said it'd interesting iif someone did research.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom