Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Something Else

  1. #1

    Default Something Else

    Something Else



    "What is restriction?"

    "It is partial prohibition."

    "What is prohibition?"

    "Absolute restriction."

    "So that what holds true of the one, holds true of the other?"

    "Yes; the difference is only one of degree. There is between them the same relation as there is between a circle and the arc of a circle."

    "Then, if prohibition is bad, restriction cannot be good?"

    "No more than the arc can be correct if the circle is irregular."

    "What is the name which is common to restriction and prohibition?"

    "Protection."

    "What is the definitive effect of protection?"

    "To exact from men a greater amount of labour for the same result."

    "Why are men attached to the system of protection?"

    "Because as liberty enables us to obtain the same result with less labour, this apparent diminution of employment frightens them."

    "Why do you say apparent?"

    "Because all labour saved can be applied to something else."

    "To what?"

    "That I cannot specify, nor is there any need to specify it."

    "Why?"

    "Because if the sum of satisfactions which the country at present enjoys could be obtained with one-tenth less labour, no one can enumerate the new enjoyments which men would desire to obtain from the labour left disposable. One man would desire to be better clothed, another better fed, another better educated, another better amused."

    "Explain to me the mechanism and the effects of protection."

    "That is not an easy matter. Before entering on consideration of the more complicated cases, we must study it in a very simple one."

    "Take as simple a case as you choose."

    "You remember how Robinson Crusoe managed to make a plank when he had no saw."

    "Yes; he felled a tree, and then, cutting the trunk right and left with his hatchet, he reduced it to the thickness of a board."

    "And that cost him much labour?"

    "Fifteen whole days' work."

    "And what did he live on during that time?"

    "He had provisions."

    "What happened to the hatchet?"

    "It was blunted by the work."

    "Yes; but you perhaps do not know this: that at the moment when Robinson was beginning the work he perceived a plank thrown by the tide upon the seashore."

    "Happy accident! he of course ran to appropriate it?"

    "That was his first impulse ; but he stopped short, and began to reason thus with himself:— "'If I appropriate this plank, it will cost me only the trouble of carrying it, and the time needed to descend and remount the cliff.

    "'But if I form a plank with my hatchet, first of all , it will procure me fifteen days' employment; then my hatchet will get blunt, which will furnish me with the additional employment of sharpening it; then I shall consume my stock of provisions, which will be a third source of employment in replacing them. Now, labour is wealth. It is clear that I should ruin myself by appropriating the shipwrecked plank. I must protect my personal labour; and, now that I think of it, I can even increase that labour by throwing back the other plank into the sea.'"

    "But this reasoning was absurd."

    "No doubt. It is nevertheless the reasoning of every nation which protects itself by prohibition. It throws back the plank which is offered it in exchange for a small amount of labour in order to exert a greater amount of labour. It is not in the labour of the Customhouse officials that it discovers a gain. That gain is represented by the pains which Robinson takes to render back to the waves the gift which they had offered him. Consider the nation as a collective being, and you will not find between its reasoning and that of Robinson an atom of difference."

    "Did Robinson not see that he could devote the time saved to something else?"

    "What else?"

    "As long as a man has wants to satisfy and time at his disposal, there is always something to be done . I am not bound to specify the kind of labour he would in such a case undertake."

    "I see clearly what labour he could have escaped."

    "And I maintain that Robinson, with incredible blindness, confounded the labour with its result , the end with the means, and I am going to prove to you..."

    "There is no need. Here we have the system of restriction or prohibition in its simplest form. If it appear to you absurd when so put, it is because the two capacities of producer and consumer are in this case mixed up in the same individual."

    "Let us pass on, therefore, to a more complicated example."

    "With all my heart. Some time afterwards, Robinson having met with Friday, they united their labour in a common work . In the morning they hunted for six hours, and brought home four baskets of game. In the evening they worked in the garden for six hours, and obtained four baskets of vegetables.

    "One day a canoe touched at the island. A good-looking foreigner landed, and was admitted to the table of our two recluses. He tasted and commended very much the produce of the garden, and before taking leave of his entertainers, spoke as follows:—

    "'Generous islanders, I inhabit a country where game is much more plentiful than here, but where horticulture is quite unknown. It would be an easy matter to bring you every evening four baskets of game, if you would give me in exchange two baskets of vegetables.'

    "At these words Robinson and Friday retired to consult, and the argument that passed is too interesting not to be reported in extenso.

    "Friday: What do you think of it?
    "Robinson: If we close with the proposal, we are ruined.
    "F.: Are you sure of that? Let us consider.
    "R.: The case is clear. Crushed by competition, our hunting as a branch of industry is annihilated.
    "F.: What matters it, if we have the game?
    "R.: Theory! it will no longer be the product of our labour.
    "F.: I beg your pardon, sir; for in order to have game we must part with vegetables.
    "R.: Then, what shall we gain?
    "F.:. The four baskets of game cost us six hours' work. The foreigner gives us them in exchange for two baskets of vegetables , which cost us only three hours' work. This places three hours at our disposal.
    "R.: Say , rather, which are subtracted from our exertions. In this will consist our loss. Labour is wealth, and if we lose a fourth part of our time, we shall be less rich by a fourth.
    "F.: You are greatly mistaken , my good friend. We shall have as much game, and the same quantity of vegetables, and three hours at our disposal into the bargain. This is progress, or there is no such thing in-the world.
    "R.: You lose yourself in generalities! What should we make of these three hours?
    "F.: We would do something else.
    "R.: Ah ! I understand you. You cannot come to particulars. Something else, something else— this is easily said.
    "F.: We can fish, we can ornament our cottage, we can read the Bible.
    "R.: Utopia ! Is there any certainty that we should do either the one or the other?
    "F.: Very well, if we have no wants to satisfy we can rest. Is repose nothing?
    "R.: But while we repose we may die of hunger.
    "F.: My dear friend, you have got into a vicious circle. I speak of a repose which will subtract nothing from our supply of game and vegetables. You always forget that by means of our foreign trade nine hours' labour will give us the same quantity of provisions that we obtain at present with twelve.
    "R: It is very evident, Friday, that you have not been educated in Europe, and that you have never read the Moniteur Industriel. If you had, it would have taught you this: that all time saved is sheer loss. The important thing is not to eat or consume, but to work. All that we consume, if it is not the direct produce of our labour, goes for nothing. Do you want to know whether you are rich? Never consider the satisfactions you enjoy , but the labour you undergo. This is what the Moniteur Industriel would teach you. For myself, who have no pretensions to be a theorist, the only thing I look at is the loss of our hunting.
    "F.: What a strange conglomeration of ideas! but...
    "R.: I will have no buts. Moreover, there are political reasons for rejecting the interested offers of the perfidious foreigner.
    "F.: Political reasons!
    "R.: Yes, he only makes us these offers because they are advantageous to him.
    "F.: So much the better, since they are for our advantage likewise.
    "R.: Then by this traffic we should place ourselves in a situation of dependence upon him.
    "F.: And he would place himself in dependence on us. We should have need of his game, and he of our vegetables, and we should live on terms of friendship.
    "R.: System! Do you want me to shut your mouth?
    "F.: We shall see about that. I have as yet heard no good reason.
    "R.: Suppose the foreigner learns to cultivate a garden, and that his island should prove more fertile than ours. Do you see the consequence?
    "F.: Yes ; our relations with the foreigner would cease. He would send us no more vegetables, since he could have them at home with less labour. He would take no more game from us, since we should have nothing to give him in exchange, and we should then be in precisely the situation that you wish us in now.
    "R.: Improvident savage! You don't see that after having annihilated our hunting by inundating us with game, he would annihilate our gardening by inundating us with vegetables.
    "F.: But this would only last till we were in a situation to give him something else; that is to say, until we found something else which we could produce with economy of labour for ourselves.
    "R. Something else, something else! You always come back to that. You are at sea, my good friend Friday; there is nothing practical in your views."

    "The debate was long prolonged , and, as often happens, each remained wedded to his own opinion . But Robinson possessing a great ascendant over Friday, his opinion prevailed, and when the foreigner arrived to demand a reply, Robinson said to him—

    "'Stranger , in order to induce us to accept your proposal, we must be assured of two things:

    "'The first is, that your island is no better stocked with game than ours, for we want to fight only with equal weapons.

    "'The second is, that you will lose by the bargain . For, as in every exchange there is necessarily a gaining and a losing party, we should be dupes, if you were not the loser. What have you got to say?'

    "'Nothing,' replied the foreigner; and, bursting out a-laugh-ing, he regained his canoe."

    "The story would not be amiss, if Robinson were not made to argue so very absurdly."

    "He does not argue more absurdly than the committee of the Rue Hauteville."

    "Oh! the case is very different. Sometimes you suppose one man, and sometimes (which comes to the same thing) two men working in company. That does not tally with the actual state of things. The division of labour and the intervention of merchants and money change the state of the question very much."

    "That may complicate transactions, but does not change their nature."

    "What! you want to compare modern commerce with a system of barter."

    "Trade is nothing but a multiplicity of barters. Barter is in its own nature identical with commerce, just as labour on a small scale is identical with labour on a great scale, or as the law of gravitation which moves an atom is identical with that same law of gravitation which moves a world."

    "So, according to you, these arguments, which are so untenable in the mouth of Robinson, are equally untenable when urged by our protectionists."

    "Yes; only the error is better concealed under a complication of circumstances."

    "Then, pray, let us have an example taken from the present order of things."

    "With pleasure. In France, owing to the exigencies of climate and habits, cloth is a useful thing. Is the essential thing to make it, or to get it?"

    "A very sensible question, truly! In order to have it, you must make it."

    "Not necessarily. To have it, some one must make it, that is certain; but it is not at all necessary that the same person or the same country which consumes it should also produce it. You have not made that stuff which clothes you so well. France does not produce the coffee on which our citizens breakfast."

    "But I buy my cloth, and France her coffee."

    "Exactly so; and with what?"

    "With money."

    "But neither you nor France produce the material of money."

    "We buy it."

    "With what?"

    "With our products, which are sent to Peru."

    "It is then, in fact, your labour which you exchange for cloth, and French labour which is exchanged for coffee."

    "Undoubtedly."

    "It is not absolutely necessary, therefore, to manufacture what you consume."

    "No; if we manufacture something else which we give in exchange."

    "In other words, France has two means of procuring a given quantity of cloth. The first is to make it; the second is to make something else, and to exchange this something else with the foreigner for cloth. Of these two means, which is the best?"

    "I don't very well know."

    "Is it not that which, for a determinate amount of labour, obtains the greater quantity of cloth?"

    "It seems so."

    "And which is best for a nation, to have the choice between these two means, or that the law should prohibit one of them, on the chance of stumbling on the better of the two?"

    "It appears to me that it is better for the nation to have the choice, inasmuch as in such matters it invariably chooses right."

    "The law, which prohibits the importation of foreign cloth, decides, then, that if France wishes to have cloth, she must make it in kind, and that she is prohibited from making the something else with which she could purchase foreign cloth."

    "True."

    "And as the law obliges us to make the cloth, and forbids our making the something else, precisely because that something else would exact less labour (but for which reason the law would not interfere with it) the law virtually decrees that for a determinate amount of labour, France shall only have one yard of cloth, when for the same amount of labour she might have two yards, by applying that labour to something else!"

    "But the question recurs, 'What else?"

    "And my question recurs, 'What does it signify?' Having the choice, she will only make the something else to such an extent as there may be a demand for it."

    "That is possible; but I cannot divest myself of the idea that the foreigner will send us his cloth, and not take from us the something else, in which case we would be entrapped. At all events, this is the objection even from your own point of view. You allow that France could make this something else to exchange for cloth, with a less expenditure of labour than if she had made the cloth itself?"

    "Undoubtedly."

    "There would, then, be a certain amount of her labour rendered inert?"

    "Yes; but without her being less well provided with clothes, a little circumstance which makes all the difference. Robinson lost sight of this, and our protectionists either do not see it, or pretend not to see it. The shipwrecked plank rendered fifteen days of Robinson's labour inert, in as far as that labour was applied to making a plank, but it did not deprive him of it. Discriminate, then, between these two kinds of diminished labour— the diminution which has for effect privation, and that which has for its cause satisfaction. These two things are very different, and if you mix them up, you reason as Robinson did. In the most complicated, as in the most simple cases, the sophism consists in this: Judging of the utility of labour by its duration and intensity, and not by its results; which gives rise to this economic policy: To reduce the results of labour for the purpose of augmenting its duration and intensity."
    Frédéric Bastiat. Economic Sophisms (Kindle Locations 3238-3358).

    Here's a link to the ebook:
    http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/44145
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Bump.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  4. #3

    Default

    Bump for another thread.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  5. #4

    Default

    Last one.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  6. #5

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    Frédéric Bastiat. Economic Sophisms (Kindle Locations 3238-3358).
    Gary Owens rises from the dead:

    "Today's chapter entitled, 'Robinson Crusoe: Imbecile Socialist1 Economist2'"


    1: Department of Redundancy Department.
    2: Department of Violent Contradictions
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  8. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Gary Owens rises from the dead:

    "Today's chapter entitled, 'Robinson Crusoe: Imbecile Socialist1 Economist2'"


    1: Department of Redundancy Department.
    2: Department of Violent Contradictions
    and I am called "cryptic"

    who the f*ck is Gary Owens and why should I look it up?
    because he can best Bastiat?
    "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." - Albert Einstein

    "for I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. - Thomas Jefferson.

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Gary Owens rises from the dead:

    "Today's chapter entitled, 'Robinson Crusoe: Imbecile Socialist1 Economist2'"


    1: Department of Redundancy Department.
    2: Department of Violent Contradictions
    Can you please offer specific cases of this?

    And further, please provide a link of exactly which Gary Owens you are referring to.

    (I did Google)
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    Can you please offer specific cases of this?
    Of what? I was being cheeky, that's all. It was clear to me Crusoe was the progressive marxist, Friday the capitalist and the only one of the two with intelligence worthy of mention.

    And further, please provide a link of exactly which Gary Owens you are referring to.

    (I did Google)
    Ah well, I guess my age is showing. Gary Owens: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0654365/?ref_=nv_sr_2

    Famous for his announcer's voice.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  11. #10

    Default

    I sensed it was Bastiat from the outset...knew it was definitely a good classical liberal... Thanks for sharing, brother. ~hugs~
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RPEphesians 6:12 (KJV)//I sell stuff here go buy nao!

  12. #11

    Default

    Bump.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  13. #12

    Default

    What must be protected from the economic warfare of other nations isn't the "jobs" it is the infrastructure, the education, and the experience, all of the things that make it possible for you to do the work for yourself if the need arises.

    If picking up the driftwood plank costs you your axe then to do so IS to ruin yourself.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  14. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    What must be protected from the economic warfare of other nations isn't the "jobs" it is the infrastructure, the education, and the experience, all of the things that make it possible for you to do the work for yourself if the need arises.

    If picking up the driftwood plank costs you your axe then to do so IS to ruin yourself.
    You have very little faith in free markets.

    This all was built through competition, entrepreneurship, and capital investment but you see it as likely that if we don't produce everything for ourselves (even if the cost is greater for us to produce it than another region or country) then the knowledge to build or create these items will be forever gone. That if a need hypothetically arose, say during wartime for instance, that capital could not be reallocated to any given sector and a new workforce trained (in amazing time) to build the most complex machinery and infastructure of the time. Considering history and human ingenuity and economics in general, I don't share your same concerns.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  15. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    You have very little faith in free markets.

    This all was built through competition, entrepreneurship, and capital investment but you see it as likely that if we don't produce everything for ourselves (even if the cost is greater for us to produce it than another region or country) then the knowledge to build or create these items will be forever gone. That if a need hypothetically arose, say during wartime for instance, that capital could not be reallocated to any given sector and a new workforce trained (in amazing time) to build the most complex machinery and infastructure of the time. Considering history and human ingenuity and economics in general, I don't share your same concerns.
    There are thresholds below which you no longer have the capacity to rebuild in any reasonable length of time or before you are forced to surrender to the enemy, the south lost the war of northern aggression because as Rhett Butler puts it in Gone with the wind "there is not a cannon factory in the whole south".

    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  16. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    There are thresholds below which you no longer have the capacity to rebuild in any reasonable length of time or before you are forced to surrender to the enemy, the south lost the war of northern aggression because as Rhett Butler puts it in Gone with the wind "there is not a cannon factory in the whole south".

    I don't foresee America having a lack of weapons manufacturing anytime soon.

    As well, there are enough munitions to destroy this planet stockpiled as is.

    And the American people are an armed people.

    And China (for instance) would have to bleed wealth to bring an army this far and the costs to them would be rather graphic.

    What other areas are you concerned about?

    As has been pointed out, America manufactures now more than any other time in its history. Is it what they are manufacturing that concerns you?

    I imagine you're familiar with I, Pencil by Leonard Read? It is inefficient and makes everyone worse off if we were to mine our own raw materials and not cooperate with other countries to produce things which have thousands if not hundreds of thousands of different items coming together to produdo. How much would it cost for Detroit to make a car start to finish? Hint: They could not do it.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    I don't foresee America having a lack of weapons manufacturing anytime soon.

    As well, there are enough munitions to destroy this planet stockpiled as is.

    And the American people are an armed people.

    And China (for instance) would have to bleed wealth to bring an army this far and the costs to them would be rather graphic.

    What other areas are you concerned about?

    As has been pointed out, America manufactures now more than any other time in its history. Is it what they are manufacturing that concerns you?

    I imagine you're familiar with I, Pencil by Leonard Read? It is inefficient and makes everyone worse off if we were to mine our own raw materials and not cooperate with other countries to produce things which have thousands if not hundreds of thousands of different items coming together to produdo. How much would it cost for Detroit to make a car start to finish? Hint: They could not do it.
    I'm not arguing that every protectionist tariff is good, I'm just pointing out that economic warfare is real and native manufacturing capacity matters, and it's not just weapons that matter either, food production is vital for instance.

    Every tariff needs to be debated on it's merits, you can't just dismiss them all as bad out of hand.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I'm not arguing that every protectionist tariff is good, I'm just pointing out that economic warfare is real and native manufacturing capacity matters, and it's not just weapons that matter either, food production is vital for instance.

    Every tariff needs to be debated on it's merits, you can't just dismiss them all as bad out of hand.
    We'll have to agree to disagree.

    As an aside, when I think of economic warfare I think of MAIN, IMF debt schemes to rob a country's citizenry and the blockades and sanctions the US maintains in their play for maintaining dollar hegemony. I don't think of two parties being unable to reach a deal on a given trade.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  19. #18

    Default

    Bump.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  20. #19

    Default

    ...
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 03-06-2018 at 11:01 AM.






Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •