[QUOTE=yawmwen;40871128]you have freedom to do literally whatever you want as long as it isn't something that the state finds questionable(like protesting or self-sufficiency, for example).
i'm not against work, i'm against wage-slavery. the wage system should be abolished and goods shouldn't be distributed based on private ownership. labor should be there to emancipate and empower humanity, not force us into cubicles where we are rented for most of the day to give our profit to another person.[/QUOTE]
So we're oppressed because we have laws against/pertaining to things that have shown a history of being a danger to the stability of society? Ha, really.
Uh well that's a good belief you have there, what I'm seeing is that you want communism, a system that works in theory, but literally never in reality. Communism will never work, people will never like it, and it will never be able to function for a good amount of time.
To be honest I could be completely misunderstanding your point, but any other alternative to capitalism tends not to work very well, capitalism simply allows for the most innovation, the most freedom, and that is what humans strive for.
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;40871150]So we're oppressed because we have laws against/pertaining to things that have shown a history of being a danger to the stability of society? Ha, really.
Uh well that's a good belief you have there, what I'm seeing is that you want communism, a system that works in theory, but literally never in reality. Communism will never work, people will never like it, and it will never be able to function for a good amount of time.[/QUOTE]
capitalism tends to be the reason that communism cannot work in practice. if you smash capitalism, you can allow for a more liberated society.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40870952]no the united states is just better at pr and manipulating the system.
we have a system of suppression and oppression similar to china's. the difference is that we are better are doing it with subtlety and it is the "third world" we exploit for profit.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2013-04/21/c_132327175_7.htm[/url]
[url]http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/2009_Human_Rights_Report:_China_(includes_Tibet,_Hong_Kong,_and_Macau)[/url]
why don't you read the difference? i've read both of them and while they both highlight serious abuses i still think china is way more guilty with this. most of the human rights abuses in the USA that the chinese report details are social problems and not necessarily political problems anyway, contrary to the chinese
[editline]1st June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40871164]capitalism tends to be the reason that communism cannot work in practice. if you smash capitalism, you can allow for a more liberated society.[/QUOTE]
honestly that's just going into political theory, not human rights abuses tbh
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40871164]capitalism tends to be the reason that communism cannot work in practice. if you smash capitalism, you can allow for a more liberated society.[/QUOTE]
Only reason I think that'd be the case is because if humans are allowed to be happy by being given the things they want, they would most definitely not want to go to a system that doesn't allow people the beauty of indulgence, and that's a literally awful reason to justify communism.
[editline]1st June 2013[/editline]
If you pamper a child long enough they'll get spoiled and hate to be made impoverished.
Since this is the fate of millions of people regarding their basic human needs n shit, I don't think the age old response of "well fuck spoiled people" works here.
[editline]1st June 2013[/editline]
"Well they only won't like it because they're better off right now!"
not really. capitalism makes communism or socialism hard to achieve because attempts to implement communism and socialism are met with soldiers and bombs.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40871300]not really. capitalism makes communism or socialism hard to achieve because attempts to implement communism and socialism are met with soldiers and bombs.[/QUOTE]
Well that's a cute anti-war slogan you got there, that is hardly the reason why communism doesn't work.
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;40871311]Well that's a cute anti-war slogan you got there, that is hardly the reason why communism doesn't work.[/QUOTE]
it's the main reason. that's why just about every communist or anarchist society has failed.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40871074]to be forced into slavery in order to survive, is that freedom? in the american system you have one freedom above all else, the freedom to sell yourself. failing that, the american system grants you your next freedom: the freedom to die.[/QUOTE]
what
If you're against people working for their pay, what do you suggest they do all day? And how do you expect society to function?
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40871316]it's the main reason. that's why just about every communist or anarchist society has failed.[/QUOTE]
Do you think that communism and anarchy are effective economic/social systems? Do you think that communism and anarchism allow for the same amount of growth and prosperity and happiness as capitalism can?
I understand people get frustrated when it comes to their place in capitalistic societies, but it's a lot better than the alternatives. You don't realize how good you have it.
If we didn't have capitalism, we wouldn't have much of the amazing things we have now, without the incentive of material wealth, there'd be very little organized attempts at innovating and producing things.
[editline]1st June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Ericson666;40871330]what
If you're against people working for their pay, what do you suggest they do all day? And how do you expect society to function?[/QUOTE]
I think he thinks that people should either work for themselves so that they alone survive (anarchy)
or he thinks that people should work, but only get the basic necessities of life and nothing more or less, no matter what (communism [this is one of the crippling weaknesses of communism])
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;40871331]Do you think that communism and anarchy are effective economic/social systems? Do you think that communism and anarchism allow for the same amount of growth and prosperity and happiness as capitalism can?
I understand people get frustrated when it comes to their place in capitalistic societies, but it's a lot better than the alternatives. You don't realize how good you have it.
If we didn't have capitalism, we wouldn't have much of the amazing things we have now, without the incentive of material wealth, there'd be very little organized attempts at innovating and producing things.[/quote]
[citation needed]
[quote]I think he thinks that people should either work for themselves so that they alone survive (anarchy)
or he thinks that people should work, but only get the basic necessities of life and nothing more or less, no matter what (communism [this is one of the crippling weaknesses of communism])[/QUOTE]
um neither of those are correct assessments of communism or anarchism...
i believe people should be able to own their work. the management of a factory should be chosen by the workers. the distribution of goods should be chosen by the workers and communities together.
anarchism doesn't mean 'fend for yourself' and communism doesn't mean 'bare minimum'. both mean that society distributes and works for society, not land owners.
[editline]2nd June 2013[/editline]
i don't believe in a system(capitalism) that benefits a few people and makes everyone else indentured servants at the mercy of those few.
[I]"We renew our call for China to protect the universal human rights of all its citizens; release those who have been wrongfully detained, prosecuted, incarcerated, forcibly disappeared or placed under house arrest; and end the ongoing harassment of human rights activists and their families."[/I]
I find it ridiculous for my government to state this while it hasn't even closed gitmo yet.
[B]Edited:[/B]
Go ahead and give me boxes
Fuck me, right?
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40871461][citation needed]
um neither of those are correct assessments of communism or anarchism...
i believe people should be able to own their work. the management of a factory should be chosen by the workers. the distribution of goods should be chosen by the workers and communities together.
anarchism doesn't mean 'fend for yourself' and communism doesn't mean 'bare minimum'. both mean that society distributes and works for society, not land owners.
[editline]2nd June 2013[/editline]
i don't believe in a system(capitalism) that benefits a few people and makes everyone else indentured servants at the mercy of those few.[/QUOTE]
And what if majority of those in the community voting decide to exclude certain individuals from receiving equal distribution as everyone else? Is that acceptable? Or do you run it where there must be absolute consensus before any actions can be taken? And if there are any holdouts on a decision in a total consensus system who remain opposed to the majority, how do you handle that? Is the decision abandoned because no consensus can be reached? What if this were to happen with every decision?
What if those involved in the community decide they want to implement a more Capitalistic system? Would you find this acceptable? What about neighboring communities? Should they have any say in such a decision?
And what if you have breakaways, who disagree with the decisions being passed or those passed thus far, and they want to be a separate communitiy that may end up in competition for resources?
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;40871562]And what if majority of those in the community voting decide to exclude certain individuals from receiving equal distribution as everyone else? Is that acceptable? Or do you run it where there must be absolute consensus before any actions can be taken? And if there are any holdouts on a decision in a total consensus system who remain opposed to the majority, how do you handle that? Is the decision abandoned because no consensus can be reached? What if this were to happen with every decision?[/QUOTE]
No, no. Everything would perfect and everyone would be equal because community Rousseau natural rights the people.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;40871562]And what if majority of those in the community voting decide to exclude certain individuals from receiving equal distribution as everyone else? Is that acceptable? Or do you run it where there must be absolute consensus before any actions can be taken? And if there are any holdouts on a decision in a total consensus system who remain opposed to the majority, how do you handle that? Is the decision abandoned because no consensus can be reached? What if this were to happen with every decision?[/QUOTE]
[url]http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/index.html[/url]
[url]http://shawnewald.info/aia/dec_consensus.html[/url]
[url]http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/seeds-for-change-consensus-decision-making[/url]
i'm not gonna spoon feed you all the answers because other people have better writing skills than me. if these pages do not adequately answer your concern, then i suggest you use the google machine.
[editline]2nd June 2013[/editline]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqsNOwANo74[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8O0DdK3JV0[/media]
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40871461]i don't believe in a system(capitalism) that benefits a few people and makes everyone else indentured servants at the mercy of those few.[/QUOTE]
This is a rather amazing contention because it's actually very selfish. Yes there are people who suffer under capitalism, but there are people who suffer and do poorly in every single sort of human population, communism or anarchy won't fix shit but make life worse on everyone (turns out humans are amazing when working together [that's kinda the only reason we have everything, if we didn't have the ability to compound knowledge and use that compounded knowledge, we wouldn't have much anything...at all, really]). The reality is that humans will always suffer, and that's the way of life, and that's always how it will be. You can't just say "people suffer in capitalism" and throw capitalism away as some garbage ideology or economic strategy, your proposed ideas have SEVERE problems, they are actually laughably obvious and the fact that you don't see it is rather odd, but may be the result of your frustration with capitalism, which is really only a frustration with yourself.
Anyway, existential shit aside, capitalism is the most effective form of economic system for humans, it encourages people very clearly to innovate and give people entertainment and goods that they enjoy, along with that comes science, which is also extremely popular in capitalistic societies.
To settle with communism or anarchy is to settle with either complete stagnation or the slowest growth of human advancement ever seen.
One more thing, capitalism most certainly makes more lives better than worse, technically the poorest existence you can be in the USA is welfare (okay, there is homelessness, but I'm not really too sure why it is that homeless people don't get welfare, it could just be their fault [addictions, gambling, drugs, whatever] or it could actually be one of the cons of capitalism [unfairness, disparity, income inequality?], but that still doesn't change that capitalism is probably the best choice we have) and in many areas of the country you can live stably on that forever. Compare that with the poorest state in 2nd and 3rd world countries (literally dying), and you'll see how well you have it. You can't expect to live perfectly fine without doing any work, that isn't how anything works or can work.
This is a rather amazing contention because it's actually very selfish. Yes there are people who suffer under fascism, but there are people who suffer and do poorly in every single sort of human population, democracy or republicanism won't fix shit but make life worse on everyone (turns out humans are amazing when working together [that's kinda the only reason we have everything, if we didn't have the ability to compound knowledge and use that compounded knowledge, we wouldn't have much anything...at all, really]). The reality is that humans will always suffer, and that's the way of life, and that's always how it will be. You can't just say "people suffer in fascism" and throw fascism away as some garbage ideology or economic strategy, your proposed ideas have SEVERE problems, they are actually laughably obvious and the fact that you don't see it is rather odd, but may be the result of your frustration with fascism, which is really only a frustration with yourself.
Anyway, existential shit aside, fascism is the most effective form of economic system for humans, it encourages people very clearly to innovate and give people entertainment and goods that they enjoy, along with that comes science, which is also extremely popular in fascist societies.
To settle with democracy or republicanism is to settle with either complete stagnation or the slowest growth of human advancement ever seen.
One more thing, fascism most certainly makes more lives better than worse, technically the poorest state you can be in the USA is welfare, and in many areas of the country you can live stably on that forever. Compare that with the poorest state in 2nd and 3rd world countries (literally dying), and you'll see how well you have it. You can't expect to live perfectly fine without doing any work, that isn't how anything works or can work.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40872018]This is a rather amazing contention because it's actually very selfish. Yes there are people who suffer under fascism, but there are people who suffer and do poorly in every single sort of human population, democracy or republicanism won't fix shit but make life worse on everyone (turns out humans are amazing when working together [that's kinda the only reason we have everything, if we didn't have the ability to compound knowledge and use that compounded knowledge, we wouldn't have much anything...at all, really]). The reality is that humans will always suffer, and that's the way of life, and that's always how it will be. You can't just say "people suffer in fascism" and throw fascism away as some garbage ideology or economic strategy, your proposed ideas have SEVERE problems, they are actually laughably obvious and the fact that you don't see it is rather odd, but may be the result of your frustration with fascism, which is really only a frustration with yourself.
Anyway, existential shit aside, fascism is the most effective form of economic system for humans, it encourages people very clearly to innovate and give people entertainment and goods that they enjoy, along with that comes science, which is also extremely popular in fascist societies.
To settle with democracy or republicanism is to settle with either complete stagnation or the slowest growth of human advancement ever seen.
One more thing, fascism most certainly makes more lives better than worse, technically the poorest state you can be in the USA is welfare, and in many areas of the country you can live stably on that forever. Compare that with the poorest state in 2nd and 3rd world countries (literally dying), and you'll see how well you have it. You can't expect to live perfectly fine without doing any work, that isn't how anything works or can work.[/QUOTE]
Uh well I have literally no idea what kind of argument this is or what you're trying to convey.
[editline]1st June 2013[/editline]
You can't just interchange capitalism and fascism, they're clearly not the same thing, just because you literally interchanged them doesn't mean your mocking makes any fucking sense.
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;40872035]Uh well I have literally no idea what kind of argument this is or what you're trying to convey.
[editline]1st June 2013[/editline]
You can't just interchange capitalism and fascism, they're clearly not the same thing, just because you literally interchanged them doesn't mean your mocking makes any fucking sense.[/QUOTE]
i'm saying that i can just change the words around and it means the same thing.
you justify oppression and totalitarianism with the "well our oppression makes our lives better!" card which is absurd. capitalism doesn't make our lives better, it doesn't spur innovation. it stifles innovation and makes us all servants to capitalist masters. is oppression truly happiness to you? if so, you are in a great system for your own happiness. it's a bit disappointing how you think that your own happiness should come at the expense of those who value liberty and self-control, though.
[editline]2nd June 2013[/editline]
people have been using your exact arguments to argue against unionization, women's suffrage, proportional representation, and civil rights for centuries dude.
find a new fucking argument and stop taking the reactionary's.
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;40871150]So we're oppressed because we have laws against/pertaining to things that have shown a history of being a danger to the stability of society? Ha, really.
Uh well that's a good belief you have there, what I'm seeing is that you want communism, a system that works in theory, but literally never in reality. Communism will never work, people will never like it, and it will never be able to function for a good amount of time.
To be honest I could be completely misunderstanding your point, but any other alternative to capitalism tends not to work very well, capitalism simply allows for the most innovation, the most freedom, and that is what humans strive for.[/QUOTE]
Capitalism allows the people who are the most corrupt and with the most money to generate insane profit at the expense of someone else. That's not freedom at all, that's gaming the system.
and I'm not even a Marxist and I realize that actual communism hasn't been properly implemented in a government so I don't think it's a fair judgment to say it's better or worse than capitalism until it has (no, the Soviet Union and PRC were not proper communist states, before you mention them).
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40872049]i'm saying that i can just change the words around and it means the same thing.
you justify oppression and totalitarianism with the "well our oppression makes our lives better!" card which is absurd. capitalism doesn't make our lives better, it doesn't spur innovation. it stifles innovation and makes us all servants to capitalist masters. is oppression truly happiness to you? if so, you are in a great system for your own happiness. it's a bit disappointing how you think that your own happiness should come at the expense of those who value liberty and self-control, though.[/QUOTE]
No, it doesn't mean the same thing at all, I've given substantive reasons as to why capitalism is better, replacing my keyword "capitalism" with "fascism" without any sort of background with any logical reasons as to why what you're saying is true is NOT THE SAME.
I'm not justifying oppression and totalitarianism, I don't see any reason why I have to considering that there is very little of that going on, and the only oppression and totalitarianism going on is either easily justified by needing a stable society, or completely made up in your frustrated head.
The rest of your post is nothing but unsubstantiated contentions that almost everything we know and have seen disagrees with.
You think communism and anarchy will spur innovation and keep us free? No, it will make us basic bitches who are slaves to our natural biology and the nature around us once again. It goes without saying that without a societal structure and economic system nothing can really be done, society and economics are natural results of our human nature, we need to have structure in order to hold us together (also we're social animals so there's that), and without structure or order, we're nothing more than a rather intelligent ape.
Communism will lead to severe problems, innovation will be stifled because there's no reason to become a doctor, scientist, lawyer, what have you, if you get paid the same 3 bread pieces and a water as everyone else, which will lead to a serious problem, obviously. That along with the fact that humans strive to be different and have fun, it will always lead to someone abusing it for their benefit, leading to communism being ruined anyway.
[B]The systems you are proposing have never worked, and hopefully, will never be commonplace, because it will be the death of us.[/B]
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;40871331]Do you think that communism and anarchy are effective economic/social systems? Do you think that communism and anarchism allow for the same amount of growth and prosperity and happiness as capitalism can?
I understand people get frustrated when it comes to their place in capitalistic societies, but it's a lot better than the alternatives. You don't realize how good you have it.
If we didn't have capitalism, we wouldn't have much of the amazing things we have now, without the incentive of material wealth, there'd be very little organized attempts at innovating and producing things.
[editline]1st June 2013[/editline]
I think he thinks that people should either work for themselves so that they alone survive (anarchy)
or he thinks that people should work, but only get the basic necessities of life and nothing more or less, no matter what (communism [this is one of the crippling weaknesses of communism])[/QUOTE]
Placing such importance on material goods creates so many social issues. It's promotes distrust and dishonesty amongst the classes and rewards fucking the other guy over as hard as possible all in the name of profit.
You clearly don't understand communism or anarchy.
[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;40872087]Capitalism allows the people who are the most corrupt and with the most money to generate insane profit at the expense of someone else. That's not freedom at all, that's gaming the system.
and I'm not even a Marxist and I realize that actual communism hasn't been properly implemented in a government so I don't think it's a fair judgment to say it's better or worse than capitalism until it has (no, the Soviet Union and PRC were not proper communist states, before you mention them).[/QUOTE]
Wasn't going to mention them, I know communism has never been done in its pure state, technically anything that follows an economic ideology purely is doomed to fail because it doesn't mix the good with the bad, capitalism is just a good backbone to be modified by other effective concepts (welfare, regulation of the market, social programs, stuff like that), and I believe it to be the best of them. Once again, there are cons, there are the elite, but it isn't like the peasants are dying in the streets, they do very well compared to the rest of the world.
[editline]1st June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;40872098]Placing such importance on material goods creates so many social issues. It's promotes distrust and dishonesty amongst the classes and rewards fucking the other guy over as hard as possible all in the name of profit.
You clearly don't understand communism or anarchy.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't promote distrust or dishonesty, it promotes self-motivation, and in order to be successful you need to work with others and do as well as you can so you can get what you want.
Not really sure what life would be like without material goods, and I don't think you or really anyone would want to find out.
lol like china gives a fuck
[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;40872098]Placing such importance on material goods creates so many social issues. It's promotes distrust and dishonesty amongst the classes and rewards fucking the other guy over as hard as possible all in the name of profit.
You clearly don't understand communism or anarchy.[/QUOTE]
<insert quip about how you can't understand that which is broken>
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;40872102]Wasn't going to mention them, I know communism has never been done in its pure state, technically anything that follows an economic ideology purely is doomed to fail because it doesn't mix the good with the bad, capitalism is just a good backbone to be modified by other effective concepts (welfare, regulation of the market, social programs, stuff like that), and I believe it to be the best of them. Once again, there are cons, there are the elite, but it isn't like the peasants are dying in the streets, they do very well compared to the rest of the world.[/QUOTE]
15% of Americans live in poverty and can barely scrape enough to eat each day. Meanwhile, the top 1% of rich Americans effectively own about a third of the entire country's wealth. You call that a fair and successful system?
[quote]It doesn't promote distrust or dishonesty, it promotes self-motivation, and in order to be successful you need to work with others and do as well as you can so you can get what you want.
Not really sure what life would be like without material goods, and I don't think you or really anyone would want to find out.[/quote]
That's just completely naive. If it's as easy as "yeah guys, just work hard it's all up to you!" everyone would have money. No, whoever is the best at screwing people over is going to end up with the most money.
I think a life without material goods would be a lot fucking better than right now. Maybe we as humans would actually care more about each other for once instead of a stupid phone or something.
Now note I didn't say get rid of material goods entirely, but stop placing such importance and excessive value on them and maybe we'll be just a little bit better to each other.
[editline]1st June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;40872125]<insert quip about how you can't understand that which is broken>[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;40872091]
Communism will lead to severe problems, innovation will be stifled because there's no reason to become a doctor, scientist, lawyer, what have you, if you get paid the same 3 bread pieces and a water as everyone else, which will lead to a serious problem, obviously. That along with the fact that humans strive to be different and have fun, it will always lead to someone abusing it for their benefit, leading to communism being ruined anyway. [/QUOTE]
this silly post of yours proves you don't have the slightest clue what communism is so I think you need to do some research before you cast such a ridiculous judgment.
[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;40872129]15% of Americans live in poverty and can barely scrape enough to eat each day. Meanwhile, the top 1% of rich Americans effectively own about a third of the entire country's wealth. You call that a fair and successful system?
That's just completely naive. If it's as easy as "yeah guys, just work hard it's all up to you!" everyone would have money. No, whoever is the best at screwing people over is going to end up with the most money.
I think a life without material goods would be a lot fucking better than right now. Maybe we as humans would actually care more about each other for once instead of a stupid phone or something.[/QUOTE]
People always suffer, capitalism as run in the US (and a bunch of western nations) allows for those in poverty to do a lot better than those in poverty in other countries. There are some issues that need to be ironed out as society shifts and changes, and that will happen. People are in poverty, but they're a lot better off poor here than anywhere else. In a communistic society everyone would "barely scrape enough to eat each day", except it would be government issued, no material goods, no entertainment, nothing, that's fucked up.
why do you guys always argue these political points of view as if your preferred system would work as well in practice as it would in theory
Anyway, I've argued enough on this subject, especially since now it's coming down to where your points are inarguable ideals that you hold that will never be proven wrong or right because you won't allow them to be.
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;40872162]People always suffer, capitalism as run in the US (and a bunch of western nations) allows for those in poverty to do a lot better than those in poverty in other countries. There are some issues that need to be ironed out as society shifts and changes, and that will happen. People are in poverty, but they're a lot better off poor here than anywhere else. In a communistic society everyone would "barely scrape enough to eat each day", except it would be government issued, no material goods, no entertainment, nothing, that's fucked up.[/QUOTE]
yeah but the reason everyone else is so much poorer is because our gain is their loss
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;40872162]People always suffer, capitalism as run in the US (and a bunch of western nations) allows for those in poverty to do a lot better than those in poverty in other countries. There are some issues that need to be ironed out as society shifts and changes, and that will happen. People are in poverty, but they're a lot better off poor here than anywhere else. In a communistic society everyone would "barely scrape enough to eat each day", except it would be government issued, no material goods, no entertainment, nothing, that's fucked up.[/QUOTE]
Are you serious? Literally every other first world country has better poverty rates and better opportunities for poor people than we do, mostly because they have socialized benefits like welfare and health care. Just look at Sweden and Norway. If you have no money here you're pretty much fucked because it takes money to make money. This one of the WORST places to be poor because you can just get exploited for your labor by anyone that owns more than you.
Once again you seem to be describing some dystopian Stalin-era Soviet Union because that's not what communism is, at all, but please, go on and continue to prove you have no idea what you're saying.
[editline]1st June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Kalibos;40872189]why do you guys always argue these political points of view as if your preferred system would work as well in practice as it would in theory[/QUOTE]
because we need to do SOMETHING instead of sitting around as people get poorer and poorer while others get richer and richer while twiddling our thumbs and saying "well we don't know if it will work so lets just maintain the status quo"
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
