Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Bin charge protests and breastfeeding
Options
Comments
-
Charlie McCreevy knocked many points off the tax rates.
But the amount of tax people are paying has no relevance to Joe Higgins in prison.0 -
Originally posted by RainyDay
Like I said earlier, comparing the absolute value of income tax revenue is meaningless, unless you look at the number of people employed, the rates of inflation etc.
Tax rates have dropped, whether you like it or not.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good arguement, eh? Have you considered a career in Fianna Fail? You'd make a great junior Minister.
whats that? lies, damn lies and statistics? the number employed hasn't decreased compared to figures 15 years ago, and incoem tax has increased inline with at least inflation, its just one of those things, inflation goes up, people get paid more so on so on, fact is the goverment has more money even in 1980s terms to spends. Never lets the facts get in the way of twisting all reality to suit your own arguements aye, you should try out for one for labour as a junior minister, or better yet a councilor.
can believe your claiming that due to a decrease in tax rates that there is less money. you clear don't have an understanding of elasticy0 -
The average paye worker is paying less tax.
Charlie McCreevy has slashed many points of both tax rates.
They are many more working.
He slashed capital gains tax in half & it generates more than what it did.
Put PAYE does not pay for all government services eg. motor tax, dog licence etc.0 -
Originally posted by Cork
The average paye worker is paying less tax.
Charlie McCreevy has slashed many points of both tax rates.
They are many more working.
He slashed capital gains tax in half & it generates more than what it did.
Put PAYE does not pay for all government services eg. motor tax, dog licence etc.
the average paye is paying allot more takes, but did you mean as a percentage of net income, in direct tax? i love the way people bang around these terms and they clearly haven't a clue. All taxation collected be it paye,vat or moter tax ect, goes to the exchequer, theres no such thing as one tax going for one thing, if all motor tax went on roads then there would be no need to tole them, there also wouldn't be many hospitals or gardi. We pay some of the lowest rates of direct taxes in europe, but some of the highests rates of indirect taxes , so when you and people like you bang on about the taxes being lower then anywhere else in the world you should take these things into account. Close of living is extremely high here fact, the main part of that is vat, bank charges,VHI, dirt, stamp dutty, customs dutty, insurance levies, ect all indirect taxes. If we get to the stage that where paying directly for everythign from health care and education to water rates and rubbish collection, then why do we need a goverment, why can't a private company take over? i mean the whole thing is run by civil servants as anybody in the system will tell you, TD's tend just to **** up the process.0 -
Originally posted by Boston
If we get to the stage that where paying directly for everythign from health care and education to water rates and rubbish collection, then why do we need a goverment,
Irish people don't pay any local taxes. There was a piece in yesterdays Irish Times - on how local taxes are supported by many socialists accross the EU.
I pay private health insurance - I want the service - so I pay for it.
I pay for refuse tags- I want the service - so I pay for it.
But local authoritys are not oblieged to collect bins without the correct payment.
Water Charges are paid in many EU countries - from an environmental propestive - these may be a good thing as they will cut down on wastage.
Refuse Charges have been a factor of life outside the pale for years- from an environmental propestive - these are a good idea as they encourage people to recycle.
Where there is a payment by wieght system - you'd have more recycling.
Maybe the government needs to re-introduce local taxation. Prior to 1977 - everynbody paid RATES. We need well funded local authoritys.
The government has finite resources better to spent it on health than collecting waste for landfill.0 -
Advertisement
-
Hi Boston - you know that if once, just once, your post contained a single verifiable statistic instead of these broad-brush generalisations, readers might actually take some of your assertions seriously?0
-
Originally posted by RainyDay
Hi Boston - you know that if once, just once, your post contained a single verifiable statistic instead of these broad-brush generalisations, readers might actually take some of your assertions seriously?
what facts do you exactly want love, my problem is you haven't disagreed with anything i've said, merely stated you case over and over as if somehow it contradicts what i say or supports you (where so poor its needed) arguements. I've told you where to go and get income statistics, i'd do it myself but i've neither time nor patients to crawl through the CSO website.0 -
Three things limit the relief and make it more incomplete:Originally posted by RainyDay
Hi Sparks - Tell us more about why the tax relief on waste charges is
incomplete. I get full tax relief on the amount that I pay in waste charges (Dun
Laoghaire Rathdown), so there is no double taxation for me. How could the tax
relief be made more 'complete'?
1) The total amount of relief is limited to less than a typical family spends in
a year on refuse collection;
2) The relief applies to "local authority charges" in total, not "refuse
collection charges" which means that the amount of tax relief available is
discriminatory - based on where you're living, your tax relief may or may not
cover your local charges.
3) If you pay a commercial company for waste removal, you can claim tax relief
on that or on local authority charges - not both, despite the fact that
by paying a commercial company, you're in net effect paying the state by
relieving the load on the local authority.
Indirect taxation applies to everyone, not just those in employment, andThese changes make a vast difference to the amount of tax paid by anyone
in employment. I can't see how increases in services charges, VAT or other
indirect taxation would come anywhere near compensating for these drops in
taxation.
thus they have a far larger catchment than direct taxes - which is also why
they're so inherently unjust.
Not quite correct - the overflowing wards and collapsing roofs areThat is why our hospitals are overflowing, our school roofs are collapsing and
our local authorities are starved of funds from central government.
Capital investment problems, and capital investment came from EU
structural funds. Which means it comes down to central government mismanagement.
Also, the decline of Local Authority was a deliberate action by central
government - not a side effect of circumstances beyond the control of central
government.
Point of Information - a waiver scheme means that there is no charge, not that aOriginally posted by Cork
Point Of information. The waiver scheme in North & West Cork offers a discount
to OAPs or hoseholds whose sole source of income is social welfare.
discount is received. But that's not a mistake I'd be surprised by, not coming
from a supported of a party that announces "adjustments" instead of "cutbacks"
and that spends enough money on a spin department for the Taoiseach to refit a
school every year, while kids sit in damp, rat-infested prefabs instead of clean
well-equipped schoolrooms in a country whose only natural resource is an
educated workforce.
That displays a degree of arrogance and entitlement that I'd fully expectA portion of your tax does not go to local authoritys - it goes to a
central fund. Cork tax does not go to Cork County Council. It is up to
government - how to spend tax money.
from a FF party memeber.
You do realise you just said that we have to pay central government, but that
they do not have to provide anything in return?
Which is patently silly.
Wrong.People outside Dublin have no problem with these charges.
Just because the protests are in dublin does not mean that only dublin people
have a problem with paying twice for a service.
Once again cork, noone is demanding a free service, they're demanding that theyPeople are responsible for thir own trash. It is up of everybody to
reduce, recycling & re-use. You cannot expect the state to pick up the tab for
your garbage.
only pay once for that service. And you cannot expect them to pick up the tab
for your inept government's mistakes.
Which frankly, is not only a welcome change in the mindset of the Irish public,
it's long overdue.
And yet it's still being done - yet as is happening in Glen Ding, councillersContact your local litter warden - such dumping is illegal.
are going through a lot of back-stage machinations to retrospectively make it
legal.
Since they're still protesting despite the penalties, I'd guess not. I'd furtherDo the protestors have troble with sentences? This was a judical
metter.
guess that they're not doing this for kicks. And I'd further guess that that's
why they'll win.
Fact - the tax take, the total amount gathered, today; is far higher than it wasOriginally posted by RainyDay
Fact: Top rate of income tax in the late 80's was 55% - today the top rate is
42%. Fact: Middle-rate of income tax in the late 80's was 35% - today the middle
rate has been eliminated and tax payers drop back to the lower rate. Fact: Lower
rate of income tax in the late 80's was 25% - today, the top rate is 20%. Fact:
Capital gains tax was at 40% for most of the 1990's and was up to 60% in certain
cases - today the CGT rate is 20%.
15 years ago, even adjusted for inflation and examined in "real" terms.
Mind you, you have to wonder - had those at the top being playing it straight
with taxes back then, would we have had to have such high rates?
Mind you, that's a dalliance (though I fully expect Cork to now post a long
thoughtful passage on why it was okay for Haughey to do it and it wasn't for
Fitzgerald...).
And the total tax take has gone up despite the rates falling, whether you likeTax rates have dropped - that is a fact. Comparing the absolute value of
income tax revenue is meaningless, unless you look at the number of people
employed, the rates of inflation etc. Tax rates have dropped, whether you like
it or not.
it or not. And despite this, indirect taxation has not fallen, and we are
still charged illegal tax like the VRT.
You don't get to haul up the bits of the past that agree with your point andCorrect - but I don't see any relevance of this to the debate in hand.
Huge amounts of today's tax revenue are being spent on catching up on the
infrastructural deficit arising from many years of underspending, but that
doesn't change the fact that tax rates have dropped considerably.
dismiss those that don't. And the infrastructural spending was supposed to come
from EU funds, not from income tax.
Have you not seen the budget for the past four or five years then?Got any real numbers to back up this load of bluster, Boston. I've shown
you my numbers (i.e. the specific rates & how they have changed), now you show
my yours?
There's your figures...
And this affects the topic how?Originally posted by Cork
The IFA were fined by our courts. Joe Higgins wasput into prison for a spell.
These sanctions were imposed by our courts.
No, but we have lower local costs than in many countries across the EU, so weThe taxation debate is interesting. We are paying very low direct taxes.
We have no local taxation as they have in many countries across the EU.
didn't need local taxation - at least, that's what FF told us...
Me, I'd be happy with local taxation - just not local taxation and
central taxation for the same service.
Excellent. Let's invite them to take over Dail Eireann and kick FF and the PDsSocialists across Europe support local taxation. (Yesterdays Irish
Times).
out.
Central government through tax relief I suspect, since using such operatorsWho does Joe Higgins think should fund fund such operators??
relieves the stress on the state.
Actually, comparing the absolute value of income tax revenue (compensating forOriginally posted by RainyDay
Like I said earlier, comparing the absolute value of income tax revenue is
meaningless, unless you look at the number of people employed, the rates of
inflation etc.
inflation) is far more meaningful than looking at the tax levels - especially
since you don't have the other figures you mentioned.
Direct tax rates have fallen. Total tax revenue has risen dramatically.Tax rates have dropped, whether you like it or not.
And indirect tax revenues have been increased by extending the catchment for
indirect tax, the rates of which have also risen.
And you'd make a great senior minister since you manage to obfuscate and beNever let the facts get in the way of a good arguement, eh? Have you
considered a career in Fianna Fail? You'd make a great junior Minister.
disingenous while claiming that your figures prove that the other person is
doing the same.0 -
And put them back on in indirect taxation. But even the reduction in direct taxOriginally posted by Cork
Charlie McCreevy knocked many points off the tax rates.
was due to circumstances he did not control or bring about.
So no credit to him for that.
Incorrect.But the amount of tax people are paying has no relevance to Joe Higgins
in prison.
That's wrong actually cork.The average paye worker is paying less tax.
So you support a financially discriminatory healthcare system then cork?I pay private health insurance - I want the service - so I pay for it.
I pay for refuse tags- I want the service - so I pay for it.
Unsurprising.
Also not something that the people in this country would ever support.
That is only due to very recent FF legislation, protested at the time of it'sBut local authoritys are not oblieged to collect bins without the correct
payment.
inception through to today.
We do need well funded local authorities. Pity that Fianna Fail have beenMaybe the government needs to re-introduce local taxation. Prior to 1977
- everynbody paid RATES. We need well funded local authoritys.
hamstringing them for years Cork, isn't it?
Yes, and as we've seen, this government is so committed to efficency thatThe government has finite resources better to spent it on health than
collecting waste for landfill.
they're wasting money on an unnecessary learjet.0 -
That is only due to very recent FF legislation, protested at the time of it's
As a democrat - I accept legalisation.
Does Joe Higgins accept the decomcratic vote of Oirecthas or local authority?0 -
Advertisement
-
Oh, there's misdirection for you! Cork, as a "democrat" (that's not the right term, by the way, unless you're an american and a member of the Democratic Party) you are obliged to accept the will of the majority, subject only to the morality of that will (and that little caveat is a Thomas Jefferson special, for those wondering).Originally posted by Cork
As a democrat - I accept legalisation.
Does Joe Higgins accept the decomcratic vote of Oirecthas or local authority?
Since FF did not achive a majority of the electorate (only of those that showed up), I have no problems whatsoever with protesting what they decide is the law - especially when they make that decision without consulting the people they allegedly serve, and in fact, over the direct opposition of the people affected. Especially when even the amoral majority they do have they got by lying about the state of the nation in public.0 -
Originally posted by Sparks
Since FF did not achive a majority of the electorate (only of those that showed up), I have no problems whatsoever with protesting what they decide is the law - especially when they make that decision without consulting the people they allegedly serve,
Refuse charges have been in this country for many years. When the Labour party were in power my area were paying refuse charges.
Governments have power to impose charges. Local Authoritys have power to impose charges.
As a democratic - I have no problem with protesting so long as it does not break the law.
As a democrat - I believe the laws in this country should be respected.
As a citizen, I accept the laws passed by parliament. I also accept the days of filling refuse bins with gargage are numbered. It makes no sense either from an environomental or economic point of view.
People should be encouraged to recycle, reuce and re-use. Just like opposition to the plastic bag levy - we have moved on.
The plastic bag levy was a solid environmental move.
Do Dubliners still go into supermarkets looking for free bags?
That they are included with the cost of your grocerys.
Do Dubliners refuse to pay the 15c levy on the grounds - they paid for the bag by buying the grocerys in the shop?0 -
I have decided not to post any more posts on this topic.Bin charge protests and breastfeeding
I have no openion on " breastfeeding".
Bin Charges are not an issue down here in Cork. Landfill is on the way out. We need to reduce, re-use and re-cycling.
Fair play to local Authories in West Cork for bringing in the payment by wieght. Your charge will depend on the net contents of the bin.
Local Authorities & Governments have power to introduce or drop charges. Rates were dropped in 1977. We've had bin charges for years.
I believe - the polluter should pay. It is about time that as a country, we become environmentally more aware.
Waste Charges are common place accross Ireland. We've had them for years.
I applaud the Minister - in endoursing the payment by wieght system. It will make economic and environmental sense when it is introduced across the country.
Another First for Cork. It is great being the real capital & leading the nation with regards deal with the nations waste.
Rebels All The Way!0 -
This isn't a sports competition Cork. "The other side didn't fix it either" isn't a valid defence.Originally posted by Cork
Refuse charges have been in this country for many years. When the Labour party were in power my area were paying refuse charges.
Actually that's not how it works. It's a gross over-simplification. But heck, that's FF for you.Governments have power to impose charges. Local Authoritys have power to impose charges.
Ah, but as a FF supporter, you have no problem supporting changes in the law that do nothing other than making protest illegal.As a democratic - I have no problem with protesting so long as it does not break the law.
Which means you're in the wrong on this one Cork.
No you don't, or you'd be calling for the resignation of half the government for breaking the law on many seperate occasions.As a democrat - I believe the laws in this country should be respected.
Go right ahead and be a sheep Cork, the rest of us happen to be of the opinion that government serves us, not the other way round.As a citizen, I accept the laws passed by parliament. I also accept the days of filling refuse bins with gargage are numbered. It makes no sense either from an environomental or economic point of view.
Indeed. Pity that the recycling centres have been shut down under the current government.People should be encouraged to recycle, reuce and re-use.
Without serious opposition as I recall, and with a *lot* of precedent from other EU countries.Just like opposition to the plastic bag levy - we have moved on.
The plastic bag levy was a solid environmental move.
Ah, but they don't complain because they can simply pay once for the bag, not twice... which is why they're protesting the bin charges - because they're being asked to pay twice.Do Dubliners refuse to pay the 15c levy on the grounds - they paid for the bag by buying the grocerys in the shop?
That's the second time you've decided to leave a thread because it's blindingly obvious to everyone that not only are you in the wrong, you can't make any argument for your position other than "that's the fianna fail stance on this".I have decided not to post any more posts on this topic.
I am curious Cork - are you actually a FF party member?
Wrong. They are. There just aren't any protests there yet.Bin Charges are not an issue down here in Cork.
Spurious truism. Has nothing to do with the topic at hand.Landfill is on the way out. We need to reduce, re-use and re-cycling.
Fair play for doing their job properly?Fair play to local Authories in West Cork for bringing in the payment by wieght.
Doesn't take much to please you, does it cork?
Spurious and irrelevant trusims.Local Authorities & Governments have power to introduce or drop charges. Rates were dropped in 1977. We've had bin charges for years.
As do the protestors. They just don't think they should pay twice.I believe - the polluter should pay.
Spurious and irrelevant trusims.It is about time that as a country, we become environmentally more aware.
We had child abuse for years too.Waste Charges are common place accross Ireland. We've had them for years.
And that's got nothing to do with the topic at hand either.I applaud the Minister - in endoursing the payment by wieght system. It will make economic and environmental sense when it is introduced across the country.
Spurious and irrelevant, not to mention wrong.Another First for Cork. It is great being the real capital & leading the nation with regards deal with the nations waste.
Tell me cork, are you bowing out because of an inability to answer a post and remain on topic?0 -
Originally posted by Cork
I have decided not to post any more posts on this topic.
That sounds a lot like a FF members comment i.e.
I can't talk my way out of this so:
"No Comment"0 -
Originally posted by Sparks
Tell me cork, are you bowing out because of an inability to answer a post and remain on topic?
No, these protests are a Dublin wonder. If protesters think they have paid for the service twice. Let them proove it.
They are laws in this country with regard being overcharged or paying for something twice.
It might be a more effective way of protesting.0 -
Sparks, I'm curious about something. You assert that refuse collection is something that is already paid for through existing taxation: why then am I paying a private company to collect my refuse?
Is it your assertion that Mayo County Council are legally obliged to collect my refuse, simply because I pay taxes? Should I demand that they supply me with water also, rather than having to pay my local group water scheme?
Oh, and let's get something clear for the umpteenth time: the protesters are not in jail for not paying refuse charges, they're not in jail for protesting - legally, peacefully or otherwise - they're in jail for contempt of court.0 -
Originally posted by oscarBravo
Sparks, I'm curious about something. You assert that refuse collection is something that is already paid for through existing taxation: why then am I paying a private company to collect my refuse?
Is it your assertion that Mayo County Council are legally obliged to collect my refuse, simply because I pay taxes? Should I demand that they supply me with water also, rather than having to pay my local group water scheme?
Oh, and let's get something clear for the umpteenth time: the protesters are not in jail for not paying refuse charges, they're not in jail for protesting - legally, peacefully or otherwise - they're in jail for contempt of court.
The government, local authorities and courts are all wrong. You too,oscarBravo is wrong. You should not pay commercial operators as you are effectively paying twice
If the anti bin protestors could prove they've paid twice - why are some of them in jail? Is it time for them to either pay up or proove before the courts they paid twice?0 -
Originally posted by oscarBravo
Oh, and let's get something clear for the umpteenth time: the protesters are not in jail for not paying refuse charges, they're not in jail for protesting - legally, peacefully or otherwise - they're in jail for contempt of court.
They are in Jail because the Judge asked them were they willing to stop protesting and they said no, thats the fact.
As I have already mentioned
This is a case of double standards The IFA were only fined for the excact same thing, I think I know why too, the number of farmers in this country compared to the few less priviliged people in local class dublin is far far greater.0 -
Point Of Information:
The local authority applied for the injunction after some vehicles were stopped during their rounds last week, by protestors who are against paying the charge.
Source:Irish Examiner0 -
Advertisement
-
Originally posted by Cork
Where is the law aganist protesting?
Was it not that - he asked them to abide by the high court order??
Where is the law aganist lawful protest??
I didn't say they were jailed for lawful protest I simply said protests.
So what you think about the double standards IFA get fined and these people get jail??0 -
Originally posted by irish1
I didn't say they were jailed for lawful protest I simply said protests.
So what you think about the double standards IFA get fined and these people get jail??
The Court fine which the IFA had to pay for illegally blockading meat factories came to £500,000
Link0 -
-
Wrong. They're only happening in Dublin now. Believe me, when they succed in Dublin, we'll either see the changes made for the whole country, or we'll see protests all over the country.Originally posted by Cork
No, these protests are a Dublin wonder.
Cork, I've shown you why it's blatently obvious that it is double taxation. Are you saying that we couldn't rely on the blatently obvious with proof in a court of law?If protesters think they have paid for the service twice. Let them proove it.
Actually, there aren't, not unless both parties have signed a contract. Other that that specific case, it's caveat emptor. (Don't you love having formal education in law?)They are laws in this country with regard being overcharged or paying for something twice.
Oh I don't know - they seem to be protesting quite effectively from where I'm sitting.It might be a more effective way of protesting.
Many a true word said with a sarcastic tone by FF...The government, local authorities and courts are all wrong. You too,oscarBravo is wrong. You should not pay commercial operators as you are effectively paying twice
They're not in jail for anything other than refusing to comply with the courts order to cease protesting, which refusal was given on the grounds that the legislation allowing the courts to make that order was forced through government in an undemocratic and unjust manner.If the anti bin protestors could prove they've paid twice - why are some of them in jail? Is it time for them to either pay up or proove before the courts they paid twice?
How do you know you're not responding to a FF TD? Hell, half the crap Cork comes out with would be best explained by his occupation being a FF TD...Originally posted by Irish1
You should join politics mate that was the kind of response I would expect from a FF TD!!0 -
Sparks,
I fail to see how you've proven that we are being asked to pay twice for these services. Your argument (from what I can see) is that if it was already covered by tax then it is double taxation if one is asked to pay specifically for this service. Cork has given examples of where the same was true in other cases and is not true now.
Just how is this solid proof?0 -
A signature is not a requirement for a contract to exist, as you should know if you have a formal education in law.Originally posted by Sparks
Actually, there aren't, not unless both parties have signed a contract. Other that that specific case, it's caveat emptor. (Don't you love having formal education in law?)
Were you planning on replying to my question?0 -
How exactly do you propose to have a single standard here? Jail the entire IFA? Fine the bin protesters "only" 250,000 per day?Originally posted by irish1
This is a case of double standards The IFA were only fined for the excact same thing, I think I know why too, the number of farmers in this country compared to the few less priviliged people in local class dublin is far far greater.
To be effective, the courts need a mechanism for enforcement of their orders. The method employed varies based on the circumstances.0 -
I have a great idea......
Lets borrow lots and lots of money so that we dont have to pay for the services provided to us. Let our children and their chiildren pay for our freebies in years to come.
I think we have been there before!!
Paddyo0 -
You've read the post I wrote to cork on this?I fail to see how you've proven that we are being asked to pay twice for these services.
Correct. If I pay you for a service and then you demand the fee again, that's double-charging.Your argument (from what I can see) is that if it was already covered by tax then it is double taxation if one is asked to pay specifically for this service.
Actually he hasn't. He's mumbled something about rates without being specific - I've given details about this year's budget arrangements regarding bin charges.Cork has given examples of where the same was true in other cases and is not true now.
This year there's a tax relief scheme for those that pay bin charges. It's incomplete, but it is there. Which means that your income tax pays the bin charges. So when the Local Authority charges you again, and the tax relief doesn't cover it - that's double taxation. Plain, simple, and obvious.
Actually, it is a requirement for any formal contract. Verbal contracts, as the saying goes, are worth the paper they're printed on. Buying something over the counter and similar transactions, don't count as contracts.A signature is not a requirement for a contract to exist, as you should know if you have a formal education in law.
Because that service isn't provided by the local authority. Which means that you're paying for a service you don't get. Which is as bad as double charging.Sparks, I'm curious about something. You assert that refuse collection is something that is already paid for through existing taxation: why then am I paying a private company to collect my refuse?
But I would have thought that went without saying, OB.
Correct, but you're missing an important point here - namely that this time last year, the courts wouldn't have been able to charge people for this. FF-pushed, specifically written legislation is the only reason they can.To be effective, the courts need a mechanism for enforcement of their orders.
I've got a better one - let's not buy a new learjet and use the funds that frees up to buy us breathing room from here to the new budgetary year to get a pay-by-weight system set up with full tax relief for everyone.I have a great idea......
Lets borrow lots and lots of money so that we dont have to pay for the services provided to us. Let our children and their chiildren pay for our freebies in years to come.0 -
Advertisement
-
I think its a disgrace that woman taking her child into jail as a way to get a lighter sentence.
Women do not breast feed thier kids at 2 years old.
Its possible, but even if they do the child is well able to come off breast milk while not with the mother at that age.
The woman used the child. What kind of fit mother is she.
And then eejits all over the place falling for this sympathy play, just afraid to be branded heartless.
The mother knew she would be going to jail, so she had the power to prevent this happening. Instead she is now the cause of her 2 year old chile spending time in a prison.
Hang her.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement