Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 189

Thread: What's wrong with Hong Kong (and how to fix it)

  1. #121
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    Orlando, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,360
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    I mean when these protests began nobody would say that the protesters would succeed in getting the extradition bill withdrawn. It would be like the last protest in 2014 was not successful and Beijing would appoint CEO of HK.

    Second, people were expecting China to crack down and hard. Not happened. In fact the restraint does not pass unnoticed.

    Maybe i should say these were my perceptions at the outset.
    So, perceptions -- preconceived notions -- were wrong.
    Not the first time, not by far.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  2. #122
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,295
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    So, perceptions -- preconceived notions -- were wrong.
    Not the first time, not by far.
    Did any China watcher predict the people would succeed in forcing Beijing to withdraw the extradition bill ?

  3. #123
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    Orlando, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,360
    I don't recall anyone predicting that the extradition bill would become such a focal point. As for withdrawing unpopular legislation, there is precedent for that (2003 National Security Bill, a/k/a Article 23).
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  4. #124
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,295
    Nobody said it would become a focal point, the surprise is the people succeeded. Yes. 2003 is the precedent but that was closer to '97 so CCP goes slow. Meaning further we get from '97 CCP pushes and gradually introduces changes to bring HK in line with any other city in China. So '14 people protested but were unsuccessful.

    If Beijing had to back down in 2019, it means any further attempts to integrate HK into China will remain problematic. Added uncertainty.

  5. #125
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    Orlando, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,360
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Nobody said it would become a focal point, the surprise is the people succeeded. Yes. 2003 is the precedent but that was closer to '97 so CCP goes slow. Meaning further we get from '97 CCP pushes and gradually introduces changes to bring HK in line with any other city in China. So '14 people protested but were unsuccessful.

    If Beijing had to back down in 2019, it means any further attempts to integrate HK into China will remain problematic. Added uncertainty.
    I'm not following you on the whole "closer to '97 so CCP goes slow."
    The main change was who was running China: Hu Jintao, with Jiang Zemin in the background.

    The implication that because it is now 2019, therefore the CCP is moving more quickly to introduce changes implies an unwarranted degree of very long term coordinated strategy. While it would be nice to think there is such a grand plan, it is pure fantasy.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  6. #126
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,295
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    I'm not following you on the whole "closer to '97 so CCP goes slow."
    The main change was who was running China: Hu Jintao, with Jiang Zemin in the background.
    Beijing does not push too hard in 2003. Seems that way.

    You are saying Hu was more lenient than Xi. If 2014 shows Xi as determined then 2019 Xi shows patience.

    Waiting it out. How long can the protests continue. Should have petered out by now but its 17 weeks and counting

    The implication that because it is now 2019, therefore the CCP is moving more quickly to introduce changes implies an unwarranted degree of very long term coordinated strategy. While it would be nice to think there is such a grand plan, it is pure fantasy.
    If HK is to become no different to any other city in China by 2047, then how to make the transition ?

    gradually over time is easier otherwise its a sudden imposition of the chinese system in 2047.

    Given the opposition over these past few months it becomes hard to imagine how even that transition in 2047 happens now.

  7. #127
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    Orlando, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,360
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Beijing does not push too hard in 2003. Seems that way.

    You are saying Hu was more lenient than Xi. If 2014 shows Xi as determined then 2019 Xi shows patience.

    Waiting it out. How long can the protests continue. Should have petered out by now but its 17 weeks and counting



    If HK is to become no different to any other city in China by 2047, then how to make the transition ?

    gradually over time is easier otherwise its a sudden imposition of the chinese system in 2047.

    Given the opposition over these past few months it becomes hard to imagine how even that transition in 2047 happens now.
    Who said HK is to become no different than any other city in China by 2047? Certainly not the Basic Law!
    Read the text. What it does is say what HK cannot do prior to 2047: practice socialism, have high taxes, use the Rmb instead of the HK$, etc. There is never any mention of "a sudden imposition of the Chinese system in 2047.

    Indeed, there is not a single word in the entire document that says what happens after 2047. Not one.

    https://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/en/basic...ll_text_en.pdf


    Section 2 has the only reference to 2047 in the entire document:
    Article 121
    As regards all leases of land granted or renewed where the original leases contain no right of renewal, during the period from 27 May 1985 to 30 June 1997, which extend beyond 30 June 1997 and expire not later than 30 June 2047, the lessee is not required to pay an additional premium as from 1 July 1997, but an annual rent equivalent to 3 per cent of the rateable value of the property at that date, adjusted in step with any changes in the rateable value thereafter, shall be charged.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  8. #128
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,295
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    Who said HK is to become no different than any other city in China by 2047? Certainly not the Basic Law!

    Read the text. What it does is say what HK cannot do prior to 2047: practice socialism, have high taxes, use the Rmb instead of the HK$, etc.

    There is never any mention of "a sudden imposition of the Chinese system in 2047.

    Indeed, there is not a single word in the entire document that says what happens after 2047. Not one.


    https://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/en/basic...ll_text_en.pdf

    Section 2 has the only reference to 2047 in the entire document:
    Article 121
    As regards all leases of land granted or renewed where the original leases contain no right of renewal, during the period from 27 May 1985 to 30 June 1997, which extend beyond 30 June 1997 and expire not later than 30 June 2047, the lessee is not required to pay an additional premium as from 1 July 1997, but an annual rent equivalent to 3 per cent of the rateable value of the property at that date, adjusted in step with any changes in the rateable value thereafter, shall be charged.
    That is the problem. Not one word about what happens after 2047 and that is why people talking about it.

    It has become a matter of interpretation and assumption. How would you interpret the following

    Article 5

    The socialist system and policies shall not be practised in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and the previous capitalist system and way of life shall remain unchanged for 50 years.
    Why is the number 50 there ?

    Means the present system does not hold in perpetuity
    Means it is not guaranteed to be the same after 2047
    Means it can be changed beyond 2047
    Means this basic law is only temporary and will expire or be replaced after 2047

    So..what happens after 2047

    Can "one country two systems" get an extension ?

    Do they remove the number 50 and just continue as is. Some definition has to be given.

    Is something to be worked out before 2047 ?

    I would assume HK would be integrated further into China in some manner. Otherwise why mention fifty years at all.

    IIANM people of HK can only directly elect a third of reps.

    Article 49

    If the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region considers that a bill passed by the Legislative Council is not compatible with the overall interests of the Region, he or she may return it to the Legislative Council within three months for reconsideration. If the Legislative Council passes the original bill again by not less than a two-thirds majority of all the members, the Chief Executive must sign and promulgate it within one month, or act in accordance with the provisions of Article 50 of this Law.
    China only needs a handful of them to make amendments to the Basic law. The Chief executive is accountable to Beijing only.

    Article 50

    If the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region refuses to sign a bill passed the second time by the Legislative Council, or the Legislative Council refuses to pass a budget or any other important bill introduced by the government, and if consensus still cannot be reached after consultations, the Chief Executive may dissolve the Legislative Council.

    The Chief Executive must consult the Executive Council before dissolving the Legislative Council. The Chief Executive may dissolve the Legislative Council only once in each term of his or her office.
    If the chief executive does not get the amendment they want they can dissolve LegCo.

    Article 158

    The power of interpretation of this Law shall be vested in the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress.
    NPC gets the last word

    Last edited by Double Edge; 07 Oct 19, at 19:50.

  9. #129
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    Orlando, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,360
    The reasons for and structure of the Basic Law is all about history, and far too few people bother to read history.

    Why does the Basic Law refer to no change for 50 years? Because 50 years is a long time. It is a place holder for “such a very long time that we will all be dead and it won’t matter anymore because both Hong Kong and China will have changed so much that anything we write today about the future would be meaningless at that time.”

    Why not 100 years? Because of the Chinese Communist Party’s notion of 100 years of shame (colonialism), and the PRC was only 40 years old when One Country, Two Systems was conceived (1979, and focused on Taiwan).

    Why are people talking about 2047 as if that is the date when Hong Kong becomes identical to any other city in China? Because they’re too lazy to read the Basic Law. This particularly applies to journalists and politicians, although most of the latter have actually read it. They just find it useful not to understand what it says.

    What happens after 2047? Any and all of what you or anyone else can imagine.
    All or nothing, but most likely something in between. Complete change or nothing anyone would notice (which is the change that happened July 1, 1997).

    Is it something to be worked out before 2047? Yes, and it was being worked on before the unrest that started about 10-12 years ago. Things like property leases that have very long lead times were being discussed, although not very urgently.

    You may assume that Hong Kong is further integrated into China after 2047; personally, I have trouble imagining more than 50% of trade and 80% of tourists coming from China, or more than 17 of the top 20 companies listed on the stock exchange being of Chinese origin.
    But, that isn’t to say it can’t happen.
    = = =

    Changing the subject, are only one-third of the legislators directly elected? No, and there is a lot of misunderstanding about that.

    Half of the legislators are elected by neighborhoods, and half by functional constituencies (FCs). The FCs include accountants, teachers, social workers, journalists, District Councillors, and labor unions, as well as banks, insurance companies, and other “corporate entities.”

    Care to take a wild guess at how many actual corporations walk into a voting booth and cast a ballot? Anything above zero is pure fantasy, since corporations can’t walk, let alone vote. The teachers and accountants, among others, vote individually … tens of thousands of them.

    Every vote cast by a corporate entity is actually cast by an eligible voter who is nominated by his or her corporate entity. Even if the chairman or board directs the voter how to vote, it is wholly illegal to do so and it is wholly illegal to interfere with a secret ballot. I don’t doubt that many people so nominated vote as their bosses wish. Some of them may actually do so solely because of the wishes of their bosses. That's there choice, since it is a secret ballot.

    Nothing like two-thirds, or even half of the votes would fall into the category of instructed-by-the-boss.

    When it comes to the reason why the legislature doesn't vote the way the protesters want it to, the simple and most accurate answer is that the people who bother to vote didn't elect people who will vote the way the protesters want. Not being able to win at the ballot box is not the same as a rigged system.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  10. #130
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,295
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    The reasons for and structure of the Basic Law is all about history, and far too few people bother to read history.

    Why does the Basic Law refer to no change for 50 years? Because 50 years is a long time. It is a place holder for “such a very long time that we will all be dead and it won’t matter anymore because both Hong Kong and China will have changed so much that anything we write today about the future would be meaningless at that time.”

    Why not 100 years? Because of the Chinese Communist Party’s notion of 100 years of shame (colonialism), and the PRC was only 40 years old when One Country, Two Systems was conceived (1979, and focused on Taiwan).

    Why are people talking about 2047 as if that is the date when Hong Kong becomes identical to any other city in China? Because they’re too lazy to read the Basic Law. This particularly applies to journalists and politicians, although most of the latter have actually read it. They just find it useful not to understand what it says.
    You will agree then that there is a lack of clarity what happens after 2047. Unless addressed with clarifications will lead to more anxiety among the locals.


    What happens after 2047? Any and all of what you or anyone else can imagine.
    All or nothing, but most likely something in between. Complete change or nothing anyone would notice (which is the change that happened July 1, 1997).

    Is it something to be worked out before 2047? Yes, and it was being worked on before the unrest that started about 10-12 years ago. Things like property leases that have very long lead times were being discussed, although not very urgently.
    To get something in between requires gradually changing the system. But you said such a coordinated long term strategy is fantasy.

    If that is the case then they are going to miss the deadline. If the required steps to get somewhere in between are not taken in time then there is no deadline. It will happen when it happens. There is no other way as a sudden imposition of the Chinese system would be disruptive.

    If your intent is to suggest the deadline of 2047 is not set in stone then agreed.


    You may assume that Hong Kong is further integrated into China after 2047; personally, I have trouble imagining more than 50% of trade and 80% of tourists coming from China, or more than 17 of the top 20 companies listed on the stock exchange being of Chinese origin.
    But, that isn’t to say it can’t happen.
    I don't understand what you are saying here ? Can you rephrase.

    If HK integrates further what is the need for a stock exchange in HK. The existing exchanges in China will replace it.

    What i sense now is an imposition of the Chinese system means taking away a lot of things that HK is used to having for no real gain. It's too difficult to do.

    Nobody is questioning China's sovereign claims over HK. HK is not disputed territory. HK isn't located at some strategic location or bordering other countries. Going slow does not have any downsides.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 06 Oct 19, at 14:27.

  11. #131
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    Orlando, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,360
    On 2047,

    "Why does the Basic Law refer to no change for 50 years? Because 50 years is a long time. It is a place holder for “such a very long time that we will all be dead and it won’t matter anymore because both Hong Kong and China will have changed so much that anything we write today about the future would be meaningless at that time.”

    Why not 100 years? Because of the Chinese Communist Party’s notion of 100 years of shame (colonialism), and the PRC was only 40 years old when One Country, Two Systems was conceived (1979, and focused on Taiwan)."

    That's really all there is to say.

    The complete reason there is no detail is because at the time it was thought to be incredibly stupid to spell out in detail exactly what would happen in 50 years.
    In my humble opinion, that was a genius move.
    Wait for history to take place, rather than pre-empt it with legions of ignorance.

    = = = = =

    Further integration.


    There are a very small handful of places that are separate but closely integrated.
    Singapore / Malaysia jumps to mind, but so does Vatican City / Italy (maybe even more appropriate).

    Deeper integration?
    Does that mean 85% of tourists come from China?
    Does it mean 65% of trade is with China?
    Doest it mean 90% of capital investment is from China?

    Without a definition, and an explanation as to why integration becomes deeper, the question is very hard to answer.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  12. #132
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    4,217
    I don't know if it is that hard to see what the future holds for Hong Kong. It would seem that if China feels that they can criticize and penalize an NBA general manager for speaking his mind (freedom of speech in his own country) then that would bode bad for Hong Kong residents.

    Of course what I expect to see is that the NBA itself will backtrack and isolate this guy as a one of. In the end $$$$$ for corporations/countries will trump (poor word has been co-opted) all other considerations including personal rights. How many $$$$$ to be made in Hong Kong in the coming years?

    Meanwhile Taiwan is sitting there going no way in hell.

  13. #133
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,295
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    The complete reason there is no detail is because at the time it was thought to be incredibly stupid to spell out in detail exactly what would happen in 50 years.
    In my humble opinion, that was a genius move.
    Wait for history to take place, rather than pre-empt it with legions of ignorance.
    If nothing is defined post 2047, it leaves options open and gives China an advantage

    Great if your China, not so great if you're HK.

    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    Further integration.


    There are a very small handful of places that are separate but closely integrated.
    Singapore / Malaysia jumps to mind, but so does Vatican City / Italy (maybe even more appropriate).

    Deeper integration?
    Does that mean 85% of tourists come from China?
    Does it mean 65% of trade is with China?
    Doest it mean 90% of capital investment is from China?

    Without a definition, and an explanation as to why integration becomes deeper, the question is very hard to answer.
    I mean legal systems get harmonised and the Yuan replaces the HK $

    Financial & legal integration.

    Is either feasible without some long term coordinated strategy

    Is it even desirable absent some dogmatic belief that HK must be integrated into China

    Right now those two are as distinct as chalk & cheese in HK compared to the rest of China.

    As a result of the legal the political follows. Same rules for local administration as with other cities in China.

    If you do not do something in these two areas then there is no further integration more a status quo.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 07 Oct 19, at 20:16.

  14. #134
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    Orlando, Florida, USA
    Posts
    3,360
    tbm3fan,

    I don't know if it is that hard to see what the future holds for Hong Kong. It would seem that if China feels that they can criticize and penalize an NBA general manager for speaking his mind (freedom of speech in his own country) then that would bode bad for Hong Kong residents.

    Of course what I expect to see is that the NBA itself will backtrack and isolate this guy as a one of. In the end $$$$$ for corporations/countries will trump (poor word has been co-opted) all other considerations including personal rights. How many $$$$$ to be made in Hong Kong in the coming years?

    Meanwhile Taiwan is sitting there going no way in hell.
    When I was regularly doing economic and political forecasting, we would look ahead 1, 3, and 5 years in most cases, and only very rarely longer than that. The smart thing to do first was to look back the same amount of time, so as to gain a better perspective as to how large a magnitude of change might be reasonable.

    2047-2019=28 years
    2019-28=1991 …

    • China’s 27% urban, but it is slowly rising (3 percentage points in 1985-91)
    • 15% of the workforce is in manufacturing, a record high.
    • Trade – two-way, imports + exports – is up to $135 billion, but there have only been two years of trade surpluses, so there’s an obvious limit to how fast exports can grow.
    • The fiscal reserves are a respectable (but not excessive) $21.7 billion, but national debt is three times that much. Trouble ahead?
    • GDP per head is a massive Rmb1,867 (US$350), but “everyone knows” it can’t keep rising at the break-neck pace of the 1980s. No way.
    • Capital investment is still way too low (27.5% of GDP, vs. 53.4% for private consumption). Who’s going to invest in a communist country anyway, the Taiwanese and Koreans?



    So, what’s China going to look like in 28 years?
    You tell me.
    On this kind of time frame, it’s anyone’s guess.

    = = =

    DE,

    I mean legal systems get harmonised
    Article 19
    The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be vested with independent judicial power, including that of final adjudication.

    [quote] and the Yuan replaces the HK$.[/quote
    Article 111
    The Hong Kong dollar, as the legal tender in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, shall continue to circulate.

    Financial & legal integration.
    Instrument 8
    * Explanations on “The Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China (Draft)” and Its Related Documents(Addressing the Third Session of the Seventh National People’s Congress on March 28, 1990).

    Ji Pengfei, Chairman of the Drafting Committee for the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China.

    Fellow Deputies,
    [yada yada yada]

    Regarding the executive power, the draft law, while stipulating that the Special Administrative Region shall, on its own, conduct the administrative affairs of Hong Kong in accordance with the Basic Law, specifically defines the Special Administrative Region’s autonomy in areas such as finance, economy, industry commerce, trade, transport and communications, development and management of land and natural resources, education, science and technology, culture, sports, public order and control of entry and exit activities. For instance, the draft law stipulates that the Special Administrative Region shall have independent finances, its revenues shall not be handed over to the Central Government, and the Central Government shall not levy taxes in the Region; and the Special Administrative Region may, on its own, formulate monetary and financial policies, the Hong Kong dollar shall be the legal tender in the Region, and the authority to issue Hong Kong currency shall be vested in the Special Administrative Region Government. Also, the draft stipulates that representatives of the Special Administrative Region Government may act as members of delegations of the Chinese Government to participate in negotiations at the diplomatic level affecting Hong Kong; the Special Administrative Region may on its own, using the name “Hong Kong, China,” maintain and develop relations and conclude and implement agreements with foreign states and regions and relevant international organizations in economic, trade, financial and monetary, shipping, communications, tourism, cultural, sports and other appropriate fields.

    Is either feasible without some long term coordinated strategy
    Is it even desirable absent some dogmatic belief that HK must be integrated into China
    Right now those two are as distinct as chalk & cheese in HK compared to the rest of China.
    As a result of the legal the political follows. Same rules for local administration as with other cities in China.
    If you do not do something in these two areas then there is no further integration more a status quo.
    And, that’s the Rmb64 trillion question.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  15. #135
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    4,217
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    tbm3fan,



    When I was regularly doing economic and political forecasting, we would look ahead 1, 3, and 5 years in most cases, and only very rarely longer than that. The smart thing to do first was to look back the same amount of time, so as to gain a better perspective as to how large a magnitude of change might be reasonable.

    2047-2019=28 years
    2019-28=1991 …

    • China’s 27% urban, but it is slowly rising (3 percentage points in 1985-91)
    • 15% of the workforce is in manufacturing, a record high.
    • Trade – two-way, imports + exports – is up to $135 billion, but there have only been two years of trade surpluses, so there’s an obvious limit to how fast exports can grow.
    • The fiscal reserves are a respectable (but not excessive) $21.7 billion, but national debt is three times that much. Trouble ahead?
    • GDP per head is a massive Rmb1,867 (US$350), but “everyone knows” it can’t keep rising at the break-neck pace of the 1980s. No way.
    • Capital investment is still way too low (27.5% of GDP, vs. 53.4% for private consumption). Who’s going to invest in a communist country anyway, the Taiwanese and Koreans?



    So, what’s China going to look like in 28 years?
    You tell me.
    On this kind of time frame, it’s anyone’s guess.
    You're mainly concentrating on the financial aspects of all this. I, OTOH, am concentrating on the human rights/freedoms aspects of all this. To some, like Xi, one should be willing to give up their rights for the monetary benefits of him being in charge. Small price to pay, eh? So where do you land on the scale of freedoms vs. totalitarian semi-capitalistic regime.

    I think Xi is stuck back in ancient times when China was ruled by numerous warlords fracturing China for their personal fiefdoms. He is now the top warlord and can't possibly ease up on control of the country because it could break up once again. Xi does not have confidence in the Chinese people. Yet the harder you squeeze...

    Edit: just read this quote out of China concerning free speech. Free speech of an American in his own country.

    “We believe that any remarks that challenge national sovereignty and social stability are not within the scope of freedom of speech.”

    https://www.apnews.com/cacbc722f6834e64814f82b14752682c

    China can go f@$k themselves.
    Last edited by tbm3fan; 08 Oct 19, at 16:53.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Hong Kong is going Commie.
    By xinhui in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 18 Jul 10,, 08:54
  2. Hong Kong Independence
    By Skywatcher in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07 Aug 09,, 03:38
  3. Hong Kong's Economy
    By Shuimo in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 20 Jan 09,, 10:30

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

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