What can the U.S> do to stop the over-dependence on outsourcing?

  • 138 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (149 posts) -
We outsource way to much, and while not entirely the issue with the U.S. economy, fixing it would help A LOT. Now what are we doing wrong and how should we fix it? Should we pass some bills that cause isolation in areas of trade? Should we have international companies have companies in the states to manage designs and manufacturing?
#2 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

Have to become more competitive. Lower corporate tax rates and fewer regulations. Less government as a percentage of GDP.

#3 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (149 posts) -

Have to become more competitive. Lower corporate tax rates and fewer regulations. Less government as a percentage of GDP.

KC_Hokie
What benefit is there to lowering corporate tax rates? Why have we not done this already?
#4 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

Have to become more competitive. Lower corporate tax rates and fewer regulations. Less government as a percentage of GDP.

Canon-Gatorade

What benefit is there to lowering corporate tax rates? Why have we not done this already?

Allows corporations keep a higher percentage of their profits which they can reinvest which included hiring. We haven't touched our corporate tax rates since the mid-80s.

#5 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (149 posts) -

[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

Have to become more competitive. Lower corporate tax rates and fewer regulations. Less government as a percentage of GDP.

KC_Hokie

What benefit is there to lowering corporate tax rates? Why have we not done this already?

Allows corporations keep a higher percentage of their profits which they can reinvest which included hiring. We haven't touched our corporate tax rates since the mid-80s.

But the mid-80's America did not have a debt problem. So what is the difference now and then when talking about changing corporate taxes? An excuse i have heard many people use.
#6 Posted by BossPerson (9432 posts) -

....remove minimum wages

pass anti-union legislation

let the iron law of wages take its course

let people starve 

#7 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"] What benefit is there to lowering corporate tax rates? Why have we not done this already?Canon-Gatorade

Allows corporations keep a higher percentage of their profits which they can reinvest which included hiring. We haven't touched our corporate tax rates since the mid-80s.

But the mid-80's America did not have a debt problem. So what is the difference now and then when talking about changing corporate taxes? An excuse i have heard many people use.

Not the corporations fault government spending is out of control. Government has to cut spending.

And lowering corporate tax rates means more profit for corporations which means more investing which means more spending, jobs, etc.

#8 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17379 posts) -
A weaker dollar would do the trick
#9 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
A weaker dollar would do the trick -Sun_Tzu-
Would work if every other country in the world isn't doing the same exact thing.
#10 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (149 posts) -

....remove minimum wages

pass anti-union legislation

let the iron law of wages take its course

let people starve 

BossPerson
Why do you suggest removing the minimum wage? One excuse I always hear is that it is placed there to ensure job income at a livable level. also, anti-union?
#11 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (149 posts) -

[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Allows corporations keep a higher percentage of their profits which they can reinvest which included hiring. We haven't touched our corporate tax rates since the mid-80s.

KC_Hokie

But the mid-80's America did not have a debt problem. So what is the difference now and then when talking about changing corporate taxes? An excuse i have heard many people use.

Not the corporations fault government spending is out of control. Government has to cut spending.

And lowering corporate tax rates means more profit for corporations which means more investing which means more spending, jobs, etc.

So why are people refusing to follow cutting the corporate tax? I hear this from many republicans.
#12 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"] But the mid-80's America did not have a debt problem. So what is the difference now and then when talking about changing corporate taxes? An excuse i have heard many people use.Canon-Gatorade

Not the corporations fault government spending is out of control. Government has to cut spending.

And lowering corporate tax rates means more profit for corporations which means more investing which means more spending, jobs, etc.

So why are people refusing to follow cutting the corporate tax? I hear this from many republicans.

Congress and the president can't even agree on reductions on future increases of spending. They're pretty much worthless right now economically.
#13 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17379 posts) -
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]A weaker dollar would do the trick KC_Hokie
Would work if every other country in the world isn't doing the same exact thing.

Hokie stop trying to act like you know anything about economics
#14 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]A weaker dollar would do the trick -Sun_Tzu-
Would work if every other country in the world isn't doing the same exact thing.

Hokie stop trying to act like you know anything about economics

I do. Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it.
#15 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3751 posts) -

Have to become more competitive. Lower corporate tax rates and fewer regulations. Less government as a percentage of GDP.

KC_Hokie

bush did that. 

I vaguely recall an explosion of debt.

#16 Posted by GOGOGOGURT (4470 posts) -

[QUOTE="BossPerson"]

....remove minimum wages

pass anti-union legislation

let the iron law of wages take its course

let people starve 

Canon-Gatorade

Why do you suggest removing the minimum wage? One excuse I always hear is that it is placed there to ensure job income at a livable level. also, anti-union?

 

Unions are bad, and minimum wages are bad.

#17 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

Have to become more competitive. Lower corporate tax rates and fewer regulations. Less government as a percentage of GDP.

MakeMeaSammitch

bush did that. 

I vaguely recall an explosion of debt.

Nope. Never touched corporate taxes. And he increases spending and the size of government which is part of our problem.
#18 Posted by DroidPhysX (17088 posts) -

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Would work if every other country in the world isn't doing the same exact thing.KC_Hokie
Hokie stop trying to act like you know anything about economics

I do.

DPef3gr.png

#19 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (149 posts) -
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]A weaker dollar would do the trick -Sun_Tzu-
Would work if every other country in the world isn't doing the same exact thing.

Hokie stop trying to act like you know anything about economics

Why do you think a weaker dollar would work? I heard a few libertaries state that.
#20 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Would work if every other country in the world isn't doing the same exact thing.Canon-Gatorade
Hokie stop trying to act like you know anything about economics

Why do you think a weaker dollar would work? I heard a few libertaries state that.

It only works in increasing exports if other countries aren't trying the same thing.
#21 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (149 posts) -

[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]

....remove minimum wages

pass anti-union legislation

let the iron law of wages take its course

let people starve 

GOGOGOGURT

Why do you suggest removing the minimum wage? One excuse I always hear is that it is placed there to ensure job income at a livable level. also, anti-union?

 

Unions are bad, and minimum wages are bad.

How so? some politicians seem to disagree, so give me a bigger picture as to why.
#22 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3751 posts) -

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

Have to become more competitive. Lower corporate tax rates and fewer regulations. Less government as a percentage of GDP.

KC_Hokie

bush did that. 

I vaguely recall an explosion of debt.

Nope. Never touched corporate taxes. And he increases spending and the size of government which is part of our problem.

It deacreased the income tax which increased debt.

We would see the same thing with corperate debt.

Maybe if CEOs weren't payed so well, we could afford to create more jobs here at home.

#23 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (149 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]bush did that. 

I vaguely recall an explosion of debt.

MakeMeaSammitch

Nope. Never touched corporate taxes. And he increases spending and the size of government which is part of our problem.

It deacreased the income tax which increased debt.

We would see the same thing with corperate debt.

Maybe if CEOs weren't payed so well, we could afford to create more jobs here at home.

So you're saying cutting corporate taxes would create more debt?
#24 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]bush did that. 

I vaguely recall an explosion of debt.

MakeMeaSammitch

Nope. Never touched corporate taxes. And he increases spending and the size of government which is part of our problem.

It deacreased the income tax which increased debt.

We would see the same thing with corperate debt.

Maybe if CEOs weren't payed so well, we could afford to create more jobs here at home.

When individual taxes were lowered the economy did increase and so did tax revunues. However, the increase in government couldn't compensate and debts piled up.
#25 Posted by BossPerson (9432 posts) -
[QUOTE="BossPerson"]

....remove minimum wages

pass anti-union legislation

let the iron law of wages take its course

let people starve 

Canon-Gatorade
Why do you suggest removing the minimum wage? One excuse I always hear is that it is placed there to ensure job income at a livable level. also, anti-union?

sarcasm
#26 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17379 posts) -

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Would work if every other country in the world isn't doing the same exact thing.KC_Hokie
Hokie stop trying to act like you know anything about economics

I do. Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it.

Off the top of my head:

you've referred to the stock market as the private economy

you do not know what the difference between GDP and GNP is

you don't know what a liquidity trap

you've been unable to explain how the US budget deficit is harming the economy

and now here you are talking about international trade and I'm suppose to think that on this subject you actually have any idea about what it is you are talking about 

#27 Posted by z4twenny (4898 posts) -

all you have to do is convince large corporations to pay people livable wages instead of outsourcing for half (or less) the cost. i mean, you won't convince them because it ends up in the pocketbooks at the top, but i guess you can try.

#28 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] Hokie stop trying to act like you know anything about economics -Sun_Tzu-

I do. Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it.

Off the top of my head:

you've referred to the stock market as the private economy

you do not know what the difference between GDP and GNP is

you don't know what a liquidity trap

you've been unable to explain how the US budget deficit is harming the economy

and now here you are talking about international trade and I'm suppose to think that on this subject you actually have any idea about what it is you are talking about 

OK Mr. Economics....name a reserve currency that hasn't been devalued over the last 6 months vs. the dollar.

#29 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (149 posts) -

all you have to do is convince large corporations to pay people livable wages instead of outsourcing for half (or less) the cost. i mean, you won't convince them because it ends up in the pocketbooks at the top, but i guess you can try.

z4twenny
Isn't that why minimum wage was made? To prevent abusive cuts in employee income?
#30 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17379 posts) -
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Would work if every other country in the world isn't doing the same exact thing.Canon-Gatorade
Hokie stop trying to act like you know anything about economics

Why do you think a weaker dollar would work? I heard a few libertaries state that.

The weaker the dollar the cheaper it is to manufacture in the US, the stronger the dollar the more expensive it is to manufacture in the US.
#31 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] Hokie stop trying to act like you know anything about economics

Why do you think a weaker dollar would work? I heard a few libertaries state that.

The weaker the dollar the cheaper it is to manufacture in the US, the stronger the dollar the more expensive it is to manufacture in the US.

Yea...only when the rest of the world isn't doing the same thing. It's called a currency war.
#32 Posted by Serraph105 (27747 posts) -

There are some companies (GE for example) proving that they can make their products more efficiently by having all the parts be made under one roof. Thus insourcing to the US  has become a key strategy in padding the bottom line. If we can get more companies realize this also we can probably entice them to come our shores improving upon our country's infrastructure. I know that spending, even when it means investing in the future is unpopular, but if it increases private sector jobs I think that it could gain real support.

#33 Posted by GOGOGOGURT (4470 posts) -

Well if you WANT to stop outsourcing, then reduce taxes, neutralize unions, and cut down on regulations and licensing.

 

But if you think outsourcing is totally bad, then you know nothing of economics.  Of course it sounds bad with the villianous corporations giving jobs to foriegners, and the media tells you it's bad, so it is, right?

 

Nope, if a company can get something made ina another place for cheaper, that's good.  It creates savings for the business that allows it to hire even MORE people domestically.  The wealth and efficiancy created by outsourcing enables companies to expand in the US.  New jobs replace the outsourced ones.  It's a natural part of free-trade.  It even HELPS them because they leave undesireable factory work to work more pleasent and higher paying jobs.  Unemployment would be worse without globalization (outsourcing) America still creates millions of new jobs.  The only reason why Joblessness stayed high was because the population growth was even greater.

 

Don't let the politicians scare you.  It's called trade, and it's not all bad.

 

#34 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

There are some companies (GE for example) proving that they can make their products more efficiently by having all the parts be made under one roof. Thus insourcing to the US  has become a key strategy in padding the bottom line. If we can get more companies realize this also we can probably entice them to come our shores improving upon our country's infrastructure. I know that spending, even when it means investing in the future is unpopular, but if it increases private sector jobs I think that it could gain real support.

Serraph105
Yea and they didn't pay federal taxes for two years out of the last four. Which is exactly my point.
#35 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (149 posts) -

There are some companies (GE for example) proving that they can make their products more efficiently by having all the parts be made under one roof. Thus insourcing to the US  has become a key strategy in padding the bottom line. If we can get more companies realize this also we can probably entice them to come our shores improving upon our country's infrastructure. I know that spending, even when it means investing in the future is unpopular, but if it increases private sector jobs I think that it could gain real support.

Serraph105
I mentioned that before, why do people insist on outsourcing instead of having certain things insource to the U.S.?
#36 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17379 posts) -

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]I do. Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it. KC_Hokie

Off the top of my head:

you've referred to the stock market as the private economy

you do not know what the difference between GDP and GNP is

you don't know what a liquidity trap

you've been unable to explain how the US budget deficit is harming the economy

and now here you are talking about international trade and I'm suppose to think that on this subject you actually have any idea about what it is you are talking about 

OK Mr. Economics....name a reserve currency that hasn't been devalued over the last 6 months vs. the dollar.

The fact that you think this inane question has any relevance to this discussion is just further evidence of your ignorance.
#37 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] Off the top of my head:

you've referred to the stock market as the private economy

you do not know what the difference between GDP and GNP is

you don't know what a liquidity trap

you've been unable to explain how the US budget deficit is harming the economy

and now here you are talking about international trade and I'm suppose to think that on this subject you actually have any idea about what it is you are talking about 

-Sun_Tzu-

OK Mr. Economics....name a reserve currency that hasn't been devalued over the last 6 months vs. the dollar.

The fact that you think this inane question has any relevance to this discussion is just further evidence of your ignorance.

You said lowering our currency would help spark the economy. My response is we already did that with quantitative easing and now every other reserve currency is being devalued by their respective countries.

So what you're suggesting won't work. We've already exhausted that option.

#38 Posted by one_plum (6330 posts) -

Emulate China.

Deregulate companies; regulate workers.

#39 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (149 posts) -

Well if you WANT to stop outsourcing, then reduce taxes, neutralize unions, and cut down on regulations and licensing.

 

But if you think outsourcing is totally bad, then you know nothing of economics.  Of course it sounds bad with the villianous corporations giving jobs to foriegners, and the media tells you it's bad, so it is, right?

 

Nope, if a company can get something made ina another place for cheaper, that's good.  It creates savings for the business that allows it to hire even MORE people domestically.  The wealth and efficiancy created by outsourcing enables companies to expand in the US.  New jobs replace the outsourced ones.  It's a natural part of free-trade.  It even HELPS them because they leave undesireable factory work to work more pleasent and higher paying jobs.  Unemployment would be worse without globalization (outsourcing) America still creates millions of new jobs.  The only reason why Joblessness stayed high was because the population growth was even greater.

 

Don't let the politicians scare you.  It's called trade, and it's not all bad.

 

GOGOGOGURT
Neutralize unions is a popular democratic and semi-libertarian saying, but what will neutralizing unions do to benefit us?
#40 Posted by Serraph105 (27747 posts) -
[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

Well if you WANT to stop outsourcing, then reduce taxes, neutralize unions, and cut down on regulations and licensing.

 

But if you think outsourcing is totally bad, then you know nothing of economics.  Of course it sounds bad with the villianous corporations giving jobs to foriegners, and the media tells you it's bad, so it is, right?

 

Nope, if a company can get something made ina another place for cheaper, that's good.  It creates savings for the business that allows it to hire even MORE people domestically.  The wealth and efficiancy created by outsourcing enables companies to expand in the US.  New jobs replace the outsourced ones.  It's a natural part of free-trade.  It even HELPS them because they leave undesireable factory work to work more pleasent and higher paying jobs.  Unemployment would be worse without globalization (outsourcing) America still creates millions of new jobs.  The only reason why Joblessness stayed high was because the population growth was even greater.

 

Don't let the politicians scare you.  It's called trade, and it's not all bad.

 

Canon-Gatorade
Neutralize unions is a popular democratic and semi-libertarian saying, but what will neutralizing unions do to benefit us?

We can only hope it will let us work more hours for less money.
#41 Posted by dave123321 (33625 posts) -
Kc stop
#42 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
Kc stop dave123321
Stop what? Devaluing your currency in order to boost the economy via exports only works if competing currencies remain steady or rise. If they all drop as well it doesn't work. Every reserve currency has dropped in value over the last six months and countries are continuing to devalue their currencies.
#43 Posted by GOGOGOGURT (4470 posts) -

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"] Why do you suggest removing the minimum wage? One excuse I always hear is that it is placed there to ensure job income at a livable level. also, anti-union?Canon-Gatorade

 

Unions are bad, and minimum wages are bad.

How so? some politicians seem to disagree, so give me a bigger picture as to why.

 

Unions cause workers to be lazy, because they can't get fired.  It makes it harder for new people to get the job, and nothing ever gets done because of all the regulations and requirements.  Also, it stops the creative juices from flowing, and make everyone slightly unhappier.

 

Minimum wages are not needed to keep pay high.  In fact, it would be higher without it.  Economist Don Bourdreaux puts it better than I can.  I quote: "Even a casual glance at reality reveals that worker compensation is determined by the supply of, and demand for, workers, and that pay does not fall to any leagally allowed minimum.  I it did, then physicians, accountants, morticians- even supermodels, rock stars, and doctors- would be paid minimum wage."

 

#44 Posted by Mafiree (3704 posts) -
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Would work if every other country in the world isn't doing the same exact thing.KC_Hokie
Hokie stop trying to act like you know anything about economics

I do. Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it.

........ And if a country didn't devalue their currency their exports would be less............So, by devaluing their currency they increased their exports.
#45 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] Hokie stop trying to act like you know anything about economics

I do. Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it.

........ And if a country didn't devalue their currency their exports would be less............So, by devaluing their currency they increased their exports.

No...if everyone devalues at the same time nothing changes. It's called a currency war.
#46 Posted by Squeets (8184 posts) -

Nothing.

Why? Capitalism.

You have a software business.  You want to make money.

Why pay an American $150k a year plus benefits when you can hire an equally (if not more) qualified Indian for example to do it for $20k a year and no benefits?

They could completely remove corporate tax, that wouldn't change the cheapness of overseas labor.  What do you suggest we do? Introduce market wide US protectionism... 1000% tariffs on all imports... Tell the rest of the world we aren't going to buy foreign, but they should buy from us at an extreme premium... What are you stupid?

Not to mention less risk/liability overseas... I know someone who works for an oil company overseas... They hire on-site guys to do some of the skilled work on rigs and ships for pennies on the dollar what it would cost to send a European/American out there... Some guy recently had his arm crushed in an accident... If that happened to an American, he would get severence in the hundreds of thousands and probably sue the company for millions... The on-site local (from Southeast Asia) that it happened to was given $10,000 and sent on his way after having his arm amputated.

#47 Posted by Mafiree (3704 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]I do. Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it. KC_Hokie
........ And if a country didn't devalue their currency their exports would be less............So, by devaluing their currency they increased their exports.

No...if everyone devalues at the same time nothing changes. It's called a currency war.

I really have to explain this? Say manipulating currency increases exports by 5%.......... Every other country manipulates currency as well and will reduce your exports by 5%...... Now if you do not manipulate your currency your exports will fall by 5%........ Conclusion....by manipulating your currency you increase your exports.
#48 Posted by GOGOGOGURT (4470 posts) -

Nothing.

Why? Capitalism.

You have a software business.  You want to make money.

Why pay an American $150k a year plus benefits when you can hire an equally (if not more) qualified Indian for example to do it for $20k a year and no benefits?

They could completely remove corporate tax, that wouldn't change the cheapness of overseas labor.  What do you suggest we do? Introduce market wide US protectionism... 1000% tariffs on all imports... Tell the rest of the world we aren't going to buy foreign, but they should buy from us at an extreme premium... What are you stupid?

Not to mention less risk/liability overseas... I know someone who works for an oil company overseas... They hire on-site guys to do some of the skilled work on rigs and ships for pennies on the dollar what it would cost to send a European/American out there... Some guy recently had his arm crushed in an accident... If that happened to an American, he would get severence in the hundreds of thousands and probably sue the company for millions... The on-site local (from Southeast Asia) that it happened to was given $10,000 and sent on his way after having his arm amputated.

Squeets

 

Yep.

#49 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (149 posts) -

Nothing.

Why? Capitalism.

You have a software business.  You want to make money.

Why pay an American $150k a year plus benefits when you can hire an equally (if not more) qualified Indian for example to do it for $20k a year and no benefits?

They could completely remove corporate tax, that wouldn't change the cheapness of overseas labor.  What do you suggest we do? Introduce market wide US protectionism... 1000% tariffs on all imports... Tell the rest of the world we aren't going to buy foreign, but they should buy from us at an extreme premium... What are you stupid?

Not to mention less risk/liability overseas... I know someone who works for an oil company overseas... They hire on-site guys to do some of the skilled work on rigs and ships for pennies on the dollar what it would cost to send a European/American out there... Some guy recently had his arm crushed in an accident... If that happened to an American, he would get severence in the hundreds of thousands and probably sue the company for millions... The on-site local (from Southeast Asia) that it happened to was given $10,000 and sent on his way after having his arm amputated.

Squeets
So instead of saying we won't buy foreign, why can't we put limitations on the amount of outsouricng so that it balances out? Also, in your first example with the software business, would it not be easier to have more money for the company so that you can pay your employers more equally throughout instead of having most of the moeny put on checks for the upper administration than do either of the two things you mentioned?
#50 Posted by Lonelynight (30039 posts) -
I hope they don't stop.