Posts
Just a little snippet of update, the tattooedbanker is once again moving back to banking. With the job market in an upswing, I really couldn't resist the opportunity to have a 40% pay increase and a move to one of the big names. So... here I am again...
I've been going through some training etc over the last month or so with my new employer, it was refreshing in certain ways, especially in terms of product offering, yet reeks of the bureaucratic bullshit that I hated of big organisations where every departments attitude was to cover their own ass and adopting a 'not my area' mindset. Its truly sickening...
I was in banking for about 3 years before I my last switch to an insurance company. Shocker number one, even though you are doing the same job, people tends to perceive insurance as more of a 'dirty' job while they look at banks with more prestige. You can actually hear the disdain in their voices when you mentioned that you are from an insurance company. Even customers whom you know that have high net worth will not place much funds with you as you are from an insurance company which they perceive as 'less stable' than a bank. The same customers that used to place hundreds of thousands worth of investments at a time suddenly reduced their figures to tens of thousands. Luckily they still gave me some 'face' though... I see the newbies to the industry really trying and struggling hard and I really pity them. Quite a few made it though, and once their confidence grows, they actually did very well. However, I do also observe that although they improve greatly in terms of rapport building, gaining customer's trust etc, they do not really gain much in terms of market knowledge or even current affairs. It may be somewhat of a generalization, but that is quite true from what I had seen so far, probably because their core focus are on long term insurance plans as it gives them maximum revenue, and their one and only retort to customer's objection on market conditions is that you don't have to worry about it as market will always sort itself out in the long run. Not wrong at all, but if I am a customer, I do enjoy or expect a little bit more depth from my advisor.
Banks on the other hand, have what I would describe as 'perceived legitimacy'. Everything that a bank does is being perceived as more 'aboveboard' and customers really trust them a lot, which may or may not be justified, I don't really wanna discuss that. Its up to the individual. The point is, newbies in banking have an added advantage of the bank's 'backing' and do not need to try so hard to gain the customer's trust, which, once again, can be good or bad, depending on which side of the fence you are on. However, banks do seemed to focus, or expect more of their staff in terms of general knowledge, especially if you are above the mass market segment. Even the tellers and non-sales staff can give a somewhat reasonable explanation on why the deposits rate are so low, currency risks or general market direction. I think this is something that the bank does really well in educating their staff through email updates and almost daily morning meetings. If you really wanna be able to take on the banks, this is something that I would like very much to see in insurance agencies instead of only focusing on the daily sales numbers only.
Personally, I think my short stint did me a lot of good. It opened my eyes to what is happening on the other side.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Friday, June 18, 2010
Not falling for hype
This is a little belated but I simply had not had the time to sit down in front of the computer at home. This is something that I had written about some time back in regards to UOB offer to buy back certain structured products. At that time, I already made it clear that I see it as nothing more than a publicity stunt by UOB and that investors should just sit tight and hold on to their investment. Looks like I was right. I wondered if UOB actually redeemed the funds as they said they would or did they actually sat on it for a while and made a tidy little profit in the process?
For those interested in my previous article
For those interested in my previous article
Reward for holding on
Investors in structured Prudential Yield product likely to make tidy profit
by Julie Quek 05:55 AM Jun 04, 2010
SINGAPORE - It was a structured product that was on the brink of collapse last year.
But investors who had held on to the Prudential Yield 15 and Yield 20 funds managed by Prudential Asset Management (Pams) look set to walk away with a tidy profit when the fund matures next Thursday.
In October last year, United Overseas Bank (UOB) made a buyback offer to about 4,000 customers who purchased the funds through the bank. UOB offered to redeem their units at par value or the initial price they paid for the investment, less all yearly payouts such as the interest coupon to date - or at 88 cents for Yield 15 and 82 US cents ($1.15) for Yield 20.
Other distributors of this structured product were HSBC, Maybank, Prudential Assurance Company Singapore and Hong Leong Finance.
At its lowest point, the Yield 15 and Yield 20 had dived to 37.5 cents and 39.8 US cents, respectively, at the end of March last year.
But improved credit conditions this year have caused the funds to recover and the price of each unit has rebounded to $1.074 for Yield 15 and US$1.104 for Yield 20 as of May 27.
Investors who held on to the fund for five years until maturity would also have earned 15-per-cent returns in coupon payments for the Yield 15 notes. This works out to about 3 per cent coupon interest a year. Meanwhile, holders of the Yield 20 fund would have collected 22.5 per cent over the 5-year investment period of the fund.
For investors, the potential capital gains coupled with the coupon payments mean that they would walk away from the fund in a better-off position at maturity than if they had redeemed those notes last year.
A retired investor who declined to be named told MediaCorp that she regretted her decision to accept UOB's buyback offer last year as this meant she lost out on the 15-per-cent returns from the coupon payments.
However, former NTUC Income chief executive Tan Kin Lian told MediaCorp that he advised these investors not to regret their earlier decision, because no one would have known whether these funds would do well or fail at maturity this year.
The fund was in trouble last year and early this year, when it suffered a total of 17 defaults out of its 100 reference entities in its portfolio.
Had the fund been hit by six more defaults, the funds' capital would be adversely affected.
Customers are expected to receive their maturity proceeds by end-June.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Changes to Criminal Procedure Code (CPC)
Some changes to the law about interrogation (clause 258) is making the waves online. Its kinda scary and to put it across in layman's term, basically it allows the police to use statements that they cheat or conned out of you, or statements that you made when you are drunk to convict you.
E.g. Someone who is caught drink driving is brought back to the police station. 1km away, there might have been a hit and run. Police questioned if the driver, who is his intoxicated state is understandably not in the best condition to answer but is forced relentlessly to answer all questions or sign a confession before he is allowed to rest. The police might also further assure him that it is not a confession he is signing but just a procedure that he needs to do before he is allowed to rest. Being so worn out and confused, the driver may just have answered wildly or signed any documents placed in front of them just to get some rest. However, the next morning, when he is sober, he is shocked to find out that what he had signed is actually a false confession as he did not commit the crime and tries to get it revoked. Unfortunately, he is unable to do so because of the law and ends up going to jail for a crime he did not commit. Is it fair?
You can say all kinds of bullshit about the integrity of our police force or government etc but I stand by Murphy's law that "whatever can go wrong will go wrong." Fuckups had, have and will continue to occur. No human being or system can be perfect. Can the police or govt guarantee a 100% no false conviction rate? By giving too much power to the agencies, what can the man on the street do to correct a wrong? Remember the case of Dickson Tan, who was caned more times than he was supposed to be? Or Tan Lai Kiat, who was released prematurely in 1999 but warrant of arrest issued again in 2003 because the courts realised that they make a mistake? If even the courts and prison can make a mistake when handling the CONVICTED, I can't see why we should put blind trust in police where the person might be actually innocent.
E.g. Someone who is caught drink driving is brought back to the police station. 1km away, there might have been a hit and run. Police questioned if the driver, who is his intoxicated state is understandably not in the best condition to answer but is forced relentlessly to answer all questions or sign a confession before he is allowed to rest. The police might also further assure him that it is not a confession he is signing but just a procedure that he needs to do before he is allowed to rest. Being so worn out and confused, the driver may just have answered wildly or signed any documents placed in front of them just to get some rest. However, the next morning, when he is sober, he is shocked to find out that what he had signed is actually a false confession as he did not commit the crime and tries to get it revoked. Unfortunately, he is unable to do so because of the law and ends up going to jail for a crime he did not commit. Is it fair?
You can say all kinds of bullshit about the integrity of our police force or government etc but I stand by Murphy's law that "whatever can go wrong will go wrong." Fuckups had, have and will continue to occur. No human being or system can be perfect. Can the police or govt guarantee a 100% no false conviction rate? By giving too much power to the agencies, what can the man on the street do to correct a wrong? Remember the case of Dickson Tan, who was caned more times than he was supposed to be? Or Tan Lai Kiat, who was released prematurely in 1999 but warrant of arrest issued again in 2003 because the courts realised that they make a mistake? If even the courts and prison can make a mistake when handling the CONVICTED, I can't see why we should put blind trust in police where the person might be actually innocent.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Rants
I happen to come across this article by Lucky Tan comparing the life of Singaporeans from 4 years ago till now. Interesting read here
I have only one major grouse in all honestly, which I look at it as the root of all the problems, is the fact that Singapore is getting overcrowded. With the fucking wrong kind of people. The govt have basically been doling out PRs and citizenships to many people whom, to put it kindly, are hardly people that qualify as 'talent'. Lets be honest here, by just bringing in just any tom, dick and harry with fucking third world mentality and habits, do you expect to become a first world country even if you have first class infrastructure?
Personal experience, I saw this chinese boy about maybe 5 years old peeing at the void deck of my house. I shouted at him and he still had the cheek to make monkey faces at me before running to his parents, who was sitting a stone throw away at the tables, eating sunflower seeds while spitting the shells on the floor. I was then confronted by BOTH his parents, shouting at me not to scare their kid and there is nothing wrong with the kid pissing there as it was according to them, 'not outside your house'. I was fucking pissed off and wasn't going to let this go so after getting nowhere with them, I decided to call the police. Long story short, the police arrive, did nothing much, no fines or anything issued, just a verbal warning. Now whenever I see this family again, which is pretty regularly since we live in the same block, the mother would make snide remarks against us 'stupid petty Singaporeans' while the father would just glare at me with his fucked up face. Its taking all I can to make me fucking wanna punch their faces in. These are the same people that crowd with you everyday on the train, squeezing in before other comes out, jumping queues, buying up your houses and fucking polluting the land I was born in, the land that I was sworn to protect.
Yeah, I am probably generalizing, but I really fucking hate these people. I can't stand their attitudes, their cultures, their mentality. Fuck the govt about being tolerant and accepting them bullshit. If I am a visitor, I would take care to gravitate myself in accordance to the host's habits and behaviors etc. In no circumstances would I expect them to change themselves to accommodate me.
Yet I don't really blame them, its not exactly their fault that their mindset and culture is such, its normal in their own country to be such. Its very much a "me first' mentality I suppose, that is probably needed to survive in their own country, given the huge population that they have. If I were them, I would have probably done the same thing to go to another country that is willing to have me despite me having no talent and pay me a salary few times more than what I am earning here and allow me to bring my whole family along to live in their govt subsidized housing and do not have to play a part in protecting the country. They even use their people's tax money to throw parties for me, teach me a new language, and maybe even provide scholarship for my kids. Without bonds of course.
If only I can find a country that stupid that is willing to take me in on those terms. I'll pack my bags and be gone on the first plane out.
I have only one major grouse in all honestly, which I look at it as the root of all the problems, is the fact that Singapore is getting overcrowded. With the fucking wrong kind of people. The govt have basically been doling out PRs and citizenships to many people whom, to put it kindly, are hardly people that qualify as 'talent'. Lets be honest here, by just bringing in just any tom, dick and harry with fucking third world mentality and habits, do you expect to become a first world country even if you have first class infrastructure?
Personal experience, I saw this chinese boy about maybe 5 years old peeing at the void deck of my house. I shouted at him and he still had the cheek to make monkey faces at me before running to his parents, who was sitting a stone throw away at the tables, eating sunflower seeds while spitting the shells on the floor. I was then confronted by BOTH his parents, shouting at me not to scare their kid and there is nothing wrong with the kid pissing there as it was according to them, 'not outside your house'. I was fucking pissed off and wasn't going to let this go so after getting nowhere with them, I decided to call the police. Long story short, the police arrive, did nothing much, no fines or anything issued, just a verbal warning. Now whenever I see this family again, which is pretty regularly since we live in the same block, the mother would make snide remarks against us 'stupid petty Singaporeans' while the father would just glare at me with his fucked up face. Its taking all I can to make me fucking wanna punch their faces in. These are the same people that crowd with you everyday on the train, squeezing in before other comes out, jumping queues, buying up your houses and fucking polluting the land I was born in, the land that I was sworn to protect.
Yeah, I am probably generalizing, but I really fucking hate these people. I can't stand their attitudes, their cultures, their mentality. Fuck the govt about being tolerant and accepting them bullshit. If I am a visitor, I would take care to gravitate myself in accordance to the host's habits and behaviors etc. In no circumstances would I expect them to change themselves to accommodate me.
Yet I don't really blame them, its not exactly their fault that their mindset and culture is such, its normal in their own country to be such. Its very much a "me first' mentality I suppose, that is probably needed to survive in their own country, given the huge population that they have. If I were them, I would have probably done the same thing to go to another country that is willing to have me despite me having no talent and pay me a salary few times more than what I am earning here and allow me to bring my whole family along to live in their govt subsidized housing and do not have to play a part in protecting the country. They even use their people's tax money to throw parties for me, teach me a new language, and maybe even provide scholarship for my kids. Without bonds of course.
If only I can find a country that stupid that is willing to take me in on those terms. I'll pack my bags and be gone on the first plane out.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Micro Financing - workable model in singapore?
I have been following the model of micro-financing or micro-loans as it is also known, for some time now. It first came to my notice through nobel prize winning Prof. Muhammad Yunus & Grameeen Bank. Then came Kiva.org which I recently became a member and pledged to do so on a monthly basis. Then I came across another for profit peer to peer site at prosper.com which really set me thinking. Can we have a similar model in Singapore?
While here I was, committing myself to a minimum of USD $25 monthly in helping someone I have never seen halfway across the globe, I began thinking if I should actually do more for my fellow citizens, my fellow neighbors. I currently contribute only a measly $2 per month to the Community Chest, while I used to contribute $10 or $15 monthly to NKF through their lifedrops programs, I stopped doing that since the NKF saga came to light. On and off, I make contributions whenever I see those fundraisers on the street or fundraiser shows on TV, but its nothing regular, an nothing exceeding $10 each time, after being wary after the NKF saga of how my money may actually be lining the pocket of some fat cats instead of reaching those that really need it.
I am quite captivated by Kiva's model, in the sense that it is peer to peer. Just a quick summary (please do check out the website for more details), what Kiva does is that it basically connect lenders willing to lend a min of USD $25 to poor entrepreneur borrowers to help them set up a small business in order to get out of poverty. As a lender, you browse the listing with photos and short description of the would-be borrowers and decide who you want to extend the loan to. In a way, you know that your money is going towards an individual or group of your choosing. It puts a face to your recipient and personally, it gives a warm fuzzy feeling to know that you have made a difference to that person and his family. Unlike giving to a charity, the borrowers will pay you back and upon receiving back your loan amount, you can choose to recycle the loan amount once again or donate the money to Kiva to aid their operating costs. Of course, there is always a risk of default, but personally, I am looking at this from a charity point of view, I am fully prepared not to get back my money, and if I do, I will be recycling them again to someone else in need.
The other site that I mentioned earlier, prosper.com, is similar to Kiva in a way in that it involves peer to peer lending, however, it does not limit itself to poor entrepreneurs, its really for anyone. The other difference is that the lenders gets to charge an interest compared to Kiva where the lenders does not earn any interest. Browsing through the site, most people are using it to reduce their credit card debts really, where instead of paying the bank on average 24% p.a on credit card interest rates, the borrowers get a peer to peer loan at interest rate for example 6%. The borrower saves on his interest rates, the lender earns a much much better rate than savings account interest rate.
I see this second model working here in Singapore. To be honest, I am sick and tired of seeing those personal loans and credit lines commercial that the banks are offering. In many adverts, they are encouraging people to use the loans for holidays, pay for some luxury products etc which I feel is somewhat irresponsible. Of course, a bank is still a business, and with personal loans and credit lines being big money makers for them, I can see why they are keen to expand that area of the business, but I wish they can do so in a slightly more social responsible way. Then again, they have no incentive to do so at all and its up to individual borrower to read and understand the terms and conditions.
If we can somehow implement the peer to peer lending model, we can actually help those people that get into debt unwittingly and help them out of the debt. Or to lend to people with genuine needs that couldn't qualify for a government aid. If the government can't or wouldn't help us, shouldn't we help each other?
Its an idea of course, implementation is another whole different matter.
While here I was, committing myself to a minimum of USD $25 monthly in helping someone I have never seen halfway across the globe, I began thinking if I should actually do more for my fellow citizens, my fellow neighbors. I currently contribute only a measly $2 per month to the Community Chest, while I used to contribute $10 or $15 monthly to NKF through their lifedrops programs, I stopped doing that since the NKF saga came to light. On and off, I make contributions whenever I see those fundraisers on the street or fundraiser shows on TV, but its nothing regular, an nothing exceeding $10 each time, after being wary after the NKF saga of how my money may actually be lining the pocket of some fat cats instead of reaching those that really need it.
I am quite captivated by Kiva's model, in the sense that it is peer to peer. Just a quick summary (please do check out the website for more details), what Kiva does is that it basically connect lenders willing to lend a min of USD $25 to poor entrepreneur borrowers to help them set up a small business in order to get out of poverty. As a lender, you browse the listing with photos and short description of the would-be borrowers and decide who you want to extend the loan to. In a way, you know that your money is going towards an individual or group of your choosing. It puts a face to your recipient and personally, it gives a warm fuzzy feeling to know that you have made a difference to that person and his family. Unlike giving to a charity, the borrowers will pay you back and upon receiving back your loan amount, you can choose to recycle the loan amount once again or donate the money to Kiva to aid their operating costs. Of course, there is always a risk of default, but personally, I am looking at this from a charity point of view, I am fully prepared not to get back my money, and if I do, I will be recycling them again to someone else in need.
The other site that I mentioned earlier, prosper.com, is similar to Kiva in a way in that it involves peer to peer lending, however, it does not limit itself to poor entrepreneurs, its really for anyone. The other difference is that the lenders gets to charge an interest compared to Kiva where the lenders does not earn any interest. Browsing through the site, most people are using it to reduce their credit card debts really, where instead of paying the bank on average 24% p.a on credit card interest rates, the borrowers get a peer to peer loan at interest rate for example 6%. The borrower saves on his interest rates, the lender earns a much much better rate than savings account interest rate.
I see this second model working here in Singapore. To be honest, I am sick and tired of seeing those personal loans and credit lines commercial that the banks are offering. In many adverts, they are encouraging people to use the loans for holidays, pay for some luxury products etc which I feel is somewhat irresponsible. Of course, a bank is still a business, and with personal loans and credit lines being big money makers for them, I can see why they are keen to expand that area of the business, but I wish they can do so in a slightly more social responsible way. Then again, they have no incentive to do so at all and its up to individual borrower to read and understand the terms and conditions.
If we can somehow implement the peer to peer lending model, we can actually help those people that get into debt unwittingly and help them out of the debt. Or to lend to people with genuine needs that couldn't qualify for a government aid. If the government can't or wouldn't help us, shouldn't we help each other?
Its an idea of course, implementation is another whole different matter.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Public transport
"Public transport fares to go down by 2.5%" screams the headline today.
Explanation of how the 2.5% decrease is derived: NIL
Comparison of current pricing vs new pricing: NIL
I re-read the article a couple of times, just trying to see if I missed out anything. My understanding of the article tells me that
To be very honest, I gave up trying to understand how much our public transports charge.
When I take a cab, I dunno what surcharges there is or going to be applied until I paid the final bill and asked for a receipt. The cabby could have told me I need to pay a surcharge for picking me up in front of a T-junction opposite a double white line and I would have believed him and paid for it anyway.
When I take a bus, I have no idea how much I will be paying when I alight, I simply struggle to tap my card while being shoved out by the other people, and I never double check. I understand there's a whole different pricing if I paid in cash, or if I am transferring from another bus or MRT.
The only time I can have 2 more seconds to look at my remaining EZlink card value is when I take the train. I think this is the only system I can understand with no surcharges or different pricings etc (i think?)
End of the day, no matter how much the cabs, bus and trains want to charge, how much they wanna increase the fares, there's nothing you can do about it at all. Its not like I can just walk to work? Just suck thumb and pay through nose lor.
Time to get another lot of those SMRT stocks.
Explanation of how the 2.5% decrease is derived: NIL
Comparison of current pricing vs new pricing: NIL
I re-read the article a couple of times, just trying to see if I missed out anything. My understanding of the article tells me that
- Transport costs will in future be based on distance
- Some people may be paying less
- Some people may be paying the same
- Some people may be paying MORE
To be very honest, I gave up trying to understand how much our public transports charge.
When I take a cab, I dunno what surcharges there is or going to be applied until I paid the final bill and asked for a receipt. The cabby could have told me I need to pay a surcharge for picking me up in front of a T-junction opposite a double white line and I would have believed him and paid for it anyway.
When I take a bus, I have no idea how much I will be paying when I alight, I simply struggle to tap my card while being shoved out by the other people, and I never double check. I understand there's a whole different pricing if I paid in cash, or if I am transferring from another bus or MRT.
The only time I can have 2 more seconds to look at my remaining EZlink card value is when I take the train. I think this is the only system I can understand with no surcharges or different pricings etc (i think?)
End of the day, no matter how much the cabs, bus and trains want to charge, how much they wanna increase the fares, there's nothing you can do about it at all. Its not like I can just walk to work? Just suck thumb and pay through nose lor.
Time to get another lot of those SMRT stocks.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Embrace migrants: MM Lee
from the straits time
-------------
Apr 18, 2010
Embrace migrants: MM Lee
MM renews call for greater integration of new, highly educated migrants in society
By Rachel Lin
Singapore must not shy away from embracing new, highly educated migrants, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said yesterday. --ST PHOTO: CHUA CHIN HON
SINGAPORE must not shy away from embracing new, highly educated migrants, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said yesterday.
Re-stating his view on the issue, he said Singapore would continue to need overseas talent to drive its economic dynamo.
Pointing to the first quarter growth of 13.1 per cent and revised government projections of 7 per cent to 9 per cent growth for the year, he said this was 'a big turnaround from our most difficult period in early 2009'.
With the outlook for the global economy now brighter, sustaining Singapore's long-term prospects meant the country needed to grow as an attractive hub for international trade, investment and talent.
'That was how we grew from a fishing village to a trading post under the British, and now a vibrant metropolis,' he said. 'We benefited from being open to immigrants from around the world, especially China, India and the region.'
He said while first-generation migrants might find it difficult to take on local habits and accents, their families would be naturalised.
Read the full story in The Sunday Times.
lyuexin@sph.com.sg
-----------------------
Rationally, I think I speak for most Singaporeans when I say that we have no problems with the 'highly educated migrants' in Singapore. If only they were all like that. The ones we are having problems with are the lower educated ones, the ones that bring with them their 3rd world mentality and dirty 3rd world habits, the ones that we have to squeeze with on fucking overcrowded public transport on a daily basis.
Don't give me the crap about them doing jobs no one wanted to do, ask ong ah heng, there are Singaporeans doing it in the first place, but were replaced as these new pets of our ruling party are cheaper, faster and better. To me, they are also dirtier, smellier and a fucking thorn in my flesh.
I wish I can replace you and your son with people that actually do some real good work in action, rather then just words. Someone like maybe gordan brown and obama. After all, they are cheaper, faster and better too.
-------------
Apr 18, 2010
Embrace migrants: MM Lee
MM renews call for greater integration of new, highly educated migrants in society
By Rachel Lin
Singapore must not shy away from embracing new, highly educated migrants, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said yesterday. --ST PHOTO: CHUA CHIN HON
SINGAPORE must not shy away from embracing new, highly educated migrants, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said yesterday.
Re-stating his view on the issue, he said Singapore would continue to need overseas talent to drive its economic dynamo.
Pointing to the first quarter growth of 13.1 per cent and revised government projections of 7 per cent to 9 per cent growth for the year, he said this was 'a big turnaround from our most difficult period in early 2009'.
With the outlook for the global economy now brighter, sustaining Singapore's long-term prospects meant the country needed to grow as an attractive hub for international trade, investment and talent.
'That was how we grew from a fishing village to a trading post under the British, and now a vibrant metropolis,' he said. 'We benefited from being open to immigrants from around the world, especially China, India and the region.'
He said while first-generation migrants might find it difficult to take on local habits and accents, their families would be naturalised.
Read the full story in The Sunday Times.
lyuexin@sph.com.sg
-----------------------
Rationally, I think I speak for most Singaporeans when I say that we have no problems with the 'highly educated migrants' in Singapore. If only they were all like that. The ones we are having problems with are the lower educated ones, the ones that bring with them their 3rd world mentality and dirty 3rd world habits, the ones that we have to squeeze with on fucking overcrowded public transport on a daily basis.
Don't give me the crap about them doing jobs no one wanted to do, ask ong ah heng, there are Singaporeans doing it in the first place, but were replaced as these new pets of our ruling party are cheaper, faster and better. To me, they are also dirtier, smellier and a fucking thorn in my flesh.
I wish I can replace you and your son with people that actually do some real good work in action, rather then just words. Someone like maybe gordan brown and obama. After all, they are cheaper, faster and better too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)