Ian Welsh

The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Month: November 2020 Page 3 of 4

The US Can Have a Boom Economy Six Months from Whenever It Gets Serious

By

On November 13, 2020

Comments

From Architecture DiY

One of the great problems in the US — and most of the Western world — is that we have been unable to accomplish anything important for over 50 years. The last significant US project was the moon landing. Failure or muddled success is the norm, now. The US even loses or muddles all its wars, and when it “wins,” as with Libya, well, they “made a desert and called it peace.”

Because nothing really works, and because every effort is half-assed (some tax cuts and an underfunded program run by corrupt incompetents) we don’t think anything big CAN be done.

But plenty of big things were done in the past, and recently by other countries like China (who just industrialized in record time and build unbelievable amounts of infrastructure.) We have, in the past, been able to put up buildings almost overnight, send a man to the moon, mobilize most of the population, etc, etc, etc.

None of this is impossible today, it is especially possible for the US (other countries it can be hard for, because the international order is set up to cripple small and medium countries’ ability to act independently, but the US set up the order and is still a superpower, even if it is in marked decline.)

So, if you’re the US and you finally get serious, you can have a boom start in six months with a real Green Deal (no caviling, no trimming).

You make a mandate to get every single building energy neutral at least. The Federal government effectively guarantees all mortgages; it sets the norms. You state that no mortgage is considered conforming starting in a year to three years if it doesn’t meet the new standards.

(I am fundraising to determine how much I’ll write this year. If you value my writing and want more of it, please consider donating.)

You then offer the funds for the refit. This isn’t a gift, it is paid out of savings on utilities: half to the building owner so they win, half to the government. If you insist on doing this through financial markets, then half goes to the entity who puts up the fund.

You MUST create a proper auditing group to inspect a significant number of the buildings, so that there isn’t widespread fraud.

These refits are about passive and active solar, proper insulation and so on. Back in the 90s, it was possible to build an energy neutral building at -40 degrees Celcius, we can certainly refit buildings now.

Another conforming mortgage change is that lawns are no longer legal except on golf courses. Specify ecologically sane alternatives.

You take over/break up/heavily regulate all utilities, and have them do proper maintainance and set up grids which allow people to feed energy back in. Utilities are going to take huge income hits with this plan, so you’re going to have to support them, but that means taking them public or regulating their profits, dividends, and so on. You move grids and generation to as local as possible, because there is vast loss in energy by long distance transmission and because solar (passive and active) works best locally, because you need to store heat during sunny periods (both daily and annually). Of course, solar is not the only energy you use, and the emphasis is on reducing energy draw, and even more than changing the energy mix.

High-speed rail is a dead obvious thing to do, and proper high-speed rail is faster from city center to center when you take into account things like traveling to and from airports and security theater. A huge high-speed rail build-out, similar to the 50s expansion of highways, is an easy win (and traveling by plane sucks).

Note that most of these jobs cannot be off-shored or out-sourced. Refitting buildings is manual labor; building high-speed rail is done locally, and there are domestic companies who can build the trains. China dominates solar power, but there are ways to build up US industry, simply by equalizing prices through industrial policy. This can be done so both China and the US win; it doesn’t have to be zero sum.

Farming is a huge source of carbon emissions, but it doesn’t have to be. This isn’t about everyone going vegan, there are ways to make animals expel a lot less methane by changing their feed. Regenerative agriculture produces higher outputs per acre than standard industrial agriculture and requires more workers. If you want to break up the big farms, there is some evidence that small farms also produce more (ideal roughly what one person can work, which doesn’t mean no machinery.)

Vast planting of trees in cities in another no-brainer, as is an expansion of mass transit. Standard asphalt roads are expensive and have to be constantly re-paved. Moving them to alternatives like cobbled streets will lead to fewer emissions and reduce city budgets massively over time, again the alternatives take a lot of labor (if you’ve ever laid cobbles you’re wincing at the thought, but cobbles aren’t the only alternative).

There are a bunch of other things to do (for example, rebuild wetlands around cities and on the coast; build sea walls around cities which are too low, blah, blah), but the point should be obvious by now: You can help the environment, produce a massive number of jobs, and create an economic boom. It isn’t hard, though it is complicated. You simply have to have the will to do it.

Further, if you can get it going, it will soon have massive support because it will create a truly good economy for the first time in 50 odd years. People will have better things to do than squeal about red state/blue state bullshit, the era will be like the post-war period: People are making money, and having kids and politics would be, in fact, largely consensus-driven because everyone sees that what is being done works.

I first outlined this back at The Blogging of the President 16 years ago. Others have also suggested similar plans.

The most fundamental, irritating thing about the world today is that we know what to do to fix most of our problems, we just refuse to even consider doing any of it because we have corrupt, psychotic, decrepit, and incompetent leadership and populations who support them. We roar towards the abyss, staring in horror, refusing to simply turn the wheel. It’s amazing to see, a true lesson in how pathological human societies can be.

Boom, essentially tomorrow, any time we want it. Well, if we don’t leave it until our civilization is actually collapsing and we no longer have the resources. Which is the current glide-path.

The West Proves Its Incapacity with Covid

By

On November 12, 2020

Comments

With rare exceptions like New Zealand and Australia, the Western response to Covid-19 has been beyond pathetic.

This isn’t a complicated problem. You do a lockdown at the start, then ease when cases are essentially extinguished. You build up track and trace, you put in support for businesses and for people who have to isolate. You test a lot, you track and trace contacts and you make people quarantine (fuck your rights. If you are have the goddamn plague, you quarantine.) If there is a local breakout during the second phase you track and trace.

You check temperatures and symptoms at the border and make travelers quarantine for 10 days, in a hotel room you provide. During lockdown and restriction phases everyone wears masks when indoors anywhere but their own homes.

This is not a matter that is open to question: countries which ran this playbook got Covid under control. They’re having safe pool parties in China now.

Moreover, the sheer stupidity of the idea that lockdowns hurt the economy is beyond embarassing. The plague hurts economies. Getting it under control is what saves economies. During lockdowns it is simple to deal with: cancel rent and mortgages for people and businesses and have the central bank make the lenders whole for the duration. Central banks routinely print trillions to bail out rich people, they can be used for this. Meanwhile, give people enough money to afford their other bills, like food.

The economy IS people and businesses. If you make sure they are all there when the plague is done, then the economy will be fine. Instead, there has been huge devastation of business in many countries so that even when the pandemic is done (because of a vaccine), the damage will linger for years, some of it will linger for decades, in industries like live music and theatre, where the venues have shut down and won’t come back easily. (It’s almost impossible to open new music and theater venues in many places.)

(I am fundraising to determine how much I’ll write this year. If you value my writing and want more of it, please consider donating.)

Again: the East and a few western outliers handled this, and the rest of the West did not. This is a combination of sheer incompetence, psychopathic leadership, and incentives. The rich get tested every day, can work from home, and get the very best care AND their wealth has skyrocketed during the pandemic even as they assume control of a larger percentage of the economy (because of small businesses going under.) If you’re rich, the pandemic has been a godsend: it’s made you far richer, given you more power, and disempowered your workers, since there are nowhere near enough jobs.

Our societies in the West are simply not functional. We cannot manage the most basic of government functions (as the inability count votes in America just demonstrated.) Our leaders are buffoons, psychopaths or both (usually both, and this includes leaders people spew over like Angela Merkel.)

If our leaders wanted the pandemic handled, it would have been. It wasn’t because they didn’t, and in some cases because they are also buffoons.

This is not primarily on the population (except they keep electing these ‘tards). The reason America has a huge anti-mask movement, for example, is that powerful leaders like Trump and various GOP figures pushed it hard, so it became a tribal authoritarian marker.

The pandemic, as bad as it is, is a minor crisis. It is as nothing, nothing, compared to what is coming at as as climate change starts to really hit.

We can’t/won’t even handle a crisis where there is a playbook and all you have to do is follow it.

Our societies are broken. Virtually everyone in a leadership position, or who has great wealth (same thing) needs to be removed from power, have their money taken away beyond a standard middle class standard, and be forbidden from every running anything ever again. Our populations need to stop accepting psychopathic and incompetent leadership and learn that the only leaders worth having are those who actually put the people’s welfare first.

If we do not do these things, climate change and the problems which will come downstream from it are going to make the pandemic look like a picnic that was upset because there were too many ants.

This is where we are.

(I should note that the Australian and New Zealand governments are not “good”, they merely handled this well. Australia just let wildfires run unchecked, while New Zealand has one of the most overpriced housing markets in the world. I assume Covid was not in the interests of their elites, unlike in many other countries.)

2020 Fundraiser

By

On November 11, 2020

Comments

I am raising funds for 2020. The more funds I raise, the more I write.

DONATE OR SUBSCRIBE

The specific goals for this year are:

A Political and Economic Concept Web Series

This will be a collection of articles, all online, linked and available from top menu bar. The goal is to explain various concepts so that readers can use them to analyze the state of the world, their countries and regions.

The series will likely start with “Human Nature” move “Why People Do Things” and then head to “When “Class Matters” and on to “Constituency Theory.” The goal of these four concepts is to explain what groups rule, why and what ideas they bring into the world: what do they do? Why?

Why people do what they do is the big question, and you can’t understand the world if you can’t account for their actions. Actions follow beliefs and interests (of which class is only one, and often not determinative.

Unlike blog posts, each article will be written with a mind to the other articles and with a larger cohesive goal in end. General principles within each concept will be explained, and examples given, so that ideally you can do your own analysis at the end.

The tiers are as follows:

$5000: five articles on who rules, why, and what they do.

$8,000: Three more articles, this set most likely on the conditions that create golden Ages, including one on how to create an ecological Golden Age (what we need next.)

$11,000: two more articles, these on the conditions that create good and bad societies to live in; an introduction and conclusion and some commentary and connecting text as seems necessary.

Subscriptions will count triple compared to donations.

DONATE OR SUBSCRIBE

 

 

The Good Scenario For America’s Future

By

On November 10, 2020

Comments

So, the default scenario is that Biden rules for 4 to 8 years, maybe Harris for another 4, then we get a more disciplined right wing “populist.” In the meantime, nothing that will actually change the trend-lines has been done about climate change or the continued concentration of wealth and power. America continues to be divided into two tribes who hate each other, while the West as a whole stagnates under neoliberalism and a second block, led by China, with Russia and many developing nations, especially in Africa and South America, forming, with its own payments, legal and trade system. The world descends into Cold War 2.0 as climate change continues its advance.

What’s the good scenario for the United States?

AOC, basically. In 2022 she takes out Schumer and becomes a Senator. In 2024 she primaries Biden or Harris and wins.

Likely? No.

Impossible? Also, no.

AOC is popular, Schumer is a lame duck. If she goes for him, I give her the nod to win. Having taken out the Senate leader, she looks unstoppable.

The primary will be extremely difficult to win. Obama, Clinton, Clyburn and all the usual suspects will do everything they can to cheat her of a win, just as they did with Sanders twice. But AOC is clearly Bernie’s heir, having saved his bacon when he had a heart-attack, and never having betrayed him as Warren did. Unlike Sanders, she is genuinely charismatic, and like him she will pack massive arenas and have huge support from the grassroots and activists.

Assuming Biden has been weak-tea, there’s an opening for her. Odd are slightly against her, but it’s not impossible.

Then we come to the general election. Contrary to what centrists claim, progressives running on Medicare-4-All did very well in this election, as did policies like a $15/hour wage. An aggressively progressive platform, with concrete job promises so people know where they go when fracking goes away, can win. A real Green New Deal offers tens of millions of good jobs.

AOC’s national numbers aren’t the greatest, but I suspect this can be turned around. The people who hate AOC don’t vote Democratic anyway (no, Republicans do not vote Democratic) and she activates constituencies which are only loosely attached to the electorate.

In fact, I see the primary as a bigger problem than the General: if AOC gets the nomination, she’s likely to win, because she can run both against unpopular Democratic politics and Republican ones. Running on an actual popular program, she stands a good chance of controlling both the House and Senate.

At that point, an FDR style Presidency which overturns everything is possible, and if the Supremes try to stop it, threaten them with court-packing. They either fold (as FDR’s court did) or they don’t, either way, it’s done.

Now this scenario isn’t the most likely (and yeah, she’s not perfect, but she’s the best on offer and way better than anyone else who could run), but it is the only possible scenario I can see right now that leaves the US in a good place.

May this, or something similar, be so.

Everything I write here is free, but rent isn’t, so if you value my writing, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

What Will A Biden Presidency Be Like?

By

On November 9, 2020

Comments

Trump is done and Biden is on the way in.

Let us first acknowledge that Biden is senile. The man is not what he was 8 years ago. He is well known to both be lazy and unwilling to delegate, and this may become a problem. Hopefully his increasing incapacity will force him to delegate, but the question is “to whom?” If he doesn’t make a decision, then the administration will be riven with knife fights and intrigue. A fair bit of money has to be on Harris, only because she is savagely ambitious and without any noticeable ethical qualms in her pursuit for power, but the vice-Presidency is an essentially powerless office. More likely multiple fiefdoms will emerge, with people fighting for access and control of the President. Alternatively, Biden’s wife may wind up running the show as Reagan’s did during his dementia.

Next let us acknowledge that Biden’s career is that of a very conservative liberal. He was against de-segregation. He has voted for war over and over. He is a fiscal conservative in the worst way (aka. has often talked of cutting Social Security and Medicare.) He was for the crime bills of the 90s and a driving force behind the bankruptcy bill which made it impossible to discharge student loans, thus causing the current student loan crisis. He has said many good things about the environment lately, but he has also said he will not ban fracking. In terms of his actual record, about the only high point is his work against violence on women.

Biden’s, well, a bad man when it comes to how he treats people who aren’t his family or friends. It’s clear that he’s a loving father; a good boss to direct reports and a great friend (just keep your young daughters away from his roving hands and sniffing nose.) But Americans aren’t in a family relationship with Biden, and they shouldn’t think they are. You aren’t Hunter Biden.

On the plus side, one can expect that he will undo many of Trump’s worst acts. I would expect an end to separating children from parents on the border almost immediately: presumably the US will go back to locking them up together. A removal of the worst Iran sanctions is likely, and with a bit of luck a return to the Iran nuclear and peace deal should occur. He is likely to close many of the parks and reserves that Trump opened to roads, drilling and logging.

Biden’s probable cabinet is quite conservative. Per Politico, front-runners are:

  • State: Susan Rice
  • Attorney Gengeral: Doug Jones
  • HHS: Michelle Lujan Grisham
  • Transport: Eric Garcetti
  • Commerce: Meg Whitman
  • Energy: Ernest Moniz
  • Interior: Tom Udall
  • Agriculture: Heidi Heitkamp
  • Veteran’s Administration: Pete Buttigieg

I trust it is obvious that most of these are not progressive in any sense. Moniz, the likely Energy secretary is a creature of the fossil fuel industry. Heitkam (Agriculture) was for the Keystone XL pipeline and Trump’s appointees. Susan Rice was one of the primary war-mongers in the Obama administration.

They aren’t all bad, Udall has a good environmental record, for example, but while interior is important, oddly, Energy is more so (and arguably so is agriculture, since farming causes vast environmental harm as it is currently practiced.)

In foreign affair, Iran will benefit from Biden’s Presidency, and I suspect Cuba will as well, though Biden is notoriously aggressive and threatening to small countries, he will want to rescue Obama’s Cuba deal. One can expect Democrats to be more aggressive to Russia, after spending the last four years blaming it for everything. I remind you that while Russia is no longer a super-power in most senses, they are still a nuclear super-power and that war between the two nations is unthinkable, in the “armageddon” sense. As best I can tell Biden does not have a personal hatred for Putin the way that Hillary appears to have, and in any case, Putin appears to be setting the stage to step down. (A recent law made it impossible to charge former Presidents for crimes committed during their Presidency, for example.)

The dragon in the patch is China. Trump’s anti-China moves had a great deal of bipartisan support. The difference under Biden is likely to be a great emphasis on working with allies against China, rather than a pivot from the anti-China position. The consensus opinion in DC is that China is a rising fascist state who doesn’t obey the rules of the current order and the primary threat to American dominance. Meanwhile, China has come to the conclusion that a split with the US is essentially inevitable. They wish to buy time, but are working furiously on improving their tech and trade area (under the Belt and Road Initiative). In short, Biden will continue the march towards a new Cold War, with the world split into two areas. China and Russia will be at the heart of the second area.

One possible bright spot in Biden’s likely administration is anti-trust. Democrats are unhappy with large chunks of big-tech, starting but not ending with Facebook. Expect an anti-trust suit against Facebook to go ahead under Biden unless, perhaps, Zuckerberg grovels like a worm (which he is unlikely to do.) There is also some possibility of actions against Google, Apple and Amazon.

As with China, there’s a fair bit of bipartisan consensus on this, even if Facebook has favoured Republicans, they are not happy with its ability to choose whose message gets thru, for example.

In terms of the economy, Biden is likely to bow to the deficit myth. Especially if Republicans hold the Senate (most likely), he will struggle to get money for his priorities, but worse, his career has generally shown him to be a fairly standard Democratic centrist who believes that only Republicans have the right to spend large amounts of money and that Democrats should reduce the deficit and instead of spend, rely on tax cuts. At worst Biden may be willing to cut a deal to reduce Social Security and Medicare benefits to “fix” the deficit. (This is nonsense, but it is nonsense Biden has believed his entire career.)

The Senate requires some extra commentary. If Republicans hold it, McConnell has said he will use it aggressively to make sure that Biden’s appointments are not progressive. While this wouldn’t be a problem if progressive meant to McConnell what it does to anyone sane, what it really means is “anyone who isn’t right wing.”

There is no reason for this to hamstring Biden, all he has to do is follow Trump’s precedent and rely on Acting leaders of various agencies. The question, however, is whether Biden will be willing to do this. In fact, this is the great question of a Biden administration with a Republican Senate (or even a bare  majority Democratic one), will he use the Presidency’s power to their full extent, as Republican presidents like Trump and Bush did? If so, there’s a great deal he can accomplish, if not, he will rule is as a moderate Republican even if he doesn’t want to.

This is also true with respect to the Supreme Court: there are ways around the Supremes, but they do require a President to use his power aggressively and in ways that, obviously, aren’t bipartisan. Biden’s willingness to do this is an open question, he certainly has preferred to “govern across the aisle” is the past.

As with Obama, ruling as a moderate Republican may well be what he wants, and a Republican Senate and Supreme Court may give him cover to do so, constantly blaming everything he does and doesn’t do on “we don’t control the Senate or the Court, give us more money for the next election.”

A wildcard in this is Schumer. Schumer’s certainly a centrist who has done nothing for anyone who isn’t a donor in ages, but he’s running scared of AOC. He recently talked up the possibility of using an executive order to forgive 50K in student debt, for example (which would be a wonderful thing for Biden to do.) Schumer knows AOC is a real threat to him, and the only way to innoculate himself is to become progressive enough that she doesn’t have an argument against him.

Pelosi will remain Pelosi. She will want pay-go, and be essentially conservative. But she lost seats in the last election and barely has a majority. How much power she will have remains to be seen. Still, she’ll probably hang on for at least another four years, before her advancing age forces her to retire.

One can assume that a Biden administraiton will generally be more technocratically competent. I expect the Covid response to improve significantly, for example, though stubborn red state governors and legislatures will remain a problem. Trump’s propaganda that masks don’t work; Covid is no big deal and that the closures are the problem, not the disease, will remain a huge issue crippling any American response, as will fears and refusal to take vaccines.

Getting any large aid bill through Congress will be nearly impossible if Democrats don’t retake the Senate, for the simple reason that there’s no reason for Republicans to give Democrats a win like that.

The great fear of a Biden administration, and why I only reluctantly supported Biden, is that he will start a new war. Biden isn’t as bad as Hillary, though, and we can hope that his foreign adventures remain restricted to bullying weak nations and instigating coups (Venezuela is going to have a particularly bad time.)

The other great fear is that Biden’s administration will be weak tea, like Obama’s. It won’t do much good for most people, and in four to eight years, they will turn to a Republican. That Republican will be a more disciplined, more genuinely “populist” version of Trump, and will be able to do what people thought Trump would do, but which he was fundamentally too incompetent to accomplish.

I wish the Biden administration well, but fundamentally, I don’t think it’s going to be enough different from Obama’s to really change the direction America, or the world is headed in. Some people will certainly be helped, and I’m happy for them, but that America continues its “undeveloping nation” slide as the oligarchy continues to become richer and richer and the majority of the population stagnates or becomes worse off is unlikely to change.

And while I expect Biden to be better for the environment than Trump or Obama, he will not be enough better to change the fact that climate change is now running away, and that environmental consequences which will destroy multiple countries are almost inevitable. Indeed, this administration was probably the last chance to do anything that really matters short of geo-engineering, but that window was closed when Sanders lost the primary due to Clyburn and Obama’s intervention.

Slightly better Obama administration, with a worse Republican President than Trump following seems like the best bet for the Biden administration. Hopefully, while the best best, it is not the one that comes to be.

Everything I write here is free, but rent isn’t, so if you value my writing, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

 

 

 

Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – November 8, 2020

By

On November 8, 2020

Comments

by Tony Wikrent

The 277 Policies for Which Biden Need Not Ask Permission

[The American Prospect, via Naked Capitalism 11-5-20]

FAST FACTS:

  • We found 277 policies that can be enacted through executive branch powers in the Biden-Sanders unity task force document.
  • 48 of the policies, or 17 percent, are rollbacks of Trump-era policy changes.
  • Immigration (78 policies), Climate Change (54 policies), and the Economy (54 policies) have the most potential executive actions.

Strategic Political Economy

[Twitter, via Naked Capitalism 11-3-20]

 

Which is the Real “Working Class Party” Now?

Matt Taibbi, November 5, 2020

Defying years of muddle-headed media analyses, Trump underperformed with white men, but made gains with every other demographic. Some 26 percent of his votes came from nonwhite Americans, the highest percentage for a Republican since 1960. The politician who became instantly famous — and infamous — by saying of Mexican immigrants, “They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists,” performed stunningly well with Latino voters.

Read More

Open Thread

By

On November 7, 2020

Comments

Feel free to use the comments to discuss topics unrelated to recent posts.

Note: Getting tired of the election, though of course there’ll be a piece on what a Biden admin portends, but note that AP and Fox have both called the election for Biden.

The Deep Green and the Shore

By

On November 6, 2020

Comments

I’m not a big fan of the wilderness. My father was a forester, and as a child I was hauled along on enough unpleasant and uncomfortable trips to develop a distaste for jolting pickup truck rides and boring conversations about varieties of trees. The Boy Scouts didn’t improve things—I mainly remember the long nights of slow dripping torment in tents that never, ever, kept the rain out, no matter what you did.

I don’t quite like the deep green, the wet and rotting world of the Pacific rainforest along the west coast. People who haven’t spent much time in it never get the picture right. It can be a hellish world. One of my uncles used to cruise timber spending months in the coastal forests. He would come back slug white and drained by months without seeing the sun. People’s skin would rot. The deep green is a dark world, one where the sun never shines, where fallen trees rot quietly, infested with a world of bugs and grubs – white and black swarming over their repast and home. It rains more days than not, but no matter how strong the rain what you experience below is a slow and absolutely endless and relentless drip, drip, drip till the memory of dryness is faint and the lust for it is your steady companion.

Even as neither day nor night is as beautiful as dawn or dusk—sunrise or sunset—the deep green is most beautiful where it fades into something else—shore or creek or glade. The glades offer blessed sun and relief from the eternal damp and in the right season a profusion of wildflowers. Most creeks don’t offer much sun—the canopy arcs over them, but the bubble and swirl of water over and around smooth round stones and the flash of silver fish languid and quick in the water are some of my favorite sights.

For me, however, it’s as the rainforest thins towards the shore that its true beauty shines. Mostly it’s the combination of water and sun that brings out the beauty. The eternal drip, drip, drip that makes the deep green a rotting hell throws up endless beauty as the canopy thins. I remember a huge fern, taller than a small child, with drops of water that shimmered with the blurred hues of a rainbow, more beautiful than any diamond. Likewise the sun shining through the forest’s roof leaves the forest suffused with a light green glow that is enchanting. It’s a beauty that shows only in the pauses amongst the interminable rain, a few brief shining hours, but it is perhaps more enchanting for its brevity and rarity.

When I moved out East, I traveled through the forest and thought it scrub. Compared to the rain forest of the west coast, normal forests can never compare. They are never green enough, alive enough or thick enough.

To me, forest will always mean the deep green and natural beauty will always be where it sweeps down to shore and thins out on the edge of the sand or rock and the sweet rotting scent of humus is joined to the salt tang of wind off the sea.

(A Reprint)

Everything I write here is free, but rent isn’t, so if you value my writing, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Page 3 of 4

Previous

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén