This Is Not Complicated



From top: Why Apple owes Ireland; Paul Murphy TD

Ireland has functioned as a tax haven for major corporations for decades and now the chickens are coming home to roost.

There should be no confusion.

Paul Murphy TD writes:

‘It’s complicated.’

That’s the government response to the EU Commission ruling that Apple owes €13 billion plus interest in unpaid taxes to the Irish state – an amount that would come close to €19 billion.

It has to be presented as very complicated because the simple reality of it is too explosive.

James Connolly had it right over 100 years ago when he wrote:

“Governments in capitalist society are but committees of the rich to manage the affairs of the capitalist class.”

it’s supposed to operate subtly so the government preserves the illusion of acting in an imagined “national interest”.

With over €13 billion owed to the state by a corporation which has a cash pile of close to $200 billion that subtlety has gone out the window. There is a choice to try to claim that money to use it resolve the many devastating social crises people in this country face, or to fight tooth and nail to keep it on Apple’s balance sheet.

The government’s choice, backed up by Fianna Fáil, is clear – they’ll fight for Apple to keep it and they’ll spend yet more money doing so. But in making that choice they are in danger of exposing the reality that the establishment parties as representing the 1%.

That is why it has to be made very complicated. Here are some of the key reasons the government says “it’s complicated”:

1. “We cannot be responsible for taking the tax from other countries.” (Brian Hayes MEP on Sean O’Rourke 30 August 2016)

The situation is presented by the government as if Ireland somehow stumbled into being a tax haven par excellence in the European Union. This is scraping the barrel of disingenuity. Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe weren’t incorporated in Ireland by accident.

They were there because of a conscious policy of government, implemented by Revenue to allow corporations to funnel profits through Ireland paying effectively no tax.

In this case, two tax rulings were given by Revenue in 1991 and 2007 to Apple in order explicitly to allow Apple to count tens of billions of euros of profit on a yearly basis on the books of Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe and pay a tax rate as low as 0.0005%.

The government can’t have its cake and eat it.

The fact that these elements of Apple’s operations made huge profits and paid almost no tax seems to be undisputed by the government. Then they should accept that significant tax is owed and should be paid.

2. The Commission wearing another hat… would require monies like this to be taken off the national debt” (Minister Noonan on News at One 30 August 2016)

This was an argument wheeled out yesterday and regurgitated by many journalists to try to cut across the predictable anger that the government would rather Apple have this money than spend it on homes for example.

When EU Commissioner Vestager appeared on RTE’s Drivetime later and flatly denied it – saying that the money could also be used for capital expenditure, Minister Paschal O’Donoghue had to admit that’s the case.

So now the government accepts, that even within the Fiscal Treaty austerity straitjacket, the money could be spent on capital expenditure, including housing.

3 Apple is going to appeal the Commission decision anyway

It’s Apple’s own business what it does to try to keep its cash mountain growing. The government is supposed to represent people in Ireland.A decision by the Irish government to “fight it in the European courts” (Noonan, RTE News at One 30 August 2016) will go down as this government’s bank guarantee moment.

It will be nauseating for millions of people that they will spend public money to try to allow Apple to get richer while two thousand children are in emergency homeless accommodation.

4. Other countries could have a claim on the money

Of course other countries could have a claim on unpaid tax by Apple. It is presented by the government as if there is now a pot of €13 billion which would have to be divided up between countries that would claim it. That’s not the case.

The €13 billion figure would increase if other countries were to take cases against Apple for unpaid taxes, because they mostly have higher rates of corporation tax than 12.5%.

Ireland is a key conduit in a global tax avoidance chain. The only winners from that are the big corporations and the lawyers and accountants who make a fortune from devising ways for their clients to avoid paying tax. The losers are the public in this country, in other developed countries, but particularly people in developing countries.

The UN Conference on Trade and Development published a study last year which found that developing countries lost about $100 billion a year in tax avoidance by major corporations. That is an issue of global injustice – and Ireland should stop being a country which facilitates the flood of wealth upwards to the 1%.

5. But what about all the multinational jobs?

This has become the equivalent of Helen Lovejoy’s “Won’t somebody please think of the children?” from ‘The Simpson’s.

The government is consciously engaging in scaremongering suggesting that all 187,000 jobs will go if one company, Apple, is forced to pay the over €13 billion in back taxes that are owed. They are preying on the fears of those who work in the multinationals and their families.

The fact that they can do so speaks volumes about the unstable economic system they are committed to. The over 5,000 people who work for Apple in Cork do real work – they create wealth and profits for Apple.

However, the vast majority of Apple’s ‘activity’ in Ireland has been nothing of the sort – it is simply a con to ensure that they don’t pay any tax.

We should reject the scaremongering which is designed to ensure that multinationals will continue to be able to not pay any tax, but also challenge the model which allows the government to use these threats.

Fintan O’Toole in today’s Irish Times is 100% accurate when he writes that the “reputational damage” that the government fears is actually ““damage to our well-earned reputation among corporations for facilitating tax avoidance on a global scale.”

Together with the ludicrous 26% growth rate which bears no relationship to the real economy or people’s lives, this ruling illustrates the fundamental unsustainability of the chosen developmental model of the political establishment in this country.

Hawking Ireland as a location with low or non-existent corporation tax, low data regulation and low wages has delivered GDP growth, but a deeply unequal society without any significant manufacturing base and dependent upon the whims of major corporations.

That model is now a failure and should be recognised as such. If we want a real and sustainable recovery, a break from the rule of corporations and the tax haven model is needed.

Instead of “committees of the rich”, we need a left government with socialist policies committed to sustainable development. That means forcing the corporations and rich to pay their taxes.

It also means using some of those resources to fund significant public investment, for example in green energy which could provide tens of thousands of quality jobs.

It means developing an industrial policy based on democratic public ownership of the key resources and sources of wealth in our economy and planning to meet people’s needs.

It’s not complicated. It’s simple.

Paul Murphy is a TD for the Anti Austerity Alliance. Follow Paul on Twitter: @paulmurphy/AAA

Earlier: ‘What The Minister Was Saying Is All Utter Balderdash’

Anne Marie McNally on Wednesday

Graph: Endgadget

Sponsored Link

185 thoughts on “This Is Not Complicated

  1. MoyestWithExcitement

    “It will be nauseating for millions of people that they will spend public money to try to allow Apple to get richer while two thousand children are in emergency homeless accommodation.”


    1. Nikkeboentje

      So your point is that the money should be used on better sex education and/or free contraception to people who have kids when they obviously can’t afford to have them.

      1. MoyestWithExcitement

        No. Keep dreaming of a day that poor people stop having sex though. That’s not at all insane and painfully stupid.

        1. Nikkeboentje

          People can have as much sex as they like. Just don’t expect the State to give you a free house and loads of handouts because you were stupid enough to not use contraception.

          1. Wedduck

            Nobody has ever received a free house from the State. They are charged an affordable rent. However I do support free contraception for women no matter their financial situation.

          2. MoyestWithExcitement

            “Prevention is better than cure”

            So you DO think poor people will stop having sex? Ok then. What will we do with the children who are very much alive and whose parents can’t afford them? Ignore them so we can feel superior to poor people?

          3. Tish Mahorey

            @ Nikkeboentje

            It’s not for you to decide who has children or how many they have. You are one citizen among all the rest.

            Some people come into hard times though no fault of their own but rather as a result of centre-right economic policies which undermine the tax base, causing a reduction in emergency social services.

          4. martco

            @ Nikkeboentje

            perhaps we could just kill the poor and be done with it….would that system work for you? keep watching over your shoulder though ‘cos you might be next

      2. Anomanomanom

        Im being serious, honestly no trolling, but you Should NOT have kids if you cant afford them, simple.

        1. ethereal

          what if you can afford them when you have then and then something like a global recession happens and you lose your job and then your home and rent allowance isn’t enough to pay the rent so you become homeless?

          1. Anomanomanom

            In that case, like I said many times, give the parents all the help they need. Give nothing to the waster that never worked and keeps having kids then moans the “corpo” wont give me a bigger house.

          2. Clampers Outside!

            “In that case, like I said many times, give the parents all the help they need. Give nothing to the waster that never worked and keeps having kids then moans the “corpo” wont give me a bigger house.”

            Hear, hear!

        2. Ivor

          So free abortions for those on poor wages?

          Alternatively, we could make it so that getting a decent wage is easier. That might involve investment in things like education and healthcare. If only we had a few extra billion to pay for such things!

          1. Junkface

            It also has some of the highest cost of living in Europe. Rent, food costs, all types of insurance, House prices, Medical bills, car/mechaincal maintainence

        1. Nikkeboentje

          Not sure if this is meant for me. If it is….I can afford my house. I became a unexpected landlord when I had to leave Ireland for work purposes. I currently pay the shortfall between the mortgage and the rent that I receive from tenants in addition to paying the rent on my apartment where I currently reside.

  2. manonfire

    Unfortunately thats the situation, and its not gonna change as a result of this “windfall”

        1. MoyestWithExcitement

          Oh, it’s legal? Then it’s perfectly morally acceptable. I say we legalise shoplifting as well. I mean, if the rich get to steal billions legally, wht can’t some scrote nick a 20 quid jumper to sell for a tenner and pay for his kid’s school tour?

          1. Nikkeboentje

            Because “stealing” or “shoplifting” is illegal. Apple et al don’t “steal” money, they take advantage of perfectly legal tax regimes.

          2. MoyestWithExcitement

            So let’s make shoplifting legal then, yeah? If we’re making it legal for the super rich to steal billions from us, let’s make it legal for the poor to steal 20 quids worth of crap. You’re in, yeah?

          3. rotide

            I love how after someone points out to Moyest that his analogy is just plain wrong, he responds by utilising the exact same analogy.

          4. MoyestWithExcitement

            And I love how gullibe little curtain twitchers like yourself are so easily fooled by legaleese.

            ‘Hey, you didn’t pay us the money you owe us.’
            ‘Actually I used a perfectly legal process to get out of paying you the money I owe you.’
            ‘Oh, well that’s ok.’

            You do bring the schadenfreude, young man, I’ll give you that.

          5. rotide

            In your awful example, If a perfectly legal method of not paying was used, the money was not owed in the first place.

            Are people over 65 all criminals for using perfectly legal methods of not paying for transport?

            You really are a complete moron.

          6. MoyestWithExcitement

            Did you just compare multi billionaires not paying for the infrastructure they use with a bus pass for people that have been paying taxes towards that infrastructure for most of their lives? :D

          7. MoyestWithExcitement

            Sorry, I mean equate. I need to be pedantic with snivelling bootlickers like yourself.

          8. MoyestWithExcitement

            No, it just illustrates your hilarious inability to understand, well, most things.

          9. Clampers Outside!

            “Oh, it’s legal? Then it’s perfectly morally acceptable…”

            Jaysus Moyest, calm will ya…. you’re losin’ the bit of logic left in your argument by equating legal with moral.

    1. Owen C

      Look, no getting around the issue that the government has been caught completely off guard on this. They are now fighting a PR battle from a couple of goals down.

      Morally/tax justice etc it looks (rightly) terrible, but the EU works on technocratic rules and treaties, so the Irish government actually has that on its side (Vestager was loose on some of these issues yesterday). The issue here is about legality, not appropriateness (though that is a separate and related issue and one which will be addressed on a much broader scale in any case). It is hard to argue about “special deals”, “selective treatment” etc if these rules were hard coded into Irish tax law (which they were) and available to other corporates, so it will be interesting to see what the ECJ thinks of this.

      1. Clampers Outside!

        Your grasp is refreshing, lacking in any emotion, and is clear and concise stating the whole picture which is more than I can say for Richard, Ann-Marie and I’m sure Julien if he were not on holiers.

        Thanks for your posts on this, genuinely… as whats her name would say.

      2. manonfire

        Folks we cant forget ethics, sociopaths have no ethics, we irish (im hoping..) strive to be better
        legality and ethical principles are fair way apart on this one

        In conclusion: Your all correct in some degree or another

        best not to mudsling

          1. Nigel

            A iboney phone of detention?

            The key to credibility with you is the ability to post YouTube clips?

            You pee everywhere?

          2. manonfire

            HI folks your tuned into the last word with Nigel..
            Todayon the show ill be talking about bitterness and coming to terms with loss..

          3. manonfire

            “dictionary in one hand, bottle of vodka and shotgun in the other”

            My names Nigel and this is how i roll..

          1. manonfire

            See how you can watch the clips Nigel
            What happened to your clip again?
            I dont remember watching it.. Was it good?
            I seem to remember you pleading with me to watch it…

            Was it broken?

      3. :-Joe

        Fair point, well put but regardless of what happens in this case Ireland still needs to break free of the FDI dependancy myth. It’s all bs propped up by lies.

        We need direct investment from our own financial system (i.e. banks being forced to offer cheap credit to entrepeneurs instead of investing abroad just for profit alone) and not from foreign corporate vultures masquerading as a solution that in reality couldn’t be further from the truth.


      4. Lush

        Owen, did I read somewhere that the actual ruling was not related to tax issues, but to competition issues?

          1. manonfire

            I said that to Owen earlier hes still correct about it being legal though, its legal just very very unethical

          2. manonfire

            remember these savvy tech companies flocked here even when the game was up because they could make so much savings in tax and could either appeal or lobby down the relative fine or tax return

      5. rory

        “It is hard to argue about “special deals”, “selective treatment” etc if these rules were hard coded into Irish tax law (which they were) and available to other corporates, so it will be interesting to see what the ECJ thinks of this.”

        Andy was arguing the same point yesterday.
        But that would mean the Irish government would have to point out that they’re a tax haven for a load of other corporates to get out of a 13 billion euro tax windfall.
        We’d be a laughing stock.

  3. Gaz

    “The over 5,000 people who work for Apple in Cork do real work – they create wealth and profits for Apple.

    However, the vast majority of Apple’s ‘activity’ in Ireland has been nothing of the sort – it is simply a con to ensure that they don’t pay any tax.”

    I’m sure the Apple workers in Cork will be delighted to read this.

    1. forfeckssake

      The ‘activity’ refers to business done outside of Ireland which were then reported by Apple as being taxable here and then funnelled into their HQ company which is not registered to pay tax anywhere. This instrument allowed them to avoid huge amounts of tax.

      The 5000 workers in Ireland ware not involved in this activity.

    2. Nigel

      Can’t be much fun to be reduced to the state of hostages against an amoral corporation getting a sweet quasi-legal tax deal, either.

  4. Jake38

    Whatever about Apple and its tax obligations, this country would be a depopulated wasteland if it were not for multinational investment.

    If Murphy was in charge it would be a socialist depopulated wasteland.

    1. Neilo

      No great fan of David McWilliams but his description of an Ireland sans FDI as ‘Albania with brutal weather’ is a a doozy.

    2. Rob_G

      We could always do a forced nationalisation of Apple, as Paul Murphy’s colleague Ruth Coppinger suggested we should do with the Dell factory in Limerick.

      1. Owen C

        “It means developing an industrial policy based on democratic public ownership of the key resources and sources of wealth in our economy and planning to meet people’s needs.”

        He’s not a million miles from that position…

    3. :-Joe

      I hope for the sake of others around you, you’re never allowed to be involved in the decision making process involving any kind of economic policy for anyone or anything at any time.

      Trust me, just leave this one to the other more mature and intelligent people.

      Have a nice day.


  5. rotide

    I LOVE the way he invokes the ‘won’t somebody think of the children’ literally two paragraphs after he tells us to think of the children.

  6. :-Joe

    100% bang on the money,

    It’s refreshing to hear an elected politician actually speak with basic common sense and truth on serious issues that affect all Irish citizens so greatly.

    Another fine example of why you’re a bloody first class stupid ignorant soab-db if you keep voting for the FF/FG establichment cronyism for the benefit of the international corparate business class party.

    Scumbags are running rampant all over the place…

    Maith an fear Paul Murphy, more of the same please….


  7. Sheik Yahbouti

    Ah, it’s great to hear from Owen and Jake. “the idealism of youth” appears to be a very scarce commodity in this country these days. Lads, I’ve just thought of a beezer wheeze. You know Thailand and the Phillipines have a multi hundred billion dollar sex tourism industry – why couldn’t we horn in on that? Planeloads of paedophiles heading our way for a change. We have loads of pale skinned kids, who speak English. Hotels full, airlines busy, children learning the meaning of a hard days work – what’s not to love about it. It would definitely generate the employment you lads are so keen on.

    1. Neilo

      No jobs, no taxes, no socialist superstate. Jobs in green energy, me ring: what, we’re going to knock out solar panels cheaper than China? This is on a par with a SF councillor telling me several years ago that the fishing industry would employ all the college graduates left jobless after ‘we throw out the American companies’.

  8. Jake38

    “You know Thailand and the Phillipines have a multi hundred billion dollar sex tourism industry…”

    I didn’t. How did you find it?

  9. Sheik Yahbouti

    Wot, a fine, thrusting, entrepreneurial/business type like yourself is unaware of overseas commerce? pish tush.

  10. Increasing Displacement

    Know a few companies, more than a few, that are certainly here for the good labour force but much more than that they are here for the preferential taxes. Don’t know if they would be here just for the labour force. There’s another across the Irish Sea with more choice, English speakers and better services.

  11. Steve

    FG shrill here – what Kenny et al have come out with in the last two days is an embarrassment.

    Hardest three words of my life coming up….agree with Murphy*

    *finds sickbag

  12. Mourinho

    What are peoples opinions on Michael O’Leary’s stance.

    Don’t appeal it. Send the EU a letter saying fupp off.

  13. Mourinho

    What are peoples opinions on Michael O’Leary’s stance.

    Don’t appeal it. Send the EU a letter saying f off.

    1. forfeckssake

      That he is an attention seeking millionaire trying to promote his own business who himself would like to have as many opportunities as possible for Ryanair to avoid tax in Ireland.

  14. Tish Mahorey

    @ Nikkeboentje

    Your rounding on mothers with children is an amazing example of invoking a manufactured common enemy to the blame for the ills of society which in fact are caused by decades of the Irish Government policy of planned social apartheid. That being the division of Ireland into a small professional and financial/legal class class who use the state coffers and majority of people for their fees.

    1. Nikkeboentje

      What? I never mentioned anything about “mothers with children”. I referred to people who have children who cannot afford them. I would love an Alfa Romeo 8C Competition, but I cannot afford one, let alone the running costs and insurance. Therefore, I saved my money and bought something I could comfortably afford. It is very simply, if you cannot afford something, don’t get/have it!

      1. MoyestWithExcitement

        Having sex is not the same as buying a car. Holy crap, like. Seriously, right wing talking points are INCREDIBLY dumb.

        1. Nikkeboentje

          How many times! People can has as much sex as they want but if you cannot afford a child or do not want a child then use contraception. Simple!

          1. MoyestWithExcitement

            Are you under the impression all children are planned or something? Honestly, right wingers live in a complete fantasy.

      2. Nigel

        People have had children in situations a lot more dire and hopeless than being poor in a reasonably civilised country with a social safety net, health care, decent educational system and fairly solid opportunities for social mobility. In fact, thanks to sex ed and contraception, they tend to have less children now than in historical times of war. plague and tyranny.

  15. 15 cent

    absolutely completely spot on. we really really need a change of government or we will always be treated as cash cows for the rich.

  16. jambon

    You always know you’re shaking the right (Apple) tree when the monkeys ensconced start screeching about how the notion of fairness is tantamount to setting the country up as a Communist regime. Also, the shilling on here today is another indicator that they are worried their time at the gravy trough may soon be coming to a sticky end.

  17. Junkface

    The real issue on this Apple tax dodge is:
    Did the Irish Gov’t clearly communicate its planned methods of Taxation for large Multinationals and the fact that they could take advantage of 0.05% Tax to the EU in 1991 and 2007?

    I think the answer is No. The appeal will therefore fail.

    1. :-Joe

      Yes, hopefully this will be the case.

      It might help people wake up from the dreamworld and do something positive for the economy.


  18. nellyb

    Apple can afford to pay more than 0.05% taxes. Comfortably, without cr@pping on the advanced tax arrangements parade. I hope Larry Ellison or Benioff or the like gives Cooke some beating for being stupid greedy b0lliX. 0.05% tax prices out indigenous companies and IS bad for business, let along the irish nation (is it a thing anymore btw?)

    1. :-Joe

      …well apart from the typo’s like 0.005% etc.
      Still spot on tho…

      Yet again, it’s the bs FDI myth that so many deluded people are happy to swallow with the help of spoonfull’s of lies by the establishment and it’s own intellectual propagandists via their media machine.


        1. :-Joe

          Ye, I used the correct perrcentage instead of the typo to highlight the previous typo.

          It’s now turning into a typo black hole of madness…


  19. David

    How many more companies have got a similar deal to apple? Who are they are how much do they owe us?

  20. Steve

    One slight inconsistency on this.

    Water charges = EU commission need to stay out of our business!!!

    Apple finding = thank god for the EU commission

    1. Nigel

      Actually it’s quite consistent, since both relate to incidences of our government screwing things up to an hilarious degree.

    2. some old queen

      I think you will find it is the other way around.

      Enda said “You will have to pay water tax now” after the last (unofficial) utterance from EU yet when it says Apple’s sweetheart deal is illegal, we are to fight tooth and nail.

        1. some old queen

          It had been obvious for a very long time that when it suits, the EU has been used as the great bogeyman.

          The EU has called this ‘arrangement’ out and I am pretty sure they know the predicted outcome of an appeal before proceeding yesterday. It stinks to the high heavens and I expect other multi nationals are also affected.

          1. sǝɯǝɯʇɐpɐq

            Bang on the button SOQ.
            …’I am pretty sure they know the predicted outcome of an appeal before proceeding yesterday.’

            Not only that, but they know which boards they’ll be paid handsomly to to sit on when they get bored with ‘representing’ the people of Oireland.

            It’s a big joke, and the punchline is coming soon.

  21. 15 cent

    corporate rate of tax is 12.5% so when apple paid 0.005% it would have been known by the collectors. obviously. so when Noonan is on his interview circuit, why dont people simply ask him one question over and over until he answers it; Why did they pay so much less than the going corporate rate of tax?

  22. jimmy russell

    “Instead of “committees of the rich”, we need a left government with socialist policies committed to sustainable development. That means forcing the corporations and rich to pay their taxes.”

    my f*cking sides, I cant breathe

    1. sǝɯǝɯʇɐpɐq

      The animosity that’s leveled at Paul Murphy on this site is always suspicious..
      – Today it drifted into the absurd…like a bunch of 12yr olds trying to look like they’re 15ys old.

      It’s quite funny.

      Broadsheet, you have excelled yourselves.
      -Take a bow…let me kick you in the ass.
      -Thank you.

      I live in Paul’s constituency. Most of you don’t.
      He’ll ALWAYS get my No.1.
      – Suck on that.

      1. spudnick

        What part of his manifesto appealed to you in particular?

        The ‘Unlimited methylated spirits for the compulsively internet addicted’ bit?

        1. sǝɯǝɯʇɐpɐq

          Ah spudknickers, thank you for asking that question.
          It’s people like you who make me stay up late.

          Where do I begin..?

          For a start, using the word ‘manifesto’ is wrong, unless you’re talking about a pretty decent Roxy Music album from 1979. You’re thinking of ‘AGENDA’, and if he has one I’m not aware of it.

          Can I just say that Paul Murphy is right, and I agree with everything he says above, and that you are wrong, even though you say absolutely nothing?

          Will that do?

      2. :-Joe

        I’d vote for him too in a heartbeat if he was in my area.

        & go suck a lemon if you don’t like it…


  23. :-Joe

    Paul Murphy the scourge of all that’s great I hear you say, eh?

    Well I don’t think so, that would be a a big no. The fact that some people on here act like he’s some extremist communist that’s also anti-capatilism would be hilarious if it wasn’t so disturbing. It shows you how far some of the minds have gone when basic common sense is branded as extremist political ideaology.

    All he is and has been talking about for a long time is basic equality and justice for Irish citizens. Seriously, how dumb can some of you be that you can’t see this?…

    Take “capatalism” as a term and it’s meaning. True classical capatilism does not even exist anywhere and wouldn’t survive a day if it did right now. The west and it’s governments are all state-capitalist systems which are run as a completely different beast alltogether from what capatilism actually is.

    So all you morons who claim that this free market capatalist system you’re living in is better than a communist led extreme socialist quagmire are completely deluded. Neither one of those scenarios exists or is ever likely to exist outside your own fantasy polemicised mind trap that you’ve been conditioned into believing since you were born. Red vs Blue team.

    Learn the difference between the dictionary definition of a term, the meaning, the coloquial understanding of the meaning and the actual technical meaning that politicians use a term for. Most of the terms you hear and use “Technnically” do not even mean what you think they do and politicians know this.

    Or you could just keep on being nicely programmed and inducted into believing yet another lie that keeps the grand illusion alive and well… All at your own expense and everyone else’s in the long term.

    Unless some of you are actually 1%’ers, which wouldn’t really surprise me the way this basket case of a country is being run…


      1. :-Joe

        Tell me more about how we suddenly became so close that we are almost related because you find my writing so enjoyable.


Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link