Sometimes, print media doesn’t show a good comparison of intellectual debates when it occurs on different days. Most people who don’t read newspapers regularly would not have bothered about these two letters that appeared last Wed and today in the Straits Times, regarding the spike in COE (Certificate of Entitlement for vehicles) that saw the paper slips soaring to S$36,089 for cars above 1600cc.
That’s why I’ve pasted these two ST Forum letters together:
Mar 31, 2010 – COE price spike: Govt not entirely right
SECOND Minister for Transport Lim Hwee Hua’s view (‘COE spikes not due to formula change: Lim Hwee Hua’; Monday), that the Government’s new formula to determine the number of replacement COEs was unconnected to the surge in prices of certificates of entitlement in the latest exercise, bears scrutiny.
The change to the new formula coincided with the exercise. The Straits Times also indicated bigger-than-expected cuts in COE supply after the new formula was announced by Transport Minister Raymond Lim (‘Big drop in COEs ahead’, March 12).
While Mrs Lim is right in pointing out that the number of COEs allocated was a function of the number of cars deregistered, it is equally true that the function was changed. Certainly, other factors such as the economic recovery led to the price spike. But it is unfair to suggest that the Government was entirely not responsible.
First, there is no objective, scientific way to determine whether the new formula could not have caused the sharp spike in COE prices. Second, the policy was formulated by the Government.
A more considered response – which acknowledges that the COE formula was one of several factors that led to the rise in COE prices – would have been more appropriate.
A more measured response would have encouraged public discourse rather than give the impression that public feedback was unnecessary because the Government is right.
Tan Jiaqi
Apr 4, 2010 – Old formula doesn’t mean more COEs
I REFER to Mr Tan Jiaqi’s letter, ‘COE price hike: Govt not entirely right’, on Wednesday.
Mr Tan asserts that the new formula for certificate of entitlement (COE) quota, which comes into effect this month, was one reason for the rise in COE prices in the recent bidding exercise last month.
Both the old and new COE formulas aim to replace deregistered vehicles through the COE supply. Under the old formula, the number of vehicles deregistered is based on projections derived from historical trends. The new methodology merely does away with the need to project deregistrations by basing the number of replacement COEs on the actual number of vehicles taken off the road in the most recent six-month period. In doing so, the new formula provides a COE supply that is more responsive to changes in vehicle deregistration patterns, and is not subject to errors in projection.
The change in formula in itself does not result in a significant change in COE quotas. If there is a trend of more vehicles being deregistered, then both the new and old formulas would provide for a higher COE quota. Likewise, if there are fewer vehicles being deregistered, the COE quota will fall regardless of the formula used.
The cut in the COE quota announced last month was a direct result of there being fewer vehicle registrations recently. It is wrong to conclude that if the Government had kept to the old formula, there would have been more COEs.
In its review of the COE formula, the Land Transport Authority sought the views of the various motor trading associations, which were generally supportive of the proposal. In deciding on the change, the Government took into account their feedback, to use a six-month recycling period to allow the industry time to adjust.
Phua Hooi Boon
Director (Land Transport Division)
Ministry of Transport
I highlighted the sentence above in red because anyone in Singapore who owns a car, or wants to own one, should rightly be astounded by Mr (or is it Ms? Not sure about gender here…you’d never know these days) Phua’s response.
Let’s get some facts clear:
1. The COE system was designed to control the number of cars on the roads in our tiny island. According to LTA’s website:
The Vehicle Quota System was implemented on 1 May 1990. Under this system, LTA determines the number of new vehicles allowed for registration while the market determines the price of owning a vehicle.
2. Over the years, the vehicle population has shot up faster than the network of roads can absorb. According to ST, from 2005 to 2008, Singapore’s vehicle population growth rate ranged from 3.8 per cent to 6.5 per cent – above the stipulated 3 per cent ceiling (see story below).
This has led to frequent traffic jams and congestion around many parts of the island during peak hours. Even during non-peak hours, a traffic accident on one highway like AYE can spread to other highways like PIE due to the small road network size, and width of the roads.
3. This is obviously because the car quota system hasn’t worked. Why hasn’t it worked? Because the old formula was based on projections (or rather, assumptions) of how many cars would be deregistered over a fixed period. This is obviously flawed because car purchases can shoot up due to introductions of new models alone, which is something the LTA doesn’t keep track of, or a booming economy.
4. The new formula is based on actual number of registrations and so would obviously work better to keep the car population in check because the trending can then be controlled by the Govt. rather than irrational market forces.
Thus, the change in formula is designed to drive a significant change in the COE quota – one that keeps our vehicle population growth in check.
So why is LTA not able to just admit that the old formula was wrong (ie. LTA was wrong)? Their mistakes and assumptions have led to really unpleasant traffic situations today. Look, the issue is not about COE pricing in itself – there’s really no other logical way to keep vehicle numbers down apart from making it unaffordable to most people.
Even if it costs $500,000 to own a Toyota Altis, the goal of the COE system would have been achieved if the car population was kept in check as a result (and even many rich guys and top civil servants have to squeeze in the MRT with us).
The issue is that LTA’s poorly thought-out policies created the traffic situation we’re in today – despite all the expensive implementations of ERP, COE and what not - and yet they are quick to distance themselves from it when they are questioned by a diplomatically-written letter.
Or maybe they didn’t get the point of Tan Jiaqi’s original letter.
These days, the Govt is trying to reach out to more people using social media or new online platforms. I say that’s all a waste of time when you can’t even acknowledge the facts on a public issue and take responsibility for your older policies. It’s exasperating to read such official responses and that’s not the way to take constructive feedback from the public.
Anyway, thank goodness for straight-talking, intelligent journalists who tell it like it is. Have a read of Christopher Tan’s column from this week on the COE issue.
Mar 30, 2010 – Steep COE prices may not be the best way to keep cars off the road
By Christopher Tan
SENIOR CORRESPONDENT
IT IS easy to forget the core purpose of the certificate of entitlement (COE) system, with feelings boiling over following last week’s unprecedented increases in premiums.
The system, implemented in 1990, has one purpose and one purpose only: to control vehicle population growth so Singapore does not become a giant carpark.
The system has been fine-tuned over the years, with the latest tweak announced two weeks ago. With the change, the supply of COEs will be determined every six months, with each allotment determined largely by the number of vehicles taken off the road in the preceding six-month period.
The Government also took the opportunity to correct an oversupply of certificates that persisted in the previous system, which was based on forecast deregistration numbers.
The oversupply resulted in roads being noticeably crowded in recent years.
From 2005 to 2008, Singapore’s vehicle population growth rate ranged from 3.8 per cent to 6.5 per cent – above the stipulated 3 per cent ceiling.
The result? An almost 25 per cent increase in the vehicle population to more than 930,000 in the past five years.
The Land Transport Authority (LTA) has tried to remedy the oversupply by trimming recent COE supplies. Last September, it announced the supply from October to March this year would be 16 per cent smaller than the previous six-month period’s, which was itself 24 per cent down from the previous quota. This was on top of a halving of the allowable annual growth rate to 1.5 per cent.
It did not quite work. Last year, the vehicle population rose by 3.4 per cent – more than double the new cap.
Then came the sledgehammer two weeks ago. With the new supply formula, as well as the adjustment for oversupply, the new COE quota kicking in next month will be nearly 30 per cent smaller.
The surgery is the worst for the category of cars up to 1,600cc. This mainstay of car buyers will see a 40 per cent shrinkage.
The car market reacted to the new supply the way most “free” markets react in such situations. It panicked.
Frenzied bidding drove COE premiums through the roof at last week’s tender – the last before the new quota period. Car premiums ended about $10,000 higher. With speculators fuelling the frenzy, the Open category, which is a proxy for car buyers, chalked up the biggest gain of $14,000.
In percentage terms, the increases were the highest since the COE system began 20 years ago, barring the recoveries from isolated freak results. As a result, car prices soared – by more than $20,000 in some cases.
Such increases are, to say the least, undesirable. They are a shock to the system, and change overnight the landscape for car buyers and sellers alike. Other than the banks and finance companies, no one is happy. But if this is the price for maintaining a sustainable vehicle population and relatively unclogged roads, no thinking person will object.
But is COE the only tool to achieve this end? Obviously, it is not. We have electronic road pricing (ERP).
Introduced in 1998, ERP targets the real cause of congestion: indiscriminate car usage in high-density areas during peak hours.
Has ERP been utilised to its full potential? In my opinion, no.
More gantries can be erected and switched on. Rates can be higher. Better still, roll out the distance-based charging system the LTA has been studying for a decade now.
Admittedly, ERP may be more politically unpalatable than COE. The latter is often forgotten once the consumer pays for the car. In fact, even the recent price spikes will become “painless” when amortised over the years through monthly instalments.
ERP, on the other hand, is a daily reminder of the cost of driving a car. With every beep of the reader, every dollar amount flashed, the driver feels the pinch.
And so it should be. ERP is designed to remind drivers of their contribution to congestion. It works, too, judging by the cases of luxury cars stopping by road shoulders to wait for gantries to be switched off.
But it is not working well enough. On roads such as the Central Expressway, East Coast Parkway and Pan-Island Expressway, traffic is heavy even with ERP. Ditto the city centre.
In the case of the latter, there is another more effective tool to curb usage: parking charges. While city parking charges have gone back up to pre-recessionary levels, they are still relatively low compared with those in many developed cities.
With higher usage charges, Singapore can afford to have more people owning cars, a key aspiration in all affluent societies. When ERP was introduced, the Government released extra COEs into the system (that is, over and above the number of COEs pegged to vehicles taken off the road).
The same principle can apply again. Expand ERP and release more COEs. Otherwise, rising car prices will persuade more people to keep their current cars, which in turn will mean fewer deregistrations in the future.
And that can only mean continued COE quota contractions ahead.
With Singapore’s growing population, this could eventually lead to six-figure premiums, although industry players say that is unlikely now.
The last piece of the puzzle is, of course, a speedy, well-connected and comfortable public transport system. If people are to drive less into the city, they must have access to alternatives that are nearly as viable as the car.
Otherwise, they will continue to drive, and gripe about high charges.
christan@sph.com.sg
Sometimes, people tell me that I write well. I disagree, because I will never be as good as Roger Ebert or Stephen King.
Do read Ebert’s loving tribute to his dad here. I wish I could write a similar piece for my late mum, but I think it’ll be many, many years before I can muster the strength and bravery to do it.
An excerpt:
Until the day he died, I always called him "Daddy." He was Walter Harry Ebert, born in Urbana in 1902 of parents who had immigrated from Germany. His father, Joseph, was a machinist working for the Peoria & Eastern Railway, known as the Big Four. Daddy would take me out to the Roundhouse on the north side of town to watch the big turntables turning steam engines around. In our kitchen, he always used a knife "your grandfather made from a single piece of steel."
This is the ninth chapter of my (hopefully to be published) book, Some Things I Wish Someone Had Told Me Earlier.
At time of writing, I just completed two weeks of tough reservist training on 12 Mar 2010, and one of the things that come to mind every time I go back to SAF is the issue of respect.
I think many young 19-year-olds assume that having a bar on the shoulder automatically meant that lower-ranked people should listen to you. This sad scenario doesn’t change even 10 or 20 years later, even though everyone has grown up, is earning their own keep and many have become parents. It’s impossible to pull rank on mature adults, so the only way is to influence people who are willing to listen to you based on how much they respect you.
And what puzzles me, back then and now, is how so many people don’t know that:
Respect is earned, not a given.
I don’t think I should go into a tirade about how one earns respect, but I’d like to share some general observations on who are the kinds of people who command my utmost respect.
Sometimes, you get a mix of a few of the below points in the same person, which is a great thing to experience. Often, you get none at all.
1. People who are truly good at what they do, and do not claim to be good at what they’re not.
Only consistent hard work, experience and a dash of inborn talent is required for this. I once knew someone who kept telling his platoon to do well for their IPPT fitness test, when he himself was unable to.
And really, if you’ve worked with enough people, it’s very easy to spot someone who’s good at what he does. The same goes for spotting people who are just eloquent with little substance.
This is especially so when you have talented people in the group who demand that their leaders be better than them in order for respect to be dished out.
But circumstances or politics often forces us to keep mum about what we see. Why stir trouble when you can’t change the person? Just dial down the Respectometer lor.
2. People who truly mean and practice what they say, and not repeat theory from some self-help book.
The key thing here is all about being sincere.
Talk is cheap, and remembering theory is easy. But I’ve seen so many people fail to grasp what the theory means in practice. You can see it in their eyes when they’re not sincere. They’re not interested in getting down and dirty with the work everyone is doing, but sometimes, they’re just focused on claiming the credit or limelight.
Having worked in the media for a long time, it’s obvious when someone is just saying things for the sake of doing so. That’s also how I avoided carrying out interviews that would never provide the info or quotes I needed.
3. People who really care for others and their feelings.
It’s easy to take command of a platoon or a business group, because you’ve been appointed to the job. It’s another thing to take on the cares and woes of every individual within the group, and develop them for greater things. There are some who desire so badly to be a leader or people manager, but who wants an uncaring person to lead for them? They won’t back you up when you’re down.
There are those who do try to care, but often they put their own interests before others and it shows too. The question here is whether you’re willing to be a selfless sacrificial lamb or learn how to manage people’s expectations that you’re not exactly a saint. I can respect these people if their self-interest does not bring down the situation or is actually necessary for the greater good, but there are many who won’t.
So, what will make you respect someone else?
 My new Bam! violin case in gorgeous metallic blue.
The first violin case that came with the purchase of Sombre Jack in 2001 was pretty compact and light, but had cheap plastic parts and really horrible, uncomfortable thin backstraps. That lasted for until this year when one of the violin instructors accidentally stepped on the case during the school concert and broke the clasp. Not a bad lifespan for a bundled casing lah (but it costs over $200 if you buy it separately!)
I then spent over $270 to get a more durable case that was made in Korea. It’s tough alright, but being a big rectangular block with many zips and straps, I got pretty fed up carrying it around town. It was just too bulky, despite providing top notch protection and having plenty of storage space.
So I put in a reservation for a Bam! Hightech Contoured (2002XL) case, which met all my criteria:
Super compact in a triangular form factor and easy to carry around.
Lightweight, at about 1.6kg, made of ABS (Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene) material which is something like fibreglass.
Looks uber-cool, I mean, I’m really sick of carrying ugly, boxy looking violin cases, or seeing other people carry them. Most young students have no choice but to carry them, since their parents just want to save money and get the cheapest functional stuff. But hey, I’m an adult, I earn my own keep and if my violin doesn’t look good, I don’t look good. (Still working on the sound quality though!)
The Synwin guys told me that it’s hard to get enough stock from Bam, as their factory stock allocation can be both small and unpredictable. Or maybe because it’s a French sales tactic, since Bam hails from the land of romance and angry writers.
So when Synwin called me yesterday to say that a partial shipment had arrived, I ran down today to their Marina Square outlet.
Upon seeing the case, released in a gorgeous automobile blue hue I had never seen before (I thought it only came in black and silver), I had no qualms forking over S$770, or frigging double the cost of a usual case. Every component is of pretty high quality – even the strap clasps are hardcore carabiners with screw locks (it’s mountain climbing gear quality). I love the two locking clasps, because they are soft-touch yet very secure.
I quickly took pictures of the Bam case because it’s gonna get dented and scratched pretty soon, and I foresee many superhero or Doraemon stickers adorning it in the future. If you’re buying a violin/cello case, I think you’ll like a Bam!
I just finished this year’s IPPT test and I should thank God for seeing me through yet another year. The test was held during my ongoing incamp training and I was worried about a stretched hamstring and strained right ankle sustained from last week’s virgin snow ski experience.
Well, I didn’t have to worry about those two medical issues at all, because when I started my shuttle run station, I pulled a left rear muscle above my thigh!
That prevented me from getting a good score on the shuttle run, but I managed to do pretty ok for the rest of the stations (chin-up, standing broad jump, situps and 2.4km run) because those didn’t really use the affected muscle.
If the records are right, I should be getting another silver award (yay, $200!) for the fourth year running. Looks like all these months of waking up at 5.30am for a quick jog around the estate has actually paid off.
As I hobbled home with a strained body tonight, several things struck me.
- I’ve been doing IPPT since I was 10 years old. That’s 24 years of physical testing! When will this horror end? Unlike some friends who’ve already finished their national service quota, I seem to be stuck in limbo with my unit mates.
- I’m probably fitter now than I’ve ever been in the past decade. Journalism wasn’t good for my fitness – I drove around and sat on my seat too much. The irregular hours meant no time to exercise at all.
Today, in my current job, I have regular working hours and I walk at least 2km a day to the MRT and to the office and back.
Here’s how my 2.4km score has improved (well, overall) over the past few years
- 2007 – 12 min 10 sec
- 2008 – 11 min 52 sec
- 2009 – 11 min 55 sec
- 2010 – 11 min 11 sec
This is not me showing off, because I used to clock below ten minutes regularly in the 1990s (now that’s me showing off, 15 years too late)!
But just sharing that despite my disdain for IPPT, I do admit it’s kept me on my toes and my heart pumping for a long time. I remember, during my uni days, I didn’t exercise much and I nearly fainted after my IPPT in 2000, after over two years of physical inactivity.
But IPPT is also a sad reminder of how our bodies gradually break down over time.
No matter how hard I train, I don’t think I can possibly return to the days when we were 18 and could finish off a 2.4km run without flailing around for breath or balance. I’ve never pulled any muscle in the past, but today’s incident was a grim reminder that those days of being a flexible youth are long gone.
What upsets me most, is no matter how much I jog regularly, my double chin wouldn’t stop expanding! But how can I ignore good food? Sigh, the choices we make, have greater impact as we get older.
And what is IPPT anyway, you say? Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPPT_Award_Badge
One of the more surprising announcements from the PMA event – Sony’s jumping into the small hybrid dSLR space too, after Olympus and Panasonic made a big splash with their Micro Four Thirds cameras (Pen and GF1 respectively) over the past 7 months. They showed off some concept prototypes (above) and plan to launch by the end of this year.
From PC Magazine:
Even though Sony is late to the market of small-body camera with interchangeable lenses, its camera will likely produce better-quality images than Micro Four-Thirds cameras because it will use a larger 24-mm by 16-mm APS-C image sensor, as opposed to the 17-mm by 13-mm sensor found in current Olympus and Panasonic cameras. The sensor, Sony’s Exmore APS HD CMOS, will also allow the camera to capture video using the AVCHD codec – a standard that can produce high-quality 1080p footage.
Sony Answers Micro Four Thirds Challenge
Excuse me, but Sony isn’t late to the party at all. It’s only just started.
I’ll admit I’ve been a SLR snob, refusing to touch any Sony dSLR largely because of my Canon fanboy status. (Also because no one asked me to try one when I was a tech journo. Will not comment further on Sony PR back in the mid 2000s.)
The Pen changed my perspective on the smaller camera players other than Canon and Nikon though.
Now despite my resistance against their Alpha cameras, I think Sony has a good shot at winning in this niche where Oly and Pana dominate now.
Why?
1. Despite rocky financials, Sony has never wavered in pushing the limits in industrial design. Their VAIO laptops are unsurpassed in style within the PC space. Anyone who’s owned a Sony MiniDisc knows they were beautiful machines. The prototypes above look boring, but the final version could surprise everyone.
2. A bigger image sensor than the MFT family. At almost 43% larger surface area, and at the same sensor size as many APS-C dSLRs today, the Sony cameras will provide true dSLR quality. The MFT sensor size is better than a digicam sensor, but gets really grainy at about ISO 1600. APS-C sensors today have really quite low noise at the same film sensitivity.
I love my Pen, but if a better Pen equivalent comes along, why not? These are the future of prosumer cameras, and they can’t come soon enough.
In 3-4 years, I predict that conventional dSLRs will go back to becoming niche products for enthusiasts and professionals, while these smaller hybrid dSLR cameras will cream the mid to high end of the mass audience.
Methinks prices need to reach these levels though (in Singapore currency) before hybrid dSLRs become mainstream, given current consumer price tolerance (which is elastic over a long period).
- Digicams (small compacts): $150 to $600
- Hybrid dSLRs (MFT, Alpha smalls dSLRs) : S$600 to S$1,000
- Conventional dSLRs (the usual guys): S$900 and above.
One interesting thing to note though – if you see the prototypes above, the lenses are a little too big for the bodies, which is natural given that these are dSLR-sized lenses, not smaller MFT lenses. It’ll be a big challenge to design an ergonomic camera with this constraint, but personally I don’t care as long as the images look good.
Several axioms I’ve learnt and committed to memory in recent days.
Mediocrity begins with a closed mind. People who refuse to step into the shoes of others are doomed to live their lives out with a narrow perspective. Sounds like common sense, but you’d be surprised how many people refuse to take off their rose-tinted glasses.
People only go on the defensive when you go on the offensive. Some people have little idea how to evaluate matters in an objective manner, which in turn forces people to take a defensive stance that leads to little positive outcome. If you want to go on the offensive, use facts, not assumptions to build your case.
 I feel like Abe Simpson sometimes….what did I just say?
I’m quite relieved that Google Buzz tanked upon its launch. Not because I don’t like their products, but because I’m really tired of this whole new social media paradigm that is making people communicate in rather unhealthy ways.
We don’t need another social media platform and another massive time-suck, for goodness sake!
We’ve reached a stage in cyberspace where suddenly, it’s cool to be navel-gazing or to put every single thought up for display in public.
Yes, this coming from me – one who updates my status in Facebook several times a day to the amazement or horror of some friends – might seem ironic and contradictory.
But Facebook is in its own league of communications and allows people to shape conversations on their own time and space.
Given its massive user base (400m at time of writing), it’s an incredible way of connecting with friends and sharing stuff you could never do so before using your own website/blog/homepage. It combines the visual, the aural, and the verbal in truly useful ways.
Compare this to Twitter, which seems to have spawned a generation of people who cannot help but keep putting up 140 character updates on every little small thing. Already, I check FB too frequently, but you have to double or triple that frequency when using Twitter!
There are folks and companies which truly use Twitter in a controlled manner and post useful information, but having tried to be a Twitterer several times over the past few years, I really find it to be a high-risk platform where I might blurt out something I’d truly regret.
And for what purpose? Millions of tweets go unread every day, a far higher frequency than Facebook postings.
For me, the worst thing about Twitter is that its so “un-visual”. Everything has to be squashed into a TinyURL or Bit-ly link.
Let me detour a bit to the marketing profession on a related rant.
There are some..make that many, marketers who now believe that one should ply all their energies into Facebook and Twitter. I don’t disagree with them as marketing platforms (heck, I set up our Xbox fanpage and maintain it daily), but one should not miss the forest for the trees.
Just because you are using social media, doesn’t make you a good marketer. And just because you’re getting some fancy numbers, doesn’t mean you’re moving the needle where it counts.
The fundamentals of using all the marketing levers, old and new, is still critical especially in Asia where old media continues to rule mindshare. You’d be surprised to know how many marketers I’ve seen who don’t understand old media, or outdoor publicity to begin with. Those fundamentals cannot be ignored because we live in a real world, not a virtual one.
The thing people (who get enamoured with social networks) keep forgetting is that the information you post on such networks is so fleeting, it hardly registers with the majority of people unless you keep grinding at it constantly and consistently.
Trust me, it’s hard to find the right people who can truly engage the public online. Xbox’s Major Nelson is one of the rare few who get it right and actually builds great affinity for the brand rather than just being a “corporate blog” (which is an oxymoron IMO, most corporate bloggers are dead boring and never reveal anything that is truly personal or worth re-reading).
And his tweets are always worth reading because he knows what he’s doing.
I often have to reserve my comments when people come and beat their chests and talk about social media marketing or digital PR. The truth is, the online space has millions of people but very few voices that actually matter. Unless you are willing to step in deep and present yourself as is, your voice will hardly rise above the din. Most people don’t dare to break that wall of privacy down and offer themselves to the masses.
There’s really too much information flooding everyone, and the scary thing is that we’re all contributing to the noise in increasing ways.
Now here’s another irony I’ve begun to observe– With social media, more is less. The more friends or followers people have on their platforms, the less they’ll notice a particular post from you, no matter how important you think it is. Unless you’re a celebrity or big personality, this rule will apply more often than not.
That said, I think Twitter is a unique tool for generating conversations in real time for people who enjoy it. But I seriously doubt it’ll last as social media fatigue sets in for more people.
For me, I’m sticking to Facebook, where I pace the conversation on my own terms, and Live Messenger, where it’s an actual exchange of thoughts with no peer pressure or interruption.
And Google Buzz? No time, gotta buzz off.
I guess I need to reduce the amount of noise I’m generating too.
|
Who Am I? My name is Ian Tan. I used to be a press photographer, a journalist and later a tech editor. Am now a regional marketing comms and public relations professional in Microsoft. This blog focuses on my likes, loves, technology, hobbies, the occasional rant against the system and represents my personal views.
Feel free to search through my blog using the box below.
How many people keep hitting on me
|
