I am a racist.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 3:40 am

Papa Willie wrote:
LTS TRN 2 wrote: That there should be no agency with governmental authority to protect America's environment?
That's fairly odd coming from somebody who is convinced that the very same government pulled off 9/11.

Checkmate.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 4:26 am

That's absurd. The proper role of government which I support has nothing to do with the sheer criminality of the Bush contagion, the PNAC agenda as it's been installed since the New Pearl Harbor, and certainly not the foreign government of the toxic apartheid state posing as a democracy in the Middle East--which plays the American congress like an accordion.

Where is your proper indignation at the disproportionate influence of AIPAC?

And why are you sucking the Koch brothers' collective nutsacks? You keep forgetting to mention...

Rooster · Post by **Rooster** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 4:30 am

I'm just curious, LTS-- and I may regret ever asking this --but what would you do with Israel? Dissolve it as a state? Let it sink or swim on its' own merits? Let it loose on the Middle East? What?

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 5:14 am

First, cut off all aid and stop using our UN veto power on its behalf. Next, root out the dual citizens in the government--and this is of course all but impossible, I'll admit. In short, stop allowing it to control us. And allow it to face the same international standards of moral behavior--or face the same sanctions that are doled out to those who abuse basic human rights, etc. As for prosecuting it as a proper international war criminal, etc., sure. But this is highly unlikely...duh!

The sheer criminality of Zionism is basically incalculable--extending now from its brazen crime of the New Pearl Harbor (a term coined by Dov Zakheim in his PNAC mission statement) into all areas of modern life.

Even if you don't believe the Zionists were behind 9/11, how do you accept the grossly disproportionate influence of AIPAC? Do you just curl and cower? Or are you Christers with the pathetic allegiance hardwired in?

Atomic Punk · Post by **Atomic Punk** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 7:30 am

LTS TRN 2 wrote: The sheer criminality of Zionism is basically incalculable--extending now from its brazen crime of the New Pearl Harbor (a term coined by Dov Zakheim in his PNAC mission statement) into all areas of modern life.

Even if you don't believe the Zionists were behind 9/11, how do you accept the grossly disproportionate influence of AIPAC? Do you just curl and cower? Or are you Christers with the pathetic allegiance hardwired in?

This was written when Dr. Phibes was in high school. It was in vogue in 2012.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 7:51 am

And who is "Dr Phibes"? i can't keep the trollage straight.

Papa Willie wrote: He's too ignorant to understand that he craves nazi protection, isn't he?

Do you mean Zionazi? The Bush family was closely working with the nazis, yes. So..? Did you fall from a potato truck?

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 8:48 am

AP, you are one of the few (very?) here who works in health care.
What is your take on Barrycare -- and what do you see with your own eyes happening to the health care system, so far?

Barrycare pros and cons?

Atomic Punk · Post by **Atomic Punk** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 9:35 am

poptart wrote:AP, you are one of the few (very?) here who works in health care.
What is your take on Barrycare -- and what do you see with your own eyes happening to the health care system, so far?

Barrycare pros and cons?

Pops, I'm going to let the tards think what they have in their 2006-era spreadsheets, etc. They have nothing else to live for. Screwey would only have his mop tell blame for being a loser if I sat him on the true Rod of Correction.

I am a nurse in a major national hospital system and I see many things. It depends on the widespread impact and implementation efforts of the ACA that the 0ccupant the people re-elected back to office has done thus far.

So far, it hasn't done much to those with money and/or good plans. It hasn't done anything for those truly in need. They aren't being helped by any new money. Those in need only hope someone will call 911 if they truly need it. The cost is and always has been on the taxpayers since day one for anyone legal or not... and it's on the US Taxpayers. This is true whether or not this law was passed.

The reality I see is those that are hard-working family types are the ones getting screwed. Their deductibles in CA can be over $6000/yr. Most stories I've heard are about in the same ballpark. All of those people lost their existing policies and had to sign up for "Covered California." I can tell a very long story or two...three... how they've lost reasonable insurance that worked for them prior. to the takeover Those effected are paying money for insurance, but the doctors aren't accepting their plans that were supposed to save them on average $2500/yr

Hope and change? You got it (D).

"Well, we have to pass it, to see what's in it."

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 9:46 am

A-punk..are you completely blotted on rubbing alcohol?

You're a nurse like this horse is about to win a fucking race..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w90nF1x2Rko

C'mon , get in the game...

Rooster · Post by **Rooster** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 11:31 am

Ok, LTS, so you'd let Israel sink or swim on their own merits then. So, when Palestine then becomes a state you'd have no problem with Israel crushing them once those rockets are launched across inviolate international borders in an act of war, right? And under internationally recognized rules of the spoils of war, Israel would then legally and morally be able to occupy the now defeated state of Palestine once and for all then too, am I correct? Because all the cards would be on the table-- no more propping up a Jewish state with American dollars, no more giving Palestinians the benefit of the doubt as to whether or not the occupation of Gaza or the West Bank is a legal action. All of Jerusalem could then be absorbed into Israel once and for all, no more Muslim claims to it because once a sovereign nation suffers an unprovoked attack then they are free to engage in a vigorous defense of their citizenry and borders.

You know this is the outcome of what you are proposing, right?

Left Seater · Post by **Left Seater** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 2:27 pm

LTS TRN 2 wrote:But as for questioning the government's constitutional authority and duty to protect the environment, it's simply the result of laws and agencies duly enacted by the congress.

Wrong. Congress has repeatedly shot down most EPA measures in the past decade or so. See carbon trading, Kyoto treaty, carbon taxes, cap and trade, etc. So what does the EPA do? They go to the President and have him issue an executive action of some type.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Sat Jan 03, 2015 5:00 pm

LTS TRN 2 wrote:
You're a nurse like this horse is about to win a fucking race..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w90nF1x2Rko

Is that...

...smack?

:?

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:22 pm

Get it straight. The Bush contagion did in fact have direct tied with the Nazis. But the casual tossing around of that term is misguided and misleading. Certainly the Zionists are in fact Zionazis, as the direct similarities are many indeed. The current control of congress--both parties-- is simply the deep pocket corporate interests like the Koch brothers--having been fully loosed by the radical activist Supreme Court with the Citizens United ruling.

And this extends directly to the congressional opposition to EPA rules and regulations. The EPA is most certainly a legitimate body, empowered by congress by way of its constitutional authority. The fact that the Kochs and so forth are able to buy congressional opposition is shameless and very dangerous to our nation's environment as well as the planet.

As for Israel, its legacy has been 66-years of lies, theft, and murder. It was formed under the most sordid and vile pretenses, and has proven itself to be the most criminal rouge state in modern history. Our cutting it off would not suddenly give it the incentive to cause further land theft and persecution of the Palestinians. And rooting out the dual citizens in our government would be a great thing. Why not? Why should this ruthless gangster apartheid state hold such disproportionate influence on our government? You never take issue with this bald fact.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 11:36 pm

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Mon Jan 05, 2015 8:15 pm

poptart wrote: They are not trying to help you and they are not trying to help the poor.
They are seeking to CONTROL.

okay I'm not sure who this cabal you believe exists is trying to control you but then again, you're a guy that believes in conspiracies and such.....

let's take a head count.....how have you personally been harmed by the Affordable Care Act? well not you because you live in Korea, but how many hard working middle class people have been adversely impacted by the ACA? I have health care provided by my employer and it hasn't made any difference on my insurance and I don't think it's had any impact on anybody that works for a relatively large employer....but how about the guy that doesn't have any insurance and goes in for an xray? My nephew didn't have insurance and he went to a doc in the box and got two xrays....the doctor visit cost him $142, the two xrays cost him about a $1,000.....now if it had been my insurance company, they would have negotiated that down to about $300 total, and would have covered most of it, but in my nephews case, he was on the hook for the entire $1,200......now he's got insurance via the ACA and his premium costs him about $300/month....had he had ACA before his foray to the doc in the box, his health provider would have been able to negotiate his total cost down to the $300 range and his insurance would have paid a good percentage of that cost.....I think if you check around, you'll see that the ACA is helping a lot more people than it is adversely affecting.....you and your ilk hate it because---well I don't know why you hate it.....you imply that you're giving up some sort of freedom or choice and that somehow the government is trying to control you but I don't see what it is they're trying to control....

look it ain't perfect, far from it, but it's a hell of a lot better than anything anyone else has produced....

I know, lets have health care vouchers....what could possibly go wrong there.....

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Jan 05, 2015 11:29 pm

Felix wrote:but how many hard working middle class people have been adversely impacted by the ACA?

All of them. It was supposed to save them thousands every year. That was a bald face lie. It's costing them hundreds.

I have health care provided by my employer and it hasn't made any difference on my insurance and I don't think it's had any impact on anybody that works for a relatively large employer....

Bullmotherfuckingshit. The cost of everyone's plan is going up. Mine has gone up 20%. The only way your cost hasn't gone up is if your service has been diminished and your deductible has gone through the roof. In your case, though, you're simply lying through your teeth or your company hasn't renewed its policy for this year.

The question is why? Are you getting paid to suck Barry's balls?

but how about the guy that doesn't have any insurance and goes in for an xray? My nephew didn't have insurance and he went to a doc in the box and got two xrays....the doctor visit cost him $142, the two xrays cost him about a $1,000.....

Who gives a fuck? That sounds like a personal problem to me.

but in my nephews case, he was on the hook for the entire $1,200......now he's got insurance via the ACA and his premium costs him about $300/month....

Assuming he can even find someone who will accept his shit insurance. You are a fucking fool.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 1:45 am

Felix wrote:how have you personally been harmed by the Affordable Care Act? well not you because you live in Korea, but how many hard working middle class people have been adversely impacted by the ACA?

I am fined for not buying a service.

It's unconstitutional.

You can keep your doctor. Lie.
You can keep your insurance. Lie.
Costs will go down by a couple of grand+ a year. Lie.

To sign up for Fraudcare, you've got to give the government all of your most personal information.
Given what we see, why on earth should anyone feel comfortable with that?

You've seen the IRS shenanigans, right?
How's the VA working out?

The _resident himself is an illegal fraud.

He can take his Fraudcare and shove it up his @ss.
Fuck him.

The gov has ZERO credibility.

They're going to handle our health care?

Fools think this is good.

Not IN.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 2:14 am

The USA had by far the cheapest, highest quality medical services in the world. Not even up for debate, it's a yacht-race.

But a handful of poor people weren't, in the minds of the "Great" Society, getting quite enough medical coverage...

so the government stepped in. For some odd reason, someone thought it was a good idea to attach insurance to employment.

Then, all of a sudden, the price started to skyrocket... astronomical increases.

But since Big Government never, ever admits to wrongdoing, they came up with a solution to the consequence of government involvement in what was a thriving system... more government involvement.

And prices skyrocketed even more.

They even passed laws telling you that you couldn't insure yourself against malpractice/mishaps (used to cost a few bucks... hellllllo, huge malpractice insurance for doctors), and that... and it's hard to even wrap one's mind around this -- they actually passed laws limiting who you could buy insurance from (hello, lack of competition).

But since having the government involved in over half of all medical transactions worked out so well, the Liberal Geniuses... again hard to fathom... figured that getting the government involved in MORE of the transactions would improve things.

But, the bleeding hearts weren't done yet... not even close.

Let's look at contraception. There was a huge movement (and if you didn't agree, you were engaging in a "war on women") to have birth control pills covered by "insurance" (because apparently, those enlightened people don't understand the definition of "insurance"... maybe we should spend some tax dollars buying everyone a dictionary).

So, let's break it down -- for the sake of discussion, let's say a month's pack of pills costs $10 at a reasonable retail price (just throwing a number out there). Ten bucks...

BUT WAIT!!!! YOU'RE ENTITLED!!!! INSURANCE HAS TO PAY FOR IT, WOOHOO!

So, the pharmacy now has to hire another full time employee to submit insurance paperwork. The insurance company has to hire people to process that paperwork. They submit it to payable. The pharmacy gets reimbursed, where the accountant now needs to deal with an extra pile of paperwork.

Now that pack of pills is $60.

It's the liberal mind at work.

And since when did "insurance" mean "cover every expense"? Gee, I wonder if I bought car insurance that covered oil changes, repairs, broken headlights, transmission service....

I wonder if that would cost any more that my regular liability insurance (that's there in case of disaster)? Hmmmm, I wonder.

Truly liberal idiocy, but they want to be heroes and fix the very problem they created, but not by reversing the policies that caused it... no no no... by upping the policies that caused it. Repealing stupid laws doesn't increase government control, so that's obviously out.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 2:23 am

Felix wrote:he was on the hook for the entire $1,200......now he's got insurance via the ACA and his premium costs him about $300/month

So, an otherwise-heathly young guy needed a couple of x-rays, and for everything, he got out for 4 whooooooole month's worth of premiums?

How much would a catastrophic policy have cost him (now illegal, of course... I guess you can't "keep your plan") per month? A few bucks?

Your whole anecdote is fucking moronic.

BTW -- been several years since I needed immediate medical services. I went to the emergency clinic down the street, and when they found out I had no insurance, they jumped for joy, and cut the price of the office visit by about 2/3... and I didn't negotiate shit. Same went for the scans. I handed them cash, they handed me a receipt (all for very reasonable costs)... you know, we did business the old fashioned way.

Our current model of "insurance" is the problem, not the solution.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 2:25 am

Dinsdale wrote:Truly liberal idiocy, but they want to be heroes and fix the very problem they created, but not by reversing the policies that caused it... no no no... by upping the policies that caused it.

RACK Dinsdale!

Moving Sale · Post by **Moving Sale** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 2:45 am

Jay in Phoenix wrote:
mvscal wrote:"That government is best which governs least."

--Henry David Thoreau
Great quote and spot on. What is happening now is the antithesis of it.

I'm glad you think so many of my clients should not even be charged with the made up crimes they are being charged with and just live their lives.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 2:49 am

Moving Sale wrote: I'm glad you think so many of my clients should not even be charged with the made up crimes they are being charged with and just live their lives.

Not knowing the circumstances, I can't comment with certainty, but if they didn't hurt anyone or put anyone in grave danger, I'm sure I agree with you.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 3:09 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Moving Sale wrote: I'm glad you think so many of my clients should not even be charged with the made up crimes they are being charged with and just live their lives.
Not knowing the circumstances, I can't comment with certainty, but if they didn't hurt anyone or put anyone in grave danger, I'm sure I agree with you.

He's talking about drunk drivers.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 3:12 am

Dinsdale wrote:The USA had by far the cheapest, highest quality medical services in the world. Not even up for debate, it's a yacht-race.

Categorical bullshit. In fact America's health care costs are about 40-50 percent higher than other developed nations.

Here's a good insight to much of the problem.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2015/01 ... -wont-work

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 3:17 am

mvscal wrote:
He's talking about drunk drivers.

While drinking while intoxicated is bad (no doubt) -- the way the government has made it an industry that benefits government coffers is a travesty.

The statistics don't in any way back up the zeal with the pigs/those who benefit pursue it. It's basic math.

Just a guess, but I'm guessing there were at least 40,000,000 instances of people driving over a 0.08 BAC. Maybe 150 (at most) died as a direct result. Whole buncha zeros after that decimal point.

Again, I don't condone driving while intoxicated, just pointing out basic math.

Then again, few people question the hilarious stats the government and its associated titsuckers roll out about smoking. Hint: if you believe any of the numbers they spew, you really, really need to go back to junior high and retake the math classes.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 3:20 am

LTS TRN 2 wrote:
Dinsdale wrote:The USA had by far the cheapest, highest quality medical services in the world. Not even up for debate, it's a yacht-race.

Categorical bullshit. In fact America's health care costs are about 40-50 percent higher than other developed nations.

Sometimes, we forget that you really are this stupid.

I'll help you out -- the word "had"... that one every one of us uses several times a day, deals with past-tense.

But it's easy to see how the rest of my post flew over your head, since you don't know what the three-letter word "had" means.

Idiot.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 4:24 am

Settle down, you tired crank. It appears you're defending the insurance industry. You're blaming their astronomical costs--and profits--on "liberals" and their philosophy? And you're implying that if these same "liberal" rules and laws were replaced by good free-market "libertarian" values...that the insurance rates would somehow go down?...and medical costs would lower?...

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 4:52 am

Sort of...

I'm actually claiming those things as stone-cold FACTS.

With decades of empirical evidence to back it up.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 6:22 am

What things? That but for "liberal" policy the insurance industry wouldn't be the runaway profit machine nightmare for all Americans?

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:46 am

Huh?...so ..you're blaming the Jewish lawyers?...

Well, for once you're actually snapping one on the corner.. :o

Moving Sale · Post by **Moving Sale** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 11:07 am

mvscal wrote:
Dinsdale wrote:
Moving Sale wrote: I'm glad you think so many of my clients should not even be charged with the made up crimes they are being charged with and just live their lives.
Not knowing the circumstances, I can't comment with certainty, but if they didn't hurt anyone or put anyone in grave danger, I'm sure I agree with you.
He's talking about drunk drivers.

I was mostly talking about drug possession and low level dealing, prostitution, drunk in public, minor weapons possession, drinking by 18-20 year olds, and the like, but yes DUI without damage or injury should be legal. PC 422 (threats) is also a big problem for me. It's way over charged in ca and three gets you struck out and you're doing 25 to life. You shouldn't be able to tell your gf you are going to kill her, but it's way out of hand here for reasons that are probably too involved for this thread.

PS insurance companies, especially health care related ones, should not be allowed to be for profit.

Jay in Phoenix · Post by **Jay in Phoenix** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:44 pm

Moving Sale wrote:
Jay in Phoenix wrote:
mvscal wrote:"That government is best which governs least."

--Henry David Thoreau
Great quote and spot on. What is happening now is the antithesis of it.
I'm glad you think so many of my clients should not even be charged with the made up crimes they are being charged with and just live their lives.

How did you leap to that conclusion? How does acknowledging a famous quote as being accurate and timely dovetail back to you?

In any case, one of the things you just wrote does wrap up in a nice little bow, everything that is wrong with what you represent. DUI under NO circumstance should be legal. Period. How on earth can you justify impaired driving under any circumstance? Just because some drunk doesn't wrap their sled around the body of a little kid and manages to weave home somehow unscathed, doesn't make it okay. Driving is a privilege and not a right and the laws in place about DUI exist for a damn good reason.

In addition, I seriously doubt that any one of your "clients" were ever innocent or had made-up charges filed against them.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 9:46 pm

I relate again a recent example of a Japanese man, age 85, who checked into a Japanese hospital for two surgeries--colon and stomach cancers--and the operations, a month in the hospital, all follow up visits and medications, all first rate...cost just over $1000...cash of course. And make no mistake, all hospitals are private in Japan. So..what's the difference? Why is it not only possible but real and happening? Because the entire Japanese medical industry is understood to be in the service of the public, not a profit mongering industry for doctors and insurance companies. It is the profit oriented philosophy--of which you are completely supporting--that is the problem.

Diego in Seattle · Post by **Diego in Seattle** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 11:28 pm

Moving Sale wrote:but yes DUI without damage or injury should be legal.

Do tell.

Please inform us why it is that an action known to likely cause serious injury & death should be legalized in circumstances where the driver is lucky enough to not hit anyone.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 1:18 am

There's some history you might want to study about alcohol prohibition.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 1:36 am

schmick wrote:
LTS TRN 2 wrote:I relate again a recent example of a Japanese man, age 85, who checked into a Japanese hospital for two surgeries--colon and stomach cancers--and the operations, a month in the hospital, all follow up visits and medications, all first rate...cost just over $1000...cash of course. And make no mistake, all hospitals are private in Japan. So..what's the difference? Why is it not only possible but real and happening? Because the entire Japanese medical industry is understood to be in the service of the public, not a profit mongering industry for doctors and insurance companies. It is the profit oriented philosophy--of which you are completely supporting--that is the problem.
What does it cost to go to medical school in Japan?

You can't charge doctors over half a million dollars to become licensed and them tell them that they can't expect to make a profit

Here's a thorough breakdown of why it works in Japan..
http://content.healthaffairs.org/conten ... 7.full.pdf

Left Seater · Post by **Left Seater** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 5:13 am

Moving Sale wrote:but yes DUI without damage or injury should be legal.

Wrong! So just because someone was lucky enough not to kill someone else, there shouldn't be a punishment?

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 7:13 am

No, you Fake a-hole, because someone pulled off a major crime which kills and damages millions of people--like the New Pearl Harbor--well indeed they should be punished. Of what part of the Japanese health care system --and ethos-- are you in complete denial? All of it? What part of you can stand to look in the mirror?

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 7:49 am

Diego in Seattle wrote:Please inform us why it is that an action known to likely cause serious injury & death...

Did you not see my numeric breakdown above?

It really takes a true retard to say it's "likely," or even "lucky it didn't happen" when the odds of it happening are akin to hitting the state lottery.

ONCE AGAIN, I don't condone driving while intoxicated, and believe some reasonable measures should be in place to stop those whose sense of personal responsibility fails in that regard. For those with reading comprehension difficulties -- no one should be driving with any sort of impairment to their motor skills... social contracts, personal responsibility and whatnot. I'm opposed.

I'm just sayin'... basic. fucking. math. It's a (statistically minor, all due respect to Lefty) menace to society, yet is treated like a government-run business enterprise.

And let's not even get into the more intricate stats of the differences between 0.08 and 0.15 BAC, which aren't in the same league -- but there were coffers to fill.

At what point are cops tilting to the side of making money, rather than protecting the public (and before you submit a stupid answer, again -- do some basic freaking math)?

Left Seater · Post by **Left Seater** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:30 pm

Dinsdale wrote: I'm just sayin'... basic. fucking. math. It's a (statistically minor, all due respect to Lefty) menace to society, yet is treated like a government-run business enterprise.

And let's not even get into the more intricate stats of the differences between 0.08 and 0.15 BAC, which aren't in the same league -- but there were coffers to fill.

At what point are cops tilting to the side of making money, rather than protecting the public (and before you submit a stupid answer, again -- do some basic freaking math)?

0.08 is enough to kill a man, that's what my dad's murderer blew shortly after the murder. Now if you are saying 0.15 should be treated at a much more severe level, you might be on to something, but rape is still rape.

A decent percentage of police time is only about making money. See speeding, school zones, stop signs in the middle of nowhere, red lights, registration, seat belts, inspections, etc. Do we give everyone a free pass on these as well?