$5.00
$20.00
$15.00
Trey Chambers
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb

http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501451368/here-is-what-donald-...

A few things are good, but those are the exact things the GOP congress will oppose. The rest is a dumpster fire that will damage this country greatly.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Corporal Joe Bauers
United States
flag msg tools
No matter games or life
badge
Honesty over everything
mbmbmb
Could you elaborate on what, if any, parts you don't like?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
フィル
Australia
Ashfield
NSW
flag msg tools
designer
Pushing a lesbian old growth union-approved agenda since '94.
mbmbmbmbmb
Term limits sound good. Tariffs will be an economic disaster.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oliver Dienz
United States
Burlington
Vermont
flag msg tools
sbszine wrote:
Term limits sound good. Tariffs will be an economic disaster.

It may sound good but doubt it will help. People keep electing the same morons and when given a choice they vote for even bigger ones. Having a mandatory exam at voter registration may be the better initiative. For example the economic illiteracy is just breathtaking.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Doherty
United States
McKinney
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
sbszine wrote:
Term limits sound good. Tariffs will be an economic disaster.


Why are tariffs a disaster? The US government used to fund 100% of its expenses with tariffs. Are you suggesting Smoot-Hawley is applicable here? Hope not, since the common wisdom that it caused problems is a myth.

http://www.thomhartmann.com/users/unlawflcombatnt/blog/2011/...

Quote:
Notice that there is a slight decline in both exports and imports by the end of 1930. The trade balance remained around 0 during the entire time. Exports bottomed in 1932 — 2 years before any revision or modification of Smoot-Hawley occurred.

The Smoot-Hawley Tariff was signed into law on June 17, 1930, and raised U.S. tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods. Legislation was passed in 1934 that weakened the effect of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff. In effect, the 1934 legislation functionally repealed Smoot-Hawley. Thus, the effects of Smoot-Hawley cover only the period between June 17, 1930, and 1934. This is the time frame that should be focused on.

So in reviewing the chart, what evidence is there that the Smoot-Hawley Tariff "hurt" the economy?? Is there any evidence at all?

No, there is practically NO evidence that Smoot-Hawley hurt our economy.

The US was already in a Depression when Smoot-Hawley was enacted. Prior to Smoot-Hawley, the 1929 Trade Surplus was +0.38% of our GDP. In other words, it contributed less than 1/200th to our economy.

What happens if we focus on exports alone? Exports were $5.9 billion in 1929, and had declined to $2.0 billion in 1933, for a -$3.9 billion decline. This $3.9 billion decline was roughly 3.8% of our 1929 GDP, which had already declined by a whopping 46% over the same period of time. Thus, of the -46% GDP decline, only 3.8% of it was due to a fall in exports.

But the effects on trade must also include the reduction in Imports, which ADDS to GDP. (A decline in imports increases GDP). If the import decline is added back to the GDP total (to measure the net trade balance), the "loss" becomes only -$0.2 billion from our GDP — or less than ½ of 1% of the total GDP decline.

In other words, the document-able "loss" from the Smoot-Hawley Tariff — the "net export" loss — contributed less than ½ of 1% of our our -46% GDP decline. Overall, the Smoot Hawley Tariff caused almost 0 damage to our economy during the Depression.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Burke Martin
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I think that even some conservative leaning people are going to have some buyers remorse soon. That list is bonkers and sounds like something a high school kid would write in the book of a notebook.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pontifex Maximus
United States
CA
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:

http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501451368/here-is-what-donald-...

A few things are good, but those are the exact things the GOP congress will oppose. The rest is a dumpster fire that will damage this country greatly.


And of course the personal vengeance part

Quote:
Donald Trump surrogate Omarosa Manigault said the President-elect's campaign is keeping a list of people who did not support his run to the White House.

"Let me just tell you, Mr. Trump has a long memory and we're keeping a list," Manigault, the campaign's director of African-American outreach, told the Independent Journal Review, an online news outlet started by two former GOP staffers aimed at a center-right audience.

Manigault made the comment in response to Sen. Lindsey Graham's tweet that he supported conservative presidential candidate Evan McMullin.
Manigault, an ordained minister, responded by suggesting that the South Carolina Republican was an enemy and said "God bless him."

"If (Graham) felt his interests was with that candidate, God bless him. I would never judge anybody for exercising their right to and the freedom to choose who they want," she said.

"It's so great our enemies are making themselves clear so that when we get in to the White House, we know where we stand," the former reality show contestant added.


Seems to be getting a head start on his paranoia. Don't remember Nixon starting with an enemies list

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/09/politics/omarosa-list-donald-t...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Frazier
United States
West Sacramento
California
flag msg tools
A man learns little by little in battle. Take this battle experience and become a man who can’t be beaten
badge
This flag says we will fight until only our bones are left.
mbmbmbmbmb
Here's the actual list (in bold) with my thoughts.

* FIRST, propose a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress;

Great so rather than a powerful political class you will have an endless election cycle. Not sure this is an improvement.

* SECOND, a hiring freeze on all federal employees to reduce federal workforce through attrition (exempting military, public safety, and public health);

No. Auditing maybe. Arbitrary hiring freezes are stupid.


* THIRD, a requirement that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated;

Again this will probably do no harm (just make the laws longer and eliminate laws that don't matter) but it's really stupid and meaningless.

The whole "LAWS BAAAAAD" without specificity is idiotic knee jerk pandering.


* FOURTH, a 5 year-ban on White House and Congressional officials becoming lobbyists after they leave government service;

I actually think this is not a bad idea and have said so before.


* FIFTH, a lifetime ban on White House officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government;


OK, sure.

* SIXTH, a complete ban on foreign lobbyists raising money for American elections.

Sounds xenophobic, not sure why it's necessary.

On the same day, I will begin taking the following 7 actions to protect American workers:

* FIRST, I will announce my intention to renegotiate NAFTA or withdraw from the deal under Article 2205


Not sure about the legality of this but I've always been on the fence on NAFTA, not sure what the effect would be.

* SECOND, I will announce our withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership

Well, that'll make China a lot more powerful in east asia.

* THIRD, I will direct my Secretary of the Treasury to label China a currency manipulator

OK, I don't think this has any effect - will we be making the premier of china wear a hat with this printed on it or something?

* FOURTH, I will direct the Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Trade Representative to identify all foreign trading abuses that unfairly impact American workers and direct them to use every tool under American and international law to end those abuses immediately

This seems like a meaningless statement. "Stop being unfair" is like "stop being mean."

* FIFTH, I will lift the restrictions on the production of $50 trillion dollars' worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas and clean coal.

I assume this means probably no more environmental concerns about anything. That's probably not great for the long term.


* SIXTH, lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward

See above.

* SEVENTH, cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America's water and environmental infrastructure

Well, I'm pretty sure that's not real, so it should be easy to end it. Hey, I just did it and I'm not even president!

Additionally, on the first day, I will take the following five actions to restore security and the constitutional rule of law:

* FIRST, cancel every unconstitutional executive action, memorandum and order issued by President Obama


So none of them. Hey that was easy.

* SECOND, begin the process of selecting a replacement for Justice Scalia from one of the 20 judges on my list, who will uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States

OK yes that is one of the duties of the president. Good job you know high school civics.


* THIRD, cancel all federal funding to Sanctuary Cities


Oh FFS. That said I don't really approve of "Sanctuary Cities" just because I think that if we have a federal law we don't like we should fix, not ignore it.

* FOURTH, begin removing the more than 2 million criminal illegal immigrants from the country and cancel visas to foreign countries that won't take them back

Well here's the thing: if we repatriate serious criminals to (for example) mexico, it's unlikely mexico will agree to jail them, so you're releasing them. That's not great.

* FIFTH, suspend immigration from terror-prone regions where vetting cannot safely occur. All vetting of people coming into our country will be considered extreme vetting.

We already do this so fine.

Next, I will work with Congress to introduce the following broader legislative measures and fight for their passage within the first 100 days of my Administration:

Middle Class Tax Relief And Simplification Act. An economic plan designed to grow the economy 4% per year and create at least 25 million new jobs through massive tax reduction and simplification, in combination with trade reform, regulatory relief, and lifting the restrictions on American energy. The largest tax reductions are for the middle class. A middle-class family with 2 children will get a 35% tax cut. The current number of brackets will be reduced from 7 to 3, and tax forms will likewise be greatly simplified. The business rate will be lowered from 35 to 15 percent, and the trillions of dollars of American corporate money overseas can now be brought back at a 10 percent rate.

OK so a massive tax cut fueled deficit to give rich people more money. Sounds like what I expect from a Republican president. Don't think it'll create more American jobs but you never know.

End The Offshoring Act. Establishes tariffs to discourage companies from laying off their workers in order to relocate in other countries and ship their products back to the U.S. tax-free.

Well, we export a little less than we import but I still think overall this is probably kind of a bad idea as many, many american businesses will go under and jobs will be lost when inevitably our exports get shut down in retaliation. Ultimately we might gain a few jobs but I kind of doubt it'll be more than we'll lose as we will be hammered by more efficient competing nations on nearly all products.

Oh and of course the poor will be utterly shafted as the cost of basic goods skyrockets.

American Energy & Infrastructure Act. Leverages public-private partnerships, and private investments through tax incentives, to spur $1 trillion in infrastructure investment over 10 years. It is revenue neutral.

And I'm a unicorn.

School Choice And Education Opportunity Act. Redirects education dollars to give parents the right to send their kid to the public, private, charter, magnet, religious or home school of their choice. Ends common core, brings education supervision to local communities. It expands vocational and technical education, and make 2 and 4-year college more affordable.

So we'll be ending public education. I have an idea - when a kid is born poor, why don't we just take him straight from the hospital to prison?

Repeal and Replace Obamacare Act. Fully repeals Obamacare and replaces it with Health Savings Accounts, the ability to purchase health insurance across state lines, and lets states manage Medicaid funds. Reforms will also include cutting the red tape at the FDA: there are over 4,000 drugs awaiting approval, and we especially want to speed the approval of life-saving medications.


Well, a lot of people will die, but on the upside, some people will save some money. To be frank, I think a lot of Americans would prefer this so I'm guessing this will be possible.

Affordable Childcare and Eldercare Act. Allows Americans to deduct childcare and elder care from their taxes, incentivizes employers to provide on-side childcare services, and creates tax-free Dependent Care Savings Accounts for both young and elderly dependents, with matching contributions for low-income families.

This seems like a good idea. I think that's two so far.

End Illegal Immigration Act Fully-funds the construction of a wall on our southern border with the full understanding that the country Mexico will be reimbursing the United States for the full cost of such wall; establishes a 2-year mandatory minimum federal prison sentence for illegally re-entering the U.S. after a previous deportation, and a 5-year mandatory minimum for illegally re-entering for those with felony convictions, multiple misdemeanor convictions or two or more prior deportations; also reforms visa rules to enhance penalties for overstaying and to ensure open jobs are offered to American workers first.


Well, it's a pointless public works project, but if you're already going billions in the hole, might as well spend some more on building a wall that will serve no purpose. I guess it beats paying people to dig a hole then fill the hole up again.

Restoring Community Safety Act. Reduces surging crime, drugs and violence by creating a Task Force On Violent Crime and increasing funding for programs that train and assist local police; increases resources for federal law enforcement agencies and federal prosecutors to dismantle criminal gangs and put violent offenders behind bars.
Restoring National Security Act. Rebuilds our military by eliminating the defense sequester and expanding military investment; provides Veterans with the ability to receive public VA treatment or attend the private doctor of their choice; protects our vital infrastructure from cyber-attack; establishes new screening procedures for immigration to ensure those who are admitted to our country support our people and our values


and a chicken in every pot! Honestly this is basically word salad nothing here indicates how any of these things would happen.


Clean up Corruption in Washington Act. Enacts new ethics reforms to Drain the Swamp and reduce the corrupting influence of special interests on our politics.

See above.

20 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wendell
United States
Yellow Springs
Ohio
flag msg tools
All the little chicks with crimson lips, go...
badge
Hey, get your stinking cursor off my face! I got nukes, you know.
mbmbmbmbmb
pdoherty wrote:
sbszine wrote:
Term limits sound good. Tariffs will be an economic disaster.


Why are tariffs a disaster? The US government used to fund 100% of its expenses with tariffs.


The US also used to have no standing army, electricity, airplanes, or Disneyland. Things change.

Imposing new tariffs would be a violation of our international commitments, both bilaterally and in the WTO. It would raise costs both for inputs that American manufacturers use AND for consumer products.

And it would almost certainly provoke other trading partner to raise tariffs on American products, making them more expensive and thus less competitive. Advantage: China, Japan, Germany.
13 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donald
United States
New Alexandria
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
a requirement that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated;


Can some explain how this is feasible, please?

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Bartosh

Sunnyvale
California
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Donald wrote:
Quote:
a requirement that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated;


Can some explain how this is feasible, please?



Theoretically, if you assume that there is a fair amount of fat in the system, it would be tenable for a certain amount of time. The problem kicks in once you've cut the fat, you create a loss every time something necessary crops up.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G Rowls
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Conners ... I like the term limits not on our agenda in the senate .

So now the repubs are still going to say no to a repub president - somebody tell me why you need the office of president?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G Rowls
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
AndrewRogue wrote:
Donald wrote:
Quote:
a requirement that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated;


Can some explain how this is feasible, please?




Theoretically, if you assume that there is a fair amount of fat in the system, it would be tenable for a certain amount of time. The problem kicks in once you've cut the fat, you create a loss every time something necessary crops up.


It's the same with the recruitment freeze - it doesn't necessarily target the fat but can seriously degrade the entire performance when a key role leaves and isn't replaced.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grand Admiral Thrawn
United States
New Jersey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
wifwendell wrote:
pdoherty wrote:
sbszine wrote:
Term limits sound good. Tariffs will be an economic disaster.


Why are tariffs a disaster? The US government used to fund 100% of its expenses with tariffs.


The US also used to have no standing army, electricity, airplanes, or Disneyland. Things change.

Imposing new tariffs would be a violation of our international commitments, both bilaterally and in the WTO. It would raise costs both for inputs that American manufacturers use AND for consumer products.

And it would almost certainly provoke other trading partner to raise tariffs on American products, making them more expensive and thus less competitive. Advantage: China, Japan, Germany.

As I understand it, it would make a ton of currently very cheap consumer goods relatively expensive: clothing, food, electronics, plastics. Right?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kaitlyn Smith
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I haven't read The Art of The Deal, but a fairly standard negotiating tactic is to start with something totally bat sh*t crazy so that when you are finished negotiating, you get what you want.

I would not be at all surprised if this is what Trump, the great negotiator is doing here.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Fox
United States
Richardson
Texas
flag msg tools
Question everything.
mbmbmbmbmb
Donald wrote:
Quote:
a requirement that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated;


Can some explain how this is feasible, please?


Easy, just replace each old regulation with a new one that contains all the text of the old one plus whatever new regulation you are passing.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Fox
United States
Richardson
Texas
flag msg tools
Question everything.
mbmbmbmbmb
growlley wrote:
Conners ... I like the term limits not on our agenda in the senate .

So now the repubs are still going to say no to a repub president - someboy tell me why you need the office of president?

We need someone to push the button to fire the nuclear weapons.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wendell
United States
Yellow Springs
Ohio
flag msg tools
All the little chicks with crimson lips, go...
badge
Hey, get your stinking cursor off my face! I got nukes, you know.
mbmbmbmbmb
einsteinidahosu wrote:

As I understand it, it would make a ton of currently very cheap consumer goods relatively expensive: clothing, food, electronics, plastics. Right?


It would depend on how big the tariff was and how it was applied - devil's in the details.

Also, this is something the business wing of the GOP would fight tooth and nail. They WANT free trade and are the biggest backers of TPP, NAFTA, and other free trade agreements and US membership in WTO. And they're big donors.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Fox
United States
Richardson
Texas
flag msg tools
Question everything.
mbmbmbmbmb
wifwendell wrote:
einsteinidahosu wrote:

As I understand it, it would make a ton of currently very cheap consumer goods relatively expensive: clothing, food, electronics, plastics. Right?


It would depend on how big the tariff was and how it was applied - devil's in the details.

Also, this is something the business wing of the GOP would fight tooth and nail. They WANT free trade and are the biggest backers of TPP, NAFTA, and other free trade agreements and US membership in WTO. And they're big donors.

If Trump is serious about changing things then he'll have to be willing to veto a bunch of bills the republicans pass if they don't contain something he has asked for. The republicans in congress just aren't going to do most of what he wants without a big fight.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Kearns
United States
Bloomington
Indiana
flag msg tools
Silence is golden.
badge
Your sea is so great and my boat is so small.
mbmbmbmbmb
sfox wrote:
wifwendell wrote:
einsteinidahosu wrote:

As I understand it, it would make a ton of currently very cheap consumer goods relatively expensive: clothing, food, electronics, plastics. Right?


It would depend on how big the tariff was and how it was applied - devil's in the details.

Also, this is something the business wing of the GOP would fight tooth and nail. They WANT free trade and are the biggest backers of TPP, NAFTA, and other free trade agreements and US membership in WTO. And they're big donors.

If Trump is serious about changing things then he'll have to be willing to veto a bunch of bills the republicans pass if they don't contain something he has asked for. The republicans in congress just aren't going to do most of what he wants without a big fight.


...or he could extort them with something they want really badly... like a hyper right wing Supreme Court nomination, something I doubt very highly he cares about one way or the other.

Just a thought. Without something like this it becomes hard to imagine how he is going to get a complicit Congress to uh, drain the swamp.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
odie73 wrote:
sbszine wrote:
Term limits sound good. Tariffs will be an economic disaster.

It may sound good but doubt it will help. People keep electing the same morons and when given a choice they vote for even bigger ones. Having a mandatory exam at voter registration may be the better initiative. For example the economic illiteracy is just breathtaking.


How 'bout just landowners? I mean, you have to know what to do with money to own land.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oliver Dienz
United States
Burlington
Vermont
flag msg tools
GameCrossing wrote:
odie73 wrote:
sbszine wrote:
Term limits sound good. Tariffs will be an economic disaster.

It may sound good but doubt it will help. People keep electing the same morons and when given a choice they vote for even bigger ones. Having a mandatory exam at voter registration may be the better initiative. For example the economic illiteracy is just breathtaking.


How 'bout just landowners? I mean, you have to know what to do with money to own land.


I think you are putting the cart before the horse. What was first: Money or land?

And no, economic literacy does not mean you need to have money or physical wealth. It means to know how to use money in order to improve human welfare. Plus, understanding a few simple accounting principles would not hurt.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
odie73 wrote:
GameCrossing wrote:
odie73 wrote:
sbszine wrote:
Term limits sound good. Tariffs will be an economic disaster.

It may sound good but doubt it will help. People keep electing the same morons and when given a choice they vote for even bigger ones. Having a mandatory exam at voter registration may be the better initiative. For example the economic illiteracy is just breathtaking.


How 'bout just landowners? I mean, you have to know what to do with money to own land.


I think you are putting the cart before the horse. What was first: Money or land?


Actually I was mocking you as you were one of those people who were doing the condescending act to no end. But now that things didn't turn out how you wanted, you want to go back over two centuries to when voting wasn't something for all but only those select few we could trust to vote the sensible way. Voter ID cards are voter suppression, but a literacy test will just weed out those whose votes we can't trust to go our way.

But think this through: Millenial sophomore in college who is more interested in hooking up with that hottie from Psych 114 than in passing the class and has a couple of credit cards thanks to how readily predatory lenders issue them to incoming freshmen is now going to be asked to take a literacy test to prove themselves worthy of voting. You really want to cut into that Rock The Vote base? Think that will get you more of what you want?

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kaitlyn Smith
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm all for a political literacy test to vote. The liberal elite should have no problem because we're all just a bunch of dumbf***s.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oliver Dienz
United States
Burlington
Vermont
flag msg tools
GameCrossing wrote:
odie73 wrote:
GameCrossing wrote:
odie73 wrote:
sbszine wrote:
Term limits sound good. Tariffs will be an economic disaster.

It may sound good but doubt it will help. People keep electing the same morons and when given a choice they vote for even bigger ones. Having a mandatory exam at voter registration may be the better initiative. For example the economic illiteracy is just breathtaking.


How 'bout just landowners? I mean, you have to know what to do with money to own land.


I think you are putting the cart before the horse. What was first: Money or land?


Actually I was mocking you as you were one of those people who were doing the condescending act to no end. But now that things didn't turn out how you wanted, you want to go back over two centuries to when voting wasn't something for all but only those select few we could trust to vote the sensible way. Voter ID cards are voter suppression, but a literacy test will just weed out those whose votes we can't trust to go our way.

But think this through: Millenial sophomore in college who is more interested in hooking up with that hottie from Psych 114 than in passing the class and has a couple of credit cards thanks to how readily predatory lenders issue them to incoming freshmen is now going to be asked to take a literacy test to prove themselves worthy of voting. You really want to cut into that Rock The Vote base? Think that will get you more of what you want?


Things did not turn out the way I wanted when Hillary won the nomination. And since I am just a taxpayer without a vote I have little beef in this whole political mess here anyway.

My post was an ironic comment about voters who could easily end every politician's term every few years but choose not to do so. Instead, they now want term limits apparently because they are too stupid to vote for a better person at election time without it. Maybe I am the only one who sees the irony in restricting the choices of the electorate for the benefit of the country when discussing term limits.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.