Compare your 401K

Once the stimulus plan is completed, Congress really needs to look into the retirement plans so that America is set for the future. When the stock market was going up, fewer people took issue with the high charges from Wall Street but now that the losses have mounted, every cent is under review. The HuffingtonPost has an article about a new service from BrightScope that lets you see just how good (or bad) your 401K plan is.

Until now, an objective evaluation of 401(k) plans has been extremely difficult because of the complexity of these plans and the cleverly hidden costs which would take a pension actuary to uncover. These excessive fees have dramatically reduced employees account balances. By some accounts, the combination of poor investment options, high expenses and poor planning have caused many plan participants to have a zero return on their 401(k) investments.

A recently launched web site, Brightscope, may change everything.

Brightscope crunched 401(k) plan data from public resources and compiled an extensive database of information. Using over 200 data points, including plan costs, amount of matching contribution and quality of investment options, it assigned a numerical rating to each plan. It then compared the rating to the lowest, average and highest rating in the peer group. It also calculated how many additional years an employee in a given plan would have to work, and how much was lost in retirement savings, compared to the highest rated company in that peer group.

Read the rest of this post...

Unemployment up in 98% of US cities

Ouch. From CNNMoney:

In a sign that job loss is felt in every corner of the nation, unemployment rates rose in 98% of metropolitan areas across the country in December, according to a recent government report.

The Labor Department reported that the unemployment rates in 363 of 369 metropolitan areas rose in December 2008, compared to the same month in the prior year. In November, 364 of 369 areas reported higher unemployment rates.

According to the report, 168 areas reported jobless rates of at least 7%, compared to just 33 a year ago, and 40 areas reported rates that were higher than 10%. Just 22 metropolitan regions had unemployment rates that were under 4%, down from 112 last year.

El Centro, Calif., continued to hold the highest rate of unemployment at 22.6%. Morgantown, W.Va., had a rate of just 2.7%, the lowest in the country.

A total of 95 regions registered unemployment rates that were at least 3 percentage points higher than a year ago. Not one region had a jobless rate decrease of more than 0.2 percentage point during that period.

Read the rest of this post...

Total recall for The Peanut Corporation of America

It's not clear if the FDA under Bush ever bothered to look into problems. If they did, they must have been asleep. The good news is that there are signs that industry knows it's a different environment now that Obama is in the White House. The days of ignoring food safety problems are over. (h/t Nicholas)

The Peanut Corp. of America has recalled all peanuts and peanut products processed at its Blakely, Ga., facility since Jan. 1, 2007.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said the expanded recall includes all lots that begin with the number 7, 8 or 9 of dry and oil roasted peanuts and peanut butter, paste, meal and granules. Previously, PCA announced a recall of only peanut butter and peanut paste.

The Georgia PCA plant, which sells its products to institutional and industrial users for service in large institutions or for further processing by other companies, has been identified as the source of a Salmonella outbreak that has resulted in the death of eight people and more than 500 cases of illness. PCA does not sell peanuts or peanut products directly to consumers in stores.

Read the rest of this post...

HHS needs a real health care leader. That rules out Tenn. Governor Phil Bredesen and Tenn. Congressman Jim Cooper

Earlier today, John wrote a post titled "Howard Dean for HHS." That's a good idea.

A bad idea for HHS Secretary would be Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen. Ezra Klein, who knows more about health care than most, writes:

He's not the only candidate. But an array of sources say he's a serious candidate. And he'd be a very risky choice.

Phil Bredesen is the governor of Tennessee. Before he was the governor of Tennessee, he made his money in the managed care revolution, founding HealthAmerica, which acquired and ran HMOs. In the late-80s, he sold HealthAmerica to MaxiCare Health Plans, pocketing $47 million in the deal. A few years later, he teamed up with HealthAmerica's former CFO to form Coventry Corporation, a similarly oriented company, which later merged with Principal Health Care to become Coventry Health Care, which was, until 2007, a Fortune 500 managed care provider (Bredesen was no longer involved).

All of which is to say, if you're concerned about Daschle's apparent ties to the health care industry, recruiting someone from the health care industry is an odd direction to take. As governor of Tennessee, Bredesen is famous -- or infamous -- for gutting TennCare, the state's low income health care provider.

An even worse idea would be Bredesen's fellow Tennessean, Blue Dog Congressman Jim Cooper. He destroyed health care reform in 1994 and no doubt would do it again. Digby dug into Cooper's record. It's ugly:

[Cooper is] being discussed as the replacement for Daschle at HHS, which is only slightly less ludicrous than the silly idea of Newt Gingrich in the job.

Jim Cooper is an enemy of universal health care. He will, howver, work to ensure that the insurance industry and the Big Pharma gets more of your tax dollars.

Digby also links to this backgrounder on Cooper written last year by Open Left's Mike Lux:

I was part of the Clinton White House team on the health care reform issue in 1993/94, and no Democrat did more to destroy our chances in that fight than Jim Cooper. We had laid down a marker very early that we thought universal coverage was the most essential element to getting a good package, saying we were to happy to negotiate over the details but that universality was our bottom line.

Cooper, a leader of conservative Dems on the health care issue, instead of working with us, came out early and said universality was unimportant, and came out with a bill that did almost nothing in terms of covering the uninsured. He quickly became the leading spokesman on the Dem side for the insurance industry position, and undercut us at every possible opportunity, basically ending any hopes we had for a unified Democratic Party position. I was never so delighted to see a Democrat lose as when he went down in the 1994 GOP tide.

Unfortunately, he came back, like a bad penny.

Back and still causing problems. Cooper voted against the economy recovery package last week in the House. It would be very unfortunate if Cooper was named as Secretary of HHS. In fact, it would be a disaster.

Obama has made health care reform a top priority as it should be. Losing Daschle was a setback. The Republicans in Congress are doing everything possible to undermine the economic stimulus package even as we're on the verge of a depression. Imagine what they'll do to health care. It won't be pretty. Obama needs a strong ally at HHS. Bredesen and Cooper don't make the cut. Read the rest of this post...

More on Haggard

It seems the church didn't quite release all the details of Ted Haggard's relationship with the young man. Signorile interviewed the guy yesterday. It's pretty racy stuff.

Read the rest of this post...

ADP: 522,000 jobs lost in January

If the reports of 10,000 new government jobs are accurate, it will take some (not much) of the sting out of this latest bad jobs report. MarketWatch:

The U.S. private sector shed 522,000 jobs in January, according to the ADP employment index, pointing to another hefty month of job losses when the government reports its payroll figures on Friday. The ADP index, compiled from anonymous payroll data, showed the goods-producing industries lost 243,000 jobs, while the service-producing industries lost 279,000 jobs. The ADP index covers only private-sector jobs, adding in some 10,000 government jobs created in a typical month, the report suggests nonfarm payrolls fell by about 510,000 in January. Economists now expect payrolls to fall by 525,000, the fifth straight month of at least 400,000 jobs lost.

Read the rest of this post...

Krugman on the efforts to get bipartisanship of the economic recovery plan: "There is no middle ground"

Dear people in the White House:

Please listen to Paul Krugman. Please. And, stop listening to David Broder.

Yesterday, in response to Josh Marshall's post "Dim Broder," Krugman ripped apart the bi-partisan blather of Broder, the painful king of the conventional wisdom:

But the part that really got me was Broder saying that we need “the best ideas from both parties.”

You see, this isn’t a brainstorming session — it’s a collision of fundamentally incompatible world views. If one thing is clear from the stimulus debate, it’s that the two parties have utterly different economic doctrines. Democrats believe in something more or less like standard textbook macroeconomics; Republicans believe in a doctrine under which tax cuts are the universal elixir, and government spending is almost always bad.

Obama may be able to get a few Republican Senators to go along with his plan; or he can get a lot of Republican votes by, in effect, becoming a Republican. There is no middle ground.

Got that? I know Krugman is a Nobel Prize winning economist, but what he wrote today really isn't that complicated. Bipartisanship doesn't work when there isn't a middle ground. You won the election. People want Obama's economic philosophy, not the GOP's.

Krugman is on your side (as am I). Broder isn't.

Thanks for listening.

P.S. It's not just Broder. Reporters and pundits have become obsessed with the topic of bipartisanship, like it's the only thing that matters. They're working themselves into a frenzy over it. That's partly because it's the only thing they can get their heads around. Most of them aren't directly affected by the economic downturn, so they focus on politics, not the policy. But, we are in the middle of an economic crisis like we haven't seen since the 1930s. And, the GOPers sure now how to distract the D.C. press corps by talking about bipartisanship, but not actually practicing it. The Republicans created the economic crisis, but now, with the help of the traditional media, they're avoiding responsibility. Read this statement from CNN's Dana Bash yesterday:

We've been talking about it with regard to the stimulus package and why didn't he get any Republican votes and why didn't he get any Republican votes, and will he get any Republican votes this week in the Senate. And those are important issues in terms of the bipartisan tone with regard to the substance of what they're doing here in Washington, which is critically important.

Critically important? That's absurd. What's critically important is saving the economy from tanking and to create jobs -- a matter lost on Ms. Bash.

But, there's more. Josh Marshall reports that CQ's Craig Crawford suggests Gingrich for Secretary of HHS. Yesterday, Brownsox at DailyKos told us that Marc Ambinder from the Atlantic and Karen Tumulty from Time are talking about Mitt Romney for the Health Czar. It seems like all the talking heads have become self-appointed experts on bipartisanship -- and if Obama isn't bipartisan enough for them, he's a failure.

So, again, people at the White House, please listen to Krugman who is an economist and knows of what he speaks. It's going to be hard, but you have to ignore the painful talking heads. Save the economy. Create jobs. That's what matters to the American people.

Read the rest of this post...

Lead gay group blasts Obama over Don't Ask Don't Tell

This is bad. It's also evidence of a much larger problem.

Today, the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN), the lead group fighting the gay ban for 15+ years now, issued a press release harshly criticizing President Obama for asking the Pentagon to prepare a study on whether lifting the ban on gays in the military would hurt national security. As I wrote on Monday, Obama's decision to pursue the study is fraught with danger, and has the air of backing off of his repeated promise to lift the ban:

I think Obama is wise to get his ducks in a row, and wise to court Congress, before trying to lift the ban (and in any case, the ban is now written into law, so Obama will need Congress in order to lift it). But this decision to have the Pentagon do a "study" on the national security implications of lifting the ban sounds like we're walking into a bit of a buzz saw. It also sounds, from the article, like Obama hasn't quite made up his mind, and may actually be waiting to see what the study says before making up his mind as to whether to proceed - if so, that would be a major, and devastating, flip-flop.

Today, SLDN weighed in, and seemed to concur:

“We oppose another ‘study’ regarding ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’” said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. “Commissioning a study is Washington-speak for kicking the issue down the road because ‘we don’t want to deal with it right now.’”

During the campaign, the president repeatedly called for the repeal of the law, which forbids gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military.

“The president didn’t say on the campaign trail that he would re-visit or review or reconsider ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ leaving wiggle room for a future study. He said categorically in public appearances and on his web site that he “will work with military leaders to repeal the current [Don't Ask, Don't Tell] policy and ensure we accomplish our national defense goals.”...

“There are at least a dozen studies or papers on this topic, and all, without exception, say the same thing,” said Sarvis. “We would, however, support a 90-day implementation study (a review of how to successfully implement a new non-discrimination policy) if the Pentagon thought that was necessary.”

There are a number of problems here, and I'm reporting on this for reasons far beyond gay politics.

As I have written repeatedly, Obama surrounds himself with people who practice political autarky. They believe so strongly in themselves, and their cause, that they not only think they can accomplish anything (a good trait), they think that they don't need anyone else's help along the way (a bad trait). We saw this time and again during the campaign, with poor outreach to the Netroots, to the gay community, to the Hill, to Democrats across Washington. Then, the Republicans chose Sarah Palin, while Obama started tanking in the polls, and suddenly Team Obama started reaching out, and we all, collectively, did great things for the final 8 weeks - and we won.

Since the election, outreach faded away, and again Team Obama attempted lofty (and admirable) things, all by themselves. From Team Obama's perspective, they have 13m names on an email list, so who needs the gays, the Netroots, the women's groups, the Latinos, the unions, and every other "whiney" Democratic constituency? The army of 13m will win it for Obama.

So what has Obama's army gotten us to date?

A nearly dead stimulus package, when only days ago we had the votes to pass the bill.

And, in terms of specific communities, Obama's every move drives a further wedge between his administration and the gay community, the Netroots is totally ignored, and there was a recent blow-up with women's groups, to name a few.

And these are Obama's friends. They're people who wanted him to win. Who helped him win. And they're practically begging the administration to work with them. To little avail.

It is unimaginable that Obama moved ahead on gays in the military without coordinating his strategy with the lead group in America working on that very same issue. And it's even odder yet that Obama's move seems to have undercut the very goal we all share in lifting the ban. Obama and SLDN need each other if we are going to win. But to Obama, SLDN, like the larger community it represents, seems always an after thought. Just like the Netroots. Just like so many others on the Democratic side of the aisle.

I have never seen anyone in Washington - or anyone in life more generally - win by consistently alienating their friends and caving to their enemies. It's a change, to be sure. But, I fear, not for the better. Read the rest of this post...

Do Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins help their constituents in Maine or stick it to them by sticking with Mitch McConnell and the GOP?

Clear choices face the Senators from Maine - the so-called "moderates." Maine is suffering economically. The economic recovery legislation can help Maine, but only if it passes. And, as we learned earlier today, "Republicans have become resolute in their opposition."

NBC's First Read reports that both Snowe and Collins have meetings with Obama today.

The senators from Maine have a critical decision to make. They can side with Mainers or with McConnell and the GOP obstructionists:

The federal stimulus bill passed by the House would allocate $2.38 billion to Maine. About 10 percent of that would go to balance the state budget, with the rest going to infrastructure spending, safety-net programs, and tax cuts. Although the numbers in the Senate version of the bill are still in flux, the House plan included $190 million in school aid, including money to renovate or repair public school buildings; $434 million for Medicaid; and $9.2 million in worker retraining funds for the unemployed.

Which of these lifelines would senators Collins or Snowe decline in the names of their constituents?

Collins, a moderate who bucked the Democratic tide to win a third term in November, has been a point person in adjusting the House bill to make it more palatable to her Senate colleagues. In an interview yesterday, she said she hopes to get the bill into a shape she can support, but said that at present, "I think it's bloated in programs that are not stimulative."

We are sure there are some parts of a nearly $900 billion bill that could be trimmed, and Collins herself points to funds for cyber-security and to prepare for pandemic flu. And Collins does support aid to the states, safety-net programs such as increased unemployment benefits and food stamps, and money for special education. But she says the overall package should be closer to $650 billion. That's a lot of foregone help for a desperate economy.

Collins is scheduled to meet with President Obama today and says she is "not drawing any hard lines." That's good. Fifty-thousand or more of her constituents are walking their own hard line: the unemployment line.

This is all great political theater for the GOP Senators. But, it's real life for 50,000+ people in Maine.

Hat tip, KAS, for the link. Read the rest of this post...

He's the Energizer Bunny of evil

He keeps going and going and going...

Cheney warned that the proposed closing of the Guantanamo prison, along with greater restrictions and limitations on interrogation tactics, puts the nation at severe risk of terrorist attack: "The United States needs to be not so much loved as it needs to be respected. Sometimes, that requires us to take actions that generate controversy. I’m not at all sure that that’s what the Obama administration believes."

It seems Darth Vader believes the Obama team's simply gonna sit arm-in-arm with our enemies and sing Kumbaya while America's targeted for a horrific attack: "When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an Al Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do anything they can to kill Americans, then I worry."

Cheney is intimately familiar with people who would do anything to kill Americans. He did nothing while those very same people killed 3,000 innocent Americans on his watch. You know what they say, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Unless of course, it kills you. Or 3,000 of you. Read the rest of this post...

Bonnie Newman and Charlie Crist

I hear they have a lot in common. Wonder what James Dobson thinks about that.

Read the rest of this post...

Angela Merkel calls out Pope Benedict

NOTE FROM JOHN: This is how bad this Pope, and this Vatican, are - they've made it increasingly unclear exactly where they stand on the Holocaust.

Rightly so.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel called on Pope Benedict XVI to make a "very clear" rejection of Holocaust denials after the Vatican's rehabilitation of a former bishop who questioned whether 6 million Jews were gassed by the Nazis.

Merkel's rare and public demand came amid increasing outrage among Germany's Roman Catholic leaders over the pope's decision to lift the excommunication of British-born Richard Williamson.

Merkel said she "does not believe" there has been adequate clarification of the Vatican's position on the Holocaust amid the controversy.

Benedict last week expressed "full and indisputable solidarity" with Jews and warned against any denial of the horror of the Holocaust, but several leading German bishops have decried the decision and called for the rehabilitation to be revoked.

"I do not believe that sufficient clarification has been made," Merkel said.

The Vatican moved quickly to counter Merkel's suggestion.

"The pope's thinking on the subject of the Holocaust has been expressed very clearly," said Vatican spokesman Rev. Federico Lombardi.

Read the rest of this post...

Howard Dean for HHS?

And if he comes out gay we'll have a two-fer. There's a Facebook group supporting him. Read the rest of this post...

Executive pay limit to be $500,000

As Chris posted below, Obama is going to propose a cap on executive pay for any entity that takes government aid. The New York Times reports the limit is $500,000:

The Obama administration is expected to impose a cap of $500,000 for top executives at companies that receive large amounts of bailout money, according to people familiar with the plan.

Executives would also be prohibited from receiving any bonuses above their base pay, except for normal stock dividends.

The cap isn't retroactive so it won't affect the companies that already got the money. But, it looks like many of them will be coming back to the trough:

Executives at companies that have already received money from the Treasury Department would not have to make any changes. But analysts and administration officials are bracing for a huge wave of new losses, largely because of the deepening recession, and many companies that have already received federal money may well be coming back.

This pay cap is a very good move. But, it has to be tough and across the board for every corporation that takes federal money. No loopholes or special exceptions. These corporate clowns have ruined our economy and made billions doing it. Their boards of directors didn't hold them accountable. But, if they want my tax dollars, there have to be limits. I bet most Americans could live very well on $500,000/year.

Read the rest of this post...

Senate can't pass stimulus: "Republicans have become resolute in their opposition"

What a surprise.

The country is in the midst of an economic crisis and the Senate can't pass an economic recovery bill. They've had months to work on it. Mitch McConnell and the Republicans have done everything they can to screw it up. But, you know now some of the Senate Democrats have to help them muck it up, too. The quest for bipartisanship takes precedence over fixing the economic mess.

Now is the time for some real leadership and hard ball in the Senate:

Senate Democratic leaders conceded yesterday that they do not have the votes to pass the stimulus bill as currently written and said that to gain bipartisan support, they will seek to cut provisions that would not provide an immediate boost to the economy.

The legislation represents the first major test for President Obama and an expanded Democratic Congress, both of which have made economic recovery the cornerstone of their new political mandate. The stimulus package has now tripled from its post-election estimate of about $300 billion, and in recent days lawmakers in both parties have grown wary of the swelling cost.

Moderate Republicans are trying to trim the bill by as much as $200 billion, although Democrats working with those GOP senators have not agreed to a specific figure.

The Senate's first vote on a stimulus amendment, a failed effort yesterday to add more infrastructure spending to the package, signaled the change in course. For weeks, the measure has grown to meet a worsening economic crisis with the largest possible infusion of government cash. Despite warnings of dire consequences if Congress does not act boldly, Republicans have become resolute in their opposition to what they view as runaway and unnecessary spending in the legislation. And as the total in the Senate version climbs to $900 billion, unease also is stirring among moderate Democrats.

The economy is in a real crisis. It's people to lose their jobs and their homes every day. But, "Republicans have become resolute in their opposition." That's classic.

I keep repeating this because so many reporters and pundits seem to forget: It was a Republican president with the aid of a Republican Congress implementing Republican policies that got us into this economic mess. And, now those Republicans are "resolute." Read the rest of this post...

Wednesday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

Yesterday was a wild news day. Daschle's withdrawal was a real stunner. But, in a move that definitely shows that change has come, Obama owned the mistake:

I'm here on television saying I screwed up, and that's part of the era of responsibility. It's not never making mistakes; it's owning up to them and trying to make sure you never repeat them and that's what we intend to do.

What a concept. Responsibility and accountability. That's got to have the heads of the press corps spinning. They won't know what to do when an administration is honest with them.

Let's see what today brings. Read the rest of this post...

Obama to announce executive pay limits

The people who allowed the crisis to happen will naturally start to make a fuss about this. We're going to hear cries of socialism and the normal kicking and screaming but until they can act like real capitalists and make due with their own money, there's no other way.

The Obama administration plans to mandate new executive pay limits on Wednesday for government-assisted financial institutions in a new get-tough approach to bankers and Wall Street.

"If the taxpayers are helping you, then you've got certain responsibilities to not be living high on the hog," President Barack Obama said in an interview Tuesday with "NBC Nightly News".

The president and members of Congress are weighing various proposals to restrict chief executives' compensation as one of the conditions of receiving help under the $700 billion financial bailout fund.

Obama did not reveal details of the administration's compensation caps. Administration officials have said that the restrictions would apply only to those firms receiving "exceptional assistance", such as the American International Group Inc., Citigroup Inc., and Detroit automakers.

But Obama's chief economic adviser, Larry Summers, has proposed that firms that want to pay executives above a certain threshold would have to compensate them with stock that could not be sold or liquidated until they pay back the government funds.

Good old Larry Summers. He's probably already looking for creative new ways to help appease the Wall Street crowd as he did during the Clinton years. There's no need to throw them a bone quite yet. Read the rest of this post...

Chinese moving money outside of China

This is never a great sign when the people who you want investing at home start seeking safe havens abroad. Before the stock market crash in Russia last year, the wealthy started moving money into Europe, snatching up real estate in posh locations just in case the market went south, which it did. Along the French Riviera and in the Alps, many credited the booming real estate markets to the wealth Russians. Now that the Chinese are moving money out, what does this say about the growth potential in China? The government still insists 8% is achievable but if the rich are buying diamonds rather than staying hitched to the local economy, maybe the problems are deeper than previously thought.

As Chinese citizens are starting to send more money out of the country, foreign investors are pulling money out too, and slowing the pace of new investment.

“There is a recognition for sure that China is slowing down, so why keep your money there?” said Henry Lee, a Hong Kong fund manager.

Nobody knows how long this trend will last.

If China’s series of economic stimulus measures are successful, then the Chinese economy could rebound later this year and start drawing back money on the same scale that it did over the last decade.

Total outflows in the fourth quarter were as much as $240 billion, but this is using the broadest possible definition and includes everything from capital flight to a slowdown in repatriation of overseas profits by Chinese companies.

There is no good data assessing the motives of those moving money out of China.

Most troubling for China would be if a sizable portion of these disparate streams represented capital flight — people taking their money out because they worry about the stability of the country.

Though there are myriad reasons to move capital around, there is also cause for concern: Chinese authorities announced Monday that 20 million migrant workers had lost their jobs. If they do not find new work, these workers could form a volatile class of unemployed.

Even more crucial, Chinese individuals and companies placing more of their money outside China could affect one of the constants of international finance over the last five years: China’s central role in bankrolling American trade and budget deficits.

Read the rest of this post...

Mobile phone consumers trading down

Who needs flash when you can have cash in the bank? Especially these days. I like the new functionality but hate the idea of spending so much for it. From The Guardian:

Mobile phone users are holding on to their handsets and "trading down" to cheaper deals, or opting for a top-of-the-range device such as Apple's iPhone or the BlackBerry Storm, according to the world's largest mobile phone company, Vodafone.

This polarisation in the more mature markets of Europe and the US was apparent in figures yesterday from the US handset maker Motorola, which saw sales halve in the run-up to Christmas.

The company, known for making so-called midrange handsets, dropped to a $3.6bn loss for the final quarter of 2008, creating doubts over a planned demerger of its handset operation from the rest of the company.

Last month Nokia, which makes four of every 10 phones sold, shocked investors by predicting its global handset sales would fall 10% this year - twice the decrease it forecast less than two months earlier - as consumers hold on to their phones.

Speaking as Vodafone increased its annual revenue forecasts because of the weakness of the pound against the euro and dollar, the chief executive, Vittorio Colao, said: "At the end of the day, it is clear that people are either getting devices that have functionality that really adds something to their life - making their life better, more enjoyable or more productive - or they are going for a cheaper type of deal.

"Some people, instead of staying on the same package and getting a better phone, are deciding to go for a cheaper package and not changing their phone."

Read the rest of this post...

Hippo eats dwarf

Not politics, but sometimes you just have to cover the human interest stuff.

Read the rest of this post...