tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post5108476403526605837..comments2023-10-12T02:29:10.937-05:00Comments on the we hunted the mammoth (formerly man boobz) blogger archive: Fall into the Wage GapAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00569290850910434331noreply@blogger.comBlogger75125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-80693575296201269342010-12-07T06:17:54.252-06:002010-12-07T06:17:54.252-06:00@ TEC
The first half of my post got lost.
Basica...@ TEC<br /><br />The first half of my post got lost.<br /><br />Basically show me where I said that, if I'm wrong I'll apologize.<br /><br />Also, women don't become caretakers by magic. Mostly they choose to be caretakers. Since businesses have no hand in that decision, there should be no forced daycares and the like on the businesses nor taxpayers dime. <br /><br />If feminists are so for these things why don't they pay for them?<br /><br />Random BrotherUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669598831813035918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-59432954258567954322010-12-07T06:14:24.670-06:002010-12-07T06:14:24.670-06:00CONT
TEC SAID: "The other issue to consider...CONT<br /><br />TEC SAID: "The other issue to consider is government support e.g. Canadians with children can get subsidies in order to support them (e.g. for daycare) and further subsidies for disabled children. Even the parent with partial custody e.g. "weekend dad" are eligible. http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/bnfts/cctb/menu-eng.html <--That's called giving a shit about children and promoting growth, unlike in the US. You pick up one end of the stick, you pick up both ends of the stick. IOW, you can't have it both ways. At the end of the day, you have to ask, are children important?"<br /><br />Oh, no! The dreaded what about the childen defense. Tell me something TEC, if business is responsible for aiding the mother with these children, do business then have any rights towards the mother and the children? <br /><br />Nonetheless, caring about children is swell and all but it should be up to the individual business. By forcing more and more business to provide crap like daycare you make companies less competitive to the overseas market and stop make people from starting businesses to begin with.<br /><br /><br />TEC SAID: "If so, then people, both men and women, need the means and support to have them. I will never understand why this is toted as a "woman's" issue -it's not, it's an issue for everyone. For instance, are you not grateful that your parents were able to have you?"<br /><br />What? So now you're anti abortion? Let me try to simplify this for you. The laws that you are for only work with sufficient money behind them. We (meaning the U.S.) are broke. So as you agree with or root for and push for more of these laws the more likely it is that the economy will collapse and then there will be no jobs for anyone. <br /><br />TEC SAID: "Also, your assumptions such as the only way to have women/mothers in certain positions is to legislate a quota and the onus completely on the employer only shows such a clear lack of imagination. Xtra points out, it just could be illegal to ask whether the woman is a mother (similar to being illegal to ask their sexual orientation and religion.) In fact, there are a number of solutions, including preventing sexist fascist assholes like you from making totalitarian decisions."<br /><br />The bottom line is that business are not democracies nor charities. All these left wing ideas you think are so wonderful and special are death. You don't pull these sort of stupid pro woman's whims laws when a country is 13 trillion dollars in debt.<br /><br />Random BrotherUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669598831813035918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-63420414513650851102010-12-07T06:13:27.962-06:002010-12-07T06:13:27.962-06:00@ TEC
TEC SAID: "@Bishop - no i was referin...@ TEC<br /><br />TEC SAID: "@Bishop - no i was refering to you. I am not misrepresenting you. You have said it several times, incl my favourite quotation of women and the economy was a hang nail compared to an amputation for men. Stupid and ignorant comments about the economy: there you have it. I can probably go search for the actual (several) quotations, but since we both know you said it, do you really want me to show what an ignorant and now hypocritical moron you are? Up to you..."<br /><br />I am not some whiny, weak, screeching feminists. If I'm wrong, I'll go ahead and say so. So do your search and PROVE IT ALREADY!<br /><br />TEC SAID: "Moreover, the issues you are discussing really belong to classism - which I already pointed out i.e. only high-paying and highly-educated-requiring positions will be able to provide benefits. Also, it's very classist to assume women work b/c they want a "career". Most women, like men, work because they have to. This is important because you're assuming a universe where the caregiver (usually the woman) could just quit and/or be "taken care of" - which is almost NEVER the case. From this different perspective, you can see that mat/parental leave is a human right, not a privilege."<br /><br />No. You don't magically become a caregiver. A woman by in large chooses to have children. In your fake narrative you skip over that crucial point. Since she made the choice to become a caregiver/parent it is wrong to make a business responible for her nights of humping. <br /><br />TEC SAID: "Or do you think only upper-middle class or richer families should exist? I'm sure you and Yohan and John Dias do but you're WRONG!"<br /><br />Well if you feminuts have your way you'll pass so many laws that we'll all be impoverished. <br /><br />CONTUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669598831813035918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-1555444315217451612010-12-05T11:31:31.098-06:002010-12-05T11:31:31.098-06:00@Bishop - no i was refering to you. I am not misr...@Bishop - no i was refering to you. I am not misrepresenting you. You have said it several times, incl my favourite quotation of women and the economy was a hang nail compared to an amputation for men. Stupid and ignorant comments about the economy: there you have it. I can probably go search for the actual (several) quotations, but since we both know you said it, do you really want me to show what an ignorant and now hypocritical moron you are? Up to you...<br /><br />Moreover, the issues you are discussing really belong to classism - which I already pointed out i.e. only high-paying and highly-educated-requiring positions will be able to provide benefits. <b>Also, it's very classist to assume women work b/c they want a "career". Most women, like men, work because <i>they have to. </i></b> This is important because you're assuming a universe where the caregiver (usually the woman) could just quit and/or be "taken care of" - <b>which is almost NEVER the case.</b> From this different perspective, you can see that mat/parental leave is a human right, not a privilege. <b> Or do you think only upper-middle class or richer families should exist?</b> I'm sure you and Yohan and John Dias do but you're WRONG!<br /><br />The other issue to consider is government support e.g. Canadians with children can get subsidies in order to support them (e.g. for daycare) and further subsidies for disabled children. Even the parent with partial custody e.g. "weekend dad" are eligible. http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/bnfts/cctb/menu-eng.html <--That's called giving a shit about children and promoting growth, unlike in the US. <b>You pick up one end of the stick, you pick up both ends of the stick</b>. IOW, you can't have it both ways. At the end of the day, you have to ask, <b>are children important? </b> If so, then people, both men and women, need the means and support to have them. I will never understand why this is toted as a "woman's" issue -it's not, it's an issue for everyone. For instance, are you not grateful that your parents were able to have you? <br /><br />Also, your assumptions such as the only way to have women/mothers in certain positions is to legislate a quota and the onus completely on the employer <b>only shows such a clear lack of imagination. </b> Xtra points out, it just could be illegal to ask whether the woman is a mother (similar to being illegal to ask their sexual orientation and religion.) In fact, there are a number of solutions, including preventing sexist fascist assholes like you from making totalitarian decisions.<br /><br />@Xtra - great points. :)Techttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09707524162506465881noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-20395173736820584042010-12-04T11:29:58.759-06:002010-12-04T11:29:58.759-06:00The only law I see needed on this is perhaps makin...The only law I see needed on this is perhaps making it illegal for an interviewer to ask if one has children. The assumption that a mother will be a bad employee. No assumption can be made if the information is not known. Something women can do is, if they are married demand equal home duties from husbands. <br /><br />Also, the employers that are giving the benefits are simply trying to keep vauled employees. It's not that it's their job to manage an employees private life or work-life balance. Losing a critical employee because another company is offering better pay and benefits effects a companies bottom line. A company I used to work for is suffering just that. Let's not forget that employee discontent causes the company problems too.Xtrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08919693590908994791noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-14066675485070665132010-12-04T10:00:57.996-06:002010-12-04T10:00:57.996-06:00@ Yohan
The problem is the money from somewhere t...@ Yohan<br /><br />The problem is the money from somewhere tends to come from men, and if you're taking money from men, while degrading and disenfranchising men at the same time, well, there's only so long that dog's gonna hunt.<br /><br />Random BrotherUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669598831813035918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-53594971206683214512010-12-04T05:18:26.037-06:002010-12-04T05:18:26.037-06:00Maybe TEC is mixing up my comment with your commen...Maybe TEC is mixing up my comment with your comment. <br /><br />I said, feminism is non-productive and costs a lot of money. <br /><br />I also said, many Western countries do not have money anymore, therefore they will have to cut public funds for feminist organizations.<br /><br />Feminism canot survive without money from 'somewhere'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-37627763017806879962010-12-04T04:23:39.797-06:002010-12-04T04:23:39.797-06:00TEC SAID: "Before Bishop foams at the mouth ...TEC SAID: "Before Bishop foams at the mouth again about how women are the cause of the economic collapse (as he has before), "<br /><br /><br />Kindly show me where I said that as I don't recall ever saying women were the cause of the economic collapse. Aren't you the one who is always hysterically whining about misrepresentation? Way to go team hypocrite.<br /><br />Random BrotherUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669598831813035918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-58711454105906363932010-12-04T04:04:49.293-06:002010-12-04T04:04:49.293-06:00@ David
Thank you for answering the question.
DA...@ David<br /><br />Thank you for answering the question.<br /><br />DAVID SAID: "I think businesses should do what they can to give male and female employees more flexible schedules, daycare, etc so that they can care for their kids. Plenty of businesses do this to some extent, as well as offering maternity/paternity leave, and this hasn't led to the collapse of the economy. (The current economic troubles have zilch to do with this.)"<br /><br /><br />This may work for larger businesses but it could be the kiss of death for small to mid sized ones. Also the fact that 'maternity/paternity leave hasn't lead to the collapse of the economy' doesn't mean such policies are good ideas, good for businesses, sustainable over the long term, nor that their negative effect is minimal.<br /><br /><br /><br />DAVID SAID: "I'm not sure what legislation is necessary, and what can be improved by changing attitudes and expectations, but it can be done."<br /><br />How in the world can you say this? If you don't know what is necessary then how can you be so sure? <br /><br />DAVID SAID: "Businesses want good employees, and they can get good employees not only by paying well but by providing them with benefits (like flexibility, daycare, etc)."<br /><br />In an economy with 9.8% unemployent businesses don't have to do any of this to get a good employee. Also as long as they can outsource laws like this will not help large amounts of women as companies who don't want to deal with this will outsource or go overseas and smaller companies will, IMHO, look for reasons NOT to hire women or women with children unless at the same time you also pass legislation mandating a certain amount of women in certain positions. And how will men react knowing that women will be legislated into jobs they don't necessarily deserve? Will her male coworkers feel she is an equal or just a privilidged joke? Who's going to mentor someone like that? There's already a saying that goes: Hire a woman, hire a lawsuit.<br /><br /><br />Can't you see the danger in these laws increases a businesses apprehension towards female hires?<br /><br />Also the idea of businesses opening daycares? While some do, what about the liabiity? There would need to be background checks for teachers, cooks, proper safety procedures and items, dozens of other issues to deal with. When litte Johnny punches little Suzie and Johnny and Suzies parents work together and are at each others throats? This is not a headache that a smart business would likely want.<br /><br />The bottom line for me is that if you go in this direction you turn business from an organization whose primary goal is to make money into basically a social organization for "equality" that may also make money. I don't think that our businesses will be able to stand up to foreign companies who are not so hamstrung by these laws in a ever increasingly competitive world economy.<br /><br />Random BrotherUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669598831813035918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-71076142897814013992010-12-03T18:53:26.071-06:002010-12-03T18:53:26.071-06:00It seems that you fail to grasp the reality of how...It seems that you fail to grasp the reality of how soundly that article was trounced in the comments by Ballgame and Robert.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-36130582904728171902010-12-03T16:27:00.174-06:002010-12-03T16:27:00.174-06:00wdodman, a lot of this stuff is dealt with in the ...wdodman, a lot of this stuff is dealt with in the Alas, a blog post I wrote about in the first place -- some of the relevant portions have already been quoted by tec several times in this discussion so far. See also some of the links in my "further reading" piece on the wage gap, also mentioned in the comments above.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00569290850910434331noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-28253277057437920602010-12-03T16:18:08.424-06:002010-12-03T16:18:08.424-06:00@David:
"It's a question of widespread se...@David:<br />"It's a question of widespread sexist assumptions that shunt women into lower-paying jobs. "<br /><br />Are you saying that women do not choose these jobs because they are closer to home, have shorter hours, are more flexible, are safer, etc? Please demonstrate how this is shunting because I see lots of men working shitty jobs too.<br /><br />Please show me the multitude of female engineers, miners, construction workers, electricians, plumbers, etc who cannot get jobs in their field because it is assumed they should be receptionists or some other lowly paid worker. Just as with male workers, if you don't have a caregiver at home, you sacrifice your career or you don't have kids!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-26589486761419347062010-12-03T14:20:35.595-06:002010-12-03T14:20:35.595-06:00@David
I think there's also a lot of classism...@David<br /><br />I think there's also a lot of classism involved ie usually flextime and daycare are only available in positions that pay well and require a higher level of education. Intersectionality! <br /><br />"Plenty of businesses do this to some extent, as well as offering maternity/paternity leave, and this hasn't led to the collapse of the economy. (The current economic troubles have zilch to do with this.)"<br /><br />Before Bishop foams at the mouth again about how women are the cause of the economic collapse (as he has before), I would say that at least in the US, there were several factors leading to the economic issues such as a prolonged economic boom previously (and since economies cycle) and of course, very poor banking practices that largely haven't changed much since the last major depression in the 30s.<br /><br />But then this isn't the place to discuss Keynesian economics. ;)Techttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09707524162506465881noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-31362909606903574712010-12-03T14:06:54.112-06:002010-12-03T14:06:54.112-06:00@Yohan - I asked YOU a question several times whic...@Yohan - I asked YOU a question several times which you willfully ignored. So tell you what, you answer MY question, and I will happily answer yours.Techttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09707524162506465881noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-43794894447143860942010-12-03T12:46:10.216-06:002010-12-03T12:46:10.216-06:00"DO ANY PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD BELIEVE THAT BUS..."DO ANY PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD BELIEVE THAT BUSINESSES HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO CONSIDER A WOMAN'S CARETAKING SITUATION WHEN FILLING A JOB POSITION?" <br /><br />I think businesses should do what they can to give male and female employees more flexible schedules, daycare, etc so that they can care for their kids. Plenty of businesses do this to some extent, as well as offering maternity/paternity leave, and this hasn't led to the collapse of the economy. (The current economic troubles have zilch to do with this.) <br /><br />I'm not sure what legislation is necessary, and what can be improved by changing attitudes and expectations, but it can be done. Businesses want good employees, and they can get good employees not only by paying well but by providing them with benefits (like flexibility, daycare, etc).Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00569290850910434331noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-50244804359777220552010-12-03T06:33:43.366-06:002010-12-03T06:33:43.366-06:00@ TEC:
You gonna keep straddling that fence or ar...@ TEC:<br /><br />You gonna keep straddling that fence or are you going to answer the damn question?<br /><br />Again<br /><br />DO ANY PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD BELIEVE THAT BUSINESSES HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO CONSIDER A WOMAN'S CARETAKING SITUATION WHEN FILLING A JOB POSITION?<br /><br />Yes or No.<br /><br />Random Brother.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669598831813035918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-82102889511660908772010-12-03T06:31:36.272-06:002010-12-03T06:31:36.272-06:00Suddenly feminist's keyboards fail them.
Rand...Suddenly feminist's keyboards fail them.<br /><br />Random Brother.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669598831813035918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-55884243560864818832010-12-03T02:17:16.942-06:002010-12-03T02:17:16.942-06:00@TEC
DO ANY PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD BELIEVE THAT BUS...@TEC<br /><br />DO ANY PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD BELIEVE THAT BUSINESSES HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO CONSIDER A WOMAN'S CARETAKING SITUATION WHEN FILLING A JOB POSITION?<br /><br />You still fail to give a clear answer to a clear question.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-50175808770119354792010-12-02T15:19:28.176-06:002010-12-02T15:19:28.176-06:00@Yohan - so then, I can assume that everything Hen...@Yohan - so then, I can assume that everything Henry Makov says you also agree with??? Or Christopher who wants to punch random strangers simply b/c they are women??? Well, okay, if you say so. <br /><br />As usual, you miss the point entirely: it's not whether I agree or disagree with Alas, a Blog, it's that, after pointing out TWICE that it wasn't my words, Bishop and yourself continued quoting as if it were my words. As I said, at best case, this is poor reading comprehension. You can't argue with someone like Bishop who doesn't comprehend what you're saying... it's pointless, and it's no longer a debate because debating implies rational discussion between two opposing, yet intelligent parties. Bishop is irrational and acting, ahem, hysterical...Techttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09707524162506465881noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-21710459584834251152010-12-02T05:53:26.550-06:002010-12-02T05:53:26.550-06:00Tec said...
@Bishop
Okay, you do realize that mos...<i>Tec said... <br />@Bishop<br />Okay, you do realize that most of what you quoted as what I was saying wasn't my words??? It was Alas, a Blog's post.</i><br /><br />I see no difference between TEC and Ampersands, both are following a certain feminist party-line, almost like identical twins.<br /><br />DO ANY PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD BELIEVE THAT BUSINESSES HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO CONSIDER A WOMAN'S CARETAKING SITUATION WHEN FILLING A JOB POSITION?<br /><br />Good question...I would say NO, why should they? Nowadays there are plenty of people looking for a job, and only a few vacancies. Therefore as employer I would accept the applicant who will bring me the best profit - troublefree. <br /><br />Only in case there are very few applicants and plenty of vacancies, employers might decide differently.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-5236236119774054512010-12-02T02:43:55.062-06:002010-12-02T02:43:55.062-06:00@ David
1. See that this thing here ?
It's ...@ David<br /><br />1. See that this thing here ?<br /><br />It's called a question mark. I WAS ASKING IF THAT WAS HER PLAN NOT STATING THAT IT WAS HER PLAN<br /><br />GOT IT? <br /><br />So I'm not misrepresenting her, I'm asking if she is going to do action x, not claiming that she is going to do action x, can you see where those things are different?<br /><br />2. There is no indication in anything she wrote that she disagrees with you, nor Alas a blog, which holds the the ridiculous notion that not catering to a woman's personal life = sexism. If I'm wrong she can just go ahead and say so. <br /><br />3. I said upstream that I will NOT go to Alas a Blog or whatever it's called because it sets off my McAffe virus alert. I will not jack up my computer for feminist bullshit.<br /><br />4. But since this is so fricking difficult, I will simply it even further -<br /><br />DO ANY PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD BELIEVE THAT BUSINESSES HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO CONSIDER A WOMAN'S CARETAKING SITUATION WHEN FILLING A JOB POSITION?<br /><br />A simple yes or no will suffice.<br /><br />Random BrotherUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669598831813035918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-70436294555323333562010-12-02T00:58:49.049-06:002010-12-02T00:58:49.049-06:00"Is this your new plan? To claim that everyon..."Is this your new plan? To claim that everyone is misrepresenting what you said and then calling on David to ban them?"<br /><br />There are a couple of things to point out here:<br /><br />1) You were misrepresenting her, confusing what she wrote with what she quoted from the Alas, a blog article. Which would have been clear if you'd actually had read what she wrote.<br /><br />2) You're misrepresenting her now. Where did she call for you to be banned? She just said it was pointless to argue with you since you're not actually reading what she's writing (or the article being discussed).Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00569290850910434331noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-44264590328851979342010-12-02T00:12:33.031-06:002010-12-02T00:12:33.031-06:00@ TEC:
Don't be disingenuos. Is this your ne...@ TEC:<br /><br />Don't be disingenuos. Is this your new plan? To claim that everyone is misrepresenting what you said and then calling on David to ban them?<br />Sickening.<br /><br />Fine then. I'll simply and try to pin down what your actual point of view is.<br /><br />1. If a business does not take into account a female employee's child care or child raising situation is it sexism in any way?<br /><br />2. What should be done to equalize the alleged wage gap, if it is due to women working less?<br /><br />A simple yes or no will suffice to start.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12669598831813035918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-5228215528122763692010-12-01T23:05:41.475-06:002010-12-01T23:05:41.475-06:00@David
"It's a more subtle sort of sexis...@David<br /><br />"It's a more subtle sort of sexism that infects the thinking of men and women both, and tends to shunt women into jobs and careers that pay less because they're associated with women."<br /><br />How can it be sexism when it's not the fault of the male gender?<br /><br />Women choose to be in careers that pay less. No one is stopping these women to do better. (especially men) It's not the fault of men or patriarchy, which simply means it’s not sexism.<br /><br />I think its time for women to hold some accountability for once! And stop blaming men or some other BS for their own failures! Yes that’s right, the failures that they are accountable for as they did it by their choice. No one is holding a gun to their head telling them to be in a less paying career.<br /><br />Face up to it and stop running behind the same old "poor oppressed women are victims for this or that reason" Act like adults for once and not like whiny children that believe they shouldn’t have any accountability.<br /><br />For christ sake, feminism makes women look like foolsnicko81mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01019892922597391646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9111611851606292564.post-66309073795567374052010-12-01T21:11:11.102-06:002010-12-01T21:11:11.102-06:00@Bishop
Okay, you do realize that most of what yo...@Bishop<br /><br />Okay, you do realize that most of what you quoted as what <i>I</i> was saying wasn't my words??? It was Alas, a Blog's post. Which you would know if you bothered to read the OP. And my original comment, and the comment after that, pointing out a second time it was Alas'.<br /><br />Unfortunately, since you miss the point completely, there's no point to continue with you on good faith that e.g. you're even bothered to try to understand my points or want a constructive debate. <b>Instead, you're delibrately misconstruing what I say and literally putting words in my mouth </b> which as best case scenario, is due to poor reading comprehension. <br /><br />Read the OP (since you haven't already), incl Alas,a Blog's critique as CITED then make an informed comment. Again, try, really this time, to read...Techttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09707524162506465881noreply@blogger.com