The Biden Administration

262,517 Views | 5465 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by James Henderson
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IseWolf22 said:

Steve Videtich said:

An area like yours is probably not a high priority to add new high density housing with the Affirmative Fair Housing Plan. They are targeting areas like mine. Imagine if those filling these units were people that were newly appointed citizens, under the Left's new infrastructure bill, and they were living off of programs from this same bill. Now you have lots of new neighbors, not contributing to the local tax revenue, and also living in housing they did nothing to earn, but were given. How do you think that would look?

I'm not okay with the government choosing my neighborhood. I'd be surprised if you were okay with it.
Mandated single family zoning IS the government choosing neighborhoods. Up zoning is far more in line with free market development than the status quo. For older neighborhoods, these zoning decisions are often decades old and any attempt to change them is met with fierce resistance from entrenched interests (the residents). If someone wants to sell their land to a developer who wants to make a condo or duplex, why are we using government to block that. That homeowner has more valuable land if it can be used for more purposes.

Also, maybe we are reading different articles, but from what I've seen the entire point is to focus on density in places like Civ's neighborhood, not yours. Basically suburbs that were built decades ago and have since been integrated into the ever expanding city. At some point those neighborhoods should be able to densify, or increasingly valuable land is being blocked from development.


Not by the Federal Mafia!!! As I have stated a number of times, the Cities, Counties, and States need to quit taking funding from the Federal Government Mafia!

Use your tax revenue wisely and quit relying on the Mafia!!!
Don’t be deceived by a fool…
IseWolf22
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packwest said:

caryking said:

Folks, we can't afford the Iron Dome spending as well as anything more that the Dems are proposing!

I'll say it again: we have a One Trillion Dollar deficit right now!!! The debt ceiling needs to be increased just to allow us to try and fund this One Trillion Dollars!!! So, let this run the next Ten Years and that's Ten Trillion Dollars that needs to be funded!!!

Remember this, NOBODY is going to buy our bonds! That means, they will try and get the Treasury to print more money and have the Federal Reserve place it on the balance sheet!

Anytime you hear anyone, in the pathetic media, say we are at risk of killing the full faith and credit of the US, that is YOU, ME, YOUR CHILDREN, YOUR GRANDCHILDREN. They will ask us to pay this back via raising taxes for all!!!!

This country is BROKE!!!! Spending, by both parties, has caused this! It's time to call your representatives (I have) and tell them to vote NO on any new spending, vote NO on a continuing resolution, vote NO on increasing the debt limit!

It's time for all of us to buckle up our belts and TELL our Representatives to cut spending significantly!!!!
Cary -- this isn't meant to be confrontational, but I'm curious where you think we should cut to balance the budget?

I've played around with those online calculators before and, man, it'll be painful. Do you see any new revenue sources as part of this?

And I agree -- fully -- that the debt is unsustainable and we've got to find a way to get out of this spiral.
Entitlements have to be focus #1, Not because they are currently the largest driver of debt, but because of the absolutely massive projected shortfalls over the next 50 years as our population ages. It'd be great to change SS to a form of mandated, private 401k (I don't like mandating it, but it will never pass otherwise).

We need to look for ways to reduce the military budget without harming our defensive capabilities. That means looking for waste in the contracting process, as well as a reduction in being the world police.

Domestic, discretionary spending can be reduced by consolidation of various agencies. Entire cabinet positions could be abolished with key functions being rolled into another area. We have way too much sprawl, redundancy, and overlapping missions and it's not efficient.

On taxation, we do need to change the current tax structure. Move to more consumption and sin taxes. If we had a VAT, we could reduce income taxes and eliminate corporate taxes. In general I'd be more amenable to raising revenue if we were committed to putting surpluses into debt reduction, but the cynic in me says it will just be spent elsewhere
packwest
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IseWolf22 said:

packwest said:

caryking said:

Folks, we can't afford the Iron Dome spending as well as anything more that the Dems are proposing!

I'll say it again: we have a One Trillion Dollar deficit right now!!! The debt ceiling needs to be increased just to allow us to try and fund this One Trillion Dollars!!! So, let this run the next Ten Years and that's Ten Trillion Dollars that needs to be funded!!!

Remember this, NOBODY is going to buy our bonds! That means, they will try and get the Treasury to print more money and have the Federal Reserve place it on the balance sheet!

Anytime you hear anyone, in the pathetic media, say we are at risk of killing the full faith and credit of the US, that is YOU, ME, YOUR CHILDREN, YOUR GRANDCHILDREN. They will ask us to pay this back via raising taxes for all!!!!

This country is BROKE!!!! Spending, by both parties, has caused this! It's time to call your representatives (I have) and tell them to vote NO on any new spending, vote NO on a continuing resolution, vote NO on increasing the debt limit!

It's time for all of us to buckle up our belts and TELL our Representatives to cut spending significantly!!!!
Cary -- this isn't meant to be confrontational, but I'm curious where you think we should cut to balance the budget?

I've played around with those online calculators before and, man, it'll be painful. Do you see any new revenue sources as part of this?

And I agree -- fully -- that the debt is unsustainable and we've got to find a way to get out of this spiral.
Entitlements have to be focus #1, Not because they are currently the largest driver of debt, but because of the absolutely massive projected shortfalls over the next 50 years as our population ages. It'd be great to change SS to a form of mandated, private 401k (I don't like mandating it, but it will never pass otherwise).

We need to look for ways to reduce the military budget without harming our defensive capabilities. That means looking for waste in the contracting process, as well as a reduction in being the world police.

Domestic, discretionary spending can be reduced by consolidation of various agencies. Entire cabinet positions could be abolished with key functions being rolled into another area. We have way too much sprawl, redundancy, and overlapping missions and it's not efficient.

On taxation, we do need to change the current tax structure. Move to more consumption and sin taxes. If we had a VAT, we could reduce income taxes and eliminate corporate taxes. In general I'd be more amenable to raising revenue if we were committed to putting surpluses into debt reduction, but the cynic in me says it will just be spent elsewhere
Building off of this bolded part, I think you could combine various welfare and social programs too. I believe it was Utah (or somewhere else) that experimented with this consolidation and saw (a) tremendous savings and (b) increase in benefits being used as intended.

You have six different bureaucracies handling six different programs -- each with overlap.

That won't solve the whole deficit, but it's a big piece of it.
Glasswolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Actually I'm not proud of abortion up the point of birth and my knowledge it's never happened. I am supportive of a women's right to choose as I am a mans or any humans right to choose . I pray they choose adoption. And I never tried to register people to vote Democrat. I just registered people to vote regardless of party. So your narrative is once again shot down. I am not registered as a Democrat. I am unaffiliated. I vote for the best candidate period fo back and look at my previous post. I voted republican just as much as Democrat. I'm currently helping Donnie Harrison, a republican raise money to get re-elected as wake county sheriff.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Glasswolf said:

Actually I'm not proud of abortion up the point of birth and my knowledge it's never happened. I am supportive of a women's right to choose as I am a mans or any humans right to choose . I pray they choose adoption. And I never tried to register people to vote Democrat. I just registered people to vote. No your narrative is once again shot down. I am not registered as a Democrat. I am unaffiliated. I vote for the best candidate period fo back and look at my previous post. I voted republican just as much as Democrat. I'm currently helping Donnie Harrison, a republican raise money to get re-elected as wake county sheriff.


I think Donnie is a good guy!
Don’t be deceived by a fool…
Glasswolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Donnie is a good man and he was a good sheriff. Also support Steve troxler another republican
Wayland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Glasswolf said:

Donnie is a good man and he was a good sheriff. Also support Steve troxler another republican
Donny was a good bowler, and a good man. He was one of us. He was a man who loved the outdoors... and bowling, and as a surfer he explored the beaches of Southern California, from La Jolla to Leo Carrillo and... up to... Pismo.

He died, like so many young men of his generation, he died before his time. In your wisdom, Lord, you took him, as you took so many bright flowering young men at Khe Sanh, at Langdok, at Hill 364. These young men gave their lives. And so would Donny.

Donny, who loved bowling.

And so, Theodore Donald Karabotsos, in accordance with what we think your dying wishes might well have been, we commit your final mortal remains to the bosom of the Pacific Ocean, which you loved so well.

Good night, sweet prince
"Good for me but not for thee..."
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

Glasswolf said:

Donnie is a good man and he was a good sheriff. Also support Steve troxler another republican
Donny was a good bowler, and a good man. He was one of us. He was a man who loved the outdoors... and bowling, and as a surfer he explored the beaches of Southern California, from La Jolla to Leo Carrillo and... up to... Pismo.

He died, like so many young men of his generation, he died before his time. In your wisdom, Lord, you took him, as you took so many bright flowering young men at Khe Sanh, at Langdok, at Hill 364. These young men gave their lives. And so would Donny.

Donny, who loved bowling.

And so, Theodore Donald Karabotsos, in accordance with what we think your dying wishes might well have been, we commit your final mortal remains to the bosom of the Pacific Ocean, which you loved so well.

Good night, sweet prince
Hokie, what the hell are you talking about?
Don’t be deceived by a fool…
Glasswolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

Glasswolf said:

Donnie is a good man and he was a good sheriff. Also support Steve troxler another republican
Donny was a good bowler, and a good man. He was one of us. He was a man who loved the outdoors... and bowling, and as a surfer he explored the beaches of Southern California, from La Jolla to Leo Carrillo and... up to... Pismo.

He died, like so many young men of his generation, he died before his time. In your wisdom, Lord, you took him, as you took so many bright flowering young men at Khe Sanh, at Langdok, at Hill 364. These young men gave their lives. And so would Donny.

Donny, who loved bowling.

And so, Theodore Donald Karabotsos, in accordance with what we think your dying wishes might well have been, we commit your final mortal remains to the bosom of the Pacific Ocean, which you loved so well.

Good night, sweet prince
Hokie, what the hell are you talking about?


I'm glad I wasn't the only one wondering wth he's talking about
mrcpack17
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You gonna tell 'em?
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
mrcpack17 said:

You gonna tell 'em?
"Good for me but not for thee..."
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

mrcpack17 said:

You gonna tell 'em?

I don't think I've seen that movie in its entirety. That's why I didn't pick-up on your reference...
Don’t be deceived by a fool…
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packwest said:

IseWolf22 said:

packwest said:

caryking said:

Folks, we can't afford the Iron Dome spending as well as anything more that the Dems are proposing!

I'll say it again: we have a One Trillion Dollar deficit right now!!! The debt ceiling needs to be increased just to allow us to try and fund this One Trillion Dollars!!! So, let this run the next Ten Years and that's Ten Trillion Dollars that needs to be funded!!!

Remember this, NOBODY is going to buy our bonds! That means, they will try and get the Treasury to print more money and have the Federal Reserve place it on the balance sheet!

Anytime you hear anyone, in the pathetic media, say we are at risk of killing the full faith and credit of the US, that is YOU, ME, YOUR CHILDREN, YOUR GRANDCHILDREN. They will ask us to pay this back via raising taxes for all!!!!

This country is BROKE!!!! Spending, by both parties, has caused this! It's time to call your representatives (I have) and tell them to vote NO on any new spending, vote NO on a continuing resolution, vote NO on increasing the debt limit!

It's time for all of us to buckle up our belts and TELL our Representatives to cut spending significantly!!!!
Cary -- this isn't meant to be confrontational, but I'm curious where you think we should cut to balance the budget?

I've played around with those online calculators before and, man, it'll be painful. Do you see any new revenue sources as part of this?

And I agree -- fully -- that the debt is unsustainable and we've got to find a way to get out of this spiral.
Entitlements have to be focus #1, Not because they are currently the largest driver of debt, but because of the absolutely massive projected shortfalls over the next 50 years as our population ages. It'd be great to change SS to a form of mandated, private 401k (I don't like mandating it, but it will never pass otherwise).

We need to look for ways to reduce the military budget without harming our defensive capabilities. That means looking for waste in the contracting process, as well as a reduction in being the world police.

Domestic, discretionary spending can be reduced by consolidation of various agencies. Entire cabinet positions could be abolished with key functions being rolled into another area. We have way too much sprawl, redundancy, and overlapping missions and it's not efficient.

On taxation, we do need to change the current tax structure. Move to more consumption and sin taxes. If we had a VAT, we could reduce income taxes and eliminate corporate taxes. In general I'd be more amenable to raising revenue if we were committed to putting surpluses into debt reduction, but the cynic in me says it will just be spent elsewhere
Building off of this bolded part, I think you could combine various welfare and social programs too. I believe it was Utah (or somewhere else) that experimented with this consolidation and saw (a) tremendous savings and (b) increase in benefits being used as intended.

You have six different bureaucracies handling six different programs -- each with overlap.

That won't solve the whole deficit, but it's a big piece of it.
Who would give up your Social Security retirement benefit in order to stop the program?

Example: If you are under the age of 60 (or any age), as of a certain date, you would not receive Social Security at retirement. We moderate the payments for those that will receive Social Security and balance the program, then, shut it DOWN for everyone else!!! Its a bad Ponzi scheme, at best!

I'm onboard!
Don’t be deceived by a fool…
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is reason for me not to trust you…
"Good for me but not for thee..."
IseWolf22
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packwest said:

IseWolf22 said:

packwest said:

caryking said:

Folks, we can't afford the Iron Dome spending as well as anything more that the Dems are proposing!

I'll say it again: we have a One Trillion Dollar deficit right now!!! The debt ceiling needs to be increased just to allow us to try and fund this One Trillion Dollars!!! So, let this run the next Ten Years and that's Ten Trillion Dollars that needs to be funded!!!

Remember this, NOBODY is going to buy our bonds! That means, they will try and get the Treasury to print more money and have the Federal Reserve place it on the balance sheet!

Anytime you hear anyone, in the pathetic media, say we are at risk of killing the full faith and credit of the US, that is YOU, ME, YOUR CHILDREN, YOUR GRANDCHILDREN. They will ask us to pay this back via raising taxes for all!!!!

This country is BROKE!!!! Spending, by both parties, has caused this! It's time to call your representatives (I have) and tell them to vote NO on any new spending, vote NO on a continuing resolution, vote NO on increasing the debt limit!

It's time for all of us to buckle up our belts and TELL our Representatives to cut spending significantly!!!!
Cary -- this isn't meant to be confrontational, but I'm curious where you think we should cut to balance the budget?

I've played around with those online calculators before and, man, it'll be painful. Do you see any new revenue sources as part of this?

And I agree -- fully -- that the debt is unsustainable and we've got to find a way to get out of this spiral.
Entitlements have to be focus #1, Not because they are currently the largest driver of debt, but because of the absolutely massive projected shortfalls over the next 50 years as our population ages. It'd be great to change SS to a form of mandated, private 401k (I don't like mandating it, but it will never pass otherwise).

We need to look for ways to reduce the military budget without harming our defensive capabilities. That means looking for waste in the contracting process, as well as a reduction in being the world police.

Domestic, discretionary spending can be reduced by consolidation of various agencies. Entire cabinet positions could be abolished with key functions being rolled into another area. We have way too much sprawl, redundancy, and overlapping missions and it's not efficient.

On taxation, we do need to change the current tax structure. Move to more consumption and sin taxes. If we had a VAT, we could reduce income taxes and eliminate corporate taxes. In general I'd be more amenable to raising revenue if we were committed to putting surpluses into debt reduction, but the cynic in me says it will just be spent elsewhere
Building off of this bolded part, I think you could combine various welfare and social programs too. I believe it was Utah (or somewhere else) that experimented with this consolidation and saw (a) tremendous savings and (b) increase in benefits being used as intended.

You have six different bureaucracies handling six different programs -- each with overlap.

That won't solve the whole deficit, but it's a big piece of it.
Definitely. If we are going to have welfare, it should all be run from a single agency with straightforward rules and qualifications. You could probably save a significant amount doing so. Less complicated rules would make it harder for fraudsters to game the system and easier for the truly needy to get aid.
IseWolf22
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:


Who would give up your Social Security retirement benefit in order to stop the program?
My father has been telling me to not count on SS since I was 10. It has zero factor in my retirement planning.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

This is reason for me not to trust you…
Hey, I'm 55 and have paid in a ton! I'd give it up today and let people 60 (or any age agreed upon) receive their amount. This program needs to go away!

Anybody not trusting me because I'm willing to give up money paid in so, my daughters don't have this over their heads, well... that probably says more about you, than me...
Don’t be deceived by a fool…
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IseWolf22 said:

caryking said:


Who would give up your Social Security retirement benefit in order to stop the program?
My father has been telling me to not count on SS since I was 10. It has zero factor in my retirement planning.
I agree! I care more about my daughters than myself. I'll leave them with plenty of assets so they will have a start! That is.. if the Dems, and probably some Pubs, don't try and tax inheritance more!
Don’t be deceived by a fool…
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

This is reason for me not to trust you…
Hey, I'm 55 and have paid in a ton! I'd give it up today and let people 60 (or any age agreed upon) receive their amount. This program needs to go away!

Anybody not trusting me because I'm willing to give up money paid in so, my daughters don't have this over their heads, well... that probably says more about you, than me...
. No, I do t trust you because you haven't watched the Big Lebowski all the way through. I don't care about your SS stance
"Good for me but not for thee..."
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

caryking said:

hokiewolf said:

This is reason for me not to trust you…
Hey, I'm 55 and have paid in a ton! I'd give it up today and let people 60 (or any age agreed upon) receive their amount. This program needs to go away!

Anybody not trusting me because I'm willing to give up money paid in so, my daughters don't have this over their heads, well... that probably says more about you, than me...
. No, I do t trust you because you haven't watched the Big Lebowski all the way through. I don't care about your SS stance


I gotcha you…. Yea, that's probably a good reason not to trust me. I've heard it's a great movie!!!
Don’t be deceived by a fool…
WPNfamily
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Just a weekly reminder that Sleepy Joe is a vegetable!
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
WPNfamily said:

Just a weekly reminder that Sleepy Joe is a vegetable!
That's just funny as hell!
Don’t be deceived by a fool…
Steve Videtich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IseWolf22 said:

Steve Videtich said:

An area like yours is probably not a high priority to add new high density housing with the Affirmative Fair Housing Plan. They are targeting areas like mine. Imagine if those filling these units were people that were newly appointed citizens, under the Left's new infrastructure bill, and they were living off of programs from this same bill. Now you have lots of new neighbors, not contributing to the local tax revenue, and also living in housing they did nothing to earn, but were given. How do you think that would look?

I'm not okay with the government choosing my neighborhood. I'd be surprised if you were okay with it.
Mandated single family zoning IS the government choosing neighborhoods. Up zoning is far more in line with free market development than the status quo. For older neighborhoods, these zoning decisions are often decades old and any attempt to change them is met with fierce resistance from entrenched interests (the residents). If someone wants to sell their land to a developer who wants to make a condo or duplex, why are we using government to block that. That homeowner has more valuable land if it can be used for more purposes.

Also, maybe we are reading different articles, but from what I've seen the entire point is to focus on density in places like Civ's neighborhood, not yours. Basically suburbs that were built decades ago and have since been integrated into the ever expanding city. At some point those neighborhoods should be able to densify, or increasingly valuable land is being blocked from development.


As cities grow, the fringes of urban areas will change as well. That's obvious. Utah had the largest % growth since the previous census. Here in Salt Lake County, we are surrounded by mountains. In 5-10 years there may not be any more raw land to develop.

When that happens, yes, changes may take place. You're already seeing tear downs and rebuilds in older neighborhoods, including higher density housing. What I'm more focused upon, is the resettlement of newly appointed citizens, placed in government provided housing. That is not a local government choice. My fear is that it becomes a bargaining chip for the current administration to hold over states for new money.

Again, I like sharing a neighborhood with folks that worked as I did, to live here. When the handouts start, I'll move.
Oldsouljer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Well, yes, I don't think anyone is claiming that a lot of fraudulent votes for Trump were found.
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
hokiewolf said:

This is reason for me not to trust you…

Cary, much like Donny, is out of his element.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

hokiewolf said:

This is reason for me not to trust you…

Cary, much like Donny, is out of his element.
Thanks Civ! When I read things like your post, I just consider the source...
Don’t be deceived by a fool…
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Things just stink!!




Don’t be deceived by a fool…
mrcpack17
How long do you want to ignore this user?
mrcpack17
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

Civilized said:

hokiewolf said:

This is reason for me not to trust you…

Cary, much like Donny, is out of his element.
Thanks Civ! When I read things like your post, I just consider the source.
You really need to watch the movie....
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Let me give you guys how this Arizona audit needs to be looked at...

If you have 100, 1dollar bills with 17 being counterfeit. Every time you count the 100, 1 dollar bills, you will always get, how many? 100

The audit revealed that the recount netted roughly the same number of ballots. Ok, with that result, everyone can say, we had the same number of votes and Biden won.

Like the 100, 1 dollar bills, if you pull the 17 counterfeit bills out, do you still have 100, 1 dollar bills? No, you have 83, 1 dollar bills.

So, the audit also listed a number of categories that shouldn't be in the final count (the same as the 17 counterfeit). One example is: we had roughly 32K votes that were duplicates! So, we counted 16K votes twice. How did they vote? I don't know!

What we do know is that the State of Arizona certified an invalid election result. That in of itself can be enough to decertify and bring charges against those that signed the certification.

Now, why do you think the Governor of Arizona is fighting this in the public? He has liability!!!
Don’t be deceived by a fool…
Steve Videtich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

Things just stink!!







Wasn't it discovered, not long ago, that the FBI was online stirring up the entire scheme to kidnap and kill the Mich governor and that a handful of the Proud Boys got caught up and went along with it? Is it too far off a reach to think that something similar could've been at play on Jan 6?
Glasswolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Steve Videtich said:

caryking said:

Things just stink!!







Wasn't it discovered, not long ago, that the FBI was online stirring up the entire scheme to kidnap and kill the Mich governor and that a handful of the Proud Boys got caught up and went along with it? Is it too far off a reach to think that something similar could've been at play on Jan 6?


Haven't seen or read any such thing. Some of what I've read concerning the Arizona recount is people voting from one address and being registered at another address. Same as absentee voting from overseas. Having a address in Arizona but voting from another address.
Steve Videtich
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Glasswolf said:

Steve Videtich said:

caryking said:

Things just stink!!







Wasn't it discovered, not long ago, that the FBI was online stirring up the entire scheme to kidnap and kill the Mich governor and that a handful of the Proud Boys got caught up and went along with it? Is it too far off a reach to think that something similar could've been at play on Jan 6?


Haven't seen or read any such thing. Some of what I've read concerning the Arizona recount is people voting from one address and being registered at another address. Same as absentee voting from overseas. Having a address in Arizona but voting from another address.


Of course you haven't. CNN would not have covered it.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Steve Videtich said:

caryking said:

Things just stink!!







Wasn't it discovered, not long ago, that the FBI was online stirring up the entire scheme to kidnap and kill the Mich governor and that a handful of the Proud Boys got caught up and went along with it? Is it too far off a reach to think that something similar could've been at play on Jan 6?


Yes! Of the 18 people involved with the Michigan Governor plot, 12 were FBI informants and maybe a few FBI agents! The head of the FBI in the district where the Michigan Governor debacle happened, well… get this…. where do you think he was transferred? Washington DC!

Some are saying that the DC Jan 6th debacle wasn't an intelligence failure; rather an intelligence operational failure!!!
Don’t be deceived by a fool…
First Page Last Page
Page 78 of 157
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.