The Atlasian Sentinel

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Ah, something new to read over breakfeast.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'm curious as to why a socially conservative economically liberal pseudo-southern populist would support a west coast socially liberal free-trader, but not much ever makes sense here in Atlasia-land.

Because he believes that PiT will be more active and knowledgeable on the issues (my opinion).

Ben would vote for a kitchen appliance if it was endorsed by the RPP.

Thanks Marokai, Now I know "what" we can run in the Pacific against MaxQue.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Excellent!

I'll admit to being pleasantly surprised.

In truth I am a little bit as well.

Well, I will be conducting an interview with somebody tomorrow (not a government official), but I would certainly like to interview all you senators, especially as things quiet down in the off season.

My PM box is always open! I promise to make plenty of controversial remarks to get you lots of traffic.

Mine is open as well. I probably will generate some controversy as well especially with the ideas I am cooking up .

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I could give a good humorous interview if people are up for a good laugh.

How to Get A Girl In 10 Days
By Governor Duke

10 days? I once proposed to a girl in 10 minutes.

How about proposing a concession in 10 miliseconds. I am getting tired

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I could give a good humorous interview if people are up for a good laugh.

How to Get A Girl In 10 Days
By Governor Duke

10 days? I once proposed to a girl in 10 minutes.

Please don't hack other people's accounts, BushOklahoma.

Now that explains his last minute disorganized Write-in campaign against me. After all I did for him in the Special Election

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I could give a good humorous interview if people are up for a good laugh.

How to Get A Girl In 10 Days
By Governor Duke

10 days? I once proposed to a girl in 10 minutes.

Please don't hack other people's accounts, BushOklahoma.

LOL! You hit that one out of the park.

I could give a good humorous interview if people are up for a good laugh.

How to Get A Girl In 10 Days
By Governor Duke

10 days? I once proposed to a girl in 10 minutes.

Please don't hack other people's accounts, BushOklahoma.

Now that explains his last minute disorganized Write-in campaign against me. After all I did for him in the Special Election

It's politics. If I lose, I'll simply switch parties and run again like my hero Arlen Specter! _{unless the Lord comes for his church before then.}

Then I will be Pat Toomey.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I will oppose any attempts to reduce the number of regions in Atlasia. I will compromise to 4 but 3 or less is impossible.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

How about this:

Reduce the Senate to 5 at-large Senators, making sure all elections to the more prestigious body are exciting.

Create a House, with 15 members, 3 max from each region, made up of 3 members from each regional legislature (if they exist) to incentivize regional constitutional reform and activity.

Abolish regional executive and judicial branch.

Require national legislation to pass both chambers. All financial legislation must originate in the Senate. Other legislation can only be in one chamber at a time, may be amended by each chamber respectively, first by the originating chamber, then by the other, and finally again by the originating before it must be passed by the second chamber as it stands.

You might as well abolish the regions all together then. Not on your life Senator.

I like regional governments.

As do I.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Why does your "Old Senate" only have 9 members?

By the way, relating to the whole Constitution problem, I've offered a major Amendment for consideration by the Senate. Feel free to tear it apart. Seriously though, I invite you all to jump into the debate when MasterJedi opens up the thread in the Government board. You guys are allowed to post in those deliberations and this is an important Amendment (that you will all, hopefully, ge tot vote on).

He forgot one of the JCP Senators. It should be 4-3-3.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I expect everyone is waiting for the court challenge to the election results to start. If we can get the runoff expect activity to shoot upwards.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I agree with Senator-elect on the SoEA, and I would like to see more interaction between the cabinet members and the Senate.

As for unnecessary regions I would disagree that the Judicial officer ensures that all three branches are represented in the Regions, and since this is an American simulation I would prefer to keep that. I also think that risks weakening the regions. The Lt. Governor serves no purpose except make daily inquires on the health of the Governor. LOL . As such I think it is not the end of the world if isn't filled yet keeping the position around can be a good opportunity to allow a newbie to get good feel for running for, and holding, an officer before becoming Governor, or Senator.

Finally the idea of redistricting every year by the Senate without the consent of the regions would number one violate my principles of regionalism and more importantly sets a precedent whereby the Senate could gerrymander them to preserve the majority in power at the time. It sets a very bad precedent.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would urge all Atlasians to accept this rulling for the good of the country and to not hold any bitterness, anger, or resentement over this rulling.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would urge all Atlasians to accept this rulling for the good of the country and to not hold any bitterness, anger, or resentement over this rulling.

Accepted. Was there a fear that we wouldn't?

I totally missed all the excitement today. Too bad. Well, I congratulate Lief and BK on a well run, clean campaign and I look forward to working with them in the next term.

No but there were protests in the streets of Nyman according to the GM. Also there were some threats from "certain" people.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

    

it is better than nothing.

As long as people are lazy and refuse to take responsibililty for the own well being, no reform will be affordable. A better term for this is third party Health care. People currently view health insurance the same way. Instead of comparison shopping, asking about prices and generics, they just hand over the card be done with it. Prices can very be as much as 19% among hospitals. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

    

it is better than nothing.

As long as people are lazy and refuse to take responsibililty for the own well being, no reform will be affordable. A better term for this is third party Health care. People currently view health insurance the same way. Instead of comparison shopping, asking about prices and generics, they just hand over the card be done with it. Prices can very be as much as 19% among hospitals. 

There are a lot of things wrong with what you just said. First of all, unlike with a consumer good or something, health insurance doesn't follow a lot of the normal rules of supply and demand. You can "shop around" for a new TV because if you don't find one that you like or one that is cheap enough, you can just not buy one or buy a used one or buy a smaller one. With health insurance when you're sick, on the other hand, you either buy it or you die; the supplier has all the power and the consumer has very little. Secondly, in many areas, there's no such thing as choice between insurance options, as there are only one or two insurance providers in the area. This is especially problematic in rural areas. Finally, depending on your insurance plan, you might not be able to "shop around" when it comes to hospitals or treatments either, as often times your insurance company tells you where you should go or will only pay for treatment at certain hospitals.

In some cases you are right but not all surgeries are life and death and many are completely elective. Health Consumerism can be made possible with a few simple reforms. Like the lack of competition and the almost cartel like relationship between Hospitals/Doctors and the insurance companies. I am in support of some kind of plan to help the poor, but I would oppose all such measures untill these  issues are addressed.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

    

it is better than nothing.

As long as people are lazy and refuse to take responsibililty for the own well being, no reform will be affordable. A better term for this is third party Health care. People currently view health insurance the same way. Instead of comparison shopping, asking about prices and generics, they just hand over the card be done with it. Prices can very be as much as 19% among hospitals. 

There are a lot of things wrong with what you just said. First of all, unlike with a consumer good or something, health insurance doesn't follow a lot of the normal rules of supply and demand. You can "shop around" for a new TV because if you don't find one that you like or one that is cheap enough, you can just not buy one or buy a used one or buy a smaller one. With health insurance when you're sick, on the other hand, you either buy it or you die; the supplier has all the power and the consumer has very little. Secondly, in many areas, there's no such thing as choice between insurance options, as there are only one or two insurance providers in the area. This is especially problematic in rural areas. Finally, depending on your insurance plan, you might not be able to "shop around" when it comes to hospitals or treatments either, as often times your insurance company tells you where you should go or will only pay for treatment at certain hospitals.

You know you can walk into an ER for free and they have to take you.

As long as people are lazy and refuse to take responsibililty for the own well being, no reform will be affordable. A better term for this is third party Health care. People currently view health insurance the same way. Instead of comparison shopping, asking about prices and generics, they just hand over the card be done with it. Prices can very be as much as 19% among hospitals. 

1. They're often forced into one by their employer. As the business secures deals with the insurance company, it is far cheaper than if you bought it on your own. Very few people can afford to pay premiums without the aid of an employer.

2. The health insurance industry is not competitive at all. As to why, it probably has to do with over regulation combined with excellent lobbying.

And is there a reason why those two things can't be corrected. If people shopped around or at least those who could did, it will decrease prices making insurance more affordable and encourage price competition. You change regulation that hurts competition and work to again reduce prices through competition. I know, when my dad got laid off we would have to have paid three times as much for the insurance, allmost 1,000 dollars a month to keep it, then we did when he was employed. It was pretty damn good coverage two, and as such it had the price to match. We need to get those prices down and encourage ways to help people afford there health care once they get laid off. It will be much easier to cover everyone once we achieve what I am talking about, then to just jump in an pick up the tab.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Are we going to finish the whole debate before it even hits the Senate floor?

Yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

    

it is better than nothing.

As long as people are lazy and refuse to take responsibililty for the own well being, no reform will be affordable. A better term for this is third party Health care. People currently view health insurance the same way. Instead of comparison shopping, asking about prices and generics, they just hand over the card be done with it. Prices can very be as much as 19% among hospitals. 

There are a lot of things wrong with what you just said. First of all, unlike with a consumer good or something, health insurance doesn't follow a lot of the normal rules of supply and demand. You can "shop around" for a new TV because if you don't find one that you like or one that is cheap enough, you can just not buy one or buy a used one or buy a smaller one. With health insurance when you're sick, on the other hand, you either buy it or you die; the supplier has all the power and the consumer has very little. Secondly, in many areas, there's no such thing as choice between insurance options, as there are only one or two insurance providers in the area. This is especially problematic in rural areas. Finally, depending on your insurance plan, you might not be able to "shop around" when it comes to hospitals or treatments either, as often times your insurance company tells you where you should go or will only pay for treatment at certain hospitals.

You know you can walk into an ER for free and they have to take you.

As long as people are lazy and refuse to take responsibililty for the own well being, no reform will be affordable. A better term for this is third party Health care. People currently view health insurance the same way. Instead of comparison shopping, asking about prices and generics, they just hand over the card be done with it. Prices can very be as much as 19% among hospitals. 

1. They're often forced into one by their employer. As the business secures deals with the insurance company, it is far cheaper than if you bought it on your own. Very few people can afford to pay premiums without the aid of an employer.

2. The health insurance industry is not competitive at all. As to why, it probably has to do with over regulation combined with excellent lobbying.

And is there a reason why those two things can't be corrected. If people shopped around or at least those who could did, it will decrease prices making insurance more affordable and encourage price competition. You change regulation that hurts competition and work to again reduce prices through competition. I know, when my dad got laid off we would have to have paid three times as much for the insurance, allmost 1,000 dollars a month to keep it, then we did when he was employed. It was pretty damn good coverage two, and as such it had the price to match. We need to get those prices down and encourage ways to help people afford there health care once they get laid off. It will be much easier to cover everyone once we achieve what I am talking about, then to just jump in an pick up the tab.

Sure, they can be corrected, but it's not so simple. Yes, in theory, if everybody started shopping for their personal insurance it would drive prices down, but it is so much more expensive to do that, so much so that many literally cannot do it. As you said, your father had to devote $12k to health insurance. Now what of somebody who makes only 30k a year. Well, a third is taxed (not sure about Atlasia's tax code, is it even clear), so that leaves 20k. So over half of his income adjusted for taxes goes to health insurance. Not good.

I agree with you that there are regulations that hurt competition. Modernization, as well as removal of redundant laws are a step in the right direction. But realize that people cannot suddenly buy their own insurance in the marketplace en masse.

By the way, have medicare and medicaid been addressed in Atlasia?

You misunderstood my post. My dad made 36,000 a year where he worked. He had to pay about 300 a month out his check for the insurance and the company paid 600. When he lost the job he would have had to pay 900 dollars to keep it. So I know what it is like to not be insured. I know Vepres that these little tweaks aren't enough alone, but I also said that I support a plan to cover the poor, didn't I. You are again taking me out of context. Damn Reporters . I am just trying to make sure that we don't subsidize irresponsible behavior, that we don't sacrifice qualitly when we don't have to, and we don't ration the supply to cut costs when again we may not have too, or have too to the same extent.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I sort of resent that characterization. I did a great deal of indepth discussion here that I wish this newspaper focused on rather than one short paragraph from me and then saying "afterward Marokai continued just to insult him."

NCY was going on and on about a doomsday scenario with no basis in reality and continually compared my provision to Smoot-Hawley, which is about as ridiculous a comparison as I could imagine.

There is a definite basis in reality that you simply brush aside due to your own partisan realities. In these types of economic environments the call to take action particulary from protections or otherwise anti-free trade elements grow louder and gain a wider audience. It is my belief that you are naively assuming there will be no reaction at all and then attempt to brush it aside using flimsy comparisons from the RL that really don't hold water. The fact is you did insult me and you called in to question my judgement over an issue of partisan disagreement.

The problem is you're dreaming up fantasy scenarios with no basis in reality. You argument is "It could be a problem to others, I dunno how, but it could be. It could be like Smoot-Hawley, but I'm not comparing them or anything!"

We did this already in the stimulus bill, and it was a much stricter provision, and it didn't result in the crashing of global trade or a wave of protectionist policies. Your fantasy scenario has yet to realize under harsher conditions in the real world.

The global economy is indeed slumping and other countries have alot of work to do when it comes to stimulating our own economies. But the idea that I'm "ignoring the consequences of my own actions" is ludicrous. The U.S. (aka Atlasia) should not be stimulating the world on our own, other countries should stimulate their economies on their own. We can maintain trade, and make things easier for people to get into the market, but we need to be realistic about the real effect certain policies have on the economy, and, for one, "Buy Atlasian" ain't got nuthin' on Smoot-Hawley.

Smoot-Hawley jacked up tariffs to record levels (more than quadrupling them) on over 20,000 types of imported products and effectively choked off trade to Europe and other areas of the world very quickly. This provision does nothing of the sort and pretending it does is the height of ignorance. This clause of the bill simply mandates that a great deal of the manufacturing material involved in projects funded by the stimulus package will be created/manufactured from Atlasian businesses and workers, it doesn't stop other projects from being funded by foreign sources, it doesn't block foreign sources from doing trade with us in any other way, and it still allows a full 33% of stimulus project materials to be obtained from other countries.

Protectionism is never a great policy when it's the only solution, and raising tariffs is seldom a bright idea when it comes to fixing the economy or raising revenue, but this is neither serious protectionism nor tariff raising, nor any other sort of trade restriction. I'm baffled that you would even pretend that they're on the same level.

He panicked over tariffs, which aren't going to be touched. Claimed there could be economic armageddon through a great trade war, which hasn't materialized under stricter circumstances in the real world. Then he claimed that protectionist people at the helm could give the wrong idea to other countries (wtf?) and could spark protectionism world-wide no matter the policies, which makes no sense given that Obama and Clinton both railed against free trade throughout the campaign and Republicans throughout the 18th, 19th, and early 20th century were very protectionist with tariffs and manufacturing. It makes no sense. NCY was dreaming up doomsday scenarios.

I resent you saying that I panicked. I had a political disagreement with you that you ratcheted up to a level where it never should have gone. It did not say that policy choices did not matter, I said that because of our current leaders "relative" Protectionism to the RL the policies that foreign countries expect them to enact would be far more damaging then what was expected of either Senators Hillary CLinton or Barak Obama in RL. You need only look at the recent interpretation of recent LGBT Trade Amendement by the distinguished Secretary of External Affairs, which Senator Purple State showed at least a little dismay over how it was interpreted. As to the RL I don't remember either Senators Clinton or Obama railing against Free Trade, I remember critizing some of the methods of George Bush on that issue and pandering to the union vote, bought overall the theme of Clintons campaign was a return to the 90's and under her husband Free Trade made more strides then it had under any previous President, and most foriegn countries still believe that both US parties support Free Trade. The calls for renegotiating NAFTA was nothing more then propaganda in a tight election campaign, which if I recall both candidates have since then backpeddled on. President Obama wants internation Trade talks resumed and is working to move some more Free Trade deals. Not exactly what you would expect from a "so-called" raving Anti-Free Trade candidate. The facts don't match your arguement that Obama and Clinton were more protectionist and yet still got away with "Buy American" provisions in RL. The Truth is most foriegners gave him a free pass on that cause they believe that real Protectionism is dead in America as a movement, however here in Atlasia it is not.

Now we get to that silly arguement about the GOP in the 19th and early 20th century, so what. Who cares what position a party took back 90 years ago, that was then, and now we know that they were just as much wrong then as the arguement for protectionism is today. The GOP got burned on protectionism not only in 1930 but also in 1890, and several previous times. So what does this have to do with anything I am arguing, because I am a Republican in RL I can't take a certain position cause some digwad President in my Party took a different approach 60 years before I was even born. Protectionism has never worked, when the country was largely Cotton based it hurt the economy(1830's), and when it was Industrial based it hurt the economy(1890 and 1930). This last arguement involving the GOP is pointless and has nothing to do with what we are talking about, they were wrong then, just as you are now.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Just a few fixes, Vepres. The title says "Interview with Fritz." Also, the vote can't be tied 8-8 (only 10 Senators) and the clause being repealed is clause i. of that section, not a.

I guess thats what you call errors of the Main Stream Media. Kind of like the idiot who does all the Letterboards and teleprompters at Fox News.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Just a few fixes, Vepres. The title says "Interview with Fritz." Also, the vote can't be tied 8-8 (only 10 Senators) and the clause being repealed is clause i. of that section, not a.

In my defense I was very tired.

CAn you at least get the clause I am trying to amend correct, right now. The current form is extremely misleading.

Edit: That is much better, thank you.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Why do you have to become such a whiny bitch everytime someone or something does not agree with you 95 % of the time, Marokai? If you want a newspaper slaming Purple State you have the right to create one. You're sounding awfully similar to a Southern Redneck crying about the evil LEEBERAL media.

This newspaper has routinely covered Purple State in a sympathetic light, and has occasionally pointed me out as some trouble-maker (which generally I like the label of), which, in turn, causes me to complain. If you find my criticisms invalid then I look forward to an explanation to such an end.

I fancy myself a loud-mouth but I don't complain just for the sake of it, if I complain, I usually have a reason.

Why do you have to become such a whiny bitch everytime someone or something does not agree with you 95 % of the time, Marokai? If you want a newspaper slaming Purple State you have the right to create one. You're sounding awfully similar to a Southern Redneck crying about the evil LEEBERAL media.

Except it costs billions of dollars to run a national news channel or newspaper. Marokai can spend five minutes typing whatever he wants bashing Purple State and have it up here right now for all to read.

I must admit, and have told plenty of others here as much, that starting a newsletter of my own simply to refute all the other nonsense out there I don't like has been tempting. But I don't expect that to quell the "Marokai whines! I'm whining about Marokai, but he's a bigger whiner!" crowd, hm?

Marokai a trouble-maker? who woulda thunk it?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I haven't ran any polls for the Pacific yet. A-Bob did using a title that looked similar to mine, maybe I should sue him for trademark infringement. .

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Please take your bickering elsewhere.

Please take your Mom elsewhere.



O SHI.T BURN.

Why the mods don't eliminate road kill like you I will never know.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The Atlasian Sentinel

New GM Very Active, Yet Senators Take Little Notice
By Vepres

When GM Purple State was sworn in, people from all sides of the political spectrum celebrated. For the first time in a long time, Atlasia would have an active GM. Yet, while Purple State has performed admirably thus far, few in the government seem to take any action on the news.

Take, for example, his recent report on the healthcare bill. Not one Senator commented on it despite the fact that it was one of the most important bills signed into law in the past few Senates.

Purple State said this in the news unit:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course, it is election season, and so the focus is on the elections, but let's not lose sight of the fact that the government must respond to the GM news or else the position is useless.

Excuse me, and just what the hell do you call this post from the other day, whistling Dixie?

Obviously if any deputy GM would be needed, it's in the economic sector.

How do the healthcare numbers look?

Well I being a cynical conservative doubt that it would run a surplus, at least initially. Other then that they seem at least somewhat reasonable. It would have a positive effect on wages and employement, and even GDP cause small Businesses will expand as you say so thats correct. It would also lead to the dropping of private Health Care plans and the bankruptcy of many small insurers as you say it does. I would say Good job.

And you wanted to do it for Foriegn policy? Told you . Needs a separate position. Unfortunately most of the "experts" either aren't registered in Atlasia like Beet, Ford, Carl Hayden or have other positions already, Sam Spade. And if you are thinking about me the answer is No way in hell.

Granted it was more about PS's analysis then the Healthcare plan itself but I did comment on the "effects" of the bill as a way of showing where PS had a good analysis, so I was commenting about it indirectly. Am I not considered a Senator?

That comment you posted from PS was in response to a request for economic data from me? What he has given so far while important is too broad and too disconected from underlying factors to tell us where to go? I asked for Libor-OIS spread to see if Credit markets where tightening, and maybe the need for a direct loans to consumers and Businesses as a response, PS refused sighting he didn;t now what it is.

I then today asked for data on Consumer and Factory orders and he refuses, saying we aren't responding. I am responding god damnit, I can't introduce legislation without more specific details about the real prime economic movers like Factory orders, Consumer data, Housing and Exports. The stock market and even Unemployement is basically meaningless in addressing matters of policy. Clearly Purple State has a very limited knowledge of economics and if he is unwilling or unable to expand his knowledge on the subject I am afraid he will end up like the last two GM's, a mistake of an appointment. I wish we could have have two GM's let PS handle foriegn sh**t and give the other one to Sam Spade or somone who know economics handle the economy.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The Atlasian Sentinel

New GM Very Active, Yet Senators Take Little Notice
By Vepres

When GM Purple State was sworn in, people from all sides of the political spectrum celebrated. For the first time in a long time, Atlasia would have an active GM. Yet, while Purple State has performed admirably thus far, few in the government seem to take any action on the news.

Take, for example, his recent report on the healthcare bill. Not one Senator commented on it despite the fact that it was one of the most important bills signed into law in the past few Senates.

Purple State said this in the news unit:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course, it is election season, and so the focus is on the elections, but let's not lose sight of the fact that the government must respond to the GM news or else the position is useless.

Excuse me, and just what the hell do you call this post from the other day, whistling Dixie?

Obviously if any deputy GM would be needed, it's in the economic sector.

How do the healthcare numbers look?

Well I being a cynical conservative doubt that it would run a surplus, at least initially. Other then that they seem at least somewhat reasonable. It would have a positive effect on wages and employement, and even GDP cause small Businesses will expand as you say so thats correct. It would also lead to the dropping of private Health Care plans and the bankruptcy of many small insurers as you say it does. I would say Good job.

And you wanted to do it for Foriegn policy? Told you . Needs a separate position. Unfortunately most of the "experts" either aren't registered in Atlasia like Beet, Ford, Carl Hayden or have other positions already, Sam Spade. And if you are thinking about me the answer is No way in hell.

Granted it was more about PS's analysis then the Healthcare plan itself but I did comment on the "effects" of the bill as a way of showing where PS had a good analysis, so I was commenting about it indirectly. Am I not considered a Senator?

That comment you posted from PS was in response to a request for economic data from me? What he has given so far while important is too broad and too disconected from underlying factors to tell us where to go? I asked for Libor-OIS spread to see if Credit markets where tightening, and maybe the need for a direct loans to consumers and Businesses as a response, PS refused sighting he didn;t now what it is.

I then today asked for data on Consumer and Factory orders and he refuses, saying we aren't responding. I am responding god damnit, I can't introduce legislation without more specific details about the real prime economic movers like Factory orders, Consumer data, Housing and Exports. The stock market and even Unemployement is basically meaningless in addressing matters of policy. Clearly Purple State has a very limited knowledge of economics and if he is unwilling or unable to expand his knowledge on the subject I am afraid he will end up like the last two GM's, a mistake of an appointment. I wish we could have have two GM's let PS handle foriegn sh**t and give the other one to Sam Spade or somone who know economics handle the economy.

Bumping cause I added a furher response to the rest of a very pro-PS article.