Please humor me. Imagine we had the attention of the wealthiest 2%...

[OneGrassRoot]

We have their attention and, somehow, got them to realize they need to help others in a much more direct, significant way, and they agreed to do so. They agreed to part with their wealth and redistribute to help others.

How you would advise them to use those funds for the most benefit...for the benefit of The Common Good?

Please be as specific as possible, advising how the average person can most benefit from the resources they are currently hoarding in many instances, and how to best redistribute those resources given our current systems -- philanthropic, governmental -- including offering a way outside of the current systems to redistribute this wealth (which is my personal preference).

Perhaps you can also suspend reality and imagine tax implications aren't part of this scenario; that people are helping because it's the right thing to do, not because they get a write-off. Maybe that will lead to more outside-the-box ideas of how we would advise them to help our society.

In addition to providing those in need who can't work with a much better social safety net, can this wealth be harnessed to create new industries and jobs? If so, how specifically do you envision that happening -- what would be the industries and jobs?

Thanks. :hi:

[valerief]

1. Read much fantasy? nt

[snooper2]

2. I would convince them to buy a large chunk of Mexico

Maybe just the top half, everything 40 miles North of Mexico City...(we don't want to have to decontaminate that hell hole).

Then, we would use that land to expand our Empire. Lots of jobs created building roads, we would automatically have a bunch of factories back. We could probably break it up into 3, maybe four states. (As long as none of them are bigger than Texas(yes, Alaska doesn't count :) ))

It would be done overnight anybody within that land mass would automatically become citizens of our expanded Empire. Of course folks North of the border as we know it today would become citizens as well.


:)

[hobbit709]

3. they won't pay attention until their asses are on the line.

[Warpy]

4. I'd tell them to be prepared to pay their taxes for the common good

because the alternative is being barricaded in their estates and paying even more to support armies of police to protect them from the angry commons.

[OneGrassRoot]

8. Well, doing anything legislatively feels rather hopeless in this regard...

My scenario didn't involve TWO miracles: our government working on the people's behalf AND the wealthy awakening to their humanity.

Only the latter.

;)

[OneGrassRoot]

5. No imagination, eh?

We all know every member of DU is the ultimate skeptic, but I also rarely see anyone contributing ideas or getting on board to do something concrete. About anything.

Yeah, this is pie in the sky, but a good percentage of the anger and frustration here is directed toward the 2% -- including my own.

I started to wonder, what IF they'd do the right thing -- exactly how would I want them do it?

I didn't have a clear answer. I just wanted to twitch my nose and have everything be fair.

Most of us here can bitch and moan with the best of them, with valid reasons for bitching and moaning.

I rarely see anyone advocating a way to get out of this victim role we see ourselves in...even if it's only imagining how it could happen. Imagining and brainstorming can be a start toward more concrete things, even if it's not in direct response to the original question.

:shrug:



edit for typo

[Obamanaut]

33. "...everything be fair..."? Life is not fair. Some people are fat, some thin, some

the ideal size.

Some people are nice to look at, some not so much, most fall in between.

Too tall, too short, etc.

Some have a lot of money, some don't have as much but want some that the other group has.

Life just simply is not fair.

But seizing stuff that others have because we want it will not bring fairness to the world.

[OneGrassRoot]

35. No, life most certainly isn't fair....

But I, personally, am led to work toward more social justice. I don't care if it never gets there, I will continue to do my best to work towards it rather than accept that that is simply the way things are and always have been.

I believe humanity has the capacity to change and create new ways of being and doing.

Yes, I do. ;)

It's not super clear to me in black and white as to exactly how I envision this justice, but I do know it doesn't involve a handful of people owning $50 million planes and yachts while millions of others literally starve and have no shelter.

There must be a better balance there.

And, I'm not speaking of seizing anything; I'm trying to simply imagine the scenario of cooperation and how it could play out.

That's all. :hi:

[laughingliberal]

39. And using the resources of a country without putting anything back when you succeed sure as hell...

won't bring any fairness.

Oligarchies die out eventually as they kill off those they've been making their money off of. Won't be sorry to see this one go.

[renate]

6. non-profit microcredit

They could change a life (and the family, for generations afterwards) for $100.

[OneGrassRoot]

7. Thank you.

:hi:

[Warpy]

10. Hell, you can do that for $25

http://www.kiva.org does peer to peer microlending. Just be aware that it gets addictive pretty quickly.

[OneGrassRoot]

13. Kiva is awesome...

I know their program is well entrenched and successful in other countries but I've heard our tax laws prevent the same success here in the States, which they've only recently been trying to launch (in the last year, I believe).

But large-scale investment in microenterprise initiatives (especially green retrofitting ventures, for example) is one of the things I was thinking about.

[renate]

16. yeah, I think I've read that the average microloan is $60

That was a few years ago, and inflation may be a bigger problem in some countries than in others, so I rounded up. There just can't be a better bargain anywhere on earth.

[Warpy]

18. My default rate is an astonishingly low 0.34%

I am absolutely floored by that, the way the world's poorest people keep paying their loans off in a brutal world economy like this one. It's very humbling and one reason making those loans is so addictive.

I've also been trying to donate more to Kiva, now rated as a huge multinational bank after a few years in business but still non profit, because they're now able to make loans as they are needed and chase funding later in many cases, especially in high risk countries like Uganda.

[Hannah Bell]

28. hmm. i found this on the first search page.

Kiva is a non-profit. They take your donations and distribute them to microfinance lenders all over the world. Those lenders disburse the money to entrepreneurs in third world countries, who pay back the loans in installments. You choose the specific entrepreneur to fund, and as they pay off the loan, the money you donated is returned to you. A lot of good, lasting change is generated by giving these people access to capital.

The problem is that the loans are NOT given out interest free. You give your donation free of charge, and Kiva gives it to the loan companies free of charge, but the loan companies charge the borrowers very high interest rates. The average rate is 23% - in the US, that would be "Payday Loan" territory.

This is not made very clear on the Kiva website. In fact, the Kiva website says that you are making a direct, "one-on-one" connection with the borrower, and call it a "person-to-person" loan. You have to dig quite a bit to find out that your money is being passed from Kiva to a for-profit company, and even more to find out that they are earning an average of 23% interest on your donation.

Yes, there are good reasons for that high interest rate. These loans are small, so the initial cost to set them up is an unusually large part of the total costs, making the interest rate seem higher. These borrowers are also supposed to be high-risk, but the average default rate for all Kiva loans is only 2.85%.

The microfinance loan companies partnered with Kiva have loaned an average of $55 million dollars, at an average of 23% interest, with an average default rate of 2.85%. That's an average PROFIT of almost $11 million dollars....

According to the latest figures on the kiva.org website, the average gross profit is up to $17 million now. And I can't imagine that it takes anywhere near $9 million to run a company in one of these developing nations. What's the average local salary? How much is rent? You're talking a drop in the bucket compared to the millions they are bringing in.

Regardless of how MUCH money they are making: Why do these companies deserve free money, if they are making a profit on the donated funds?


http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=76720

more...

I'm such a cynic...

But the world never seems to let me down in my cynicism. Here is an example. I keep hearing about how nice and philanthropic Paypal is that they are doing Kiva transactions for free.

So in my mind, I am asking "Who is making this decision?" I have worked for several big corporations and they don't give a damn unless someone has something to benefit. So I remember the ones on the job that make the big money are on the board of directors.

So I looked up Kiva's board of directors and lo and behold there is Brian Philips.

From Paypal international business development and Shripriya Mahesh Vice president of marketing from Ebay. There were a host of other big wigs from huge multi-billion dollar corporations on the list.

But does Kiva talk about that? That their board of directors is comprised of extremely business savvy people from some of the most profitable corporations on the planet? No, they make it sound like 5 college kids working in a dimly lit room for the betterment of mankind.

[OneGrassRoot]

34. Thank you so much for this info! n/t

[Warpy]

37. Do read the discussion that follows

that tells you where the money goes.

Apparently the OP doesn't know the difference between a giveaway and a loan and is annoyed that these are microloans, not micro giveaways.

[Hannah Bell]

52. i did read it. i thought there were enough questions that it was worth looking into further.

there have been a number of exposes on microlending recently.

the op didn't seem annoyed at all. the op seemed to be trying to clarify a point: that someone was profiting.

[Warpy]

36. Well, duh, when I said "has become a large internationational bank"

that's exactly what I meant. You bet they've got business savvy people sitting on the BOD. It's still non profit, though, and must comply with all the rules and regs covering non profit organizations.

Yes, they charge interest on those loans. Those are extremely high risk loans often in politically unstable regions. In addition, these loans cost money to administer. They'd be totally nuts not to have the interest reflect that. However, such interest is a fraction of the vig charged by the village loan shark and less than national banks would charge if national banks gave loans to such poor people, which they don't.

You can continue to wallow in your cynicism. I do join you in it from time to time. However, these loans are given out in small enough amounts with generous enough repayment terms that they're not onerous to the borrowers and lives are improved once the loans are paid off and the increased income is realized.

In the meantime, it's one of the best ways to improve this sorry old planet. You have to start at the bottom, and this is one of the places to find it.

[OneGrassRoot]

38. And thank you as well...

I'm so torn when it comes to huge today's non-profits which can often feel like a typical multinational corporation; I'm trying to keep an open mind and weigh pros and cons.

I've always especially loved the Kiva model.

Thanks again. :)

[Hannah Bell]

53. no, according to the OP, *kiva* is non-profit, but the middleman financial institutions

aren't.

i don't know myself, because i haven't looked into it extensively. i do know, though, that there have been a series of exposes on the microlending industry recently.

[Hannah Bell]

56. and some on kiva itself, apparently:

And in just the past few weeks, the nonprofit and social entrepreneurship blogosphere has lit up with debate over what some have called Kiva's misleading marketing.

In short, a Kiva user does not make a loan to a specific borrower but to a microfinance institution, which actually makes and administers the loan.

In general, the borrowers posted on Kiva's site have already received their loans before their profiles are even featured.

And repayments to Kiva users are not tied directly to repayments made by specific borrowers.

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/10/kivaorg_role_model_or_cautiona.html


But today I saw a Kiva document that, for me, points to a far bigger problem. Roodman shared a document Kiva uses to explain its operations to MFIs. Two points in the document floored me. First, all losses from Kiva-securitized loans are borne by the Kiva user. Second, Kiva’s monthly repayment reports are not based on actual repayment data.

The first is a problem because of fungibility. MFIs have no liability for delinquent loans underwritten by Kiva users, while they often are liable for capital from other sources. I’m sure I’m not the only one who immediately saw that this encourages MFIs to book delinquent loans to Kiva rather than to other capital providers. It seems to me we have pretty recent experience with what can happen when you separate liability from lenders.

The second, in my mind, isn’t subtle misleading of users—it’s just plain misleading. Essentially, Kiva is not receiving reports from the MFIs on whether specific loans are being repaid. Kiva is reporting repayment to its users based on the assumption that the loan is being repaid—and Kiva will assume that the loan is repaid until the MFI decides to notify Kiva otherwise. For anyone who has been inside the books of an MFI this should be really disturbing. No two MFI’s define default the same way and often default is up to the discretion of a particular loan officer. Combined with the zero-liability noted above, these are accounting loopholes big enough to drive an entire fleet of trucks through.

In the big picture, this is just another illustration of the dangers of the illusion model of person-to-person connection in charitable giving. Like little white lies there is often a perfectly plausible, even good, reason for creating the illusion. And like little white lies, the illusion has to keep growing to continue to be credible. And as the illusion becomes all encompassing you open the door to deception, corruption and fraud. That’s what happened with child sponsorship back in the ‘90’s. Is that what will happen to person-to-person microfinance in the ‘10’s?

...Thinking about this more it also occurred to me that the way Kiva handles repayments means that new lenders money is often not going to the borrower or even the MFI. It’s being used to repay prior lenders.

http://www.philanthropyaction.com/nc/even_more_questions_about_kiva/


GiveWell Board member Tim Ogden asks, is Kiva reporting phantom payments?

It’s hard to say for sure, but it seems that the answers is either (a) yes, they are or (b) no, but borrowers listed on Kiva’s website are not representative of the average borrowers visiting that MFI.

The table below shows default rates for Kiva’s largest field partners (in terms of total loans provided through Kiva) and compares the default rates reported on Kiva to default rates reported for those same institutions on MixMarket, a site devoted to sharing data on microfinance.

Data from the two sources aren’t perfectly compatible but the broad story is clear: Kiva’s partners have higher repayment rates on their Kiva-listed loans than on their portfolio overall, as listed on MixMarket. This could come about in a couple ways:

•The borrowers that partners list on Kiva could be substantially more likely to repay than “other” borrowers. If Kiva loans are effectively fungible between partners (as the recent discussions imply), this would mean that donors are likely “effectively” funding clients who are less likely to repay than those in the profiles they’re scanning.

•Kiva’s partners could be “covering for” their clients to keep their Kiva-listed repayment rates high.

It’s worth noting that this analysis is only possible because Kiva makes its data available and due to the efforts of those at Kiva Data and MixMarket who have created extremely useful information resources. Similar analysis would be impossible for nearly every other charity I can think of.)

http://blog.givewell.org/2009/10/13/kiva-repayment-data/


Only one aspect of microfinance is known to work: microsavings, small savings accounts for the poor, which, according to the Seattle Microfinance Organization, “has been shown to increase average daily food expenditure, mitigate health shocks, and increase productive investment.”

In Kanoni, however, Annette, Henry, and their associates do not seem interested in saving a little money; they want to borrow a lot. No one in the group complained about the high interest rate they had to accept to access credit. On the contrary, nearly every one of them pleaded with Reme and George – and me too – to be allowed to borrow more money with their next loan. Clients taking their first loan with Pearl Microfinance are limited to a maximum of 300,000 shillings, about $150. Assuming successful repayment of their first loan, they can borrow as much as one million shillings the next time. All of the borrower’s in Kanoni are already dreaming of the day they can tap into the more voluminous fountain of cash, portending a frightening dependency on a cycle of very high interest debt.

http://longroadhome.wordpress.com/2010/03/20/adventures-of-an-african-microfinancier/

[zipplewrath]

9. Every rich person should "have"

1) Their own charitable foundation

They are easy to set up, and provide certain tax advantages. Plus, it allows them to influence issues important to them on a local, national, or international scale, depending upon their wealth.

2) A "pet" charity.

They should be serving on the board, or otherwise involved in the operation of a charity. It's pretty easy to get on smaller ones. The wealthier you are, the larger and more influential they can become. Ultimately, it can lead to having the power and influence to shape ones community/country.

3) "Postumous" arrangements

Give funds to their own foundation, or to their pet charity, or set up a new one. But fund an organization with a "named" benefit that will out live them and continue to influence their community/country long after they are gone. It will allow their name to become "synonomous" with their ideals.

[Statistical]

11. Take all their money, make them live poor for a year, then ask them what they needed the most. n/t

[nc4bo]

14. Point blank. Nothing like walking in another's shoes is there? nt

[nc4bo]

12. Purchase an empty foreclosed megabuilding, rehab it to shelter entire families who lost their homes

due to foreclosure or other homelessness.

Purchase land around it and create a family farm co-op, sell the produce not used by the families.

Crap I'm wingin' it here...

[OneGrassRoot]

15. LOL...I appreciate you wingin' it.

We're not used to even THINKING in this direction, but I have been lately.

My thoughts lean toward them essentially adopting communities and focusing on the most critical, bare survival needs: food, shelter, healthcare.

Once the basic needs of more people are met, expanding into education and other areas can be a focus, but there are entirely too many people barely surviving, without the basics of food and shelter. To start by focusing efforts on alleviating this extreme suffering is a start, as I see it.

A focused, concerted effort by those with the resources to alleviating the suffering.

[nc4bo]

20. I like yours. Go to them vs. them going elsewhere. Def. basics, food, shelter, medical.

Those are the very basics to human survival (even a more peaceful society) and not having either of the 3 is demoralizing, depressing, stressful and makes us feel less than human, even worthless, especially if you have dependents like kids or elderly parents to deal with.

Education is extremely important but if the top 3 needs aren't met, no one can be expected to have a clear enough head to even consider intellectual undertakings.

You know what? Just typing this made me think that the basics are so simple that IF we have them (even if it's just 2 of the 3), it's easy take them for granted and easy to forget just how important basics needs actually are to all of us.

Then there are those people whose hearts are as black and shriveled as a year old raisin. They just do not care for anything or anyone other then themselves. Those are the worst to have to fight against and I'm sure they outnumber those who've just forgotten or never experienced life without.

[Bonhomme Richard]

17. There is only one way I can think of to get their attention n/t

[OneGrassRoot]

19. No, my question is based on the premise that we already have their attention.

As irrational as that question may be. ;)

I'm wondering IF we had their attention and they agreed that our society isn't sustainable as it is (which it isn't...and a societal breakdown WILL affect everyone, even them, eventually) and the majority of them chose to DO something about it directly, how do we envision this taking place to alleviate as much suffering as possible, as fast as possible?

Thanks. :hi:

[Bonhomme Richard]

21. In general you need to get actual dollars into the economy, into

the hands of the people that will spend it. The only way I see to do that in the short term would be for the top 2% to pay very high taxes that could be spent on major infrastructure spending. That would create jobs and spur manufacturing. Hand in hand with that we for business leaders to work on a smaller profit margin and put those profits directly into the salaries of their workers.
The way I see it you have two tiers here. You have a segment that makes their money playing with money. The only way to get that spread around is through taxes. because they don't actually produce anything that people would buy. The second tier would be manufacturing and service. Those companies actually do produce something that people want such as widgets (manufacturing) or filling a need. If they spent time putting real money into their workers hands everyone's standard of living would rise.
Having said that, I don't hold out much hope in their cooperating because the greed is out of hand and the real decision makers can always move somewhere else if things go down the toilet here. I don't think anything will change until they personally feel vulnerable for their actions. Literally vilified and afraid to leave their homes. It amazed me just how afraid they were when the shit hit the fan and people were actually picketing their private home here in CT..

[OneGrassRoot]

23. Thank you so much, and I absolutely hear you...

There is a small movement (around 700 people) of those in the top 5% of wealth promoting ending the tax cuts. I know there are others who have pledged to give their money away, etc., but chances are they mean into a foundation which simply provides them a write-off. It's not truly altruistic or perhaps even very helpful.

The group of which I speak, Responsible Wealth, has said that there are simply some things that only governments can do well and that's the best use of their money, so they want their money to be used for that and to let the tax cuts expire or even raise them. Things like infrastructure, healthcare, etc.

The greed is obscene to put it mildly, as is the suffering of so many...

:(

[felix_numinous]

22. 1- Buy out Fox 'news'

and replace it with real debate, commentary and public forums.

2- support a FDR Democratic presidential candidate plus as many representatives as possible, start a WPO program

3- Organize a group of CEOs to start American green companies that hire Americans to work toward a sustainable future

4- Support preservation of the commons, waterways, land and resources to halt land sales to overseas investors

5-Start rural and urban public gardens for growing food for neighborhood coops, fruit and nut tree planting programs, and endangered tree planting programs

6- Open free medical clinics across the country

7-Support legalization of hemp and cannabis for economic growth and personal health

8-Lobby to stop illegal wars and corporate citizenship

just a few ideas......just in case someone has trillions of dollars and a conscience.

[OneGrassRoot]

26. Bam!

That's my kind of thinking.

:thumbsup:

Thanks! :hi:

[asdjrocky]

24. Okay, here's my thing.

Everyone in the top 2% must have dinner at a new poor home every night. Not just families with homes, but old people, single people and everyone in between. On Saturdays Richie (or Ruthie) Rich goes to a homeless shelter. On Sundays he/she communes with those not lucky enough to find a shelter, you know the folks in their cars or worse.

Richie, or Ruthie, helps prepare the meal, pays for the meal and eats the meal with the family, whatever shape that family happens to be. After the meal, Richie or Ruthie thanks them, gives them a check for 1 million dollars, and asks if they know anyone else who could use some help.

On leaving, Richie, or Ruthie, thanks the nice people for letting them in their home, apologizes for hording 90% of the resources for so long, and asks them to please do better with their fortune than he/she has done with theirs.

At the end, the rich will still be rich, and the poor, who really know how to help people, will set this country straight.

I've often thought if I had a million I'd spend it going to 365 new houses for a year, having dinner, and dividing it up with each house.

That's my crazy idea.

[OneGrassRoot]

27. I like your crazy idea...

One-on-one.

:thumbsup:

Thanks, Rocky. :hug:

[asdjrocky]

29. I think it has to do with my current perosnal philosophy.

I grew up working class poor and I became a bit more affluent as I grew older. I lived in upper middle class neighborhoods where honestly, for the most part, the really poor were hidden from view. (With our eyes willing turned away in most cases, no doubt.) Even with some of the volunteer work I did, and the fact that I never left my roots (the criminal aspect of it at least) I didn't know how bad things had gotten til I ended up back here. In my old neighborhood.

I was only middle class, and I started to lose my hold on what it meant to be poor, imagine what it is for someone who has literally never known want, much less need.

They gotta get out of the bubble, somehow.

[rucky]

25. Invest in renewable & alternative energy

Invest in retraining workers for this field.
If they do, they'll be investing in stable, high-quality jobs that are competitive in a global economy.

[OneGrassRoot]

31. I agree...

To me, there is huge job potential not only with infrastructure, but in green retrofitting of ALL of our structures: residential, business, schools, governmental.

There is a great co-op in New Mexico, I believe, training people (and in the process retrofitting the homes of elderly, low-income residents) and providing jobs.

I think that is a great model of what could be done, as one example.

:hi:

[bigmonkey]

30. Fund infrastructure design research, and create organizations to push hard for them.

With the intention of segregating speculative activity from common infrastructure, both physical and virtual, that would support both sustainability and fairness. Currently all human activities are being deliberately corrupted, in the sense that all of them are being brought under the sway of monetary power, and non-income-producing activities of all kinds are being defunded. This will stop, one way or another.

[OneGrassRoot]

32. Wow...

Now that's a vision statement!

Thanks, bigmonkey! :hi:

[snooper2]

50. think tanks to build bridges?

come on, buying part of Mexico would be a bigger bang for your buck right?

[hootinholler]

40. Good keep 'em distracted

so we can whack them with a big stick. Then we'll actually have their attention.

-Hoot

[OneGrassRoot]

42. LOL!

Figures a fellow Steelers fan would say that.

;)

:hi:

[hootinholler]

49. Raised in Ligonier

Graduated form Laurel Highlands in '78 There is no other team, lol. Living in Md, I do wish the Browns, er Ravens were in a different division sometimes.

-Hoot

[OneGrassRoot]

55. Raised in the South Hills area here...

Graduated from Thomas Jefferson in '81.

I'm in Raleigh now (Yankee at heart and hope to move North again when daughter graduates) and can't stand that games aren't always televised. :(

:hi:

[hootinholler]

58. Oh that drives me nuts

There are weeks when I can't get the game on cable and forget radio. I detest the NFL blackout rules.

I used to love to watch on TV and listen to Myron's play by play on FM, he *always* cracked me up even though he had a voice for semaphores.

-Hoot

[Occulus]

41. I'd ask them to research fusion power.

We need a cleaner, abundant power source. Solar, wind, geothermal, and so forth only go so far and cannot possibly meet our ever-increasing demands for energy. We know fusion works and is possible. We see the undeniable, direct evidence of that in the sky every day. What we need to learn is how to do it on Earth.

A viable fusion power source would also enable us to end the oil wars and tell the Saudis et al to, literally and figuratively, go pound sand. I cannot think of that as anything but a good thing.

We would then be able to do two things to seriously affect global climate change. One would be a truly massive automobile retrofitting program, as a national jobs project, with a goal of converting all currently operating petroleum-based engines on US roads to electric (the power being basically free, abundant, and clean thanks to fusion).

The second would be a concurrently-running jobs project to build and maintain a national power distribution system large enough to support the number of electric vehicles that would eventually be on the roads. Either of these projects by themselves would be nonsensical, and impossible without fusion energy; together, and combined with fusion, this could solve our economic woes and at the same time vastly improve the planet as a whole.

[OneGrassRoot]

43. Thank you for such a succinct, thoughtful reply.

Brilliant as well.

:hi:

[lonestarnot]

44. I've said it before and I will say it again, mass produce solar so it is on every rooftop, and I do

mean every. With such production, we will see reduction in costs, create jobs and convert to alternative energy. It's simple really.

[OneGrassRoot]

45. +1000. Thanks. :) n/t

[lonestarnot]

46. Thanks for the +1000. :) Do I get a star too?

:evilgrin:

[OneGrassRoot]

47. You've earned many stars...

:yourock:

:hi:

[lonestarnot]

48. How very kind you are this evening.

:hug: :hi: You my friend are one of my stars. Hence, lonestarnot. :D

[mmonk]

51. Are you planning something from the responses?

If so, let me know.:hi:

[OneGrassRoot]

54. I will...

;)

:hi:

[blindpig]

57. Set up the guillotines.

Nothing focuses the mind better than impending mortality.

That's what it's gonna take, they ain't gonna give up nothin' freely.

[Fire Walk With Me]

59. Kick.