The Herald’s inequality calculator

September 4th, 2014 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

The Herald has a calculator where you enter in your income and it tells you what income decile you are in, and how much your decile has gained over time compared to others.

If you are in the top 10% it shames you with your 29% income growth and tries to make the other 90% resent you.

And then just for balance, it provides a link to a left wing campaign site, for people to join.

Very fair and balanced.

A reader also points out another flaw:

I have checked the fine print and it talks about needing to know your household size to compare like with like but doesn’t refer to what income to include. 

 As an example one woman i know initially did it using just after tax on her pay slip… Didn’t include WFF, tax credits, accomm supplement, cash jobs etc. Once added changed her position by two spaces 

Additionally, we are top bracket – we have grown our businesses in last few years to point where we have gone from employing three people to eleven and a financial position where we had huge debt in the business (that we have now paid off) and now getting dividends plus additional $ with me working more. 

I inputted what we had as income five years ago (I wasn’t working, kids were little, plus still had significant debt in business that we were paying down plus mortgage). The Herald indicator put us at the third tier. We weren’t poor by any stretch of imagination but it was bloody tight – and high stress trying to make a business work. We didn’t claim WFF as don’t believe in it. Damn principles!

 One of the things I love about NZ is ‘ where there is a will there is a way’ – I’d hate to think people will believe we have always been top tier because we just are… Bloody hard work got us there. And we give back where and when we can.  We don’t pull the ladder up behind us. Please recognise we need people like us to employ people and to invest in new ventures. 

Most of those in the top 10% moved there up the scale. We should applaud that, not envy them and want to pull them down.

Tags: ,

48 Responses to “The Herald’s inequality calculator”

  1. Other_Andy (2,676 comments) says:

    “Very fair and balanced….”

    It’s the New Zealand Hamas.
    They don’t even pretend to be fair and balanced anymore like most of the MSM.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. mandk (993 comments) says:

    The blurb on the calculator says: “More and more people are talking about the growing gap between rich and poor”

    What it doesn’t say is that the most reliable evidence shows that there has been no significant change in income inequalities in NZ since the mid-1990s.

    But, hey, if you say anything long enough it becomes true, regardless of the evidence.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. MaxRashbrooke (1 comment) says:

    Hi David, thanks for the comment. Couple of points, though, from the POV of someone whose idea it was. First, there’s no attempt to shame. There’s no comment on the virtues or otherwise of the top 10%. It’s just asking people to think about how income is distributed, by showing them the facts. Second, the NZCCSS, with whom I worked on this, is not a “left wing” group. It’s Christian, non-partisan and maintains good relations (including regular meetings) with government. Its solutions to inequality include things like timebanking which can be taken up across the spectrum. But I take your readers’ point about what counts as income; we should perhaps have been clearer about that. Cheers.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Chuck Bird (4,883 comments) says:

    I wonder if this Herald tax calculator count as election spending?

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Lance (2,655 comments) says:

    Yes like at One News “good sorts” section.
    Normally pretty laudable stuff but the other night it had someone receiving warm curtains because they couldn’t even afford decent curtains.
    Except an external shot of the house had a late model car on the front lawn (theoretically could have been someone else’s) and a bloody sky TV dish on the corner of the house FFS.
    And this is poverty????

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    Chuck

    Only if the Herald are Exclusive Brethren, if they are a union it’s OK.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Yoza (1,872 comments) says:

    Most of those in the top 10% moved there up the scale. We should applaud that, not envy them and want to pull them down.

    Envy is more of a rich people thing. The need to perpetually accumulate status, influence and fancy objects and comparing that status, influence and accumulation of property with other wealthy individuals is where this right-wing obsession with envy is founded, they are determined to judge us by the standards to which they cling.

    In reality, most of us see a more even distribution of resources and influence in the decision making process as a way of fomenting a more inclusive society that will provide a stable base from which more sophisticated social structures can grow.

    Rich people grabbing as much as they can while trickling down on everyone else probably will not last very much longer.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 2 Thumb down 28 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. SW (240 comments) says:

    I was in the top tier.

    Personally it made me realise just how bloody difficult it must be for most of the country to raise kids on their incomes.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Ed Snack (1,872 comments) says:

    Envy is a rich people thing thing, hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaha (pauses to draw breath)….

    Envy is the standard, default, mindset for the entire left; it’s also a component of human nature that almost everyone has to some degree.

    That linked website “Everyone is better off when we’re more equal”…one of those mindless slogans, the mere process of trying to make everyone “more equal” makes us poorer and less equal ! Reminds me of one of Kurt Vonnegut’s novels, where the athletically able had to wear weights to make them less agile, and the good looking I think had ugly masks…all in the name of equality of course. Even economic equality, the first thing to remember is change, few people actually remain in the same segment, they go up and down; through good management, personal decisions, good/bad luck even. They strike me as exactly the sort of people who earnestly believe that we’d all be better off if we ALL lived nasty, short, brutiish lives than a far wealthier but less equal society.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Daniel (208 comments) says:

    The NZCCSS, which MaxRashbrooke claims is non-partisan, includes the Anglican and Methodist churches that have rolled out election hoardings with anti-government (anti-National) messages. To claim they are non-partisan with a straight face must have required a fair amount of botox. It does not surprise me the Herald has gone along with it though – given the Herald has also endorsed a Mana-Internet party website with electioneering material on it (the website even has a promoter statement on it – meaning it is an election advertisement for Mana-Internet, ffs).

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Lance (2,655 comments) says:

    @Yoza
    So you are saying a top surgeon should earn the same as a beneficiary?

    Wow, that’s incentive to study for 15 years or for the entrepreneur to take risks, live the constant threat of financial failure year in year out vs someone who just earns wages with practically zero risk?

    Good recipe for success……….. not.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. kowtow (8,469 comments) says:

    Christian does not make something non partisan.

    Many leaders of Christian denominations have bought lock stock and barrel into the political and dangerous French Revolution concept of “equality”.

    I was at a public lecture at a uni a year or so ago where a leading Christian activist stated to applause that, and I paraphrase “to end inequality in NZ only the coercive power of the state had the means to enforce redstribution of resources to end same” That’s naked socialism.

    This is taken from the NZ Catholic bishops blurb to the faithful for this election.

    “People living in poverty: It is a matter of shame that many people live in situations of material deprivation in a country like New Zealand which has the resources for all its citizens to live in dignity. We also have a responsibility to reach out to our neighbours in the rest of the world who do not have what they need to survive.”

    What material deprivation? These bishops have bought into the cultural marxism that has become such a feature of the New Zealand politcal landscape. Also the heading to the newsltter is Aotearoa New Zealand. There is no such place. They have also recently sent a letter to the Pope condeming Israel’s self defence measures in Gaza. Hahahaha the Pope has said military intervention is justified over the Muslim aggression towards minorities in Syrai and Iraq.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. jem (51 comments) says:

    What a crock.
    I did the calculator and it told me im the 3rd bottom tier and tried to make me feel bad about that! And silly me here thinking that my wife, 4kids and I are perfectly happy and comfortable where we are. Shame on me!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Psycho Milt (2,412 comments) says:

    Most of those in the top 10% moved there up the scale.

    So? That’s irrelevant. It’s not a scale of individual moral worth, it’s an income decile ranking. Of course individuals move between deciles, that’s not the point – the information provided is at a societal level, not an individual level.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. mandk (993 comments) says:

    Hey jem, you’re not one of those class traitors lefties delight in denouncing, are you? :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Nigel Kearney (1,013 comments) says:

    So you are saying a top surgeon should earn the same as a beneficiary?

    Actually even if everyone was a surgeon the methodology would still produce massive inequality. Because at different ages some would be studying and/or working part time, some would be junior doctors with families, and others would be retired and funding their lifestyle by drawing down on their accumulated asset portfolio supplemented by super.

    That’s why the agenda of reducing inequality in household incomes is so dishonest and manipulative. Inequality defined in that way will always exist and implies nothing about whether anyone is really struggling to make ends meet.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Harriet (4,970 comments) says:

    “….We didn’t claim WFF as don’t believe in it. Damn principles!…”

    WFF is a tax break – it is not welfare!

    You simply pay less tax!

    This businessmen needs a better accountant. Poor bastard.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Yogibear (366 comments) says:

    The fact the survey does not take account of age is a critical flaw

    As DPF points out, many will have moved up through the bands and few will have been “born into it.” I had a state school education, a student loan and paid fees, started in a low-paid position in my first “real job” worked hard, made good choices, some sacrifices and had the right attitude to the opportunities that came my way.

    All that took time.

    The counter factual to the theme of the website is we now have a society that offers proportionately greater income rewards to those who do the right things and make good choices.

    How is this a bad thing?

    I’d really like to understand this from the likes of Yoza, free of ideological dogma.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. gryfon (18 comments) says:

    Don’t forget your earlier post on income inequality David. But let’s not have any of those pesky empirical facts interfere with the politics of envy…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. JC (956 comments) says:

    The calculator puts us at the 4th poorest level.. poor us.

    However we are basically retired.

    Then again, we could have been between contracts and living off substantial savings.

    One partner could have been ill, or having a baby.. another temporary condition.

    But more importantly, the stats tell us inequality hasnt changed much in 30 years and any of the non partisan economists could have told us that.. as indeed they have.

    Other evidence tells us that people who meet some arbitrary definition of poverty are in a temporary situation with the vast majority improving their situation by getting employed, getting married, out of university, getting well, getting off smokes drugs and alcohol, getting more education etc.

    The group of people who are in poverty for most of their lives is thus quite small and ties in well with poor educational achievement.

    Also when you look at the deciles and smoking, you find the heaviest smokers are at the DPB level at 30% compared to just 7% in the top deciles.. a pack a day smoker can chew through more than half her DPB weekly benefit so she’s always going to be poor as a result.

    Incidentally, if the Govt builds tens of thousands of two bedroom houses which houses two adults and one child aged 10 and one aged 12 and the household earns $100,000 per year then that household is in poverty because one of the definitions is the boy and girl share a bedroom! Similarly a family of 7 earning $150,000 per year is in poverty in a 3 bedroom house because of overcrowding.

    I could go on but you get the general idea that dumb quizzes like this are pointless partisan politics.

    JC

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. tom hunter (4,838 comments) says:

    Second, the NZCCSS, with whom I worked on this, is not a “left wing” group. It’s Christian, non-partisan

    For the sake of good will I’ll assume you still believe this. However, few accept such crap at face value any more, mostly because increasing numbers of people understand that “left-wing” is not defined by what parties one supports but what policies are promoted.

    NZCCSS, like most such Christian “activist” groups in NZ, is left-wing. Whether they think they are themselves does not matter because that’s just their ignorance of ideology and politics.

    Lenin coined the term “useful idiots”. You should read up on it some day.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. unaha-closp (1,165 comments) says:

    As a long standing non-church member I’ve never really understood why these cults are awarded tax free status, surely if they are so heavily in favour of income redistribution we should start by redistributing theirs.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Harriet (4,970 comments) says:

    No one is awarded ‘tax free status’.

    Charities don’t pay taxes with regards to some matters, but with all of their general operations they pay the very same taxes as every other business does – gst paye ect. It’s mainly donations and profit that they don’t pay tax on – or less tax – which is fair enough as they are a ‘charity’.

    Although of course there are those who promote themselves as a charity and arn’t. But that’s another matter.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. DJP6-25 (1,387 comments) says:

    kowtow 10:38 a.m. Christian churches of all denominations have been subverted by Cultural Marxists. They’ve used the Am I my brothers keeper bit to con them into supporting welfarism.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    Dime was shocked when he stumbled across this the other day.

    I thought it was a paid ad by mana or the greens.

    What shocked me the most though is the threshold to be in the top 10% – 70k! we are a poor poor country.

    When was income inequality a bad thing anyway? If my income was ever capped like MANA want, id lay off about 5 people. totally downgrade the business. thats how it works folks. the rich own businesses an employee you losers! (and decent hard working people).

    As for the troll who said envy is a rich people thing – BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA outstanding.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Willow11 (5 comments) says:

    This just makes me so angry. I would like to know the facts MaxRashbrooke is talking about! I bet they DO NOT include the work, time and effort spent studying and working to earn a salary that puts you in the top 10%. And I bet his facts DO NOT take into account the FACT that those people in the 10% bracket work 7 I say 7 days a week NOT 5 and that their hours of work far exceed 40-hours per week.

    I can say this because I am one of those top 10% earners. Not only that but I consider myself an “ordinary New Zealander” and shock horror I am also Maori (no I do not work for a Post Settlement body)!!

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Harriet (4,970 comments) says:

    “…..As for the troll who said envy is a rich people thing….BAHAHAH oustanding…”

    Reminds me of the saying “Tax the poor like you do the rich and they’ll soon better themselves.” :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Psycho Milt (2,412 comments) says:

    This just makes me so angry.

    What just makes you so angry? The fact that the top 10% has upped its share of the pie so much, or the fact that Mr Rashbrooke has publicised it?

    I bet they DO NOT include the work, time and effort spent studying and working to earn a salary that puts you in the top 10%. And I bet his facts DO NOT take into account the FACT that those people in the 10% bracket work 7 I say 7 days a week NOT 5 and that their hours of work far exceed 40-hours per week.

    Well no, I expect they don’t, because those aren’t relevant to what’s being measured – unless your point is that the top 10% are now doing 29% more studying, working etc than the top 10% of 30 years ago.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Yoza (1,872 comments) says:

    Lance (2,577 comments) says:
    September 4th, 2014 at 10:35 am

    @Yoza
    So you are saying a top surgeon should earn the same as a beneficiary?

    If the opportunity for social development was more widespread the remuneration of surgeons would decrease with the increase of candidates competing for available positions, most of those who attend tertiary education are historically from that more affluent 10% the Herald calculator identifies.
    There are exceptions to the rule, but generally universities exist for the benefit of those groups that are invested with managing the social order. Trying to fob off those aspiring to develop are more socially just system as envious seems dangerously delusional.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Lance (2,655 comments) says:

    @Yoza

    I don’t know if you got the memo…
    Communism doesn’t work.

    You are obsessed with wealth distribution while ignoring wealth creation.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. big bruv (13,888 comments) says:

    According to this calculator (running on defective batteries I suspect) Mrs Bruv and I are some $43,000 better off than we were. It also goes onto suggest that I would feel a whole lot better if I gave up that extra income and handed it out to some lazy arsed beneficiary bludger.

    Well bugger that!. We got there because in the last four years we have worked our backsides off, four years ago our combined income would not have exceeded $100k, now it is nearly triple that amount and these wankers think that is far too much.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. JC (956 comments) says:

    If we are going to dump on inequality the place to start is on the richest bugger of all. It steals $70-80 billion of our money and wastes it on half baked ideas and destroys opposing wealth wherever it finds it. It uses its wealth to force people to do things they hate and is the largest kiddie fucker by a million miles.. we call it the NZ Government and its the most dysfunctional household in the country.

    JC

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    yoza- im not sure where you live. i live in new zealand. we have free education and then low uni fees and student loans for all.

    the only problem we have is shit head leftists telling poor people they are worthless and that they need more charity. the flow on effect from that is bad parenting. but if you have the brains to be a doctor, you can rise above that.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. kowtow (8,469 comments) says:

    “I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.”

    WS Churchill

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. unaha-closp (1,165 comments) says:

    yoza- im not sure where you live. i live in new zealand. we have free education and then low uni fees and student loans for all.

    Yoza is obviously alluding to the fact that 90% of NZs students are forced to go to substandard schools where they are taught by ineffective PPTA drones. A system in need of urgent reform.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Psycho Milt (2,412 comments) says:

    According to this calculator (running on defective batteries I suspect) Mrs Bruv and I are some $43,000 better off than we were.

    Not according to that calculator, you’re not – it says nothing whatsoever about any individual. Is there something about statistics that you lot find difficult to understand? Maybe, if Stats NZ were to find that the average NZ family includes 2.3 children you’d declare it rubbish because people who don’t have children now may have them in the future, that you deserve the kids you’ve got, and anyway no-one has .3 of a child?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    Reality has a well-known liberal bias.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Tom Jackson (2,553 comments) says:

    This just makes me so angry. I would like to know the facts MaxRashbrooke is talking about! I bet they DO NOT include the work, time and effort spent studying and working to earn a salary that puts you in the top 10%. And I bet his facts DO NOT take into account the FACT that those people in the 10% bracket work 7 I say 7 days a week NOT 5 and that their hours of work far exceed 40-hours per week.

    Have you ever considered the fact that the economy is not for rewarding people for hard work. After all, if your training became obsolete tomorrow, you would have done it for nothing, yet you would have worked as hard as someone whose skills were still needed.

    You cannot construct a workable capitalist economy that rewards people for individual merit – you would need the kind of oversight that the communists needed and you would need to redistribute from the undeserving rich to the deserving poor.

    The economy exists to get stuff done and not to satisfy your individual sense of moral entitlement. If you don’t understand that, you don’t support capitalism.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Berend de Boer (1,709 comments) says:

    unaha-closp: As a long standing non-church member I’ve never really understood why these cults are awarded tax free status, surely if they are so heavily in favour of income redistribution we should start by redistributing theirs.

    To enlighten you: there is no such thing as a tax free status. A church is simply a registered charity, and gets treated as such. If the church pays salaries, it has to pay PAYE. Every donation the church received comes from AFTER tax income. They pay for their utilities, they pay rates, they pay GST.

    Yes, church members can claim a portion back of their donation to the church, but that’s true for every charity.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Yoza (1,872 comments) says:

    Lance (2,581 comments) says:
    September 4th, 2014 at 12:37 pm

    @Yoza

    I don’t know if you got the memo…
    Communism doesn’t work

    There’s this cartoon. Two panels. The first panel has picture of a communist commissar thumping a desk with his fist while ranting. Underneath the caption reads: For most of the 20th century communists tried to destroy capitalism.

    Next panel. A couple of characteristically bloated corporate banker types are hoofing it carrying large sacks of cash, beside them one of those line graphs indicating a collapsing economy. Underneath the caption reads: Now it’s the 21st century a few capitalists are showing them how its really done!

    People who comment on this blog about the wonders of capitalism are no different in their reflexive deference to authority than the zombies that regurgitated state propaganda in communist countries.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Lance (2,655 comments) says:

    @Yoza
    Where ever have I expounded the virtues of extremism, such as capitalism to it’s full extent?

    I am a centrist as far as economics go, that’s why I am a National Party supporter.
    But what you have been pushing is extreme left ideology. Which is as idiotic as pure capitalism.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. unaha-closp (1,165 comments) says:

    The advancement of religion is defined as a charitable act, that seems a pointless almost counterproductive law.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. unaha-closp (1,165 comments) says:

    @Yoza,

    Underneath the caption reads: Now it’s the 21st century a few capitalists are showing them how its really done!

    Which is funny because they aren’t capitalists, that is to say they do not risk their capital. The bankers are the biggest welfare recipients of this century.

    The 3rd classist communist party types of the 20th century were bigger welfare recipients, but that was so last century.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. you reap what you sow (35 comments) says:

    Pathetic solution is for all the people in the top category to leave NZ. This would solve poverty and give the labour green communists what they want….a mess

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Yoza (1,872 comments) says:

    Lance (2,584 comments) says:
    September 4th, 2014 at 5:09 pm

    @Yoza
    Where ever have I expounded the virtues of extremism, such as capitalism to it’s full extent?

    I am a centrist as far as economics go, that’s why I am a National Party supporter.
    But what you have been pushing is extreme left ideology. Which is as idiotic as pure capitalism.

    National is hardly ‘middle of the road’. Like Labour, National subscribes to an economic order that serves the interests of big business and requires the general population remain in a state of docile servility. People who question the status quo or challenge the authority of corporate access to resources and the decision making processes are attacked, denigrated and marginalised if they are lucky, in some countries they are just killed outright.
    People do not need to be communists or radicals to understand the current system is not sustainable and is having a miserable effect on most of the planet’s population and an utterly disastrous effect on its environment, all in the name of providing a tiny portion of the population the means to live a lifestyle of historically unparalleled opulence.
    Things are going to change.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Crusader (314 comments) says:

    The Herald? Who cares? Or even notices?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. OneTrack (3,093 comments) says:

    Yoza – “National is hardly ‘middle of the road’.”

    Yes, National are centre-left. Labour is left ( the centrists have been expunged from the party ) and the Greens ultra-left ( but they try and keep it on the down low of course ).

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. OneTrack (3,093 comments) says:

    “Pathetic solution is for all the people in the top category to leave NZ. This would solve poverty and give the labour green communists what they want….”

    Well Labour and Greens are going to spike tax rates to get things started.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote