I remember that it was a sunny day in El Paso, as it almost always was, and I was upstairs with my girlfriend in our dusty apartment when we heard someone calling to her through the window.
We went downstairs and found a young woman named Lupe, a friend of a friend, who lived just across the border in Juarez. My girlfriend had mentioned some time back that she had some extra clothes, and Lupe stood for a minute or so trying to work up the nerve to ask for them. A little girl, one of Lupe’s four children, peeked out from behind her legs.
Lupe worked at a maquiladora in Juarez, sorting American coupons as I recall, and as a day maid in El Paso. She and her children lived well below the U.S. poverty line.
I’m not trying to ennoble her. I have no real idea whether she was a good person or a bad person, whatever that means. I only know that she was an extremely poor person, with four children, and she was working hard and not making enough to provide for them and so she was here, on the sidewalk, trying not to appear to be begging in front of one of her children.
Then it got worse.
This blob of white liquid landed on her head. Splat. None of us could understand what was happening. For a second, I thought she’d been shot and I was seeing her brain matter. Then I looked up. A pair of fat pigeons was perched above her on the phone wires. We stood there in excruciating silence. The little girl said nothing. Her eyes were dark and unsurprised. She was about the age of my daughter, about six.
There is no moral to this story. It is something that happened in El Paso many years ago, and that I have been unable to forget.
***
I can remember, also, the view from the porch of that apartment, which was of the Rio Grande, and the colonias of Juarez, where families built houses out of cardboard and old tires and collected water in steel barrels and pirated electricity.
At dawn, the day maids like Lupe would wade across the Rio Grande—a river so dirty American children were not allowed near it—with plastic bags on their heads. They would scramble up the concrete embankment to the American side and pull their dry work clothes out of these plastic bags and change into them while also trying to hide their exposed flesh. Sometimes it was cold and they shivered. Sometimes a green INS van would show up and chase them through the low desert scrub.
I could watch all this from my balcony, as I sipped coffee.
***
I remember, also, covering a wildcat strike by the young Mexican men who were bused up to the fields of New Mexico to pick the tasty green chilies we enjoyed eating so much. It was brutal labor. The fumes from the chilies caused their nasal membranes to swell. The pickers were paid by the bucket. I believe they were on strike because they wanted 37 cents per bucket, not 35 cents.
The buses left before dawn, to insure ten hours in the fields. Most of the workers slept in the shadow of the International Bridge, curled like question marks on cardboard mats.
***
I am not speaking here about the character of these people. I am speaking about what little I knew of their material circumstances. I don’t think they regarded their lives with pity or contempt. I think, for the most part, they just lived their lives and did the work necessary to support themselves and their families.
I found this work remarkably arduous and humiliating. But that’s only because I was born into privilege. It’s my hang-up.
***
Most Americans who travel overseas suffer the same hang-up. It’s what Mitt Romney felt when he saw all those young women working at that Chinese factory he once considered buying. There’s a kind of awe in his voice as he describes how hard these women work, for how little money, under circumstances most Americans would consider slave labor.
Romney sees the story as a kind of inspirational morality tale about capitalism: this is how the poor should behave. They should be grateful for any opportunity to better themselves. “This is an amazing land and what we have is unique and fortunately it is so special we are sharing it with the world.”
The real problem with America isn’t that we have too many poor people but that our poor are insufficiently grateful.
***
That, in a nutshell, is Romney’s pitch—not just to the swells eating $50,000 chicken breasts; to all of us.
***
One of the great wonders of the conservative movement is how effectively they’ve constructed this inverted narrative in which the rich are victims, and the poor are perpetrators. They’ve managed to convince tens of millions of decent Americans—many of them poor—to ignore any evidence that contradicts this worldview.
You can jump up and down and scream, ‘Hey, the Americans who don’t pay income tax are dirt poor, or serve in the military, or are aged!’ Or, ‘Listen, the top ten percent of our country controls 75 percent of our wealth, while the bottom half controls 1.1 percent!’ These are factual statements.
But they don’t register.
The reality conservatives cling to resides in their hearts. The poor wind up poor not because they lack access to opportunity—to good education and good jobs—or because they lose their jobs, or get sick, but because they’re parasites. The rich are rich not because they were born that way, not because they’ve rigged the system in their favor, or because they’re ruthless or unethical, but because they’re braver and more noble than the rest of us.
***
More and more, I’m convinced that this mindset is psychologically protective. It’s how citizens in a nation of unprecedented abundance justify our own inaction, our entitlement, our sloth. It’s how we make it okay to eat gourmet meals while other human beings are starving. It’s how we transmute our guilt into rage.
Conservatives take the lead. But most of the rest of us go along. We don’t take to the streets to demand an end to greed in our time. We drive hybrids and complain to each other. This allows us to feel superior without putting much at risk. It’s a cozy arrangement. The Romneys of the world provide cover for our own moral negligence.
***
But still. I have to believe that there must have been some part of Mitt Romney who walked through that factory and saw more than “favorable labor costs,” who looked around and thought: Gosh, these young women are the same age as my sons. What if my sons were born in this country? What if the most they could hope for in life was a slightly larger apartment on the edge of some blighted Chinese landscape?
I have to believe this because Mitt Romney isn’t a robot. He’s a human being. He’s a father.
***
Sometimes, at night, I close my eyes and I’m back on that sidewalk in El Paso. There’s nothing I can do about it. I’m just there. And there’s Lupe. She’s come to beg for clothes. Her hair is suddenly covered in bird shit, as if the pigeons themselves know the order of things. But they don’t. It’s just dumb luck. It’s mean luck. Lupe is standing there. Her daughter is behind her, looking up. There’s nothing I can do about it. She’s still there. She’s still the same age as my daughter.
24 responses
I have to believe your perspective is skewed by the fact that you are a child of privelege.
I was married to a bank VP and drove a brand new RX and wore gorgeous clothes. Later, I worked as a housekeeper an got paid under the table out of which I paid rent, utilities and food, clothing, etc for three children. I bought my grandchildren, living with me, PJs at rummage sales for 25 cents a pair. I had to lie to my boss abou ta flat tire to go to he rummage sale. I did get food stamps and $200+ a month from Illinois for the twin grandchildren. I am college educated. The beautiful estate I worked on hired several illegals, one whose family came up here to have the babies in our hospitals for free. I paid cash, over $100 a month for my anti-depressants and cash to the dr.
The food stamp rolls have increased under Obama. On the news, a video interview: “I love Obama. He gives me money.”
Don’t start with me.
Virginia,
When money gets concentrated at the top, there are more poor people. That’s just math.
All the same, I’m not going to start with you.
But I am glad that you found the Rumpus, and The Week in Greed, whether you agree with what I’m saying or not.
“They’ve managed to convince tens of millions of decent Americans—many of them poor—to ignore any evidence that contradicts this worldview.” This, I’ll never understand.
Wonderful post, Steve, thanks.
I’m scratching my head trying to figure out why Virgina took this article as such a personal assault–as though it was written specifically with her in mind. There seems to be a very strange sort of narcissism going on there.
By the way, another great article, Steve.
@Virginia: Not to mention “I worked as a housekeeper an got paid under the table..” almost immediately preceding “I did get food stamps and $200+ a month from Illinois”. Hmmm…
I agree with this article. Anyone who really looks at the media and at what both parties yell back and forth at each other that “the poor” has become a group of people without any real voice. Both parties use a whole demographic when election time comes around. Democratic candidates are just as guilty as the Republicans however I personally think that the Democrats at least try. We as a country need to stop looking at 47 percent as either a problem to be fixed or moochers and see them as people trying to pay their bills and feed their kids.
Virginia, it’s not a perfect metaphor, but I did just discover the most fascinating thing about squirrels’ squirreling. The grey squirrel buries nuts that he himself may never ever eat. When he’s hungry, he takes his share from the collective store beneath the dirt (no visas required)then heads home less hungry. The leftover nuts, come spring, sprout and become new trees. The new trees, of course, pop through the earth and make more nuts for more squirrels to eat. Red squirrels, on the other hand, don’t bury their food. They collect nuts too, but they hoard their stash in nests at the tip-top of the highest trees. (*My* nuts!) The extra nuts don’t grow new trees and they don’t feed other squirrels. What they do is, they make the red squirrel feel fat and lucky and then they rot and go to waste. Silly red squirrels.
Steve, thank you for this thoughtful post. It articulates a lot of the thoughts swirling in my head.
I am, as always, fascinated by the preoccupation with the poor as political tool and not with the poor as fellow human beings whose heads we should not shit on.
I enjoyed this post. I think Virginia missed how self-incriminating it was. You don’t need to start with her–you started with yourself.
But now what?
Or perhaps Mitt was celebrating this…
“We are in the midst of the fastest period of poverty reduction the world has ever seen. The global poverty rate, which stood at 25 percent in 2005, is ticking downwards at one to two percentage points a year, lifting around 70 million people – the population of Turkey or Thailand – out of destitution annually. ”
I’m all for redistribution of wealth, but you’ve got to give credit where credit is due. No amount of hand-wringing, debt reduction and aid could make this sort of progress. It’s access to markets and technology that did the job.
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/little-notice-globalization-reduced-poverty
Yes, generally speaking, we are all a combination of brainwashed, complacent, scared, and yes, feel entitled in different ways. To varying degrees we all seperate our spiritual, working, social, and family lives – there seems rarely to be a chance to have a fully unified life in contemporary America. So it is with our elected leaders, because they are people too, just like us. That would be my most compasionate take on guys like Mittens…he’s as lost and at loose ends in a huge complex world as you or I. But to me, he really comes across as a driven, amoral creature. Oh well……
Mr. Almond, thank you for your insights and political writings. Jen Hicks and Catholic Feminist thanks for adding thought and interest to my life. I was stumbling around the internet looking for some commentary worth reading. Therumpus.net gives me hope that US citizens
remain both thinkers and doers…
Catholic Feminist got it right. Jobs in the sweat-shop are helping those Chinese women to have better lives. If the women’s husbands also work then between the two of them they can probably save some money each month for their future. Some may be going to night classes to learn skills to get a better job. I doubt anyone forced them to take the jobs – they WANTED the jobs for the reasons I just mentioned. Is the work “arduous and humiliating� Yes. That describes MOST work on this planet – maybe all of it. That’s why God uses work as punishment for mankind as explained in Genesis 3:17 to 19. Eventually those Chinese workers may save enough to start their own factory and hire more poor people, and that cycle of wealth creation continues BECAUSE OF ARDUOUS AND HUMILIATING WORK. This same cycle has created the wealthy nations of the world. It’s a cruel system and many people hate it, but it is the only system that works – a humiliating and arduous job may prod you to work hard to improve your life, your neighborhood and your nation.
On the other hand, getting a handout each month from the government will only prod you to sit on your ass, engage in crime, do nothing useful with your life, impoverish your neighborhood and your nation, and whine and complain about people who worked hard and are wealthier as a result of their efforts.
Romney understands this and would like to stop this cycle of handouts – he understands it is destroying the people receiving the handouts. Oblabber understands it also and wants it to continue so the welfare cases will vote for him so he can remain in power and feel important while the nation gets a little closer to socialism which is what he wants because he thinks like Steve. Problem is most people in socialist countries are about as poor as bird shit Lupe.
Privileged but helpless Steve could do nothing to help Lupe – his words, not mine. (He could have offered the use of his shower.) If over the course of his life he had achieved even a fraction of the success of Mitt he could have done a lot more to help. But because the path he chose is one of whining and making excuses, he can help no one. Only strong people can help the weak – are you going to try to become one of the strong ones and help, or are you going to sit on your butt and whine about people like Mitt that gave millions to charity in 2011? Are you going to whine about Bill Gates who gives billions to help poor people?
A famous Democrat once said: “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.†This is Mitt’s vision also, but not Oblabbers and not this Oblabber voters:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI
Every time somebody begins a comment with “Virginia,” I expect to find next “there is a Santa Claus.” Disappointed when I don’t, but then, it’s an impossibly perfect metaphor for my recent contemplation of our political system. “Yes, Audrey, there exists in Washington a striving for the common good, a respect of our Constitution, and a selflessness borne in the hearts of our elected leaders.” But it isn’t true. And because I live overseas, I get to explain these campaign trail antics to my international set of friends, and shift uncomfortably in my seat when their racism and class-ism (which aren’t under such keen, global scrutiny as my own, because I’m an American, and they are not) come up in conversation, immediately followed by some thinly-veiled insult about America’s two-party system, and how little room it leaves for true advancement or enlightenment. What a dance. A tango between guilt and transmuted rage; it’s helpful to be able to name the two partners. Thank you, Steve Almond, for your articulation and your memory vault.
Wooly Bully,
It’s pretty sad that you’re willing to comment, but not to be interviewed. But it’s not surprising.
The mark of intellectual integrity is the willingness to defend your views in the face of others who might disagree, not just taking potshots in the comments section.
I offered you that chance to prove your mettle. Repeatedly.
You chickened out.
I’m happy to have you as a reader, and I can tell my columns goad you into defensive responses.
But every time you post, you’re just telling me you’re a chicken.
Cluck cluck,
sa
I attended a lecture at the local Unitarian Fellowship a few weeks ago, around Labor Day. Funny thing, I found out that the U.S. does not celebrate the occasion on the same date as the rest of the world (wherever that is allowed). Guess why…. Anyhow, a model was developed in some New England states during the “Industrial Revolution” (ha ha) to lure young women to work in the new textile mills. That environment included housing, food, churches, etc…all owned and controled by – that’s right, the mill owner(s). So you leave your family, labor in an unsafe workplace, have no rights or benefits, and buy and rent from the same people who own it all and set the prices. Of course, the rest of the “pioneer’s” family would usually follow to end up living and working in the mill town. But that is the sunny side of the larger picture. This textile mill system was dependent on cheap cotton. Guess where that came from….ahhh….the sunny plantations of the south, where slaves did the really really humiliating backbreaking labor for…oh yeah, food clothing and shelter…hmmm… I wonder who was more grateful for their wonderful life. You know, the kind of life that, uh, God (probably a man and white) condemned humankind to…And those noble mill owners, well, when those ungrateful New England indentured servants demanded minimal working rights, well, those owners (wealthy free market capitalists) moved the factories south to get more grateful laborers. That model still holds true to this day. So those workers left behind, now in a place with no work were, uh, Screwed (no unemployment benefits, job training, etc..the kind of stuff guys like Willard Romney want to eradicate). I was reading about a horrific fire just last week in a “sweat shop” in a foriegn country where hundreds of workers were burned to death in a fire due to unsafe working conditions. An investigation is coming, I guess due to a few of those ungrateful family members who survived the fire and dared complain. Yeah, that’s the kind of world Everyone should have to start out in… oh yes indeed. Oh, except for the Owner types, those noble pillars of society. I was reading Nietzsche’s “On the Genealogy of Morals” (ugh–Nietzsche) and the first essay titled “Good and Evil, Good and Bad” here is what he wrote: “…the real homestead of the concept of “good” is sought and located in the wrong place: the judgement “good” did not originate among those to whom goodness was shown. Much rather has it has been the good themselves, that is, the aristocratic, the powerful, the high-stationed…who have felt that their actions were good, in contradistinction to all the low, the low-minded, the vulgar, and the plebeian. It was out of this pathos of distance that they first arrogated the right to create values for their own profit, and to coin the names of such values…The pathos of nobility and distance…the chronic and despotic espirit de corps and fundamental instinct of a higher dominant race coming into association with a meaner race, an “under race”, this is the origin of the antithesis of good and bad”. I won’t even touch upon The Doctrine of Discovery or Manifest Destiny. Don’t start with me….
So many things to discuss here:
1) Steve – great essay.
2) Ironically enough the states with the highest number of people who don’t pay taxes, the highest poverty rates, etc., tend to be GOP leaning. Meaning: the people buying the GOP message around economics are the people who have the least, and the ones rejecting it are often those with the most.
I work in Mgt. Consulting and I had a discussion with someone the other day who said that they “WANT” to vote GOP for lower taxes, but they can’t do in in good conscience because of social issues, how the poor would be treated, etc.
I.e. they want to buy Mitt’s message, but their consciences won’t let them.
I wonder, I wonder if Mitt’s poor voters treat it like a coping mechanism. Believing his rhetoric so they can say: “I’m no victim, I’m no moocher, it’s those OTHER poor people”.
On Facebook I’ve been having some surreal discussions, where I see low income friends of mine who live in Red States (or friends of friends) vigorously defending Mitt against people who earn a lot more.
It’s a strange argument.
An affluent person saying they want their taxes raised and the poor person’s reduced, for them to have more opportunities, and the poor or low income person making the contrary argument.
???????????
3) I think it’s a dual edged coping mechanism.
If you have privilege you don’t want to admit how lucky you are because doing so is terrifying, because even if you accept it, it’s EFFING terrifying.
I was the smart Black kid who was put into remedial classes despite my test scores, lucky for me it only lasted a few weeks because my Mom and Step-Dad were professors at the local college where some of my teachers had earned their degrees or where one of the women who made the decision was going back to school.
But what if my Mother was a cleaning lady?
If you’re poor admitting how much of success is the situation you’re born into may even be harder to deal with. Perhaps having some pride and saying “I work hard and don’t complain, nothing is holding me back” is easier than saying: If I was born to privilege I would have a better shot at life.
It’s easier for me to deal with the “what if my Mom was a cleaning lady?” argument when it’s a reality I don’t have to deal with, then for the child of a cleaning lady to deal with: “What opportunities would I have if my Mom was a college Professor?”
4) It’s amazing to me that as wealthy as this country is, we squabble over someone else having a leg up as if we’re all struggling.
People complain about having to wait in line behind someone with Food Stamps, and then they scrutinize all their purchases: “They bought cake, HOW EFFING DARE THEY BUY CAKE WITH MY TAX MONEY?! GRUEL FOR THE POOR!”
Driving home I often listen to this drive time talk radio show just so I can have some white noise. I don’t like the two guys on the show, but the woman who has her own segment is entertaining so I mostly tune in to hear her.
The guy was complaining about how Romney’s 47% number didn’t matter because there are too many moochers. “Why do people need student loans? I worked through college”. “There were this unemployed/poor people watching HBO”
??????
We don’t just want the poor to be grateful, I think we want them to suffer as well.
People act as if being on Welfare and Food Stamps is an easy ticket to being middle class, as opposed to living in the worse neighborhoods, running out of food at the end of the month, etc. People act as if the people who abuse the system are the norm.
I wonder though is it really just a way to make themselves feel superior? Is it really just fear?
Either way, the culture of economic superiority is annoying to watch (and hear), but I think it comes from a place of fear.
People talk about the Food Stamp rolls increasing as if Obama was actively trying to do this, as opposed to the fact that we haven’t recovered yet from the Bush economy and people are just out of work and broke.
Final thought:
Let’s talk mortgage interest deductions. Per current tax law you can deduct the interest on up to $1 Million in mortgage interest, $500k if married filing separately.
1 Million dollars.
I agreed with someone on Twitter that this should be reduced substantially so that middle class renters aren’t subsidizing the homes of highly affluent to rich people. A couple of people freaked out on me.
“Middle Class in San Fran is a $800k home, I need this tax break to afford this house”
All the arguments were like that, I need this tax break to afford this super expensive home and how dare you suggest taking it away. Suggesting phase outs, exemptions for high cost areas or that if you can afford a $800k house with a payment higher than most middle class families monthly take home pay, maybe you shouldn’t be crying poverty.
The point is that everyone is entitled in this country, it’s our culture really.
Actually, I have one more final thought: did anyone else notice that Mitt Romney said his campaign was about creating jobs, and then he said getting people to take responsibility for themselves and find one?
Which one is it, do jobs need to be created or are we really just stuck with lazy people who don’t want to get a job. You can’t have it both ways.
Now to address the twisted interpretation of a video bite that keeps getting posted on “The Week In Greed” columns. Here is the direct quote on the above clip (it’s refering to a speech by President Obama, just heard)— “It was the most memorable time of my life. It was a touching moment. Because I never thought this day would ever happen. I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage. You know, if I help him, he’s gonna help me.” Hey—a black woman who has a job, a mortgage, a car, children she is involved with enough to take them out of school for the day (what? — her children are in school?) to see the President in person. Wow…that must be a mind blower for some people…and she states in her own words just what that Democrat president once said (do you think it was J.F.K.?) that Wooly kindly quoted for us all. It takes a really sick mind-set to try and twist a heartfelt moment into a lame hateful piece of propaganda. Nice try, but you Lose. Again.
hi, markham. the tax deduction for home mortgages only applies to interest. as your interest declines and more of your payment is going to principal, the deduction lessens. i think it was meant as an incentive to buy because home ownership is supposed to be good for the country or whatever. without it, i’d probably still be renting because what would be the point to buying except to be able to paint the walls what ever color i want.
wooly bully, dude: that video you posted has nothing to do with obama paying for the woman’s house or gas. i guess we all hear what we want to hear. but come on, man. what a low shot. and soooo not what she is talking about.
@Betsy: I’m aware. I said: “Per current tax law you can deduct the interest on up to $1 Million in mortgage interest”, I worded poorly though, I should have said the interest on up to $1 million worth of mortgage debt.
Typo aside, we’re saying the same thing. Obviously it declines, but it doesn’t change the fact per my thinking, renters shouldn’t subsidize owners.
So we either let EVERYONE deduct housing costs whether they’re interest or rent, or we phase it out above a certain amount. I’m cool with up to $300-$500k, then have a sliding scale to phase it out.
Especially when you can’t deduct healthcare costs that easily, which is absolutely ridiculous.
A millionaire can deduct his mortgage interest easier than a sick middle class person can deduct their healthcare costs?
Rubbish
@markham – but i pay property taxes and a renter doesn’t. i think i get what you’re saying, though – it’s about fairness.
@Markham, the issue with taking away a mortgage interest deduction from current owners is that we planned financially for that deduction. It increased the price of the house and decreased our monthly payments. If my mortgage deduction went away tomorrow, I would have to sell. And my house would be worth a lot less because it would cost a buyer more to pay for it.
It’s not generally considered fair practice to change the rules after people make thirty-year financial decisions. Phasing it out for future owners would still affect housing prices, but also seems pretty unfair in a state like CA where newer homeowners already pay far more in property taxes than people who were in their homes before the boom. I agree the system is unfair, but I don’t know a way to correct that without screwing over a lot of people.
@Sarah – they have changed the rules on interest deductions before, and taxation related to Real Estate. People survived.
Either way it won’t have the impact you think if done right.
#1) Median Home price is about $190k, and the home is typically owned by a married couple (or head of household) that gets the standard deduction of $11k. – meaning they don’t get to deduct much anyway, especially not after they’ve paid the principle down.
2) A well constructed phase out could minimize the impact on existing homeowners fairly easily, especially if you include exceptions for people in high cost areas.
My thought would be to phase it out for high priced homes (say the phasing kicks in at $500k), because if done right it would only impact a small % of the population in any significant way, a % of the population that can afford it.
The Tax Reform act of ’86 is seen as causing the Savings & Loan Crisis, but…. what really happened is that you had a bunch of dodgy financial institutions that couldn’t hide their bad business practices anymore.
Still everyone survived in the end.
I’m not doubting that it would cause some short-term pain, but I think the long-term benefit is worth it.
The key is just do it in a smart way so you minimize it, and if you design the change with that in mind it shouldn’t be a huge problem. If you set the upper limit at $500k, had some things in there to help homeowners in high cost areas, and a gradual phase in you could reduce the short-term pain fairly significantly and create a long-term situation where renters aren’t subsidizing owners.
In the end that’s the issue, FAIRNESS. Home ownership is a lifestyle choice that people who aren’t ready, can’t afford to, or don’t want to shouldn’t have to subsidize.
Look at cities like San Francisco and NYC with a high % of solidly middle class renters, they’re subsidizing home ownership for people in cheaper areas. How is that even remotely fair?
Remember, people are already getting screwed over by the system as is.
Hell if the median house price is $190k, you’d only pay $13k in interest with a loan as high as 7%. If you’re married then you only are really deducting $2k over the standard deduction, making the value as far as tax reduction only several hundred bucks.
I’m not concerned about those people.
I’m concerned about people in say $500k-$1 million dollar houses, start phasing it out above $500k, exemptions for high cost areas and really you hit the people in the $750k-$1 million range the most.
They’ll survive just fine, especially if you phase it in over several years.
Steve Almond, thank you for this piece. I think what’s so striking and moving about it is that you’ve written from the first person perspective, anchoring the personal and the political in a thoughtful, introspective, and observant manner we so rarely get to see in political and social commentary. It was refreshing and thought-provoking to see this approach in action and so well-rendered. Though I already agreed with you before ever reading this piece, it made me look at the issues in a new way. Thank you for that.
Click here to subscribe today and leave your comment.