Jump to content

Free college


stahleyp
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm sure most here probably agree that free college is probably a bad idea. I'm sure most would also agree that college costs are out of control and the student debt load is harming the economy.

 

Rather than "free" college, why couldn't the government require any colleges who receive funding to not increase total college costs by more than inflation per year? That would control a lot of the future costs, I would think.

 

Further, I think it's wild that student loan interest is as high as it is. One would think a loan that is not dischargable in bankruptcy would be lower. I think a good use of funds might be something like very low (or no) interest on student loans assuming the loan is paid off, in full, within say 10 years. That encourages folks to keep paying since there's a benefit. Sure, taxpayers are subsidizing still but not nearly to the same degree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

One thing that would help dramatically is skin in the game.

 

Right now colleges reap a disproportionate benefits from the Federal Student Loan program. If students are struggling to pay or don't get value, the schools have no penalty, while the students are saddled with debt, that can not be discharged in bankruptcy. There is great incentive to raise costs since it just means more money for the schools and no concern about pay back or value for the students.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

USA has perfected a crooked form of capitalism in Education & Healthcare that has resulted in economic slavery for substantial part of the population.

 

The conditions are very ripe for a good old fashioned revolution if things go unchecked. The "powers be" have kept a lid by smoke and mirrors (focusing attention on guns, abortion, immigrants, race etc). If not resolved, this will bring down the house of cards.

 

I don't know what the solution is:

 

For starters,

 

Nationalize the production & distribution of must need generics (insulin etc)

Break textbook & scientific journal monopoly

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing that would help dramatically is skin in the game.

 

Right now colleges reap a disproportionate benefits from the Federal Student Loan program. If students are struggling to pay or don't get value, the schools have no penalty, while the students are saddled with debt, that can not be discharged in bankruptcy. There is great incentive to raise costs since it just means more money for the schools and no concern about pay back or value for the students.

 

All this talk about "free college" is ignoring one of the problems...NO politician is talking about the problem of the EDUCATORS.  Until THAT is addressed, you are going to have problems.

 

The skools get their money first.  Doesn't matter if they lie/fudge/obfuscate about the outcomes of their graduates or the value of their education.  Doesn't matter if they have a 50% unemployment/underemployment rate for their graduates.  Doesn't matter that the majority of graduates in DPS are functionally illiterate.  The amount of society's capital that is wasted/squandered in the USA education industrial complex is simply staggering.

 

The default rate is actually orders of magnitude higher than what is commonly reported.  In order to "default" on your student loans, you've got to be developmentally disabled OR hopelessly broke.  If you've got ANYTHING going on, you can get deferred payments OR get on IBR (income based repayment).

 

The real default rate should be the percentage of students who are NOT making regular payments (11 of 12 trailing months) towards their loans that cover BOTH interest AND something towards the principal of the loan.

 

If that were the standard, I think you would see the default rate easily exceed 50%.

 

If college is free, then what about the problems of all the fools who saved & worked to pay for their education?  All those whose worked extra hours and scrimped and saved to pay on their student loans?

 

What about the people who took out hundreds of thousands in student loans and can't get a job that pays ANYTHING near enough to pay back their loans?  They are jammed up for DECADES.

 

Finally, what protection do students have against a defective education?  They can't get their time & money back, nor can they get their loans discharged.  The educators get it all.  It appears to me that the way college is set up is simply to transfer $$$$ from government/society to educators with students stuck in the middle.

 

Mark my words, this is going to get traction in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ontario has had free tuition for low income families for some time, and has just axed it.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/pc-government-tuition-fees-1.4981987

 

It was actually a very smart program, but was starting to be aggressively used by those going into the trades (food prep, bakers, cake makers, brewers, plumbers, welders, truck driving, nursing, etc.) - hence the 25% spike in usage. Too many trades students from poor families, were discovering that between free tuition and (on-line) textbooks, savings from co-op terms built into their program, and working part-time in their field while going to school; they could graduate in 2-3 years with certifications, experience, and debt free.

 

An unexpected consequence was pensioners returning to college to learn a trade (bread baking, cake making, welding, plumbing, etc) -  just for something to do. Incomes low enough to trigger free tuition, most other costs allready covered through pension, and work a few hours/week at your local grocery/metal shop (for more than minimum wage) just to stay in touch and do your own thing. With a little encouragement  ;)

 

Too many of the wrong people were starting to make a few bucks.

 

SD

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure most here probably agree that free college is probably a bad idea. I'm sure most would also agree that college costs are out of control and the student debt load is harming the economy.

 

Rather than "free" college, why couldn't the government require any colleges who receive funding to not increase total college costs by more than inflation per year? That would control a lot of the future costs, I would think.

 

Further, I think it's wild that student loan interest is as high as it is. One would think a loan that is not dischargable in bankruptcy would be lower. I think a good use of funds might be something like very low (or no) interest on student loans assuming the loan is paid off, in full, within say 10 years. That encourages folks to keep paying since there's a benefit. Sure, taxpayers are subsidizing still but not nearly to the same degree.

 

I'm a liberal on many things, but I don't believe in free college, nor should parent's pick up the tab for it.  Same with a car.  You can help your kid if you put away some money in a RESP or equivalent, but I think the student should be responsible for, and if they want to go, to college.  Not everyone should go to college! 

 

And if you have too much student debt, then you should have thought twice about taking it on, pay it, or file bankruptcy.  We are becoming a no consequence society!  I'm ok with them filing bankruptcy, because then there is a consequence.  If corporations can file for bankruptcy, why shouldn't overburdened personal debt holders...but you live with the consequences of bad credit.  Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely like the idea of losing funding if too many graduates go into default.

 

In some ways, I like not being able to discharge the debt in bankruptcy. There is a reason these laws were put into place. Supposedly, a lot of physicians and others would rack up a few hundred thousand $ in debt and then file. I think that if one files, there should be something more than a hit to credit. Perhaps giving up the degree and/or banned from practicing in the field where the degree was earned.

 

I used to be more liberal but I think a big reason liberalism has rallied over the past 40 years is due to debt. It's a lot easier to give money to others when governments aren't disciplined.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really circles back to student maturity at the time the student takes on the debt.

There is no 'undo', or 'I was stupid' button, that forgives it - and there really shouldn't be. It's money secured against lifetime earnings, it allowed you to improve yourself, and if you make the wrong decisions you wear it. Society ain't mommy and daddy, and lenders ain't the forgiving type.

 

SD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“If college is free, then what about the problems of all the fools who saved & worked to pay for their education?  All those whose worked extra hours and scrimped and saved to pay on their student loans?

“What about the people who took out hundreds of thousands in student loans and can't get a job that pays ANYTHING near enough to pay back their loans?  They are jammed up for DECADES.”

 

This is a bad argument.

 

“If we cure cancer, what about all the people who had cancer and died!!!”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely like the idea of losing funding if too many graduates go into default.

 

In some ways, I like not being able to discharge the debt in bankruptcy. There is a reason these laws were put into place. Supposedly, a lot of physicians and others would rack up a few hundred thousand $ in debt and then file. I think that if one files, there should be something more than a hit to credit. Perhaps giving up the degree and/or banned from practicing in the field where the degree was earned.

 

I used to be more liberal but I think a big reason liberalism has rallied over the past 40 years is due to debt. It's a lot easier to give money to others when governments aren't disciplined.

 

Why is student loan debt the only debt not to be discharged in bankruptcy?  I am sure there are TONS of students/professionals who would GLADLY trade in their diploma/license in order to have their debts discharged.

 

Then, if you have too much of that going on, the college issuing the worthless degrees can be shut down OR no longer be eligible for loans.

 

If there are consequences for students/graduates, then there needs to be some consequences for the educators.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really circles back to student maturity at the time the student takes on the debt.

There is no 'undo', or 'I was stupid' button, that forgives it - and there really shouldn't be. It's money secured against lifetime earnings, it allowed you to improve yourself, and if you make the wrong decisions you wear it. Society ain't mommy and daddy, and lenders ain't the forgiving type.

 

SD

 

SD:

 

Please do not offense to this...but I really don't think you have any idea what is going on, the magnitude of it, and the underlying problems.

 

One of the problems with student loan debt is that there are a lot of LIES/MISREPRESENTATIONS being made by the educators.  How is a student supposed to correctly evaluate their position and the worth of a degree/education, when one party has an asymmetric information imbalance?  When one side is lying about the figures? 

 

If your diploma/education is not worth it within 2 years of graduating, odds are it is NEVER going to be worth anything.  Educations do not typically improve with age.

 

 

Heck, leave that argument aside...what if a skool has 70%+ of it's graduates on IBR?  The skool & educators got their money up front.  The students have wrecked lives (20+ years IBR), and the government/taxpayer foots the bill in the end!  It is simply a transfer of capital from taxpayers to educators with students trapped in the middle.

 

Finally, if too many people get upset with situation, and see no reasonable way out, why not "flip the table"?  I think that is why SO many younger people in the USA are being attracted to socialism.  That is a VERY dangerous thing indeed.

 

The education industrial complex in the USA is rotten to the core and needs to be changed.  The sooner the better.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“If college is free, then what about the problems of all the fools who saved & worked to pay for their education?  All those whose worked extra hours and scrimped and saved to pay on their student loans?

“What about the people who took out hundreds of thousands in student loans and can't get a job that pays ANYTHING near enough to pay back their loans?  They are jammed up for DECADES.”

 

This is a bad argument.

 

“If we cure cancer, what about all the people who had cancer and died!!!”

 

People made choices to go to certain colleges (or to party or to work). Those choices should have consequences. Virtually no one chooses to get cancer.

 

I agree, dtejd. Educators should also be held responsible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely like the idea of losing funding if too many graduates go into default.

 

In some ways, I like not being able to discharge the debt in bankruptcy. There is a reason these laws were put into place. Supposedly, a lot of physicians and others would rack up a few hundred thousand $ in debt and then file. I think that if one files, there should be something more than a hit to credit. Perhaps giving up the degree and/or banned from practicing in the field where the degree was earned.

 

I used to be more liberal but I think a big reason liberalism has rallied over the past 40 years is due to debt. It's a lot easier to give money to others when governments aren't disciplined.

 

Well maybe all of the debt shouldn't be discharged, but I think a significant portion of it should be.  Lenders, be it private or government, should be on the hook for the stupid or smart loans they make.  Maybe like a mortgage, students should be required to put up 20% of their own to cover fees...like anything, if you have capital at risk, you're probably going to be a better loan risk. 

 

Circumstances change...you generally borrow for your education when you are young and healthy.  What if you develop an illness 5-10 years down the road and you were making all of your student loan payments until then.  Student loan debt shouldn't be fundamentally different than any other type of debt.  Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"This is a bad argument."

 

LOL!

 

Always a bad argument when it does not line up with your socialist mantra.

 

Why stop there? Free beer, homes and diapers too? Everything should be free! No one should owe anything, nor have to work!

 

Cardboard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely like the idea of losing funding if too many graduates go into default.

 

In some ways, I like not being able to discharge the debt in bankruptcy. There is a reason these laws were put into place. Supposedly, a lot of physicians and others would rack up a few hundred thousand $ in debt and then file. I think that if one files, there should be something more than a hit to credit. Perhaps giving up the degree and/or banned from practicing in the field where the degree was earned.

 

I used to be more liberal but I think a big reason liberalism has rallied over the past 40 years is due to debt. It's a lot easier to give money to others when governments aren't disciplined.

 

Well maybe all of the debt shouldn't be discharged, but I think a significant portion of it should be.  Lenders, be it private or government, should be on the hook for the stupid or smart loans they make.  Maybe like a mortgage, students should be required to put up 20% of their own to cover fees...like anything, if you have capital at risk, you're probably going to be a better loan risk. 

 

Circumstances change...you generally borrow for your education when you are young and healthy.  What if you develop an illness 5-10 years down the road and you were making all of your student loan payments until then.  Student loan debt shouldn't be fundamentally different than any other type of debt.  Cheers!

 

You can get your debts discharged if you develop serious health issues.

 

https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/repay-loans/forgiveness-cancellation/disability-discharge

 

Student loan debt is fundamentally different. You don't lose what you learned. You don't lose the degree. If you file bankruptcy you can lose your car, items, etc.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

USA has perfected a crooked form of capitalism in Education & Healthcare that has resulted in economic slavery for substantial part of the population.

 

The conditions are very ripe for a good old fashioned revolution if things go unchecked. The "powers be" have kept a lid by smoke and mirrors (focusing attention on guns, abortion, immigrants, race etc). If not resolved, this will bring down the house of cards.

 

I don't know what the solution is:

 

For starters,

 

Nationalize the production & distribution of must need generics (insulin etc)

Break textbook & scientific journal monopoly

 

The revolution will come when the generation screwed by non dischargable student loans has enough Heft in the voting booth and can call the shots at elections. I think it’s inevitable that student loans will become dischargable. Might screw up the financial system a bit cost taxpayers dearly, but so be it. Every generation has the “right” to screw up the system at least once in their lifetime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really circles back to student maturity at the time the student takes on the debt.

There is no 'undo', or 'I was stupid' button, that forgives it - and there really shouldn't be. It's money secured against lifetime earnings, it allowed you to improve yourself, and if you make the wrong decisions you wear it. Society ain't mommy and daddy, and lenders ain't the forgiving type.

 

SD

 

SD:

 

Please do not offense to this...but I really don't think you have any idea what is going on, the magnitude of it, and the underlying problems.

 

One of the problems with student loan debt is that there are a lot of LIES/MISREPRESENTATIONS being made by the educators.  How is a student supposed to correctly evaluate their position and the worth of a degree/education, when one party has an asymmetric information imbalance?  When one side is lying about the figures? 

 

If your diploma/education is not worth it within 2 years of graduating, odds are it is NEVER going to be worth anything.  Educations do not typically improve with age.

 

 

Heck, leave that argument aside...what if a skool has 70%+ of it's graduates on IBR?  The skool & educators got their money up front.  The students have wrecked lives (20+ years IBR), and the government/taxpayer foots the bill in the end!  It is simply a transfer of capital from taxpayers to educators with students trapped in the middle.

 

Finally, if too many people get upset with situation, and see no reasonable way out, why not "flip the table"?  I think that is why SO many younger people in the USA are being attracted to socialism.  That is a VERY dangerous thing indeed.

 

The education industrial complex in the USA is rotten to the core and needs to be changed.  The sooner the better.

 

No offense taken.

But a couple of very relevant points ...

 

Education is not collateral that may be seized and sold to repay debt; at best it produces a higher MINIMUM future income, over the students remaining working life. Take away the ability to remove debt through bankruptcy, and that future POTENTIAL income stream can now become collateral for a loan. We may not like it, but that is the offer in the US.

 

Getting an educational certificate, is NOT a job guarantee; it is just 3rd party verification that person A has been awarded certificate X, that represents Y years of formal schooling in the broad subject area specified. How well Person A passed their subjects is not a consideration. It does not become a consideration unless that person tries for graduate school, when a minimum GPA will be required. 

 

It is to the employer to verify credentials when he/she hires person A. 'Reputation' just means that prospective employers evidence a repeating preference for School X over School Y. It may be simply because the parents/students of School X are generally better 'connected', and have nothing to do with the technical 'excellence' of the students it graduates. And if your business relies upon 'connectedness', this is an entirely rational decision (I-Banking, Legal, Medicine, Academia, etc); student misintrepretation is not the schools problem, only misrepresentation is. 

 

Buyer beware applies to everything we do, and 'stupid' is not a defense. Most people would not buy a house without using a real-estate agent, a new/used car without doing research or bringing an expert with them, or marry the girl/boy next door without an extended courtship period. Going to school, choice of school, and selection of the eventual school, is no different.

 

A certificate mill only exists because new customers (students) are not doing their due diligence, for whatever reason. This is America, the land of opportunity; and it would appear, that this is an area rife with opportunity. Rather than fight the system, why not make it work for you instead?

 

People make mistakes, that's life. All over North America there are thousands of small towns and cities screaming for doctors, nurses, professionals, etc. to live in and/or service their communities; and we live in an era where the ability to work 'remotely' has never been better than it currently is. It is a simple step to conditionally link limited debt forgiveness to an extended period of physically living in these areas. Fly in/out for work as you wish, but you physically live in small town X for 'N' years.

 

This isn't harsh, this is just life.

If you screw up - there are consequences. The same as it has always been.

 

SD

 

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

USA has perfected a crooked form of capitalism in Education & Healthcare that has resulted in economic slavery for substantial part of the population.

 

The conditions are very ripe for a good old fashioned revolution if things go unchecked. The "powers be" have kept a lid by smoke and mirrors (focusing attention on guns, abortion, immigrants, race etc). If not resolved, this will bring down the house of cards.

 

I don't know what the solution is:

 

For starters,

 

Nationalize the production & distribution of must need generics (insulin etc)

Break textbook & scientific journal monopoly

 

The revolution will come when the generation screwed by non dischargable student loans has enough Heft in the voting booth and can call the shots at elections. I think it’s inevitable that student loans will become dischargable. Might screw up the financial system a bit cost taxpayers dearly, but so be it. Every generation has the “right” to screw up the system at least once in their lifetime.

 

So true...both sad and very realistic in thought and practice.  Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“If college is free, then what about the problems of all the fools who saved & worked to pay for their education?  All those whose worked extra hours and scrimped and saved to pay on their student loans?

“What about the people who took out hundreds of thousands in student loans and can't get a job that pays ANYTHING near enough to pay back their loans?  They are jammed up for DECADES.”

 

This is a bad argument.

 

“If we cure cancer, what about all the people who had cancer and died!!!”

 

People made choices to go to certain colleges (or to party or to work). Those choices should have consequences. Virtually no one chooses to get cancer.

 

I agree, dtejd. Educators should also be held responsible.

 

And tons of people smoke tobacco products, knowing it greatly increases their cancer risk.

If we cure cancer, should we only make the cure available to non-smokers?

 

The underlying logic of acknowledging we have a problem but rationalizing a reason to leave it unaddressed is pure sillyness.

 

Student loan debt is fundamentally different. You don't lose what you learned. You don't lose the degree. If you file bankruptcy you can lose your car, items, etc.

If you paid $250,000 for an education only worth $25,000, where is the debt relief?

At least writing down assets generates taxable losses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole argument for educational loan forgiveness is that this was predatory lending, the same as the predatory mortgage lending that gave rise to the GFC. If it was OK to bail those people out of predatory lending, then how come it is not OK to bail me out for the same thing? What gives?

 

The reality of course is that the borrowers weren't bailed out.

Hundreds of thousands of home owners paid the penalty for 'moral hazard', and were foreclosed on. Lenders also paid the penalty for 'moral hazard', as per Lehman Bros. Then we discovered too big to fail ....  and now argue that educational predatory lending is a systemic problem that is too big to ignore. Most would agree.

 

As in any divorce or separation, blame is shared; as the breakdown didn't happen by itself.

There's hard conversation, and ultimately an agreement that is worked out.

 

We would suggest that the solution may be as simple as NOT making student loans available to anyone under 21 ('traditional' age of maturity); and leaving loan terms essentially the same as they are today. If you are going to rely on the public purse, you do so as a more mature individual, better able to make the right decisions for you. Still free to screw up, and mommy/daddy still free to send you to school early - but it's on their dime. A first year 17yr old is now in a class of first year 21yr olds, EVERYBODY'S game is raised, and more of school is on-line, versus in-class. Culture change.

 

You're still free to pay 250K for 25K of value, and stupid is still stupid.

The same as its always been.

 

SD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 50centdollars

People are free to make stupid decisions in life. Why should we bail them out? Should I feel sorry for them?

 

Take this lady for example.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/student-loan-debt-seniors-owe-billions-in-student-loan-debt-this-will-follow-me-to-the-grave/

 

CBS News met Stupida on the campus of San Luis Obisbo State University, where she got her master's degree 19 years ago.  She was 57 years old then, at a time when most people would be planning the last few years of their working life and counting down the days to retirement.  Instead, she stupidly decided to borrow money to get a Master's degree at age 57.  Surely, the remaining five or ten years left in her working life would justify the tens of thousands of dollars in tuition and other educational costs, right? She is foolish. Why should people bail her out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“If college is free, then what about the problems of all the fools who saved & worked to pay for their education?  All those whose worked extra hours and scrimped and saved to pay on their student loans?

“What about the people who took out hundreds of thousands in student loans and can't get a job that pays ANYTHING near enough to pay back their loans?  They are jammed up for DECADES.”

 

This is a bad argument.

 

“If we cure cancer, what about all the people who had cancer and died!!!”

 

People made choices to go to certain colleges (or to party or to work). Those choices should have consequences. Virtually no one chooses to get cancer.

 

I agree, dtejd. Educators should also be held responsible.

 

And tons of people smoke tobacco products, knowing it greatly increases their cancer risk.

If we cure cancer, should we only make the cure available to non-smokers?

 

The underlying logic of acknowledging we have a problem but rationalizing a reason to leave it unaddressed is pure sillyness.

 

Student loan debt is fundamentally different. You don't lose what you learned. You don't lose the degree. If you file bankruptcy you can lose your car, items, etc.

If you paid $250,000 for an education only worth $25,000, where is the debt relief?

At least writing down assets generates taxable losses.

 

 

We'll I suppose a big reason I'm not very liberal anymore is the abjection of personal responsibility. Bailouts lead to a lot of moral hazards which we see more and more of. I think colleges and student should take responsibility - not others.

 

I think we can agree that life and death are a little more serious than student loans.

 

Let's say someone goes to community college for two years (then transfers to a low cost university), works and lives at home the full time. They end up with no student loans (but less of the college "fun"). While the other person didn't worry about that and graduates with $50,000 in loans. Why is it fair to pay cover the costs of the 2nd person?

 

Now, if the purpose is to stimulate the economy, we could forgive X amount of dollars for students but then also give every other citizen the same amount of X dollars. After all, it's just pushing a button! Giving everyone X will certainly stimulate the economy more than just paying off some debt.

 

As far as the write off is concerned...I don't think tax payers get any benefits if their fellow citizens don't pay.  Now, I could get more behind lenders who are not taxpayers taking a hit especially with the normally higher interest rates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll I suppose a big reason I'm not very liberal anymore is the abjection of personal responsibility. Bailouts lead to a lot of moral hazards which we see more and more of. I think colleges and student should take responsibility - not others.

I think it's a bit of a stretch in characterization to label liberals in such a way. If you look at the situation now, who has "abjected personal responsibility"?

 

Two facts:

1-From the data I have seen, an entire generation of students are definitely suffering from the current student loan status quo (lower home ownership rates, lower savings rates, etc.)

 

2-For lenders, prior to making a loan they must assess two major risks: credit risk and default risk. Yet for student loans, lenders can gleefully ignore any default risk, and there is a natural mitigation to credit risk.

 

So we have a situation that, when students are irresponsible and take out "bad loans", they are punished.

Yet when lenders make these "bad loans", their risk is strongly mitigated.

To me it is clear which group is "abjecting personal responsibility"

 

Let's say someone goes to community college for two years (then transfers to a low cost university), works and lives at home the full time. They end up with no student loans (but less of the college "fun"). While the other person didn't worry about that and graduates with $50,000 in loans. Why is it fair to pay cover the costs of the 2nd person?

Just because someone is too poor, or too ignorant, or too short-sighted to decline predatory loans, this does not make it OK to offer them in the first place.

 

And when predatory loans were made in the past, there is a responsibility to make that right. Government enables such a poor structure to exist and should share responsibility in making it right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...