Revealed: How The Pap Uses The Wage-CPF/HDB-Debt Cycle To Stab Singaporeans In The Back

(Please note that this is a five-page article.)

Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Page 1: How The PAP Pushed Down Singaporeans’ Wages, Forced Singaporeans To Pay The More Into CPF But Give The Least Back

Page 2: How The PAP Controls The GIC And Pretend They Do Not Know How Our CPF Is Being Invested

Page 3: How The PAP Uses The Wage-CPF-HDB Trinity And Double-Paying Trickery To Entrap Singaporeans

Page 4: How The PAP Creates A Triple-Debt To Lock-In Singaporeans And Force Singaporeans Into Poverty

Page 5: When The PAP Magic Plan All Began

Dear Singaporeans, I have finally uncovered the sinister PAP plot to cut Singaporeans down. Please read this. This is the most single most important piece that I have ever written about Singapore. After you read this, all you need to know about Singapore and the PAP’s whole entrapment plan to cut Singaporeans down will all be revealed and make sense finally.

For a long time, Singaporeans have felt that we are not able to earn and save enough and life doesn’t seem to get better. Today, I have finally put together all the information and pieced together the whole picture of the PAP’s ploy.

If you feel that your life isn’t getting better, it’s not an accident at all. The PAP has planned for it all this while.

Last week, I had shared with you how the PAP has devised the deceptive CPF-HDB dirty scheme to siphon off your retirement funds so that you would never be able to save and retire.

Today, let me put everything together for you and let you see the complete picture. Today, let me show you when it all started and when they had planned to stab you in the back since 30 years ago.

Have you read the book 1984? Well, welcome to the real 1984.

(If you would like to jump straight into finding out what the Wage-CPF-HDB Trinity is, you can jump right into Page 3. However, you would most probably come back to Page 1 as in Page 1, it will be revealed to you the points at which the PAP concocted this trinity.)

The Old PAP Used To Care For Singaporeans

Before we start, do you know that things didn’t always used to be so bad under the PAP. Well, at least the original PAP wasn’t bad – the current ones are shady-artists under the guise of the PAP brand but who bear no resemblance to the old PAP guards whatsoever.

In fact, under the first generation PAP politicians, Goh Keng Swee, S. Rajartnam, Toh Chin Chye (and Ong Teng Cheong), things only got better and better.

Under them, Singaporeans’ wages grew under their wise leadership. The wage share of Singaporeans grew. The wage share is the proportion of GDP that goes into wages (instead of to profits). As Singapore grew more prosperous in the 1970s and 1980s, Singaporeans shared more in the wealth that we had helped to grow.

From 1972 to 1985, the wage share in Singapore increased from about 36% to about 48%, or by almost 1% every year. The wage share then fell after the 1985 recession to 42% but climbed back up 45.4% in 1992 (Chart 1). That was the last of the good times. By 1997, the wage share had dropped to 43%. Since then, according to the PAP, the wage share has dropped to around only 40%. This means that Singaporeans are now earning lower wages and companies are earning higher profits.


Chart 1

Not only that, under the then-PAP, the CPF contribution rates grew as well – from 10% in 1955 to 50% in 1985 before it was reduced to 36% in 1986, after the 1985 recession (Chart 2).


Chart 2

However, more importantly, even as the CPF contribution rates grew, the interest earned by the CPF also grew as well. Under the stewardship of the initial PAP politicians, the interest rates grew from 2.5% in 1955 to 6.5% in 1986 – the highest ever interest rates that Singaporean had even gotten (Chart 3). Today, we receive a miserly 2.5% to 4%. The interest rate of 2.5% today is at an all-time low – as low as what Singaporeans had received in 1955.


Chart 3

Under the old PAP, income inequality had also reduced. Inequality actually dropped to its lowest in Singapore in 1979. The Gini coefficient fell to an all-time low of 0.41 – still a high figure and a high level of inequality, not something you want to shout about but it is still the lowest ever on record since independence from the British and Singapore was a fairer place then compared to today.


Chart 4

Also, the share of income that went to the richest 10% in Singapore was maintained at around 30% until 1984. (Chart 5). Then, Singaporeans still had a relatively more equal livelihood. The wealth distribution in Singapore was a lot more equal and the poor and middle-income in Singapore were also better off. But since then, the rich has only gotten richer and richer and the poor, even poorer.


Chart 5

Under the wise stewardship of the first PAP leaders who guided Singapore into an era of unprecedented growth and prosperity, all the people of Singapore grew together with the country and shared in the success of our country.

Our people and Singaporeans were proud to be who we were and we were learning to be a (truly) kinder and more gracious people, who were on our way towards achieving a (truly) First World standard of living.

But everything changed right after.

The young guns who took over the PAP today are wild horses who first tore inequality through the roof, then fumbled along their way to create the mess that Singapore is now in today.

So much so that Forbes had to pen an honest article to say that, “The first step for Singapore’s reinvention lies with recognizing the seriousness of its challenges. The policies of the past may have worked impressively, but may not be as appropriate in the future. As my old Japanese sensei Jiro Tokuyama once noted: the hardest thing to do is how to unlearn the secrets of your past success. The ingredients in the cocktail that is Singapore need to be tweaked for a new era.”

But of course, all these fell on deaf ears. Why? Because the new PAP’s agenda had been all along to grow at all costs and to grow Singapore to become a more and more unequal place, so that they can earn from Singaporeans and siphoned off our hard-earned money from us, into their own pockets.

Last week, I had shown you exactly how they have done that with your CPF and HDB.

Today, you will finally see how the PAP is undercutting you via the Wage-CPF-HDB Trinity. Today, you will finally see for yourself how the PAP had stabbed you in the back and when they had embarked on their corrupted plans.

To begin with the story, let’s take a look at your wages – the first trinity.

Singaporeans’ Wages Fell Over The Past 30 Years

Last year, the PAP took great pains to explain to Singaporeans that our wages have grown. They shared that the wage share of Singaporeans has grown over the past 3 decades.

The PAP claimed that, “In the 1980s, the wage share averaged at 41.8 per cent. This rose slightly to 41.9 per cent in the 1990s and further to 42.5 per cent between 2000 and 2009. (Chart 6)”


Chart 6

However, when you compare Singapore’s wage share with that of the other high-income countries, you would see that a 40% wage share is not only pathetic, it’s seriously low. In the other high-income countries, the wage share averages at 55% and can be as high as 60% (Chart 7).


Chart 7

Singapore’s wage share of 40% means that Singaporeans are losing as much as one-third, or 33% of what we should actually be paid (Chart 8).


Chart 8

Last month, I had explained that low-income Singaporeans may be losing as much as 75% of our wages and the average Singaporeans might be losing half, or 50% of our wages! Instead of $800, a low-income earner should rightfully be earning more than $3,000 and for the median income earner, instead of earning $3,000, we should be earning at least $6,000 (Chart 9). But why is this not happening?


Chart 9

You see, this is all because the PAP has very conveniently chose not to mention something. The PAP had only chosen to mention that “in the 1980s, the wage share averaged at 41.8 per cent”.

But what they had very conveniently chosen not to state is that from Singapore’s independence from the British all the way until 1985, the wage share actually grew from 35% to 48%. As Singapore got richer, so did Singaporeans.

In fact, I do not even know where the PAP had gotten the 41.8% in the 1980s figure from! In the 1980s, the wage share grew from almost 40% in 1980 to 48% in 1984, then declined to about 42% in 1988 after the recession and then grew again to 45% in 1990. In fact, instead of 41.8%, the wage share in the 1980s should actually average closer to 43% (Chart 10)!


Chart 10

Is the PAP pulling a fast one on Singaporeans? Why does the PAP want to tell Singaporeans that the wage share is 41.8% when it was at 43% in the 1980s? Now, in real wage terms, this is very significant.

Even as the PAP had claimed that the wage share in the 1990s was only 41.9%, it actually grew to 45.4% in 1992 and even as it dropped, it was at 43% in 1997. So, where did the PAP get 41.9% from? Wage share in the 1990s might be as high as 43% (Chart 11)!


Chart 11

Is the PAP pulling the wool over our eyes? What this means is that the truth would have been that wage share had fell from 43% in the 1980s to 43% in the 1990s to 42% today! It has not actually grown, as what the PAP had claimed!


Chart 12

Actually, what’s worse is something happened in 1994. In 1994, the PAP drove the wage share of Singaporeans down to nearly 40%, or the lowest ever since the early 1980s (Chart 13).


Chart 13

If that’s not already bad enough, in 2004, the PAP drove the wage share down even further to its lowest ever since to 40% and then even below 40% in 2007 (Chart 14). Singapore had never seen such a low wage share since the early 1980s.


Chart 14

But why did the PAP drive down the wage share of Singaporeans? In both 1994 and 2004, there was no recession and no reason for the PAP to do so. So why did they? Take note of these two years – 1994 and 2004. You will see them frequently throughout this article.

As you read on today, you will know why this important. Why does the PAP want to pretend to Singaporeans that the wage share in Singapore has always been at around 40%? Why does the PAP not want Singaporeans to know the truth that at one point, the wages of Singaporeans were growing and higher?

If wage share had kept pace at the rate it did, the wage share in Singapore could be as high as 57% today (Chart 15).


Chart 15

In real terms, what this means is that a low-wage worker in Singapore should be earning $3,000 today instead of $800 and for a median wage earner, instead of $3,000, he/she should be earning $6,000 today (Chart 16).


Chart 16

Then the question is, is the PAP keeping the wage share in Singapore today artificially low? And if so, why does the PAP want to keep it low?

The answer can actually be found in this – the income share that goes to the richest in Singapore.

The Richest In Singapore Grew Richer And Richer Over The Past 20 Years

As I had written before, the share of income that went to the richest 10% in Singapore reached an all-time low of 30.18% in 1995 before exploding like never before. The share of income that went to the rich exploded from 30% in 1995 to 42% in 2011 (and possibly higher today) (Chart 17).


Chart 17

And for the richest 5%, they got rich even faster – the share of income exploded from 22% from 1995 to 31% 2011 (Chart 18).


Chart 18

Never before has Singapore been so unequal and never before has the rich in Singapore been so rich and the rest of Singaporeans so poor.

And as I had also written before, when inequality increases, the share of income that goes to the rich would then increases in the following year (Chart 19).


Chart 19

What this means is that if the rich started getting richer and richer from 1995 onwards, this means that the inequality in Singapore actually has its roots in 1994. It was in 1994 that the rich started siphoning off money for themselves.

But do you know what else happened in 1984? Something even more sinister. They didn’t even bother to hide their greed.

In 1994, the PAP decided to increase the salaries of its ministers. It was in 1994 that the PAP decided to peg the salaries of the ministers to “two-thirds of the average of the top 24 people in 6 professions”. It was in 1994 that they decided to pay themselves the highest salaries in the world, and million-dollar salaries (Chart 20).


Chart 20

It was in 1994 that everything changed, that they made the wage share that went to Singaporeans drop and they started taking more and more money away from themselves to pay themselves.

Remember this year – 1994.

But we are only halfway through the story.

The PAP Forced Singaporeans To Earn Low CPF Interest Rates

Now, let’s take a look at the second trinity – the CPF.

As I had mentioned, from 1955 to 1985, the CPF contribution rate increased from a low of 10% in 1955 to the highest ever at 50%. However, this was all fine since the interest earned by the CPF also increased from a low of 2.5% to the highest ever at 6.5%. Singaporeans had to sacrifice a larger and larger proportion of our wages but we were also earning higher and higher returns on our CPF, so our retirement funds were growing (Chart 21).


Chart 21

Even after 1985, things were still not as bad. The CPF contribution rate fell to 35% in 1986 after the recession. But in 1994 (1994 again), the PAP then pushed the CPF contribution rate all the way up to its next peak of 40% (Chart 22).

In 1994, the PAP pushed the CPF contribution rates to a new high and forced us to sacrifice a massive chunk of our wages.


Chart 22

But more importantly, look at the interest rates. In the 1970s and early 1980s, the interest rates grew in tandem with the increase in the CPF contribution rates. Singaporeans were paying more and more, but we were also earning more and more interest returns.

But from 1986, it was a completely different story. The CPF interest rates fell to 3.1% in 1989 and then increased. But it then fell to its lowest at 2.5%, but in which year? You guessed it – 1994 (Chart 23).


Chart 23

In 1994, the PAP pushed the CPF contribution rates up to a new high at 40% and pushed the interest rates to a new low in 1984 (Chart 24). What this means is that the PAP was already forcing Singaporeans to give up the highest proportion of our wages into the CPF in the world and was giving us possibly the lowest returns in the world as well.

1994 – are you seeing the trend?


Chart 24

The interest rates did go up a bit to between 4.41% and 5.91% in 1999 but that was because they had to decrease the CPF contribution rates to 30% after the recession. In 2000, they pushed up the CPF contribution rates again to 32%, but as they did that, they also pushed interest rates down to the lowest ever – between 2.5% and 4%, and it has stayed at this harshly low level ever since.

The 2.5% is the lowest ever interest rates that Singaporeans are forced to accept since 1963.

Not only that, this year, they pushed the CPF contribution rate to an all-time high since 1999 – at 37% (Chart 25).


Chart 25

So, today, Singaporeans are forced to sacrifice the largest chunk of our wages into CPF (Chart 26).


Chart 26

The PAP also pays us the lowest interest rates on the CPF (Chart 27).


Chart 27

But then, the question is – why is the PAP forcing Singaporeans to pay so much out of our wages and yet give us such pathetic returns?

To recap, in 1994, the PAP started to push down the wages of Singaporeans, started to siphon our wages away for their own wealth as they started getting richer and richer, forced us to pay more out of our wages into CPF and gave us the lowest returns ever, thus depleting the value of our retirement funds.

Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5


  1. Raymond Lim

    Very well presented. This is indeed the truth that many daft Singaporeans are refusing to see all along. I am going to share this with all my family and friends. I am going to take it upon myself to educate them to not vote for PAP come 2016. Say no to PAP.

  2. John Koh

    So not voting PAP in? Will those charts reverse their trends? By the way, you may not even have any trends to chart! We’ll be charting trends for basic needs and poverty. Then you’ll die comparing them with Norway.

    • Ace

      Some people just don’t know what their priority is. Suppose you had been kidnapped, do you want to escape from the kidnappers first or are you worried that after you escape, will someone else kidnap you? Let’s deal with one thing at a time and cross the bridge when we come to it.

    • joe doe

      I agree with Ace. Don’t be a wussy, John. You don’t have a crystal ball or 20/20 hindsight, so you are not in a position to foretell the unknown. First thing first -> get rid of PAP.

  3. eric

    So according to Roy, a ‘low wage’ worker should earn $3k. The auntie who sweeps our void deck should earn 3k from according to Roy earns 800 now.

    A median wage worker who earn 3k now should earn 6k. So the will university grads not demand more?

    If a low wage worker can earn 3k, will prices remain the same? Will a plate of chicken rice at a hawker center still cost $2.50?

    • Aye

      Hello Eric, can I know your Facebook name? Mind to share with us? I also want to know whether you are certified economist.

      Singapore and other countries have beggars. BUT I see so many poor elderly collecting scrap materials in rich Singapore. This situation does not appear in other countries. What can the new PAP help them?

    • Simple man

      Firstly, wage is only one component of total cost.
      Secondly, if wages of the low and median wage worker is doubled or tripled, do you think it is a problem if prices of food in a hawker centre is double of what it is now?

      The cost of living will certainly be higher but lower in proportion to increase in wages meaning that we will have a better quality of life. Simple enough to understand?

      • joe doe

        Yes, this is simple logic. I hope eric don’t carry the balls to far. Your credibility sucks, eric.

      • Roy Ngerng

        A research has already shown that a 10% increase in wages will only result in a 0.4% increase in general prices.

        Let me just give you the simple reality – in Norway, wages are 3 to 5 times higher but grocery prices are similar, and housing and cars are cheaper.

        So your “fallacy” is illogical.

    • Sgcynic

      Wow Eric, the first brilliant question I ever heard from you!

      “If a low wage worker can earn 3k, will prices remain the same? Will a plate of chicken rice at a hawker center still cost $2.50?”

      I really don’t know. When rentals can increase by 50% from $8k to $12k, making low wage workers progressively earn wages down to $500 per month also not enough. What do you think? Heh

      • Sgcynic

        Still have lah. Just need to take a $2.50 bus-MRT-bus trip with seamless transfer to enjoy.

  4. eric

    Your article is indeed eye-opener! There will be worms inside PAP cans and skeletons inside PAP wardrobes.

    PAP has already cheated our feelings, robbing our hard earned money because of CPF increased minimum sum and increased withdrawal age. HDB took advantage of CPF loan interest to rob our hard earned money.

    CPF loan should not have interest. Why is PAP so greedy and selfish?

    Shame on PAP, Lee Hsien Loong and his wife Ho Ching! Vote PAP out in 2016!

    Fuck PAP off!

  5. Simple man

    In addition. CPF Life means that they can drag out the payout of CPF by another 20 years (assuming life expectancy is 85 years) and pay very little residue to your beneficiary. Why they want to do this is simply because the returns on the use of your CPF is much higher that the borrowing cost from us.

    So why do you think they have now come up with compulsory MediSave Life?

    You get screwed from birth till death, right, left and centre. This is worse than a Ponzi scheme.
    In a Ponzi scheme, you have the option to get out while you are still alive. Here, your compulsory Ponzi membership expires only when you die.

  6. anonymous

    Singaporeans live in an invisible slave matrix where they can’t see, hear, smell, or touch. Worse, they are brainwashed in schools to support the PAP from young. Thanks to internet everything is exposed, its up to Singaporeans to break free for themselves.

  7. L(iving) H(ell) L(ord)

    Those peoples whom involved in inventing this systems (past & present, directly or indirectly), must have deep in their stone heart, acknowledged there is truth in this article.

  8. Raymond Lim

    My blood boils when I read part 2. It is indeed an eye-opener as others have said. Thanks for compiling all these facts into very easy to digest charts and exposing the lies that PAP has been propagating all these years. A really well researched article.

  9. Calvin

    I have been following your blog for a while and not only I have understood what has been going on but also to feel the effects of it. Not only are the rich getting richer, but they are also getting greedier. Look at how many honest businesses were forced to shutdown due to the exorbitant increase in rent and the inability to hire staffs due to wages and quotas. The standard of essential services like public transport and telecommunications here are so poor and we often hear praises of them being world class, and such praises really makes my blood boil.

    Singapore needs a change. And the change needs to come from each and everyone of us.

  10. anonymous

    It makes sense now why they build casino and locals are deterred from entering. its all about lining their pockets.

  11. Raymond Huang

    I have followed your blog through Tremeritus for some time. I also think that there are a lot of people who still think that perhaps we should change the leader or have a coalition and everything will be solved. It does not work that way.
    There is no option but to aim to remove the ruling party altogether so that Singaporeans can be self-governing again.
    Also we cannot let the ruling party choose who they prefer to be the opposition party. That is for the people to decide. So any change in leadership or succession planning that is “underway” is really meant for the ruling party alone–not for Singapore.
    Singaporeans should keep that in mind.

  12. Richard Charles

    Roy, why don’t you expose the truths in the main media such as the press or STOMP. Best still if BBC or CNN can report it to the whole world the PRO ang mo Singapore government will have to change to save face. Otherwise, do you really think the PAP will let us bring them down by just mere voting? Remember, all those in power are afraid to lose it & they will do anything to keep it.

      • Calson Cheng

        Hey there. Malaysian here.

        You have written a fantastic article.

        A true eye opener for an outsider like myself.

        All the best in liberating your country from your corrupt government. We’ll also do our best to remove our own.


      • Roy Ngerng

        Thank you, Calson, may both Malaysia and Singapore work towards a government and society which will enshrine equality and the protection of their peoples and bring our region towards a renewed peace, prosperity and equality and the Nordic region had been able to achieve.

  13. S128

    Just a factual clarification on the accrued interest. See

    If you sell your HDB flat, you need to refund the principal amount you had earlier withdrawn for the purchase of the flat, including the accrued interest, to your CPF account. This interest is the amount you would have earned, had the savings not been taken out.

    If you are aged 55 and above when you sell your flat, the CPF refunds will be used to top up your Retirement Account up to your cohort Minimum Sum and your Medisave Account up to the current Medisave Minimum Sum. Any excess CPF refunds will be paid to you within 5 working days from the crediting of the refunds to your CPF account.”

    As CPF account holder is required to refund the accrued interest to his CPF account (and not another party), and excess CPF refunds could be withdrawn at age 55 years and above, the CPF account holder would effectively not “lose” the accrued interest he refunded isn’t it? What the account holder effectively lost is the interest he would have earned had he not withdrawn the money for purchase of the HDB flat.

    • Roy Ngerng


      (1) This interest should be paid by the government in the first place.

      (2) If you don’t pay back the accrued interest, whatever you have inside would be eaten up. If you have to use cash in hand to pay back the accrued interest, this is money lost in cash which you could have used for something else.

      (3) In the first place, the government gives a low 2.5% interest – proven to be the lowest in the world – on the CPF and second, the government jacks up the prices of HDB flats, which cause us to lose our CPF.

      It’s because of the poor interest rates and unjust increase in flat prices that cause us to lose our CPF.

      If the government is sincere, return the interest that that use our CPF to earn – they taken our CPF to earn up to 16% interest in Temasek Holdings but return us only 2.5%.

      Effecticely, we’ve been robbed of our returns.

      • Chin Boey Song

        Hi Roy,
        Thanks for sharing what I believe, many ordinary folks out there still do not know what the CPF “Acrued Interest” means and how its mechanism actually works…

        Your sharing will live on…

  14. Daybit

    You got it wrong la

    Why CPF pay us interest? Simply because we contribute into the fund and the Government uses the fund for investment. That is why we earn interest from our CPF savings.

    when we withdraw the money from CPF for our flats and $$$ is not available for the government to invest. So why the government should pay the interest?

    You want CPF to pay us a higher interest ah?
    HDB loan is marked at 0.1% above the CPF interest rate hor. If the interest if CPF interest is 5% and HDB loan is 5.1%. What will happen to our loan repayment??

    During the 80s, flats were very cheap – a 4 room flat was around $40K. If I bought a flat then and sell it today, if I only return $40K to the CPF. WIll it be enough for retirement?

    Be realistic.

  15. Pingback: Chan Chun Sing: Who’s Creating the Divide in Singapore? | The Heart Truths
  16. chris

    It woud be ridiculous to pay the CPF accrued interest, even though it is a tool for money creation.
    Was told many years ago that the lien would simply expire when one retire or pass away. It can’t be paid if your property is not sold and in any case they have to return you the cpf monies after retirement or death. Question is what happens if it is not sold, does the cpf lien carry on indefinitely? Good job bringing it up as I couldn’t get an answer on this.
    Your other points are valid too.

    • chris

      CPF site says that if sold, transferred, etc it need to be paid even after 55yo and it goes into the retirement a/c to be distributed back to you in bits.
      Don’t touch the cpf!

  17. chris

    This is just preliminary. All those points about HDB interest rates, etc are all irrelevant and can be solved.
    Rules are made by man.

  18. Dan

    Can this be a good strategy: After redemption of my bank housing loan, i should then pay CPF (using own cash) all monies utilised for HDB plus accrued interest to prevent compounded growth of accrued interest? In this way, government at least will need to pay me 2.5% interest. Am i correct?

    • Dan

      I mean we should not wait until the sale of HDB flat to repay CPF the monies utilised for HDB plus accrued interest. If the sales of HDB is 30-50 years as you indicated, i actually run into a snowball growth of accrued interest. If this is true, i better act fast to cover the ‘hole’ after completing bank loan. Thanks.

  19. Pingback: What PAP Has Done to Your CPF and Doesn’t Want Singaporeans to Know (The Real History) | The Heart Truths
  20. Pingback: PMG: Portfolio Management Group » LEGITIMATE PROTEST
  21. Pingback: 行动党是如何操纵我们的公积金资金?为什么他们不让新加坡人民知道公积金的历史真相?《第一部分》 | The Heart Truths
  22. Pingback: How PAP Created Inequality in Singapore: Will Singapore Collapse? | The Heart Truths
  23. Pingback: This is What is Wrong in Singapore. Now, are You Willing to See It? | The Heart Truths
  24. Pingback: 这是新加坡的问题所在,您愿意正视它吗? | The Heart Truths
  25. Pingback: A Singaporean Tale of World Domination | THOUGHTS OF REAL SINGAPOREANS
  26. Pingback: This is How the PAP is Not Taking Care of Singaporeans | The Heart Truths
  27. Pingback: Singapore’s Economic Growth and Social Development Story (My Article for Oxford Round Table Journal) | The Heart Truths

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s