|
OwlFancier posted:I don't think boomers are still working unless they're working in their 70's. People in their 50's were born in the 1960's, they're hippies. That's GenX and they were not hippies. If anything they were the people that came of age at the tail end of the disco era into the early punk rock era of the early 80's. Those people are not hippies. Now, they have similar purchasing behavior as the boomers/very beginning of GenX in that the American Dream (tm) was fundamentally the only thing that made sense to do....and they had the benefit of being right at the tail end of being able to acquire property cheap and get in on great tier defined benefit plans. They were, essentially, the last.
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 12:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 02:05 |
|
|
TyroneGoldstein posted:That's GenX and they were not hippies. If anything they were the people that came of age at the tail end of the disco era into the early punk rock era of the early 80's. Those people are not hippies. Yes and no. That's my generation, and poo poo was beginning to hit the fan but we didn't know it then. In the cheap parts of the country the good union manufacturing jobs were already gone or going, and in the pricy parts of the country the great run-up in property prices had already started thanks partly to the absolutely hosed-up inflationary spiral from the mid-Seventies to the mid-Eighties. If you got in early, like the late Boomers did, you were ok, inflation made your house payment get cheaper every month, but the early X-er's didn't have the money to buy homes because the interest rates were so high - you couldn't get a loan. Mortgage rates were over 10% until ~1989. It wasn't nearly as hosed as it is now for Millenials, but it was considerably more difficult to get ahead than our parents had it and the mass media hadn't yet acknowledged it so it was considered a personal failure. Like you said though, we just kept trying to do poo poo like the Boomers because that's all we knew.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 13:27
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:On the flip side of the coin, I'm really getting kind of tired of people telling me to move away from my job and my entire family just because the Seattle area is "trendy". Washington State also has legal weed, mail-in voting, high minimum wages, accepted the Medicare funding and has solid protections against being fired for being LBGT. I certainly don't need all of that, but those close to me certainly do. St Pete is on the original west coast  Also it rules down there and once my lease is up I'm getting back out of Hillsborough. Will miss being able to walk to Cigar City, but them's the breaks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 13:30
|
|
|
I grew up in the Boston area. Neither of my parents has a college diploma. They were able to raise 2 kids in a small house that they were able to afford in their late 20s. My mom was able to stay home with us for a couple years, and then go back to work part time when we got a little older. So, about 1.5 income household for most of the time. In Boston now, it would be loving IMPOSSIBLE for the same thing to happen for an equivalent young family. The only place a similarly affordable small home can be found is over an hour from Boston, and more like two hours including traffic. Child care costs as much as rent. Most jobs, even for people with college degrees, don't pay enough for a mother to stay home. I'm unbelievably lucky/privileged/fortunate that I'm able to stick around this area as an adult, because gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 13:51
|
|
|
i lied, i'm a rich millennial, but only because i have discovered an alchemy that transforms dead people... into gold
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
Xae posted:Most people who came of age in the 60s and 70s weren't hippies. Like how most people who came of age in the 80s weren't punk rockers. Ditto 50s and greasers. Ditto for the 90s and grundge/goths, etc. Tiny Brontosaurus posted:It's still true though. The Baby Boom was from the end of WWII to the invention of the pill. It's an unusually large generation, but "Boomer" is still the correct term for anyone born from 1946 to 1964. And if you think for a minute it's obvious that no one born in the Sixties could be a hippie. Hippies were in their twenties when they were hippie-ing around. People born in the 60s had their formative years in the 70s and 80s - they were Yuppies. I want to make some analogy about how not everyone in the 2000s was a [raver/goth/80s new wave revivalist/whatever] but I can't. Pop culture fragmented into niches over the preceding decades. JnnyThndrs posted:If you got in early, like the late Boomers did, you were ok, inflation made your house payment get cheaper every month, but the early X-er's didn't have the money to buy homes because the interest rates were so high - you couldn't get a loan. Mortgage rates were over 10% until ~1989. It wasn't nearly as hosed as it is now for Millenials, but it was considerably more difficult to get ahead than our parents had it and the mass media hadn't yet acknowledged it so it was considered a personal failure. Like you said though, we just kept trying to do poo poo like the Boomers because that's all we knew. Halloween Jack fucked around with this message at 15:03 on Aug 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 15:01
|
|
|
Generations are dumb
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
the old ceremony posted:i lied, i'm a rich millennial, but only because i have discovered an alchemy that transforms dead people... into gold so selling organs
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 15:42
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Generations are dumb  Checks out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 16:05
|
|
|
The only reason I'm living in the suburbs is because the school public school district in the city is absolute garbage. I think it is interesting that the topic of millennials having children hasn't come up in this derail (or if it did, my apologies) -- it is actually pretty easy to see the impact of our generations preferences for city living through the lens of early childhood education. Many of the quality preschool programs in my area are much easier to get into now than they were before the Great Recession, due to millennials either having children at a lesser rate or are just not moving into the ranges of the schools.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 16:25
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:I thought about this, and I think many are probably confused about what constitutes a hippie because of hippie fashion. The trappings of hippiedom in the 60s became mainstream pop-cultural affectations in the 70s (the costume design in Mad Men is a good showcase). It's easy to look at old photos of ordinary people in the early-to-mid-70s and think those people were hippies. Yeah, I think you're right! And I think you're onto something with 2000s fashion too, because you actually do see weird surviving elements of it. The "punk girl" character in all children's media, for example, is always dressed straight out of Hot Topic. And it's always been a pet peeve of mine that lazy Boomer cartoonists scribbled out a baggy jeans, tiny/huge tee (depending on gender), big shoes shorthand for "teenager" in 1995 and have been using it ever since.  Jeremy's look is probably as incomprehensible to today's teens as Archie's was to me. And circling back to retail collapse: How is Hot Topic doing these days? I never liked the store but I can't think of many others that defined an entire style of dressing. J. Crew maybe?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:Also, even the millennials with degrees and it's also cuz of technology making it easier to save money, who the gently caress would pay for cable TV and watch commercials 1/3 of the time when you can get netflix for $10/month
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Mozi posted:
Hot take: Generations was ok.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #82 posted:The only reason I'm living in the suburbs is because the school public school district in the city is absolute garbage. I think it is interesting that the topic of millennials having children hasn't come up in this derail (or if it did, my apologies) -- it is actually pretty easy to see the impact of our generations preferences for city living through the lens of early childhood education. Many of the quality preschool programs in my area are much easier to get into now than they were before the Great Recession, due to millennials either having children at a lesser rate or are just not moving into the ranges of the schools. millenials just aren't having kids as often, or as quickly, and having kids is one of if not the biggest reasons why people finally settle down in one spot and buy a home if they can where i live, i have different options Large Suburban County - excellent, top quality schools, but in suburban sprawl hell. my option of last resort Large Urban County - decent schools, much closer to the city. housing is more expensive to a degree, but still affordable. this is what i'm shooting for as the best balance of school quality, housing cost, human and cultural diversity, and proximity to the city Large Urban City - schools are hit and miss. affordable districts have low ranked schools due to chronic underinvestment, some districts in the system are excellent but housing is consequently more expensive. not a viable option but i could probably find something affordable in a good district if i looked Small Yuppie City - some of the best schools in the state. housing is ridiculously expensive, because of the geographically exclusive school district. my ideal outcome but i'm largely priced out of this district
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Hot take: Generations was ok. It's no Nemesis, that's for sure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
Just to reinforce that inflation bit: $100 in January 1970 was worth the same as $205.82 would be in January 1980 (effectively dollar lost half its value versus 1970), and as $337.04 would be in January 1990 (effectively lost a bit over 2/3 it's value versus 1970). This had a major impact on any debts you managed to take out by like the early 80s, even after accounting for interest loads. In contrast if we start with $100 in January 1990, it's the value of $132.50 in January 2000 and $170.08 in January 2010. Even now, as of last month, it would have just become the worth of $192.14 of modern currency. You're going from 10 years for inflation to cut that much value of money in the 70s, to taking over 27 years to do the same since 1990. (And incidentally, that $100 in 1970 is now the equivalent of $647.58 today). Additionally, inflation rates over the 50s and 60s were pretty similar to the rates we've had since 1990.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #82 posted:The only reason I'm living in the suburbs is because the school public school district in the city is absolute garbage. I think it is interesting that the topic of millennials having children hasn't come up in this derail (or if it did, my apologies) -- it is actually pretty easy to see the impact of our generations preferences for city living through the lens of early childhood education. Many of the quality preschool programs in my area are much easier to get into now than they were before the Great Recession, due to millennials either having children at a lesser rate or are just not moving into the ranges of the schools. another fun way to look at this is businesses who relocate or open offices is lovely parts of red states to take advantage of cheap labor. turns out people with children and a choice are hard to lure to areas with dogshit education. see: Kansas
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
Proud Christian Mom posted:another fun way to look at this is businesses who relocate or open offices is lovely parts of red states to take advantage of cheap labor. turns out people with children and a choice are hard to lure to areas with dogshit education. see: Kansas Is Kansas one of the states doing four-day school weeks? I know Oklahoma is. So any employee you're trying to lure to work there would have to factor in the exorbitant cost of all-day childcare once a week, and since you only moved your company there because you could pay lower salaries, welp...
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:Who are these people telling you to move because a place is too trendy? I've seen it mostly in the form of "piece about high housing costs comes up -> reaction is to immediately blame people for wanting to live in a "cool, trendy city" rather than place with incredibly low cost of living while ignoring that the place in particular doesn't have much in the way of jobs, support for minority protections and otherwise ignores the cost of moving. This used to be accompanied by "why the gently caress aren't you moving to the Dakotas to become a roughneck" but mysteriously this has been curtailed a bit. EDIT: Not to mention the point TB makes right above - there's a massive difference between living in a state that funds things and one that doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
If you aren't in the highest value industries and/or highest earning professions, you can have a higher standard of living if you move away from SF/NY/LA to a different major metropolitan area in the US while still having plenty of job opportunities and progressive culture. Your two options aren't Manhattan and North Dakota with nothing in between.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:If you aren't in the highest value industries and/or highest earning professions, you can have a higher standard of living if you move away from SF/NY/LA to a different major metropolitan area in the US while still having plenty of job opportunities and progressive culture. Your two options aren't Manhattan and North Dakota with nothing in between. Welcome to the beginning of the conversation. It's good that the incoming generations buy less stuff and live in smaller houses in denser neighborhood layouts. It's a good thing, it's something we should have been doing all along. A lot of what's broken in this country is because we took a 70-year break from normal civic planning. Scolding people for not living the bad old way in a house a hundred yards from the neighbor and fifty miles from town is no more productive than scolding millennials for not buying dryer sheets. Dryer sheets are pointless chemical garbage that only existed by the grace of advertising. Applebee's is poo poo food. Living in a town that amounts to not much more than one continuous parking lot dotted with mega-chains is something people are right to be less interested in. We should be celebrating this era as a return to normalcy. And I think everyone saying "just move to a smaller town!" is ignoring what a disruption to your social and work lives it is to move anywhere, and how much longer you're a stranger in a town where most people who live there grew up there. The biggest cities are used to absorbing newcomers, and so are the industries within them. If you're a transplant to Akron, Ohio you legit might not be able to break into the office printer industry there, because maybe there are only two companies in town and one of them only hires Ohio State grads and the other one only recruits from Miami of Ohio U. Staying where you grew up is easiest if you happen to be one of the lucky ones who can find a job there. Big cities are, counterintuitively, the next easiest, because while they're expensive, the industries there are larger and more used to applicants from out of town. Small towns are by far the hardest place to put down roots if you aren't from there. My husband's family moved to a new town when he was in kindergarten, and when he graduated high school he was still "the new kid." So in conclusion, the retail industry should suck it up and pivot to selling things that aren't garbage, in locations convenient to where people live or work. This used to be obvious, but for some reason during the Boomer era none of the old rules applied, and now they're whining about it instead of going "yeah maybe driving to a single, sparsely-stocked store in the middle of a sea of asphalt isn't as convenient as buying online, good point, millennials!" Tiny Brontosaurus fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Aug 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Welcome to the beginning of the conversation. I'm just replying to Solkanar512's post, where he's creating this kind of false dichotomy. There's no need to be rude. Solkanar512, If an internet company boom is pricing you out of an area, e.g. Seattle or SF, and you aren't working in those high paying industries, it is very smart to move, if you can afford it or you don't have family keeping you there. While many young people are fixated on NYC/SF/LA, they ignore the fact that there many other major metropolitan areas in the US with jobs and progressive culture, where you aren't surrounded by millionaires who bid up the prices of housing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
If I can't buy a thing at a reasonable price within walking distance of my home I generally buy it online. I'm willing to pay a little more to get it right now and locally, but not double like so many local shops that plaster their windows with SHOP LOCAL stickers seem to think. Then again they're just charging what they need to charge to stay in business in a city with absolutely hosed realestate which trickles down into retail lease rates. Why keep that old affordable 3 story building with 2 local shops on the bottom and 6 cheap lovely 1br apartments that rent for only $1100 a month up top when you can tear it down and build some condos that have half the retail space because there needs to be a big ugly parking ramp due to new off-street parking regulations and sell 40 lovely 1br condos for 400k each and lease the bottom retail unit to a starbucks or high end glasses chain or an all natural organic skin rejuvenation clinic for rich 40-something year old women who think paying $400 for people to rub some Himalayan sea salt and magic seaweed on their faces while they shine magic lights on them will get rid of their crows feet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:There's no need to be rude. Hahaha you better stay inside so you don't get hit by a gigantic bolt of irony lightning, friend.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
http://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-are-killing-list-2017-8/#oil-19 Another list of things millennials are killing. Some are cultural but most seem to very obviously be things people with no disposable income or chance of buying property or having families would purchase. It's weird how structuring the entire economy and society so that existing home owners get to enjoy tax free equity gains while the current generation need 2 incomes working over-time to just pay rent and student loans has an impact in people buying houses, renovating houses, shopping at home improvement stores, or having kids. Just a totally unexplainable cultural shift that these millennials have chosen to delay buying houses or having children.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:It's good that the incoming generations buy less stuff and live in smaller houses in denser neighborhood layouts. I like this guy's blog, he talks about it: http://www.andrewalexanderprice.com/
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
what is fabric softener used for  i mean, i guess it makes fabric softer?Neon Noodle posted:It is EXTREMELY good. Unfortunately, nobody is building additional dense neighborhoods because of zoning and inadequate public transportation. this IS happening, just not quickly and it's often unaffordable for the sort of folks who would 'traditionally' live in neighborhoods like this here's an example from suburban atlanta the town of suwanee tore down a large strip mall shopping center and replaced it with a town center featuring a large park, government buildings, and mixed commercial/residential development. it's modest but a good start, and easily something most small suburban towns are capable of doing if they have the political will to make it happen boner confessor fucked around with this message at 20:51 on Aug 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:what is fabric softener used for It's basically hair conditioner for textiles. It made more sense back when everyone wore natural fabrics all the time - things like cotton can dry feeling kind of crunchy and scratchy. Wool is naturally coated with an oil called lanolin that softens it - before the mass-consumer era people would sometimes add lanolin to their laundry as a natural softener. The modern ones just coat everything with something like silicone so that the fibers lie flat and the fabric feels slicker. It's a dumb idea even for natural fabrics but completely, literally useless for synthetics, since they're already slick.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
quote:Homeownership is hitting record lows among millennials, Jesus Christ how can they be this willfully dense? "Tighter credit standard and lifestyle changes" is a funny way of saying "hosed by Great Recession and cheated out of the social contract by Boomers"
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:http://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-are-killing-list-2017-8/#oil-19 Haha, there was only one quick mention in that article of kids not having money to spend
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Is Kansas one of the states doing four-day school weeks? I know Oklahoma is. So any employee you're trying to lure to work there would have to factor in the exorbitant cost of all-day childcare once a week, and since you only moved your company there because you could pay lower salaries, welp... No, Kansas is (at the moment) using a 5 school day week. I have no idea what it will be like going forward, though, since outside of a few rich counties Education in the state is abysmal and is bound to get worse before it gets better. I actually live in Kansas, and my wife and I have already decided that if we go to a 4 day schedule we are moving out of the state and not looking back.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #82 posted:No, Kansas is (at the moment) using a 5 school day week. I have no idea what it will be like going forward, though, since outside of a few rich counties Education in the state is abysmal and is bound to get worse before it gets better. I actually live in Kansas, and my wife and I have already decided that if we go to a 4 day schedule we are moving out of the state and not looking back. God, what an awful possibility to have to face. You should tell your state and local reps about your ultimatum. Yeah, they're probably all republican shitlords and won't listen, but be the change you want to see, etc. etc. There are really good resources in D&D and TGRS for contacting your reps if you need it. I think some awesome poster even made an app to help you bug your congresspeople.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
If I may float an idea. Part of the issue with retail is that the people whom build it do so on a basic here's the local daytime population in this area which means we can expect this many likely customers based on the demographics. Straight forward enough right? The problem as I've observed is that we have a population, lacking any kind of civic education at all have failed to grasp just how much their lives are being destructively ruined by unbridled corporate capitalism. The short term profit and the obsession with the suburban style because it most enriches the land owning developers is driving a lot of bad planning and frankly acting as a noose around small business potential. What is the solution? I think it is what a friend calls polydensity, the basic concept being that one needs to accept that A. density is good, if you build densely doesn't mean you need to build out into sprawl. B. It increases potential customer populations so there's more value in building things like consolidated shopping malls with smaller businesses that aren't reliant on anchor stores to maintain customer bases, because you can have things like 500 people living in the apartments above the retail two floors above. C. It reduces commute time because instead of forcing workers to commute to the only urban center, they will commute to the businesses that support to their own communities, both for potential tax collection and infrastructure support. D. Density allows more walkable cities, reduction of environmental impact and more functional government. If you can cover 50,000 people in 10 sq miles it is much easier to provide police, fire, sewer and dare I say internet than if that same population is spread out over, 30, 40 or 50. So why hasn't this happened? Two fold, the aformention influence of land owners and the suburbanites ninnies who complain every time you remove trees and especially have the nerve to put up a building more than single occupancy home of more than two floors. They whine about trees coming down and vote against parks. Why are they against parks and apartments? Welcome to the new Lost Cause. A mini castle for everyone! Major American metros want all the jobs and businesses too, with no density its surreal. RuanGacho fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Aug 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
High-density housing attracts the dirty poors, foreigns and teenagers, of course.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:This is bizarre. I don't think there's been a good study on the number of hippies, but Lewis Yablonsky's 1968 estimate was 400,000 for the entire US, or 0.2% of the US population of 1968. I'd be shocked if the hippy population ever exceeded 2% of Americans. Noctone posted:"Phygitals" (portmanteau of "physical" and "digital") is a new one I just heard today. That sounds so stupid
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:God, what an awful possibility to have to face. You should tell your state and local reps about your ultimatum. Yeah, they're probably all republican shitlords and won't listen, but be the change you want to see, etc. etc. There are really good resources in D&D and TGRS for contacting your reps if you need it. I think some awesome poster even made an app to help you bug your congresspeople. After the 2016 election, the Kansas State Legislature, while still overwhelmingly republican, did loose a fair number of seats to democrats and primaried a lot of the "no taxes ever" Ayn Rand Fundamentalist CHUD shitheads and as a whole tacked a lot more to the center. Large swaths of the Brownback tax plan has been overrode with veto-proof majority and the State is actually bringing in money again and the legislative focus for the next session is going to be un-loving schools now that the state can afford to do so. Source: I literally drink most Saturdays with this guy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
Neon Noodle posted:It is EXTREMELY good. Unfortunately, nobody is building additional dense neighborhoods because of zoning and inadequate public transportation. Instead we all have to cram ourselves into the existing ones. That poo poo is driving me nuts right now. I'm starting to shop, and it's nigh impossible to find anything decent in the sub 1500 square foot range that isn't snapped up off the market in 36 hours. All the old boomers are holding on to what used to be the 'starter house' market segment as their retirement shacks, and all the new builds are 2500 square foot McMansions in the exurbs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:That poo poo is driving me nuts right now. I'm starting to shop, and it's nigh impossible to find anything decent in the sub 1500 square foot range that isn't snapped up off the market in 36 hours. So are the Gen Z kids going to have the good luck and hit their 20s just as the Boomers are dying off and leaving those homes vacant?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
Nah that's when the boomers kids/grandkids move into those houses since they can't afford to actually buy a house.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 02:05 |
|
|
RuanGacho posted:So why hasn't this happened? Two fold, the aformention influence of land owners and the suburbanites ninnies who complain every time you remove trees and especially have the nerve to put up a building more than single occupancy home of more than two floors. They whine about trees coming down and vote against parks. it is happening. america is a big place, you can have urban infill, redevelopment, and densification at the same time as you have suburban infill/densification as well as continued growth of the exurban sprawl the problem is that, mostly -america is fragmented into tens of thousands of different jurisdictions with varying levels of planning and land use control -a large portion of these jurisdictions are rinky dink little towns or counties that dont give a poo poo about urban planning and are coasting along on the suburban expansion paradigm dominant since the 1950s -local planning and zoning ordinances are typically highly simplistic and prepackaged to support this suburban expansion paradigm in the form of exclusionary zoning, single use zoning and it takes effort to change these things, political as well as personal effort that a lot of small town local governments dont necessarily care to engage in -planning is highly sensitive to public input meaning that your two year study on changing the zoning over by the poo poo creek watershed to support clustered greenspace subdivisions could freak out a ton of people who show up to your charette getting all sweaty about their property values, then they lean on the mayor and she comes over and leans on you and that's two years worth of work and studies shelved -also generally the biggest economic game in town is land development, typically tract subdivisions and throwing up strip malls and office/industrial parks, and they like anything that is quick, easy, and guarantees returns. they dont like having to step outside of their specializations or endure any changes to the permitting process -the status quo is thus preserved due to the greed you mentioned, as well as fear of change
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 17:24
|
|