>>29207363Not the anon you replied to. I just slid into your convo and took his place. Guess you couldn't even tell the difference. Any anon will do it for ya, huh?
>>29207598>No I'm actually saying that suburbs are less expensive to live inNot if you don't have anyone to split the cost with, or an income source lined up to pay for it. Living paycheck to paycheck won't necessarily cut it.
>cities are predatory for the poor minorities who believe their government funded lifestyle is the only way to live wellThat's racist. It could just be that they have friends, family, income or other circumstances that make it more economical than moving to suburbia. Like I said, not everyone is a digital nomad. Especially not people who've lacked in life and didn't necessarily have the same opportunities to learn the kind of skills (not that being a woman on the internet is one of the things you can learn) which can be transferred anywhere in the world.
>effectively being trapped by the same politicians that claim to be helping them Or just circumstances like not wanting to move away from their social support network, or even just the cost of moving. Your views are incredibly simplistic and completely gloss over the complex nuances that define people's lives.
>Amelia Watson would want you touching grass regardlessGreat. Call me when she's willing to bankroll muh suburban lifestyle. After all, the golden rule is put up or shut up. And if she's not willing to fund her viewers grass touching adventure, maybe she shouldn't be throwing shade at other people in the first place.
