Skip

Before the Occupy movement, there were tent cities.
November 10, 2011 10:23 AM   Subscribe

"Imagine if you had never been homeless before and you'd just lost your job and you lost your home. What would you do? Would you immediately go begging or knocking on a door? No, you would downsize, move into cheaper accommodations, if that did not work you'd move in with friends or relatives and then you'd move into a cheap motel and then ... where would you want to go before winding up at a shelter door? You would much prefer to live at a park with your family and your dog." ... "In just about every major city, there are tent cities. Unfortunately, we're in a growth industry and the numbers are going to continue." -- Michael Stoop, a community organizer for the National Coalition for the Homeless, explaining that the surge in American tent city shantytowns, first highlighted on MeFi in 2008/09: 1, 2, 3, has not slowed. The Great Recession: Life in Tent City, Lakewood NJ / Photo Gallery / Video.

Additional Links
The Lakewood tent city has a website. They were founded in 2006 by Reverend Steven Brigham of Lakewood Outreach Ministries.
NYT (2007): A Ministry in the Cold, With a Gospel of Propane / Slideshow

A documentary about the Lakewood group called "Into The Woods" was the focus of a kickstarter fundraiser earlier this year. The filmmaker met his goal in April and the project is in progress. Official site. He keeps a blog and has a page on facebook, both of which are tracking Lakewood's ongoing efforts to evict the tent city group.

Videos
* A Year in Tent City (Asbury Park Press)
* 'Tent City', New Jersey's homeless refuge
* Doug Hardman playing piano in Lakewood tent city (Business Insider)
* The New Homeless (USA Today, from 2009: Pinella's Hope, FL)

Articles (includes info on other American tent cities)
* Recently on Mefi: Safe Ground
* Once prosperous New Yorkers forced to live under canvas in New Jersey woods
* There Are So Many Homeless In Virginia Beach Officials Are Pondering Official Tent City
* Ann Arbor, MI: Camp Take Notice They were evicted in May, 2010, but that didn't last long. From July of this year: Ann Arbor’s homeless tent city faces scrutiny after string of small crimes
* Tarp Nation / Related Images (from 2009)
* MSNBC: In hard times, tent cities rise across the country (from 2008)

Photo Gallery
* MSNBC: Sacramento, From Boom Times to Tent City / Depression Days (photos from 1936)
* Inside California's Tent Cities (from 2009)
posted by zarq (40 comments total) 41 users marked this as a favorite

 
Today here in Springfield, MO, the Reverend Larry Rice is clashing with city officials for allowing the homeless to camp out in the parking lot of his New Live Evangelistic Center.
posted by General Tonic at 10:30 AM on November 10, 2011 [3 favorites]


Where exactly does Wichmer expect those people to go? The city doesn't have a shelter.
posted by zarq at 10:37 AM on November 10, 2011


The cost of housing in this country is too (damn) high. Tent cities are a rational free market response to limited supply. Like so many things, no one seems to be objecting to tent cities because they are unsafe or inhumane. Rather it seems like 50% of the response is gawking at the poor people and 50% of the response is not-in-my-backyard.
posted by 2bucksplus at 10:39 AM on November 10, 2011 [12 favorites]


Interesting that the woman would rather live in a tent city than with her daughter, son-in-law and three grandchildren. Not condemning her choice at all (I'd probably do the same thing), but just ... interesting.
posted by Melismata at 10:42 AM on November 10, 2011 [2 favorites]


Heartbreaking. But one thing that stuck out is that even America's poor have too much shit.

It won't be long before the US has Brazil style favelas on the edge of major cities.
posted by formless at 10:43 AM on November 10, 2011


@2bucksplus: You're exactly right - and the worst part is, the collapsing housing market is pushing rents higher and higher, especially on the low end as people flee from mortgaged housing.
posted by speedgraphic at 10:44 AM on November 10, 2011


Yeah 2bucksplus, I just totally don't understand what's so damn hard about building a ton of cheap housing, and putting regulations in place so that the right people get to live in it. Apparently spending tons of time on managing tent cities is easier.
posted by Melismata at 10:44 AM on November 10, 2011 [1 favorite]


why can't Jersey just give them the land and bring in Habitat for Humanity to build them some affordable shelter for the winter? Oh wait, I forgot, politicians only help corporations... Would be pretty cool if a couple million of us could get together to pool some bribe money to governors for situations like these.
posted by any major dude at 10:45 AM on November 10, 2011 [2 favorites]


The cost of housing in this country is too (damn) high.

Actually, housing costs have fallen 50% in some parts of the country (resulting in underwater mortgages), and the real problem is access to capital: it's impossible for many people to get a loan because of the credit crisis clusterfuck. On top of that, there is high unemployment, as well as high underemployment - people can't afford to rent.

In short, the system is fundamentally broken. I really wonder if we are witnessing a "crisis of capitalism" or if there is some sort of Keynesian way to get the US back on track.
posted by KokuRyu at 10:46 AM on November 10, 2011 [5 favorites]


I'm sure cities will start outlawing tent cities and, thus, solve the homeless problem.
posted by Thorzdad at 10:46 AM on November 10, 2011 [1 favorite]


That right there is a long list of interesting links. Thanks!

From having hung around the Occupy Vancouver tent city, I'm not sure that it's correct to say that tent dwellers are homeless. I've seen what happens to street people who move into tents. They feel pride, and a sense of community. Having a place that's yours (even if it's just a tent) is a huge step up from sleeping in shelters or out in the rain.

Question: from the half dozen links I've looked at so far I haven't seen evidence that the tent cities are functioning as municipalities. The Occupy Vancouver site has a tent library, tent places of worship, a tea tent, a medical tent staffed 24/7 by volunteers and a tent community kitchen. It has a municipal government (the general assembly) which the community recognizes as having authority to pass bylaws and it has a volunteer security force charged with keeping the peace. The OV tent city is a tent city, and I hope that these tent cities have/come to have similar institutions.

I just totally don't understand what's so damn hard about building a ton of cheap housing

Even a favela would be a further step up.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 10:50 AM on November 10, 2011 [3 favorites]


"Too much shit" can be a good anchor when times themselves are shit. Folks cling to belongings like security blankets.
posted by Goofyy at 10:53 AM on November 10, 2011 [2 favorites]


Great post. It is a miserable situation, but the people in the tent city seem to be making the best of it. I like that they have provided themselves with the basic amenities, like hot water. It should serve as a big FU to the Have's in this country that these people have some happiness without gorging at the trough of consumerism.
posted by sswiller at 10:56 AM on November 10, 2011 [2 favorites]


Excellent post. Lots of stuff to peruse here.
posted by Gilbert at 11:00 AM on November 10, 2011


Olympia's Camp Quixote, which is actually getting a permanent location in an industrial-zoned area; it started as a protest in a downtown parking lot a few years ago.

Of course, that doesn't include folks camping out along the bike trail. They got cleared out in 2010, but I don't know if the campers have come back.
posted by epersonae at 11:00 AM on November 10, 2011 [2 favorites]


"Too much shit" can be a good anchor when times themselves are shit. Folks cling to belongings like security blankets.

Ironically, it's also easier to live as a minimalist if you're wealthy. If you're poor, you need to buy things (on sale) so that you have them when you need them because renting them is too expensive and buying them at full price might not even be possible depending on exactly how poor you are.

Spending money on useless junk is a different matter, of course.
posted by asnider at 11:04 AM on November 10, 2011 [8 favorites]


Arrrrgh! Although I give a heartfelt salute to Pastor Brigham for his good work, it pains me to see that in Lakewood, New Jersey, one of the largest and most devout Orthodox communities in the U.S., there is (apparently) no organized Jewish presence at this place. I am emailing him to see if there is anything (aside from the obvious donations) that can be done for Chanukah, Passover, etc.. Any interested members are welcome to memail me.
posted by skbw at 11:15 AM on November 10, 2011 [2 favorites]


There have been a ton of tent villages springing up here in Honolulu, especially on sidewalks. The city is, of course, looking into banning keeping private property on sidewalks.

As it happens, the tent villages mysteriously vanished earlier this week because of APEC. Rumor has it most of them have temporarily retreated into the woods and hills.
posted by Joey Michaels at 11:24 AM on November 10, 2011 [1 favorite]


General Tonic: "Today here in Springfield, MO, the Reverend Larry Rice is clashing with city officials for allowing the homeless to camp out in the parking lot of his New Live Evangelistic Center"

His ads in the St. Louis area can be annoying as hell, but Larry's the most Christian Christian around.

(One time, I was looking at a construction job at a building next to one of the Reverend Rice's soup kitchens/job centers in downtown St. Louis. Some of the other estimators sneered. God, what assholes.)
posted by notsnot at 11:27 AM on November 10, 2011 [2 favorites]


Locke (2nd treatise, 36):

Supposing a man, or family in the state they were at first peopling of the world...let him plant in some in-land, vacant places of America, we shall find that the possessions he could make himself...would not be very large, nor, even to this day, prejudice the rest of mankind, or give them reason to complain, or think themselves injured by this man's encroachment.


But of course we are not in the state of nature: the invention of money, and the tacit agreement of men to put value on it, introduced (by consent) larger possessions, and the right to them. Because we all agree that our financial system is just, municipalities and absentee landlords have the right to use force to ensure that their vacant, neglected property remains vacant and neglected.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 11:32 AM on November 10, 2011 [2 favorites]


Christ, looking at some of the photos, the similarity to scenes from the Fallout games, set in a post-nuclear-apocalypse USA, is pretty shocking.
posted by Dysk at 11:36 AM on November 10, 2011 [1 favorite]


It's good to have lots of "shit" and collect more so that you can barter.
posted by snsranch at 11:41 AM on November 10, 2011 [1 favorite]


My observation of the amount "shit" as others have quoted it wasn't so much a critique of the individual homeless. Instead it was an observation that even the poorest among us in the country are still beholden to the consumerism rampant in this society, as shown in yesterdays post about Black Friday.

And of course a nod to Carlin's classic bit.
posted by formless at 11:47 AM on November 10, 2011 [1 favorite]


Occupations are NOT tent cities. They are not homeless camps. They are essentially 24/7 picket lines. We have this very problem in my local OWS camp. The vast majority of our Occupants are people who have homes, but choose to sacrifice by camping out in the freezing cold weather. And there are some homeless people who came here to actively participate in the Occupation, some of them are key people in our group.

But recently our camp was invaded by a large group of local homeless people with mental disabilities and alcoholism. They nearly outnumber active Occupants. They commit assaults against Occupants and steal property of the camp that was intended for use by everyone. They are constantly drunk. They harass and attack passersby and this makes our Occupation look bad. We have to call the police over and over and have them arrested, which makes it look like the whole camp is a public nuisance.

The police says these homeless people normally spend the winters having turf wars about the choicest spots in homeless camps under bridges etc. and now they have moved into our camp, attracted by the free food and free tents. The police say they don't want to have their turf wars occur in our camp, right in the middle of the community, and are willing to move them out. But the City Attorney prohibited the police from acting, she says that anyone who says they are with our occupation is allowed to stay in the park. We responded that we welcome anyone to join, but have rules prohibiting violence and alcohol, and we have a right to expel people from our group for violating our rules. We are at an impasse with the City. We recognize that the homeless are amongst the 99% that we are fighting for, the most unfortunate cases at the bottom of the 99%. But we also recognize that these people are incapable of helping themselves, and are actively hurting our ability to do anything for them. We have tried to get them help, but they don't want help, mostly they just want alcohol and drugs. These are the people that would have been in psych hospitals and group homes, before cutbacks in public health programs.
posted by charlie don't surf at 11:53 AM on November 10, 2011 [29 favorites]


justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow: " Question: from the half dozen links I've looked at so far I haven't seen evidence that the tent cities are functioning as municipalities. The Occupy Vancouver site has a tent library, tent places of worship, a tea tent, a medical tent staffed 24/7 by volunteers and a tent community kitchen. It has a municipal government (the general assembly) which the community recognizes as having authority to pass bylaws and it has a volunteer security force charged with keeping the peace. The OV tent city is a tent city, and I hope that these tent cities have/come to have similar institutions."

My understanding is that the Lakewood tent city is barely organized and does not have any of those things. The NYT article linked above is three years old, but it sounds like the people there are barely surviving. The Occupy movement is not similar, in that they are a voluntary protest movement. (on preview, I see that charlie don't surf covered much of the points I was going to make. Thanks charlie!)

There was a comment left on an article I didn't include in this post which said that the terms 'shantytowns' and 'tent cities' give a false sense of impermanence to groups that have now existed for several years and are unlikely to disband completely unless forced, even if the economy improves.

The commenter suggested calling them a more accurate term: slums.
posted by zarq at 11:56 AM on November 10, 2011 [4 favorites]




We are at an impasse with the City. We recognize that the homeless are amongst the 99% that we are fighting for, the most unfortunate cases at the bottom of the 99%. But we also recognize that these people are incapable of helping themselves, and are actively hurting our ability to do anything for them. We have tried to get them help, but they don't want help, mostly they just want alcohol and drugs. These are the people that would have been in psych hospitals and group homes, before cutbacks in public health programs.

charlie don't surf, that's fascinating to me. This summer, we looked at moving to one of the oldest communes in the US (the Farm, in TN) and went to visit. One of the stories they told us was that when they were still growing, in the 70s, they had a similar problem of mentally ill people showing up looking for shelter and someplace to live, to the point that it used up many of their resources. They struggled with the right compassionate response too. In the end, they developed a process for getting them to move on after a few days, or sooner, if they were violent.

I'm not sure what's best to do for Occupation sites, I've heard other stories like yours. Perhaps, a la the occupation that moved to the home of a family being foreclosed on, there could be some sort of occupation setup in front of a mental health clinic or government structure where the mentally should be (but aren't) receiving care? Lack of access to mental health resources is part of the problem too.
posted by emjaybee at 12:47 PM on November 10, 2011 [2 favorites]


formless: "It won't be long before the US has Brazil style favelas on the edge of major cities."

Brazilian here. That won't happen. Favelas are basically city-sized squats, and (thankfully, believe me) property rights are very much enforced in the US. What might happen is the degradation of neighborhoods and planned suburban communities to the point where property is worth squat. I think that's what's starting to happen in Detroit. Brazilian-style favelas is what happens when there's no rule of law and the US is pretty fucking far from that stage of institutional degradation.
posted by falameufilho at 1:11 PM on November 10, 2011 [4 favorites]


charlie don't surf, what city are you in? My experience in here in Vancouver has been quite different. (perhaps you're also in Vancouver! it might just be that we see the same situation differently)


Most of the homeless people I've seen at Occupy Vancouver are also protesters (community spirit is a powerful thing). To the extent that there are homeless non-protesters, they are in symbiosis with the Occupiers. It is easy for the city to say protesters have no right to a long-term encampment, but hard to justify removing the homeless from the only shelter they have. Their presence provides the Legal Committee with an argument for OV's survival.

By building an inclusive tent city, Occupy Vancouver went beyond being a protest against inequality to being an attempt to address inequality. People at the bottom have material needs that Occupy just can't supply (adequate food, shelter, medical care, etc.) but the minimal attempt we have made shames the rest of the city.

I don't know if this is true of Occupations in general, but Occupy Vancouver has put priority on amplifying the voices of marginalized people, reason being that injustice of every kind thrives when it is overlooked. To whatever extent that mentally ill people are capable of expressing themselves, this includes them too. Example: At my first general assembly, an obviously disturbed man wandered into the center of the circle, brandishing a sign that said "your voices sound hollow to me." He walked slowly around the circle, locking eyes with each of us in turn. Two remarkable things happened. First, the meeting went on uninterrupted. Second, the man was quietly taken aside; ten minutes later the person who was talking to him put out a request for an ASL translator. That's right, "your voices sound hollow" was an expression of a real-world concern. It was then that I realized that Occupy Vancouver was dead serious about listening to the voice of the voiceless. It's why I went back.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 1:19 PM on November 10, 2011 [10 favorites]


Melismata: Yeah 2bucksplus, I just totally don't understand what's so damn hard about building a ton of cheap housing, and putting regulations in place so that the right people get to live in it. Apparently spending tons of time on managing tent cities is easier.

From what I know, there are a few factors keeping this from happening: 1) minimal market incentive for the free market to provide such units, and 2) limited government funding to build sufficient low-cost housing.

In my area, there's not just a shortage of really low and low income housing, there is also a shortage of moderate income housing. Yes, even people making an average income have a limited housing stock in this area, so the demand on affordable housing is increased, making low-income housing more appealing to moderate income earners. I could be off on the numbers, but in this arae, anyone building four or more units must provide one affordable unit, and I think that can include a moderate income unit, or pay in lieu fees. There was one affordable housing complex built within the last few years with those funds, but that was the first that I can recall, and it wasn't that many units.

As for tents vs shanty towns, regulations enforce certain standards, which increase the cost to build, but also prevent catastrophic failures as seen in countries where significant earthquakes kill thousands. When was the last time thousands of people were killed in the US because of buildings falling down in an earthquake? Liabilities would not allow jurisdictions to lighten restrictions, and anyway, it could lead to (more serious) slum lord situations.

In short: yes, it is easier to manage tent cities than build sufficient inexpensive housing and ensure it remains inexpensive.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:50 PM on November 10, 2011


what's so damn hard about building a ton of cheap housing, and putting regulations in place

The regulations already in place are what prevent the construction of inexpensive housing. Also, not enough profit can be generated, constructing cheap housing. I would like to see unused commercial spaces converted into inexpensive housing, but again, zoning laws, etc.
posted by Rash at 1:58 PM on November 10, 2011 [1 favorite]


Tarp Nation indeed.

Some of us are living high off of T.A.R.P.
Some of us are living under a tarp.
 
posted by Herodios at 2:10 PM on November 10, 2011 [1 favorite]


what's so damn hard about building a ton of cheap housing

You know, I was assuming that this was not a serious question, but maybe it is...

First, you have to decide if you want cheap housing-- that is, housing that is low-cost because it is built as inexpensively as possible-- or if you want affordable housing--housing that is rented or sold at lower rates but is otherwise similar in quality to market housing. Cheap housing, in the long run, is not cheap-- it's more expensive to maintain, it has higher utility costs, it deteriorates quickly & becomes an eyesore in the neighborhood, and it tends to lower property values, so people don't want it in their communities.

Affordable housing requires subsidy to build. If rents are kept affordable, the rental income will not be sufficient to finance the property and/or pay ongoing maintenance costs to keep the property in good condition. And in order to make sure that people who qualify for affordable housing get to live in it, you need a system to enforce the regulations, which means funding for staff and administration.

The subsidy for affordable housing in the United States comes from three main sources: HUD and state funding, which depends on sales and income tax revenue, and local city/county finding, which depends on sales, income, and property tax revenue. These funding sources keep being cut, and cut, and cut, and, in most places, it's extremely difficult to convince voters to approve tax increases to pay for affordable housing. So there's no subsidy, so there's a massive undersupply of affordable housing, which means there are more people who become homeless.

Voters like, and will more often approve, taxes to support safety services, like police and sheriff services. They do not like, and will not generally approve, taxes to help build and maintain affordable housing. Does this mean that they're ultimately spending more money? Of course. It's much, much cheaper to keep families housed than put them in shelters or deal with all the costs associated with homeless camps (totally aside from the fact that I think it's the humane and decent thing to do to keep families housed). But there's not enough funding, and voters won't approve new taxes, and the House Budget Committee keeps slashing HUD funding.

People don't want to pay for affordable housing, because they think it's some kind of handout for lazy people. And building, maintaining, and administering affordable housing costs money.

So what's so hard about it is, pretty much, the same thing that's so hard about nearly all social services and support programs-- there are a lot of people who need help, there's not enough money, and there are a lot of people who foam at the mouth when they think 'their' tax dollars are benefiting anyone besides themselves, even if that means that it will cost more in the long run. It's extremely frustrating.
posted by Kpele at 3:04 PM on November 10, 2011 [10 favorites]


I feel for anyone going through this...
posted by MetaRoc at 4:29 PM on November 10, 2011 [1 favorite]


Similar issues are coming up at OccupyBoston. There are homeless people at the camp, and there are challenges for taking care of those who are mentally ill and/or disruptive. There is also a contingent of young people who have recently joined the ranks of the homeless, and if they're going to sleep rough, I'm glad they're sleeping in the middle of a media spectacle in front of the Federal Reserve Building.
posted by ocschwar at 5:32 PM on November 10, 2011


*this is me wondering who the next FDR is going to be*

I'm really saddened by the lack of leadership in the U.S. and specifically Obama. I know the Prez can't do THAT much, BUT, he has a voice, a direct link to the citizens...All of the citizens. This time in history is the greatest opportunity to create a feeling of unity...e pluribus unum.

"We have to accomplish things together in order to be proud and successful together. We need to put aside race, religion and party politics and focus on American Prosperity! We need to build industry. We need to become the worlds center for research and development. I'm counting on every man, woman and child to be a part of this effort and shame on you if you're willing to take record profits if you are downsizing and shipping American jobs abroad." Etc.

That's what I'd say anyway. Twice a month on radio and TV and I'm damn sure things would start changing.

Silly Obama should know that those of us who voted for him didn't vote for him because of his war chest. We voted for him because we thought he was a young man with new ideas, because he was a person willing to challenge the status quo. Hope?

/ok, end rant.
posted by snsranch at 6:09 PM on November 10, 2011


These woodsy outdoors forest tent cities are miles away from the tent city in Camden, New Jersey. It's on the side of a highway in what appears to be a de facto landfill and when snowy weather or pouring rain hits its the saddest thing you've ever seen. For days afterwards the residents will be trying to salvage whatever they can from their waterlogged, likely collapsed, tents. Every time I rode by it, I felt an extreme level of powerlessness, because with no money, no political connections, no free time and no one else willing to help there was absolutely nothing I could do for this situation other than to be a witness.

I should also state that I was homeless this summer after I lost my home in a fire. By the grace of good friends my fiance and I are back indoors again. I don't drive by the tent city on the way to school anymore, but I think about it every day.
posted by smackwich at 7:45 AM on November 11, 2011


Nothing is going to get done until a whole lot more of the 99% end up in tent cities themselves and considering the current economic policies I don't think that is too far down the road.

Don't think it can happen to you? In 2001 I was making 106K a year. A huge influx of H1B visa workers in California workers , due to a bill sponsored jointly by Microsoft, Intel and HP, began taking I.T. jobs at 1/3 the price. By 2004 I was living in a shelter.
posted by Poet_Lariat at 9:43 AM on November 11, 2011 [1 favorite]


what's so damn hard about building a ton of cheap housing, and putting regulations in place

But there's not enough funding, and voters won't approve new taxes, and the House Budget Committee keeps slashing HUD funding.


This is a big part of it. We actually have a really robust program of low-income housing here in Milwaukee. It was originally funded and provided by the City of Milwaukee before HUD, and afterwards operated as a mixed City-Federal venture. Finding funding has always been an issue to contend with. Some income is provided by residents, who pay on a sliding scale based on their income and some is provided by market-rate units, with the rest based on subsidies. We actually got quite a bit of funding recently because we had lots of “shovel-ready projects” (developments in need of repairs/rebuilding), but that’s been drying up. The newly built units are really nice and incorporate sustainability-focused infrastructure. Olga Village, for instance, has a green roof, solar hot water and geothermal heat pumps. There's also a rent-assistance program that provides part of the rent for people living in apartments, also based on a sliding scale. It's extremely popular, but getting back to the funding issue, the wait list is currently around 2 years, by which time the recipient may be in a much worse position.

What I’d really like to see is the foreclosed housing get used to…house people. It seems to me like the “we have too many vacant homes” and the “we have too many homeless people” problems could both be solved by finding ways for the homeless people to live in the vacant homes. Obviously, this would require some planning and funding, perhaps a program to help encourage people to care for and even rehab the properties, but for the amount of money going into housing programs and the low prices of the properties, it seems more than workable. Of course, there’s always squatting, which is going to happen anyway whether the city’s involved or not.

I’m always impressed by the ingenuity that goes into improvised villages like this – especially ones that have found ways to provide for hot water, limited electricity, shared pantries and the like. Reminds of burning man.
posted by nTeleKy at 11:43 AM on November 11, 2011


Oy, transportation is almost as big a problem. Let's say, through a maximum deployment of connections, etc., I found a job in greater Lakewood for even just one of these folks. Odds are it would be in some car-only place. I respect the people (mentioned in one of the links) that are trading off a bike to get to a day labor/factory agency, but you would really have to be made of iron (with good nutrition and many years experience on a bike) to make that work long-term, much less in the ice and snow.
posted by skbw at 12:35 PM on November 11, 2011


« Older Stories made from: microspores, fog maps, infected...   |   Local NPR Reporter Eats Guatemalan Insanity Pepper Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post