So he have nothing, no home, no more belongings that a suitcase and a laptop, the ideal SLAVE of the modern time, someone who exists until he can produce for someone else, who effectively own him, then can only die since he have no more option to live. And the article seems to be a spot for this kind of existence "hey, it's cheap"...
I'm actually curious how many really have stopped a minute to imaging what does it means be homeless and not owning anything. OF COURSE IT'S CHEAP.
I'm actually curious how many really have stopped a minute to imaging what does it means be homeless and not owning anything. OF COURSE IT'S CHEAP.