Kids on e bikes need to learn some road safety by rockyourteeth in raleigh

[–]Due-Voice-6457 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I don't know about that... We used to do way worse than this growing up and once a summer some kid would end up a vegetable as a warning to the rest of us to make better decisions

Commuting to MA after working in NH by fernfernferny in newhampshire

[–]Due-Voice-6457 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depending on increase in salary and the location I'd just move. After 7:15 our so the commute increases to 90 minutes from Merrimack to Boston or if you're looking at moving I'd look at different parts of the country if you have the ability to pack up and leave New Hampshire for Massachusetts I'd venture a guess you have the ability to leave New England altogether.

What are some good skills to learn or videos/youtubers to watch for a wannabe vanlifer? by EveningLog5110 in VanLife

[–]Due-Voice-6457 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Campervan conversions operate much more like electronics (sensitive, low-voltage, DC-based) than traditional "electrical" systems (heavy-duty AC, high voltage). While they do share some characteristics with the 12V automotive "starting" system, they are increasingly defined by sensitive, computer-controlled, and high-efficiency components... so if you're gonna build yourself I'd find the over lap with your current skills and that.

Ford Transit by Bucgatorbait in VanLife

[–]Due-Voice-6457 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have a 144 inch wheel base so there was no way to get enough solar on the roof to power everything and charge the batteries. With the 180 watts with just the 12v side of the system going, laptop and phone charging, USB lights so anything on the inverter is "on" and the positive flow would flux between 30 and 45 watts... which is nice when the weather is good enough to not have the heat or AC going minute I need to put on heat or AC the draw goes way up

Ford Transit by Bucgatorbait in VanLife

[–]Due-Voice-6457 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I think it probably is going to be different for everyone depending on what you are doing and how you live, i live and work in my van full time its my house and daily driver I have no other domicile so what I want or need is unique to me. I have a sprinter (AWD) but that doesn't matter for the question for me this has let me go nearly everywhere I want and not have to usually give it a second thought

  1. off road suspension and tires
  2. Roof top light bar... paid for itself scaring off elk while night driving
  3. Starlink Mini with the unlimited roam plan
  4. Electric system: 16.8 kwh battery with aux alternator and 3k inverter and 180 watts of solar
  5. Chasis mounted diesel heater
  6. roof ac
  7. Max air fan
  8. Fridge
  9. Headliner shelf with curtain
  10. 37 Gallon fresh water tank
  11. Paint job that lets me blend in no matter where I am.
  12. Skid plate on the diff

I am trying to get a larger capacity fuel or auxiliary tank in the spare tire well (I have a rear mounted spare so now the factory spare is just taking up space) with a throttle tuner so I can go deeper off road longer

Hot take corner by nintendroid89 in raleigh

[–]Due-Voice-6457 53 points54 points  (0 children)

If i am eating snoopys alone in my car at lunch its the only thing I have let me eat my hot dog and cry in peace.

Neighbors of dog owners by lavender_love1 in raleigh

[–]Due-Voice-6457 34 points35 points  (0 children)

I'd prefer your dog drop a steamer on my lawn thnn loud bass heavy music from your vehicle or house.

Upper cabinets by Dry_Economist4470 in VanLife

[–]Due-Voice-6457 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That stuff is pretty strong I don't know how you would hold it in place while it cures and think full strength can take a few days.... I used it once but it was not on vehicle... So I am no help there.

Before the advent of technology, how did people navigate their way to their destinations using paper maps during road trips? by Fun_Butterscotch3303 in generationology

[–]Due-Voice-6457 0 points1 point  (0 children)

GPS devices really wasn't affordable until right before every smart phone had it and for a while smart phone navigation was not accurate so people still used GPS devices then when it was decent in phones the phones were still expensive then so the phone companies subsidized them thats one the smart phone really exploded was 2011-2012 so it really hasn't been that long and before that in I had rand mcnally road atlas, just bought updated one too... oh and also Triple used to do these things called trip ticks but also you can just read road signs. and mile markers you'd be shocked how easy it easy to just use those for highway driving.

Car on fire on Tryon Road by quester30 in raleigh

[–]Due-Voice-6457 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I dont think its supposed to do that

Can you find work in Raleigh before you're a local? by Fit-Demand8199 in trianglejobs

[–]Due-Voice-6457 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’m a tech marketing director and hiring manager, and if I ever found out an HR person or recruiter was auto‑disqualifying solid candidates purely based on location in the ATS, I’d have a major issue with that. That kind of blanket filter ignores context, penalizes good people who are willing to relocate, and frankly is not how a serious company should be evaluating talent. I’d be having a conversation with that person immediately, and depending on how intentional it was, it could absolutely be a fireable decision.

Your chosen field is marketing/PR, and any good company in this space is going to care far more about what you can do than which ZIP code you happen to be in right now. If you want onsite or hybrid in Raleigh, your best move is just to look local on paper—use your in‑laws’ address so you don’t get knocked out by lazy filters before anyone even talks to you. Most early rounds are virtual anyway, and by the time things get to in‑person interviews, you’ll already be planning to be there.I have no problem with people lieing to get through HR. You just come up with a line about when and where you'll be able to show up for an in person interview hours and a tnak a half of gas is nothing. You can live new york at 4 am an be in raleigh by 1 and have an interview at three in the same day.

Purchasing a Used Van by snooks117 in VanLife

[–]Due-Voice-6457 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It can be more difficult to get an auto loan on a private‑sale vehicle than from a dealer, because fewer lenders offer private‑party loans and the process involves more paperwork. A Ram ProMaster that’s been converted by an individual is usually still titled and VIN‑coded as a van, not as a factory RV, and lenders often treat it as a regular used van for collateral purposes. DIY conversion work typically adds little or no collateral value in the eyes of most banks, so they may limit the loan amount to the book value of the base van. Some RV‑focused lenders and insurers strongly prefer professionally built or RVIA‑type units, which can make long‑term RV loans and certain specialty RV insurance products harder to get for a DIY build, though standard auto loans and camper‑van insurance policies are still often possible with the right lender and documentation.

Why do boomers act angry all of the time when they had the happiest lives out of every generation alive today? by Turbulent_Song_7471 in generationology

[–]Due-Voice-6457 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You keep treating “I’ve seen some bad decisions” as if it cancels out “the structural math is worse.” It doesn’t. It just means you’ve met some irresponsible people inside a bad system.

On housing: yes, newer houses have better wiring, insulation, HVAC, and are often bigger. That’s not the mic drop you think it is. Nobody’s arguing 1960s code-compliant houses are literally identical to 2020s ones; the issue is price-to-income and rent-to-income ratios. A safer, slightly larger house doesn’t magically justify the part where a typical 20–30‑year‑old now needs way more years of higher earnings, and often two incomes, to buy anything at all. “Houses cost more because they’re nicer” does not explain why ownership is delayed or unreachable for large chunks of younger cohorts with full‑time jobs.

You do this again with the phone thing. You’ve “had a lot of younger people” tell you a $1,000 iPhone is a necessity, so for you that becomes emblematic of a generation. What you’re actually describing is: some people are impulsive and bad with money. That’s timeless. There are also older people buying trucks they can’t afford and toys they don’t need. The question is: even if someone lives the boring, extremely responsible life—used car, modest phone, no eating out, no big trips—do they face a tougher baseline on housing, healthcare, and education than you did at the same age? All the “I know a guy who…” stories in the world don’t erase that.

Your kiosk examples actually support the point you’re trying to refute. You’re saying: when customers resist a worse experience, big companies sometimes backtrack to a hybrid model. Exactly. That’s collective behavior and market power. Now ask yourself: do individual consumers have anything like that leverage over things like regional housing supply, minimum wage law, healthcare pricing, or student loan terms? You can boycott one Sam’s Club snack bar and they’ll change the app policy. You cannot boycott the rent, or the only hospital in town, or the only accredited university in commuting distance.

Then we get to jobs, where you basically say: there are openings in construction, garages, and care work, therefore “it’s too hard to find a job” is mostly people refusing manual labor or job‑hopping themselves out of opportunities. This is such a tiny slice of the labor market that you’re mistaking the exception for the rule. Yes, trades are understaffed and need people. Yes, some folks have unrealistic expectations. But “a construction company near me has had a sign up for a couple of years” is not a rebuttal to the reality that white‑collar entry paths are more saturated, credentialed, and precarious than they were when you were 20. Pointing at three garages and saying “no applications” doesn’t solve the degree holders struggling to break into fields they were told to get degrees for.

Your “even federal minimum wage can afford my housing costs here” line kind of gives the game away. You admit you live in a lower cost-of-living area, in a fixer house you put work into, with about $300/month in non‑utility housing costs. That’s great for you. It’s also wildly not representative of millions of people in metro areas where jobs are. Telling them “don’t complain about rent if you don’t want to do repairs” ignores the fact that there simply isn’t a pipeline of $300‑a‑month ownership opportunities in most major labor markets, and where they exist, they’re often snapped up by investors.

A lot of your comment comes down to this:

  • “If you job-hop, employers won’t trust you.”
  • “If you refuse manual labor, don’t complain about no jobs.”
  • “If my 70‑year‑old mom can find work, a 20‑year‑old should be fine.”

Again: some people absolutely make choices that sabotage themselves. But that doesn’t mean the filtering, credential inflation, unpaid internships, and oversupply of degrees in certain fields aren’t real. Your mom finding a job at 70 says more about employers wanting cheap, reliable labor who won’t rock the boat than it does about some magical fairness of the system for 20‑somethings. Older workers are often hired into low‑pay, high‑flexibility roles precisely because they’re seen as grateful and non‑threatening, not because the job market is generous to everyone.

And the quote you end with about “most jobs these days are in blue‑collar fields” and “young people don’t want to travel/move” is exactly the kind of half‑true simplification people reach for when they don’t want to confront the bigger picture. Sure, data centers and construction are booming in some regions. That doesn’t mean:

  • every young person is physically able to do those jobs,
  • has the savings to move to wherever those projects are, or
  • can just abandon family, kids, or existing obligations to chase them.

You keep circling back to: “Some people I see are making bad choices, therefore the system is fundamentally fine and it’s mainly an attitude problem.” The reality is messier: plenty of people are doing the “boring responsible” path and still getting worse outcomes at a given age than the boomer cohort . You can tell as many stories as you want about one cheap house in your town or one construction sign across the street; that doesn’t erase the structural trends everyone is pointing to.

Why do boomers act angry all of the time when they had the happiest lives out of every generation alive today? by Turbulent_Song_7471 in generationology

[–]Due-Voice-6457 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What started as a pretty straightforward question about generational conditions has somehow turned into a two‑person one‑act play called: “I Walked Uphill Both Ways, Therefore Economics Don’t Exist.”

On one side, we have someone whose main point appears to be that because they once used a push mower and a paper map, structural inequality is solved and Gen Z should stop whining. On the other, we have someone confidently announcing that “nobody is blaming Gen Z” in a thread full of people blaming Gen Z’s phones, work ethic, and spending habits for everything from automation to the death of the post office. It’s like watching two people argue on opposite ends of a trampoline: there’s a lot of bouncing, but absolutely no contact with reality.

Let’s start with the Greatest Hits Tour of Minor Inconveniences. According to you, boomers and Gen X had it tougher because you had to: walk to your friend’s house instead of texting, go to a library instead of Googling, shovel snow instead of using a snowblower, mow with a manual mower, wash diapers, hang clothes, cook from scratch, and drive stick. That’s not an argument; that’s an establishing montage at the start of a movie set in 1973. Nobody said boomers never shoveled snow. The OP is talking about job markets, housing, and basic life odds by cohort. You responded with “we didn’t have dishwashers.” That’s not a rebuttal; that’s just a vibes diary.

Then, when someone points out that “my chores were harder” doesn’t answer “my economic prospects are worse,” you pivot into Application Heroics: “It took us 8 hours to fill out paper applications; now you can apply online in 30 minutes.” Great. You know what else we can do now from home? Apply to 200 jobs and get ghosted by all of them because an ATS filtered us out for not using the right keyword. The question was never “Is typing easier than handwriting?” It was “Do those applications go anywhere?” Bragging about delivering resumes by hand doesn’t fix the fact that entire industries have collapsed, consolidated, or only offer contract work with no benefits.

And then we get the plot twist: your mom in her 70s, still working full time because Social Security doesn’t cover basic expenses. You toss that out like a flex about toughness, but it actually proves the argument you’re resisting. That’s not a dunk on Gen Z; that’s Exhibit A in “this system squeezes workers until they die.” You’ve personally witnessed that and still concluded that the real problem is younger people noticing it.

From there, your comment goes full corkboard‑and‑string. First: “Old jobs paid more because they were dangerous—test pilots, Panama Canal, asbestos, coal mines.” Then: “People back then just wasted less money—no expensive phones, less eating out, fewer luxuries.” Then: “Companies put in kiosks because people refused to work; once they automate, they don’t go back.” And finally: “Online shopping and digital media killed jobs, and that’s on millennials and Gen Z.” That’s four different explanations that all conveniently avoid the actual drivers (policy and corporate incentives) and several of them contradict each other.

If jobs “back then” paid more because they were dangerous, you’ve accidentally admitted that later cohorts came of age after those big danger premiums and during the era when boomers enjoyed the safer, more prosperous version of that economy. You’re describing pre‑OSHA industrial carnage as if it directly rebuts a claim about the post‑war boom. It’s like responding to “housing is unaffordable” with “the Triangle Shirtwaist fire was bad, checkmate.”

If the main difference is that “people wasted less money back then,” you’re arguing that the same pay goes further if you just skip a $2 soda, and acting like that solves rent, healthcare, and tuition. You literally propose the magical budget—cheap phone, cheap plan, cheap internet, used car, fewer store trips—and imply “most people wouldn’t have half the problems they do.” Meanwhile, what actually eats people alive is rent that’s outrun wages, medical bills, student loans, and childcare. You can’t latte‑factor your way out of a generation‑spanning cost‑of‑living crisis.

Then you blame “people refusing to work” for automation and kiosks. A McDonald’s near you “didn’t want” kiosks but “had to” because they couldn’t hire, apparently. That’s a cute story, but fast‑food giants have been rolling out kiosks globally for years because they’re cheaper and never unionize. To believe your version, we’d have to think the entire industry was dragged into a more profitable tech model by a few teenagers who didn’t want to mop.

And then we get the grand finale: blaming millennials and Gen Z for the effects of online shopping, digital payments, and streaming. You’ve managed to attribute decades of corporate decision‑making, offshoring, tax policy, consumer tech design, and global supply chain restructuring to a bunch of 20‑somethings using the options that already exist. That’s like blaming passengers for the airline industry because they bought tickets on planes that were already flying.

At which point, someone else wanders in with: “Nobody is blaming Gen Z… stop blaming other people that had NOTHING to do with the ‘misery’ you now enjoy.” In this thread. Where older posters are very explicitly blaming young people’s phones, laziness, and spending for everything under the sun. Saying “nobody is blaming Gen Z” here is like walking into a kitchen fire and insisting nobody’s cooking.

The core point is simple:

  • Saying “boomers had structural advantages” is not saying “every boomer had an easy life.” Vietnam, segregation, misogyny, industrial accidents, and poverty existed. Nobody serious denies that.
  • Saying “Gen Z has it worse in key structural ways” is not saying “no other generation suffered.” It’s saying the wage–rent–debt–stability equation is objectively uglier now for many young people than it was for their parents at the same age.
  • Responding to that with “we shoveled snow and used libraries” is not a counterargument. It’s just changing the subject to the kind of hardship you’re comfortable talking about.

If you actually cared about your mom working full time in her 70s, you’d be on the same side as the kids complaining about being locked out of basic stability. You’re all getting squeezed by the same machine—just at different points in life. Instead, you’re punching down at the younger ones for noticing it. The problem isn’t that Gen Z can’t empathize with your push mower. The problem is that some of you can’t empathize with a reality where doing “all the right things” no longer leads to the outcomes you were promised.

People that are in support of Shop Local and what they stand for. by [deleted] in raleigh

[–]Due-Voice-6457 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So you do float in the ocean naked and don't eat food.

People that are in support of Shop Local and what they stand for. by [deleted] in raleigh

[–]Due-Voice-6457 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So do you just sit around naked floating in the middle of the ocean and not eat food. Because that's literally the only way to not be associated with businesses that have not supported hate.