Yet one of the madnesses of money is that to spend it is to lose it.

Los Angeles, if it has an ethos, it's this tacit understanding that everything can be bought, and that this necesitates that there are an infinite number of ways to make a living, which presents strange economic realities to human beings, the people primarily tasked with making a living. I know, quite the sentence. Examples: The Oscars need a voice over actress that can tell you in authoritative detail the number of times Meryl Streep has previously won the statue in question, and she lives in Studio City, the owner of that voice. Then, there needs to be the jobs which tend to her desires: there needs to be a voice of the Oscars, but also a house keeper to the Oscars, and a small stable of employees that man her arts non-profit, and there's the freelance accountant who writes the artful tax returns that keep vanity project non-profits for the wealthy moving along, and there are the bus drivers that gets the housekeeper up those steep hills near Coldwater Canyon.

So, right? It does make for an awfully gorgeous little tongue twister of commodities and negotiations. This knowledge is, of course, preferred. If you know that there are all of these livings to be made, and that it is people ultimately who make livings, you get smart about class. Our writers strike, the economic repercussions of which includes the invention of reality tv, and thus Trump, and thus the rebirth of history. Which is to say, you know, to hem and haw, it's good to be direct in your knowledge of how money and wealth is made, to know that it's people, ultimately, who make the livings, who make wealth. Los Angeles, as a city, knows this without shame.

The other thing is, you can spend money on things that will hurt you (most restaurants, a nice and lethal car) or spend money on things that are good for you (purchasing bonds, purchasing stocks). Why should money also do the bad things?