A Brain-Based Explanation For Why Old People Get Scammed 209
sciencehabit writes "Despite long experience with the ways of the world, older people are especially vulnerable to fraud. According to the Federal Trade Commission, up to 80% of scam victims are over 65. One explanation may lie in a brain region that serves as a built-in crook detector. Called the anterior insula, this structure — which fires up in response to the face of an unsavory character — is less active in older people, possibly making them less cagey than younger folks, a new study finds."
So they voted for Romney? (Score:2, Funny)
Just sayin'... the guy looks like such a crook; I always wondered how he could get supporters.
Also keep in mind... (Score:2)
Well, that and a bunch of other stuff (Score:5, Insightful)
They're also (as a general populace) more lonely, less educated, more dependent on repairmen to do tasks for them, and more financially well-off than their younger counterparts.
They're basically the perfect soup for travelers, gypsy trash, and other assorted con-artist-pieces-of-shit to take advantage of. Makes me want to go back to the days when a tall tree and short noose waited for that filth when they got caught. There is very little in this world lower than someone willing to take advantage of the elderly.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
That's some primo racism in there buddy. Here's a hint: If you replace the word "gypsy" by "jew" or "black" or "muslim" and something would appear racist, then it's racist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiziganism [wikipedia.org]
But of course you'll claim you're not a racist, and travelers are really like that, because you know someone who heard something that happened this one time, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Gypsy isn't a race, and con-man sure as hell isn't. But if you want to call me bigoted against people who take advantage of the weak and feeble-minded with scams and cons, then you are certainly correct on that point.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you heard about a thing called "romanipen"? It's essentially "gadjas are not human, you should never steal from or cheat someone following romanipen but everyone else should be distrusted, and being not humans, crimes against them are not a bad thing".
Things are so bad that in Slovakia you have 80% unemployment among Romas (ethnicity not romanipen wise) while the general population has 7%. This is way more than could be explained by antiziganism, especially that legally no one can discriminate agains
Re: (Score:2)
Another post full of pathetic drivel from another racist.
How is an IDEOLOGY a "race"?
You've got no statistics to back up your "follow romanipen" (totally made up) bullshit.
Here [wikipedia.org] for example. From your tone I guess adding more references would be a waste of time.
Aside from the fact that widespread racism against blacks hasn't ended
Eh? Please show me any western country where racism against blacks isn't limited to a bunch of skinheads and other lowlifes not worth notice or spitting at? There might be some grumbling here and there, but nothing even close to full-blown discrimination we have plenty of examples elsewhere. This fight is mostly won.
they didn't need to be "rehabilitated"
Here's a dictionary: 3. rehabilitation -- (vindication of a person's cha
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have to wonder (as with all of these things) if it's correlation or causation.
Do these structures in older people decline ... or are we measuring a generation of
Re: (Score:2)
what's to understand about a con man who criminally takes advantage of others through fraud?
oh just that? (Score:4, Interesting)
All brain functions are in decline throughout most of our lives, I doubt any one specific area has much more of an impact than any other. Judgement, trust, memory, reasoning, caution, etc.
Up to a certain point, sheer experience helps prevent older folks from being scammed, but somewhere there's going to be a tipping point in most people's cognitive skills in general that make them an easier mark. A headline like "Elderly found to be easier to scam!" just gets "no kidding!" from me.
I'd also wager the average 85 yr old is easier to coax into a stranger's car than the average 5 yr old.
I'm sure I'll get a reply from one or two telling me their Aunt Gracie was sharp as a whip till the day she died at 90, and you'll run into that from time to time, but those people are by far the exception to the rule.
Re: (Score:2)
All brain functions are in decline throughout most of our lives, I doubt any one specific area has much more of an impact than any other. Judgement, trust, memory, reasoning, caution, etc.
You have to live for an awful long time to make up for it, or in a very unusual culture, where teens and twenty-somethings are the pinnacle of judgement, caution, and reasoning. I thought I was doing a pretty good job of it at the time, but compared to way back then, I've slowly improved to something like wise old Gandalf now.
I don't think any of that peaks until probably 50s or so. Maybe early 60s. Its an exercisable facility, 40 adult years of watching TV is not going to improve that individual, but on
Re: (Score:2)
I've successfully developed my brain to the point where I don't trust anyone. :)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't believe you. ;-)
Isn't it obvious? (Score:5, Funny)
As we all know, the human cerebral cortex is heavily wrinkled, allowing a very large sheet of neural network to fit inside the skull.
During the aging process, the wrinkles gradually diffuse through the skull, collecting on the skin surface, and leaving the cerebral cortex much less efficiently packed. This, obviously, is why old people are wrinkly and suffer cognitive decline. What theory could be simpler or more parsimonious?
Re: (Score:2)
Wrinkles, like hair, are a conserved quantity.
Everybody knows that as you get older, hair travels from the top of your head and starts coming out of your nose and ears.
In much the same way, wrinkles travel out of your brain and collect on your face and neck. By the time you reach your 80s, your face looks like something out of a movie adaptation of a Stephen King novel, but that brain inside is smooth as a baby's bottom.
"Unsavory Character" != Crook (Score:5, Insightful)
Called the anterior insula, this structure — which fires up in response to the face of an unsavory character
Just because someone's shady looking, does not mean they're a thief. The inverse holds true as well.
Truth be told, most-if-not-all of us have been robbed of far more by white guys in suits, rather than black guys in hoodies.
Re: (Score:3)
Just because someone's shady looking, does not mean they're a thief. The inverse holds true as well.
But its still statistically correct enough to be a survival advantage.
From an evolutionary standpoint, I'm guessing its something like: If as a youth you're sitting around the campfire and the faces are "not-family" either you're lost at the wrong campfire or its wartime or whatever so be worried. As an old dude you're sitting around the campfire and the faces are "not-family" that's because all your ancestors/family are dead and these weirdos are your in-laws, so chill and play nice with them.
Old people
Re: (Score:2)
Old people having stuff worth stealing is a recent phenomena.
No, the longer you're here the more time you have to collect stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Signs of untrustworthiness include averted eyes; an insincere smile that doesn't reach the eyes; a smug, smirky mouth; and a backward tilt to the head."
It's not about some new age, face based phrenology; it's about reading body language and facial expressions. Especially the involuntary micro-expressions that we all make every minute of every day but that are too subtle to be consciously detected by most people. A "smile that doesn't reach the eyes" isn't something you're going to see and say to yourself
Re: (Score:2)
That's outdated. It's perfectly possible to train smiling with your eyes. That's the whole point of being a sociopath, no connection to any actual emotional state or bond with the other required.
No, what this describes is the average (if not cocky) amateur doing something fishy, it's how you catch a dumb person in an unprepared lie. But that's about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because someone's shady looking, does not mean they're a thief.
Enough about McAfee already.
Re: (Score:2)
Truth be told, most-if-not-all of us have been robbed of far more by white guys in suits, rather than black guys in hoodies.
As in several orders of magnitude more. A mugger might want my pocket change once but the government takes a third of my income before I even see it, then comes back to demand extra fees on everything I buy.
Re: (Score:3)
I was watching The Queen of Versailles the other night (a pretty amazing documentary) and in one scene the tycoon is bragging on the phone that he defaulted on a $9M loan, then secretly sent a third party to the bank to buy back the assets on auction for $3M. Just like that, he stole $6M with a few phone calls, probably completely legally. More welfare than a dozen inner-city welfare moms could get in a lifetime. No retribution, even after everybody knows. The
Re: (Score:2)
And you get nothing in return! Poor baby.
Did I say that?
I get plenty in return much of it worth paying for. However the government is paying people who choose not to work, overpaying its own under performing staff, and underpaying the hard workers I really do respect.
And don't try and tell me that voting changes anything because you can't vote out the civil service.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, white guys in suits look like crooks. But why are you contradicting your own statements?!
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I'd even say the average crook is going to be look slicker and come across warmer than the average person. Kinda like I'd expect a professional boxer to have a stronger biceps than average.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I'd even say the average crook is going to be look slicker and come across warmer than the average person. Kinda like I'd expect a professional boxer to have a stronger biceps than average.
Agreed, but what person do you see others shy away from on the street more readily - a guy in a nice suit, or that shaggy dude wearing 6 coats and mean-mugging everyone?
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, people tend to be noobs that way. I actually think assuming bad character when dealing with dirty and/or poor people is projection to no little degree: if someone is starving through no fault of their own, and I'm well fed through no merit of my own, I better make up a story real quick in which I'm not the asshole; the rest follows from there. Just like we love to believe that we're somehow a winner when being taken advantage of by someone with a big bullshit smile. That can also go the other way, too
Re: (Score:2)
Kudos.
Re: (Score:2)
being PC is ruining peoples' comprehension of simple things.
"shady looking" is less about physical looks and more about behaviour and mannerisms (failure to maintain eye contact, inability to keep still, hem/haws before answering a straight question, etc.), though being unkempt or bleary eyed are also indicators of someone "not at their best".
Re: (Score:2)
White guys in hoodies are only able to steal your money if you are dumb enough to buy into their company.
On the other hand, they have already stolen your soul and identity via their social network, so I suppose they have to leave you something.
For when the metal ones decide to come for you (Score:2)
This might also explain why so many of them watch Fox News and buy stupid things on TV. In fact, the association between right wing causes and commercial scams is well known [thebaffler.com].
Perhaps trust in cable tv news too? (Score:2)
Without picking on any network in particular, according to Nielson one network has an average viewer age over 65. Surprisingly, the competing networks are not wildly younger wrt age demos.
Not the source but a nice overview of the demographics:
http://www.quora.com/Fox-News-cable-news-network/What-are-the-demographics-of-Fox-News-viewers [quora.com]
Could certainly be considered trollish, I know. But it's an interesting hypothesis nonetheless.
Re: (Score:2)
No need to ask Nielson, I caught a few minutes of that network waiting for a doctor, all commercials were for gold, seniors insurance, medicines and mobility scooters.
If they think only the elderly are easy . . . (Score:3)
Re:If they think only the elderly are easy . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
You are absolutely right. Old people are in general desperately lonely, and they often suppress `warning messages' for the company when being conned by a smart personable young person (or a cheerful voice at the end of the phone line).
The problem is really social isolation.
The father of one of my closest friends (in his 80s) was conned into investing close to $250,000.00 into a real estate venture in Latin America. He is not someone who comes across as a doddering old man. He is still alert, reasonably physically fit (for his age) and shows no signs of dementia. He had a successful career in business and survived all the vicious corporate politics of the huge corporation that he worked for, and retired with a healthy retirement account.
But pretty much everyone he knows is either dead or lives too far away for regular contact. His children live across the country and his spouse is no more. He has almost no living friends. Pretty much everyone whom he knew before he was 30 have passed on. The elderly do not make new friends very easily with their own age group. He goes for weeks without talking to a single soul (think of the guy from the movie `Up', that scenario is quite accurate). He is isolated, lonely, disenfranchised and desperate to feel relevant to society.
He was ripe for the picking by the smart young woman who knocked on his door in a business suit, heels and with a briefcase full of glossy brochures.
Is this right? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Beany Babies? Oh yes, those little stuffed animals that some adults were spending upwards of thousands of dollars on to get a "rare" Beany Baby... These days I can't go to a garage sale where some sucker.... I mean individual isn't trying to pawn them off as if they were actually worth more than 99 cents a piece.
Correlated with Having Fewer Friends? (Score:2)
I wonder if this is correlated or even causality related to older people having a much-reduced circle of close friends?
Trial lawyers knew this a long time ago (Score:2)
Depending on what counts as a "scam"–some people think the lottery is a big one–there are way too many other reasons beyond something wrong with their brains to make this explanation complete or even useful.
For example, a much better and simpler explanation is that the older you are the more likely you are to be socially isolated. Socially isolated people are easier prey for scammers.
In fact, the results reported in TFA more usef
Re:Generation Gap? (Score:5, Interesting)
Only during the early TV years did everyone seem so honest and wonderful. Leave it to Beaver, My Three Sons and about a million other goody goody TV shows makes the newer generations think that life back then was so golly gee whiz good. There never was a Mayberry and people were just as dishonest then as they are now, the internet just allows us to see it more often.
Re:Generation Gap? (Score:5, Interesting)
If anything people were less honest. In the 1950s lots of crimes went totally unreported and still their crime rates where rather high. Physical, mental or sexual abuse of family members was very often unreported. In most states a wife could not even report a rape by her husband as no such crime existed.
The homicide rate today for the USA is lower than it was in 1960.
Re: (Score:3)
If anything people were less honest. In the 1950s lots of crimes went totally unreported and still their crime rates where rather high. Physical, mental or sexual abuse of family members was very often unreported. In most states a wife could not even report a rape by her husband as no such crime existed.
The homicide rate today for the USA is lower than it was in 1960.
Citation needed
Re: (Score:3)
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=homicide+rate+in+united+states+over+century [lmgtfy.com]
Re: (Score:2)
At the same time getting information about what is a scam is also much easier. Even if no one in your family knows, surely one of them can use google.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Rape without physical force is possible, and probably relatively common compared to physical rape.
Don't think that all guys happily accept sex anytime with just any woman. We're choosy too, though it may not be as obvious.
I'm a guy, and I've been pushed into sex. It was bordering on rape as I didn't really want to, but felt pushed into it. (I don't want to go into detail.) I wouldn't call my situation a clear case of rape because of the situation (still don't want to go into detail) but I can well imagi
Re: (Score:2)
Because that is what was being talked about - rape within marriage. If that's not what you're talking about then you sound like a whiner and an attention whore who just has to add his irrelevant experience to every conversation with the word "rape" in it.
Re: (Score:2)
Your first sentence is nonsense so I will ignore it.
The point was that those kinds of assaults were not reported in 1950s and 60s.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Try more recent data slick.
2010 4.8
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl01.xls [fbi.gov]
Not sure how one would measure moral decay. My guess is it would include a bunch of things I do not find immoral.
Re: (Score:2)
Surveys and other later data collection.
Re:Generation Gap? (Score:5, Insightful)
There never was a Mayberry and people were just as dishonest then as they are now
I have to disagree at least for the US. Over the past half century a lot of rural places have changed from not locking one's doors to widespread theft of agricultural equipment and various manifestations of the drug war, such as marijuana growing and meth labs.
Another place is college. Try leaving a laptop or bicycle unlocked and unattended. Fifty years ago you could have gotten away with it except for perhaps the most urbanized colleges.
It is worth noting that just as there is the myth of Mayberry, there's also the myth of the Children of the Corn, namely, that small towns have "dark secrets". My view is that small towns were more honest because that is what it takes for a small, isolated society where everyone knows everyone, to survive. It also becomes much harder for dishonesty to profit. You have a small set of possible targets, and they'll figure it out eventually.
When you get large urban societies or a massive, flat society like the internet, potential con artists can easily move from one mark to the next as well as filter through large numbers of potential targets for a mark. Thieves have a sea of targets to choose from. The payoff for dishonesty and theft is much better.
So I agree that the people haven't really changed. But the payoffs for various sorts of dishonesty have changed.
Re: (Score:2)
rural places have changed from not locking one's doors to widespread theft of agricultural equipment
In the past, it wasn't as easy to move stolen goods and the markets didn't exist. If you stole a tractor, a car, or someone's silverplate and jewelery, chances were good that you'd have to fence it locally. Now, I can make a quick trip to another state.
small towns were more honest because that is what it takes for a small, isolated society where everyone knows everyone, to survive
Now-a-days, there are no isolated towns in the U.S. It's unlikely that you would need to drive more than an hour or two to reach a city.
Re: (Score:2)
People started locking their doors when they started watching the news and HEARING about more crimes. Of course no one stole your computer 50 years ago - they were too heavy for someone to run off with them quickly and you didn't take them with you to public places. People had cheaper things stolen and the whole state didn't hear about it.
Re: (Score:2)
So then explain the fact that crime has gone DOWN?
I don't buy that. What's the basis for your claim? In my defense, I've frequently run across people who have continual problems now with crime yet didn't decades ago.
People started locking their doors when they started watching the news and HEARING about more crimes.
No, that's not right either.
People had cheaper things stolen and the whole state didn't hear about it.
The whole state doesn't hear about college crimes now either (unless it happens to push a hot button). And "yellow journalism" (the kind that hypes crime and such) has been kicking around since the beginning of the 20th Century.
Re:Generation Gap? (Score:4, Interesting)
There were some pluses to living in the 1950's, but there were almost all related to the fact that men ages 20-50 were in short supply after WWII. For instance, white men could get better (in terms of wages, benefits, and hours) jobs than are available now and could marry better (because they were so outnumbered by women who wanted to get married).
That difference is actually key to the modern American social conservative narrative, which sells the (completely bogus) idea that if we had the same social structure white people had in the 1950's, we'd have the economic success that white families enjoyed in the 1950's. And of course, if you weren't white, it's a completely different story.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Generation Gap? (Score:4, Funny)
almost brags/seems pleased that she got scammed.. I don't get it
Attention seeking behavior. Look on the bright side, decades earlier she would have been wearing miniskirts and bikinis, aren't you glad she's changed tactics?
Re: (Score:3)
Wouldn't a hardcore christian know about things like 'original sin' and(if catholic) 'concupiscence' or (if protestant) the necessity of salvation through grace? There are certainly variants of christianity that emphasize the redeemability of all people; but what flavors espouse the notion that the world isn't actually pretty full of malicious dickheads, albeit ones that might be redeemed?
Re: (Score:2)
Verily, verily..
-- Matthew 10:16
Clearly, too many people focus on the "be harmless" part.
Re: (Score:2)
One would think so, but many Christian women, if they don't work outside the home, are constantly surrounded by Christians. They go to women's Bible study, church, MOPS and various other Christian activities between soccer games and picnics with the family. They go so long without meeting a dishonest person, they forget that such people exist.
I had to set my wife up to not be Administrator on her computer, because she kept getting viruses. When I explained the scams to her, her response was, "But why wou
Re: (Score:2)
Yes this, now mind you it is even worse with my grandmother as she is hard core christian. She thinks everyone is good and can be trustworthy
Hmm... the Bible is full of quotes to the effect that one should be very careful at trusting another person. Two I know about are "I send you forth as sheep among wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." (Matthew 10:16) and "Cursed is the man who trusts in man" (Jeremiah 17:5). There are probably more. Maybe you could tell her to keep those in mind? Perhaps even print them in a huge type and fix them as portraits near her phone and computer? I know my own grandma surely benefits fro
Re: (Score:2)
I am far from religious but those two quotes are definitely words of wisdom.... Maybe there's merit to some of the words in that book. Guess I would have to cherry pick what works best for me. :)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
just wait a few years. eventually youll get old too. and as you get old you'll be glad for every chance you get to talk to other people about anything. because it wont be long before you're in the ground, and no one wants to go quietly, unnoticed and unmissed having not connected with anyone on the way there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, hard core Baha'i have trained themselves to believe anything. Hard core Christians have trained themselves to believe the tenets of Christianity (a tautology).
Most pedantic answer ever!
If someone donates money to an organization that has been involved in the systematic and repeated sexual abuse of children and the covering up of this, and can still believe they are a good person then that person can believe anything. Such a person won't have a problem believing in Nigerian diplomats trying to wire millions to random strangers.
Or are you talking about the other christian groups that amass huge wealth for their founders by lying their asses off to their followers?
Re: (Score:2)
It's a myth (based on unreliable memory) that people were more honest Back In My Day.
See: Richard Nixon. Frank Abagnale. Charles Ponzi. Piltdown Man. P.T. Barnum.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they just grew up at a time when people were more honest?
Maybe they grew up in a time where they could find the scumbags that treated them dishonestly.
Nowadays the scumbags don't need to be near you to attempt to scam you.
Re:I prefer to think they deserve it... (Score:4, Insightful)
If young people weren't all such self-involved pricks and actually bothered to spend the 30-45 minutes EVERY TWO YEARS that it takes to CAST A FUCKING VOTE then maybe there wouldn't be such a death grip on this country from the elderly...
One good troll deserves another.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's like saying she deserved to be raped because she didn't go to her self-defense classes.
Last I checked, standing in line and filling out a form was not a martial art.
However, if we are making it one, I am a fucking black belt.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, no it's not. Your analogy is like saying any politician that assumes people who aren't actively complaining don't object (or they would be complaining), becomes a rapist. The people who modded you insightful are those people who really, literally believe all politicians are sub-human scumbags that deserve to be called rapists or worse, and probably believe as well that total anarchy is a good thing. Go ahead, keep feeding them red meat.
Re: (Score:2)
You talk as if there is a way you could vote that would actually change anything. Even assuming that the system worked as intended, at most you'd get to choose one issue where you get to make a positive change. For the other issues things either stay the same, or you get ass-raped.
Re: (Score:2)
You talk as if there is a way you could vote that would actually change anything. Even assuming that the system worked as intended, at most you'd get to choose one issue where you get to make a positive change. For the other issues things either stay the same, or you get ass-raped.
The real problem is that every generation complains that the previous one mucked things up and they will make it better once they get in power.
Then they do get in power but "surprisingly" things do not get any better.
It is as if people stop caring about injustice once they are on the right side of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Vote for the one with lube. Obviously.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I prefer to think they deserve it... (Score:4, Insightful)
Weed got legalised because they held a vote on the actual issue. Of course it's worthwhile voting on individual issues. Jeez.
Voting for a person rather than on issues as a way to express your opinion is like asking your taxi driver to solve a set of riddles rather than telling him your actual destination. How does voting for a specific person say that you want weed legalised? Maybe you abhor weed, but you agree with the rest of the guy's policies, etc. I'd rather we had a system of being allowed to nominate issues and vote on them. Voting certain people into certain positions of authority is probably still a good idea, but it's a very poor way to make your wishes known, and it's dumb to act like things aren't going the way you want simply because you didn't vote for a certain individual.
Re:I prefer to think they deserve it... (Score:4, Interesting)
If your head is too far up your own ass to go cast a ballot for the politicians that best represent your interests [...]
Unless you feature in Forbes Magazine, no politician on the ballot represents your interests.
Re: (Score:2)
maybe not, but some are certainly better than others, and who gets elected to congress DOES matter. even if a politician doesn't *precisely* share your views, they may agree on matters you care about most, such as internet freedom or immigration or taxes.
A politician may or may not agree with some of your views but they, as a rule, do not have your best interests in heart.
voting is worth everyone's time.
Making sure that you have good voting choices is worth everyone's time.
Going through the motion to vote for what you consider to be "the lesser evil" is not.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If voting was done on Sundays and free child care was offered, and/or if it were able to be done online, I bet the number of young people voting would skyrocket.
Re: (Score:2)
If you can't drag your brat along when you vote, you have failed as a parent.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It could be that us younger folk have been taught from day one not to believe a damn thing anyone says online.
I always thought that was why old people appear to fall for scams more. People brought up before the communication age would have encountered fewer scams when their personalities were forming and would be less able to handle them, they would have dealt mainly with people they would see again.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, scammers have to find new way's to scam all the time. What worked well for them in 1978 doesn't work these day's (maybe there is an exception for ponzy schemes and pyramid fraud which were 0-day exploits in 1463, but still remain unpatched)
Now I think of it, as this is
Scammers find 0-day exploits to scam the elderly then, after a while, the elder
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Oooooorrr (Score:4, Interesting)
Within 45 minutes someone inserted the stick, opened the malicious
Lesson learned: even old tech works with geeks
How is that for a brainfest huh?
Re: (Score:2)
Scams weren't invented with the internet. Ponzi schemes, the tulip investment hysteria, bogus overseas investments in the 1800s, they were all there. It is just far easier to initiate and promote scams now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)