If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by Matt Barrow on February 11, 2007, 4:20 pm
> Matt Whiting wrote:
>> M&S wrote:
>>
>>
>> You need to move to a place with smarter people. :-)
>>
>> Matt
>
> Heh, perhaps.
>
> I have lived/worked in the land of Harvard, Yale, MIT, cash galore, and
> now live in the land of many who did not even get their diploma's and now
> farm, raise cattle, hunt for food, and do whatever they can for a living.
> Oddly, its very much the same in both locations.
>
> You can see in the media regularly "Jennifer Aniston seen shopping at
> Wal-Mart". It is not an issue of wealth or location. Its greed and human
> nature. Although those two things are virtually one in the same.
Think: demographics, now and a generation ago.
A generation ago, people bought a house expecting to live there for 10, 20
years or more. Today it more like 2-3 years. In a way, a basement is for
long term storage, and moving things in and out every couple years is not
desirable.
In many areas of the southwest, garages are a recent feature. Prior to about
the 1980's, carports were considered adequate.
Surveys show people want basements, but they also show people are unwilling
to pay the premium required to build them. This is more a matter of tastes
and demographics than any form of "greed".
In short, people pay less attention to the WHAT of a home, than the WHERE
(closer to work, schools) and basements are wayyyy down on the list.
Build a house with a basement and, say, 1800 sqft for $340K, and a house for
$300K, and 2000sf, and the $300K house will sell first, often by weeks or
months, especially in the dense cookie-cutter developments.
Custom homes are quite different.
|
 
| |
Posted by Matt Barrow on February 15, 2007, 10:00 am
>>
>> You need to move to a place with smarter people. :-)
>>
>> Matt
>
> Heh, perhaps.
>
> I have lived/worked in the land of Harvard, Yale, MIT, cash galore, and
> now live in the land of many who did not even get their diploma's and now
> farm, raise cattle, hunt for food, and do whatever they can for a living.
> Oddly, its very much the same in both locations.
>
> You can see in the media regularly "Jennifer Aniston seen shopping at
> Wal-Mart". It is not an issue of wealth or location. Its greed and human
> nature. Although those two things are virtually one in the same.
>
"Greed" being defined as, what?, people getting the most bang for their
buck?
BTW, why is someone WORKING to make a better/more secure life "greedy", but
politicians and parasites demanding more in taxes "benevolent public
interest"?
|
|
Posted by M&S on February 17, 2007, 5:18 pm
Matt Barrow wrote:
>
>>>
>>> You need to move to a place with smarter people. :-)
>>>
>>> Matt
>>
>>
>> Heh, perhaps.
>>
>> I have lived/worked in the land of Harvard, Yale, MIT, cash galore,
>> and now live in the land of many who did not even get their diploma's
>> and now farm, raise cattle, hunt for food, and do whatever they can
>> for a living. Oddly, its very much the same in both locations.
>>
>> You can see in the media regularly "Jennifer Aniston seen shopping at
>> Wal-Mart". It is not an issue of wealth or location. Its greed and
>> human nature. Although those two things are virtually one in the same.
>>
> "Greed" being defined as, what?, people getting the most bang for their
> buck?
>
> BTW, why is someone WORKING to make a better/more secure life "greedy",
> but politicians and parasites demanding more in taxes "benevolent public
> interest"?
From www.m-w.com:
Main Entry: greed
Pronunciation: 'grEd
Function: noun
Etymology: back-formation from greedy
: a selfish and excessive desire for more of something (as money) than
is needed
In the context of my my posts this would mean throuh greed people are
solely looking to pay as little as possible regardless of the total
costs. These are mostly people who know full well there are serious
short, long, global, and local, negative consequences linked directly to
their actions yet they do it anyway for personal benefit. Its called a
lack of social conscience but it is manifsted through greed.
Sticking with the Wal-Mart/Anniston model, many who shop there are not
ignorant to Wal-Mart's well established business model with regards to
human resources, employee compensation, global market practices, vendor
practices, its in the news daily. Yet people like Jennifer Aniston, who
by far has the resources to shop at far more conciencious outlets, shops
there by choice.
With her bajillion dollars in the bank she smiles cutely at the cashier
as she hands the cashier her gold card knowing full well that the
cashier likely has no paid vacation, no paid sick days, may full well be
intentionally held at weekly hours _just below_ full time in an well
publicized effort by Wal-Mart to not pay full time benefits, barely
exists on their wages, on and on. Forget about the global ramifications
of Wal-Mart bankrolling manufacturing overseas where they dump waste
straight into the river, in holes in the ground, child labor, and the
like. For 20 years now we have been bickering back and forth that what
other countries do to their country side should be no concern of ours.
Yet now atmospheric studies are showing clearly that the waste plume
leaves Chinese air space within hours and is over the west coast of the
US in days. Western China has, and will continue to have, some of the
cleanest air on the planet. Ironic that the very waste plume from our
low cost goods is actually raining back down on the rockies. So much for
the outa sight outa mind philosophy.
The Jennifer Aniston's of the world, and the vast majority of the rest
of us, are well aware of these issues and have the means to shop
elsewhere but choose not to. Forget about the fact that the consumer is
willing to accept low quality (or dilludes themselves into thinking it
is quality), thats fine. You can buy junk all you want. Where will the
the social conscience of the worlds major retailers, and the customers
who gobbled up the low cost goods, be for the numerous cancer pods
50,000 strong and more each caused by effluent outflows from
manufacturing facilities constructed to feed our greed for more.
Multiply China by what 20, 30, or so other countries where we are doing
the same thing? We already did all this to our own country and have been
cleaning it up for 75 years. Now, because lord knows we cant act
responsibly and learn from our mistakes, we are doing it elsewhere but
we sleep soundly because we arent actually "doing it", they are doing it
to themselves.
These are the exact reasons why the very politicians and taxes you whine
about exist, because we are too selfish, greedy, and irresponsible, to
police ourselves and behave in a responsible manner. We cant even manage
that locally, forget about globally. You are the very reason these laws
and taxes exist, we all are. Its why there are laws about beating your
children, chaining your dog, speed limits, drugs, dumping trash, murder,
j-walking, sending your children to school. Christ! We have to make it
_a law_ to send your children to school! People have to be TOLD to send
their children to school and you are wondering why we have politicians
and laws?!?! Hell, there ARE people out there who believe(d) that
chaining your children in the basement should be an acceptable form of
punishment. These people have to be told otherwise by the government and
the laws it creates. After that vast amounts of taxes need to be
collected to pay the dog officer, cops, EPA, DHS, DHHR, BATF, NEA, and
so on.
Its very simple, if you want less government just make the EPA go away.
Companies should have been smarter and not polluted rivers, lands, and
air. The EPA wouldnt even exist if we were a responsible lot. There
would be no need for the EPA. But greed makes people dump into the river
rather than go through the expense of proper disposal hence an
enforcement agency is born out of the citizens irresponsibility. The
same for Unions, OSHA, Labor Laws, Corporate laws, NEA/Education, DHHR,
on and on. Dont force miners into the mines without safety equipment and
a law wont have to be created that mandates it for you. But greed
prevails. It always does. Its human nature. Laws, and taxes to enforce
them, soon follow.
Mark
|
|
Posted by Matt Barrow on February 17, 2007, 10:32 pm
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> You need to move to a place with smarter people. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Matt
>>>
>>>
>>> Heh, perhaps.
>>>
>>> I have lived/worked in the land of Harvard, Yale, MIT, cash galore, and
>>> now live in the land of many who did not even get their diploma's and
>>> now farm, raise cattle, hunt for food, and do whatever they can for a
>>> living. Oddly, its very much the same in both locations.
>>>
>>> You can see in the media regularly "Jennifer Aniston seen shopping at
>>> Wal-Mart". It is not an issue of wealth or location. Its greed and human
>>> nature. Although those two things are virtually one in the same.
>>>
>> "Greed" being defined as, what?, people getting the most bang for their
>> buck?
>>
>> BTW, why is someone WORKING to make a better/more secure life "greedy",
>> but politicians and parasites demanding more in taxes "benevolent public
>> interest"?
> From www.m-w.com:
>
> Main Entry: greed
> Pronunciation: 'grEd
> Function: noun
> Etymology: back-formation from greedy
> : a selfish and excessive desire for more of something (as money) than is
> needed
>
> In the context of my my posts this would mean throuh greed people are
> solely looking to pay as little as possible regardless of the total costs.
> These are mostly people who know full well there are serious short, long,
> global, and local, negative consequences linked directly to their actions
> yet they do it anyway for personal benefit. Its called a lack of social
> conscience but it is manifsted through greed.
>
Take that elitist/collectivist "social conscience" crap and stick it where
the sun don't shine.
[rest of PC blather snipped to prevent someone losing their lunch]
--
Matt Barrow
Performance Homes, LLC
|
|
Posted by Fred P on February 10, 2007, 12:59 am
says...
> > No, they build what sells.
>
> Well, what they can build CHEAP.
Big snip
> I'm appalled by the builders of $300K+ home that use Wal-Mart quality
> fixtures.
Builders use "Wal-Mart quality fixtures" because the "Wal-Mart quality
buyer" will not pay another penny for better fixtures.
On the other hand the Rodeo Drive Buyer will pay 10K for a warmer toilet
seat.
Successful Builders sell what the Buyers in their market want to buy.
|
Page 3 of 6 < 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | The REAL housing crisis: TOO MANY PEOPLE | August 16, 2007, 11:30 pm |
| Home Builders | June 23, 2008, 7:48 am |
| Volume Home Builders | August 30, 2006, 3:12 pm |
| Home builders in Reno, NV | July 25, 2007, 9:10 pm |
| Concrete dome builders in Europe | July 16, 2006, 9:21 am |
| Am I being cheated? (Premier Home Builders) | October 31, 2006, 11:55 am |
| Premier Home Builders/USA Five Star Homes LP in Little Elm, TX | May 22, 2007, 1:59 pm |
| how can I find best publications for press release for builders? | April 1, 2008, 4:49 pm |
| How DoYou Build CoalBin | August 15, 2006, 9:10 am |
| Build own house, where to start? | January 29, 2007, 9:52 am |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap