 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / RVs / September 2007Woman is content living in 84-sq. ft. tiny dream home.
Electricity from solar. Propane from a small container. $10k for the entire house. No mortgage... Wait... no debt? Isn't that un-American? Aren't we all supposed to be enslaved to the banks? See the video at http://Muvy.org > Electricity from solar. > Propane from a small container. > $10k for the entire house. > No mortgage... > Wait... no debt? Isn't that un-American? Aren't we all supposed to be enslaved to the banks? Trailers have been like that for centurys now. > See the video at http://Muvy.org f.ck off. http://www.tumbleweedhouses.com/ > http://www.tumbleweedhouses.com/ Trailers and RVs make a lot more sense, even shipping containers. > Trailers and RVs make a lot more sense, even shipping containers. Come on now, where is the adventure in your swagger? > Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote >>> http://www.tumbleweedhouses.com/ >> Trailers and RVs make a lot more sense, even shipping containers. > Come on now, where is the adventure in your swagger? More adventure in any of those than that. > More adventure in any of those than that. I know, no room for a bloomin' onion. > Electricity from solar. > Propane from a small container. > $10k for the entire house. > No mortgage... It's very possible. After all, lots of Americans - especially men - for generations have CHOSEN to live for days at a time in small hunting cabins, fishing cabins, po-up vacation trailers, etc. No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com >> Electricity from solar. >> Propane from a small container. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com Lots of criminals live in 8x10 ft. cells and survive quite well. They have a sink and commode, a nice bed to entertain their "buddy", and have meals prepared for them. The cells are climate controlled and they go out to eat. The taxpayer picks up the bill. Unfortunately, the cells aren't mobile, and they aren't allowed to have campfires or pets. > >> Electricity from solar. > >> Propane from a small container. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > out to eat. The taxpayer picks up the bill. Unfortunately, the cells > aren't mobile, and they aren't allowed to have campfires or pets. TiVo?  Signaturewhen you believe the only tool you have is a hammer. All problems look like nails. >>> Electricity from solar. >>> Propane from a small container. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > eat. The taxpayer picks up the bill. Unfortunately, the cells aren't > mobile, and they aren't allowed to have campfires or pets. Man, learn what you be talkin' about before you talk. Every brother got a ton a roaches all to his self. On Jul 16, 4:55 am, not the moderator <lavenderlo...@AZGOV.com/us> wrote: > edi...@netpath.net wrote: > >> Electricity from solar. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > out to eat. The taxpayer picks up the bill. Unfortunately, the cells > aren't mobile, and they aren't allowed to have campfires or pets. I think that there are shed kitsat the home depot that are just a bit bigger than this house. They don't cost 10k either. One could easily live in one of those if the climate allowed it. ---------------------------------- www.tawny-kitaen.com > On Jul 16, 4:55 am, not the moderator <lavenderlo...@AZGOV.com/us> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > bigger than this house. They don't cost 10k either. One could easily > live in one of those if the climate allowed it. Makes more sense to start with a shipping container and replace the metal doors with a decent glass patio door etc. >I think that there are shed kitsat the home depot that are just a bit >bigger than this house. They don't cost 10k either. One could easily >live in one of those if the climate allowed it. Those last five words are the problem. In most places, the climate won't allow it. Those sheds are not insulated and the ones I've seen are quite shabbily constructed. The houses at the Tumbleweed Tiny House Company are larger than the 84 sq ft house, and cost more than $10K, but are far better designed and constructed and well worth the price. I would buy the plans and do the construction myself, but not everyone is into that. Greg >>I think that there are shed kitsat the home depot that are just a bit >>bigger than this house. They don't cost 10k either. One could easily [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > constructed and well worth the price. I would buy the plans and do the > construction myself, but not everyone is into that. I can't believe this thread has dragged on this long. Did anyone look at the pictures? Her 'dream home' is a home-made camping trailer, nothing more. A used airstream trailer comes to mind as an off-the-shelf viable alternative. aem sends... >> I think that there are shed kitsat the home depot that are just a bit >> bigger than this house. They don't cost 10k either. One could easily >> live in one of those if the climate allowed it. > > Those last five words are the problem. In most places, > the climate won't allow it. Those sheds are not insulated Its easy to insulate them. > and the ones I've seen are quite shabbily constructed. Yeah, I'd start with a shipping container myself. > The houses at the Tumbleweed Tiny House Company are larger > than the 84 sq ft house, and cost more than $10K, but are far > better designed and constructed and well worth the price. Not compared with a shipping container they arent. You can get those already insulated, the ones that are refrigerated. > I would buy the plans and do the construction myself, but not everyone is into that. I'd use a shipping container myself, hell of a lot easier to do and much cheaper too. >>> I think that there are shed kitsat the home depot that are just a bit >>> bigger than this house. They don't cost 10k either. One could easily [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Its easy to insulate them. Opinions differ on that. >> and the ones I've seen are quite shabbily constructed. > >Yeah, I'd start with a shipping container myself. Too ugly. Not designed for living. >> The houses at the Tumbleweed Tiny House Company are larger >> than the 84 sq ft house, and cost more than $10K, but are far >> better designed and constructed and well worth the price. > >Not compared with a shipping container they arent. Yes, even compared to a shipping container, they are. >> I would buy the plans and do the construction myself, but not everyone is into that. > >I'd use a shipping container myself, hell of a lot easier to do and much cheaper too. Much harder to find an area that will allow them, too. We don't have many warehouse districts where I live. Greg > Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote >>> mail3277198@gorillaswithdirtyarmpits.com wrote >>>> I think that there are shed kitsat the home depot that are >>>> just a bit bigger than this house. They don't cost 10k either. >>>> One could easily live in one of those if the climate allowed it. >>> Those last five words are the problem. In most places, >>> the climate won't allow it. Those sheds are not insulated >> Its easy to insulate them. > Opinions differ on that. Its completely trivial to insulate them using rigid insulation board. >>> and the ones I've seen are quite shabbily constructed. >> Yeah, I'd start with a shipping container myself. > Too ugly. Not designed for living. True in spades of those sheds. >>> The houses at the Tumbleweed Tiny House Company are larger >>> than the 84 sq ft house, and cost more than $10K, but are far >>> better designed and constructed and well worth the price. >> Not compared with a shipping container they arent. > Yes, even compared to a shipping container, they are. Nope. Grossly over priced. >>> I would buy the plans and do the construction myself, but not everyone is into that. >> I'd use a shipping container myself, hell of a lot easier to do and much cheaper too. > Much harder to find an area that will allow them, too. Nope. > We don't have many warehouse districts where I live. You dont need those. >>> Its easy to insulate them. > >> Opinions differ on that. > >Its completely trivial to insulate them using rigid insulation board. OK, let me change my statement. It's not easy to insulate them WELL. Solid metal is a remarkably efficient thermal conductor. You'll be dealing with humidity from condensation, as well as the need for excessive insulation. >>>> and the ones I've seen are quite shabbily constructed. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >True in spades of those sheds. But that is irrelevant, since I was not advocating the sheds. >>>> The houses at the Tumbleweed Tiny House Company are larger >>>> than the 84 sq ft house, and cost more than $10K, but are far [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Nope. Grossly over priced. You just don't know what you're evaluating. Living in a rusty tin can can reduce your cognitive skills. >>>> I would buy the plans and do the construction myself, but not everyone is into that. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Nope. What a well-reasoned response. Try to put one of those rusting hulks inside the city limits of any self-respected community and you'll be more worried about the gunfire from the residents than than the zoning enforcement officer. Greg OK, let me change my statement. It's not easy to insulate them WELL. Solid metal is a remarkably efficient thermal conductor. You'll be dealing with humidity from condensation, as well as the need for excessive insulation.<<<<<<<<< With the price of steel being so high, I don't understand why there is a bunch of containers laying around. Even if the price wasn't high, I can't believe shipping something over here and then leaving the container here, is cheaper than shipping the empty container back. SignatureJerryD(upstateNY) > Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote >>>> Its easy to insulate them. >>> Opinions differ on that. >> Its completely trivial to insulate them using rigid insulation board. > OK, let me change my statement. It's not easy to insulate them WELL. Still wrong. > Solid metal is a remarkably efficient thermal conductor. Irrelevant to how easy it is to insulate them well. > You'll be dealing with humidity from condensation, Nope, there's plenty of insulation that doesnt care about that. > as well as the need for excessive insulation. Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you dont have a clue about the basics. Even you should have noticed that insulated shipping containers work fine. >>>>> and the ones I've seen are quite shabbily constructed. >>>> Yeah, I'd start with a shipping container myself. >>> Too ugly. Not designed for living. >> True in spades of those sheds. > But that is irrelevant, since I was not advocating the sheds. Its easy enough to make them look fine and to design them for living. >>>>> The houses at the Tumbleweed Tiny House Company are larger >>>>> than the 84 sq ft house, and cost more than $10K, but are far >>>>> better designed and constructed and well worth the price. >>>> Not compared with a shipping container they arent. >>> Yes, even compared to a shipping container, they are. >> Nope. Grossly over priced. > You just don't know what you're evaluating. Wrong, as always. > Living in a rusty tin can can reduce your cognitive skills. Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys. >>>>> I would buy the plans and do the construction >>>>> myself, but not everyone is into that. >>>> I'd use a shipping container myself, hell of a >>>> lot easier to do and much cheaper too. >>> Much harder to find an area that will allow them, too. >> Nope. > What a well-reasoned response. Try to put one of those > rusting hulks inside the city limits of any self-respected > community and you'll be more worried about the gunfire > from the residents than than the zoning enforcement officer. What matters is where the OP wants to put it. And they dont rust when treated properly. And when a shipping container isnt allowed, a trailer fixes that problem for a hell of a lot less than that stupid dolls house you are in favour of. 'After all, lots of Americans - especially men - for generations have CHOSEN to live for days at a time in small hunting cabins, fishing cabins, po-up vacation trailers, etc.' REPLY: True. And then theres prisoners who live in solitary confinement but they probably have 160 sq. feet . >> Electricity from solar. >> Propane from a small container. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com I am parked as I type, next to a young man who is living in a pickup camper removed from the pickup, which couldn't have more than 60 sq. ft. He picks up garbage (and other tasks) in an RV park here in North Pole, AK. He also has a dog (beautiful Husky). > Electricity from solar. > Propane from a small container. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > See the video at http://Muvy.org I saw it featured on a major media channel. While this is along the idea of something I would like to put on my land in TX, I do think 84sq ft is a bit on the small side for 1 person. I have messed around with floor plans for small cabins and came up with a 500sq ft floor that seemed livable. Actually I started with about 1000sq ft and worked my way down to about 500. Very simple rectangular design, 1 bed, 1 bath, kitchen, dining / living area. Tried to keep the design /green/ I.E. solar power, supplemental water via rain water harvesting, composting toilet, etc. etc. etc. I figured I could do the whole thing for about $10k using recycled stuff. > > Electricity from solar. > > Propane from a small container. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > etc. etc. I figured I could do the whole thing for about $10k using > recycled stuff. An Alternative: http://tinyurl.com/2corcd >>>Electricity from solar. >>>Propane from a small container. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > http://tinyurl.com/2corcd its kinda sad that people are reduced to that in "wealthy" lands >>>> Electricity from solar. >>>> Propane from a small container. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >> >> http://tinyurl.com/2corcd > its kinda sad that people are reduced to that in "wealthy" lands Nope, its just not feasible to do a one size fits all even in those. >>>>>Electricity from solar. >>>>>Propane from a small container. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Nope, its just not feasible to do a one size fits all even in those. American Indian TeePee , English settlers first homes? >>>>>> Electricity from solar. >>>>>> Propane from a small container. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >> > American Indian TeePee , English settlers first homes? Not too practical today. "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in news:5g05otF3f0mfsU1 @mid.individual.net: >> American Indian TeePee , English settlers first homes? > > Not too practical today. As practical as you want to be. Signature~Donna http://www.frugalsewing.com > American Indian TeePee , English settlers first homes? Teepees were used by American Plains Indians. English settlers were on the East coast and never saw a teepee. >>>>Electricity from solar. >>>>Propane from a small container. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >its kinda sad that people are reduced to that in "wealthy" lands I was just talking with the people in the neighboring site in our campground here in North Pole, Alaska. They mentioned they ran into a 60ish woman at a car dealership this afternoon who was just returning from the Arctic Ocean (she had dipped her feet into the Arctic Ocean). She lives in her car and sleeps when she wants along side the road. He said she was at the dealership (which sold her the car) asking for a cup of coffee and to use the restroom. She was retired military, bar tender and prison guard and was searching for "adventure"! To each her own. Dean >>>>>Electricity from solar. >>>>>Propane from a small container. [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > Dean Living in a car is not bad , living in a toilet cubicle tho ... it would get stenchy at times ... I wouldnt want that nor wish it on anyone but a politician Myal wrote:.... its kinda sad that people are reduced to that in "wealthy" lands<<< You have the wrong attitude. She probably WANTS to live that way. I guess you would think it would be better if the government took (stole) some money from a "rich' guy and then rented (forced) an appartment for/on this woman ? SignatureJerryD(upstateNY) > Myal wrote:.... its kinda sad that people are reduced to that in "wealthy" > lands<<< > > You have the wrong attitude. > She probably WANTS to live that way. That is a convienient line of thought > I guess you would think it would be better if the government took (stole) > some money from a "rich' guy and then rented (forced) an appartment for/on > this woman ? Why do you guys allways fuss about money and govt when it comes to matters of life and wellfare ? is it the end of your little world , work and nanny state ? Myal wrote: Why do you guys allways fuss about money and govt when it comes to matters of life and wellfare ? is it the end of your little world , work and nanny state ? This country is too much of a nanny state right now. I certainly don't want it to become any more of a nanny state. As soon as the country does everything for you, the country is near collapse. Europe is closer to a full nanny state (socialism) and look at their 20% unemployment and $6.00 per gallon gas prices. Socialism has failed every time it's tried. SignatureJerryD(upstateNY) > Myal wrote >> Why do you guys allways fuss about money and govt when it comes to matters of life and wellfare ? >> is it the end of your little world , work and nanny state ? > This country is too much of a nanny state right now. > I certainly don't want it to become any more of a nanny state. > As soon as the country does everything for you, the country is near collapse. Bet you cant list even a single country that has ever collapsed that way. > Europe is closer to a full nanny state (socialism) and look at their 20% unemployment There's f.ck all european countrys with a 20% unemployment rate. > and $6.00 per gallon gas prices. > Socialism has failed every time it's tried. Pig ignorant lie. >> Myal wrote >> As soon as the country does everything for you, the country is near collapse. > > Bet you cant list even a single country that has ever collapsed that way. Russia with many more struggling with the high cost of socialism. >> Socialism has failed every time it's tried. > Pig ignorant lie. Socialism is a failure. Most European socialist countries have absurdly high taxes that is crippling. Along with absurd income taxes they also pay incredible sales taxes (15%) and $7+ gas most of which is tax. In the UK they are having to reduce funding of free collage in order to pay for a cash strapped healthcare system. > Socialism is a failure. Most European socialist countries have > absurdly high taxes that is crippling. Along with absurd income taxes > they also pay incredible sales taxes (15%) and $7+ gas most of which > is tax. In the UK they are having to reduce funding of free collage > in order to pay for a cash strapped healthcare system. If the European countries are crippling under their tax burdens, any suggestions why why the Euro has gained 40+% in value vs. the US dollar over the past 6 years? > > Socialism is a failure. Most European socialist countries have > > absurdly high taxes that is crippling. Along with absurd income taxes [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > suggestions why why the Euro has gained 40+% in value vs. the US dollar > over the past 6 years? Likely because other countries are trying to balance their currency holdings. SignatureKeith > PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com says... >>> Socialism is a failure. Most European socialist countries have >>> absurdly high taxes that is crippling. Along with absurd income >>> taxes they also pay incredible sales taxes (15%) and $7+ gas most >>> of which is tax. In the UK they are having to reduce funding of >>> free collage in order to pay for a cash strapped healthcare system. >> If the European countries are crippling under their tax burdens, any >> suggestions why why the Euro has gained 40+% in value vs. the US >> dollar over the past 6 years? > Likely because other countries are trying to balance their currency holdings. Nope, its primarily due to the terminal stupidity of the immense amount of money the US is pissing against the wall in Iraq with that being funded by deficits and not out of taxation. The same thing happened during the Vietnam War. > Nope, its primarily due to the terminal stupidity of the immense > amount of money the US is pissing against the wall in Iraq with > that being funded by deficits and not out of taxation. Oh geez. Another political zealot thats clueless! The dollar trade value has far more to do with interest rates in the USA as well as the trade deficit and the fact that so many countries tie their currency to the $. > Rod Speed wrote >>> PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com says... >>>>> Socialism is a failure. Most European socialist countries have >>>>> absurdly high taxes that is crippling. Along with absurd income >>>>> taxes they also pay incredible sales taxes (15%) and $7+ gas most >>>>> of which is tax. In the UK they are having to reduce funding of >>>>> free collage in order to pay for a cash strapped healthcare system. >>>> If the European countries are crippling under their tax burdens, any >>>> suggestions why why the Euro has gained 40+% in value vs. the US >>>> dollar over the past 6 years? >>> Likely because other countries are trying to balance their currency holdings. >> Nope, its primarily due to the terminal stupidity of the immense >> amount of money the US is pissing against the wall in Iraq with >> that being funded by deficits and not out of taxation. > Oh geez. Another political zealot Thats just you projecting, child. > thats clueless! This from the political zealot that cant even manage to work out the basics, that ALL modern first world econonmys are a mixture of socialism and capitalism, including the US. Cant get any more clueless than that. > The dollar trade value has far more to do with interest rates in the USA Have fun explaining the recent sag in the USD on that basis. > as well as the trade deficit Have fun explaining the recent sag in the USD on that basis. > and the fact that so many countries tie their currency to the $. f.ck all that matter do except china and that doesnt explain why the USD has sagged with respect to the Euro anyway. > If the European countries are crippling under their tax > burdens, any suggestions why why the Euro has gained > 40+% in value vs. the US dollar over the past 6 years? Maybe because the Euro is backed in part by US greenbacks. Signature"For those who believe, no explanation is necessary. For those who do not, none will suffice." - Joseph Dunniger Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens, Georgia > clams casino <PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com> wrote >> If the European countries are crippling under their tax >> burdens, any suggestions why why the Euro has gained >> 40+% in value vs. the US dollar over the past 6 years? > Maybe because the Euro is backed in part by US greenbacks. No it isnt. I see where "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> very quickly qualified itself for my twit filter. This moron thinks Socialism is nifty - I hope he goes whereever that system has come to fruition. <plonk> Will Sill The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill > miles wrote >> Socialism is a failure. Most European socialist countries have >> absurdly high taxes that is crippling. Along with absurd income >> taxes they also pay incredible sales taxes (15%) and $7+ gas most of which is tax. In the UK >> they are having to reduce funding of free >> collage in order to pay for a cash strapped healthcare system. > If the European countries are crippling under their tax burdens, any suggestions why why the Euro > has gained 40+% in value vs. the US dollar over the past 6 years? Essentially because the US has been stupid enough to piss an immense amount of money against the wall in Iraq. The same effect was seen during the Vietnam War. > If the European countries are crippling under their tax burdens, any > suggestions why why the Euro has gained 40+% in value vs. the US dollar > over the past 6 years? I never said all European countries are crippling under their tax burdens. I said the UK with their socialism is and the UK has not adopted the Euro as its standard. Also the Euro is rather new. Your 40% dates back to the creation of the Euro. Since then more countries have adopted it and thus its total value in circulation has grown substantially. Another reason for the low $ vs. Euro is the large trade deficit and low interest rates in the US. A side effect of that is a weaker European stock market. > clams casino wrote: >>> miles <nope@nopers.com> wrote >>>> Socialism is a failure. Most European socialist countries have >>>> absurdly high taxes that is crippling. Along with absurd income >>>> taxes they also pay incredible sales taxes (15%) and $7+ gas most of which is tax. In the UK >>>> they are having to reduce funding of free collage in order to pay for a cash strapped >>>> healthcare system. >> If the European countries are crippling under their tax burdens, any >> suggestions why why the Euro has gained 40+% in value vs. the US >> dollar over the past 6 years? > I never said all European countries are crippling under their tax burdens. You clearly did however claim that most of them are. > I said the UK with their socialism is You actually said a hell of a lot more than just that. And carefully deleted that from the quoting. I have restored what you actually said. > and the UK has not adopted the Euro as its standard. You didnt actually say that, liar. > Also the Euro is rather new. Your 40% dates back to the creation of the Euro. Since then more > countries have adopted it and thus its total value in circulation has grown substantially. Irrelevant to the USD/Euro relativity. > Another reason for the low $ vs. Euro is the large trade deficit and low interest rates in the US. Pity about the USD/Yen sag that cant have been due to that. > A side effect of that is a weaker European stock market. Not a f.cking clue, as always. > Rod Speed wrote >>> As soon as the country does everything for you, the country is near collapse. >> Bet you cant list even a single country that has ever collapsed that way. > Russia Doesnt qualify. It went for half a century attempting to do that before it collapsed and it collapsed for other reasons, essentially because the political system doesnt work over the long haul and they couldnt keep up with the US on military spending. China certainly didnt collapse because they attempted that route. They eventually came to their senses and realised that capitalism just works a lot better. > with many more struggling with the high cost of socialism. Socialism aint communism. And I bet you cant actually list any countrys 'struggling with the high cost of socialism'. Plenty of those have even better real living standards than the US has and the US has plenty of socialism too, most obviously with public schools, medicare, medicade, social security etc etc etc. In fact ALL modern first world countrys are a mix of socialism and capitalism. And so are plenty of other places like china too. >>> Socialism has failed every time it's tried. >> Pig ignorant lie. > Socialism is a failure. Pig ignorant lie. > Most European socialist countries have absurdly high taxes that is crippling. Pig ignorant lie, only a few of them do. > Along with absurd income taxes they also pay incredible sales taxes (15%) and $7+ gas most of > which is tax. What matters is the total tax take and even HongKong had some socialism and very low taxes. > In the UK they are having to reduce funding of free collage in order to pay for a cash strapped > healthcare system. Pig ignorant lie. Pity about the extensive socialism in the US too. >> Rod Speed wrote > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Socialism aint communism. And I bet you cant actually list any countrys > 'struggling with the high cost of socialism'. See Norway: http://tinyurl.com/yopp5a -Raf SignatureMisifus- Rafael Seibert mailto:rafseibert@suddenlink.net blog: http://rafsrincon.blogspot.com/ Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rafiii home: http://www.rafandsioux.com >>> Rod Speed wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >> Socialism aint communism. And I bet you cant actually list any >> countrys 'struggling with the high cost of socialism'. > See Norway: http://tinyurl.com/yopp5a Doesnt qualify as struggling and there are plenty with more socialism than norway that are doing fine. And that is social WELFARE, not socialism, different matter entirely. > Doesnt qualify. It went for half a century attempting to do that before it collapsed > and it collapsed for other reasons lol, you seem to pick and choose what qualifies or doesn't based on your own personal views. Russia's attempt to provide everything for everyone was a failure. , essentially because the political system doesnt > work over the long haul and they couldnt keep up with the US on military spending. Yes it collapsed because it had no money from a broke system of trying to be everything to everyone. > 'struggling with the high cost of socialism'. Plenty of those have even better > real living standards than the US has and the US has plenty of socialism too, > most obviously with public schools, medicare, medicade, social security etc etc etc. The UK is struggling in providing its social programs. College and healthcare in the UK are running low in funding. Free college has already seen cutbacks in order to shift funds to a starved health care system. In the long run socialism can't work. Each year the demands on social programs increases faster than the ability to generate those funds through taxation. >> Most European socialist countries have absurdly high taxes that is crippling. > > Pig ignorant lie, only a few of them do. Only a few huh? Now thats a lie! Take a look at the tax rates of most socialist European countries or even Canada. >> In the UK they are having to reduce funding of free collage in order to pay for a cash strapped >> healthcare system. > > Pig ignorant lie. Truth bothers you huh? The UK's social system is cash strapped and thats no lie. > Rod Speed wrote >>> Rod Speed wrote >>>>> As soon as the country does everything for you, the country is near collapse. >>>> Bet you cant list even a single country that has ever collapsed that way. >>> Russia >> Doesnt qualify. It went for half a century attempting to do that before it collapsed and it >> collapsed for other reasons > lol, Village eejut imitations cut no mustard. > you seem to pick and choose what qualifies or doesn't based on your own personal views. We'll see... > Russia's attempt to provide everything for everyone was a failure. It worked reasonably well for a while, and they got a much better result during the Great Depression than most of the first world did. The fundamental thing that sank Russia was actually the cold war, not doing everything for the inhabitants of that country. >> essentially because the political system doesnt work over the long haul and they couldnt keep up >> with the US on military spending. > Yes it collapsed because it had no money from a broke system of trying to be everything to > everyone. Have fun explaining how come China did the same thing and didnt collapse. >>> with many more struggling with the high cost of socialism. >> Socialism aint communism. And I bet you cant actually list any countrys 'struggling with the high >> cost of socialism'. Plenty of those have even better real living standards than the US has Particularly for the dregs of their society. >> and the US has plenty of socialism too, most obviously with public schools, medicare, medicade, >> social security etc etc etc. > The UK is struggling in providing its social programs. Pig ignorant lie. They have chosen to not have the very high taxation levels that are seen in the worst of europe like Norway. > College and healthcare in the UK are running low in funding. Pig ignorant lie. > Free college has already seen cutbacks in order to shift funds to a starved health care system. Pig ignorant lie. And their schools work a hell of a lot better than the socialist schools in the US anyway. > In the long run socialism can't work. Easy to claim. > Each year the demands on social programs increases faster than the ability to generate those funds > through taxation. Fantasy with the basics like school education, where every single modern first world country isnt even self replacing on population when you take out immigration. The socialism in the Jap economy works fine. >>> Most European socialist countries have absurdly high taxes that is crippling. >> Pig ignorant lie, only a few of them do. > Only a few huh? Now thats a lie! Nope. > Take a look at the tax rates of most socialist European countries or even Canada. Been there, done that. It isnt crippling in england, or canada. It isnt even that much higher in canada when you allow for the different funding of health care costs. >>> In the UK they are having to reduce funding of free collage in order to pay for a cash strapped >>> healthcare system. >> Pig ignorant lie. > Truth bothers you huh? You wouldnt know what the truth was if it bit you on your lard arse. > The UK's social system is cash strapped and thats no lie. Its a pig ignorant lie and the only reason it doesnt have as much money as some would like is because they have chosen to not have the very high tax levels that some other european countrys like Norway have chosen to have. > Its a pig ignorant lie and the only reason it doesnt have as much money > as some would like is because they have chosen to not have the very high > tax levels that some other european countrys like Norway have chosen to have. The UK has 50%+ tax rates along with 15% VAT sales tax and $7+ gallon gas most of which is tax. Yes, I realize many socialist European countries have even more absurdly high rates but to say the tax rates in the UK isn't high is...well...absurd! > Rod Speed wrote >>>>> In the UK they are having to reduce funding of free collage in order to pay for a cash >>>>> strapped healthcare system. >>>> Pig ignorant lie. >>> Truth bothers you huh? >> You wouldnt know what the truth was if it bit you on your lard arse. >>> The UK's social system is cash strapped and thats no lie. >> Its a pig ignorant lie and the only reason it doesnt have as much money as some would like is >> because they have chosen to not have the very high tax levels that some other european countrys >> like Norway have chosen to have. > The UK has 50%+ tax rates Most dont pay anything like that tax rate. > along with 15% VAT sales tax and $7+ gallon gas most of which is tax. And you have to allow for the fact that thats paying for their health care, something an american has to pay for separately. And with the US you have to allow for the fact that its the property taxes that mostly are what funds the socialist school system too. > Yes, I realize many socialist European countries have even more absurdly high rates but to say the > tax rates in the UK isn't high is...well...absurd! Its the total tax take that matters, and england isnt that much higher than the US. Rod Speed wrote:....essentially because the political system doesn't work over the long haul and they (Russia) couldnt keep up with the US on military spending. The Democrats will never admit that fact. If they did, it would mean they would have to admit to the fact that Reagan caused Russia to collapse. I am not sure what the Democrats think cause the collapse of the USSR. Maybe global warming ? SignatureJerryD(upstateNY) > Rod Speed wrote >....essentially because the political system doesn't work over the long haul and they (Russia) >couldnt keep up with the US on military spending. > The Democrats will never admit that fact. Slick did. > If they did, it would mean they would have to admit to the fact that Reagan caused Russia to > collapse. It was more than just that. > I am not sure what the Democrats think cause the collapse of the USSR. > Maybe global warming ? Read Slick's memoirs. > Myal wrote: Why do you guys allways fuss about money and govt when it comes > to matters of life and wellfare ? is it the end of your little world , work [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > unemployment and $6.00 per gallon gas prices. > Socialism has failed every time it's tried. see , measured by money again .... its something that ya just cannot get past hey ? price of housing , price of health care , price of caring for old folk no longer wanted by society cos they are no longer able to turn a profitable $$ and pay their taxes .. actual human element just does not enter the equation , even the roads remain as death traps till the financial cost of the people being killed outwieghs the cost of repair or remaking the road safer . That folk die matters none , that folk live in shithouses matters none , as long as its cool to justify it with "they probably WANT to live there" and pointout that it would take $$ and effort to do anything about it , thus making it OK to do nothing ... Its cool , I understand , this is the land of the free , and this is the american way . Myal wrote:...nothing but doom and gloom I see you don't like anything about this country, not even the way we keep the roads. You are looking for perfection and that will never happen. It must be hell walking around in your shoes every day. SMILE.....we live in the best country in the world. SignatureJerryD(upstateNY) > Myal wrote:...nothing but doom and gloom > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > It must be hell walking around in your shoes every day. > SMILE.....we live in the best country in the world. Tell yourself that often enough and you will believe it I dont have a problem with your country as such , the leaders yeah , for sure they be scum , the racist bastards and xenophobic gibbering idiots , yeah , I got a problem with them , but the actual country you live in , nah , I hear its pretty good mostly its just the way the people treat each other .... > actual human element just does not enter the equation , even the roads > remain as death traps till the financial cost of the people being killed > outwieghs the cost of repair or remaking the road safer . That folk die > matters none , that folk live in shithouses matters none , as long as > its cool to justify it with "they probably WANT to live there" The alternative is what communism tries to solve. Reduce everyone down to the least common denominator. A society that just exists with only the basic essentials to survive. But hey, nobody has more than anyone else. No thanks. > Myal wrote >> actual human element just does not enter the equation , even the >> roads remain as death traps till the financial cost of the people >> being killed outwieghs the cost of repair or remaking the road safer >> . That folk die matters none , that folk live in shithouses matters >> none , as long as its cool to justify it with "they probably WANT to >> live there" > The alternative is what communism tries to solve. Reduce everyone down to the least common > denominator. Communism doesnt do that, most obviously with the apes at the top of the tree. > A society that just exists with only the basic essentials to survive. Mindlessly silly, no society works like that. > But hey, nobody has more than anyone else. Wrong again, the apes at the top clearly do. > No thanks. >> A society that just exists with only the basic essentials to survive. > Mindlessly silly, no society works like that. Exactly my point. Communism fails for that very reason. Have you been to Russia? I have. People had the basic essentials of living and little else. But people were fairly equal, few poor and few rich. Little incentive to strive towards anything as there were no rewards for ones hard work. Some has changed since I was there as more western capitalism has entered. > Rod Speed wrote >>> Myal wrote >>>> actual human element just does not enter the equation , even the >>>> roads remain as death traps till the financial cost of the people >>>> being killed outwieghs the cost of repair or remaking the road safer. That folk die matters >>>> none , that folk live in shithouses matters none, as long as its cool to justify it with "they >>>> probably WANT to live there" >>> The alternative is what communism tries to solve. Reduce everyone down to the least common >>> denominator. >> Communism doesnt do that, most obviously with the apes at the top of the tree. >>> A society that just exists with only the basic essentials to survive. >> Mindlessly silly, no society works like that. > Exactly my point. Nope. > Communism fails for that very reason. Have fun explaining why that didnt happen in China. > Have you been to Russia? I have. But you're so stupid that it didnt help. > People had the basic essentials of living and little else. Pig ignorant lie. > But people were fairly equal, few poor and few rich. Nothing like your original pig ignorant lie. > Little incentive to strive towards anything as there were no rewards for ones hard work. There was for the apprachiks. > Some has changed since I was there as more western capitalism has entered. Pity they f.cked that up completely. China didnt. >> I guess you would think it would be better if the government took >> (stole) some money from a "rich' guy and then rented (forced) an >> appartment for/on this woman ? > Why do you guys allways fuss about money and govt when it comes to > matters of life and wellfare ? Because it is *MY* money the governmentuses, and ever-increasing amounts of it. Given your "life and wellfare(sic)" criteria, I should NEVER fuss about money in ANY amount, which I have EARNED, that is arbitrarily redistributed to others. Don't hold your breath. > is it the end of your little world , work and nanny state ? Give 'em time. They're working toward that end. Signature<sigh> JR >>>I guess you would think it would be better if the government took >>>(stole) some money from a "rich' guy and then rented (forced) an [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Because it is *MY* money the governmentuses, and ever-increasing amounts of it. Its your patriotic DUTY to hand that money over to be spent by politicians on themselves , their careers , to buy votes and run propoganda campaigns , invade other countries .... and use a tiny % on welfare of folk who are down and out > Given your "life and wellfare(sic)" criteria, I should NEVER fuss about money > in ANY amount, which I have EARNED, that is arbitrarily redistributed to > others. Don't hold your breath. its your DUTy to earn it and hand it over to the politicians , what the politicians do withit is their business , do you know if your $ went to kill Iraqies or feed illegals or pay for a Bush night out shaking hands and pressing flesh ? its not your business to know , your leaders worry about it for you . >>is it the end of your little world , work and nanny state ? > > Give 'em time. They're working toward that end. This I agree with > Its your patriotic DUTY to hand that money over > to be spent by politicians on themselves , their > careers , to buy votes and run propoganda > campaigns , invade other countries .... and use a > tiny % on welfare of folk who are down and out I don't see paying taxes as a "patriotic duty", but it's an obligation that has to be met. Also, the US budget spends about $700 BILLION toward Health and Human Services. Hardly "tiny" in total dollars or percentage of the total budget. There's over $600 BILLION spent on Social Security benefits. Roughly $1.3 Billion out of a total of close to $2.8 Billion in expenditures. Not quite half, but not "tiny" by a long shot. Should they spend less elsewhere? Maybe so. But that's not the point you were trying to make. SignatureIf electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons? ---------------- Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens, Georgia >>Its your patriotic DUTY to hand that money over >>to be spent by politicians on themselves , their [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Should they spend less elsewhere? Maybe so. But that's not the point you > were trying to make. compared to military spending ... but you still totaly miss the point and are insisting on measuing human life in terms of $$ only Myal wrote: but you still totaly miss the point and are insisting on measuing human life in terms of $$ only And you have totally missed the point that the world will never change. Get use to it. SignatureJerryD(upstateNY) > Myal wrote: > but you still totaly miss the point and are insisting on measuing human life in terms of $$ only > And you have totally missed the point that the world will never change. It already has. Absolute monarchys have been flushed down the tubes of history. Communism too. We've worked out how to avoid full depressions now. > Get use to it. Nothing to get used to. > compared to military spending ... Military spending is estimated to be $527.5 billion - or roughly 19% of the 2.77 trillion budget Federal spending on education, training, employment, social services, health, medicine, income security, social security and veterans benefits and services comes to a whopping 1.787 trillion, or 64.5% of the budgeted outlays. > but you still totaly miss the point and are insisting > on measuing human life in terms of $$ only Amazingly you missed the news bulletin that pointed out that the deaths in Iraq over 4 years roughly equal the number of highway fatalities in one month - yes, just one - here in the US of A. So the question begs, why aren't we yanking people out of cars to save lives, if saving lives is what matters most. Does the life of a US service man or woman have greater value than the life of an Iraqi citizen? If so, please explain. If not, then explain why we should allow them to be killed off in sectarian violence. SignaturePaul A. Thomas, CPA Athens, Georgia > Why do you guys allways fuss about money and govt when it comes to > matters of life and wellfare ? > > is it the end of your little world , work and nanny state ? Why do you think the best way to help people is to make them dependent on welfare. All that leads to is oppression. Wins votes from those dependent though. >> Why do you guys allways fuss about money and govt when it comes to >> matters of life and wellfare ? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > on welfare. All that leads to is oppression. Wins votes from those > dependent though. you prove the point , your mind cannot cope with any concepts beyond work n welfare .... >> Why do you think the best way to help people is to make them dependent >> on welfare. All that leads to is oppression. Wins votes from those >> dependent though. > you prove the point , your mind cannot cope with any concepts beyond > work n welfare .... You prove my point by not answering the question. You seem to not accept the fact that it takes money to live. Most of us work for it. >>> Why do you think the best way to help people is to make them >>> dependent on welfare. All that leads to is oppression. Wins votes [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > You prove my point by not answering the question. when you replied to my post "is it the end of your little world , work and nanny state ? " by rattling about welfare ... you kinda lost any intrest for me , besides having proved you cannot concieve of anything besides work or welfare ... > You seem to not accept the fact that it takes money to live. Most of us > work for it. You totally miss the point , you absolutely totally miss the point , and are way past due time to shipped to the knackery / old folks home , your usefullness as a productive tax paying drone has come to an end , pleas make way for younger drones who have more to contribute than you . bye > are way past due time to shipped to the knackery / old folks home , your > usefullness as a productive tax paying drone has come to an end , pleas > make way for younger drones who have more to contribute than you . I'm still waiting for you to contribute something. Myal wrote:..pleas make way for younger drones who have more to contribute than you . miles wrote:....I'm still waiting for you to contribute something. Why do you have to keep talking to a TROLL ???? I have him blocked so I don't have to look at his nonsense but I STILL see his posts because YOU answer him. (like a nitwit) SignatureJerryD(upstateNY) > Why do you have to keep talking to a TROLL ???? > I have him blocked so I don't have to look at his nonsense but I STILL see > his posts because YOU answer him. (like a nitwit) Sigh...If it's not blocked by you then you just gotta read and reply huh? Try self control. Some peoples kids! >> are way past due time to shipped to the knackery / old folks home , >> your usefullness as a productive tax paying drone has come to an end , >> pleas make way for younger drones who have more to contribute than you . > > I'm still waiting for you to contribute something. you missed it ? > I saw it featured on a major media channel. While this is along the idea > of something I would like to put on my land in TX, I do think 84sq ft is [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > etc. etc. I figured I could do the whole thing for about $10k using > recycled stuff. I haven't found anything online about this, but on one of those shows about cool technology on one of the Discovery Channel channels, or maybe National Geographic, so something similar, they showed student houses at a university in Europe. They were tiny detached houses, each something like 110 sq ft. They made very good use of space, and seemed quite comfortable. There was a separate bathroom with a toilet and sink. The bathroom was waterproof and had a drain in the floor, so it also served as the shower (and that also made it easy to clean). The kitchen had, I seem to recall, a two burner stove, small fridge, and microwave. The beds folded into the wall. There were two of them, big enough that four people could sleep in the house, although two people would be more comfortable probably. There was a built-in flatscreen TV for entertainment. There was a table that could be used for dinning or as a work area, and it folded away when not in use. It seemed to work very well. There wasn't a lot of space total, but because of the way things folded away to reconfigure the space, there seemed to be plenty for whatever you needed at any given time. The beds could be used for seating, too, and with it configured for maximum seating, they showed a student having a party. He managed to get something like 9 guests in there, with everyone being reasonably comfortable. Signature--Tim Smith >> I saw it featured on a major media channel. While this is along the >> idea of something I would like to put on my land in TX, I do think [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > get something like 9 guests in there, with everyone being reasonably > comfortable. Yeah, saw that, but an RV or trailer makes a lot more sense because its easier to move too. > Yeah, saw that, but an RV or trailer makes a lot more sense because its easier to move too.- Hide quoted text - If ya don't mind all that plastic and the formaldahyde vapors... >>Yeah, saw that, but an RV or trailer makes a lot more sense because its easier to move too.- Hide quoted text - > > If ya don't mind all that plastic and the formaldahyde vapors... Get a few years old one that dont have the smells anymore ... if not avoiding the problem it certainly lessens it > Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote >> Yeah, saw that, but an RV or trailer makes a >> lot more sense because its easier to move too. > If ya don't mind all that plastic and the formaldahyde vapors... Those are trivially avoidable if you're obsessed about those. > > If ya don't mind all that plastic and the formaldahyde vapors... > > Those are trivially avoidable if you're obsessed about those. I do like to avoid known carcinogens like formaldahye vapors...if I can... > Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote >>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote >>>> Yeah, saw that, but an RV or trailer makes a >>>> lot more sense because its easier to move too. >>> If ya don't mind all that plastic and the formaldahyde vapors... >> Those are trivially avoidable if you're obsessed about those. > I do like to avoid known carcinogens like formaldahye vapors... What minimal amounts of formaldahye you get with RVs and trailers arent carcinogens and are trivially avoidable if you want to avoid them. > if I can... Corse you can, just like you can with a micro house too. > I saw it featured on a major media channel. While this is along the idea > of something I would like to put on my land in TX, I do think 84sq ft is > a bit on the small side for 1 person. How much square footage do college students choose to pay tens of thousands of dollars yearly for to live in dorms and go to college? And those students - usually - have a community restroom at one end of the hall, rather than any in their own room. That woman's situation sounds a lot less implausible when you think through the college-dorm example. > I have messed around with floor > plans for small cabi |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message