Discussion Forum

Discussion Forum

BIGGER IS BETTER?

| Posted in General Discussion on

*
What market drives the 3000 sg ft plus home to it’s level of popularity today? What can the average 3 person family do with this much space? Especially since both husband and wife work 40 plus hours a week to pay for it. What will this market look like after all of the boomers retire and downsize?

Replies

  1. Frenchy_Dampier | | #1

    *
    What makes people do what they do? Is that what you're asking? It's called human nature. When I was a kid a 16 ft. travel traller served as a home for me and my wife while I served in Vietnam. My first home was a 900 sq. ft. home on Lake MTKA. I'm now in the process of building a 5000 sq. ft. timberframe. In my neighborhood that's small....
    As for how wise it is to build a home when the babyboom will be nearing retirement age soon, well Some will sell, some will share their homes with the kids who move back home, and some (those who build in the wrong neighborhood) will lose money.
    Not as many as you apparently think, Remember our population is still growing and that means new homes will be needed into the forseeable future. It's not like POOF! we're retired and going to disappear off the face of the earth.

    1. Terry_Smiley | | #2

      *FrenchyConspicuous Consumption. Is that the answer? Is bigger better? Why? You didn't tell me why?

      1. Mike_Smith | | #3

        *terry.... don't you think some of this is fueled by the huge runup in the stockmarket in the '90's?not everyone rode the crash down... some pulled thier enormous profits out before the slide into the abyss..if you can't put that kind of money into the stockmarket.. or bonds... the only place left is real estate... which is usually a pretty safe place to put it... at least better than your old mattress...

        1. Terry_Smiley | | #4

          *MikeNo one got out of that market, and no one will escape the big house market either. They all think like you said "it's usually pretty safe". Look what it's been doing. Build'em big your neighbors are. Buy tech, don't get left behind.

          1. Cloud_Hidden | | #5

            *>No one got out of that marketSound pretty sure of yourself. Of course, you're wrong.Why does anyone even need to explain why they want a house the size they want? Just cause it don't pass your muster doesn't mean it's conspicuous consumption.Lincoln was asked how long a man's legs should be and he said long enough to reach the floor. Same with house size--large enough to serve the occupants' needs. Not your needs, their needs. How can you put yourself in a position to even question their needs?

          2. Mike_Smith | | #6

            *terry.. just for smiles.. think of this...a lot of 'em invested a mil. in '93... rode it to 10 mil...pulled 8 mil. out and watched the last two they let ride disappear down the rat hole...those are the ones building these houses...the rich get richer.... and the poor are always ready to help 'em get richer...

          3. Joe_Hennessey | | #7

            *Mike,iThe Rich get Richer.....by working their asses off.Just for smiles think of this. A lot of people started with nothing and got rich too. Are you pissed at the world because you didn't? Joe H

          4. Dick | | #8

            *I think the trend toward bigger houses started post-WW2 as the economic engines started to really recover for the first time since the late twenties. More money was available to the average family, so more was spent on things other than the bare neccesities. Consumption to and past rising income levels was learned and constantly reinforced by marketing over succeeding decades to the point where it is now considered an inalienable right regardless of need or any negative effects it creates.Will the economy of the world hold up well enough that the upcoming generation can afford those bigger houses? I guess we`ll find out. Its a little late to change the path that brought us here.

          5. Mark_H | | #9

            *In the late 1800s there was a boom time when huge homes were built. Great Victorian homes with 3rd floor attic quarters and large carrige houses out back. Most have been cut up into our 2 to 4 family inner city rental properties of today. I tell everyone that when the big crash comes, these neighborhoods of McMansions will be the apartment districts of tommorrow.

          6. Mike_Smith | | #10

            *joe... bite me.......i ain't even pissed at u.. why should i be?terry was askin about possible reasons for larger houses.. i was answering..and no... not all the rich get rich by working their ass off... hell, now take our president for example... hah, hah, hah...do you think the working poor don't work their ass off?...if you have a justification for two people living in a 10,000 sf house.. i'm all ears..and if you think american industry has a just distribution of profits to its workers and management.. i'd like to hear that one too...some ceo's earn every penny they get... some don't.. so who'w making the blanket statements here ?and puleeeeze don't gimme the green with envy speech...not me....tell me again how the family with 4 kids and three jobs doesn't have health insurance and that 's a good thing ....or 25 of our multinational corporations get tax rebates retroactive after they had already written them off .. and that would be because ?if you think you're part of the "eat all you can buffet"... more power to you....just remember , it's a small world.. and the gap between the "haves" and the "have nots" is getting bigger all the time...guess we'll leave that for our grandkids to straighten out

          7. FredB | | #11

            *Mike I've been trying to figure out why in other posts you have been so emotional about your viewpoints. You just haven't stated them for others to take or leave. You have argued that your point of view is the only correct one. Since we are only swapping ideas for mutual education I couldn't figure out why you were so argumentative.Now I get some idea of why you post the way you do. From this post I get the idea that you are jealous of those who have succeeded and have what you don't. Instead of saying: "Atta boy, glad you made it. Now have fun with it." you come up with some sourgrapes statements about how those who have made money ought to spend it.Now none of this may be accurate. But that is what your posts say. If that isn't what you mean then maybe you could try using different language.

          8. Mike_Smith | | #12

            *well, golly, fred... u can bite me too..<<>>.. yup , you got that right... how many times do i have to say it and how many ways?..... i got mine .. i'm happy and i'm a lucky guy.. but i don't wear blinders to the conditions in America.. or the world...seems like you do...as long as we're swapping ideas.. maybe you could answer the question..b tell me again how the family with 4 kids and three jobs doesn't have health insurance and that 's a good thing .... or 25 of our multinational corporations get tax rebates retroactive after they had already written them off .. and that would be because ?

          9. Dave_Richeson | | #13

            *Terry,I currently live in a 1050 sq. ft. house with a full basement. My new house plans are for 2400 sq. ft. with a full walk out basement.By the standards I have lived with for the past 31 years, the new house will be huge. Do I need that much space for three people? IMHO yes! I am tired of small rooms with no closet space, a kitchen with inadequate cabinates and counter space, and a litenany of other gripes. My wife and I had the new home designed for our way of living and to correct the problems we are currently uncomfortable with. We do not live an extravagent life style, so you might say this is our final splurg. It has nothing to do with the amount of money we make, but everything to do with fullfilling our dreams.Aside from that, see how much stuff you have in 30 years, and then tell me you don't want a bigger place.Dave ( a 1947 baby boomer)

          10. E_Pinkston | | #14

            *"tell me again how the family with 4 kids and three jobs doesn't have health insurance and that 's a good thing ...."Maybe they should have thought about how to support 4 kids without having "good" jobs before they had 4 kids. Our choices in life have consequences, if you can't afford kids maybe you shouldn't have them.

          11. Michael_Rimoldi | | #15

            *Terry, The house I'm building for my wife and I is 2,895 sq. ft. with a 1152 sq. ft. detached shopgarage. There are only two of us and it will likley stay that way??? I'll tell you what drives the needwant for a house that big for two people... WE HAVE TOO MUCH STUFF (JUNK) and never throw anything away!Mike

          12. Mike_Smith | | #16

            *e.pinkston... merry christmas you old scrooge..and merry christmas to the ceo with his $2 million salary and $3 million bonus.... and no health plan for his employees ...if he had no kids .. there still wouldn't be health insurance.. in the only super power left on earth... hah, hah, hah...if you don't see the irony in that ...

          13. Terry_Smiley | | #17

            *My original question still stands. Why is bigger, better. I'm not asking anyone to defend themselves, maybe I'm playing a little devils advocate. I'm wondering if this question get's asked often enough, and what the answer is. It is obviously a personal choice. Is it a case of needing 5000 square feet to be comfortable. Haven't any of you ever run into people wanting smaller, better built homes that have market value? They seem unable to find them? They seem to end up buying larger homes to hedge inflation. The smaller homes don't keep up. As for my earlier statement about no one getting out of the stock market unscathed. Does anyone here personally know anyone who did. I work for a lot of market players and none of them have said "wow I'm glad I got out when I did". Just my experience.Cloud, you're right. I apologize if I insulted anyone. I just think businessmen should understand their market.DickI like your economic appraisal, but what about the mental motivation.

          14. Theodora_D. | | #18

            *I live in 2000 square feet, and we could do with less if we had to, but we could also do with about 500 sq more. I am a serious craftsperson, as some of you are, and my studio takes up one large bedroom and could expand even more, if I were to decide to make it a money making deal. Now it is a hobby. My husband and I are both academics, so he, as a professor, has an in house study, and I share that as well. No kids, but if we had them the studio and study would go to the kids. We could live in a 2000 sq ft house that was reconfigured intelligently, very nicely.My pet peeve about the MacMansions is that the master suite often has a bathroom that is far larger than any of the bedrooms for the kids. Why a 5000 sq ft house and the kids bedroom is 10x12? I grew up in very spartan circumstances but in our 2700 sq ft house, my Dad made sure we 4 kids had room to build, play, craft, dream, experiment, race around, and learn. That was more important than curtains on the windows or AV equipment or expensive furniture or a luxurious bath. It's up to you if you can afford and desire the luxuries, but share some of the space with the kiddies!I also get a little worried sometime about the percentage of the world's mineral resources I use up as an individual. I'm not going to stop heating my house, but I'm also not going to heat more space than I realistically need.

          15. Michael_Rimoldi | | #19

            *Terry, Would it be that folks just want to show off? Many of the people I knew from school are now making six figure incomes (boy did I blow it! anyway...) and alot of them buy such homes just because its the thing to did when you are said attorney, computer guru, IT specilaist, etc. The gated community, the in-home theater, the works just because you can afford it, others at work have it and the realtor you know convinces you that it is an "investment" and when you move in 3-5 years due to a job relocation, it will resale easily and even be worth more then. I'm not convinced of some of these nor do I condone the ideas but its what I see from a lot of the folks I know.Mike

          16. Terry_Smiley | | #20

            *Mr RimoldiI'm sad to say I think you're right. I'm sad because there doesn't seem to be space in this market for the well built smaller home (less than 3000 sq ft). Why is that, and how can we turn it around. The people you describe, only want large, and in my experience will gladly sacrifice quality. Has anyone here had similar experiences?Terry

          17. Michael_Rimoldi | | #21

            *Terry, I don't think it will turn around easily especially with so many people making big money and the peer status being seen as so important. And by the way, Mr. Rimoldi is my dad...You can call me Mike. ;)Mike

          18. Peter_Shlagor | | #22

            *Terry,I'm a stockbroker and yes, I know of a number of people that got out - as well as a number that didn't. Those that got out know they were lucky. And only a fool would call those that didn't foolish. They all had their reasons and those reasons were all good. They made their choices and knew their choices had consequences.Hard work is only one factor in achieving success. Luck is another. Those that work hard and constantly look for opportunity seem to have a bit better luck. However the one major factor I've seen that seems to be common with those that have seen success is an optimistic point of view. They believe in themselves and what they can do. Those that I've known that struggle (and admittedly, out of business reasons, I avoid them) seem to blame others for their misfortune.I beleive if you're pissed at the world, you spend your time focusing on that concept rather than what you can do to make it better.As far as that boy with 3 jobs and no health insurance - Why in the world is he wasting his time working for someone that does not offer it? That guy has choices. He has made his to continue in that environment. Until he realizes that only he is responsible for the situation, it's tough to feel sorry. Even though we're in a recession, I beleive that anyone with some form of skill, that is careful about how he acts, looks, and speaks can land himself an opportunity. The only thing stopping him is his own outlook on life.I'm sure that the question is raised: Where are these jobs? Right in front of you. Take off the blinders. Ask friends and neighbors - even strangers. Then do more than what's expected.During the remodel on my house, I had some guy walk up off the street and hand me his resume. Told me he was looking for work as a trim carpenter. Just when I needed one. He did such good work that I ended up paying him $5 an hour more than he asked. And I thought I was the one that lucked out.

          19. Terry_Smiley | | #23

            *PeterYou're imput is greatly appreciated. I agree whole heartedly with your view on sucess and how to acheive it (always do more than what's expected). I also agree with your assessment of people caught in their own bad choices. With you're background can you give imput on what your colleagues look for in a home. Size or quality, if they could only chose one, which would it be? Mark H says these Mcmansions will be apartment, I say they won't stand long enough.

          20. Boss_Hog | | #24

            *> do you think the working poor don't work their ass off?...Most of the working poor I know are lazy and don't have the same idea of work that I do. > tell me again how the family with 4 kids and three jobs doesn't have health insuranceNever met anyone like that. I'm not sure they exist.

          21. Mike_Smith | | #25

            *peter... thanks for the insight... but what percentage of the working population are we talking about...<<<>>not everyone will have an optimistic viewpoint... and some of the working poor work very hard...i've been in business since '75.. and i've only seen the working poor going backwards..... as to the original question..aren't the stock market and the real estate market counter cyclical?when money flow out of the stock market , there is only one place for it to go.. real estate..when the market turns for the better, the real estate market cools off and the stock market heats up.. both cycles broken by the intermittent recessions...another reason for larger and more ornate homes is the decling availability of desireable building sites.. when house lots were $50K.. they could support 2500 sf homes.. now that house lots are $200k.. they are supporting 10,000 sf homes...go near waterfront resorts.. and watch the market...the mansions are being bought up and bulldozed and are replaced with homes 2 and 4 times the size of the original...another reason encouraging an increase in size is the stabilization of energy costs.. and the increase in energy conservation construction.. you can heat and cool larger homes for the same amount of money we spent on our boxes from the '70's.... i think the limiting factor is going to be service.. all of the homes being built will have to be serviced... the lawns have to be mowed.. the bathtub shower head fixed.. the pipes in the basement that are leaking have to be fixed...the people that fix them don't live in the communiites anymore.. they can't afford to....sooner or later the retired couple in the 10K sf house will just give up and buy a condo in town....because they can't get a plumber...course.. the condo association can .. cause they hired sonny as a consultant..anyways.. american industry and business has to solve the problem of how to pay their workers a living wage and keep them from becomming working wards of the state.. and that is not bitterness speaking .. jsut someone who has eyes to see...

          22. Mike_Smith | | #26

            *ron..i meet them everyday of my life....and i live in, work in, and grew up in .. a very wealthy community..they work hard... they make about $12/ hr..they don't own a home and never will... or they used to own a home and went thru a divorce..who do you think is building the homes your trusses go in?...most people get up in the morning , pull on their pants and go to work... they work very hard..some get well compensated for what they do..most don't .. that's the way it is...but what makes you think a country as great as we are , shouldn't be able to house and feed and care for our own citizens who want to work.. or just want to raise their families in safe surroundings....more people get killed in drive-by shootings in our cities every year than were killed in the WTC....how's that for terrorism ?you're a lucky man , ron.. and you worked hard for what you have....do you really think that the only problem those "other " people have is that they're lazy ?

          23. Dick | | #27

            *Terry, The mental motivation? - Think of the Bower Bird. The male spends an enormous amount of time constructing a bower - size does matter. Then it goes out and collects unusual objects, some bright colored, some shiny, some strange shaped - the more the better - and arranges these items in deliberate patterns within the bower. The point of this whole excercise is to announce to all the females that "I have good genes" when breeding time rolls around.Commerce has become the stage on which humans "display their genes", at least in developed society. Bringing home the meat has been replaced by bringing home the money. Conspicuous consumption replaces building bowers in announcing your breeding worth. You gotta have more stuff, and then you gotta have more space for keeping your stuff, so you might as well build space so you can store even more and on and on. Doesn`t matter if you need the stuff or even use it. Lots of stuff equals economic success equals good genes.It will never go away. If the world was wiped out except for a thousand people, the contest would just start all over again. It`s not the actual level that is important, its the relative levels. There is a small market I think for sensible, rational consumption, but it will never be more than a fringe, and it is an evolutionary blind channel.To all you jokers who think the poor don`t work as hard or harder than the rich, try looking beyond your own navels.

          24. Peter_Shlagor | | #28

            *Terry,There's a difference between my colleagues and my clients. I assume you are referring to my clients since that seems to be your target market.I'm a bit different. I'm a house freak. My house is my nest. It represents my refuge from the world as well as my satisfaction with my accomplishments. I could give a hoot whether my neighbor has a house like mine or not. I've chosen a house based upon it's location and how it can be adapted to my needs.There's just the two of us. And the place is (by definition) 2140 sq ft. In some areas it's too small, others a bit large. But I got 900K into it. I demand quality and detail. Tons of detail. I bet if you could list the things you wish your house could have, I've put in mine, but not useless things. I've done it for myself and my wife's convenience, not anyone else's opinion. I believe it's my ultimate "empty nester."As far as my clients and what they look for: That's why you see SIZE. Frankly, they have little concept of quality. Their definition of a nice house is a BIG house. Never mind function or craftsmenship or something that's a piece of art. I've come to recognize their definitions of nice is surface decorations such as trim, fabric, wallpaper and such. Eye candy. They couldn't tell you what the difference is between an inside miter vs a cope. As you read all of the posts that go into this web site, you'll notice the ones on quality seem to come from people involved with houses in ways more than just by living in them.I believe that's why a more successful builder reads his clients closely in an attempt to pick out that quality issue. He choses his clients rather than they chosing him. He probably also just does custom homes rather than tracts. And his clients don't compare bids by sq ft. They probably decide by who is more likely to meet their expectations. Which leads into a whole new concept of "realistic expectations."Mike, I gotta run right now. I'll get back to your questions later tonite.

          25. Scrapr_ | | #29

            *Mike, The working poor as you call them are movable. They start out at lower wages but move up through the pay scales. And by the way I don't think $12/hr is working poor. 2 jobs at $12/hr would be about 50K. But back to the moving masses. Last year when the economy was rolling everybody was crying about not being able to find employees. For people that have some smarts and get up this is their opportunity. They move up through the pay scales. And are replaced by new "working poor". And during the last recession 1980 (1990 was a pimple) I worked 3 jobs and went to school. the jobs are out there in all economies. Just may not be what you want to do at that time.

          26. IanDGilham_ | | #30

            *As you know, houses here in the UK are generally a lot smaller than yours -- we're building on bits of people's gardens, or reclaimed land.Just after the war, a building licence for a new house was almost impossible to obtain as so much of the material available was needed to repair/rebuild the bomb damage all over the country.The size of a new house was restricted to a maximum of 1,000 sq.ft. and my father designed a mansard, with 3 bedrooms, that came in at 986 sq.ft. That design turned out to be one of his best sellers.

          27. Michael_Rimoldi | | #31

            *Hey Dick, I like your Bower Bird analogy. I can relate that to some of the single folks my wife and I know. The gals want a man with money and the guys want a trophy bride. Superficial? YES! But thats the way folks are and homes are not an exception. Unfortunately, dare I say, I think its just an American phenomena. When we lived in Germany (on the economy) we met folks who would be deemed very successful (engineers and pilots for Lufthansa, IT people, IBM Europe employees, etc) but none owned their own home. Homes are just too expensive and many (most) rented apartments or townhouses. Even folks making six figures were content with renting and saving or investing their money. Our landlord was a 20+ year pilot with Lufthansa and he and his wife and two daughters lived in a small townhouse but they owned the townhouse we rented from them in another town. He told me it was an investment for one of his daughters to own somewhere down the road. A commendable way of family oriented thinking. I was impressed.Mike

          28. Phill_Giles | | #32

            *A lot of differernt thoughts going back and forth here: 1) Universal healthcare is pretty much standard in the "developed" world, except for the US. It is not without its problems (50% of our problems with it are that you don't have it and drain away some of our doctors and most of the other problems come from letting civil servants administer it instead of outsourcing it). Those of you who have never had a sick child and had to make a decision as to how much you could afford to make him well will never understand this, but universal healthcare is a necessity.2) 3000 sq ft is not that big; I live in a region where that's sort of the average. That's what middle middle-class folks in the far burbs live in. My neighbour 3 doors down is an autoworker, this not "rich" by any stretch of the imagination. One of the major driving forces for large homes is the fact they are an investment that escapes capital gains tax. In the US, you also get preferential treatment of mortgage interest and other expenses. If you want that money to go to other sectors of the economy, then lower your capital gains taxes. But that money does go into the economy.3) I have no answer for the violence. We live in an area of around 5M people and, because of drugs and gangs, we're saddly looking forward to a new record in murders this years, maybe over 80 if there's a spree over Christmas; which is way too many violent deaths.

          29. Frenchy_Dampier | | #33

            *Terry, You asked why I "need" 5000 sq.ft.? Fair question. I "need" 5000 sq.ft so I don't become a burdon on society. You see I expect to get old (someday). Rather than be shipped off to some old folks store house untill I die, I would like to die at home with my family and memories around me. To do that once I can no longer earn a comfortable living I would like to offer my children my home. To encourage them to move back home with their parents I need to give them enough space so they will feel comfortable and that it's a better deal to move back home with their parents then get some little apartment of their own. When this was the normal way of living the grandparents provided day care for their grandchildren as a means of "working" once their productive days were over. In their final years the children then took care of those who raised them. In return they inherited the family home and didn't need to bust their ass just to get a roof over their head. To make this all work I need to raise my children with love and respect. If I succeed I'll get my reward, if I fail I won't. Sorry, I kind of got side tracked here let me explain why 5000 sq.ft. Currently there are 5 people living here My wife and I and our two daughters plus the daughter of someone we know who is in a tough spot right now. When she is able to get on her feet there will be 4. The house will be divided up into two floors. We will have the first floor, the children the second. As you know they'll want enough space. If they get married and live with us, there has to be enough space so that sound won't carry and they can feel at ease. They will also need enough room to not feel cramped, and when they have children they will want those children to feel free to roam around without being constantly under foot. Thus it's possible that I may need to provide room for three families. I don't know, does 5000 sq.ft. still sound excessive?

          30. Jay_Honeycutt | | #34

            *Terry,Hate to sound harsh here, but who cares if bigger is better? If it is the house someone wants — their dream home — and they have the financial means to build it, it's their business.More importantly in a place like this, its GOOD business. Most of the folks on these pages make their living building. By these so-called "rich" people building homes, big homes in some cases, a certain percentage of their wealth is redistributed to contractors, subs, carpenters and the like - and trust me, those guys are as interested in eating dinner and paying their bills as anyone else.In addition, bankers are making a cut, lawyers are making a cut, cities are picking up tax money and the little old lady who works down at the county assessors office answering the phone still has a job.Houses are created in a vacuum. It's no secret that housing starts are a key indicator of economic activity - and that's because of the things I've mentioned above. Instead of $500,000 sitting in the stock of a soon-to-be-worthless tech company, that $500,000 has been put to work at the grass roots level.Why is bigger better? Because the homeowner wants it and can afford it.

          31. splintergroupie_ | | #35

            *I feel like Goldilocks. I lived for several months in a 600' apartment (this one's too small) before i moved into my present 1700' 4 BR house (this one's too big). The one-to-come has 2 spacious BR's, only 1440' feet, and feels just right. My Victorian was the right size for me (1200') and really tricked out, but the rooms were all wrong, set up for show (parlor, foyer, large landings) instead of comfort, usability, and flow. Sometimes the reason for building larger is that people don't know HOW to build small, well. Unable to fashion a Faberge' egg or the Gettysburg Address, they settle for Disneyland and USA-Today.

          32. Ken_Layfield | | #36

            *Terry, I think consumers are trend driven. Today the magazines concentrate on big homes and opulence. Tomorrow might be the "green house". As a slate roofer in your mind, you see one of your roof jobs as a statement to your skill as a craftsman. To other roofers, its just a paycheck. To the average homeowner, they couldn't tell the difference between the slate roof on lot 1 or your roof on lot 22 in Cherry Hills. As someone who has worked on a few "mansions", my reward is in my work and the smile on the customers face. Sure there are people that can do it faster and cheaper, but how many of them can stop by to an old clients home for coffee?

          33. Sgian_Dubh | | #37

            *i "Never met anyone like that. I'm not sure they exist."Ron, Perhaps you've not read/heard/seen any news put out in the last thirty years by that well known lot of myopics, the American news agencies via print/radio/television. You must be from another country. Sh*t, even I, a foreigner, think I know a bit about American poverty and the spotty medical coverage that is offered to American residents, but admittedly it's only via the BBC, via The Financial Times, via The London Times, via The Scotsman, via The Glasgow Herald, via USA Today, via The Houston Comical (sic), via The Wall Street Journal, via The Washington Post, via ABC, via NBC, via Fox, via CNN, via The Voice of America, via PBR, and via living in the US, .....and maybe I'm missing three or four sources of serious news and opinion here, but the British magazine, Private Eye, is a damn good rooter out of scum-bags too in its satirical way. How could you have possibly missed all those news reports, and are they b all lies? Slainte, RJ.

          34. Sgian_Dubh | | #38

            *Maybe they aren't that smart. Maybe they don't know how to buy a flunkey (rubber.) Maybe they don't know what a flunkey is for. Maybe they left school without graduating. Maybe they can't use a keyboard, and maybe they don't own a computer, and maybe there are lot of dumb f*cks kicking around the world, and maybe we're all- contributors here that is- too superciliously fuggin' educated and superior- and too stupid to understand overarching poverty- to even begin to comprehend real poverety, both financially, and intellectually? After all, we are nearly all rich enough to live in 'nice' homes, and to own computers that we know how to use to a greater or lesser extent. Slainte, RJ.

          35. Dave_Richeson | | #39

            *Nice rant Sgian! I couldn't agree more. I once worked with a man that was functionaly illiterate. At the time he was in his late fifties and had always worked at least two jobs, and somtimes three jobs. He managed to raise his family and send two of his three chidren to college before he died. He literally worked himself to death. I will always have more respect for his meager accomplishments than I ever will for the pompous a*s that says his attitude is what kept him from being succesfull. Working two or three minimum wage jobs at a time still won't make you middle class, and it won't give you much time for self improvement either.

          36. 4Lorn | | #40

            *1) Quantity, size, is a simple concept to grasp. This makes it easy to sell and if an error is made in choosing large over small it is easily excused or foisted upon the next simplton in resale.2) Quality, outside of real and meaningful professional standards, is both more intangible and contengent upon the specific user. Without help most people can't tell a quality job from shoddy workmanship. The uneven reveal around a window or a poorly wired outlet that would drive a craftsman nuts is largely a non-issue, unless pointed out, to most of the public. Selling quality, especially to people who are looking at the house as an investment or temporary housing, is much more difficult.3) Preference and cost and value. Discounting spec housing the customer chooses much of the design and pays for each feature. Most customers are at a loss when building. All wish to avoid getting ripped off and everbody wants to get be a known as a shewd negotiator. Without experience or some research they are out of thier depth. They know very little about quality and yet don't wish to seem weak. So arguing for the one point they understand, size, they demand more. The builder realizing that building twice as big does not double his costs is quick to agree after properly complimenting the client on thier hardball negotiating skills and mumbling about loosing money.3) The builder. For a custom home a good, honest builder will take pains explain the advantages of quality materials and work and will hire subs that do a quality job. He, or she, will discuss long term costs such as disability access, what happens when the kids move out and can you afford to live in the same house on a retirement income. Substantial long term savings can be had in terms of monthy costs, maintenence and adaptability. Most of these are relatively cheap, relative to the cost of the home or retrofitting later, to put in when the house is built. 4) Building technology. When inflation is discounted the cost of building, per square foot with similar features, has dropped while the cost of land has skyrocketed. Some of this saving, in the end,is eaten up with the features that have become common but didn't exsist not too long ago. Most homes prior to the 60s didn't have AC much less multiple phone and data lines.5) The basic inability, common to all consumer societies, to differentiate between what one needs and what one wants in terms of long term costs. Big is not always bad. Some people NEED the space for thier twice weekly 400 guest garden parties. Some people have visions of mass gatherings and resplendant adulation as envious guests enter thier mansion. Mostly it doesn't happen. Some end up rattling around a glorified aircraft hanger never quite sure why it just doesn't feel like home. Worse still are the empty nesters trapped by market costs, maintenence and property taxes with thier nest egg tied up in a house they can't afford but can't afford to sell.It comes down to a judgment call that is best handles by being well informed as to the options and lifetime costs involved. It is the customers call to make as they are the ones who will live with it. A good builder will make sure the customer doesn't navigate these shoals without a pilot to guide them.

          37. Boss_Hog | | #41

            *Sgian, I've heard all the news reports. And no, they're not all lies. But they are hyped, exagerated, and twisted around to make them sound as bad as possible to maximize ratings. I don't think the truth is particularly important to the media. What I said is based on my personal experiences, not on news reports. I stand by what I said.

          38. Boss_Hog | | #42

            *Mike -Anybody around here that's making $12 an hour isn't what I call "working poor". I was in that catagory just 3 or 4 years ago. I've worked hard to build a good work history and good reputation. I don't take job changes lightly. I take my work seriously. Maybe our difference of opinion lies in the definition ?When I think of "working poor", I think of the guy making low wages working at wal-mart or maybe pumping gas. He has a bad attitude, and thinks his employers are all trying to screw him. He changes jobs at the drop of a hat anytime he gets pissed off about something silly. Or he get fired because he doesn't think it's important to show up for work every day. He drinks a lot of his paycheck away. He won't be able to buy a house anytime soon, since he's sunk so much money into paying for his $10,000 4X4 truck that he doesn't need, and only bought to impress his friend. That describes most of the guys who work in the truss plants I've worked at. I have a hard time feeling sorry for them. Any one of them could change their attitude, and work themselves into better jobs over the course of several years. I make fairly good money now. But it took me 17 years of steady effort to get there.

          39. Ron_Teti | | #43

            *Ron,Try raisng a family on 12 bucks a hour in SoCal. The average apt rent last I heard was about 1200 bucks a month. just to get into it you nedd first and a security deposit. The security deposit usually equals last and some damage money. Since they cant charge 1st last and deposit they charge a huge deposit. either way they get you. i make well over the national average and due to the cost of living am scraping buy w/ 3 kids and a stay at home wife. Why does wifey stay at home cuz the child care killed us. It was cheaper for the wife to stay home then to pay child care. just another rant i'll bow out now...

          40. Terry_Smiley | | #44

            *Thank you all for your honest and intelligent input.I feel as though I've pried into some of your lives and I apologize.I've gotten great feedback to my question and here's how I view it now. Keep in mind these weren't my ideas when I started this post.Why bigger is better:Bigger gives a sense of success, comfort and worth. Some people do need it, others would feel insecure without it, and others are just trying to keep up.Developers would rather build bigger, as opposed to building higher quality, smaller homes because bigger maximizes profits.People would rather have bigger because it's a sure sign of their prestige. Quality is to hard for them to quantify.The bad things about bigger vs better:Waste of natural resources.Waste of energy resources.Lower demand for highly skilled craftsmen (making a decent wage).Negative impact of looking at a view consisting of a sea of beige clone houses.Possible negative impact to empty nesters who view their home as their retirement nest egg.Please add your thoughts to these list if you feel I've missed something.Thanks again for your input,Terry

          41. Stephen_Hazlett | | #45

            *Ithink americans to a large extent confuse wants with needs.Many feel that If they want something and can scratch together the down payment that they are thereby entitled to it.This thread has an amazing string of posts that illustrate this type of pompous and vaguely defensive sort of world view.Of course a lot of "Affording" these types of homes and attitudes really involves abandoning existing infrastructure while at the same time asking society to subsidize new infrastructure elsewhere.I would like to thank Dave Richeson,Sgian,Mike Smith and a few others for being able to look beyond their own self interests and also their willingness to speak out on behalf of others.Terry----if you are really interested try some research on a phenomonon I think is called "Neo-Traditional". I think it describes developements that are largely pedestrian friendly enclaves of smaller homes built with a variety of materials,textures,porches and floor plans with facades that are not dominated by overhead garage doors.schools,restaraunts,stores,fire protection services,libraries etc. are readily accessible. It's kind of a retro thing now,but it is a return to an older idea of "neighborhood".I live in an older version( built before they called it "Neotraditional" populated by a mix of factory workers,small business owners,accountants,engineers,police men,firemen,teachers,lawyers,tradesmen,nurses,and computer specialists.Most of us could afford to live in new developements of yuppie ghettoes and some do move on but I think the rest of us prefer the mix of a "village" feel.

          42. Phill_Giles | | #46

            *To think more on:In this area, the number of custom-built houses is a drop in the bucket compared to "tract" housing. Developers build houses (size, style, quality) to suit neighbourhoods, customer expectations, and local bylaws. Very few people would risk buying a house that is out of place (too small, too big, too expensive, etc.) because they'd lose money at the back end.With land costs and soft costs going through the roof and with new building techniques constantly lowering building costs; the incremental costs of labour and materials become decimals. So if a developer has 50' lots, why build 2000 sq ft houses when there's a ready market for 3000 sq ft ?It is my observation that a goodly proportion of the people in Mcjobs are there due to choices they have made. I don't know if they're 25% of the lowest rung or 90%; I also don't know if they even knew they were making those choices; but, they surely made them. And they were selfish choices as every one of them costs the rest of us money(lost markets, lower tax yield, lower GDP, lack of labour for skilled manufacturing, welfare, don't pay their own way for schools and services, negative balance of trade, high crime rate, high rate of violence).

          43. Mike_Smith | | #47

            *philllllllllll.... your last paragraph says more about your view of the world than the true economics of the situation... your world could not exist if the people filling your so-called McJobs were not there to supposrt you.. and your elitist viewpoints...why don't you come out of your gated community and have a conversation with the meat cutter in your supermarket...or the clerk in your liquor store...or the rug installer in your house.. even you could learn something...you're an educated idiot...IMHO... hah, hah, hah

          44. Dick | | #48

            *"And they were selfish choices as every one of them costs the rest of us money (lost markets, lower tax yield, lower GDP, lack of labour for skilled manufacturing, welfare, don't pay their own way for schools and services, negative balance of trade, high crime rate, high rate of violence)"Phill, tell that to the 52 year old middle management type who just got downsized and can only find a job at $11 per hour as a nighttime security guard or the 30 yr old postdoctoral student who is flipping burgers because the government isn`t funding Fisheries research anymore or the guy that just came through divorce court and finds that sixty percent of his earnings have to go to his ex and she gets the tax deductions on that money to boot.Try spending a little time observing the truth of the situation instead of swallowing that conservative line of crap. People take McJobs because thats what is available. There is a segment that like the free ride, but a far larger proportion would rather be functional, contributing members of society. There is a major structural change in the economy happening in that a smaller group is controlling more and more of the wealth, and a larger group is being forced to divide a smaller and smaller piece of the pie. You are fortunate to be included in the smaller group, but don`t blame the ills of society on that not so fortunate larger group.

          45. Peter_Shlagor | | #49

            *Mike,Back to address your earlier question regarding the stock market and real estate market being counter cyclical.In short, not really.First, the stock market is composed of far more than tech stocks that have crashed. Some sectors have done quite well over the past year or two. Even some performers within suspect sectors have done well. For some of my lucky clients, we moved into Lowes early in 2000. Some of my unlucky ones bought Home Depot. Lowes has more than doubled. HD is still under water.Many that moved out of growth stocks moved into interest rate sensitive ones - preferred stocks, utilities, banks, and Fannie Mae. That moved caused those sectors to swell. Some bonds worked too, but not all. Treasuries and munis worked, mid to low quality corporates did not. Supply and demand.Where much of the money went was into short term cash equivalents. Savings accounts, money markets, and short term CD's. Looking at a chart of those amounts over time can show a huge "money mountain" has been built - waiting to be redeployed elsewhere. Trillions of dollars are sitting there now at extremely low rates, getting impatient for better returns. Maybe times stink now, but just wait - HoooWEEE!!If your concept of cash moving from stocks to real estate where valid, we would have seen a much greater rise in home prices in that time. There's been some, but it's more of a function of lower borrowing costs which has outweighed a decline in general home purchasing demand. In my area, I can see the local newspaper tracking home prices by zip code vs sales volume. Prices are up slightly, but volume is moderately down.In summary, when money flows out of the stock market, there are a lot of places for it to go other than real estate. But note, the stock market is not a dollar measurement mechanism. These are funny dollars that show an exaggerated response to money flows. If at one given time company X is worth $200 Billion in market capitalization, in the open market those shareholders could never get out with that much because of supply and demand issues. The only way it could happen is if the company were taken over by another in an all cash transaction. Accordingly, the stock market does create money but also loses it. Real money is created through borrowing such as home mortgages. In these cases, when a bank lends out 7 dollars, it only needs one dollar in deposits to stand behind that loan. That's one reason the homebuilding industry is so important to our capitalist way of life. When one factors in the previously posted comments about how that homebuilders dollars are recycled through the economy coupled with the borrowings that occur at those stages, the effect this industry has is incredible.Therefore we may like to believe size is extravagent and shameful, but it offers a way of life and opportunity to those many working souls found downstream.

          46. Phill_Giles | | #50

            *Just out of curiosity, can you ever make a statement without including a personal attack ? They really don't add any weight to your incredibly stupid and inaccurate views. I do talk to the butcher, and the clerk in the liquor store (neither of those are minimum paying jobs by the way). Like most extreme socialists, you think that people on the lower rung are there because they are somehow oppressed by the middle class. They are there because they walked away from a free high-school education and never even tried to go to college: they'd rather hang-out, do drugs, play pool, join a gang, skip school, and when they hit 25 stand there mystified as to why they can't get a job as a computer programmer. Well it was their choice, and their's alone. The proof are all the immigrants who come with virtually nothing, work hard for 10 years, move up to a good neighbourhood, and send all their kids to medical or law school. And the trades are not low-paying jobs, skilled job are sitting empty, do you see a line up of your loafers asking for a position ?

          47. Luka_ | | #51

            *Ron, my friend...What kind of shampoo do you use ?

          48. E_Pinkston | | #52

            *I've got to agree with Phill on this. You definately can't make blanket statements about ALL people but people do make choices and they face the consequences. I think Phill's thoughts on immigrants is a valid point.Anyone one who comes to me looking for a job that is willing to truly work and follow some basic rules is going to make $10-12/hour AND receive health insurance. If they work hard and are willing to learn (especially outside of work), they will progress quickly into middle class. The people that don't show up, don't want to learn, always ask for advances, blow their money on beer and big trucks, won't last long.Again, I emphasis there are exceptions! Some people have been dealt an unbelievebly unfair hand and may have difficulty overcome that but for those who choose not to overcome it, I have little sympathy. I gladly support organizations through my church and community that help those that have been dealt that difficult hand, but I certainly don't think the government should take my money at gunpoint to squander in waste and then give what's left to undeserving individuals. Welfare does NOT help individuals in the long run, people do.Eric

          49. Sgian_Dubh | | #53

            *Ron, That would seem to imply that you take the news reports of the alleged recent spat with a certain chap based in Afghanistan with a big bucket of salt, and it's all done for ratings? I wonder what caused the countries of the West to allegedly gang up against this character who's existence is seemingly in doubt. I had no first hand experience of events in New York early in September, but so far I do believe that someone flew a couple of aeroplanes into the twin towers of the World Trade Centre on purpose, and that many people died as a result of it. I also believe that another plane was flown into the Pentagon, and one was downed somewhere in Pennsylvania, but there again,........? I think what I'm saying is that it's true that you can't trust all the news, but if you find enough sources- of an essentially free news media- that reiterate and repeat the initial report, then there is probably something of truth in the original story.As to the 'excluded,' wherever I've lived in the world, I've always been able to see with my own eyes those that are 'outside' normal society, and living in poverty and squalor. In the US, one example are the sad souls that live under freeway bridges. In the UK, France, New Zealand, etc., they cluster in closes, alleys, abandoned factories, etc., under old newspapers and cardboard, and in nearly all cases they seem to live mostly on cheap booze, cigarettes, and hand-outs of food and clothing from well meaning charitable organisations. Why these people lead such terribly desperate and hopeless lives I don't know, but they do. I almost didn't respond here because this diversionary discussion has absolutely nothing to do with the original topic, but, well, it's done now, and this is the end of it for me. Slainte, RJ.

          50. Phill_Giles | | #54

            *Dick, you can always find a b fewpeople who fit this unrealistic profile you're presenting. 52 year-old displaced middle managers with skills can get a new job in no time. And yes, there are some people who expected to ride the government gravy train and discovered their train no longer runs; now, with virtually every college and university in the G7 facing severe professor shortages, there's something drastically wrong with any young Phd who can't get a teaching position. And yes, there are lots of people who are now sitting on the outside looking in; why, because they never tried when it counted, and that's the point.

          51. Mike_Smith | | #55

            *this is for you , phill.. and ron S. and scrapr... and me.. we were born with a silver spoon.. into families that taught us some of the secrets of making a living in this world...as you and i are passing those secrets on to your families... and unless they get sidetracked by booze, drugs, unfortunate relationships or just plain old catastrophic bad luck.. they 'll probably do ok for themselves not every one was fortunate enough to get dealt a winning hand... at least the immigrants got a full hand... a two family , work ethic background .. parts of our societies (canada, GB, ozzie, us ) were not dealth the same hand...and wether the minimum sustining wage of where you live is $8.. or $12 is all irrelevant.. the disparity in economic distribution is harmful to our economies.... and promotes a revolving door of inner city and rural poor.. we are our brother's keeper.. and it is in our own best interests to break the cycle of poverty... if we don't start the solution.. our grandchildren will be living in high security compounds.. with the dispossesd assaulting the walls .. and our roman legions will not be able to stop them..so stick your head in the sand.. and pretend it's not really our problem... but it really does have more effect on us than any international terrorist....

          52. Michael_Rimoldi | | #56

            *Phill, I have to respectfully condition your statement that those faced with sudden job loss can find a new job in no time. I have a few friends who have lost jobs recently (one of them was a door lock rep...I never thought he would be cut due to the economy) and sure, they can find new jobs but they aren't always at the same amount of money nor working conditions. If you're used to living on an income of $44k a year and all of a sudden you're out of work and the only thing available is a $30k position its a hard pill to swallow both egotistically and financially. Anyone who has ever been laid off, unemployed or underemployed knows exactly what this is like. And the mere fact of holding a PhD does not guarantee the necessary qualifications to teach. And no personal attack from me Phill, I like ya!Mike

          53. Mike_Smith | | #57

            *peter...in the high income towns... the runnup in real estate prices has been fantastic...my own example is RI...after the local recession finallly cleared out of here about '93...houses were not much of a market... they had still not recovered to the levels of the mid-'80's...but some examples...water view victorians...'95 say..$270 K... now $1.3 mil..waterfront land ..undeveloped..."95 say $500K... now $5 mil.waterview houses...'95 say $400 K.. now $1.8 mil.. and here's the killer.. any one family home.. the worst shacks in town.. '95.. say $70 K.. now $230 to $250..and most of that move has been in the last two years...there was a piece in the realestate news about 18 months ago...the first multimillion dollar home sold in RI..... now they are legion...this is as hot as the mid -'80'sso....in the Shaker Heights... Newports... Greenwich , CT...Hamptons..i see it happening is it just supply & demand.. or is some of the impetus the money that came out of the market...not to mention the change in the tax laws for exclusion of capital gains

          54. Boss_Hog | | #58

            *Whatever the DW buys & sticks in the shower. Why ?

          55. L._Siders | | #59

            *Why do people mix politics with work?I hate politics and work. I just wanna goof off. Maybe thats why I am a Libertarian. I got tired of the scocialists and supply side folks shitting me.

          56. Phill_Giles | | #60

            *Silver spoon, what a crock ! Here's a real life example: my wife was born in the Manilla slums during WWII while her parents were refugees from China running/hiding from the Japanese (my father-in-law had a price on his head) with little more than the clothes on their backs; my mother-in-law died while my wife was still very young; in a time, place, and culture where girls didn't get educations, my wife put herself through university, although it took years; she has had meaningful work ever since.My head's not stuck in the sand, I enumerated many of the problems that the large and growing numbers of have-nots in the west bring to the rest of us; but, it should be obvious by now that only thing that's going to break the cycle is a swift kick in the butt. We've all reached down to give a hand up, as individuals and as a society, only to have that hand spat on. That's the real tragedy here, the dispossed will come assulting the walls when they could have been cheerfully admitted if only they wanted to come in.

          57. Boss_Hog | | #61

            *> That would seem to imply that you take the news reports of the alleged recent spat with a certain chap based in Afghanistan with a big bucket of salt, and it's all done for ratings?Nope. But it's certainly hyped to the max for ratings. You're trying to blow what I said way out of proportion.> there is probably something of truth in the original story.Not enough truth to suit me. > Why these people lead such terribly desperate and hopeless lives I don't know, but they do.Maybe it's because they're lazy, as I said. Or maybe they have bad attitudes, like I said. There certainly are exceptions, but I feel like most of them have made their own (poor)choices. They made their beds, and now they have to sleep in them.

          58. Phill_Giles | | #62

            *Well, I was "retired" early when my job was "consolidated" and there were lots of jobs available.And virtually anyone with a recent Phd can get an entry teaching position at a university; true, if you can't do the job, then it may not last long, but the opportunities are there. What you can't do is walk in and get a chair or a tenured posting.

          59. Phill_Giles | | #63

            *Not true, the people at the very bottom are there because they've been squeezed there by the next layer up - they are the real victims of the unmotivated masses. The very bottom are the people who just have less talent than the rest; they'd cheerfully take the McJobs and have the dignity of looking after themselves if it wasn't for all those dropouts filling those jobs that should have been in higher-paying jobs instead of those better jobs going off-shore. A reservoir of skilled workers would have generated its own economic opportunity.

          60. Phill_Giles | | #64

            *Why the United States, of all places, doesn't have universal healthcare is one of the great mysteries of the western world. I suspect it comes from the same attitude that creates "you can't make me go to school, you can't make learn, and you can't make me work hard; but, you have to feed me and give me enough welfare to buy my constitutionally guaranteed handgun".

          61. Michael_Rimoldi | | #65

            *Phill, I think a good healthcare system would be provided once you graduated from high school...Man, have we ever hijacked poor Terry's thread about building large size homes.Mike

          62. Mike_Smith | | #66

            *phillllllllllll... very impressive wife !..now.. the discussion was not about wives.. it was about YOU.. hah, hah, hah..bet you were a regular Horatio Alger.....no, wait.. yeah, Booker T. Washington.... up from slavery... hah, hah, hah... you are such a piece of work...

          63. Mike_Smith | | #67

            *mike, don't you think poor terry got just what he wanted ?

          64. Michael_Rimoldi | | #68

            *Mike Smith, OH, he got WAY more than he wanted!!!...and more than he asked for.Mike

          65. Luka_ | | #69

            *I just wonderd how you get all that sand out of your hair.b : )

          66. Terry_Smiley | | #70

            *b HIGHJACKED?Did I ask a political question? Poor who? Sometime I'll steal one of youse guys threads.Terry

          67. Dick | | #71

            *Phill, the worst kind of blindness is the voluntary kind."It is my observation that a goodly proportion of the people in Mcjobs are there due to choices they have made. I don't know if they're 25% of the lowest rung or 90%; I also don't know if they even knew they were making those choices; but, they surely made them. And they were selfish choices as every one of them costs the rest of us money (lost markets, lower tax yield, lower GDP, lack of labour for skilled manufacturing, welfare, don't pay their own way for schools and services, negative balance of trade, high crime rate, high rate of violence).""My head's not stuck in the sand, I enumerated many of the problems that the large and growing numbers of have-nots in the west bring to the rest of us; but, it should be obvious by now that only thing that's going to break the cycle is a swift kick in the butt. We've all reached down to give a hand up, as individuals and as a society, only to have that hand spat on."Do you even think once about what you post, or is it just stream of conciousness? What an incredible pair of statements!Are you actually blaming the poor for the problems in society? Maybe we should just line them up and shoot them so the rest of us don`t have to suffer any more.

          68. Luka_ | | #72

            *That would cost bullets and burial. Phillllll just wants them to disappear, and not bother him on his silver cloud any more.That is, until the next time that something costs him money, then all those people who just disappeared will still be to blame. How dare they just disappear and leave him to have to clean his own toilet ?The poor are themselves to blame for being poor. And they are to blame for everyone else's problems as well. Yup. Sounds logical to me. This whole world would be so much better if they would all get off their lazy asses and get rich too, so that there would be no poor people left to have/cause problems. What ? You mean you don't want to pay the rich carpenter 500 percent more than you paid him while he was poor ? What do you mean you don't want to pay 20 dollars for a hamburger at McDonalds so that all those people can get rich too ? C'mon, Philllllllll, we all just want to get rich too. We don't like causing all those saintly rich folk all those problems. We feels really bad about that. We'd all just like to be rich and spotless, and angelic like you.

          69. Boss_Hog | | #73

            *Maybe I generalized a bit too much. But I still stand by what I said fori the people I've dealt with overt the past 20 years in this area. Anyone in this town can work themselves out of the bottom of the food chain if they want to. You might have to start out flipping burgers, but you don't have to stay there. I started out with nothing but a high school diploma, and worked up from there. Got a job building trusses, and worked my way up to a management position. Took a hell of a long time, but I got it done. As always, there are exceptions. People with special needs, etc. But I believe they are a small minority.

          70. Boss_Hog | | #74

            *So does everyone who disagrees with you have their head stuck in the sand, or is it just me ???

          71. Joe_Hennessey | | #75

            *Phill, you come up with some of the dumbest s**t. What the hell does any of this have to do with the right to own a handgun? Is that another "Phill doesn't approve" item that we American should change to suit you? Joe H

          72. Luka_ | | #76

            *Ron,We all generalize a bit too much from time to time. Also, we all tend to get carried away occassionaly and may say things that, were we to take the time to think about them, we may not choose to say. You are no different from the rest of us. I think I know what kind of person you really are, and it was easy to remember that in my approach.To some extent I actualy agree with you. In that, there really and truly are people out there who are like you describe. But in my own very extensive personal experience, there are a whole helluva lot more people out there who are stuck in the situation they are in, through no real fault of their own. People who would give anything to 'succeed'. Who do work hard, and concientiously, and are taken advantage of. people who really don't know any better, etc. And to answer someone else before they jump in here, what kind of crap is it to blame them for simply not knowing any better ? Were you to blame for not knowing how to ride a bike before you even knew what a bike was ? Because you have not personaly met many people who are good people, concientious, hard working, intelligent, not drug addicts, alcoholics, or gamblers, etc... does not mean that in the real world, the ones you describe make up the majority. In my experience it takes a combination of luck, circumstances, and intelligence to get anywhere if you start from nowhere. What Mike said about silver spoon circumstances is true. While I don't like the term silver spoon either, because I believe that it is possible for some people to work up from the bottom, the concept is that those who are born intop circumstances of success, are able to learn how to achieve success themselves. Those who are born in abject circumstances have very little chance to learn what success is made of. To blame them for not knowing how to achieve success is disengenuous at best.It also takes very little to knock you back down again, once you do start to get somewhere.Take my own circumstances... I was born into a poverty that even if I explained it to you, and you tried your best to imagine it, you would never really be able to understand. Through my own work, perseverance, self-education, etc, I was climbing slowly but surely up out of that pit in much the same way that many are able to. Along came Manic-depression. That alone would be enough to ground most people. I dealt with it for many many years with no one the wiser around me. Not even my (now ex) wife. Intelligence, and belligerant determination got me through that one. Then I broke my back. Check out the spinal fusion thread on the main page for the x-rays. Then, I developed heart problems. Taken all together, I was not able to continue. The back and heart problems shortly magnified the Bi-polarism to the point where it was no longer something that I could even handle my own self, let alone hide from others.Now, am I to blame for beinf Bi-polar ? Am I to blame for breaking my back ? Or the heart problems ? Is it my own fault when I get agoraphobic and cannot go outside my own door, let alone to town, or god-forbid to a job ? Or have a panic attack somewhere, and have to drop whatever I am doing, and go find a place to hide and catch my breath ? You may be able to understand the circumstances that I have described as being circumstances that are beyond control, and that would hold me back from 'success'. But what you don't seem to understand is that for every one like me, there are hundreds more who are are born to poverty and/or dire circumstances, and not only never learn what it takes to 'succeed', they may never really learn that it is possible at all. There are many who are trying, who may actualy understand what it takes, and are doing the absolute best they can, but circumstances along the way keep falling against them, through no fault of their own. Add to that all those who do have success, and who are taking advantage of those who are still struggling. Add to that the fact that a lot of the time it takes having soething to begin with, in order to make something better of it. There are kazillions of reasons whay there are bazillions of people out there who are not rich or successful. To harp on a small percentage who are drug addicts, or are there because of their own shortcomings is bad enough. To lump everyone else in the world who is poor, into one big lump with the chaff, and to blame all their troubles on them themselves, is bool hockey. (To be polite.)Someone here described people who live under highway overpasses, in abandoned factories, and in train cars. I am one of those people. Througn my own intelligence, perseverance, ability to communicate, and the caring of those whom I have communicated with... I have managed to scrape together a better cardboard box than most, but it is still a cardboard box. One that could be taken away from me at any time, in a heartbeat, by the powers that be. Some think they can insult me by calling me whit trash, saying i live in a hovel, or a hut. How can they know that I am actualy proud that I have been able to fight back to the point of having something over my head that someone esle can call a hut ? How can they know what great public asses they are making of themselves when they choose to use that as an insult to me ?Simply put, I am making the best of my circumstances. I am still as perversely stubborn and determined not to be trod into the gravel of the train tracks as I ever was. I am intelligent enough to use this computer, and along the way I have made the sacrifices necessary to even have this computer and the internet connection in the first place. I have connected with a lot of people who care, who continue to give encouragement. I have just enough brain cells to figure out how to put one thing off and pay the next, so I can continue to hold on by my fingernails until next month. There are an awful lot of people who only know how to do one thing. There are people who have no idea what to do when something comes along and knocks them off of the only horse thay have ever known. People who are honorable. Who care about those around them. Yes, even those above them. People who do not want to be a problem to anyone else. They just want to carry their own weight and to do the right thing. I refuse to listen to those people be degraded and offended by those who want to blame all the problems of the world on them.

          73. Luka_ | | #77

            *ROFLOLIt's not a matter of disagreeing with me, my friend. Lots of people who disagree with me have their heads on a lot better than I do. And are a lot better aware of the world around them, than I am. To be accused of having your head in the sand, (at least if I am the one doing the accusing), means that you are not aware of things that are all around you. Whether by choice or by circumstance. But if I make the accusation, I am usualy of the opinion that it is by choice. And I didn't mean to attack you, either here or in my long post a bit further down the page now. b : )

          74. splintergroupie_ | | #78

            *Phill, i just read a study done in Montana on my state's homeless. Now think about that...Montana, winter, homeless... and i'll bet most of them don't ski.The greatest cause of homelessness among single adults, 46% of the total, was mental illness. Canadians with whom i've discussed the US health care system v. yours are usually surprised when they discover that the incredible level of health care here is available only to those with deep pockets to pay, that people like me can't afford health care that your poorest take for granted.The other 54% are families who most often cite losing a job as the reason for tucking the kiddies into their van seats for the night. (Not that there's anything wrong with mobile homes...) Don't you think a lot of those parents would rather visions of sugarplums were dancing in their heads instead of condensation dripping on them?But i also hear you on the "professional" poor; i'm surrounded by this statum of society where i live. But the issue is more complex than saying the Poor (all-inclusive) just need a swift kick in the butt to move up; if it were so, i'd let you plant your wingtips in my ass anyday! I also tend to think the apologists here for the Poor would be less charitable were one of their (non-mobile) homes to be used as an ATM by someone who thinks "heavy lifting" is a good thing.

          75. Mike_Smith | | #79

            *gee, splinty.. so .. which side are u on ?is there a working poor or isn't there ?come on .. you don't have to weasel this...

          76. Phill_Giles | | #80

            *Ah, then we both perhaps took it for granted we were being clearer than we thought - you're right, there is a small number who have no chance, and they deserve every bit of help we can give them; the rest just didn't have the right stuff.

          77. Phill_Giles | | #81

            *It's all part of the same attitude.

          78. splintergroupie_ | | #82

            *It gets even more confused, mikey! I was just thinking that in terms of leisure time and toys, my deadbeat neighbors look a lot better off than i do...so i've decided to go out and get me a case of Keystone while i fill out some of these-here assistance applications...Funnier still...i have four houses, but i think i qualify for food stamps.

          79. Phill_Giles | | #83

            *Carpenters poor ? We get $44/hour here - not terrific, but certainly not poor. The point, which you obviously can't (or won't see) is that most of the people who are flipping burgers could have done much better and they've taken those opportunities away from those who could only have aspired to those jobs. But this is typical of the whole losing attitude: anyone who suggests that the able get up and help themselves get flayed. You got a really bad deal out of life, well too bad that the lazy are sucking the system dry so that the amount of help you get is minimal.

          80. Mike_Smith | | #84

            *too bad, phillllllllllll... maybe your kids can come up with the solution..obviously it's not your problem...ever wonder what happened to the puritans... seems the next generation rejected their world view....

          81. Phill_Giles | | #85

            *But you obviously like it just the way it is.

          82. Joe_Hennessey | | #86

            *Phill. Yes,i Yourattitude. Joe H

          83. Luka_ | | #87

            *Phill, I was going to leave you alone. Picking on those who can't help themselves, and all that. But I have decided that you can just plain bite me.I am constantly amazed at how intelligent you can seem to be one instant and yet how totaly assininely stupid you can be the next. The point, which you obviously can't (or won't see)Look in the mirror. At least you probably have one of those. This is precisely my point. You are some kind of madam rosa, psychotic reader or something. You are seeing things that simply are not true. You sit there in your comfortable armchair, and presume to tell me about those people who are flipping burgers. How many people do you actualy KNOW, and talk to on a daily basis, who flip burgers ? I don't mean people that you talk to as you make your order. How many of those people do you live beside, go to social functions with, have over for dinner, or get invited to dinner with ? How many of those people have you let cry on your shoulder because their boss has fired them so they can hire someone else for a dollar an hour less ? How many of them have you let live under your roof for months because it took that long for them to get back on their feet, and earn enough money to pay first last and deposit on their own place again ? How many have you watched get shuffled from one job to the next because they are 'overqualified', and yet this is the only job available in the area ? How many people have you seen work three jobs to make ends meet, get dumped from one because someone cheaper could be gotten, then lose the other two because there was not enough money any more for the gas it takes to get to the jobs, after getting the medicine their daughter has to take every day to survive. Then they spend months trying to get a job anywhere doing anything, and can't because they have had too many jobs, or they are too old, or they are overqualified, or any one of a thousand other stupid little reasons.How long have you lived in poverty, and seen everyone around you living in the same poverty, going through the same thing as you are, trying to make something better of themselves and losing the battle through no fault of thier own ? You sit there in your smug little world and presume to know what is really happening to the normal people outside your gated community. Screw your opinion of whether I got a bad deal out of life. I do not need someone like you to tell me what kind of a 'deal' I got out of life, even while you are calling me scum. Screw you and your smug, opinionated, worthless fantasy of what real life is actualy like for the working poor. I would not presume to know so, without having lived amongst you, but I would be willing to bet that I could find a whole hell of a lot more lazy assholes on your side of the fence than on mine.I have been in line with these 'lazy' that you refer to. I do not hold any grudge whatever about the benefits that 90 percent of them are getting. Regardless of how many people are getting the benefits, someone like you will always be around screaming that the money should be used for something like making sure the local pool has enough chlorine, and the local golf course be green enough. Every time that you open your mouth and offer these ridiculous opinions of yours as 'facts' you take away all doubt in anyone's mind what a total idiot you are. I have already stated the fact that some people, a lot of people, are able to work their way up out of poverty. I know, because I have been there beside them. I have watched some succeed, and some fail. I know their life stories. I know their kid brother's nickname. I know who their sister has a crush on. I know what happened when their mom got fired from work because she refused the advances of the boss. I know what happened to their whole family when their proud papa lost his job because he broke his ankle and the boss decided they couldn't wait for it to heal.I have watched some succeed, and I have watched a lot more fail. And I can tell you from first hand experience that you are full of shit when you categorize everyone who has 'failed' as lazy, and there because of their own choices.You are a bright colored bird sitting on the top of a tree somewhere crowing about how great the world is, and telling everyone how those lowly ants down there are there because they refuse to fly. You are a blind man holding the tail of an elephant and telling the world that elephants are like snakes. You do not have the least bit of a clue about the truth in this subject, and yet you insist on continuing to make a total fool of yourself yelling about how you know the truth, and everyone else is wrong.Now shut up and go away, you bother me, boy.

          84. Phill_Giles | | #88

            *I know the "gated commmunity" slur is a way to try and put down anyone who actually worked hard for what they got. The people you hate because they've worked hard, but you sure want them to pay through the nose to support those who don't. I don't live in one (I can't recall ever seeing one here, lots in the US, but not here). And I know many people who live in poverty: in the Philippines, in China, in Malyasia, in Indonesia; where poverty is real, not the "gee, this free housing and free food isn't 3-star" poverty we have in NA.

          85. Ken_Layfield | | #89

            *Phil, I've watched you belittle our American neighbours during the WTC attack saying they deserved it. I've watched you knock down the poor, saying they deserve it. Tell me Phil what do you deserve? Certainly, not the time of day - Goodbye

          86. Luka_ | | #90

            *Phill, I don't hate them. Nor do I hate you. I pity you. You are a fool. You insist on continuing to dig yourself even further into the hole you have started. I do not hate anyone who has worked hard for what they have. I don't even hate those who have had it handed to them. I do not want anyone to pay through the nose to support anyone else. You are once again seeing that psychotic reader of yours. Leave me out of your ridiculous 'facts' fantasies from now on.I am finished with this discussion. Feel free to remain here and bury yourself further by throwing baseless accusations and factless facts after me.

          87. Phill_Giles | | #91

            *I never said they deserved the WTC attack, not ever. The question was asked: why did the terrorists hate them, and I, along with several others, tried to explain it to them. Paraphrasing Jack Nicolson's line in i A few Good Men",they couldn't handle the truth.

          88. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #92

            *Mike, you keep holding up the 5 million dollar CEO as a bad thing. You are looking at the glass half full.Every single person in America has the option to accept that 5 million dollar CEO job. There are no laws preventing them from reaching that goal. The people working for multi million dollar corps without health benefits are making a choice. Sometimes the hard choice is to not work for a particular company. I've made those hard choices in my lifetime. I sacrficed or made choices based on my own set of values. So do the workers for those corps that don't provide employer based health care benefits.Health care insurace is a commodity that is sold on the open market. I know many workers that don't have health benefits that don't spend the 200 to 600 per month for a policy. They spend that much on beer, cigarettes, weed, and other assorted "consumer" products. Everyone makes their own decision about what is important to them. Obviously health insurance is lower on their list than mine, or yours.I see no irony in a CEO taking advantage of the lack of initiative of the masses. Some of the masses wisely avoid these types of employers. Others don't. Thank goodness we live in the USA, the land of choice and freedom.blue

          89. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #93

            *Mike, I get the feeling that you feel sorry for the worker that earns $12 per hour because they can't afford a McMansion. I don't believe that every American should have a McMansion. I do believe that every American should be able to afford a house.I just looked at a very nice house that is offered for $28,000. It is out of the big city and in a small town in rural America. There are two brand new houses offered for 67K and 70k. The buyers will have to travel an hour to work, just like I do every day. Why are these houses still on the market if there is such a big need for them? The guy earning $12 can buy many, many homes within one hour of my house. If he works 80 hrs @ $12, he will be able to let his spouse stay home with the kids and have a modest existence. Modest existences are nice, don't you agree? You must agree, since you wan't the $5 million CEO to downgrade to that?!blue

          90. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #94

            *Mike R., I've got a German friend who also couldn't afford a house on a six figure income. That's why he is now living here in America! I don't see your ditty as commedable and impressive. I see the German way of life as miserable and depressing. I know we are heading that way but would love to stave it off as long as possible.blue

          91. Michael_Rimoldi | | #95

            *Blue, Well, the German way of house ownership may be miserable but many other things in their way of life are impressive. More family based time in regards to work (NOTHING operates on Sundays aside from trains). Maternity leave is far better than the US. Small items go on and on. I think the big thing is that a few folks strive to own homes but others have accepted the way it is for other benefits. One big thing is no urban sprawl. When you leave a big city in Germany, you are not crowded in by suburbia. Instead there are many biking, walking and nature trails which many of the German people seem to enjoy. I'm not saying its a good or bad way, just the way it is. I guess the German folks who don't like it move to America like your friend did? Sure owning a house is the American dream but its not the dream of alot of other countries. Don't even get me started about what I saw in Russia (homes and apartments a mile outside of Moscow with no running water A LOT OF HOMES!)Mike

          92. Mike_Smith | | #96

            *blue... $5mil.....how did he get it... ?lets see... downsized 3000 career tellers..yup , thta deserves a nice bonus.. ok , here's $3 mil...ceo's work hard..but that doesn't mean the new reality is superior to the old reality.. the new reality is the percs and salaries and bonuses go to the top... the reductions in staff and benefits and service to the customer go to the bottom... the net change in profits to the corporation & shareholder are zero..the expenses have just been moved from one end of the factory to the other...what is a reasonable expectation for a hardworking two income family in the US....until the '70's it was : health care,a modest house, transportation (public or private)a vacation with pay..and 7 to 9 paid holidays...what is it now?did some of those expenses get shifted from private industry to the government?....did the government pick up those expenses ? did the Fed. govt shift expense back to the states and municipalities?is there a growing disparity between the richest in our country.... and the poorest of b THEIR employees ? what causes this? is it government tax policies .. ie: is this just bottom line economics or are we as a society influencing the action?yesterday... the 23d homicide occurred in Providence..that's a small city...is that acceptable as a society? as long as the very wealthy can isolate themselves from the problems of their fellow citizens, then there will be no great effort to solve these things...the last time we paid any attention to the problems of the poor and made an effort to float all boats on a rising tide was the'60's.."oh, well.. at least we tried"... i know.. let's change the name of the game from the "war on poverty" .. to the "war on drugs".. and instead of section 8 housing we can build prisons..and create jobs by hiring guards..hah, hah, hah.....that oughta work....

          93. Boss_Hog | | #97

            *Blue, I gree with you for the most part. I don't blame the CEO of a company for taking a job that pays 5 mil a year. I blame the companies that pay that sort of salary. I think the companies could benifit more from investing that money back into the company. Like buying equipment that's more efficient for the workers. Or hiring more workers so their people aren't under so much strain. I'm no business expert, but I don't see the justicifation for that sort of salaries.

          94. Boss_Hog | | #98

            *Hey Blue - My understanding of the German economy is that's it's a very high standard of living. Everything's expensive. (Gas was $2.50 a gallon back when I was over there in 1983) Newlyweds often can't afford a car, or even an apartment. They often live with one set of parents or the other. But poverty as we know it is/was rare. No people living on the streets like we have here. But the german people (for the most part) seemed to like things that way. Does that seem to square with what your friend tells you about Germany?

          95. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #99

            *Dick, don't take this wrong-even though I'm not aggeeing with every thing you say, I'm not exactly taking Phil's side. He's actually making a valid point, but not protraying it in the best light.You are making the normal mistake of believing that there is a limit to wealth. Your fear of "...a smaller group is controlling more and more of the wealth..." indicates your beliefs. Even though the rich are getting richer, it doesn't mean that the poor are getting poorer, because the rich are getting richer. Wealth and money has no limits. There is no cap on rich people. You've cited a few examples of lifestyles that resulted in less than perfect financial situations: divorce, risky choices of employement (middle managers) coupled with a rat race spending mentality, accepting jobs that depend on fragile governmental subsidies (beware of taxpayer revolt), etc. All of these life decisions are individual choices made by the individual. Each has it's risks and rewards. Sometimes the rewards don't make sense, but that is the choice that each of us make in life. The opportunity is there for all of us to embrace. Like it or not, we are the masters of our own financial success or failure.If the $5 million dollar CEO position is filled, start your own! blue

          96. Boss_Hog | | #100

            *> ...growing disparity between the richest in our countryI know the media throws that around a lot, but I don't buy it. We've always had rich and poor. We've always had rich politicians, and homeless people. We've always had deadbeats and hard workers. I doin't see it changing much.

          97. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #101

            *Michael, I have a hard time feeling sorry for the 44K per year guy that is "forced" to accept 30k. If he had made better choices while he was earning 44k, he easily would have acquired a comfortable cushion that would allow him to live easily at the 30k level. The problem is that most of us live well beyond our means and rely on future earnings to sustain our fragile financial existence. We are the victims of our financial "success". Look at how the penniless immigrants survive here. They share housing, autos and probably everything to get ahead. The work, long hours at meager wages and hoard enough till they can upgrade. They "invest" in asset producing investments, instead of bloated consumer debts. The 44k guy walks around in overpriced designer jeans, and crys about his lot in life when he's "downsized". Why is he crying? Because he's going to have to start over in a "lessor" industry. He might have to ask those immigrants for a job!blue

          98. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #102

            *Luka, this post isn't about those in society that can't function. This is about the opportunities that exist in burger flipping.A few years ago, my wife was hankering to get out of the house. She really didn't "need" to work, but felt sowewhat useless because she didn't "contribute" money into our household. Well she landed a job at the local "eatery". It was called Wendy's. They sell burgers. She took a job as an "opener" because it started early and got her done by noon. She worked "part time". I could tell you a lot about the business, but I'll keep it simple. The entire industry is screaming for competent workers and every hardworking individual that takes a Wendy's job would easily earn themselves a manager's position if they applied themselves. The truth is that my wife saw lots of riff raff come and go, passing up a 50k opportunity day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day after day etc. My wife didn't want the responsibilities of a mangerial posistion because she already has a job-housewife and mother. She left that job 5 years ago and every bit of the same opportunity exists today. The only thing lacking is applicants that are willing to accept the repsonsibilites of the task.Incidently, the owner needed workers so despeately that he was willing to pay bus fare for inner city workers to bring them from Detroit to the suburbs. The bus stopped in the mall parking lot. The inner city workers didn't like the one hour commute that they had to endure on the bus. The suburban kids don't want to work. The suburban housewives don't want a career. These industries are loaded with opportuity. No one is taking it.blue

          99. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #103

            *Splinty, tell me more about you owning four houses and qualifying for food stamps. I'm confused...blue

          100. George_W._Carpenter | | #104

            *Joe? Mike's sitting on some real expensive real estate. He'd tell you, but... he's too modest.

          101. George_W._Carpenter | | #105

            *CH, one of the early participants to this forum worked at the Architecture Dept. of the U of Kansas... Lisa was constantly amazed at the Bigger IS Better mindset.Got $500K to build? Are you better with a 5000 SF house with Hollow-core doors and $8.00/yard carpet? Or would that money be better spent on quality materials and in a <3500 sf house?As a by-product, which house would have materials, which will result in a better long-term investment, yield a "healthier" house (less allergens/less aldehydes), and be esthetically pleasing yet durable and easy to maintain?Your legs may reach the ground... but what are you standing in?-GWC

          102. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #106

            *Mike, the issue of more family is a question of choice. Here in America, we can choose to work less, or more. We tend to choose more.The maternity leave is dictated by law. The employers are burdened with the cost and it stifles small businesses. I myself would have been hankrupt if I had to deal with many of the same type employer laws that the German small business owners deal with. Their "socialistic" business laws tend to squash the little guy in favor to bigger businesses.The results are there for you to see. Small apts are the norm for 100k workers.blue

          103. Bill_Hartmann | | #107

            *FWIWHome onwnership has stayed 63-64% from 1970 to 1995 except for 3 years it reached into the 65% range. Since 1996 is has increased to 67.5% with most of the increase in the last 2 years.http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/hvs/q301tab5.html

          104. Joe_Hennessey | | #108

            *And would he feel guilty about being rich if he sold it? To some evil rich person? Maybe he'd feel good because the Government would take a big chunk of the money away from him? Maybe it's property with some kind of rare bug on it and the Gov already has taken it away but Mike just doesn't know it yet? I know someone in that position. What he thought was going to be his retirement is instead a nesting ground for Gnat Catchers. That Evil Rich guy got what was coming to him, nobody is gonna buy his property at any price to build their shoddy McMansions. Joe H

          105. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #109

            *Ron, the CEO's compensation package is derived from the marketplace. Top CEO's are as valuable to the company as their compensation package. They manage the companies wisely, re-investing the money to provide both long term and short term benefits. The do buy equipment that's more efficient for the workers. Sometimes, the equipement eliminates the workers! Then, the CEO gets a bigger raise!All of this stuff is capitalist America at work. The mundane factory jobs are replaced by high tech jobs and the wealth of the middle class increases. But the naysaysers and those that only see the working poor complain. It's a no win situation.Without the ultra rich, there would be no middle class. We can go back to our peasant and king days, or continue in our overindulging, debt ridden capitalist society. Either way, it's not going to make everyone happy.The working poor are always welcome to join the working rich. We can lead them to water, but we cant make them drink. Opportunity is everywhere all across America. If someone's particular skill doesn't jive with the local economic trends, then they have to leave or accept their plight. At the very least, they are free to travel unrestricted and seek any employment or business opportunity anywhere in this great country (assuming it's legal). The choice is ours. blue

          106. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #110

            *Ron, yes, that seems to be the German way. They accept their standard of living because that's all they know and all they can get.(This is a repeat story that I've told here) My friend Wolfgang tells me that my little house on my little lake would be owned by only the ultra richest of the rich in Germany. He tells me that ordinary citizens wouldn't even be able to access the road on which I live. He sees this country as the epitomy of economic opportunity and views American workers as lazy, uneducated and wasteful of their opportunity.Incidently, he's not doing that well here even though he claims many skills. He is illegal and has a hard time earning legit money. blue

          107. JeffCall | | #111

            *A need is a want that your neighbor already has

          108. FredB | | #112

            *After all the bias swapping and server space swamping has anyone had their mind changed?

          109. Joe_Hennessey | | #113

            *Yes, I thought Phill was a jerk before. He has confirmed it. He's also apparently an unarmed rich guy waiting to be plucked by one of the low-life living under a bridge types. Mike is a Communist for sure,vacations in Russia. Must be a Rich Communist? Blue wants to be a greedy slum lord rich guy too. Splinty has decided to spend her food stamps on Keystone and stop working so hard to make a living. Next time I see a picture of her crawling around on the floor it'll be caused by the cheap beer, not sniffing varnish. Ron has Ostriches in his family tree I guess. Learned a lot here. Joe H

          110. Amy_Sw. | | #114

            *After slogging through all 113 messages, I was surprised that nobody mentioned the mortgage industry as a contributing factor to bigger homes. The fact is that appraisals are (mostly) based on square footage - they don't even enter the home to see if there is $8 carpet on the floor or if the cabinets are made of plastic. Those of us who are less educated about what makes a quality home take some of our cues from the money men - what is valuable to them is consequently more valuable to the home buyer. Furthermore, those of us who DO buy smaller homes are more likely to gravitate towards older, more established neighborhoods. Why buy a small home in a neighborhood with only 6 designs when you can buy a small home that is totally unique (and usually on a larger lot), has a tree or two, and where you don't have to pay the sewer hookup, the irrigation hookup, the gas hookup and other fixed costs for establishing a new residence? Incidently, in my area, those costs are the same no matter what size your home. Lastly, my home is small by Utah standards (it seems like there are an average 6 kids per household here), and I could easily figure out ways to burn up a couple 1,000 more square feet, starting with a bathroom big enough to have a linen closet, and closets in the bedroom big enough to hang my clothes in. Say, a library would be nice...

          111. Mike_Smith | | #115

            *damn, amy.... there you go changing the subject again.....

          112. Cloud_Hidden | | #116

            *George, I was trying to escape to the sidelines, but ya yanked me back in. Thanks a lot. :)>Got $500K to build?The problem with your example is that it's not complete. There are other choices. For example, one could choose to spend the money on a 5000 ft house with quality materials in an area with lower prices, thereby stretching the money farther. Or could do major parts of the work him/herself, again stretching through sweat equity. Under the "putting my money where my mouth is" category, I did both.>As a by-product, which house would have materials, etcI don't see how choice of materials relates to the size question. The opposite of "bigger is better" isn't "bigger is worse" or "smaller is better". They're entirely different concepts.Quality is better and size bears little relationship to quality (in houses). So the issue isn't size v quality--one issue is size and another issue is quality. The two don't automatically correlate.To be sure, I don't like the McMansions (DW and I called them "Southern Colonials" when looking), and chose to not build or buy one. So we built quality (by your list) in a unique design, but we also built big. We had reasons, and the reasons prove themselves to us daily. 22 years ago, smaller suited me better, so that's what I did. Funny thing, I'm using almost all of the same materials (just more of them!).This whole premise--including your U of K friend's reaction--is striking me as a bit inane, in the following sense: It's like picking up a book and saying it can't be good if it's long. Well, what makes a book good is plot, character development, and the fit be/t it's genre and the reader's interests--not the number of pages.Agree, disagree, other?Jim

          113. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #117

            *Amy, I was trying to get to that point about the mortgages. I was going to tag it on at the end if i ever get there. Since you brought it up...The ever increasing availability of mortgage money has helped to explode property values. More and more people are cashing in equity and taking advantage of easy jumbo mortgages. The bigger houses are a natural extension of this phenomenom. Bigger equity allows the purchase of bigger homes. If you are living in a small home, and feel cramped in any way, you naturally will explore the possibility of swapping your inflation adjusted equity for a larger portion of the American Dream. Ii makes sense to me. The builders build what buyers buy. Most buyers want bigger. Small homes don't sell well unless they are starter homes: no paper under the vinyl, $6 light fixtures, etc.Builders, which product do you want to provide? Speaking of mortgages, has their been any study regarding the explosion of credit, since the women of America won the right to have their income included in household income for credit purchases? Some of you you younger people might not realize that the 60's revolution included many economic, as well as political victories for women. Dual incomes were somewhat rare when I was a kid, and the ensuing economic development that followed women's rights issues no doubt are contributing to the larger homes that we see today.If you don't want these larger homes (I personally like them even though I live in a shoe box), blame the bra-burning women!blue

          114. Rich_Beckman | | #118

            *> blame the bra-burning women!Now we are very close to the thread title having a whole new meaning!Rich Beckman

          115. Roger_Dumas | | #119

            *Terry, have you gotten enough for your term paper yet?

          116. Roger_Dumas | | #120

            *Terry, to get back to your original question. My wife and I have no kids. The house we built happens to be 3200 sq ft. It has only two bedrooms (but we have a loft that can serve as a third) and three baths.But we didn't set out to design a 3200 sq ft house. We designed a house that had the features we really wanted and it just turned out that it had that many sq ft. So to answer your question from my perspective, bigger is only better when, for you, better just happens to be bigger.

          117. gary_gattis | | #121

            *My wife and I have one kid, planning another, and our house is about 4500 ft2. Big? Yes. Too big? Well, yes. BUT, It was built in 1900, we moved it into South Austin, and we are preserving a beautiful piece of history. 12 foot ceilings, long-leaf pine floors, incredible transoms and woodwork. It also will cost about half of what we can sell it for when we are finished. So we are living in a large house... should we feel guilty? I don't thinks so, but my wife still does. Her dad blames it on her liberal leanings.Everything about this house is large, the rooms are large, the halls are huge, I now have a garage and shop that I have always wanted.But hell, it came that way!

          118. Cloud_Hidden | | #122

            *>But we didn't set out to design a 3200 sq ft house. We designed a house that had the features we really wanted and it just turned out that it had that many sq ft.Absolutely identical logic here. We designed what we wanted, added up the ft, and it was what it was. Should we have limited ourselves to just what we needed? Woulda probably never moved out of Mom and Dad's house if that was the criterion. (Of course, their need was to have us move!) Who was it that said, "From each according to their abilities; to each according to their needs?" Oh yeah, I remember.

          119. L._Siders | | #123

            *Don't ya just hate it when people hate things? What? What did I just say? I'm a bad boy. I think we all should have free medical so someone that doesn't know me has the authority and knowhow to choose if I live or die. As you well know when a person is sick they don't have a clear mind and can't really think for themselves.When we are sick we can't be taking any emotional adventures by making choices. Besides what does a doctor or I know? Poor? There always been poor people (rich too). and there has always been a big difference between the rich and working people.. SO WHATS NEW? Unemployment during WW2 when jobs were very plentyful was at the 2% to 3% level. My 3 cents worth.... Now its your turn again.

          120. L._Siders | | #124

            *I want a BIG house too! With land and horses with NO TRESSPASSING signs.

          121. Steve_Zerby | | #125

            *Where do you get a horse that comes with a no tresspassing sign?;-)I'm not gonna touch this thread with a ten foot pole, but it sure is fun to read it.Steve

          122. Roger_Dumas | | #126

            *I've seen "caution horses" but I hadn't heard of ones with no tresspassing signs. In fact, it seems lately that every time I go for a drive I get stuck behind a trailer that says "CAUTION HORSES".

          123. Frenchy_Dampier | | #127

            *Children, children, children, You simply have to learn to play together nice! Try to moderate your position, try to understand where someone else is coming from and consider their feelings before you answer. For example one gentleman claimed that all underemployed and woorking poor just needed a swift kick to achieve. Another felt that it was all the fault of the few very wealthy (and greedy) people who if they really wanted could end suffering in America. Someone brought the Germans into the conversation and no one had anything nice to say about Mc Mansions. Try this approach, some people are lazy and some just have bad luck. Some very rich are money grubbing skinflints and some have the good of society as a whole as their ambition. There are those who's interest was served well when Guaranteed health care was shot down and their are those who will have to pay a very great price because of it. Homes can be well built no matter what size and they can also be poorly built no matter what size...... But it's all mote. This should be up on the tavern not here.....

          124. L._Siders | | #128

            *Sounds like a bunch of class envious people that are feeling sorry for themselves for working hard for a living.I think I will get pissy at everyone else because I work too hard. Then get envious of anyone that has a BIG home.... But hell! I'm rich!!!! What am I doing this for???? I ain't gonna be a 'WORKIN MAN' no more!!!!

          125. L._Siders | | #129

            *As Tom T. Hall sez "Life is about faster horses,older whiskey, younger women and more money."

          126. George_W._Carpenter | | #130

            *Jim, the majority of the market is "big" for a set cost. Thereby myexample. Worked on a house ($600K - 1/2 Acre) in Georgetown, MA (tony Cape Anne 'burb of Boston) which was built along the more for less principle. Grand kitchen... $300 stove, particle board cabinets with oak vinyl woodgrain sides, hollow core masonite doors, plastic bathtub... ad infinitum.Nice for the entire family to have individual bedrooms, and have "extra" room... however. It's McMansion building at it's most typical self.Not in any stretch "Fine" Homebuilding.-GWC

          127. splintergroupie_ | | #131

            *Write-offs, blue, and entirely legal. I get the same mileage deductions for my little Toyota truck as someone in a Cummins diesel. I get oodles of per diem for being on the road to craft fairs that you won't get if you work close to home. I can write off 51% of my house utilities/improvements because my shop is my walkout basement. Pretty much all my craft fair income goes back into deductible items, like tools and materials. Recreational costs are low (dancing, canoeing, etc.), so i don't need to make a lot of reportable income for toys. I can schedule art fairs where i'd like to vacation, so that's deductible. I tithe, but those donations are deductible, too.It didn't hurt that the housing market in Missoula went nuclear after i bought the first house for $33.5K--it's worth 4X that now, and i put another cottage on the property to rent out as well. I've also been willing to live in some real dumps while renovating them, and learned to do 95% of the work myself, so i "make" 50 bucks/hour (probably more where you are) tax-free when i run a circuit or plumb a bathroom, legal here if you live in the house for a year after the work is inspected. And when i start to sell my way back out of the houses for my retirement income, i won't pay any capital gains taxes if the laws remain the same for the next 4-5 years. I've had a couple years where i had to claim money i didn't make in order not to come out in the red (high medical deductions those years), because i didn't want the IRS to red-flag me. I feel sheepish and keep my mouth shut when i hear my waitress friend tell me what she has to give the gov't...painful.

          128. Cloud_Hidden | | #132

            *>Worked on a house ($600K - 1/2 Acre) ... Grand kitchen... $300 stove, particle board cabinets with oak vinyl woodgrain sides, hollow core masonite doors, plastic bathtub... ad infinitum.YUCK. I'd guess that most here would agree that this don't seem so fine. Maybe this comes from consumers who confuse size with quality. Maybe they wouldn't recognize quality in any size. An alternative explanation is what I see around here--a lot of execs are transferred in and out. They want a house that's commensurate with their executive stature, thus dictating certain developments and size/cost parameters. They're only gonna be there for a coupla years before moving on, so there's no time to build custom or be concerned with issues of fine homebuilding. They get to pick from what's avail, and thus the kind of market you describe. That's a really different breed though than the houses my builder friends talk about, which, though big, also include a lot of fine craftsmanship.Cheers, Jim

          129. Peter_Shlagor | | #133

            *Getting back to Terry's original question....I beleive Amy touched on the real problem. But from my experience, it's a bit better focused by examining one factor in the mortgage process - the Appraisal.The Appraisal governs the entire process as you all are aware. And I'm sure you are all aware of the subjectiveness of the process.We've all been benefactors of favorable appraisals. Either when we wish to refinance or sell. However, I dare say that those few of us that have been victims of unfavorable appraisals lie in the group that focus upon Quality as opposed to Quanitity.I'm sure that there are many compentent appraisers. But those not-so-few I take issue with seem to have a commonality in their methods (training) that completely discounts quality. Oh they say they've included upgrades, but when it comes to the bottom line, it's the comps. Comps based on sq footage. Because they NEVER have gone inside the comp to accurately judge. They further say it's based upon supply and demand and how long it takes to sell a home under such and such circumstances. This simply factors into the equation the number of people that cannot judge quality vs those that can. Again, by those that have not done a side by side comparison of Quality (buyers, sellers, agents as well as appraisers). And again, many of these appraisers (especially in hot markets) fail to take the time because they don't wish to be bothered by the extra work without extra compensation.This problem further depends upon one's point of view - either who's selling or who's buying. One poster mentioned the executives on the move as a contributing factor. He's quite right. If one needs an accurate appraisal for a corporate buyout, he gets the shaft as upgrades, craftsmanship and style have no value. If on the other hand he wishes to buy a piece of eye candy, his purchase offer becomes the gold standard.Normally I wish to be noncritical of others. I lose that ability when discussing appraisers. Quality vs Quantity is ultimately best decided by the party living in the house. Other opinions are simply noise that needs to be factored out.

          130. Mike_Smith | | #134

            *so, peter, who does a better job at their respective trades... the home appraiser..or the stock analyst?..hah, hah, hah...seriously though.. don't you think a concensus of appraisers would be closer to the mark of what the buyer will pay.. and i know a lot of it is the chicken and the egg..

          131. Peter_Shlagor | | #135

            *Well, Mike, in my case I had a nice spread on 10 acres when the wife got transferred. Her relocation deal offered to buy the place if it hadn't sold after 3 months. The terms were for the averaged appraised value after two separate appraisals - if the appraisals were within 10%. If not, another would be done and then the two closest would be averaged.Now this place was just completely updated. All new paint inside and out. New DHW heater and geothermal system. New well. New windows. On and On. I had nothing to apologize for. It was one of the nicest places in the township.I had it offered at 339 late in the summer. The slow action at that time called for the appraisals. The first came in at 330. The second at 270. Since it was outside the 10%, the third was called. This guy I walked through pointing out the extras and he said, "I realize what you've done. I'm building now and doing similar extras." I thought now here's a guy that understands. He came back at 285.A month later it was sold at 330 to a guy to this day believes he stole it.The problem with the appraisals were the comps. The guys didn't look very far. And when they did, they stretched the imagination to make them comps. When presented with more accurate comps, they rejected them outright without reason. Only the one that originally came in at 330 used the more appropriate comparisons.It was an interesting experience in retrospect. Although several of the appraisals used the same comps, their means of adjusting for the differences was night and day.Yes, your humor of who would be more accurate does have a point, but mine is that when it comes to recognizing the quality in home value, there is no one better than the homeowner him/herself.

          132. Roger_Dumas | | #136

            *Peter,I've had somewhat similar experiences. We refinanced our previous house a couple of times after major improvements. The guys who did the appraisals for the bank used comps that were the same size but lower quality and came in lower than we expected. When we sold the house, the realtor who did the fair market appraisal used properties that were a lot more comparable. Part of it might be whom the appraiser actually represents. The bank wants to be conservative (i.e., low), the realtor wants to be on the optimistic side of realistic (i.e., commission scales with selling price but they don't make anything if it doesn't sell because it's overpriced). Bottom line is that there are a few fuzzy subjective "quality" assessments in the appraisals (quality of materials, outside condition, interior condition) that's lets the appraiser swing the numbers either way. I assume your wife's company paid the appraisers, eh?

          133. Frenchy_Dampier | | #137

            *Peter, I've had the oposite result with appraisels. My home is dogship. the poorest DIY piece of ship on the planet. Bouncy floors, cheap covered by plastic, cardboard siding, well figure out the crappiest way to convert a cabin into a big house and that's this house. I bought it as a tear down, but since it's on a lake surrounded by expensive homes it's worth a ton actually 750 tons (I paid 107 for it...) I'm currently building a very nice timberframe on the site. Black Walnut/ white Oak etc. I am overbuilding to the max. oversized timbers much closer than needed, copper flashing 18 inch thick walls stainless steel fasteners, well you get the drift. According to the appraiser who looked at an exact scale (1in.=1ft.) model of the home I would get an upgrade because of the better trim level and I would get credit for the increased sq.footage. Nothing for quality. It doesn't matter because I have only a very small mortage, but I could see someone trying to convince a banker that because it's built to last 1000 years that it's somehow worth more.

          134. Phill_Giles | | #138

            *Around here we get two different kinds of appraisals: market appraisals (what it's worth to sell) and insurance appraisals (what it would cost to repair/rebuild). A market appraisal is also driven by circumstances: an empty home, power of sale, or forced sale almost always significantly lowers the offering prices unless the market is really hot. An appraisal for a mortgage is based on what the lending institution can sell it for as a power of sale at any time during the term of the mortgage and has to take into account long-term market trends and risks (e.g. if it's a very hot market, the value is bound to take a dip now and then).

          135. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #139

            *Your my kind of player Splinty! Now head on down to the office and pick up them food stamps before they run out!blue

          136. splintergroupie_ | | #140

            *i pick up them food stamps before they run out!The gubmint and i have a deal, blue: i don't give them nuttin' and they don't give me nuttin'...pretty un-American, isn't it?

          137. Frenchy_Dampier | | #141

            *hey Blue, See that's the trouble with us liberals, We want a safety net for those who really need it but work very hard to avoid using it ourselves.

          138. Randy_Rogers | | #142

            *From long ago economics class the answer is "Conspicuous Consumption" or "Hey, mine is bigger than yours." For good explanation on those attitudes I recommend reading "The Millionaire Next Door". Lesson: vast majority of millionaires are unrecognizable based on what they drive, wear, or live.

          139. Greg_Warren | | #143

            *I think people that buy homes that are larger than they need is because they can afford them and they happen to like nice things around them. It brings them pleasure to come home to after a long(or short)day. I think people stay home alot more these days as well. We are getting older as a society, and home is where we want to be. I am buying a 3750 sf home with a 5 car garage on 2 1/2 acres to be completed in March. It has four bedrooms, five baths. A master bedroom for my wife and I, a second bedroom for my office, a third bedroom for my daughter, and a fourth for a guest room. My Taylor-Made 320cc driver, three and five woods cost me $1200.00. I could have as much fun with a knock off, but I like many people with disposable income like nice, high quality things. Clients that hire me do so because they want something really nice to appreciate. It is just human nature. GW

          140. blue_eyed_devil_ | | #144

            *Excellent Greg! You've worked hard, got lucky, or made your luck and you deserve whatever you want!blue

          141. rez | | #146

            Ol' blue always seemed to be able to get the last word in.

  2. Terry_Smiley | | #145

    *
    What market drives the 3000 sg ft plus home to it's level of popularity today? What can the average 3 person family do with this much space? Especially since both husband and wife work 40 plus hours a week to pay for it. What will this market look like after all of the boomers retire and downsize?

Log in or create an account to post a comment.

Become a member and get full access to FineHomebuilding.com

Video Shorts

Categories

Discussion Forum

Recent Posts and Replies

  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
View More Create Post

Up Next

Video Shorts

Featured Story

FHB Summit 2025 — Design, Build, Business

Join some of the most experienced and recognized building professionals for two days of presentations, panel discussions, networking, and more.

Featured Video

Builder’s Advocate: An Interview With Viewrail

Learn more about affordable, modern floating stairs, from design to manufacturing to installation.

Related Stories

Highlights

Fine Homebuilding All Access
Fine Homebuilding Podcast
Tool Tech
Plus, get an extra 20% off with code GIFT20

"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.

Fine Homebuilding Magazine

Fine Home Building

Membership & Magazine

© 2025 Active Interest Media. All rights reserved.

Fine Homebuilding receives a commission for items purchased through links on this site, including Amazon Associates and other affiliate advertising programs.