Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > House
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should there be mandatory limitations on how large a home you can own?
Yes - people do not need large homes - it hurts everyone else 4 4.04%
No - Absolutely not - Freedom is about having as big a property as you want and can afford 66 66.67%
No - but there should be a large tax - like the Gas Guzzler Tax imposed 25 25.25%
Undecided 4 4.04%
Voters: 99. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-11-2008, 07:05 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,100 posts, read 39,261,360 times
Reputation: 4937

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alter View Post
Greatday did you start this thread so you could have the opportunity to tell us about all your stuff??
Not like we aren't all highly impressed that you have 4000+ sq. ft house, 2 SUVs and that you fly your own aircraft but you clearly had your mind made up on the topic and no one could possibly convince you otherwise.
No - it was based on a TV news item
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-11-2008, 09:39 PM
 
Location: Marshall-Shadeland, Pittsburgh, PA
32,616 posts, read 77,614,858 times
Reputation: 19102
I will take the advice of Drifter and others and stop debating now since nobody on either side of this debate is making any headway towards the other. This is just a pointless thread anymore.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2008, 09:43 PM
 
Location: Marshall-Shadeland, Pittsburgh, PA
32,616 posts, read 77,614,858 times
Reputation: 19102
I will leave you all with this article though to show you that I'm by far not the only one who feels overconsumption is starting to lead to dire long-term economic consequences in our nation. "Condascending", "elitist", "know-it-all", etc. aren't words I take to kindly too, but there are indeed MANY more on the anti-consumption side of this debate, but they're obviously not going to be found here on "Suburban-Data.com"

The swelling McMansion backlash - Buying a House - MSN Real Estate

Why not read this article and try to digest it (and my previous comments) before attacking?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2008, 09:58 PM
 
Location: Marshall-Shadeland, Pittsburgh, PA
32,616 posts, read 77,614,858 times
Reputation: 19102
Here are a few more to consider just to show you that I'm not a lone wolf here with my thinking. My logic may be widely-unpopular on this forum, but that doesn't necessarily make it "wrong." Let's not forget there was a time when American society at-large opposed womens' suffrage. Were those that strove for it "wrong?" Sometimes the minority has some valid points.

AlterNet: Environment: Big Houses Are Not Green: America's McMansion Problem

WorldChanging: Tools, Models and Ideas for Building a Bright Green Future: McMansions and the Energy Gap

McMansion Busting - Democrats Propose Removing Tax Benefits For Homes Larger Than 3,000 Square Feet | The Arizona Housing Bubble | Watching The Arizona Real Estate, Credit, Lending, And Mortgage Crisis From A Consumer's Point Of View

No McMansions

There are dozens of other sites out there as well. So many of you are becoming so defensive simply because you own large homes and large SUVs and don't like to be told that you're over-consuming.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2008, 10:35 PM
 
Location: Silver Springs, FL
23,416 posts, read 37,001,401 times
Reputation: 15560
Just another example of bad taste knowing no bounds.... see above..... conspicuous consumption is alive and well in the US.
I make my living from people building these monuments to themselves and their egos, and am crying all the way to the bank because of the boundless idiocy.
Whatever happened to dwellings of discreet good taste, that only hinted of the luxury within?
I think some folks might be better served by trying to figure out why they need to compensate their need to display everything?
How vulgar, truly gives credit to the old saw, " Money cannot buy taste."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2008, 10:44 PM
 
Location: Marshall-Shadeland, Pittsburgh, PA
32,616 posts, read 77,614,858 times
Reputation: 19102
Quote:
Originally Posted by kshe95girl View Post
Just another example of bad taste knowing no bounds.... see above..... conspicuous consumption is alive and well in the US.
I make my living from people building these monuments to themselves and their egos, and am crying all the way to the bank because of the boundless idiocy.
Whatever happened to dwellings of discreet good taste, that only hinted of the luxury within?
I think some folks might be better served by trying to figure out why they need to compensate their need to display everything?
How vulgar, truly gives credit to the old saw, " Money cannot buy taste."
You and I differ somewhat in our opinions though. I don't fault people for buying large homes EXCEPT for the energy issue. People can come back and squawk at me all they want about how their house actually powers itself from ice cream, but in my area (and MOST others) this isn't the case at all. It is considered "progressive" around here when someone uses propane. It is considered "crazy" around here to consider wind power, solar power, etc., even though renewable energy is the wave of the future.

I say let people build homes as tacky or cheesy as they wish; they just better be able to account for how much energy they are using just to "look cool." The whole "I'll use as much energy as I want as long as I can afford to" sounds very selfish to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2008, 10:55 PM
 
Location: Silver Springs, FL
23,416 posts, read 37,001,401 times
Reputation: 15560
Quote:
Originally Posted by SWB View Post
You and I differ somewhat in our opinions though. I don't fault people for buying large homes EXCEPT for the energy issue. People can come back and squawk at me all they want about how their house actually powers itself from ice cream, but in my area (and MOST others) this isn't the case at all. It is considered "progressive" around here when someone uses propane. It is considered "crazy" around here to consider wind power, solar power, etc., even though renewable energy is the wave of the future.

I say let people build homes as tacky or cheesy as they wish; they just better be able to account for how much energy they are using just to "look cool." The whole "I'll use as much energy as I want as long as I can afford to" sounds very selfish to me.
If we could build the whole world around the ice cream theory, I would be in the vanguard, believe me!
The energy/footprint issue is my worry, too.
The whole 4000sf issue for 2 people is pure ego. However, if they stated that it were a rammed-earth home, I would offer my design services gratis, just to be a part of such an exciting venture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2008, 11:12 PM
 
130 posts, read 524,593 times
Reputation: 73
you know what i "would" be in favor for? i cant exactly remember where i heard this, maybe it was england? but anyways, i heard that some townships (somewhere in europe) have a building code, that u cannot build anywhere except on a pre-existing foundation. therefore, no more urban sprawl, instead its just the opposite, u have urban renewal. imagine if that was to happen here in the states, i think that would be great? all the old run down properties would be torn down and built like new. currently, when a part of town becomes old and run down, developers just build new buildings elsewhere, therefore, adding to the urban sprawl. i "really" dont have anything wrong with urban sprawl, but....what incentative is there to tear/down and build up old parts of town? ppl in europe would tear down the old house and build a new house that is twice or three times as big......all they do is build up
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2008, 11:13 PM
 
Location: Dayton OH
5,764 posts, read 11,373,540 times
Reputation: 13565
As energy prices push up and up and up over the next 3 to 5 years, at some point it may trigger a connection by more people between the size of their dwelling and energy costs and consumption. I can't hardly imagine a bigger waste of energy than a $500+ monthly heating or air conditioning bill, which could go much higher over the next few years. If most of that heat or AC is used to control temperatures in giant rooms that are hardly ever occupied, it is almost pathetic.
Meantime I'll continue to get along fine here in southern cal in my comfy 1 br apartment that requires almost no heat or air conditioning, almost the only break I get living in this otherwise expensive place. The other is being able to bike commute to work year round instead of driving, but that's a whole other thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2008, 11:18 PM
 
Location: Northglenn, Colorado
3,689 posts, read 10,417,852 times
Reputation: 973
Quote:
Originally Posted by SWB View Post
You and I differ somewhat in our opinions though. I don't fault people for buying large homes EXCEPT for the energy issue. People can come back and squawk at me all they want about how their house actually powers itself from ice cream, but in my area (and MOST others) this isn't the case at all. It is considered "progressive" around here when someone uses propane. It is considered "crazy" around here to consider wind power, solar power, etc., even though renewable energy is the wave of the future.

I say let people build homes as tacky or cheesy as they wish; they just better be able to account for how much energy they are using just to "look cool." The whole "I'll use as much energy as I want as long as I can afford to" sounds very selfish to me.
I am not pointing out my own home, I DESIGN THEM FOR A LIVING. Energy issues you are bringing up are involving older tech. which is not being used anymore. You need to get yourself more knowledgeable in the construction technology's that are being used now day. Stuff that is now mainstream that used to cost a fortune to use IE 95% efficiency heaters, and tank less water heaters.

solar power is a very common thing now on custom homes, high efficiency furnaces, tank less water heaters, low E glass, Xera scape yards, Trex decking which is recycled plastics, they are ALL extremely common in the large custom home area. You are fighting an issue that was big in the past, but is not as much of an issue now adays. Get information, don't just spout randomness of MSN articles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > House
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:48 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top