Should housing building standards be lowered or eliminated? (generation, fence, compare)
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.
You will NEVER get back the money you pay in property taxes, in homeowners' insurance, in mortgage interest, and in PMI. And unless you're far different than most American homeowners, that's at least 80% of your monthly mortgage payment.
Our whole home-ownership mindset is completely backwards! We've been trained to think that you need to buy the most expensive house you can afford, with the longest mortgage loan available, and use the (supposed) equity to sustain an unsustainable lifestyle. Look where it has gotten us.
And thats what I have a problem with. Why not lower the cost of the house, so your taxes are lower, and it can be replaced every so often? We have a 1950 standard of taxation and property ownership that doesn't seem to fit in a twenty first century world.
If they are "death traps" waiting to happen, why aren't we hearing about people dying daily on the news? I've seen fires and other things from poor electrical standards, but not the building standards themselves.
I'm not saying that we should build houses where they are going to fall on people after a year or something, but now we are forcing houses to be built for 20/30 years or longer. Since no one is taking care of their homes, why not make them cheaper, by lowering standards, so they can be replaced in 10 years or so?
First of all, you might want to ask why those fires are often so devastating.
Second, I can tell you - from a professional perspective - that standards really cannot be lowered more than they already are. Think about it... 2x4 walls, with 1/2" drywall on the inside, and 7/16" sheeting on the outside, is all that stands between you and 50 mph winds. Lower the standards further and you might as well be living in cardboard boxes.
Driving around town the other day with a friend, he was talking about how all of the neighborhoods have all gone down hill, no one takes care of their house anymore, etc.
I made the observation that this is a byproduct of our throw away society. A cell phones average life is 18 months. People are buying a new TV every three years or so. Cars aren't really fixed anymore, often they are totaled out by the insurance company and you go and buy a new car.
No one is used to taking care of major purchases anymore, and it shows in how our neighborhoods look and feel.
So should we lower housing standards for their building? Make sure they can last a decade, but lower the cost of the production so its cheaper to just buy a new pop up decade house to replace it? Recycle the old house into new building materials?
The main reason we can't do that are the construction standards for houses.
Your thoughts?
I can build anything I wish, how I wish on my property in Gonzales county. Not so much at my house here in Austin. I can do pretty much anything but change the footprint and size of the structure.
And thats what I have a problem with. Why not lower the cost of the house, so your taxes are lower, and it can be replaced every so often? We have a 1950 standard of taxation and property ownership that doesn't seem to fit in a twenty first century world.
I'm not sure you're familiar with how property taxes actually work. A municipality sets its budget, then goes about determining how to collect the money. If every house in a city is of sub-par quality, and low value, the city is just going to raise its "per thousand" property tax rate. In other words, you'll be paying the same amount of property tax for crap.
The fact is this: Our 21st Century World is a HIGHLY TAXED world. The money has to come from somewhere.
Again, lowering the standards for housing construction is not the answer. If people want less expensive housing, they need to buy smaller, cheaper houses in older neighborhoods. It'd be good for everyone!
You're not really talking housing construction standards (likely BOCA or a version of it) but code enforcement. Many areas adopt the International Property Maintenance Code for that.
I think from what you describe you're seeing lax code enforcement.
First of all, you might want to ask why those fires are often so devastating.
Second, I can tell you - from a professional perspective - that standards really cannot be lowered more than they already are. Think about it... 2x4 walls, with 1/2" drywall on the inside, and 7/16" sheeting on the outside, is all that stands between you and 50 mph winds. Lower the standards further and you might as well be living in cardboard boxes.
First of all, you might want to ask why those fires are often so devastating.
Second, I can tell you - from a professional perspective - that standards really cannot be lowered more than they already are. Think about it... 2x4 walls, with 1/2" drywall on the inside, and 7/16" sheeting on the outside, is all that stands between you and 50 mph winds. Lower the standards further and you might as well be living in cardboard boxes.
That's certainly an option for some people, but I'm not going that route. I live in a big brick house, with 2x8 sidewalls and full brick (not veneer) on the outside. 90 years old, and not so much as even a crack in the basement walls. Sadly, houses just aren't built with that kind of material anymore.
There's nothing wrong with them; ours are among the highest on the face of the earth.
If you'd like to know why the number of folks who died in 1995's Kobe earthquake was approximately 100 times higher than the death toll of the Northrdige, CA earthquake exactly one year earlier, there's your answer.
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.