Cob: misprint

[Patricia L. MacKenzie]

>From: John Fordice <otherfish at home.com>
>Reply-To: otherfish at home.com
>To: "Patricia L. MacKenzie" <ruanmackenzie at hotmail.com>
>CC: dealy at deatech.com, owl at steadi.org, coblist at deatech.com
>Subject: Re: Cob: misprint
>Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 09:15:32 -0700
>
>Patricia & all,
>
>"Patricia wrote:
>
> > How does one comply with government regulations and maintain a 
>lifestyle,
> > within the confines of an individual budget? Not all of us care to be
> > communally owned and operated and we resent it. Obtaining the very 
>approval
> > appears to sound as if a tedious and odious process, since code 
>compliance
> > is not readily available and frequently conflicts.
>
>
>While my following comments may not solve any immediate conflicts
>between regulation and the desire to build with natural materials, there
>is here a very important issue here.
>
>Building codes exist as a response to a history of inadequate
>construction.  While each of us on this list may be geniuses & able to
>build flawlessly while standing on one foot ( please excuse the
>lighthearted sarcasm here ), there are a world of folks out there with a
>gaziillion different motivations who want to build and who are
>unfortunately neither so flawlessly nor righteously endowed.  The point
>being, that thru either ignorance or questionable will, there are folks
>who will make bad decisions in how to build.  This is why codes exist.
>
>A response to this may be: "So who cares, it's my building & nobody
>else's business."  Fair enough..... except for the fact that what we
>build transcends us.  Once the artifact is created, it goes beyond us
>and will at some point be used by others.  It is the either intentional
>or unintentional charlatanism in not building on a sound physical basis
>that is the root of the problem which codes have been created to resolve.
>
>Please understand that the building codes are just a tool.  They are the
>result of a lot of work by alot of very intelligent people and contain a
>wealth of information.  The problem with the codes relative to natural
>materials is that like any tools, they are only as good as their design.
>  As Mr. Natural sez, "Use the right tool for the job".  The codes as
>they exist are not designed for natural materials.  Much to the credit
>of the folks who write the codes, they have kept their applicability
>open in spite with the maddening fascination of the majority of our
>culture with industrial consumerism and proprietary greed.
>
>What I mean by all this is that while the shoe of codes may not
>currently fit our desires to escape barefooted from lunacy, the vehicle
>to do so does exist in the code.  The code can be changed.  To do so
>will require an act of will on our part.  It is a huge task requiring
>devotion, time & $$$, but it can be done.
>
>So while the codes may drive you nuts, they do serve a useful purpose.
>It is up to us to change them, as nobody else is going to do it, and for
>the majority of folks, they are not going to go away.  Escape them &
>subvert them if it is your desire & if you can.  Just remember, that
>while each of us may create our own personal refuge from the madness,
>the bigger problem is still there.  Until we take control of the codes &
>make sure that they define & allow the individual freedom to build with
>natural materials on a SOUND basis that you espouse, we will be victim
>to our own inability to organize into an effective force for positive 
>change.
>
>Cob on.
>
>john fordice
>maker of cobbers thumbs
>&
>The Cob Code Project---------->>>>>>>>

Dear John Fordice:
I am in agreement with your brief dissertation however, the problem I see 
facing me and perhaps others is group of requirements imposed by others, 
obviously for very good reasons, is that the requirements have made the 
actuality of ownership and/or "fun" of being an owner/builder, if you call 
it that, nearly a requirement as well as economic necessity!
I personally have been informed here I have had too much money coming in (I 
had almost $150 a week between wages and inheritance) and had an excess of 
$200 plus or minus one year to dispose of. I was undecided where to put it, 
mentioned it to a supervisor in passing and was informed I would be taking a 
"lower paying job with benefits".
To which I replied I will not.
My fathers family had the misfortune to sign a government independence 
document (so did our president father's family) and we tend to stick by it. 
Something about life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
My only point is that I may not be able to have housing of my own due to my 
f****** wage salary (I no longer have any money from the inheritance) and 
cannot replace my job. I was able for fourteen years to live within those 
confines and saved very hard to be able to afford to build my own house. 
Which, as I said, I may not be able to whether I want to or not. Depends on 
the result so I have money to pay another's wages, since the information 
exists some forty miles away on foot down a major highway.
It's there, its supposed to be complied with but the phrase "extenuating 
circumstance" probably applies. Dealing with the grantors of exemptions of 
that phrase is another item entirely. So are assessments, which is another 
reason I will not build here for awhile. I need to be able to keep the house 
(read pay the taxes annually and any other costs associated with ownership) 
or there is no sense in me building or I become a contractor building for 
others, which has happened here, resulting in a lot of houses that are mass 
produced in a way. They are highly energy inefficient, expensive to own and 
acquire, not to mention inconvenient to my desires and needs.
Does a single working individual with a couple of dogs require a three (this 
is the minimum size touted here!) bedroom house with living room, dining 
room, family room, kitchen, two baths and a two car garage? Or taxes 
approaching $4,000 per year for a residential area near a medium sized city?
I'm for the regulations, I grew up in an area where they weren't and 
remember some of the houses being deconstructed, condemned or destroyed in 
some manner. BUT I also recall the human beings who tried so hard to keep 
and maintain what they were able, through their actions, however good they 
were or however trained/untrained, to acquire, keep and maintain ownership 
of.
I think the time may come that the regulations will be overregulated and 
restricting. I also think it may be soon. To force compliance to this degree 
may bankrupt a person but it also has something to do with the amount of 
"business" created. By that I mean a self-perpetuating system, one that 
creates more work for itself. That system is government, and who the hades 
pays for it? Which brings us back to income and work.
Sorry I ranted and sounded off, but I intend to comply. To the best of my 
fiscal ability and knowledge. And that's all.
Bye.
P.
ruanmackenzie at hotmail.com
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.