Posted on 10/21/2012 9:08:27 AM PDT by markomalley
Micro housing. It’s not just for the homeless anymore. So says the New York Times.
Most people see a parking space and promptly back up into it; Tim McCormick sees one and thinks, “I could live here.”
Who would willingly choose to live in something with the footprint of a parking space (8x10x16 feet)? Millions already do, argues McCormick, a communications consultant: bedrooms, dorm rooms, motel rooms, hostels, mobile homes and the like. “I myself live comfortably in a converted one-car garage of 200 square feet,” he says, “which allows me to live inexpensively near downtown in super-expensive Palo Alto.”
The Times has run more stories on the, uh, growing movement to live in cramped spaces than it has on Benghazi.
But when you think about it, that’s entirely appropriate for the house organ of Barack Obama, the man who has systematically set out to cut America down to size.
Remember these oldies but goodies?
• “I do think that at a certain point, you’ve made enough money.
• “…there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.”
• “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.”
• “We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times… and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.”
It’s no wonder that, as the Weekly Standard‘s Jonathan V. Last discovered, America’s general fertility rate is now the lowest it’s ever been.
So don’t let anyone tell you that our president hasn’t accomplished anything of significance. Based on his own words, he’s done just what he intended to do. Imagine what he might accomplish with another four years.
As Obama’s own brother George is wont to say, a man’s home is his castle shanty.
There are lots of other reasons. For example, in a given area, when wages go up, rents invariably rise as a consequence, and with increase taxes based on those raises, workers may end up earning less.
Lessors also tend to jack up prices around universities, military posts, and other places where they are assured renters who need to live there.
Yes, the economic law of supply and demand is still in effect. Still, where there is a demand, and it is technologically and economically feasible, someone will usually create the supply.
I think there would be a demand for inexpensive dormitory type housing without the control by the university, military, or other concentrators of population. It is possible that land nearby has become so valuable that rents need to be high to pay for it, but I believe that zoning ordinances have driven up housing costs considerably.
I’ve heard stories back to the 1940s about collusion between lessors in college towns to block new construction, and often to arrange kickbacks from the universities for placements. And the universities, for their part, wanting to force students to live in dorms.
It’s all about the money. On the plus side, at least back then, returning veterans refused to play ball with a lot of the rackets, and they were not men to be taken lightly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.