[Carry_Okie]

I said we'd probably be in agreement. . . LOL!. . . and so would Sowell.

Sowell is too busy pontificating at a kindergarten level to really grapple with this kind of topic, partly because he lacks the technical background in ecology I now have. When I was writing the book, he refused to even look at a summary despite the fact that it had quantitative analyses of what he was writing about in principle. I was so far ahead of where he was going it was pathetic, showing how free markets using the lowered cost of massive data analysis and communications with intelligent agents drafting contracts could optimize the balance among the myriad possibilities in ecological resource land uses with currently intangible and unaccounted aperiodic risks and industrial demands. It left those idiots at Stanford touting Gretchen Daily and their "nature's services" scam in the dust. Henry Lamb told me in 1999 it would be fifty years before people would be ready for it. Hi might have been right, but somebody had to do it.

[Swordmaker]

Sowell is too busy pontificating at a kindergarten level to really grapple with this kind of topic, partly because he lacks the technical background in ecology I now have. When I was writing the book, he refused to even look at a summary despite the fact that it had quantitative analyses of what he was writing about in principle. I was so far ahead of where he was going it was pathetic, showing how free markets using the lowered cost of massive data analysis and communications with intelligent agents drafting contracts could optimize the balance among the myriad possibilities in ecological resource land uses with currently intangible and unaccounted aperiodic risks and industrial demands. It left those idiots at Stanford touting Gretchen Daily and their "nature's services" scam in the dust. Henry Lamb told me in 1999 it would be fifty years before people would be ready for it. Hi might have been right, but somebody had to do it.

You have to consider who Sowell is writing his column for. . . it is not Economists or Ecologists, but the regular public, who have no idea of economics or ecology, and he has to get the basic idea that Liberals of screwed up the availability of affordable housing in under 500 words, 300 if you count intro and conclusions paragraphs. Not too much space for sophisticated arguments, don't you think?

[Swordmaker]

Many years ago, when I was running a food bank I founded, I was at a dinner in which a Catholic Priest was the main speaker. HIs topic was on affordable housing. He pointed out that in the past, many of our houses had started out built as one room shacks built by poor people that could never be built under modern County building codes. These one room shacks were added on to as the poor got richer and could grow their houses and that some of them were now the most modern of ranch houses and farm steads in the County. . . but we have cut off the starting base for anyone to even begin to build such a house anymore in our modern society, because we apply our modern notions of what is "required" for a house.

It is illegal for someone to build a house that suits his purposes without also suiting the purposes of a bunch of busybodies. . . telling him he has to install this, and that, and meet this requirement and that requirement all at thousands of dollars of cost he just doesn't have. . . AND, under the code, it has to be complete within a specified time period or else he can be fined! Then he gets the privilege of paying a tax on what he has built with his own two hands. . .

Since that speech, in that community, the Liberal Inspired building code now requires that ALL low income apartments built ALL bathrooms must be handicapped accessible with wheelchair doors, and five foot turning circles, raised toilets, wall suspended sinks, etc, and all doors in the apartments, must have wheel chair widths, kitchens be wheelchair friendly etc., when only 3% of the population is wheelchair bound.

NOW add that they are demanding these improvements in all apartments even in upper floors reachable only by stairs, and do not require elevators!

To add those handicapped improvements for wheelchair access costs approximately $25,000 per apartment. Using the rules of 100 for rent calculations, that adds an extra $250 per month on top of regular building costs to the price of renting that apartment to all LOW INCOME people, and especially for apartments on the upper floors for people in wheelchairs who CAN'T REACH THOSE APARTMENTS without lots of assistance! Such short sighted Liberal feel good requirements add huge costs to building low income housing and make them economically unviable to build. . . or any apartment complex for that matter. It's STUPID!

As a result, no low income housing is being built. . . or reasonably priced apartment complexes.

Tell me, why can not the building code require all new low income housing or all apartment complexes to build 5% of their apartments as handicapped equipped and LOCATED THEM ON THE GROUND FLOOR, where they do not need to climb stairs for access?