OT - Gas to hit 4.00

Dave Smith dave at thesmithfam.org
Mon Jun 16 22:03:35 MDT 2008

Thus said "Jonathan Ellis" on Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:11:30 MDT:
>> I suspect most home  buyers _like_ a big house on  a small yard, since
>> it's cheaper than a big house on a big yard.

Yes, I suppose some home buyers have *consciously* opted to sacrifice 
acreage in favor of a larger house. I just don't happen to know any. 
Whatever the case, you can't deny or discount the fact that it's in the 
developers' best money-making interest to pack as many houses on as 
little land as possible. Having witnessed the real estate boom in 
Northern Virignia from 2000 to 2003, and having watched developers buy 
up small plots in my own Murray back yard , I have seen huge 3,000 to 
4,000 square feet homes erected with barely 6 feet between them. Who can 
blame them? If you can squeeze an 11th house onto a plot of land that 
would comfortably only fit 10, that's 10% more profit for the same 
expense. And since it was such a great sellers' market for so long in 
most of the nation for 15 years, they got away with it. And seriously, 
what shrewd business man wouldn't do that (provided all the houses would 
sell)? Couple the developer's desire for more profit with a 
taste-lacking populace of consumers who only sees square footage and 
garage capacity, and, well, welcome to the United States. Things weren't 
exactly better before that either, but hey, the McMansion seems to be 
the building style du jour so it's an easy target.



More information about the PLUG mailing list