On Jan 15, 10:25*am, Evan wrote:
On Jan 15, 10:00*am, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:









?
"Evan" wrote

Ok... *First off Bob, we are all talking about an additional
system on a home which will cost all of maybe $10,000
maximum on an average sized home... *If you can not
afford that cost on a home which will preserve lives and
the home itself in the future and would rather be spending
it on a fancier bathroom or kitchen, then you really should
be living in a high rise tower with small brick lined rooms
and an elevator ride of two minutes up and down...

It is NOT an immediate out of pocket expense to most
people as they have a mortgage to build the house in
the first place...

Right, it is not an immediate out of pocket expense, it is a finance payment
that will be huge over time. * On a 30 year mortgage at 4%, that is $47.47
for 360 months or $17,186. *Adding that much to the cost of a home can be
devastating to the small house market for lower incomes.

Second, fighting a fire costs a LOT more than the $10,000
a residential fire suppression system would cost... *Think
of a small town which has four fire apparatus... *For a big
enough fire they would all be at that one house dealing with
it... *That is an awful lot of water being pumped and diesel
fuel to power the pumps...

Multiply $10000 times the number of houses in the town. *Is that not greater
than the cost of fighting a few fires every year? *While you may be able to
justify the cost over one house, you cannot over an entire town.

So why shouldn't the government place a tiny portion of
the burden of the costs of such work on the owner of the
home by requiring automatic fire sprinklers be installed in
homes...

Because it is not a tiny cost and putting sprinklers in every house would
not eliminate the fire department. *They still need that equipment and
people to operate it. * Put some real numbers together and lets talk. Right
now you are blowing silly scenarios out your ass with no facts to back it
up.

The fact that it will cost LESS to finish putting

out any fires which have spread to the attics or roofs of
fire sprinkler equipped homes and overhaul them AND that
such systems will SAVE LIVES isn't enough for you,
you feel that there should be no requirements at all...

Let's see the numbers.
I have doubts, but I'm sure you can remove them.

Ok Ed,

If someone can not afford an extra $18k when building a house,
they should be building a house... *They should be living in
the public project housing in a nasty city on welfare...

I hear people **** and moan about houses and the market,
too many idiotic people bought "investment properties" with not
one clue how to either "invest" nor rent them out...

Don't cry over the market -- you are supposed to buy a house
because you want to live there for a very long time, not because
you want to upgrade to the next biggest and best thing when
you have paid down your mortgage enough to have 20% down
on another house you aren't able to afford...

Buy a house that you can afford and live within your means,
not a house which has a mortgage payments you can't
really afford if you were honest, those 2 shiny new leased
cars in the garage/driveway and the lastest and greatest
shiny electronic toys...

~~ Evan

Evan-

So everyone should live their lives according to the plan that you
endorse?

cheers
Bob