If you had a conversation with a person in 1770 would they understand?

[Edward]

I've been in "mobile home communities" with golf courses and tennis courts and swimming pools. And I've seen some newer manufactured houses that in no way resemble trailers. Indeed, most people would have to be told that such structures were built indoors rather than site-built.

Given the increasing sophistication of mobile homes in comparison to the sometimes crippling or unreachable cost of a fixed home, I've often wondered why we don't see more of these sorts of community. Granted, it's probably not an option in the same way in high-density urban areas like London, but I suspect we'll have to see some sort of radical re-imagining of the home ownership concept if prices keep going as they are. Last night, we watched Prime Suspect 1973 (which bears the same relationship to the Prime Suspect show as did Endeavour to Morse). Depicted in that was a notorious Hackney sink estate: during an advert break, we googled it and found the search return full of records of 1980s calls for the whole estate to be levelled as the only solution to its crazily high crime rate.... and current listings, with two-bed ex-council flats on that estate now selling for GBP400,000. London in a nutshell!

The "prosperity gospel" of today must have direct lineage to the favored by God/wealth line of thinking. I dislike hearing people say things like, "yes, we have a nice house and this new truck. We've really been blessed." The notion that those who have material wealth must be favored by God or have been materially "blessed" because they have a stronger faith or live right carries the cruel opposite that those who struggle must have some deficiency in faith or belief or behavior. "I got mine, what's wrong with you that you don't have all this?"

This is popular among the charismatic churches in the UK. A Christian friend of mine who has particularly severe medical issues has been told, quite unashamedly by some (who have invariably never had long-term health problems of their own) that her severe health conditions are her own fault, because she doesn't believe enough to be healed. She's well able to give them what for for that nonsense, but it still hurts of course.

In the United States, all Christians tend to get lumped into this group in conversation, it seems.

Increasingly, a certain US stereotype of Christianity is seen globally as "what Christians are like". I find people here in the UK who believe all Christians are YECs, for example, whereas only a minority are, though six day creationism is a much more mainstream belief in the US than the UK. I can only assume it's down to what is the dominant image in the media. Hollywood?

 

[LizzieMaine]

Who even grills a steak? Throw it in a hot buttered skillet, pour some worcestershire sauce on it, and be done with the thing.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Increasingly, a certain US stereotype of Christianity is seen globally as "what Christians are like". I find people here in the UK who believe all Christians are YECs, for example, whereas only a minority are, though six day creationism is a much more mainstream belief in the US than the UK. I can only assume it's down to what is the dominant image in the media. Hollywood?

Partially, but also it's that particular image that's most dominant thru their own paid media -- they're the ones who sell "No Evil Oil" on late nite informercials, they're the ones who own radio stations, they're the ones with paid ministries on cable TV, they're the ones who buy billboard and print ads, and they're the ones that have well-paid professional lobbyists and marketing organizations to push their agendas at the political level.

The mainline churches signed their death warrant when they sold themselves to the National Association of Manufacturers after WWII as part of that organization's "Religion In American Life" movement to replace the social-justice Christianity of the first half of the century with what historian Kevin Kruse calls anti-New Deal "Christian Lbertarianism." This campaign basically overlaid the form and structure of Christianity with the worship of unfettered capitalism. This had the effect of pushing religion in general further and further to the right, and eventually pushed many people of faith of more moderate views completely out of the churches. You can still find pockets of prewar-style "social Christianity," but its influence in ecumenical politics has been greatly, greatly diminished.

 

[vitanola]

It never ceases to amaze me how those who insist that the Talking Snake story and the Six Day Creation of Genesis are literal history are the first ones to gleefully embrace social Darwinism. Opiate of the masses, indeed.

This as the reason why Bryan so firmly opposed biological Darwinism. He understood that it would be used as justification for the pernicious doctrine of Social Darwinism, and could well imagine toe awful consequences thereof.

 

[tonyb]

This as the reason why Bryan so firmly opposed biological Darwinism. He understood that it would be used as justification for the pernicious doctrine of Social Darwinism, and could well imagine toe awful consequences thereof.

The ascribing of varying degrees of intrinsic value to varying categories of people predates Darwin by millennia. Some just twisted Darwin's work into a "scientific" justification for what they had been doing all along.

We might like to think that all human life is of equal value in the eyes of the law and society and the gods of our choice. But our behavior betrays that.

 

[LizzieMaine]

The woods are full of "scientists" who use "science" to justify oppression. The "science of eugenics" was hot pups all over the Western world until World War II came along and revealed the inevitable result of such thinking. And yet you'll still find people today cooking up "research" to support it.

 

[tonyb]

^^^^^
I strongly suspect that many among us are closet racists, and sexists, and ableists, and any number of other ists.

Rather than get defensive about it, I suggest we all look within ourselves and accept that we aren't yet the people we could be.

As I've noted many times before, I'm much more comfortable in the company of people who at least acknowledge their own failings. These days, we're witnessing many a racist who would tell you (and himself) that there isn't a hint of racism in him.

 

[Harp]

I know what Belichick does wrong, but in truth, nope, not a chance I should be doing this

Season before last, against Denver, in-the-red and Belicose consistently failed to order a kick; leaving a two-point conversion attempt that failed the go-for-broke ending.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Belicose

Heh.

 

[Fading Fast]

^^^^^
I strongly suspect that many among us are closet racists, and sexists, and ableists, and any number of other ists.

Rather than get defensive about it, I suggest we all look within ourselves and accept that we aren't yet the people we could be.

As I've noted many times before, I'm much more comfortable in the company of people who at least acknowledge their own failings. These days, we're witnessing many a racist who would tell you (and himself) that there isn't a hint of racism in him.

I agree with this, but come at in from a slightly different angle. I know I'm not perfect, evidence has shown me that many other people aren't perfect and I doubt that there are many perfect people amongst us. And while I deeply believe legally and through societal pressures we need to fight all the "isms," I believe that we will be better off as a society being happy with a 99%ish solution.

Please let me explains my thoughts. Trying to make people perfect is probably impossible. Humans have only so much bandwidth to work on all the problems we face - economic, societal, environmental, personal, geo-political, etc. At some point, the marginal return of fighting something, of trying to make it perfect, becomes very expensive in time, effort, money, energy, etc., and takes away form our ability to fight other ills.

We will never get most individuals 100% free of all the "isms" and some amongst us will hold steadfast to them despite whatever we do. So what? If the problem is reduced to 1/1000 of what it was, then let it stand unless it can be shown that we can get to the 100% solution and it will cost X in time, money, effort - and that X is achievable without draining our ability to fight other problems. Otherwise, we are making the classic mistake of letting the perfect being the enemy of the good or even great.

We do this with murder, rape and other horrible crimes. We try to reduce them, but we don't set a zero tolerance as we understand that it is probably impossible and would entail Herculean efforts that would sap our resources. I think the same needs to be done with the "isms." We fight them with passion - legally and socially - we beat the problem into a small corner, we never let up, be we don't let an unachievable goal drain us of our energies and resources to fight our other problems.

What is the right amount to allow or, really, not fight - I don't know. What is the right amount of murder of rape or sexism of racism? Theoretically - none. But in reality, some number above zero (but not much) and it's for society to decide democratically.

 

[LizzieMaine]

It's like living in a house infested with bugs. Even if you get the place fumigated you probably won't get them all -- but that doesn't mean you shouldn't stomp on the ones you see running across your kitchen floor.

 

[Fading Fast]

It's like living in a house infested with bugs. Even if you get the place fumigated you probably won't get them all -- but that doesn't mean you shouldn't stomp on the ones you see running across your kitchen floor.

Yup, fight hard, fight them back, stomp on the obvious and less obvious ones, but try to get the absolute last one on earth - good luck with that, you'll end up blowing your and everyone else's house up just to kill it and they're still be another one out in a field or bush somewhere.

 

[ChrisB]

Improvement rather than perfection is a reasonable goal.

 

[vitanola]

Given the increasing sophistication of mobile homes in comparison to the sometimes crippling or unreachable cost of a fixed home, I've often wondered why we don't see more of these sorts of community. Granted, it's probably not an option in the same way in high-density urban areas like London, but I suspect we'll have to see some sort of radical re-imagining of the home ownership concept if prices keep going as they are. Last night, we watched Prime Suspect 1973 (which bears the same relationship to the Prime Suspect show as did Endeavour to Morse). Depicted in that was a notorious Hackney sink estate: during an advert break, we googled it and found the search return full of records of 1980s calls for the whole estate to be levelled as the only solution to its crazily high crime rate.... and current listings, with two-bed ex-council flats on that estate now selling for GBP400,000. London in a nutshell!

Now they are not pretty, but a modern (2017 model) fully equipped (all appliances, and living room an bedroom furniture of an inexpensive grade) 16' Single Wide mobile home with two bedrooms and two full baths, with a peaked roof and 2x6 walls with R-19 insulation may be had complete with central heating and air conditioning, set on your lot, ready to move in, for less than $30,000.

Many years ago I proposed building a "Bungalow Court" using end entrance single wide homes trimmed up with attractive stick-built gabled porches in the Craftsman style on some land on which I had an option just outside of our village. The land was agricultural, but would have allowed nearly two units per acre, strung out in a little Tobacco Road all its own had I chosen such a layout. I planned to cluster the houses in a compact, friendly arrangement around a landscaped courtyard with alleys at the rear for parking and automobile access and leave the balance of the land (which was nicely wooded, and had a stream running through it) alone. Couldn't get the idea past the Zoning board.

 

[sheeplady]

Here you can buy a trailer lot for about $5,000 ($20,000 buys a nice large lot, multiple acres), a well is $10,000 (max), and a septic is $5,000.

That's a new house for $50,000.

Comparatively, it's $12,000 a year to rent a decent 2 bedroom apartment/ house here. You can own in about 5 years compared to renting, considering property tax.

Lots of time here you see broken down houses right next to new trailers. Beautiful old homes. But people can't afford the new roofs ($10,000), new windows ($15,000), and insulation/ siding ($10,000), new wiring and plumbing ($15,000), new heat ($3,000) it would take to make them livable... and that's nothing cosmetic... no flooring, paint, etc... and these houses need that. When you can get a brand new trailer for $30,000, but it costs you $45,000+ to fix up a old house (that's going to cost you 3x as much to heat and in taxes a year)... people choose a trailer.

 

[tonyb]

...
Lots of time here you see broken down houses right next to new trailers. Beautiful old homes. But people can't afford the new roofs ($10,000), new windows ($15,000), and insulation/ siding ($10,000), new wiring and plumbing ($15,000), new heat ($3,000) it would take to make them livable... and that's nothing cosmetic... no flooring, paint, etc... and these houses need that. When you can get a brand new trailer for $30,000, but it costs you $45,000+ to fix up a old house (that's going to cost you 3x as much to heat and in taxes a year)... people choose a trailer.

Yeah, easy for me to say some interesting old structure is begging for restoration when it ain't my money paying for it.

Sometimes the wisest financial decision is to accept that one has made an unwise decision and reverse it, before one throws more perfectly good money into a bad investment. Cut your losses, right?

 

[sheeplady]

Yeah, easy for me to say some interesting old structure is begging for restoration when it ain't my money paying for it.

Sometimes the wisest financial decision is to accept that one has made an unwise decision and reverse it, before one throws more perfectly good money into a bad investment. Cut your losses, right?

I'm a sucker for old houses. Abandoned ones especially. I'm not wise with my money in this respect.

Husband has said no more abandoned homes, we've owned 2. He won't even let me stop the car when I see one now. I don't blame him, I've gotten sick of living without to save $500 so you can do something that normal people do and take for granted. Like getting water out of the outside faucet because the house isn't plumbed yet, and because you do it yourself around your jobs it takes 2 months to get done. We've yet to lose money, but only because we lived like the poverty stricken. I'm not willing to do that with kids, and it's lost its appeal.

 

[tonyb]

^^^^^^
There's a time in life for such things, and for me that time has passed. When I was younger and didn't know what I didn't know, I might have jumped into such a project. The projects I did undertake, such as converting a '47 Dodge school bus, turned out to be money losers, but I would have lost the money on something else, such as even more carousing than I was already doing back then.

That's among the reasons I am happy to be rid of our rental properties. I just don't care enough to learn the skills a small-time rental property owner should have. The people who do well at it typically do know those things.

 

[Benny Holiday]

This article is interesting:

http://www.history.org/foundation/journal/summer01/words.cfm

From my understanding, we would for the most part be able to be understood, though some words have different meanings today (eg. undertaker, then meant someone who undertook a project as opposed to today, when it means someone who works in a funeral parlour. Very interesting question in the first place!

 

[LizzieMaine]

Very interest!ing! Partic the part about subject-predicate agreement not always being carefully observed -- that still shows up in Northeastern working-class speech.

Interesting too that some of those Colonial era words lingered on with their 18th Century meanings in New England into the 20th Century -- for example, "cop" used as a verb meaning "capture" was a favorite of newspaper headline writers well into my own lifetime: PICK SOX TO COP FLAG.