Re: Automatic fire sprinklers

[Evan <evan.news.reply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jan 15, 10:00=A0am, "Ed Pawlowski" <e...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ?
> "Evan" <evan.news.re...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
>
>
>
> > Ok... =A0First 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... =A0If 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 paym=
ent
> that will be huge over time. =A0 On a 30 year mortgage at 4%, that is $47=
.47
> for 360 months or $17,186. =A0Adding 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... =A0Think
> > of a small town which has four fire apparatus... =A0For a big
> > enough fire they would all be at that one house dealing with
> > it... =A0That 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. =A0Is that not gr=
eater
> than the cost of fighting a few fires every year? =A0While you may be abl=
e 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. =A0They still need that equipment and
> people to operate it. =A0 Put some real numbers together and lets talk. R=
ight
> 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 piss 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