Wednesday, August 06, 2014

The "Tiny House Movement". Otherwise known as "Poverty".

Yep, more "Tiny House" propaganda. Makes me wanna barf.

Once upon a time an American family's home was their castle and the bigger the better, but growing concerns about meeting mortgage payments and the environmental impact of large houses has helped fuel a new movement of people who are happy to live small.
The Tiny House Movement is a growing group of people who are happy to downsize the space that they live in and enjoy simplified lives as a result.
While the average American home is around 2600 square feet, the typical small or tiny house is around 100-400 square feet.

Hey hipsters. Its not a tiny house. its a TRAILER. Its not a tiny house community. Its a TRAILER PARK. You are not "right sizing". You are POOR.

Words mean things. Stop your damn lying.

The Phantom

Update: Welcome Small Dead Animals and flying monkeys! :)


Alyric said...

Glorifying poverty isn't new - the greenies have been doing it for ages - but this is getting ridiculous.

It reminds me of those old South African propaganda videos about how black people are happy to be second class citizens... except that most on the left actually support this.

Go figure.

People without resources are easier to control and less of a threat to those in power. Since most of the media now design their reporting around the best way to get a pat on the head from someone on the left in power, we get this.

One of these days, they'll figure out that things like plumbing and heating were 'luxuries' in the Soviet Union, and start attacking those. Give it ten years.


Alyric said...

Thought I would elaborate on my comment a bit, especially since the groundwork for what I mentioned has already been placed.

It happened when Congress banned incandescent light bulbs for the sole reason that they were 'inefficient'... in spite of the fact that Congress was essentially creating a new authority for itself by doing so.

Their stated reasoning was that it would 'save energy'... but that's not true. We know it's not true, because even as they've been banning incandescents, they've also been tearing down coal power plants as fast as they can, and blocking new ones from being built. All this in spite of being told that it's going to cause an energy crisis, and potentially leave communities without power.

Now that they've created both the authority to ban 'wasteful' energy products, and an energy crisis, the only thing left is to keep moving the goalposts on what products are 'wasteful'. They ban those products, then move the goalposts again. This is what I expect to start seeing within the next 10-15 years.

Vacuum cleaners? Europe is already going after those. Dishwashers? They're a prime candidate, considering how they've already gone after detergent. Washing machines? Probably dryers first, though - you can just let them air dry! Water heaters? God knows, there's nothing you could need hot water for after we've gotten rid of your dishwashers and washing machines.

Unless something significant changes in Congress - and honestly, I don't expect it to - I expect to see many of the basic advances we've taken for granted since at least the '50s get thrown to the curb by politicians.

It won't happen all at once, but it will happen.

Maikeru said...

The 'Tiny House' movement springs from the same juvenile mindset which holds that 'Prius' is preferable to 'Mustang', 'Eldorado', or 'Hummer'.

Absent kiddies, one may enjoy, as an adult, living in a space little larger than one's childhood bedroom.

Less is more

And in other news...
Airbag warranty duration is the determinant for motor vehicle obsolescence circa 2014.

The Phantom said...

Greetings dudes. If you make people poor enough, their conspicuous consumption will be confined to fancy iPhone apps and Air Jordan running shoes.

There's no reason to own a vacuum cleaner if you don't have a house. No reason to own a car if the only place you ever go is the liquor store and the welfare office.

This is the long term Lefty/Greenie plan for the USA: poverty.

Because its much harder to control people who have vehicles, tools, raw materials and a place to work on them.

Anonymous said...

UN Agenda 21 at work...

The Phantom said...

{I posed this comment at SDA, but the spam filter ate it. I think its worth re-posting here.}

Kate, thanks for the linkage! :)

I note at this time that my uncles, who's wives did not work, had by the age of 40:

New car every five years or so.
Cottage in Muskoka and/or Florida vacations every year.
$avings for retirement.
No debt to speak of beyond a 20 year mortgage on house and cottage.

One worked at the steel company, the other at the telephone company, not in management. Average incomes. Both had kids.

That list now represents the top 5% of income earners. We're talking established doctors who have been practicing 20 years, very successful businessmen, high end management nearing retirement, top-of-the-food-chain civil servants.

Average wage earners rent, their car is more than five years old, their appliances came with the apartment, they have no savings but they do have $10k in credit card debt, and the closest they've ever been to Muskoka is watching Holmes on Homes on their one extravagance, a big screen TV. Which forms about half of the aforementioned credit card debt.

What do I have to listen to? Hipsters talking about "right sizing" their lives by living in a trailer park and taking public transit.

Ladies and gentlemen, your government has taxed you all into poverty. Your attainments and options are but a shadow of what they would be in an -actual- free country where half your income was not confiscated before you even see it.

You should be angry. Torches and pitchforks kinda angry. But you're not. Why is that?

Anonymous said...

We're too tired and working too hard to have time to think about being angry. My son works 7 days a week, 11.5 hours a day in what is considered a good job. He makes about $600 a week. Period. My husband does a little better but has been working there almost fifteen years. It was a strange thing when I heard that my grandfather brought home the same amount my son now makes in 1978. Back in '78, a house was a few thousand bucks in this area, and grandpa had a new car every three or four years.

Anonymous said...


"It's not a tiny house, it's a trailer; and you're not right sizing, you're TRAILER TRASH!"


Anonymous said...

I would be"poor" and live in a tiny house over a lifetime of mortgage payments any day

Ratt Stone said...

The sad part here is all these kids now days are growing up not knowing the power of a V8.

maikeru said...

You should be angry. Torches and pitchforks kinda angry. But you're not. Why is that?
In Canada, texting has replaced smoking, which was aptly described as something to do when you're doing nothing, and NOBODY READS WHAT YOU WRITE WHEN YOUR(sic) YELLING!!!!

Anonymous said...

We're tired Phantom. Very very tired. I have everything on the list except the cottage, and I stayed home and raised my four children. But only about one and a half of my kids have that stuff. The others rent etc. Its maddening but what can you do?

Anonymous said...

There's nothing wrong with tiny houses. Once upon a time, the wealthy would construct small houses or cottages in their gardens or in the woods somewhere on their rolling estate. This provided a nice place to take a nap, smoke a pipe, or drink wine out of the sun and away from their regular surroundings.

I've recently built a 3000 sqft house. Maybe I can buy a nice 5-10 acres a few miles down the road. If I so, a nice little garden house would be pleasant. Someplace to park my truck next to when I want to do some gardening.

The Phantom said...

Anonymous, instead of a tiny house, build a 100 sq ft "shed".

Its the same thing, just that if you call it a "shed" everybody knows its a teeny little 10'x10' place with outdoor plumbing you visit on the weekends for a giggle, and you aren't some kind of neck-bearded hipster twinky.

Different anonymous above said: "I would be"poor" and live in a tiny house over a lifetime of mortgage payments any day"

You missed my point. If you weren't already poor, a mortgage wouldn't be a problem.