Sunday, November 21, 2010

Housing Prices Going Up In California

At least for new ones, and it won't be a case of market forces driving them up.

As of January 1, the Modesto Bee reports, all new homes in California must be built with fire sprinkler systems. That's expected to increase home prices by thousands of dollars.

New home buyers, of course, won't be any better off then than they are now. They'll be taking a big hit, adding insult to injury. This likely won't work out well for anyone, except plumbers and sprinkler system suppliers.

13 Comments:

At 8:55 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

On the plus side, a lot of people won't die in accidental fires. Silly thought, I know.

 
At 9:07 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A couple of years ago I saw a fire department video of a fire in a house that had sprinklers and smoke detectors - they set the drapes on fire which went to a chair pretty quickly - room filled with smoke as did house. Smoke detectors went off but sprinkler system was not at the temperature yet to turn on and didn't turn on till you could not see anything for the smoke. They said the people in the house would have died if they had not gotten out with smoke detectors and that sprinklers save the residence and not lives.

 
At 9:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, you would be wrong. Sprinklers do, and have saved, thousands of lives in residential homes.

 
At 9:14 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is riduclous. First, house don't catch fire and burn as they did in days of yore. Second, this is why we have smoke detectors. Third, life has risks. If we need sprinklers, let the free market place decide if folks want to have this addition freely to their homes.

Thanks, Fred, first I've heard of this is here. I'd like to know who-- or what-- lobbysits-- pushed this through.

 
At 9:21 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Studies by the Federal Emergency Management Agency's United States Fire Administration indicate that the installation of residential fire sprinkler systems could have saved thousands of lives; prevented a large portion of those injuries; and eliminated hundreds of millions of dollars in property losses." [source]

Is the libertarian party the party of death? Or is part of your economic recovery plan to fuel home sales and product purchases by watching homes burn to the ground? Serious question.

 
At 9:30 AM, Blogger Fred said...

If we need sprinklers, let the free market place decide if folks want to have this addition freely to their homes.

I'm guessing the price of sprinkler systems should start rising now that builders have to install them.

I'd like to know who-- or what-- lobbysits-- pushed this through.

I was wondering the same thing. I'm guessing plumbers unions, for one. Sprinkler system manufacturers, for two.

 
At 9:32 AM, Blogger Fred said...

Is the libertarian party the party of death?

The LP is the party of individual choice and personal responsibility.

Go read the Sacramento Bee editorial in the post above. There's a commentary I'm sure you'll agree with.

 
At 10:35 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The market works the opposite way. Now that more sprinklers will be purchased, the price will drop for everyone.

If LP is about personal responsibility, then I trust libertarians are opposed to this law because they already have sprinkler systems installed in their homes. If not, they're hypocrites.

 
At 10:38 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, and also if not, then libertarians are a drain on socialist entities known as fire departments. Maybe personal responsibility includes libertarians not paying for fire insurance (shifting the buck), and also paying to replace their neighbors' homes when their own personal lack of sprinklers razes the neighborhood.

Maybe when I buy my next house, my realtor will point out libertarian homes that are nearby so I know how much of a fire risk my potential home will be.

 
At 10:41 AM, Blogger Fred said...

If LP is about personal responsibility, then I trust libertarians are opposed to this law because they already have sprinkler systems installed in their homes. If not, they're hypocrites.

That's completely silly. The idea is that people should be able to install sprinkler systems in their homes should they chose to, not whether they want to, or not.

Nothing stops anyone from having a sprinkler system installed in their home now, with the exception of cost. This new regulation simply forces the purchase of sprinklers on new home buyers whether they could afford to buy the home otherwise, or not.

I can see why you can't understand this, though, as you're obviously a solid authoritarian. We see this sort of thing time and time again with the "progressives" in this state. You think you have to force everything on everyone else for their own good.

 
At 10:59 AM, Blogger Fred said...

Maybe personal responsibility includes libertarians not paying for fire insurance (shifting the buck), and also paying to replace their neighbors' homes when their own personal lack of sprinklers razes the neighborhood.

As expected, coming up with every reason (or excuse) you can to force something on someone.

 
At 1:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

People whine when home prices are too low.
People whine when home prices are too high.
What the hell do you people want anyway?

 
At 9:31 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In light of this development and the fact that some poster's comments are incredulously favorable towards the sprinkler legislation and construction, I'd like to add a new addition for you:

"All new home construction must be built with the regulatory building codes requiring equal handicap/disability accessibility for all. This would include: ramps, doorknobs, safety bars, height and width requirements met, etc.; allowing and ensuring both equal access and overall safety for owners and the overall public."

 

Post a Comment

<< Home