Senseless Regulation of Construction - Page 3

looneybin · 07-03-2008, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Gaijin

If the government did not require inspections, then the E&O insurance policy of the general contractors would, or the bank lending the money would.

But quality control inspections would get done - and they would be done better and cheaper and faster.

That is EXACTLY the case on the indian casinos.
They are not subject to any gubment codes or regs.
They don't need permits either

berettafan · 07-03-2008, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Gaijin

If the government did not require inspections, then the E&O insurance policy of the general contractors would, or the bank lending the money would.

But quality control inspections would get done - and they would be done better and cheaper and faster.

I dunno. If quality stds. were not set then what basis would there be for lawsuits? And if lawsuits had no basis and thus were unsuccessful then insur. co's wouldn't need to charge for potential losses.

Superman · 07-03-2008, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by berettafan

I dunno. If quality stds. were not set then what basis would there be for lawsuits? And if lawsuits had no basis and thus were unsuccessful then insur. co's wouldn't need to charge for potential losses.

You liberals are all the same. Always sticking up for gubmit.

berettafan · 07-03-2008, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superman

You liberals are all the same. Always sticking up for gubmit.

honestly supe is anyone really supposed to react as you want to that? perhaps if you just pm the script you'd like me to follow i'll post verbatim. i'm supposed to make my argument w/ the (incorrect) assumption that you meant that as an insult after which you condescendingly point out the the group that you already held that opinion. right? huzzah, the wisened supe has opened the eyes of the ignorant and done so in stunningly witty fashion!

A GOOD writer will not rely on the reader to know his/her background and opinion on an issue when tossing out suggestive comments on said issue. The rest of US need to stick to the green font.

this is a very simple issue that requires very little brainpower to understand. at the heart of it we have human beings (contractors) who will act as human beings (ie cheat people and do the minimum) when allowed to do so hence the need for a minimum standard.

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

Quote:

Originally Posted by berettafan

I dunno. If quality stds. were not set then what basis would there be for lawsuits? And if lawsuits had no basis and thus were unsuccessful then insur. co's wouldn't need to charge for potential losses.

Negligence.

berettafan · 07-03-2008, 11:07 AM

Yes but doesn't negligence require a standard against which an action/lack of action must be judged?

I could see something not fit for its intended use but that's a bit more vague than negligence.

Not that this is really important to the discussion but it's interesting.

Superman · 07-03-2008, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by berettafan

honestly supe is anyone really supposed to react as you want to that? perhaps if you just pm the script you'd like me to follow i'll post verbatim. i'm supposed to make my argument w/ the (incorrect) assumption that you meant that as an insult after which you condescendingly point out the the group that you already held that opinion. right? huzzah, the wisened supe has opened the eyes of the ignorant and done so in stunningly witty fashion!

A GOOD writer will not rely on the reader to know his/her background and opinion on an issue when tossing out suggestive comments on said issue. The rest of US need to stick to the green font.

this is a very simple issue that requires very little brainpower to understand. at the heart of it we have human beings (contractors) who will act as human beings (ie cheat people and do the minimum) when allowed to do so hence the need for a minimum standard.

Whoa! I guess jokes need to be more obvious in order for your sense of humor to become available.

As far as this being a very simple issue that requires very little brainpower to understand.......there are LOTS of gubmit "issues" that fall into this category. I guess it just so happens that this is one of those very simple issues with which you actually have enough experience to understand. This is not always the case. There is a significant and very vocal group right here on Pelican OT that sees very little sense in any and all gubmit programs or decisions. No, that is not an exaggeration. So no. No, I do not assume that "very simple issue(s) that require very little brainpower to understand" are actually understood by all. In fact, I know they are not. Good that you at least understand this one. If someone were to suggest a wholesale disbanding of all government building regulation or inspection.....I'm guessing you'd see the potential problem. What if someone suggests a wholesale disbanding of all welfare programs, including the provision of medical care for those who are uninsured and cannot pay. Sure, that's a ridiculous notion, but plenty of folks here think it would be a good idea.

I guess you think I called you a bad name by joking about you being a "liberal." From me, that was a compliment but of course you will not accept it that way. Fact is, you're a conservative that just happens to understand the importance of THIS PARTICULAR government function. Congratulations. Broaden your thinking and you will see more sense in other programs. Lighten up and you will see more humor as well.

berettafan · 07-03-2008, 11:50 AM

i saw the humor and thought it beneath you.

Superman · 07-03-2008, 11:53 AM

It was offered in a friendly and lighthearted spirit. I am considerably more lighthearted than most folks here perceive. A few Seattle-area Pelicanheads know me, and I think their impression is very different from some folks here. Whatever..... I didn't intend to offend you and regret doing so.

rusnak · 07-03-2008, 12:13 PM

too many negative vibes here. unsubscribing.....I hope everyone here stays friends, and has a safe 4th of July. Liberal, Conservatives, Hippies, Agnostics, I hope everyone has fun, and maybe we can find some common ground on "lets all wish each other well".

nota · 07-03-2008, 12:42 PM

there are the contractors, the sub's and the crews all can and will take the eazy way out

example a place called COUNTRY WALK in south Dade
the plans called for rebar in the concrete beams
''SOMEBODY" desided to skip that to save a few bucks and time
story was they made up a portable set of rebar and after the Insp moved on
they just pulled the rebar set from the forms and moved the rebar to the next homes site
when hurricane ANDREW blew in a few year later
you saw the destruction on the TV news
the homes blew apart many with walls down not just roofs failing
BTW right across the street was a different builders site
and NONE of those houses had major damage or roofs that failed

the other problem is good new ideas are hard to use if they are not covered in the existing code

in the islands [ Bahamas] the ship builders do the roofs and build them like a ship hull
3 layers of a/c ply screwed and glued with the screw holes plugged, then the roof is just painted, no need for tar and paper or tile or shingles
BUT in south Fla the code will not allow this stronger and better roof that will not blow off in any storm as the code said the size and type of nails that must be used no matter that screws are many times stronger and the roof must have tar and paper and then be covered with tiles over 1 sheet of cdx plywood that is no where near as strong as the 3 layers of a/c
plywood in even one layer

Dantilla · 07-03-2008, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superman

Dan. Dan. Relax.

And as always, if you still disagree with me, I'll have to punch you in the nose next time we meet.

Okay.... Breathing easier now...

Next time we meet, I'm wearing the full-face helmet. Neener- neener.

Dantilla · 07-03-2008, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nota

they made up a portable set of rebar and after the Insp moved on
they just pulled the rebar set from the forms and moved the rebar to the next homes site

Hard to believe anybody's that stupid. Buying new rebar would be less expensive than the labor involved in moving it.

And all this illustrates is that there are a few scumbags around, that will cheat with or without government oversight.

The Gaijin · 07-03-2008, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by berettafan

I dunno. If quality stds. were not set then what basis would there be for lawsuits? And if lawsuits had no basis and thus were unsuccessful then insur. co's wouldn't need to charge for potential losses.

An agreed to industry code that the builders and GC promised to adhere to. They would have a performance bond (with a 100 year provision) and professional liability insurance.

Why do "quality standards" need to be regulated by the government?

Sorry fellows - a can of worms has just been opened. Why is the government's (at any level) job??

Something to think about it over this long 4th of July weekend...

Superman · 07-03-2008, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Gaijin

An agreed to industry code that the builders and GC promised to adhere to. They would have a performance bond (with a 100 year provision) and professional liability insurance.

Why do "quality standards" need to be regulated by the government?

Sorry fellows - a can of worms has just been opened. Why is the government's (at any level) job??

Something to think about it over this long 4th of July weekend...

Remember the congressional hearings that focused on the tobacco industry? That was all about regulation. You see, the agency that should be regulating, or at least setting standards, for that industry is the FDA. The tobacco industry has effectively avoided falling under FDA regulations. Why? So it can self-regulate. See where this is going? The tobacco industry decided to regulate the "tar" content of cigarettes. Classic. In football, this is called the "misdirection" play. Nicotine regulation is what that industry needed.

Having industries self-regulate? Self-regulating is.......regulating?

Okay, let's have motor vehicle operators "self-regulate."

The absence of an independent third-party who is responsible for representing the potential victims (in this case, "society" would be the population of potential victims)......is FATAL to so-called "self-regulation."

Superman · 07-03-2008, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Gaijin

An agreed to industry code that the builders and GC promised to adhere to. They would have a performance bond (with a 100 year provision) and professional liability insurance.

Why do "quality standards" need to be regulated by the government?

Sorry fellows - a can of worms has just been opened. Why is the government's (at any level) job??

Something to think about it over this long 4th of July weekend...

Remember the congressional hearings that focused on the tobacco industry? That was all about regulation. You see, the agency that should be regulating, or at least setting standards, for that industry is the FDA. The tobacco industry has effectively avoided falling under FDA regulations. Why? So it can self-regulate. See where this is going? The tobacco industry decided to regulate the "tar" content of cigarettes. Classic. In football, this is called the "misdirection" play. Nicotine regulation is what that industry needed.

Having industries self-regulate? Self-regulating is.......regulating?

Okay, let's have motor vehicle operators "self-regulate."

The absence of an independent third-party who is responsible for representing the potential victims (in this case, "society" would be the population of potential victims)......is FATAL to so-called "self-regulation."

The Gaijin · 07-03-2008, 02:50 PM

Oh my. Roofs are about to fall in.

Please tobacco is not home builders.

A lot of govenment inspected crap built in the past 35 years. OSB and 20 year shingles and appliances that wear out in 7 years. All the regulation in the world and we are growing a crappy housing stock...

Superman · 07-03-2008, 02:57 PM

No doubt. Stuff is lasting precisely as long as regulations require, and not a minute more. If the industry did not already have standards placed on it, they would sheet roofs with particle board instead of the expensive OSB. Or styrofoam. Get paid.....move on to the next job.

The Gaijin · 03:38 PM

Sorry Supe - 6:35PM and the beginning of a holiday weekend..

These "regulations" give a false sence of security, but they are written (via lobbying) by those they are supposed to regulate. Crappy regs for a crappy product.

People in modern Sheep-America have given up on responsibility, prudence and informed decision making - preferring to pass that along to the government. But that is not the job of a democratic government. More regulations will not help.

Think about the Founding Fathers this weekend. I bet many of them had houses built - or even built them themselves. Think of old Thos. Jefferson - the ultimate homeowner/GC if their ever was one..

None of them had any damn regulations to deal with and few taxes when they were done. And many nasty McMansions and few Monticellos being built today.

http://www.monticello.org/house/index.html

The depression is over, Stalin is dead. The leftist thought process needs to be purged. Time to regain our freedoms and responsibilities. All of them.

Superman · 07-03-2008, 03:57 PM

I both agree and disagree. I'm not so naive that I believe regulations are unnecessary. Plus....I believe in government. Because it is the administrative arm of the peoples' interests and decisions.

But I VIGOROUSLY agree with you that Sheep-America has abandoned its responsibility for self-governance. And I do not favor additional regulations as a cure. I favor a citizenship that is better informed and more alert.

Again, as always, we agree on the goals. The devil is in the details.