Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Honey, I Shrunk the Country

Honey, I Shrunk the Country

Micro housing.  It’s not just for the homeless anymore.  So says the New York Times.

Most people see a parking space and promptly back up into it; Tim McCormick sees one and thinks, “I could live here.”

Who would willingly choose to live in something with the footprint of a parking space (8x10x16 feet)? Millions already do, argues McCormick, a communications consultant: bedrooms, dorm rooms, motel rooms, hostels, mobile homes and the like. “I myself live comfortably in a converted one-car garage of 200 square feet,” he says, “which allows me to live inexpensively near downtown in super-expensive Palo Alto.”

The Times has run more stories on the, uh, growing movement to live in cramped spaces than it has on Benghazi.

But when you think about it, that’s entirely appropriate for the house organ of Barack Obama, the man who has systematically set out to cut America down to size.

Remember these oldies but goodies?

• “I do think that at a certain point, you’ve made enough money.

• “You didn’t build that.”

• “…there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.”

• “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.”

• “We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times… and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.”

It’s no wonder that, as the Weekly Standard‘s Jonathan V. Last discovered, America’s general fertility rate is now the lowest it’s ever been.

So don’t let anyone tell you that our president hasn’t accomplished anything of significance.  Based on his own words, he’s done just what he intended to do.  Imagine what he might accomplish with another four years.

As Obama’s own brother George is wont to say, a man’s home is his castle shanty.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I prefer that point of view to the ones who expect the taxpayers to give them a 3 bdrm/2ba house to live in.

Boy, I’d forgotten some of those chilling chestnuts, especially, “We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much…” and (gist of quote): EVERY country thinks they’re exceptional!

He has Got To Go.

“Micro-housing”? Is that they call it now? I did that for a while about 12-13 years ago, when I was cut from full-time to part-time and couldn’t afford rent anymore(the DotCom bubble, remember that?). It was an improvement over sleeping in my car…

Tim McCormick’s story is indicative of the fierce competition for living space in such a lovely area where a great many wealthy people have congregated, so it doesn’t, in itself, illustrate economic decline. You could find stories like that when lots of people were building McMansions not far away. If a larger shift from supersizing to downsizing can be found in less affluent parts of the country, that’s news.

TrooperJohnSmith | October 21, 2012 at 12:29 pm

To most Obama supporters, a reduced living space is called a jail cell.

Obama has accomplished more than I would have thought. It just shows that it is far easier to destroy, than to create.

My living room is bigger.

It’s a metaphor for a war against largeness is all respects — of spirit, freedom, intellect, individuality, dreams, ambition — of Americanism. A nation that thinks large along lines of freedom and the individual — how could such a thing possibly be good for the Left, for the State. A nation that thinks small, that contracts itself into smaller spaces of the mind and of matter, and looks up with increasing powerlessness and fear to the sustaining benefaction of the State — that is what the State wants. It was an inherent contradiction, even a categorical impossibility, for Barack Obama in 2008 to have wanted America to succeed and grow, or to have done anything to improve the economy. Why would he do that? How would that help his cause? More prosperous and empowered Americans doing well for themselves, buying more things, expanding their businesses, succeeding in the marketplace rather than depending on the government for subsistence? The government becoming less important to people’s lives? To a Statist, that is self-canceling. We’re on the road to East Germany circa 1960. The all-powerful State; the broken and supplicant citizen who has little, and dreams only of holding on to what little he has.

Why do you think I coined the term “Obamic Decline”?

It fits on every level.

Obama does not want an America of expansive vision and generous proportions. He wants a small, mean America of gelded expectations and aims.

Reminds me of the hypocrisy of the left. Telling everyone else to control their carbon footprints, when they themselves emit huge amounts of hot gases out of their mouths (and other orifices).

Now, it’s “You don’t need a large space to live in,” say the progressive “mansioneers”.

I would like to see Obama downsized to become a guard at the Libyan embassy – as “one of us.”

Lots of people live in tiny apartments in big cities. I used to keep one in NYC. It was good for trips, better than hotel, no packing. But more than 3 days would drag; my blood pressure would subside as soon as the plane descended back home.

    Ragspierre in reply to janitor. | October 21, 2012 at 1:43 pm

    There is nothing wrong…and a lot right…about the Zen of living in modest quarters. As one learns to do aboard a boat, for instance.

    But HAVING to live that way is just not an American kind of life.

      NC Mountain Girl in reply to Ragspierre. | October 21, 2012 at 6:11 pm

      A good friend who is an architect talks a lot about how he believes true luxury housing is sparse and intimate with items fitting neatly in to their place as they do on a yacht. We often talk about how trends come and go in upscale housing. He notes that before 2008 almost everyone wanted lots of square footage with special purpose rooms which often went unused. Now he’s finding his clients opt for less sq footage and more subdued designs, which he’d much rather design.

      A lot of this is living in a cubbyhole is driven by people who feel they need the status that supposedly comes from living in certain neighborhoods. They’d rather live in a cramped studio in the neighborhood where the fancy restaurants and clubs are than rent a 2 bedroom apartment for less money five miles away where their neighbors are working class stiffs with children who shop at Walmart or Costco.

I watched 2016 last night, and O’s brother George impressed me. He talked sensibly and seemed smart. I feel very bad about his book not getting published. I’m sure that O had something to do with that.

After a night of drinking caused me to miss the last train, I had the pleasure of spending the night in a Japanese capsule hotel. The claustrophobia of life as a worker bee in the collective hive assigned to my little cell left me unable to sleep (simply amazing given how drunk I was). Instead, I spent the night in the “hotel’s” communal bath.

In Japan, the scarcity of space is a fact of life for an island nation. In America, planners dream of scarcity and try to heap us upon each other in hopes of catalyzing their collectivist fetishes.

It’s a wonderful metaphor for their hopes of seeing a diminished, smaller America on the world’s stage. Just another faceless country among all the countries. No better than any other country. That’s their sick thinking.

When Thomas Friedman (http://christopherfountain.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/thomas_friedman_house.jpg ) and Al Gore (http://www.writingtheewrong.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Al-Gore-new-house.jpg ) start living in a space that small, we’ll talk.

Until the, not on your life. My house is small, but it’s bigger than a parking space. People who “live” in spaces that small must use the space for nothing but sleeping, showering, and maybe watching a little TV. I run a part-time business out of my home.

One size does not fit all. Enjoy your smug snug, and I’ll enjoy my normal 1950-sized house.

I have no problem with this as long as it’s not forced. I lived in micro spaces in Manhattan and loved it, as it allowed me to live IN MANHATTAN! And if you don’t know what’s so great about living in Manhattan then clearly it’s not for you.

SoCA Conservative Mom | October 21, 2012 at 3:48 pm

As H_Tuttle said, “I have no problem with this as long as it’s not forced.” However, there is a problem. The environmentalist lefty’s pipe dream is to shoe horn everyone into cramped accommodation in large cities. That way they can take away individual cars and make everyone rely on mass transportation. Then they can tax you for every square in of living space you use. Think of all the redistribution!

Hell, my “dorm room” my first year of college was an 8’x12′ room in a converted army barracks. The bathroom was down the boardwalk. Bed, closet, dresser, table. That was it.

[…] Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion: Honey, I Shrunk the Country […]

“It’s no wonder that, as the Weekly Standard‘s Jonathan V. Last discovered, America’s general fertility rate is now the lowest it’s ever been.”
– – – –

In fairness, it’s tough to get excited about sex when, each and every day, the government is already . . . .

Well, never mind. You get my drift.

Well, for once, this isn’t actually Teh Won’s fault. This push for moving humans into tiny boxes is part of Agenda 21–that fun little deal H. W. signed with the U. N. and that has been alternately called “sustainable living/development” and thousands of municipalities across the country are on board under the ICLEI label. American Thinker has a decent primer in Agenda 21: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/un_agenda_21_coming_to_a_neigh.html

Don’t get me wrong, the Commie in Chief is doing his part–as all our presidents have since the agreement was signed, and crashing the economy is great way to force people out of actual homes and into shoe boxes.

Henry Hawkins | October 21, 2012 at 7:03 pm

Here’s what we do. Once an American reaches adulthood the government shall issue him or her a specially fitted coffin with holes cut out for the arms and legs, and a little window for the face. Each coffin will be fitted for heat, air conditioning, cell, internet, etc. We shall go through life living 24/7 in our little boxes and when we die, the mortician simply shoves our arms and legs back inside and closes the face window, the preachers says a few kind words, and we are chunked in our eternal holes in the ground.

quarteracreofcrazy | October 22, 2012 at 7:47 am

I’m a little surprised at some of the comments, although I suppose it’s understandable if you haven’t done any further research on the subject beyond this one article. I agree that if you’re willing to live in a shoe box for $200K just because it’s in the middle of a big city that you’re a dope. Of course, you wouldn’t catch me spending $200K OR living in a city… But the bigger picture of this “movement” (?) is much more interesting, which the author fails to mention. Do a little research on what’s commonly called the “tiny house movement”. (I like tinyhouseblog.com) While many of the folks involved come across as left leaning hippies and/or environmentalists they actually share a motive that most of us would appreciate; a desire for financial freedom. They willingly downsize, expecting quality over quantity in their home and belongings, and live in places that work best for their families, even when it means breaking a few codes/rules when their “tiny home” doesn’t meet regulatory expectations. Being fiscally responsible, doing what’s best for their family and sticking it to the “man” if necessary… sounds like something I’d do!

[…] More Years? Hell, No! Posted on October 22, 2012 11:30 am by Bill Quick » Honey, I Shrunk the Country – Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion Remember these oldies but […]

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend