If you read my last tongue in cheek blog, you know I'm running for President as a write-in candidate. I'm running with the desire to get just one vote, but that might be difficult if no impossible. I can run for the highest office in the land only if I qualify as a write-in candidate, and if you try to do that, I'll fail. You'll find that most states who control voting laws aren't wild about having someone like me on the ballot. In fact, I won't be on the ballot at all. All I'll be, if qualified to run, is a blank where you can write in my name. Well, that's the way it is in most states, and the rules vary from place to place.
And, if you check into it, you find that running as a write-in candidate is expensive. You can't just declare your candidacy and expect to get a vote because they'll disallow that. You've got to register with the state, shuck out the bucks which could be several thousand dollars, and then run almost in total anonymity. Some write-in candidates have actually been elected to office, but that's a long shot at best. The laws are set up to make it hard on write-in candidates, who are view mostly as an irritation or nuisance. Come to think of it, that's exactly what I want to be - a nuisance.
Here in Texas, if I try to run as a write-in, I'd have some big buck in the campaign, and that's not what I want. I've already promised not to campaign, won't make speeches, won't shake hands, won't ever show my face at a public rally, none of that. I guess what that means is that I won't be able to get the one vote I'm looking for, just to say I actually got a vote for President. The powers that be have made it practically impossible for me to present myself to the electorate as a protest candidate who doesn't want to hold office but will allow a fully disgusted voter to waste a vote rather than give it to someone they don't trust. My name won't be on the ballot, and there might not be any way for you to write me in. Electronic voting makes it hard to do that. But if you by chance vote in an old time precinct that still uses paper ballots, scribble my name on it and stuff it in the box. They'll probably chuck the ballot, won't count it, and I won't know if I got my one vote. Drat!
But . . . maybe between now and then I can figure a way to get my name on a ballot somewhere. I'll keep working on it . . . not hard, but I'll check it out. Maybe I'll end up in jail for violating state law, so I should qualify my candidacy as calling it unofficial.
Sunday, August 31, 2014
Monday, August 25, 2014
I NEED YOUR VOTE
OK, here's the deal. I'm using this post to announce my candidacy to be President of the U.S., and I need your vote. Here are my credentials:
1) Former Political Science Professor
2) Have been both a Republican and a Democrat
3) I have no money
4) I have no attachments with the Washington crowd, don't even know anyone there
5) I do not plan to campaign (other than write a few blogs that nobody reads)
6) I'm 73 years old and slightly feeble minded (the last part qualifies me for politics)
7) I don't owe any favors to anyone
8) I promise not to shake hands, flash a phony smile, or kiss babies
9) I will not criticize my opponents
10) I will not enter into any debates
And, my goal is to get just one write in vote. I just want the one vote so that I can say that somebody actually voted for me.
Remember the name - D. Paz Dalton. You might as well vote for me. I'll end up doing as much for you as any of the other yahoos in the race. Oops! Is that a criticism?
And, oh yeah, I'm trying to talk my brother-in-law into being my running mate. He's a tea party guy, but he's still got most of his teeth and can use three syllable words. So far, he hasn't fully committed.
But I still need your vote.
1) Former Political Science Professor
2) Have been both a Republican and a Democrat
3) I have no money
4) I have no attachments with the Washington crowd, don't even know anyone there
5) I do not plan to campaign (other than write a few blogs that nobody reads)
6) I'm 73 years old and slightly feeble minded (the last part qualifies me for politics)
7) I don't owe any favors to anyone
8) I promise not to shake hands, flash a phony smile, or kiss babies
9) I will not criticize my opponents
10) I will not enter into any debates
And, my goal is to get just one write in vote. I just want the one vote so that I can say that somebody actually voted for me.
Remember the name - D. Paz Dalton. You might as well vote for me. I'll end up doing as much for you as any of the other yahoos in the race. Oops! Is that a criticism?
And, oh yeah, I'm trying to talk my brother-in-law into being my running mate. He's a tea party guy, but he's still got most of his teeth and can use three syllable words. So far, he hasn't fully committed.
But I still need your vote.
Thursday, August 21, 2014
HEY, BIG BROTHER, DO YOU NEED ALL THAT LAND?
The biggest landowner in the U.S. is the federal government . . . by a long shot. When I read through the list of states where the feds own the lion's share of acreage, I shudder, thinking maybe we'd all be better off if those lands were in the hands of private enterprise or the state governments. Is there any reason the federal government should own 81 percent of the state of Nevada? Do they need to own over half of a number of other states in the western U.S.? And if they didn't own it, who would? I don't have definite answers to those questions, but I'm of the opinion those lands are better off right where they are. At least most of them are, and some states are better off not owning them. The feds
pay out big bucks each year to the states where they own considerable property to offset the loss of funds the states would get from levying property taxes on them.
Like a lot of other environmentalists, I'm not exactly wild about the way the feds manage their properties. It's not like they're just sitting there. They lease a lot of it to mining interests, tree cutters, and ranchers who want to graze cattle on it. They make considerable money off their holdings, and sometimes at the expense of what's best for the land itself. But overall, they do a much better job of taking care of it than most states would . . . and they most certainly do a better job than private owners would do. Only a small percent of people who look at forestlands, for instance, see them as a thing of beauty that should be preserved. Left to private enterprise, there'd be no more redwoods, and they'd turn the country into nothing but a vast treeless expanse . . . save for their tree plantations, which don't replace natural forests. Wildlife would be in even worse jeopardy without federal protection.
I don't advocate more federal ownership of lands, but one reason so much of it is in their hands is because the states and private holders showed little regard for it. Left in their hands, it would've been utilized in ways damaging to us all. I do advocate, however, stricter government control over the land it already owns. They could do a better job of managing it, partly because it is subject to politics, and politics has a way of screwing up almost everything. We go from having liberal leaning politicians in office who want to do more to preserve natural resources, take care of the environment in a more conscious matter, to having conservative leaning governments that want to loosen the controls and give up more to those who want to profit from it. That's not a good deal, but measures have been put in place that to some degree minimize the effects of politics on the environment, on federal holdings. Much of the management of federal lands is in the hands of career bureaucrats, and that's probably a good thing . . . probably, but not always.
Woody Guthrie got it wrong when he wrote the words, "This land is my land, this land is your land." Only in a round about way through the muddled democratic processes is it your land or mine. It's theirs, the feds, and there's a lot of it. About all I can say about that is: GET USED TO IT.
pay out big bucks each year to the states where they own considerable property to offset the loss of funds the states would get from levying property taxes on them.
Like a lot of other environmentalists, I'm not exactly wild about the way the feds manage their properties. It's not like they're just sitting there. They lease a lot of it to mining interests, tree cutters, and ranchers who want to graze cattle on it. They make considerable money off their holdings, and sometimes at the expense of what's best for the land itself. But overall, they do a much better job of taking care of it than most states would . . . and they most certainly do a better job than private owners would do. Only a small percent of people who look at forestlands, for instance, see them as a thing of beauty that should be preserved. Left to private enterprise, there'd be no more redwoods, and they'd turn the country into nothing but a vast treeless expanse . . . save for their tree plantations, which don't replace natural forests. Wildlife would be in even worse jeopardy without federal protection.
I don't advocate more federal ownership of lands, but one reason so much of it is in their hands is because the states and private holders showed little regard for it. Left in their hands, it would've been utilized in ways damaging to us all. I do advocate, however, stricter government control over the land it already owns. They could do a better job of managing it, partly because it is subject to politics, and politics has a way of screwing up almost everything. We go from having liberal leaning politicians in office who want to do more to preserve natural resources, take care of the environment in a more conscious matter, to having conservative leaning governments that want to loosen the controls and give up more to those who want to profit from it. That's not a good deal, but measures have been put in place that to some degree minimize the effects of politics on the environment, on federal holdings. Much of the management of federal lands is in the hands of career bureaucrats, and that's probably a good thing . . . probably, but not always.
Woody Guthrie got it wrong when he wrote the words, "This land is my land, this land is your land." Only in a round about way through the muddled democratic processes is it your land or mine. It's theirs, the feds, and there's a lot of it. About all I can say about that is: GET USED TO IT.
Friday, August 15, 2014
IF YOU BUILD IT, THEY WILL COME
Yeah, it's sure true that if you build it, they will come . . . and mess with you. They'll come and want to examine your building permit, and if you don't have one, they'll fine the crap out of you. They'll come and demand inspections to make sure you did everything up to code, and if you didn't, they'll make you do it over . . . and they'll likely fine you again. They'll come a make sure it gets placed on the property tax rolls. All this doesn't sound on the surface all that unreasonable. We have zoning ordinances for reasons that protect the entire community, to make sure buildings are safe and all that. These ordinances protect people against unsightly structures or create hazards or present a danger to public safety. But . . . and it's a big but . . . building ordinances are likewise an intrusion into a person's privacy, the sanctity of his home and land.
Stop to think about it for a moment. Think about the level of intrusion this brings about, and then examine closely the real reasons for these pesky regulations. Are they really for the sake of safety, or are they just another way to get more money out of the citizenry. First off, look at who makes these rules and enforces them - politicians and petty bureaucrats mostly. We pay their salaries to start with. That's what taxation is all about, to pay all the people it takes to run government at all levels. And we're talking big bucks here, and still, that obviously isn't enough because they're always looking for ways to get more money out of the people they're supposed to be serving.
Obtaining a building permit is not expensive, shouldn't keep anyone from getting one, but that's not where they make the money. The real rub comes in with the building regulations. Did you hire a licensed electrician to wire the building? Did you hire a professional plumber to plumb the place? Did a licensed roofer put on the roof? And it goes on and one, and hiring these people will cost you more big bucks. It's one of those you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours sort of things. Laws are most often set up to benefit someone, and it's easy to see who is most benefited from building ordinances in cities. And if you don't do it, the city fines the crap out of you, another benefit for them.
I'm by no means a pure libertarian, but I resent the intrusion of government into things that should be left to the property owner. I understand the need for building permits and ordinances that require that structures be built according to a specific code. I resent the forced mechanism for making me comply to nitpicking regulations for things like a storage shed in my yard. I've got one in my back yard right here in the middle of town, and people who see it are highly complimentary of it. It has no electricity, no plumbing, and is simply a home for junk and stuff . . . and as long as it's not unsightly, and I can build it on my own without professional help, I should be allowed to. Allowed to? Just saying the words pisses me off. It's my house, my property, and that should guarantee me certain rights and freedom from unreasonable regulatory intrusion.
Most of the time, code enforcement people only act when a complaint is filed with them . . . and this is good. Not only did I build my little storage shed out back without a permit, I build a patio room onto the back of my house. And I closed in my two car garage and made a big hobby room out of it for my wife. Didn't get permits for that either, but I did hire a professional electrician to do the wiring. All that
took place ten years ago. When I was closing in the garage, doing the remodeling work there, it was done in plain sight of all the neighbors. Nobody said a word, but one day this building contractor came by to ask if I needed any help with the project. He was out hustling business, and I don't blame anyone for that. I explained that it was going to be a lengthy process, something I'd do as time and money permitted, that I couldn't afford to hire him. He pointed out to me that I was breaking the law, that I needed a permit from the city, and that some of that work was required by law to be done by a licensed professional. He must've picked up the murderous look in my eyes 'cause he quickly added that he didn't intend to complain about it to the city. As far as I know, he didn't. Sometimes having bad eyes pays off, I guess.
It wouldn't be fair of me not to point out a few things. I did a lousy job on the patio room and must now fix the problems. A professional would've known better. I did a good job on the garage addition, except I put in French doors (the wife wanted 'em), and that's not good for exterior doors. I hired a
professional carpenter later, who told me that. "It's a common mistake people make," he said. In fact,
nothing I build is perfect, but nothing in life is, so I don't worry much about it. I'm smart enough, though, to build structures that are safe. If anything, I overbuild. I'm not sure, but I think there's probably a law against that too.
Stop to think about it for a moment. Think about the level of intrusion this brings about, and then examine closely the real reasons for these pesky regulations. Are they really for the sake of safety, or are they just another way to get more money out of the citizenry. First off, look at who makes these rules and enforces them - politicians and petty bureaucrats mostly. We pay their salaries to start with. That's what taxation is all about, to pay all the people it takes to run government at all levels. And we're talking big bucks here, and still, that obviously isn't enough because they're always looking for ways to get more money out of the people they're supposed to be serving.
Obtaining a building permit is not expensive, shouldn't keep anyone from getting one, but that's not where they make the money. The real rub comes in with the building regulations. Did you hire a licensed electrician to wire the building? Did you hire a professional plumber to plumb the place? Did a licensed roofer put on the roof? And it goes on and one, and hiring these people will cost you more big bucks. It's one of those you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours sort of things. Laws are most often set up to benefit someone, and it's easy to see who is most benefited from building ordinances in cities. And if you don't do it, the city fines the crap out of you, another benefit for them.
I'm by no means a pure libertarian, but I resent the intrusion of government into things that should be left to the property owner. I understand the need for building permits and ordinances that require that structures be built according to a specific code. I resent the forced mechanism for making me comply to nitpicking regulations for things like a storage shed in my yard. I've got one in my back yard right here in the middle of town, and people who see it are highly complimentary of it. It has no electricity, no plumbing, and is simply a home for junk and stuff . . . and as long as it's not unsightly, and I can build it on my own without professional help, I should be allowed to. Allowed to? Just saying the words pisses me off. It's my house, my property, and that should guarantee me certain rights and freedom from unreasonable regulatory intrusion.
Most of the time, code enforcement people only act when a complaint is filed with them . . . and this is good. Not only did I build my little storage shed out back without a permit, I build a patio room onto the back of my house. And I closed in my two car garage and made a big hobby room out of it for my wife. Didn't get permits for that either, but I did hire a professional electrician to do the wiring. All that
took place ten years ago. When I was closing in the garage, doing the remodeling work there, it was done in plain sight of all the neighbors. Nobody said a word, but one day this building contractor came by to ask if I needed any help with the project. He was out hustling business, and I don't blame anyone for that. I explained that it was going to be a lengthy process, something I'd do as time and money permitted, that I couldn't afford to hire him. He pointed out to me that I was breaking the law, that I needed a permit from the city, and that some of that work was required by law to be done by a licensed professional. He must've picked up the murderous look in my eyes 'cause he quickly added that he didn't intend to complain about it to the city. As far as I know, he didn't. Sometimes having bad eyes pays off, I guess.
It wouldn't be fair of me not to point out a few things. I did a lousy job on the patio room and must now fix the problems. A professional would've known better. I did a good job on the garage addition, except I put in French doors (the wife wanted 'em), and that's not good for exterior doors. I hired a
professional carpenter later, who told me that. "It's a common mistake people make," he said. In fact,
nothing I build is perfect, but nothing in life is, so I don't worry much about it. I'm smart enough, though, to build structures that are safe. If anything, I overbuild. I'm not sure, but I think there's probably a law against that too.
Thursday, August 14, 2014
CLINGING TO OLD WAYS NOT ALWAYS GOOD
If given an option, I usually choose the old way. I still write snail mail letters, and I pay my bills the old fashioned way, like writing a check and sticking it in an envelope to be mailed. I hate cell phones, am pretty much opposed to internet marketing, distance education, and a bevy of other things . . . including, the work at home trend. According to Forbes, one in five Americans now work from home, and that number is going to increase by 60 percent in the near future. That doesn't sit well with me. People should get up and go to a workplace every day, do it like mom and pop did, stick with a tried and proven system of how a work ethic works best. But does it?
Researchers are saying that stay at home workers decrease traffic jams in cities, and that will save the country billions of gallons of gasoline and carbon emissions. That's a good thing. I think distance education is a shoddy way of getting a diploma. I like the old way best, the one where if you want a college degree, you go to a real college campus, sit in classrooms taught by real professors, and do the good old college student thing. But that's not possible for everyone. Doing that causes great inconveniences, is overly expensive, and it may not insure you of a quality education. For one thing, a quality education is pretty much a thing of the past. Nobody in this day and age expects a college graduate to know as much as those who went through college twenty years ago, much less fifty years ago. But more people have college degrees now, and that feeds the growing demand for employees who are promotable.
Old ways are to be held up as a standard in some respects, but they are no longer practical. Todays high school graduate, that budding college kid, is to some degree retarded by modern technology. Asking one of them to actually think is asking the impossible because they now carry their brains in their pocket in the form of some sort of electronic gizmo. As much as I detest that, it's the present and the future. If you can't keep up with developing technology, you end up functionally crippled. Old ways just don't fit the new world, and I can accept that.
I've got a cell phone in my pocket, but it just works to make calls. I don't text, don't use it to work the internet or anything like that. I've got computers, but I don't market anything, nor do I intend to. My wife does, but that's her thing. My thing is clinging to more fundamental things, doing it the hard way, the slow way . . . and by using my brain . . . you know, the one in your head. But I live in two worlds, and that can get confusing.
"We need a credit card, sir," the clerk says.
"But I don't have credit cards. I pay cash," I say, and get this stupid look in return. It's that dead-eyed,
slack-jawed look you get these days when dealing with people.
Lodging establishments and car rental places, for instance, won't reserve a room for you without a credit card number. That's an inconvenience to an old timer like me. No sweat 'cause I don't travel much and I never rent cars. If I don't have the money on me, I don't buy some things only a card can get you. My life is no worse off without them. I'm forced into some compromise with the new technologies available, those things that make life more convenient on the one hand and more obnoxious on the other. I'll compromise some, even admit that some of the changes for for the good of mankind . . . but I'll never give in to it.
Researchers are saying that stay at home workers decrease traffic jams in cities, and that will save the country billions of gallons of gasoline and carbon emissions. That's a good thing. I think distance education is a shoddy way of getting a diploma. I like the old way best, the one where if you want a college degree, you go to a real college campus, sit in classrooms taught by real professors, and do the good old college student thing. But that's not possible for everyone. Doing that causes great inconveniences, is overly expensive, and it may not insure you of a quality education. For one thing, a quality education is pretty much a thing of the past. Nobody in this day and age expects a college graduate to know as much as those who went through college twenty years ago, much less fifty years ago. But more people have college degrees now, and that feeds the growing demand for employees who are promotable.
Old ways are to be held up as a standard in some respects, but they are no longer practical. Todays high school graduate, that budding college kid, is to some degree retarded by modern technology. Asking one of them to actually think is asking the impossible because they now carry their brains in their pocket in the form of some sort of electronic gizmo. As much as I detest that, it's the present and the future. If you can't keep up with developing technology, you end up functionally crippled. Old ways just don't fit the new world, and I can accept that.
I've got a cell phone in my pocket, but it just works to make calls. I don't text, don't use it to work the internet or anything like that. I've got computers, but I don't market anything, nor do I intend to. My wife does, but that's her thing. My thing is clinging to more fundamental things, doing it the hard way, the slow way . . . and by using my brain . . . you know, the one in your head. But I live in two worlds, and that can get confusing.
"We need a credit card, sir," the clerk says.
"But I don't have credit cards. I pay cash," I say, and get this stupid look in return. It's that dead-eyed,
slack-jawed look you get these days when dealing with people.
Lodging establishments and car rental places, for instance, won't reserve a room for you without a credit card number. That's an inconvenience to an old timer like me. No sweat 'cause I don't travel much and I never rent cars. If I don't have the money on me, I don't buy some things only a card can get you. My life is no worse off without them. I'm forced into some compromise with the new technologies available, those things that make life more convenient on the one hand and more obnoxious on the other. I'll compromise some, even admit that some of the changes for for the good of mankind . . . but I'll never give in to it.
Friday, August 8, 2014
NOBODY EVER TOLD ME LIFE WOULD BE EASY
Nobody ever told me that life would be easy, but I got lots of warning that it would be hard. Time and again I was told to prepare myself for a life that would test me, and most of that preparation was taken care of by my parents. They did a good job of making sure I was properly educated so I could make a living. They pushed me to be a responsible person who met challenges when they came along, and they did their best to prepare me for that too. None of us get a free ride, I was told time and again. Nothing is free. We all face hardships, and when those things come along, we buckle down and do our best to work through them. I was taught to trust God, to turn to him when I was hard up against it, but I was also taught that God had already set me up with a good mind and body so I could handle my own affairs. Nobody ever told me life would be easy . . . but my expectations for a good life were high. I didn't expect an easy life, but I did expect a good one, and I've always felt like living a good life was mostly up to me.
Now that my life is mostly behind me, I still have high expectations. Looking back, life hasn't been easy by a long shot, but it has been worthwhile. Has it been a good life? I don't really know how to gauge exactly how good it has been, but it's been fairly productive and at times enjoyable. But it has always been an uphill struggle for me, seldom ever easy, and marked with lots of disappointments. "If you don't expect a lot, accept that you'll often come up short of expectations, you'll have less disappointment in life," my mother once told me. And by saying that, she wasn't trying to say that I should expect less of life. Just be prepared for disappointments, especially when you strive for a lot.
I've failed at a lot of things, came up short of expectations with most things I've tried to do, but I usually got somewhere. In other words, there have been some successes in those failures. I didn't get to the top, but I got part of the way there. I didn't get exactly what I wanted, but I got some of it . . . and having a good life might well come from being satisfied with those partial successes. I wasn't a wonderful father or husband, but I tried to be, and I got the job done well enough most of the time. I wasn't a wonderful college professor either, but I was a good one. I made lots of mistakes as a coach, but I had some success there too. But some of the greatest happiness I've know in life has come from unexpected sources . . . from being successful at some things I never expected to be good at.
I'm a man with lots of formal education, and it served me well. I have no real training at most things relating to craftsmanship, but I somehow acquired the ability to build things. I learned to do woodwork early on and eventually became a decent enough guitar builder. I learned to draw and paint some, and I became a fairly decent musician. I learned to write, and that lead to becoming a novelist, songwriter, and a poet. I've learned to do a lot of things that have made life a lot more enjoyable than just being what I was trained and prepared for. And none of those things have been easy, and looking back at it now, I wouldn't have wanted them to be. It's the hard things in life that have me a stronger person. It's the disappointments that have pushed me to do better. It's the pain and suffering I've endured from time to time that turned me in a direction I needed to go.
. . . nobody ever told me that life would be easy, and I'm glad they didn't. With time growing short for me, I'm content and at peace with life, and I'm ready for the challenge of living out what's left of it. That means more disappointments, but it doesn't mean I'm done yet. I don't know what I'll do, but I'll do something. And that's the best any of us can do.
Now that my life is mostly behind me, I still have high expectations. Looking back, life hasn't been easy by a long shot, but it has been worthwhile. Has it been a good life? I don't really know how to gauge exactly how good it has been, but it's been fairly productive and at times enjoyable. But it has always been an uphill struggle for me, seldom ever easy, and marked with lots of disappointments. "If you don't expect a lot, accept that you'll often come up short of expectations, you'll have less disappointment in life," my mother once told me. And by saying that, she wasn't trying to say that I should expect less of life. Just be prepared for disappointments, especially when you strive for a lot.
I've failed at a lot of things, came up short of expectations with most things I've tried to do, but I usually got somewhere. In other words, there have been some successes in those failures. I didn't get to the top, but I got part of the way there. I didn't get exactly what I wanted, but I got some of it . . . and having a good life might well come from being satisfied with those partial successes. I wasn't a wonderful father or husband, but I tried to be, and I got the job done well enough most of the time. I wasn't a wonderful college professor either, but I was a good one. I made lots of mistakes as a coach, but I had some success there too. But some of the greatest happiness I've know in life has come from unexpected sources . . . from being successful at some things I never expected to be good at.
I'm a man with lots of formal education, and it served me well. I have no real training at most things relating to craftsmanship, but I somehow acquired the ability to build things. I learned to do woodwork early on and eventually became a decent enough guitar builder. I learned to draw and paint some, and I became a fairly decent musician. I learned to write, and that lead to becoming a novelist, songwriter, and a poet. I've learned to do a lot of things that have made life a lot more enjoyable than just being what I was trained and prepared for. And none of those things have been easy, and looking back at it now, I wouldn't have wanted them to be. It's the hard things in life that have me a stronger person. It's the disappointments that have pushed me to do better. It's the pain and suffering I've endured from time to time that turned me in a direction I needed to go.
. . . nobody ever told me that life would be easy, and I'm glad they didn't. With time growing short for me, I'm content and at peace with life, and I'm ready for the challenge of living out what's left of it. That means more disappointments, but it doesn't mean I'm done yet. I don't know what I'll do, but I'll do something. And that's the best any of us can do.
Wednesday, August 6, 2014
THE ITTY-BITTY KITTY RANCH
I've got this thing for little houses, and I'm not talking about homes or dwellings where people actually live. You could live in a little house, I suppose, but that's not for most people. Here in America, we're into big . . . the bigger, the better . . . and most people want to live in as large a house as they can afford. In fact, most of those people overbought, got themselves strapped with big payments which come with big houses. I live in a fairly large home, about 3,000 sq. feet, and it's more than we need. No kids to worry about, hardly ever have visitors, and it's just me and the old woman now. We need big because we've got lots of stuff, and I'm always looking for more space. That's where the little houses come in.
My home had a big patio out back when I bought it back in 2000 - about 15 by 25 feet - and I turned that into a patio room. Didn't take long to fill it up with stuff, and now it's sort of a catch all room. I didn't want another room on this house, just a place for plants, flowers, counter with storage, shelves,
etc. In the back yard, I build a little house, took my inspiration from Sunday houses. Down here in central Texas, especially around Fredericksburg, there are lots of little Sunday houses, left over from the days the German ranchers and farmers built them in town so they'd have some place to stay when they came into town on the weekends for church, shopping, whatever. My little house out back is only 8 by 12 with a porch across the front, has two windows and a door . . . and it's full of stuff too.
Across town is the Line Camp, an old house I bought some ten years ago for a guitar shop. I spent a year restoring it, fixed it to where it was somewhat of a rustic reproduction of ranch line camps, places where cowboys lived in remote areas of the ranch. My line camp is in town, of course, with a working shop in the back and a place for things I've collected over the years . . . and it's full of stuff too. It's also full of rescued cats. That house is only about 1,100 sq. feet . . . and I've run out of room over there too. I've built a number of little houses, now have another one in the drafting stage. In fact, come fall and winter, I plan to build several little houses on the grounds over there.
I've always admired those old saloon, or western storefront, style structures, and I've drawn up the plans for one. It won't be big, but it will be constructed to be a secure place for tools, equipment, etc. I like working outside when weather permits, and this is good country for doing that most of the year. Before the year is out, I'll build another small shed that will look like an old time outdoor toilet, an outhouse, only like 4 by 8 feet, and specifically made for little critters - the cats mostly. Yeah, I'm going to have my very own cathouse. I'll also construct a western style gazebo house, a dog house that will look like a small livery stable. That ought to keep me busy a while.
This may sound ridiculous, but the cost of building these things is very affordable. My saloon style house will be 16 feet thick, including the front porch, and 20 feet long, and I'll get that totally framed in
with a metal roof for around $2,500.00. No plumbing or electricity, and I'll finish the inside as time permits. Maybe by next summer I'll wire it so I can run tools there. The outhouse will cost me about five hundred bucks, total. The little livery stable house will cost about a grand. Most of the cost in building little houses is in the labor, not the materials. If you build properly, know how to utilize space, you can store a lot of stuff in small houses.
I always wanted a ranch or farm, but that won't ever happen. My ranch is going to be itty-bitty. I'm thinking about calling it The Itty-Bitty Kitty Ranch. Maybe I'll post some pictures in a later blog.
My home had a big patio out back when I bought it back in 2000 - about 15 by 25 feet - and I turned that into a patio room. Didn't take long to fill it up with stuff, and now it's sort of a catch all room. I didn't want another room on this house, just a place for plants, flowers, counter with storage, shelves,
etc. In the back yard, I build a little house, took my inspiration from Sunday houses. Down here in central Texas, especially around Fredericksburg, there are lots of little Sunday houses, left over from the days the German ranchers and farmers built them in town so they'd have some place to stay when they came into town on the weekends for church, shopping, whatever. My little house out back is only 8 by 12 with a porch across the front, has two windows and a door . . . and it's full of stuff too.
Across town is the Line Camp, an old house I bought some ten years ago for a guitar shop. I spent a year restoring it, fixed it to where it was somewhat of a rustic reproduction of ranch line camps, places where cowboys lived in remote areas of the ranch. My line camp is in town, of course, with a working shop in the back and a place for things I've collected over the years . . . and it's full of stuff too. It's also full of rescued cats. That house is only about 1,100 sq. feet . . . and I've run out of room over there too. I've built a number of little houses, now have another one in the drafting stage. In fact, come fall and winter, I plan to build several little houses on the grounds over there.
I've always admired those old saloon, or western storefront, style structures, and I've drawn up the plans for one. It won't be big, but it will be constructed to be a secure place for tools, equipment, etc. I like working outside when weather permits, and this is good country for doing that most of the year. Before the year is out, I'll build another small shed that will look like an old time outdoor toilet, an outhouse, only like 4 by 8 feet, and specifically made for little critters - the cats mostly. Yeah, I'm going to have my very own cathouse. I'll also construct a western style gazebo house, a dog house that will look like a small livery stable. That ought to keep me busy a while.
This may sound ridiculous, but the cost of building these things is very affordable. My saloon style house will be 16 feet thick, including the front porch, and 20 feet long, and I'll get that totally framed in
with a metal roof for around $2,500.00. No plumbing or electricity, and I'll finish the inside as time permits. Maybe by next summer I'll wire it so I can run tools there. The outhouse will cost me about five hundred bucks, total. The little livery stable house will cost about a grand. Most of the cost in building little houses is in the labor, not the materials. If you build properly, know how to utilize space, you can store a lot of stuff in small houses.
I always wanted a ranch or farm, but that won't ever happen. My ranch is going to be itty-bitty. I'm thinking about calling it The Itty-Bitty Kitty Ranch. Maybe I'll post some pictures in a later blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)