Ann Vole wrote:
Johhny Electriglide wrote:
In the "feeding 25 people from the back yard", I can only wonder if that really was totally feeding them or just feeding them vegetables, certainly NOT total nutrition. What are they doing to replenish the soil??? How about the occupancy laws?? Do they allow immigrants to live in crowded hovels like that? Yuck!
They insisted on being self-supporting to the point of paying the church back for the house within 2 years (which went to help other families). They had all gotten jobs and bought houses by the end of that 2 years. They were very resourceful to go from owning nothing to being able to raise the price of a house within 2 years... these were no charity cases! The house was certainly overcrowded for a few months but they found friends to live at and just came over to help grow food, sew clothing and so many other cottage industries (one guy assembled hi-fi audio equipment from parts shipped in bulk).
So they paid the "church" back with jobs they got (low buck and taking away from real Canadians' employment like in the US?). They did not grow total nutrition, and they did break occupancy laws for a period of months. In the US, only 2 per bedroom are allowed($1,600 fine in 1994)---unless the landlord or others are afraid of getting a discrimination lawsuit and being politically incorrect. The reason is the capacity of septic systems or municipal sewer systems, and property taxes being used for community schools, police/fire, and government. Too many people in a building mean not enough taxes are being paid for these services.
I remember in 1994, I was supposed to run a hotel building job near Vail. Because I had one child, I had to get a two bedroom apartment, while Mexican illegals doing housekeeping at hotels were doing it for $1.50 less than American girls, who had to live 50 miles away for affordable housing and ended up losing out to the $1.50/hr. less and under the table illegals, who were allowed to live 6 people per bedroom. I had to decline the job because it worked out to be a $2/hr. pay cut(instead of $6/hr. more) with the increased cost to white Americans of housing. It was a union job, too. The cost of food was higher from the increased demand, also, and went into the COL figures for us. There was an article in the Grand Junction paper about it with disgruntled out of work American housekeepers interviewed. Then PC and the big bucks of the ski industry shut up any follow up journalism.
While it is nice to admire resourcefulness, the fact of a world in overshoot can not be forgotten.