Why building codes should be abolished

[aociswundumho]

Less insulation cost much more in energy bills and comfort over the life of the structure, so why would you want to use less insulation?

All kinds of reasons. Whatever house you are living in right now, it could use better/more insulation and better/more air sealing. Doing so would save you money, but is it worth it? I have no idea, only you can answer that question, because it's your home and your money.

 

[RF667799]

Less insulation cost much more in energy bills and comfort over the life of the structure, so why would you want to use less insulation?

Because up-front costs are a consideration, and there is likely always something "better" no matter the criteria being used to determine that.

 

[Airyaman]

For the bazillionth time, I have nothing against building codes per se. I follow them myself. I'm only against mandating them, because they don't make anyone better off, as outlined in the OP.

Even in ancapistan, building standards would exist. They would just be voluntary.

You've outlined it but you've not made a very good case for it. Home inspectors cannot see what is behind a wall, but inspection during construction can catch violations before they are hidden (plumbing, electrical, etc.).

For instance, what if I used 2x8s where I should have used 2x10s for joists or rafters, but this was all covered up by sheetrock, insulation, etc. How would a home inspector catch this?

 

[Roadvirus]

Although this example focuses on insulation, the same reasoning applies to every aspect of home construction. Since building codes make no homeowners better off, and make millions of homeowners worse off, they should be abolished.

Homeowners living in quake & hurricane zones beg to differ.

 

[Lisa]

Because up-front costs are a consideration, and there is likely always something "better" no matter the criteria being used to determine that.

Building cheap is never a good investment over the life of a home. It is also a national issue because of the increased energy used in under-insulated homes.

For the bazillionth time, I have nothing against building codes per se. I follow them myself. I'm only against mandating them, because they don't make anyone better off, as outlined in the OP.

Even in ancapistan, building standards would exist. They would just be voluntary.

Voluntary regulations offer the consumer and the society a false sense of security.

 

[RF667799]

Building cheap is never a good investment over the life of a home. It is also a national issue because of the increased energy used in under-insulated homes.

The house you live in is probably cheap, relative to other houses.

You guys missed or ignore the part where all this is on a continuum.

 

[Lisa]

The house you live in is probably cheap, relative to other houses.

What is this supposed to mean?

You guys missed or ignore the part where all this is on a continuum.

MAGA to English translation?

 

[Gatsby]

Building codes are definitely overregulated, and our housing market would generally be better with fewer of them. But not all of them are bad. We need *some* building codes for safety, accessibility, etc.

 

[RF667799]

What is this supposed to mean?

MAGA to English translation?

Nah. Your instant retreat under your partisan blanket likely signals the conversation would be unproductive.

 

[Airyaman]

Let's take one example. Let's say a house was built on a slab in 2024. The plumber, to save money, used regular 90s whenever he should have used long sweep 90s in the drainage plumbing. Or maybe they didn't maintain the proper slope for straight runs. No code or inspectors, so who cares? And the home inspector would not see this because the plumbing is inside walls and the floor slab. This brand new house could very well end up with drainage issues that would require extensive plumbing repair, especially if in the slab.

 

[RF667799]

Building codes are definitely overregulated, and our housing market would generally be better with fewer of them. But not all of them are bad. We need *some* building codes for safety, accessibility, etc.

This is a reasonable response, IMO. My idea of libertarianism doesn't call for overnight revolution.

 

[Lisa]

Nah. Your instant retreat under your partisan blanket likely signals the conversation would be unproductive.

Your existential red herrings were not worthy of replies. Stick to a debate subject.

 

[RF667799]

Let's take one example. Let's say a house was built on a slab in 2024. The plumber, to save money, used regular 90s whenever he should have used long sweep 90s in the drainage plumbing. Or maybe they didn't maintain the proper slope for straight runs. No code or inspectors, so who cares? And the home inspector would not see this because the plumbing is inside walls and the floor slab. This brand new house could very well end up with drainage issues that would require extensive plumbing repair, especially if in the slab.

I wouldn't want a house built on a slab, especially if there were utility runs under the middle of that slab. That's my personal opinion. If I was a basement contractor, I might even be interested in supporting a building code that prohibits building on slabs other than for garages and outbuildings.

 

[RF667799]

Your existential red herrings were not worthy of replies. Stick to a debate subject.

The debate subject is not who is or who is not a "Maga".

 

[Lursa]

Of course not all home inspectors are good. You could say the exact same thing about any profession.

However you don't know how good the inspector will be when your house - and your work - gets inspected. If you're smart (and you are), you'll assume the inspector will be competent, and therefore you will do good work. The market aligns the incentives correctly, with no government goons needed at all.

So then people have no way of verifying the safety of a dwelling before renting/buying either? Again...what are their options to avoiding predatory practices?

 

[Lisa]

The debate subject is not who is or who is not a "Maga".

Another red herring.

 

[RF667799]

Another red herring.

"Maga" was introduced into the conversation by you.

No means no, Lisa.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

I have no problem with standards, as long as they are voluntary.

A voluntary standard is not a standard. It is merely a suggestion. And you know why we have so many standards, codes, and regulations? Simple, because we have learned through experience that most people, particularly people who are motivated by profits, will not do the right thing voluntarily.

 

[Lisa]

"Maga" was introduced into the conversation by you.

No means no, Lisa.

We were discussing insulation amounts until you deflected in #156.

 

[aociswundumho]

Homeowners living in quake & hurricane zones beg to differ.

No they wouldn't. You don't need to coerce people to do what's in their best interest.

 

[rahl]

No they wouldn't. You don't need to coerce people to do what's in their best interest.

it’s not coercion. It’s how society, every society that has ever existed, works. Nobody is forced to live here. You are free to buy your own private island and implement whatever utopian fantasies you’d like.

 

[RF667799]

We were discussing insulation amounts until you deflected in #156.

That was a direct response to a general statement in your post. And it had nothing to do with "Maga".

 

[aociswundumho]

You've outlined it but you've not made a very good case for it. Home inspectors cannot see what is behind a wall, but inspection during construction can catch violations before they are hidden (plumbing, electrical, etc.).

That's why people hire their own private inspectors during construction, like this guy.

People have no faith in government inspectors, and for good reason.

For instance, what if I used 2x8s where I should have used 2x10s for joists or rafters, but this was all covered up by sheetrock, insulation, etc. How would a home inspector catch this?

For floors, undersized framing will be noticeably bouncy.

 

[RF667799]

That's why people hire their own private inspectors during construction, like this guy.

People have no faith in government inspectors, and for good reason.



For floors, undersized framing will be noticeably bouncy.

For something as costly as a house, I think it is a good idea to investigate the contractor and the subs that will be doing the building. Someone with little experience or good reviews- but who assures me everything will be done "up to code"- isn't reassuring.

 

[Lursa]

That's why people hire their own private inspectors during construction, like this guy.

People have no faith in government inspectors, and for good reason.



For floors, undersized framing will be noticeably bouncy.

If there's no govt or other standards for certifying private inspectors...where's the protection in that? How do you verify their expertise?

For floors, prospective buyers/renters should just go in and "bounce around?" What the heck? How about ceilings? Roofs? Walls? Windows? Foundations? Jeebus.