Small Spaces, Preaching and Elections

SMALL SPACES

I have been reading a lot about how municipalities are looking to have smaller apartments. In particular, New York is looking to make apartments that are about 250 square feet. I have also been noticing articles aimed at those who want to build tiny "homes". I watched a video today that was about an hour and a half about small living spaces around the world (though they didn't show Tokyo's small apartments).

I have a few thoughts on the matter. I had a 2,700 square foot, five bedroom house with a Jacuzzi in the back and lots of storage space including two custom built storage sheds (I didn't build them). I don't know what my lot size was; but, it was big. I now live in an apartment that is probably around 500 square feet so I understand downsizing. In fact, I think most people have more stuff than they need or is even healthy for them; but, it is an individual choice.

In fact, I am one of those people who could live quite well in a 300 square foot or so apartment, trailer, boat or house. People tend to fill their space with things they "might need someday"; but, never do. After the divorce I knew that I had way to much space and I couldn't pay for it anyways. The downsizing came from necessity; but, I really wanted to anyways, the kids are all grown. As I look forward to retirement, I ponder how much space I will truly need and where it should be located. To a large extent my lifestyle will determine how much space I will need and my preference has always been minimalist. During college I lived in a studio that was less than 300 square feet and it was just fine with me.

I like smaller spaces because, the truth is, I don't like to spend a lot of time cleaning or maintaining stuff. I would rather read and write then clean and fix. In the last few weeks an actor (can't think of his name) decided to leave New York and return to Los Angeles because he said that in New York everyone could hear you and that in L.A. you could yell because it had space. I have to agree with him. There is the dichotomy, how much space is enough?

While I enjoy my small space, if I were raising a family I would want everyone to get their own room for privacy. I would also want a shared space that was big enough that we could all talk. I may retire and continue renting my apartment, I like the area; but, I may retire and go off grid. I have not decided yet.

The issue I have is with the hard sale on minimizing our lives. I choose small; but, I do not choose high density, there is a difference. High density is bad for people and animals and is certainly not necessary. Throughout the midwest there are thousands of towns where the people moved out as we killed off the family farm. No work; but, plenty of space.

While I have always treasured my solitude and quiet, that is not for everybody. What Mayor Bloomberg and others are trying to tell us is that we should learn to live on as little as possible. The logic is that the United States is going to become poorer and we will have to live on less. We will not work less, we will work more. We will have just as much as we need and no more. I have a problem with that, not for myself, as a rule I have a problem with saying people should live with as little as possible, seems sort of extremist.

PREACHING AND ELECTIONS

I have mentioned before that sometimes I preach at a church. Recently I came across some articles that said that if you are a church that has filed the proper documentation with the government that you cannot support a candidate. That is an easy one for me as I don't support any of them, not Obama, not Romney and not Ron Paul. I have absolutely no intention of promoting any of them at church; but, I don't think I should be prohibited from giving my opinion from pulpit. The law certainly would not stop me from saying what I think.

I am pretty sure that I am not in church right now and can say anything I want. While I do not intend to vote and no longer believe in the system, I would not vote for Romney on a bet. This election is not about people, it is about philosophies, it is about the moral character of the nation, how much we care about each other and how much we are worried about ourselves. While all the candidates are merely shills for private interests, in the end, it is also a statement about how we care about each other. We will live with the consequences of our choices.

Mr. Romney believes it is a question of survival of the fittest (so long as you can cheat the system), President Obama represents (in theory at least) a more communal approach where we set a minimum that all are guaranteed (and it is not much), Mr. Paul represents everyman for himself; but, with rules that are fair to everyone. That pretty much sums it up. None of them are calling for rewarding a person based on their efforts. I assure you that those with inherited wealth are not in favor of such a thing, think about it, why would they be?

This election is a choice; but, we are not given the choice of more or even better, we are being told that the pie is going to shrink and we get to choose how we cut it up. That is what this election is about. Strip away all the nonsense and that is the choice we are making.