Monday, August 22, 2011

A Reason not to Paint a House

A Change and a Parting is a book published by the Iowa State University Press. It is a first person account of the Amana colonies that started in the mid 1800s.

The homes were unpainted for economic reasons and not religious.

According to the account of the author. "The elders (our governors) considered rebuilding to be more economical than painting since we had an abundance of free labor and free lumber but very little capital."

Extended a bit further they had no need for retail bakeries, or groceries or meat markets. And "we had no individual problems of housing, food, clothing,sickness or funeral expense, nor did we pay for education, recreation, church, nor for any part of our maintenance."

Our modern society has added costs for cell phones, internet, cable tv, car payments.

Did we go wrong somewhere?

There is much to be said for having all variable costs and no fixed costs. The idea of not painting a house is most unique. How long does a house last that is not painted? How much time and paint cost would there be during the life time of the house? Did it get repaired along the way?

With everything we do we should look at all the alternatives. A new pickup can easily cost more than $50,000. Add to that sales tax, annual ad valorem taxes and fees, and insurance. Would a succession of older vehicles, maybe even very old, be advantageous?

How much of our life is consumed earning the cost of our fixed cost items?

Cowboy Safety is a way of developing work-life balance. Traditional safety is limited to preserving our whole life at all ages. Why not consider things that "kill" part of our life somewhere in the middle?

David Sneed

No comments:

Post a Comment