>>SECTION 16-2 BASEMENT-HOUSE AS DWELLING.
>>No person shall use a basement-house as a dwelling.
>>
>>http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/Municipal_Codes/Chapter_16.pdf
>
>I appreciate the effort they invested in explaining the reasons.
>
>>Most places in Wisconsin have similar codes. In my opinion, if it meets all other safety codes (wiring, plumbing, etc) and has a roof on it, what difference does it make (other than perhaps being an eyesore)? I've seen worse eyesores all over the U.S. (20 cars in the yard, 3 sofas on the porch,...).
>
>I still can't bend my mind around the way houses are built here, so can't really judge what'd count as an eyesore. It could be argued that all the houses you see here are temporary and unfinished, being built of not solid material. 2x4 is something one'd use for a shed, not a house.
>
>I'd definitely build a basement house if I lived in a cold region and didn't have access to cheap enough insulation. Our house back home has foot thick (actually, thicker - add mortar and finish) walls made of concrete foam blocks, all windows have vacuum panel glass. Digging in would have been much cheaper, and would give much better insulation (including sound!).
>
>How about garage and porch on ground floor, the rest below?


Please don't think I am speaking out against quality workmanship, because I'm not. I like solid walls and architectural grace notes as much as the next person. But isn't it a trade-off, like so many other things in life? My house may be a good illustration. It's in a 10 year old subdivision that was put up by a big builder. I have no doubt this house went up in about two weeks, assembly line fashion, with the cheapest materials and the fewest frills possible. I could put my fist through any of the internal walls and could probably build another, smaller house with the 2x4s in the place. OTOH, it's presentable enough and even more importantly is affordable to me. If it had been built old world style, with proud craftsmanship, it would probably cost at least double what I paid and I wouldn't be able to afford it. And do I really need that level of quality? Illinois may not be the most scenic state but we are generally unafflicted by hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and other natural disasters. Barring a truly unusual event this house will be standing for a very long time. Is there a need to fortify it against events it is highly unlikely to encounter?

Yeah, I know. It isn't all about money and there is a difference in pleasure between something of quality and something designed to "satisfice" -- to get by. Can I afford to pay for that difference? Along with many folks, no, I can't.

Another factor, which is in a way paradoxical, is that so many Americans are well off. There is no serf class who can be forced to labor for little or nothing. Everyone likes to point the finger at Wal-Mart and their imitators but Wal-Mart workers are incredibly well off compared to the people who built things like the pyramids and the Great Wall of China, and very well off to most who have labored under the despots of Europe.

Here is a question I honestly don't know the answer to. What is the quality of new home construction in other developed countries? Are they going through the same thing or is current American construction indefensibly shoddy? Facts please, thanks.