6 ms·
> Maybe this administration blowing up the government is good, actually. My house was so difficult to walk through with the years of stuff piled up. Much easie
by btreecat 1y ago
> Maybe this administration blowing up the government is good, actually.
My house was so difficult to walk through with the years of stuff piled up. Much easier now that it's all been burned to the ground!
- turkishdelight 1y agoActually...that sort of works.
- btreecat 1y ago> Actually...that sort of works. Not if you need a house
- lmm 1y ago> My house was so difficult to walk through with the years of stuff piled up. Much easier now that it's all been burned to the ground! For anyone who's dealt with a hoarder house that's not the reducto ad absurdum you think it is, just the tragic reality.
- throwaway3b03 1y agoI'm that hoarder, and granted, not in terminal stage, but enough to severely impact my quality of life. And I disagree, I think it would take me two days to clear out the house, but mostly lack the energy and motivation to do it. So no, burning down the house would be way way worse.
- nlitened 1y ago> And I disagree, I think it would take me two days to clear out the house, but mostly lack the energy and motivation to do it Likely you’re psychologically unable to ever do it, but it’s comforting to have this convenient lie. There’s only one way to know.
- lazide 1y agoBurn his house down? (/s)
- coldtea 1y ago>it would take me two days to clear out the house "I'm not addicted, I can quit anytime I want"
- Forgeties79 1y agoThis is unproductive and quite rude.
- jdross 1y agoIt could actually be very productive. Addicts do not do well with coddling
- Forgeties79 1y agoThe comment above was clearly not intended to be helpful and it's a bit disingenuous to suggest otherwise.
- coldtea 1y agoComments can be productive whether they are intended to be helpful or not. Just calling out a common case/rationalization can make the other person see it as a possibility. Or make others identify it as some problem they also have. No helpful disposition is required behind the "calling out" for that to be the case. The (unverifiable anyway) intention doesn't add some magic dust to a comment to make it good or bad.
- lotrjohn 1y agoUser name does not check out. :-)
- ansho 1y ago> I think it would take me two days to clear out the house my experience helping clear out a hoarding family member's house tells me this is highly unlikely.
- hjadal 1y agoIf you don't care about the possessions you could remove it quickly. The problem is that when you try to clean it, they want to evaluate every single item for if it should stay or not. Throwing it all in garbage bags and then in the bin takes much shorter amount of time.
- technothrasher 1y agoI just recently helped a buddy clean out his dead relatives hoarder house. The only real decisions were "consignment, charity, or dump?" It took us weeks. I'm sure if we threw a ton of money, people, and vehicles at it we could have done it quickly, but that's not your typical scenario.
- doubled112 1y agoIsn’t this a reality TV show?
- rtkwe 1y agoIt used to be at least. Not sure if it's still airing but the process does happen outside of the confines of the TV show too.
- nostrademons 1y agoThe problem is having to make an item-by-item decision for thousands of items. If the decision is just "dump", the problem become easy: you strip the house bare and throw it in a dumpster. There was a hoarder house near me that was cleaned out in a couple days that way - they parked a dumpster in the front yard, hired a couple guys to toss everything in the house in garbage bags and toss all the garbage bags in the dumpster, gutted it down to the studs, remodeled it, and sold it.
- flir 1y agoMaybe just one room?
- ninalanyon 1y agoDoesn't work. Did that with my sister. I managed to clear out the dining room so that it wa possible to sit the family around the table to eat. Went back six months later and not only was that room uninhabitable but the amount of junk in other rooms had increased and the family was eating off trays in front of the television. It's not the junk that is the problem, it's the way of thinking that leads someone to refuse to discard it. Or more likely there is some even deeper rooted cause that makes them think that way. It can also be the case that the people they live with don't help either.
- barrenko 1y agoYou can finally see the moon?
- AdamN 1y agoYeah - I read that and was like 'yeah' and didn't even realize at first that they were trying reductio ad absurdum. At some point demolition is the best step. Don't agree in demolition of the USG though - it's actually quite effective when you think about it.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- ur-whale 1y ago> For anyone who's dealt with a hoarder house that's not the reducto ad absurdum you think it is, just the tragic reality. As a matter of fact, hoarder house is quite an accurate description of the US government.
- foxyv 1y agoBeen there! It's hard, but not nearly as bad as building a new house I would say. Although the temptation exists!
- beebmam 1y agoPlease say sike
- scotty79 1y agoI often have this sentiment. Ultimately I compromised and moved to a new one leaving the old to be a storage space for old stuff.
- coldtea 1y agoWell, sometimes the only realistic solution is to burn the whole mess to the ground and build a new one...
- XorNot 1y agoI'm sure years to decades of anarchy would kill very few children and the elderly. /s
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- coldtea 1y agoYeah, because shutting down an ineffective bureucracy and replacing it with a new organization necessarily leads to chaos and mayhem /s And obviously sustaining an ineffective bureaucracy can never itself lead to the deaths of children and the elderly /s
- paulryanrogers 1y agoIs the government becoming less opaque and more effective? I guess if the goal is to harass innocent Hispanics and deport fewer criminals then effectiveness is on the rise!
- eptcyka 1y agoYou don't get to do that with people's lives.
- lazide 1y agoClearly you’ve never dealt with a government before.
- avidphantasm 1y agoIn starting from scratch, you also run the risk of recreating, from first principles, the thing your are trying to replace.
- baby 1y agoIt's funny that you chose to use this analogy because most people improve old buildings by blowing them up and rebuilding everything
- dymk 1y agoPeople move out of the building first
- iwontberude 1y agoIsrael doesn’t always give advanced warning before they improve buildings
- btreecat 1y ago> It's funny that you chose to use this analogy because most people improve old buildings by blowing them up and rebuilding everything It's not funny, it's practical. Even if we were to demolish and rebuild first there's cleanup. Then there is a survey. And then planning, input design and then after all that, construction. If you were going to do all those tasks inside that building you already destroyed, it's now much harder to rebuild. Order of operations matter.