Marc Marotta’s Mequon McMansion

[Skatastrophy]

What is wrong with some of you?

If he/she/they want a big house that he/she/they have paid for, they can have it.  This is America, isn't it?  A person still has the right to spend money the way he/she sees fit, right?  

Some people have car collections, some big houses, some like to travel.  What the big f'ing deal?  And you think this is excessive?  Have you ever been in one of the turn of the 19th century mansions?  This is a shack in comparison.

FACT is that the standard of living for EVERY strata of the income scale is higher today than it ever has been.  We live in a time of unprecedented prosperity - all of us, no matter what the income.  We should all be thankful, not bitching about trivial crap like this.

+1

Everyone else in Milwaukee would laugh at how much we spend on MUBB. Throwing stones and all of that.

[River rat]

boy,
I didnt know we had so many democrats on this board  

U guys taking the bulk of your incomes and helping the underpriveldged or are u just hating on those that have been more financially successful?

[GGGG]

boy,
I didnt know we had so many democrats on this board   

U guys taking the bulk of your incomes and helping the underpriveldged or are u just hating on those that have been more financially successful?

No I just think their house is ugly.

Seriously if you offered a straight trade for my house, offered to pay the utility and property tax difference, and said I had to live in it (ie, couldn't sell it), I would stay in my house.  I have absolutely no desire to live in a house like that.

[GOO]

Is anyone arguing they don't have the right to build such a house?  No.

We're saying it's ugly.

Agreed.  Of course they have the right.  No one wants to make it illegal.  We have the right to question the morality, ethics, and if it is best for society.  The right to ask the question "does it make any sense" what are the current and future  societal costs.

We need people to think about these things and not just think bigger and more is better.  More stuff is better? No.

Maybe tearing down a mid-century modern to build that should be illegal    Just kidding, but it does hurt as I love the modern stuff like the house to the south.   

[humanlung]

Is anyone arguing they don't have the right to build such a house?  No.

We're saying it's ugly.

Really?

See: What's astounding is that both Bert and Marotta built these monstrosities. They actually sat down and dreamed up these things, not once ever asking themselves about what they needed v what they wanted. Aren't they embarrassed when they drive up at night and these things fill up their windscreen?

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Really?

See: What's astounding is that both Bert and Marotta built these monstrosities. They actually sat down and dreamed up these things, not once ever asking themselves about what they needed v what they wanted. Aren't they embarrassed when they drive up at night and these things fill up their windscreen?

Calm down.

Not everybody has to like Marc's place because it's big or expensive.

Some people don't like it.

So what?

[humanlung]

Agreed.  Of course they have the right.  No one wants to make it illegal.  We have the right to question the morality, ethics, and if it is best for society.  The right to ask the question "does it make any sense" what are the current and future  societal costs.

We need people to think about these things and not just think bigger and more is better.  More stuff is better? No.

Maybe tearing down a mid-century modern to build that should be illegal    Just kidding, but it does hurt as I love the modern stuff like the house to the south.   

Whose place is it to decide how big is too big?  How much is too much?  What are "proper" morals and what aren't? What makes "sense", to use your term, and what doesn't?  

Is it your place?  Mine?

These decisions in a free society MUST be left up to the individual.  The consequences of those decisions should also fall on the individual.

[humanlung]

Calm down.

Not everybody has to like Marc's place because it's big or expensive.

Some people don't like it.

So what?

I have no problem with who likes or doesn't like a house.  I have a big problem with some people saying that it is somehow inappropriate to build a big house.  That it would be better for society if these people looked at life differently and adjusted their respective moral compasses. 

[GGGG]

Really?

See: What's astounding is that both Bert and Marotta built these monstrosities. They actually sat down and dreamed up these things, not once ever asking themselves about what they needed v what they wanted. Aren't they embarrassed when they drive up at night and these things fill up their windscreen?

Where does this quote say that they don't have the right.

Seriously, this isn't that difficult a concept to understand.

[GGGG]

I have no problem with who likes or doesn't like a house.  I have a big problem with some people saying that it is somehow inappropriate to build a big house.  That it would be better for society if these people looked at life differently and adjusted their respective moral compasses. 

Eh...it's an opinion.  Sorry you don't share it.  But no one is saying that the government should get involved.

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

Actually, not. She is the Chief Environmental Responsibility Officer for her corporation which is a very specific mandate and quite different than Community Outreach. On the left coast these roles typically have people with science backgrounds and exceptional green credentials rather than lawyers. And they certainly live the mission. If Marotta was in Seattle or SF the press would crucify her for living in that house and would be justified in doing so.

I was being facetious. 

[Tugg Speedman]

I'm not impressed ... unless that is the guest house.

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

I'm as libertarian as they come, so I agree that they have every right to build it. I also think that everyone else has the right to comment on how much of a waste it is and what it says about the character of the people who live in it.

I also do not understand the appeal of building on these huge properties that essentially do not have neighborhoods. I'd much rather have a nice property in an area with other houses, etc. Grown trees.

[GOO]

Really?

See: What's astounding is that both Bert and Marotta built these monstrosities. They actually sat down and dreamed up these things, not once ever asking themselves about what they needed v what they wanted. Aren't they embarrassed when they drive up at night and these things fill up their windscreen?

No where does it say they don't have the right.  Many of us think of the societal costs and would blush and be embarrassed.

Are you saying that we can't have an opinion that this is not a best practice that it isn't right for our society?  That we shouldn't have a discussion that this is not a sustainable way for a society to live and that we need to change how we think of success?

I don't want to make it illegal to buy a new car every year or build a hugh house, but I would hope people at least start to think about the consequences of a society that replaces stuff with more and more stuff.  

But I digress.  I think about what it takes to make such a house: All the costs of production just to harvest raw materials, then convert and transport and make building materials, then transport these and build, etc.. it takes so much energy and resources. Then to sustain it and keep it up.  The furnish it.  Is it built to last 100 years?  Probably not, of course, most modern construction is essentially a tear down or replace and rebuild it in stages over a 30 year cycle.  I just can't justify it, and I can't do it.  I think it is a bad American practice.

But, they have the right to do it and I don't want to take that right away. No legal line needs to be drawn.

Compare that with the thoughtfulness and simplicity of caring as set forth in this little blurb/teaching (not mine, but again let's at least think about the consequences of how we live and spend):

"The most important event, when pursuing a spiritual path, is to meet your teacher. He or she touches something within you that brings the teachings to life. In my life, this person was our temple’s founder, Rev. Gyomay Kubose. His approach to the Buddhadharma was simple, yet deeply profound. An example of this was a story he often told the Dharma school children.

Rev. Gyomay told them that every night, before he went to bed, he would tell his shoes, “Thank you my shoes.” This seemed silly. Why would anyone thank their shoes? After all, the shoes couldn’t hear you, they were just shoes. Rev. Gyomay explained that throughout the day his shoes had kept his feet warm and dry. They had protected him from stones, glass and other objects that might have injured him. His life in the city was much more pleasant because of his shoes. His shoes did all this and expected no reward. By thanking them he was expressing his gratitude for all they had done. Even more, this gratitude went beyond just his shoes.

Buddhism speaks of the Oneness of all things. Too often, we think of ourselves as existing apart from others. Our ego wants us to believe that we are self sufficient and completely independent. This attitude is a cause of our suffering. Rev. Gyomay’s shoes existed because of the hard work of all those involved in their manufacture and delivery. The leather in his shoes came from the hide of an animal. His “Thank you my shoes” encompassed a gratitude to all of these. And all the history and people and events and animals that made the production process possible and made those shoes possible.

All that exists now is the result of that which has come before. The situation into which we are born is a result of factors out of our control. The various opportunities and hardships we encounter, and how we respond, also shapes our lives. Many people in the world are not fortunate enough to have shoes. Mindful of this, “Thank you my shoes” acknowledged his gratitude for the causes and conditions that resulted in his present life.

A simple story touching upon basic Buddhist teachings. Giving without the expectation of reward. The Oneness of all things. Karma, the law of cause and effect. Throughout his life, until his death at age 95, Rev. Gyomay was able to make the most difficult concepts understandable and relevant to everyday life. What is more important, he lived the teachings. He was a true teacher."

[SuddenSam]

You want opulence, you guys could go crazy in L.A. or many other places.  MKE ain't nothin'

Didn't know we lived in Rusky.  

[Benny B]

What did I miss?  Why is any of this relevant to MUBB?

[madtownwarrior]

I also do not understand the appeal of building on these huge properties that essentially do not have neighborhoods


That I do understand - sure nice not to have neighbors 4 feet away where you can hear them fart in their own toilet...  or far enough away that it's a planned effort to "stop by"

[VegasWarrior77]

I'm hoping Wojo gets a commitment soon so we can talk about BB again!

[madtownwarrior]

can we have a last minute entry to the Meme tourney - "moral outrage at large home building"

[Rudy]

I'm not impressed ... unless that is the guest house.

Funny!!!

[melissasmooth]

I guess I'm in the minority here. When it gets to the time when I'm going to be buying houses, I couldn't care less about sustainability. I want to get a huge house like the one I've grown up in and one like my grandparents had. I would like more land though, so the neighbors would be further away. I'll also be buying a big, fast and powerful car.  Because - "That's what the money is for!"

[GooooMarquette]

GOO - Very well said.

As others have said, Bert and Marc certainly have every "right" to build monstrous McMansions...just like others have every right to question the role of such ostentatious houses from the larger perspective of sustainability, the responsible use of resources and the ever-growing focus in our society on material possessions.

[BCHoopster]

This is a ridiculous topic, nice house Marc, he earned it.  If you like real estate, go to zillow and put in Malibu to see pricing, starting at $57M, or type in the street paradise cove in malibu and
see what trailer parks cost there, Stevie Nicks just bought one for $4M.

[Lennys Tap]

No where does it say they don't have the right.  Many of us think of the societal costs and would blush and be embarrassed.

Are you saying that we can't have an opinion that this is not a best practice that it isn't right for our society?  That we shouldn't have a discussion that this is not a sustainable way for a society to live and that we need to change how we think of success?

I don't want to make it illegal to buy a new car every year or build a hugh house, but I would hope people at least start to think about the consequences of a society that replaces stuff with more and more stuff.  

But I digress.  I think about what it takes to make such a house: All the costs of production just to harvest raw materials, then convert and transport and make building materials, then transport these and build, etc.. it takes so much energy and resources. Then to sustain it and keep it up.  The furnish it.  Is it built to last 100 years?  Probably not, of course, most modern construction is essentially a tear down or replace and rebuild it in stages over a 30 year cycle.  I just can't justify it, and I can't do it.  I think it is a bad American practice.

But, they have the right to do it and I don't want to take that right away. No legal line needs to be drawn.

Compare that with the thoughtfulness and simplicity of caring as set forth in this little blurb/teaching (not mine, but again let's at least think about the consequences of how we live and spend):

"The most important event, when pursuing a spiritual path, is to meet your teacher. He or she touches something within you that brings the teachings to life. In my life, this person was our temple’s founder, Rev. Gyomay Kubose. His approach to the Buddhadharma was simple, yet deeply profound. An example of this was a story he often told the Dharma school children.

Rev. Gyomay told them that every night, before he went to bed, he would tell his shoes, “Thank you my shoes.” This seemed silly. Why would anyone thank their shoes? After all, the shoes couldn’t hear you, they were just shoes. Rev. Gyomay explained that throughout the day his shoes had kept his feet warm and dry. They had protected him from stones, glass and other objects that might have injured him. His life in the city was much more pleasant because of his shoes. His shoes did all this and expected no reward. By thanking them he was expressing his gratitude for all they had done. Even more, this gratitude went beyond just his shoes.

Buddhism speaks of the Oneness of all things. Too often, we think of ourselves as existing apart from others. Our ego wants us to believe that we are self sufficient and completely independent. This attitude is a cause of our suffering. Rev. Gyomay’s shoes existed because of the hard work of all those involved in their manufacture and delivery. The leather in his shoes came from the hide of an animal. His “Thank you my shoes” encompassed a gratitude to all of these. And all the history and people and events and animals that made the production process possible and made those shoes possible.

All that exists now is the result of that which has come before. The situation into which we are born is a result of factors out of our control. The various opportunities and hardships we encounter, and how we respond, also shapes our lives. Many people in the world are not fortunate enough to have shoes. Mindful of this, “Thank you my shoes” acknowledged his gratitude for the causes and conditions that resulted in his present life.

A simple story touching upon basic Buddhist teachings. Giving without the expectation of reward. The Oneness of all things. Karma, the law of cause and effect. Throughout his life, until his death at age 95, Rev. Gyomay was able to make the most difficult concepts understandable and relevant to everyday life. What is more important, he lived the teachings. He was a true teacher."

Your reverend is a wise man. Those who are grateful about the simple (the shoes) and the profound (friends and family) are the happiest people I know. Grateful in every way is what I'm trying to become. When I succeed I'm happy. When I get embroiled in judging how others choose to live I become unhappy and a bit of a prick. Want to persuade people? Live your beliefs. Be a good example. It's more effective than constantly contrasting your enlightenment to what you consider other's selfishness, stupidly, etc. And I think your Rev. Gyomay would agree with me.

[Aughnanure]

Whose place is it to decide how big is too big?  How much is too much?  What are "proper" morals and what aren't? What makes "sense", to use your term, and what doesn't?  

Is it your place?  Mine?

These decisions in a free society MUST be left up to the individual.  The consequences of those decisions should also fall on the individual.

Who am I? Why are we here?

....am I real?