[patb]

[quote=UCGal]A yurt, in many ways, is like a tee-pee – most have the center hole to let the smoke out.

IMO you could argue it’s a tent.
The only issue might be if you put in a slab, electrical, etc… You would be crossing into “needs a permit” area.

But if you put it on pavers and ran an extension cord for lights – you’d probably be legally permit free…

Of course this is all just opinion on my part.[/quote]

don’t put it on pavers, instead, maybe set up a small wooden deck and then a few layers of felt insulation on the floor.

san diego has a mild climate, so, at most a small
heater would be needed.

i’d wrory ore about rain fall causing water damage, hence the platform.

[patb]

the thing to remember in older areas, the really cruddy housing long ago rotted away.

the cheap stuff failed leaving only the worthwhile.

[patb]

the thing to remember in older areas, the really cruddy housing long ago rotted away.

the cheap stuff failed leaving only the worthwhile.

[patb]

the thing to remember in older areas, the really cruddy housing long ago rotted away.

the cheap stuff failed leaving only the worthwhile.

[patb]

the thing to remember in older areas, the really cruddy housing long ago rotted away.

the cheap stuff failed leaving only the worthwhile.

[patb]

the thing to remember in older areas, the really cruddy housing long ago rotted away.

the cheap stuff failed leaving only the worthwhile.

[patb]

salaries and expense reports per individual
and

resumes

and

contracts vs contributions

[patb]

salaries and expense reports per individual
and

resumes

and

contracts vs contributions

[patb]

salaries and expense reports per individual
and

resumes

and

contracts vs contributions

[patb]

salaries and expense reports per individual
and

resumes

and

contracts vs contributions

[patb]

salaries and expense reports per individual
and

resumes

and

contracts vs contributions

[patb]

[quote=meadandale]Funny, the first amendment says nothing about the first amendment right to free speech applying to ‘humans’ as opposed to corporations.

It says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…”

And I find it funny that so many of you are insinuating that foreigners are not covered by our constitution when that is exactly what people have been saying in support of the civil trials of the Guantanamo prisoners…who are clearly foreigners.

Finally, let’s not forget…is it right that Fox or MSNBC gets free reign as a corporation to spout whatever viewpoint on their ‘news’ programs they want while non news corporations are essentially neutered with respect to the political process?

Admit it, you have no problem with corporate involvement in elections if it helps YOUR guy. You’re just worried that it is going to help the OTHER guy.

Frankly, we need to hold ALL of our representatives accountable to make sure that they aren’t favoring corporate constituents at the expense of the populace. This influence already exists. Maybe this will be a wakeup call for people to get off their asses.[/quote]

The Constitution refers to the (People.persons,citizens) 115 times,
to the states 135 times and to corporations?

Zero times.

The founders knew what joint stock companies were

they gave them nothing for good reasons
The States 25 times

[patb]

[quote=meadandale]Funny, the first amendment says nothing about the first amendment right to free speech applying to ‘humans’ as opposed to corporations.

It says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…”

And I find it funny that so many of you are insinuating that foreigners are not covered by our constitution when that is exactly what people have been saying in support of the civil trials of the Guantanamo prisoners…who are clearly foreigners.

Finally, let’s not forget…is it right that Fox or MSNBC gets free reign as a corporation to spout whatever viewpoint on their ‘news’ programs they want while non news corporations are essentially neutered with respect to the political process?

Admit it, you have no problem with corporate involvement in elections if it helps YOUR guy. You’re just worried that it is going to help the OTHER guy.

Frankly, we need to hold ALL of our representatives accountable to make sure that they aren’t favoring corporate constituents at the expense of the populace. This influence already exists. Maybe this will be a wakeup call for people to get off their asses.[/quote]

The Constitution refers to the (People.persons,citizens) 115 times,
to the states 135 times and to corporations?

Zero times.

The founders knew what joint stock companies were

they gave them nothing for good reasons
The States 25 times

[patb]

[quote=meadandale]Funny, the first amendment says nothing about the first amendment right to free speech applying to ‘humans’ as opposed to corporations.

It says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…”

And I find it funny that so many of you are insinuating that foreigners are not covered by our constitution when that is exactly what people have been saying in support of the civil trials of the Guantanamo prisoners…who are clearly foreigners.

Finally, let’s not forget…is it right that Fox or MSNBC gets free reign as a corporation to spout whatever viewpoint on their ‘news’ programs they want while non news corporations are essentially neutered with respect to the political process?

Admit it, you have no problem with corporate involvement in elections if it helps YOUR guy. You’re just worried that it is going to help the OTHER guy.

Frankly, we need to hold ALL of our representatives accountable to make sure that they aren’t favoring corporate constituents at the expense of the populace. This influence already exists. Maybe this will be a wakeup call for people to get off their asses.[/quote]

The Constitution refers to the (People.persons,citizens) 115 times,
to the states 135 times and to corporations?

Zero times.

The founders knew what joint stock companies were

they gave them nothing for good reasons
The States 25 times

[patb]

[quote=meadandale]Funny, the first amendment says nothing about the first amendment right to free speech applying to ‘humans’ as opposed to corporations.

It says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…”

And I find it funny that so many of you are insinuating that foreigners are not covered by our constitution when that is exactly what people have been saying in support of the civil trials of the Guantanamo prisoners…who are clearly foreigners.

Finally, let’s not forget…is it right that Fox or MSNBC gets free reign as a corporation to spout whatever viewpoint on their ‘news’ programs they want while non news corporations are essentially neutered with respect to the political process?

Admit it, you have no problem with corporate involvement in elections if it helps YOUR guy. You’re just worried that it is going to help the OTHER guy.

Frankly, we need to hold ALL of our representatives accountable to make sure that they aren’t favoring corporate constituents at the expense of the populace. This influence already exists. Maybe this will be a wakeup call for people to get off their asses.[/quote]

The Constitution refers to the (People.persons,citizens) 115 times,
to the states 135 times and to corporations?

Zero times.

The founders knew what joint stock companies were

they gave them nothing for good reasons
The States 25 times

[Author]

Posts