What I said was remove the demand for big homes and there would be less demand for the natural resources and the materials made from them. If we quit building 3000sf homes and reduced them to 2000 sf avg. We would need and consume 1000 sf less material. Supply would have to go down or the suppliers would go broke.

"The supply of materials (and their corresponding price) will have no effect on the demand for big homes."

Sure it would. This is a real life example. If a 2800 sf home cost $200 per sf to build today and that cost went up to $250 per sf that adds $140 K of cost. This is simply the difference in using certified green materials in the build vs. standard practice materials. Try convincing a developer to make that move for the good of the world.

Its way more simple than that... stop selling logs to Japan etc and start selling them desks and chairs, finished lumber etc.

Once again, in your example, demand has not changed. Quantity demanded has, because the price has gone up. From an economic standpoint, there is a distinct difference.

In your example, cost of materials has gone up, increasing the price of the finished home. In that case, the supply curve will move back resulting in a higher price, and a smaller quantity demanded.

If demand had changed, as you are claiming, you would see the price drop and the quantity demanded fall as the demand curve shifted back.

You're mixing your economic terms.

TK: Fun stuff. Now I remember why I hated economics.

BUT . . . there is ample lumber supply even with all our exports and our huge homes. There is no need to log the few roadless areas we still have.

Very true Dave... Clear cuts I hunted 20 years ago will be ready to log again in about 10 years. There is no shortage of trees out there on forrest service land.

DanS,

True

Dave,

Yes but at what cost to the environment? Do you think the roadless issue would be as big if we had less logging?

TK: Who else wants the roads ??? give an example of who would be happy with a reduction of wilderness area.

BRun,


Just so you understand my position. I do not want any roads built anywhere and would like to see more shut down. The point I am making is about the people that are dead set against the roadless int being repealed . They are driving the need by consuming the resources( it's more mined goods that forest goods). So I am pointing out that unless they are willing to change their life style more roads will have to be built. We do however have to make a choice about managing fire issues in wilderness areas regardless of the road less issue.

Not really. An alternative is just letting the price of the resources reflect their reduced supply. Of course economic forces will lead miners to gain whatever access they can..........but if the access isn't there, the price will just go up, and people will consume less.

TK: I guess, sorta maybe... I don't think demand has anything to do with it. There is no shortage of timber or minerals.. there is a shortage of " easy high profit margin ... make the company a ton of money resources.. while keeping wages low and sucking off the goverment boob at the same time resources "

It costs a lot to log these days, and its not really the lack of trees. Its the difficulty of harvest. Big timber wants time to stand still. They want it like the good old days when they could build a road, put in a mill, hire the whole town for low wages, log everything thats easy to get, then leave. The bottom line is just not as high as it used to be at the ownership and stock holder level. It can be profitable under current regulation, but they liked the old way better.

Anyway, thats what loggers I know think is at stake, and I know more than a few.

DanS,

True again but we know that our society is like water and we take the path of least resistance. The roads will be built as history has proven. If you read the whole roadless int. it's not as bad as it sounds. I just prefer to have wilderness area that keeps most people out so my horses and I can hunt can hunt in peace.

TK
Least resistance, so very true

No argument here, tk. The profit motive is very strong in an economy like ours.