Despite the original posters overly extensive post, with certain questionable content, the central point is still quite vaild. We as a nation spend more money on grass than on any other crop. That by itself should be reason enough. Read up on the history of lawns and you'll find that they were orginally created as a means of demonstrating wealth (aka, I have this big area and I can afford to do nothing with it except grow grass I can't eat) Regarding the comments of junegem13 and zachslc, you might want to read up on the legal history of this movement. As it turns out, most weed laws (ones based on hight, not on noxious weeds) are unconstitutional. Nonetheless, if you are in a city or subdivision and decide to do a wildflower meadow where there is not an reasonable ordinance, then you should notify your neighbors and the city about why you are doing and the legal preceedants. The EPA has all this information. Regarding property values, that was the original complaint neighbors made against one landowner when she converted her lawn into meadow. When they were unable to demonstrate an actual decrease in property values, the city ordinance was ruled unconstitutional. Afterwards, the neighbors decided if they couldn't beat her that they'd join her and replace their own yards with meadows. Property values in that one neighborhood are now some of the highest in the city (Specific names and places, are available if you want them). Time and time again, lawn alternatives done correctly have shown to raise values, not lower them. In Charlottesville, VA local government is working on an ammendment to exclude native meadows from our weed ordinance. Other cities are doing the same very quicky, especially since the weed ordinance as written by many localites constitutes a legal liability to local governments.

Super! I was giving them way too much credit, I thought they might be hard to catch, but noooo........... they used the computer at their house to submit the ad! lolol I hope they go to prison. I'll be curious about how much of the owner's belongings were returned, if any. Grrr. Stupid or not, people like this make me so mad. Everybody wants something for nothing. (Well, not everybody, but a lot!)

I totally agree about the people who don't bother to clean the clutter off of whatever they are trying to sell Or how about the ones trying to sell a couch with the dog laying on it. I love my dog, but would definitely shoo him off if I wanted to take a picture. This one almost made me spit my coffee out this morning. Probably more than they paid for it in the 60's. Here is a link that might be useful: red plaid set

What’s worse is that they had disclosed that the home had needed piers for the foundation in the past on the disclosure form and included a letter from the president of the company that makes the piers, saying that the piers had a lifetime warranty that extended to new owners. What they did not say is what we learned from one of the guys digging the 8 ft hole where our living room floor used to be. He remembered being at the house before, when the first six piers went in. He told us that 12-13 piers were recommended by the company, but the homeowner had only agreed for the six that could be installed easily, outside of the house. So, the left side of the living room was supported, while the right side, the foyer, and the garage wall continued to sink. We had cracks in all the doorways that had to be repaired. Our front door and sidelights (one big unit) was removed for the summer of construction and a plywood wall was constructed to separate the construction zone from the occupied house. Each workday, the plywood covering where the front door belonged had to be reinstalled. It was crazy. We had a POD in the driveway, holding the contents of the rooms and garage that were under construction, for six months. It makes me wonder if the foundation company had a responsibility to say that the homeowner had not installed all of the recommended piers in the letter telling us that the warranty extended to us. That letter gave us reassurance that there were no foundation problems with the house.