“I have no comment on MHI’s legislative agenda.”
– Ross Kinzler.
“The [MHI] Urban Design Project didn’t have any lasting market effects.”
– Ross Kinzler
Priceless, direct quotes.
Why Priceless?
They are significant observations – and de facto admissions – by someone ‘defending’ MHI, and their ‘new class’ of manufactured homes.
The rest that follows are details, context, and commentary.
Briefly consider the point Ross Kinzler made about a prior MHI project that he used as an analogy to the MHI-backed ‘new class of homes’ concept.
Kinzler raises the interesting comparison between MHI’s previous ‘Urban Design Project,’ which didn’t perform as planned, and the MHI proposed “new class of manufactured homes.”
It is Ross who said the Urban Design Project had no lasting market effect, a nice way of saying MHI didn’t move the needle.
Aren’t those polite phrases for failed?
Keep in mind that Kinzler has reportedly done some consulting for MHI. Yet, Ross won’t defend MHI’s legislative agenda.
That speaks volumes.
The rest are useful details and commentary, but if a reader stopped right here, the take way is that MHI’s prior ‘similar’ project failed, and MHI’s legislative agenda won’t be defended even by those who have been or are paid by MHI, or whom MHI staff has called ‘affiliates.’
Kinzler, has reportedly done consulting for MHI, and yet he still won’t defend their legislative agenda?
Why not?
Aren’t those two directly quoted sentences by Kinzler at the top warnings for every independent community, retailer, producer, service provider, and lender?
CityScapes at the Mills of Carthage; Boston and other cities, are you Listening?
(MHLivingNews has spotlighted one of the HUD Code
manufactured home projects dubbed
the Urban Design Project that Ross Kinzler’s
comments referenced.)
To Be Fair and Accurate, There are Many Possibilities
There are several possible reasons why Kinzler, or others in the MHI camp, don’t want to defend MHI’s legislative agenda. We are not casting any dispersions on Ross, Amy or any others.
People can make good faith errors, and good faith mistakes in reasoning.
That, by the way, is one of the reasons why public debate can be healthy! If there is an honest fact or analysis error, let that be logically aired out in public.
Which begs the question, why then does MHI and their surrogates often duck such debate? When key questions are asked about MHI, Berkshire Hathaway, et al, why do they all go quiet?
But as the CSUN – California State University – says in a report on logical fallacies, one of the reasons to know and spot errors in reasoning, is that once an error is spotted, that error can be removed from the discussion.
Doing that saves time in the long run. Such honest, intellectual analysis dates back over 2,000 years.
Why keep repeating some variation on a logical error? We’re doing MHI members and non-members alike a favor by spotlighting what look to be logical, legal or other errors.
What Sparked the Flak
ICYMI, the email in the article linked below is part of what sparked all of this flak this past week.
Nathan Smith on the MHI Agenda and Track Record
I credit former MHI Chairman Nathan Smith for admitting during the video below that MHI needed to admit the associations prior mistakes, and make an effort to learn to avoid them. Smith’s admission was an important step. But have MHI’s leaders in fact learned from prior errors? Is there any consequence for MHI leaders from failures? In the private sector, a mistake costs jobs or money or both. What happens when MHI errors? Where are the consequences?
One possible reason why Kinzler won’t comment is MHI’s legislative agenda and history is simple. The MHI track record and agenda are not an easy to logically defend or explain.
MHI’s Rick Robinson, an attorney trained in debate and objective analysis, won’t defend MHI’s position either, nor will he or anyone else at MHI do so.
Why not?
So Kinzler’s in plenty of company when it comes to not defending MHI’s agenda or track record.
Another reason, as this writer replied to Kinzler is that the logic, history, ethics, and theories behind the MHI agenda are dubious at best. It’s a relevant point. In fact, Kinzler was the one that pointed out the steep decline in manufactured housing production, and noted the harmful ripple effects throughout the industry.
Perhaps that explains in part why after years and millions of dollars in efforts, MHI key agenda items have not passed. Positions like the arguably contradictory position on the DOE Rule led to a flip flop that MHI leaders don’t want to admit. Their flip flop on Clinton/Trump, their flip-flop on Pam Danner/HUD, etc. all can reasonably be seen as falling into that category.
But once more, in fairness, there are other possibilities. What we know is that Kinzler won’t defend MHI’s agenda, and neither will MHI publicly defend their agenda; why not?
Those who seek the truth on any subject want solid answers to reasonable questions. Curious minds want to know…
Kinzler Defended Bliss, A Deeper Look
Kinzler indicated he was defended his colleague Amy Bliss. But Amy was not attacked. Ross ‘defended’ Bliss by what’s known as “straw man” arguments. He said things neither MHProNews, nor this writer have said.
Perhaps Kinzler misread?
Then, Ross ducked the same questions and opportunities to discuss by phone to clarify possible misunderstandings that was offered to Bliss, why?
Keep in mind, I personally like and respect Amy and Ross — so this isn’t personal, from our side of the fence, this is a purely professional disagreement.
Think of it as a clinical doctor’s analysis — what do the tests and the facts reveal?
George Allen, a Bit Different?
Neither Kinzler nor Bliss accepted the offer to discuss items by phone, to clarify understanding. While written words are useful, they can be misunderstood. The combination of written and spoken words can thus become one way to avoid misunderstandings.
Allen’s situation is perhaps different.
He made an interesting revelation, saying he has quit MHI. He’s not alone.
Then, Allen says he has ‘no dog in the hunt,’ but begins blasting away furiously with attacks on the person (= ad hominem fallacy) or red herring tactics. Those have been an Allen-isms traits for some years.
But what’s revealing is the fury of the defenders of MHI, without actually addressing the specific points made or concerns raised.
Why weren’t specific questions, being directly answered?
Don’t Bother Me With Evidence or Third Party Report’s…?
There’s an old saying, ‘don’t bother me with facts, my mind is made up.’
- Rick Robinson
- Richard ‘Dick’ Jennison,
- Lesli Gooch,
- Amy Bliss,
- Ross Kinzler,
- George Allen and others have ducked out on dealing with specific concerns raised by voices inside the industry and those outside of the industry.
For Allen, that’s perhaps particularly problematic, because he claims the mantle of defending independent communities. Is he failing them, by not digging into the realities? Why is he now denying concerns on similar issues he himself has previously raised? Has Allen flip-flopped? Doesn’t he see the contradictions in his reasoning?
Personal Example Makes a Professional Point Useful to Manufactured Housing
My friends, family, and relationships include people of many faiths and backgrounds. Among them are various kinds of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, and non-believers. My parents raised us, thank God, with lived examples of how you treated all people with respect, and dignity.
People of good will can have disagreements.
So the response? It ought to be to examine issues, and if someone is mistaken – to show them their error.
But that isn’t done by name calling. Even when we strongly disagree with Mr. Buffet, Berkshire Hathaway or MHI, we aren’t name calling or mud-slinging. Rather, we provide evidence, quotes and voice concerns in a professional manner. Let them reply, if they can. If they can’t perhaps that answers why they began ducking out on engagement, discussion or debate over a year ago.
Progressive “Nation” Reports on Monopolies Cites Buffett, Clayton, Others – MH Industry Impact?
Bliss can speak about conspiracy theories, but when many have provided evidence, how can you call it a conspiracy theory any more?
Wisconsin Housing Alliance – an MHI ‘Affiliate’ – Amy Bliss’ Messages Raise New Anti-Trust Issue
Honest discussion is not accomplished by twisting the other person’s words, or by using false evidence, or misleading arguments. In fact, manufactured housing advocate, the Rev. Donald Tye Jr. has raised several important points, which will be useful in upcoming articles.
Soheyla had an article this week were we showed some of the vile name calling people post or send on the tornado and manufactured housing topic. It is linked above. The typical response made by this writer begins doesn’t start by cursing them back in return.
Let’s close with a very personal analogy, and I asked permission before sharing this.
My younger brother Tom Kovach holds very different views on a wide range of issues, and leads a life quite different than my own.
That said, we are brothers. We love and respect each other. Yes, at times we’ve exchanged thoughts in ways that hurt the other’s feelings, but we get over it, forgive as is needed, and move on.
I don’t have to agree with him, nor he with me, to have a rich intellectual discussion on a topic we disagree about. We don’t call each other some vile name.
21st President and CEO, and prior MHI Chairman Tim Williams said in our exclusive interview with him a number of very important ideas. One of my favorites is Tim’s fraternity example. It’s terrific.
A fraternity is at the root a brotherhood.
Brothers – kinfolk, family – ought to be able to disagree with respect.
MHProNews has focused on facts, concerns, documents, behaviors, trends – which is a kind of history – and evidence. Where does the logic of a position or case take someone?
I strive to hold no personal animus toward anyone in the industry, including those who have demonstrably wronged others or us, or have generally been unjust. Telling someone to ‘go to hell,’ or worse solves nothing.
If MHProNews is wrong on an interpretation, then that should be thoughtfully refuted, right? George or anyone, where is the need for rude name calling, or manipulative debaters tricks?
If my bride and I were the only two on the planet who believed these concerns, there might be a better cause for others to say ‘conspiracy theory,’ as Bliss said. If we were the only ones to say, there is a risk from monopolistic behaviors, then mischaracterization by Ross, Bliss, or as Allen did – 9BTW, I’m well aware of Allen’s nice side, and we respect and value his service to our country0 – could make more sense.
I like Amy and Ross on a personal level. But liking someone doesn’t mean you have to agree.
If MHI, Tim Williams – who can be very charming and likable too – Warren Buffett – ditto – or anyone else wants to debate the issues, let’s do so publicly, where the industry can tune in, and we should do so with mutual respect.
No cheap shots or debaters dodges, like those in the chart above, are needed.
My sincere belief is that the evidence shows that MHI is being used as a tool by the largest companies in manufactured housing. They are being used to advance an agenda that benefits those larger corporate players, and often hurts millions of home owners and millions of potential home buyers too.
I explained in a recent post how my view about MHI evolved.
If we at MHProNews know about or suspected a problem, and failed to report it, you could say, shame on me.
If we report concerns, and readers opt to ignore or think differently, that’s a reader’s absolute right as a free person.
But to ignore the growing body of evidence from sources inside the industry and outside the industry, is to do so at one’s own peril.
To paraphrase Jim Ayotte, all of us can only act upon the insights we have available at the time. We then do our best, based upon those insights.
We believe the states have done far better on the whole than MHI has. Others in the industry say so too.
We believe that MHI has demonstrably made blunders for years. Rather than admit them now, as then MHI Chairman Nathan Smith did a few years ago, they and their surrogates are demonstrably using tricks and tactics to duck, dodge, distract, detract, diminish, or defame.
That’s wrong, in my view.
If they were right, they have attorneys who are trained in debate, who could make us look foolish in public, with straight up debate. No tactics. I have no such advantage, no such formal training in debate. I think the last formal debate I was in, was high school or maybe even junior high.
So why doesn’t MHI bring out their Ph.D. and attorneys and debate? Or why doesn’t Clayton Homes, et al, do the same?
Let them try to honestly refute the concerns of voices across the political divide about monopolistic tactics. Again, see the link above from the recent report by The Nation that cites monopolistic tactics and names Clayton Homes.
Let them explain ethically why they kept others who do publishing as members, and not MHProNews (and our related operations)? No one ever accused me of disrupting an MHI meeting, nor of breaking an MHI rule, did they? All I ever did was ask questions, and offer different views if that seemed wise. Aren’t they violating what their 990 filings claim? Don’t they want feedback from their members? Or do they only want yes men and women, who fall in line, as the industry continues to get consolidated by a few?
Why would MHI single us out, ‘marked [us] for elimination’ as sources at or with MHI have said?
These folks are arguably hiding not one thing, but many things.
Those who ignore the evidence do so at their own peril. On these issues, my conscience is clear.
Beating Swords Into Plowshares
“And He [God] shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.” (Isaiah 2:4, Bible Hub)
Dig through the various reports, and ask, if they could refute any of it, why don’t they do so? ## (News, analysis, and commentary. Note 1: this post will be updated with downloads of statements emailed by Amy Bliss, Ross Kinzler and George Allen, among others. Note 2: where issues have not yet been litigated or determined by legal authorities, the word ‘allege’ should be construed as needed in the above as part of our analysis and statement.)
(Third party images and information are provided under fair use guidelines.)
L. A. “Tony” Kovach is an award winning manufactured housing industry veteran, and is the managing member of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC – the parent company to MHLivingNews.com, MHProNews.com and professional service provider to the factory-built housing industry.
Connect on LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/latonykovach
