Unfortunately I disagree with such a simple explanation of such a complicated subject.
For example, if the cost of labor goes down because we have more automated machinery (Saws, nail guns, bigger forklifts/etc) to help us build houses, than you could build more for the same price of labor.
Also, the cost of labor keeps going down relative to inflation, because we are paying immigrants with no other job opportunities very little to build these houses (This is NOT a good thing, but it does mean labor is getting cheaper, as these jobs pay rise slower than inflation).
The cost of materials might be going up too, but in reality that fluctuates a lot, and overall is a reasonably small portion of the pie for a house (more for cheaper houses, less for more expensive houses).
The cost of land goes up, oh boy does it. Most of a houses price is in the land, theoretically, especially for smaller houses. So that’s a higher price for the same thing 60 years ago.
So what if you built a 2400 sq ft home on the same land as the old 1000 sq ft homes go for? With cheaper labor but more material, it shouldn’t be that much more in theory. But because of land cost, taxes, and much bigger profit margins, it costs so much more.
But all of this is really a digression anyway because ultimately you can’t find a home with a thousand square feet new. Also, if a home isn’t renovated, a 60’s house is going to need a lot of repairs, bringing up the price. At least in my area this is true. I presume the house you bought needed repairs, was in a “blighted” neighborhood, or for some other reason the neighborhood is considered less desirable. And even then, cheaper houses in poorer neighborhoods tend to get hit with taxes harder because the poor people can’t threaten to pay a lawyer to renegotiate their taxes.
I haven’t even covered the beginning of how complex this issue really is and how rising home sizes are just one aspect to the very many factors that play into housing prices.
But just to give you a taste of some more nuance from my perspective. I bought a big house in a new neighborhood because I could afford it, and we wanted to have a family. Buuuuut, it was only after doing this that I learned about socialism, and I want to change my habits. Also, I feel we have too much space and I don’t want to be so far out from town, so we started looking at smaller homes & cheaper places for the future. In my area, it’s not pretty. Houses going back to the 60s have been renovated so they are just as expensive (So, we could afford it as dual professionals, but not a single income union job), but the houses are still smaller, but sometimes on bigger lots, but also the lots haven’t been taken care of like the houses so there’s still a ton of work to do… And some of the older, cheaper houses that aren’t renovated need 50k+ in work to keep from falling apart (Or just feeling like you are living in filth), meaning they aren’t actually cheaper if you were to fix them up. Aaaaaand since I’m in “suburbia” everyone watches fear-filled news and think that those neighborhoods are filled with crime, and every time we talk about moving to one of those neighborhoods our family is like “Whoa you don’t wanna live there, poor people just roam around the place” as if their material conditions mean nothing, and they are just terrible people that are lost causes and need to be avoided. This is a social/cultural issue as much as it is an inflated lifestyle issue. I didn’t even mention the public school system, there’s so much involved in this decision!
Ugh, there’s so much more too it than just sq footage. People should live within their means, people shouldn’t inflate their lifestyle. But right now, the only way to live kinda cheaply is through renting a tiny place, which means no wealth growth, no chance for generational wealth, bad schools, the perpetuation of poor families, the continued stigma of “living in an apartment means you are poor and worthless so you better buy a house but they are expensive so you better just feel bad and pick yourself up by your bootstraps”.
You can’t just say that we are living too inflated lives, that might be true, but there’s so much more too it, especially for those that aren’t living an inflated life. One persons story (Yours or mine, or whoever) is just one story. We know that on average, people are having a harder time living even the most modest lives. And all of this is still in the context of living in an imperial core, where your stuff is cheap and made by children in the other hemisphere, so you are still advantaged.
I just don’t like when a simple explanation is used for such a complex situation.
It really is true that you can lie 20x before someone can prove your first lie wrong. And quipy responses are usually seen as “correct” because of how short simple answers feel so “enlightening”.
Unfortunately I disagree with such a simple explanation of such a complicated subject.
For example, if the cost of labor goes down because we have more automated machinery (Saws, nail guns, bigger forklifts/etc) to help us build houses, than you could build more for the same price of labor.
Also, the cost of labor keeps going down relative to inflation, because we are paying immigrants with no other job opportunities very little to build these houses (This is NOT a good thing, but it does mean labor is getting cheaper, as these jobs pay rise slower than inflation).
The cost of materials might be going up too, but in reality that fluctuates a lot, and overall is a reasonably small portion of the pie for a house (more for cheaper houses, less for more expensive houses).
The cost of land goes up, oh boy does it. Most of a houses price is in the land, theoretically, especially for smaller houses. So that’s a higher price for the same thing 60 years ago.
So what if you built a 2400 sq ft home on the same land as the old 1000 sq ft homes go for? With cheaper labor but more material, it shouldn’t be that much more in theory. But because of land cost, taxes, and much bigger profit margins, it costs so much more.
But all of this is really a digression anyway because ultimately you can’t find a home with a thousand square feet new. Also, if a home isn’t renovated, a 60’s house is going to need a lot of repairs, bringing up the price. At least in my area this is true. I presume the house you bought needed repairs, was in a “blighted” neighborhood, or for some other reason the neighborhood is considered less desirable. And even then, cheaper houses in poorer neighborhoods tend to get hit with taxes harder because the poor people can’t threaten to pay a lawyer to renegotiate their taxes.
I haven’t even covered the beginning of how complex this issue really is and how rising home sizes are just one aspect to the very many factors that play into housing prices.
But just to give you a taste of some more nuance from my perspective. I bought a big house in a new neighborhood because I could afford it, and we wanted to have a family. Buuuuut, it was only after doing this that I learned about socialism, and I want to change my habits. Also, I feel we have too much space and I don’t want to be so far out from town, so we started looking at smaller homes & cheaper places for the future. In my area, it’s not pretty. Houses going back to the 60s have been renovated so they are just as expensive (So, we could afford it as dual professionals, but not a single income union job), but the houses are still smaller, but sometimes on bigger lots, but also the lots haven’t been taken care of like the houses so there’s still a ton of work to do… And some of the older, cheaper houses that aren’t renovated need 50k+ in work to keep from falling apart (Or just feeling like you are living in filth), meaning they aren’t actually cheaper if you were to fix them up. Aaaaaand since I’m in “suburbia” everyone watches fear-filled news and think that those neighborhoods are filled with crime, and every time we talk about moving to one of those neighborhoods our family is like “Whoa you don’t wanna live there, poor people just roam around the place” as if their material conditions mean nothing, and they are just terrible people that are lost causes and need to be avoided. This is a social/cultural issue as much as it is an inflated lifestyle issue. I didn’t even mention the public school system, there’s so much involved in this decision!
Ugh, there’s so much more too it than just sq footage. People should live within their means, people shouldn’t inflate their lifestyle. But right now, the only way to live kinda cheaply is through renting a tiny place, which means no wealth growth, no chance for generational wealth, bad schools, the perpetuation of poor families, the continued stigma of “living in an apartment means you are poor and worthless so you better buy a house but they are expensive so you better just feel bad and pick yourself up by your bootstraps”.
You can’t just say that we are living too inflated lives, that might be true, but there’s so much more too it, especially for those that aren’t living an inflated life. One persons story (Yours or mine, or whoever) is just one story. We know that on average, people are having a harder time living even the most modest lives. And all of this is still in the context of living in an imperial core, where your stuff is cheap and made by children in the other hemisphere, so you are still advantaged.
I just don’t like when a simple explanation is used for such a complex situation.
Shortest marxist answer
I couldn’t help myself on this one.
It really is true that you can lie 20x before someone can prove your first lie wrong. And quipy responses are usually seen as “correct” because of how short simple answers feel so “enlightening”.
deleted by creator