5 ms·

"400 sqm with two kids might be a drama for people in the US" 400 square feet (~37 m^2) No need to turn this into another stereotyping Europe vs US issue. I

by x43b 11y ago

"400 sqm with two kids might be a drama for people in the US" 400 square feet (~37 m^2) No need to turn this into another stereotyping Europe vs US issue. I agree 37 m^2 is plenty of room for some people, not for others, regardless of where you are from.

goodJobWalrus 11y ago
> No need to turn this into another stereotyping Europe vs US issue But it is kind of true that Americans are extremely melodramatic about this stuff. 800 sqft house is often referred as a "tiny house" in American media. In the UK (for example) this is an average house size.
- serge2k 11y ago
  The US is over 10 times larger than the UK. Guess what, tons of land leads to different expectations. I don't understand why Europeans seem to like acting condescending about this stuff?
  - goodJobWalrus 11y ago
    > The US is over 10 times larger than the UK. Guess what, tons of land leads to different expectations. I'm not sure it's just that, it's also I think, that Americans find it acceptable to live in suburbs. If everyone tried to live in the city centers (like they do in nyc or SF), small places would also be the norm.
    - serge2k 11y ago
      > it's also I think, that Americans find it acceptable to live in suburbs Guess what, tons of land leads to different expectations
    - douche 11y ago
      Why would you want to live in a city center, when you could have 40 acres of good land in the country for the same money, or less? Suburbs are a compromise, where you get a little of column A (room enough for decent living) and a little column B (urban wages and access to capital), which equals a lot of column C (long, shitty commutes).
      - goodJobWalrus 11y ago
        > Why would you want to live in a city center Well, one reason would be: > long, shitty commutes another is that some people prefer urban life. I bet you'd be surprised to hear that in some countries people actually prefer to live in apartments to houses.When I ask why, they often state the fact that it is much less work to upkeep an apartment, so I guess that would be another reason. I personally understand why would some kid from the midwestern suburbs want to live in nyc, even if it means a much lower standard of living. But in reality I think it really is purely cultural, people prefer what people like them around them prefer. People in the US were living in the cities as well before the "white flight", so at some point, urban middle class families were also the norm.
        Turing_Machine 11y ago
        "I bet you'd be surprised to hear that in some countries people actually prefer to live in apartments to houses." One sniff test for the credibility of this is to look at what rich people do. No matter where you go, the wealthy tend to have large country estates. Sure, they may have a luxury apartment in town as well, but where do they spend their leisure time? Bingo.
        goodJobWalrus 11y ago
        I wasn't referring to rich people. They have a whole different set of requirements. Also, they typically don't have to clean their own mansion, of take care of the pesky chores around the house.
        Turing_Machine 11y ago
        Well, they're the ones who are free to choose anything. Someone who is forced to live in a tiny apartment because they can't afford anything better isn't really making a free choice, even if they rationalize it by claiming that it is.
        goodJobWalrus 11y ago
  - mikerichards 11y ago
    Obviously it sucks, but the Europeans have to justify it because they can't admit its much better in the US when it comes to housing.
    - Turing_Machine 11y ago
      It's not just Europeans. I remember a conversation years ago where people from New York City were making fun of how "unrealistic" the Roseanne TV show was, "because people that poor couldn't possibly afford that house". Never mind that the show was set in a small Midwestern town, and small Midwestern towns are, in fact, chock-full of houses very similar to the one on the show, which are, in fact, occupied by working-class people. Europeans, New Yorkers, and (increasingly) people from the Bay Area think that paying forty billion dollars a month to live in a closet is normal. It is not.
  - Turing_Machine 11y ago
    More like 40 times (3.8 million square miles compared to 94,000 square miles). The UK is smaller than Oregon.
    - serge2k 11y ago
      I think I switched one to miles and then dropped a zero. I should probably return that math degree :/
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- pjc50 11y ago
  It is now, it wasn't always so: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2398714/The-incredible-shrinking-houses-British-homes-built-just-HALF-size-1920s.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2398714/The-incredib... (see yesterday's discussion about rubbish buildings)
  - goodJobWalrus 11y ago
    Yes, it is definitely a consequence of suburbanization of America.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
sz4kerto 11y ago
I meant square feet, sorry. I wanted to hightlight that the 'normal' or 'acceptable' size of private space varies hugely between regions. You can call that stereotyping, but we can also just call them cultural differences.

by x43b 11y ago

goodJobWalrus 11y ago

> No need to turn this into another stereotyping Europe vs US issue But it is kind of true that Americans are extremely melodramatic about this stuff. 800 sqft house is often referred as a "tiny house" in American media. In the UK (for example) this is an average house size.

serge2k 11y ago
The US is over 10 times larger than the UK. Guess what, tons of land leads to different expectations. I don't understand why Europeans seem to like acting condescending about this stuff?
- goodJobWalrus 11y ago
  > The US is over 10 times larger than the UK. Guess what, tons of land leads to different expectations. I'm not sure it's just that, it's also I think, that Americans find it acceptable to live in suburbs. If everyone tried to live in the city centers (like they do in nyc or SF), small places would also be the norm.
  - serge2k 11y ago
    > it's also I think, that Americans find it acceptable to live in suburbs Guess what, tons of land leads to different expectations
  - douche 11y ago
    Why would you want to live in a city center, when you could have 40 acres of good land in the country for the same money, or less? Suburbs are a compromise, where you get a little of column A (room enough for decent living) and a little column B (urban wages and access to capital), which equals a lot of column C (long, shitty commutes).
    - goodJobWalrus 11y ago
      > Why would you want to live in a city center Well, one reason would be: > long, shitty commutes another is that some people prefer urban life. I bet you'd be surprised to hear that in some countries people actually prefer to live in apartments to houses.When I ask why, they often state the fact that it is much less work to upkeep an apartment, so I guess that would be another reason. I personally understand why would some kid from the midwestern suburbs want to live in nyc, even if it means a much lower standard of living. But in reality I think it really is purely cultural, people prefer what people like them around them prefer. People in the US were living in the cities as well before the "white flight", so at some point, urban middle class families were also the norm.
      - Turing_Machine 11y ago
        "I bet you'd be surprised to hear that in some countries people actually prefer to live in apartments to houses." One sniff test for the credibility of this is to look at what rich people do. No matter where you go, the wealthy tend to have large country estates. Sure, they may have a luxury apartment in town as well, but where do they spend their leisure time? Bingo.
        goodJobWalrus 11y ago
        I wasn't referring to rich people. They have a whole different set of requirements. Also, they typically don't have to clean their own mansion, of take care of the pesky chores around the house.
        Turing_Machine 11y ago
        Well, they're the ones who are free to choose anything. Someone who is forced to live in a tiny apartment because they can't afford anything better isn't really making a free choice, even if they rationalize it by claiming that it is.
        goodJobWalrus 11y ago
- mikerichards 11y ago
  Obviously it sucks, but the Europeans have to justify it because they can't admit its much better in the US when it comes to housing.
  - Turing_Machine 11y ago
    It's not just Europeans. I remember a conversation years ago where people from New York City were making fun of how "unrealistic" the Roseanne TV show was, "because people that poor couldn't possibly afford that house". Never mind that the show was set in a small Midwestern town, and small Midwestern towns are, in fact, chock-full of houses very similar to the one on the show, which are, in fact, occupied by working-class people. Europeans, New Yorkers, and (increasingly) people from the Bay Area think that paying forty billion dollars a month to live in a closet is normal. It is not.
- Turing_Machine 11y ago
  More like 40 times (3.8 million square miles compared to 94,000 square miles). The UK is smaller than Oregon.
  - serge2k 11y ago
    I think I switched one to miles and then dropped a zero. I should probably return that math degree :/
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
pjc50 11y ago
It is now, it wasn't always so: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2398714/The-incredible-shrinking-houses-British-homes-built-just-HALF-size-1920s.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2398714/The-incredib... (see yesterday's discussion about rubbish buildings)
- goodJobWalrus 11y ago
  Yes, it is definitely a consequence of suburbanization of America.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

sz4kerto 11y ago

I meant square feet, sorry. I wanted to hightlight that the 'normal' or 'acceptable' size of private space varies hugely between regions. You can call that stereotyping, but we can also just call them cultural differences.