3 ms·

It could already have been solved at least in theory. A Tiny House on Wheels or THOW can be built for between 5000 and 50,000 dollars depending on specificatio

It could already have been solved at least in theory. A Tiny House on Wheels or THOW can be built for between 5000 and 50,000 dollars depending on specifications. I have even talked to two people (on HN and on Reddit) on the verge of homelessness who are building small transports for shelter (several hundred dollars) which they can haul by bicycle. These can be very effective in the colder months. The sticking point is Land, or rather, Parking. Tiny Housers are very political active and slightly devious but for people in cities in particular this is tough. There is a nice technical problem to solve for here if you could build a closed loop system for each input and output for a small house. I don't know that the technology exists for getting it to work properly even on a small scale at reasonable cost. Because if one could solve that, then lots of problems go away.

Mz 10y ago
I am well aware of the tiny house movement. They were put on wheels to get around the fact that it is illegal to build a house that small. It is a legal loophole. It also means they are relegated to being glorified trailers, which means they will never be on even footing in many important respect with a house with a foundation. Furthermore, because it is "cutting edge," it isn't yet accessible to most poor people. A lot of tiny houses are insanely expensive per square foot, containing quite high quality materials. They are basically aimed at eccentrics, not nirmal people with a limited income. For $50k, you could build a house that is 600-1000 sq ft on a foundation without a lot f bells and whistles. The average new home today is nearly 2500 sq ft -- more than twice the size of the average new home in the 1950s -- and contains fewer people than the average house in the 1950s. We don't need eccentric high quality trailers. We need normal houses with actual foundations that aren't trying to compete with the Taj Mahal for grandeur. This isn't remotely solved and the primary areas that need to be addressed have nothing at all to do with construction technique. They primarily have to do with policy reform and financing mechanisms.
- internaut 10y ago
  > It also means they are relegated to being glorified trailers, which means they will never be on even footing in many important respect with a house with a foundation. Well sure. It means you might have have trouble getting post delivered to your door or getting utility hookups in a city, or trash collection. However those kinds of things are much more easily hacked than this: "This isn't remotely solved and the primary areas that need to be addressed have nothing at all to do with construction technique. They primarily have to do with policy reform and financing mechanisms." I completely agree! Meanwhile we have a problem... Get back to me when it costs 5-10 years of average wages to purchase the average house. Until then Tiny Houses are at the least a good interim solution to not becoming homeless or massively indebted or ripped into by landlords. > Furthermore, because it is "cutting edge," it isn't yet accessible to most poor people. A lot of tiny houses are insanely expensive per square foot, containing quite high quality materials. Remember I said 'in theory', it was a hypothetical. A lot of Tiny Houses are very expensive per sq ft because of the kind of people who are building them. Mine is for example because it is stuffed full of cool features, materials and designs. I believe one can build a mass production of Tiny Houses for 5k-7k per unit which have all the basic necessities. > They are basically aimed at eccentrics I'll take that as a compliment. I prefer 'unique individual' ;-) > not normal people with a limited income. You double your costs per sq ft if you hire somebody else to do everything for example. Tiny Houses are very accessible to the lower middle class and to the working class, because they tend to have the right skillset or because they have some amount of cash flow. Most Tiny Houses are built and finished for about 25k. That is good number when contrasted with the alternatives. If you have close to zero cash flow, you have two options available to you, perhaps to be used in concert. 1. Reclaim waste materials. People have built Tiny Houses for as little as 500 dollars although I don't recommend this if you can get a job and save up. But if your time is effectively free then this is a wise way to spend it. 2. Construct a micro sized Tiny House to be transported by bicycle. That's about 200-300 dollars. Better than being homeless with no shelter. I think we're coming at this subject from different premises. Mine is 'obtain shelter' and yours is 'obtain housing'. I think government related problems aren't going to be solved for a long time and that in light of that a lot of people are going to get screwed over unless they adopt something like Tiny Houses.
  - Mz 10y ago
    I think we're coming at this subject from different premises. Mine is 'obtain shelter' and yours is 'obtain housing'. Yup, that's why in my original comment I talked about affordable housing, not affordable shelter. Good for you that you like your current lifestyle and are a fan of tiny houses. It doesn't solve the problem space I am suggesting for the question posited.
ZeroFries 10y ago
How are tiny houses better than small apartments? Being able to vertically stack things sounds hugely more efficient.
- internaut 10y ago
  Density or going 3D does make things cheaper. However there are still three problems. 0. Zoning in the UK and USA is prohibiting new construction. This is a fact that can't be got around. It is a political problem. 1. House prices. Extant legal construction builds have gone way above what millennials can afford on their stagnant wages. It is a logical consequence of monetary policy at zero % interest rates can cheap debt but many people, including myself, have no desire to be buying a building which will take several decades of work to pay for. Renting isn't a solution either. It used to take between 5 and 10 years to pay off a mortgage. Builders I've talked to say their new builds in the US are never less than 350k per unit. 2. Work is not what it used to be. Even jobs which have decent wages have not kept up with the kind of house price inflation that exists in London and San Francisco. People go where the work is, and it is becoming ridiculous to shackle yourself to a thirty year debt when the job you went there for lasts about five-seven years on average. Summation: Tiny Houses are a good solution to a world of stagnant opportunity and a schizophrenic economy. They are about putting a backstop against getting fucked by going bust or becoming homeless to put it plainly.
- RUG3Y 10y ago
  A modified parking garage with simple utility hookups would be a good place to park tiny houses. If you could spring ~5k for a tiny house and $50 a month for garbage collection/water, you'd have a decent situation going. Cheaper to build and more flexible than an apartment building, but still "stackable."

Mz 10y ago

I am well aware of the tiny house movement. They were put on wheels to get around the fact that it is illegal to build a house that small. It is a legal loophole. It also means they are relegated to being glorified trailers, which means they will never be on even footing in many important respect with a house with a foundation. Furthermore, because it is "cutting edge," it isn't yet accessible to most poor people. A lot of tiny houses are insanely expensive per square foot, containing quite high quality materials. They are basically aimed at eccentrics, not nirmal people with a limited income. For $50k, you could build a house that is 600-1000 sq ft on a foundation without a lot f bells and whistles. The average new home today is nearly 2500 sq ft -- more than twice the size of the average new home in the 1950s -- and contains fewer people than the average house in the 1950s. We don't need eccentric high quality trailers. We need normal houses with actual foundations that aren't trying to compete with the Taj Mahal for grandeur. This isn't remotely solved and the primary areas that need to be addressed have nothing at all to do with construction technique. They primarily have to do with policy reform and financing mechanisms.

internaut 10y ago
> It also means they are relegated to being glorified trailers, which means they will never be on even footing in many important respect with a house with a foundation. Well sure. It means you might have have trouble getting post delivered to your door or getting utility hookups in a city, or trash collection. However those kinds of things are much more easily hacked than this: "This isn't remotely solved and the primary areas that need to be addressed have nothing at all to do with construction technique. They primarily have to do with policy reform and financing mechanisms." I completely agree! Meanwhile we have a problem... Get back to me when it costs 5-10 years of average wages to purchase the average house. Until then Tiny Houses are at the least a good interim solution to not becoming homeless or massively indebted or ripped into by landlords. > Furthermore, because it is "cutting edge," it isn't yet accessible to most poor people. A lot of tiny houses are insanely expensive per square foot, containing quite high quality materials. Remember I said 'in theory', it was a hypothetical. A lot of Tiny Houses are very expensive per sq ft because of the kind of people who are building them. Mine is for example because it is stuffed full of cool features, materials and designs. I believe one can build a mass production of Tiny Houses for 5k-7k per unit which have all the basic necessities. > They are basically aimed at eccentrics I'll take that as a compliment. I prefer 'unique individual' ;-) > not normal people with a limited income. You double your costs per sq ft if you hire somebody else to do everything for example. Tiny Houses are very accessible to the lower middle class and to the working class, because they tend to have the right skillset or because they have some amount of cash flow. Most Tiny Houses are built and finished for about 25k. That is good number when contrasted with the alternatives. If you have close to zero cash flow, you have two options available to you, perhaps to be used in concert. 1. Reclaim waste materials. People have built Tiny Houses for as little as 500 dollars although I don't recommend this if you can get a job and save up. But if your time is effectively free then this is a wise way to spend it. 2. Construct a micro sized Tiny House to be transported by bicycle. That's about 200-300 dollars. Better than being homeless with no shelter. I think we're coming at this subject from different premises. Mine is 'obtain shelter' and yours is 'obtain housing'. I think government related problems aren't going to be solved for a long time and that in light of that a lot of people are going to get screwed over unless they adopt something like Tiny Houses.
- Mz 10y ago
  I think we're coming at this subject from different premises. Mine is 'obtain shelter' and yours is 'obtain housing'. Yup, that's why in my original comment I talked about affordable housing, not affordable shelter. Good for you that you like your current lifestyle and are a fan of tiny houses. It doesn't solve the problem space I am suggesting for the question posited.

ZeroFries 10y ago

How are tiny houses better than small apartments? Being able to vertically stack things sounds hugely more efficient.

internaut 10y ago
Density or going 3D does make things cheaper. However there are still three problems. 0. Zoning in the UK and USA is prohibiting new construction. This is a fact that can't be got around. It is a political problem. 1. House prices. Extant legal construction builds have gone way above what millennials can afford on their stagnant wages. It is a logical consequence of monetary policy at zero % interest rates can cheap debt but many people, including myself, have no desire to be buying a building which will take several decades of work to pay for. Renting isn't a solution either. It used to take between 5 and 10 years to pay off a mortgage. Builders I've talked to say their new builds in the US are never less than 350k per unit. 2. Work is not what it used to be. Even jobs which have decent wages have not kept up with the kind of house price inflation that exists in London and San Francisco. People go where the work is, and it is becoming ridiculous to shackle yourself to a thirty year debt when the job you went there for lasts about five-seven years on average. Summation: Tiny Houses are a good solution to a world of stagnant opportunity and a schizophrenic economy. They are about putting a backstop against getting fucked by going bust or becoming homeless to put it plainly.
RUG3Y 10y ago
A modified parking garage with simple utility hookups would be a good place to park tiny houses. If you could spring ~5k for a tiny house and $50 a month for garbage collection/water, you'd have a decent situation going. Cheaper to build and more flexible than an apartment building, but still "stackable."