4 ms·

If you read it he notes how he earned the money to buy some of the components. For one, he built a stone driveway, which would be pretty backbreaking work. Othe

If you read it he notes how he earned the money to buy some of the components. For one, he built a stone driveway, which would be pretty backbreaking work. Other pieces he found at the town landfill. And to be honest it isn't high-end gear for the most part. I mean, a lot of it is from Radio Shack. And the higher-end stuff isn't new and/or had to be repaired.

astura 8y ago
The reality is, even if it were all free, it would be rare for a teenager to have enough physical space to store all this crap in the 1970s. Especially in their bedroom vs the garage or basement. "Today’s new homes are 1,000 square feet larger than in 1973, and the living space per person has doubled over last 40 years" http://www.aei.org/publication/todays-new-homes-are-1000-square-feet-larger-than-in-1973-and-the-living-space-per-person-has-doubled-over-last-40-years/ http://www.aei.org/publication/todays-new-homes-are-1000-squ...
- jamiek88 8y ago
  Just having your own bedroom if multiple kids would be considered wealthy! Certainly in Britain. America was always different though, middle class kids always have more. I remember watching tv shows with kids having a phone in their room that blew my mind as a kid sharing a room with two brothers and very locked down phone in the house. Free local calls amazed me too when I found out about that. And refills of soda. Land of plenty indeed.
  - dangerbird2 8y ago
    It's less "land of plenty" than it is the federal government paying for big bedrooms instead of universal healthcare and a proper social safety net. As part of the post-depression New Deal and especially after WWII, single-family housing was very heavily subsized by the federal government. However, these policies were coupled with segregationist housing restrictions that pretty much excluded non-white Americans from the rise of suburbia in the 50s. While white suburban families were accumulating wealth through home ownership and mortgage equity, black families (as well as rural Americans who didn't see many of the benefits of the industrial boom of the 40s and 50s) were increasingly pushed into poverty.
- jonhendry18 8y ago
  TBH it looks like a remodeled attic room. And the way it's all crammed in a corner suggests that it isn't taking up an especially large amount of space. We don't see how large the rest of the room is. I live in a pretty average US home (built in 1971, raised ranch similar to this:https://photos.zillowstatic.com/p_e/ISi3u8fp8ljszu1000000000.jpg https://photos.zillowstatic.com/p_e/ISi3u8fp8ljszu1000000000...) and there's plenty of room in the 2 non-master bedrooms to dedicate half the room to a crammed-in arrangement like this, with a bed crammed in the other half.

astura 8y ago

The reality is, even if it were all free, it would be rare for a teenager to have enough physical space to store all this crap in the 1970s. Especially in their bedroom vs the garage or basement. "Today’s new homes are 1,000 square feet larger than in 1973, and the living space per person has doubled over last 40 years" http://www.aei.org/publication/todays-new-homes-are-1000-square-feet-larger-than-in-1973-and-the-living-space-per-person-has-doubled-over-last-40-years/ http://www.aei.org/publication/todays-new-homes-are-1000-squ...

jamiek88 8y ago
Just having your own bedroom if multiple kids would be considered wealthy! Certainly in Britain. America was always different though, middle class kids always have more. I remember watching tv shows with kids having a phone in their room that blew my mind as a kid sharing a room with two brothers and very locked down phone in the house. Free local calls amazed me too when I found out about that. And refills of soda. Land of plenty indeed.
- dangerbird2 8y ago
  It's less "land of plenty" than it is the federal government paying for big bedrooms instead of universal healthcare and a proper social safety net. As part of the post-depression New Deal and especially after WWII, single-family housing was very heavily subsized by the federal government. However, these policies were coupled with segregationist housing restrictions that pretty much excluded non-white Americans from the rise of suburbia in the 50s. While white suburban families were accumulating wealth through home ownership and mortgage equity, black families (as well as rural Americans who didn't see many of the benefits of the industrial boom of the 40s and 50s) were increasingly pushed into poverty.
jonhendry18 8y ago
TBH it looks like a remodeled attic room. And the way it's all crammed in a corner suggests that it isn't taking up an especially large amount of space. We don't see how large the rest of the room is. I live in a pretty average US home (built in 1971, raised ranch similar to this:https://photos.zillowstatic.com/p_e/ISi3u8fp8ljszu1000000000.jpg https://photos.zillowstatic.com/p_e/ISi3u8fp8ljszu1000000000...) and there's plenty of room in the 2 non-master bedrooms to dedicate half the room to a crammed-in arrangement like this, with a bed crammed in the other half.