3 ms·

Yes, they are, and that's why I responded by pointing out that consumers generally don't think about that factor, they only think about initial costs.

• danans 8y ago
  It's hard to blame consumers if they are buying the average sized homes for their area that are still huge in operational and maintenance costs. In most newer SFH developments, house size is usually dictated by exclusionary zoning (i.e minimum lot and house sizes) and developer business priorities, not by what is financially prudent for buyers. And as your SUV example illustrates, bigger sells better. Choosing not to buy in to that usually requires relocating to an area that values efficiency over size, and those are often very expensive areas, since they are few and far between.
  • magduf 8y ago
    The consumers are always at fault, as they're the ones with the purchasing power, and the voting power. >And as your SUV example illustrates, bigger sells better. There's no such thing as "vehicle zoning"; if consumers wanted to buy smaller vehicles, they're out there on the market. No one's forcing them to buy and drive huge SUVs. >In most newer SFH developments, house size is usually dictated by exclusionary zoning (i.e minimum lot and house sizes) and developer business priorities, not by what is financially prudent for buyers. This is controlled by the local government, which is controlled by the voters, who are the consumers. They don't have these problems in Japan, because they don't have exclusionary zoning. If you own the lot, you can build whatever the heck you want on it, and the neighbors have no power to stop you.