26 ms·
I've lived in spaces this small, and smaller, but there were large common areas and the small space was only meant for sleeping and storage. It was unclear from
by jquery 7y ago
I've lived in spaces this small, and smaller, but there were large common areas and the small space was only meant for sleeping and storage. It was unclear from the video what common spaces were available to these individuals. I got the impression the apartments were "fully functional" (bathroom, kitchen, living space). The extremely narrow hallway added to the impression that the units were not part of a larger shared space.
The fact the option exists is better than nothing. These people did not seem under duress and it was a choice they made over alternatives.
That said, it's a symptom of a wider problem when full-time workers are in spaces that small, it tells us not enough units are being built to accommodate demand. Just like SF's insane rents are symptomatic of a wider problem and not merely the fault of wealthy people. More units would help as well as more jobs in local communities instead of concentrating all the good jobs inside a small city core (i.e., they said they did this to avoid commuting, wouldn't it be nice if they didn't have to commute at all?).
And to the person who mentioned Hong Kong's "coffin beds", I agree, those were straight out of a horror film and very sad to see.
- kenneth 7y agoThe issue in HK is poverty, not space. HK's blue collar workers are still quite poor today, and so live in nasty conditions. Poor people everywhere live in nasty conditions, it just so happens that the problems are different… e.g. Bangkok or Manila or India.
- drcode 7y agoI assume though if there was less poverty in Hong Kong, more space wouldn't suddenly appear... the existing small spaces would just become nicer but more expensive.