7 ms·

This comment deserves to be higher. People just think you can put these anywhere but you need water connection, sewer connection, electrical, telephone line/cab

This comment deserves to be higher. People just think you can put these anywhere but you need water connection, sewer connection, electrical, telephone line/cable, permits and red tape, by the time you're done it'll be double. And I don't think these solve any of our housing affordability problems, the land in a desirable area will be far more expensive than what's on top.

Kosirich 5y ago
So my question is, if you had a piece of land, concrete foundation, electrical, water and sewer connection, is it possible to get something better for 50k?
- dagw 5y ago
  is it possible to get something better for 50k? If you are willing to do a lot of work yourself and value your time a $0 and aren't in a hurry, probably. Otherwise, this looks pretty good.
  - EricE 5y ago
    >If you are willing to do a lot of work yourself and value your time a $0 and aren't in a hurry, probably. I wish I could vote you up more than once. If they are taking advantage of economies of scale they should be able to obtain for higher quality materials (and in looking over their materials this is not stuff they are buying at Home Depot). Couple that with the advantages of building all this stuff indoors, sheltered from the weather while under construction and that they can afford to create specialized jigs and tooling to not only speed the construction time but also produce far more consistent and higher quality results they should be able to do things that you simply can't do on site in the field. Transportation of prefabbed housing has always been the major issue, which is why they spend so much time talking about how they are solving that :)
- harmmonica 5y ago
  Absolutely possible. 50k for a 400 SF house that's built to modern code given those things you mentioned are already in place. To be specific, that's a full kitchen, with decent appliances, a full bath, 1 bedroom (though you _could_ fit 2 in 400 SF), a living room and some storage space. Not that it helps to write checks you have zero way of cashing, but we just built this: https://imgur.com/gallery/KbPlbPR/comment/2099542904 https://imgur.com/gallery/KbPlbPR/comment/2099542904. We're still working on the interior, but this design, if we increased its size to 400 SF, and given the things you mention being in place, could be had for 50k or less even, and it would be built better than most homes in the US. Just one guy's take, but my friend and I are trying to realize the dream of building more affordable housing that doesn't compromise on quality and design. We're just starting with this one project, though, so obviously a long way to go!
- wintermutestwin 5y ago
  >is it possible to get something better for 50k? Theoretically, yes. In practice, finding a builder who wants the job is pretty impossible.
amelius 5y ago
We need a better way to distribute land than the one we use now (=based on money and inheritance). This is the problem which smart people should be working on, not some prefab home.
- chris123 5y ago
  People should be free to buy the land they want with the money that they've earned or otherwise legally acquired. It's just a basic principle. The principal below that principle, is that you have autonomy over your own body, and your own labor, and you have a choice as to how you apply. And you have a right to the fruits of your labor and creativity and entrepreneurship. And you can spend those fruits, and all the ways that are legal, including buying land, including buying expensive land in desirable places. And that kind of land is expensive. Not everybody can buy it.
  - amelius 5y ago
    Land is different from consumer goods. How would you feel if companies started to divide the available drinking water or breathable air? That rich people controlled who can drink or breathe? And that inheritance determined your odds of survival, not based on genes but on access to basic resources? It is OK if hard work is rewarded with money. However, it is not OK if people use that money against the rest of us, who made different life choices. Since land is a limited resource, there is a problem there.
  - iso1631 5y ago
    Back in 1600 someone declared they owned all the land in a valley. Their descendants still own it, or have benefited from selling it off at various points. It seems wrong that a decision 400 years ago has bearing on people today. In the UK it's even worse -- much of the land is still owned by the families that were mates with William the Conquerer back in 1066. About 1500 years ago the king fell out with some landholders (monasteries) and confiscated it, giving it to his mates, who still own it. Land should not be owned, it should be rented from the people. You improve its value? Great, you shouldn't be charged for that, but the unimproved value of that land is something that should be of benefit to society as a whole.

Kosirich 5y ago

So my question is, if you had a piece of land, concrete foundation, electrical, water and sewer connection, is it possible to get something better for 50k?

dagw 5y ago
is it possible to get something better for 50k? If you are willing to do a lot of work yourself and value your time a $0 and aren't in a hurry, probably. Otherwise, this looks pretty good.
- EricE 5y ago
  >If you are willing to do a lot of work yourself and value your time a $0 and aren't in a hurry, probably. I wish I could vote you up more than once. If they are taking advantage of economies of scale they should be able to obtain for higher quality materials (and in looking over their materials this is not stuff they are buying at Home Depot). Couple that with the advantages of building all this stuff indoors, sheltered from the weather while under construction and that they can afford to create specialized jigs and tooling to not only speed the construction time but also produce far more consistent and higher quality results they should be able to do things that you simply can't do on site in the field. Transportation of prefabbed housing has always been the major issue, which is why they spend so much time talking about how they are solving that :)
harmmonica 5y ago
Absolutely possible. 50k for a 400 SF house that's built to modern code given those things you mentioned are already in place. To be specific, that's a full kitchen, with decent appliances, a full bath, 1 bedroom (though you _could_ fit 2 in 400 SF), a living room and some storage space. Not that it helps to write checks you have zero way of cashing, but we just built this: https://imgur.com/gallery/KbPlbPR/comment/2099542904 https://imgur.com/gallery/KbPlbPR/comment/2099542904. We're still working on the interior, but this design, if we increased its size to 400 SF, and given the things you mention being in place, could be had for 50k or less even, and it would be built better than most homes in the US. Just one guy's take, but my friend and I are trying to realize the dream of building more affordable housing that doesn't compromise on quality and design. We're just starting with this one project, though, so obviously a long way to go!
wintermutestwin 5y ago
>is it possible to get something better for 50k? Theoretically, yes. In practice, finding a builder who wants the job is pretty impossible.

amelius 5y ago

We need a better way to distribute land than the one we use now (=based on money and inheritance). This is the problem which smart people should be working on, not some prefab home.

chris123 5y ago
People should be free to buy the land they want with the money that they've earned or otherwise legally acquired. It's just a basic principle. The principal below that principle, is that you have autonomy over your own body, and your own labor, and you have a choice as to how you apply. And you have a right to the fruits of your labor and creativity and entrepreneurship. And you can spend those fruits, and all the ways that are legal, including buying land, including buying expensive land in desirable places. And that kind of land is expensive. Not everybody can buy it.
- amelius 5y ago
  Land is different from consumer goods. How would you feel if companies started to divide the available drinking water or breathable air? That rich people controlled who can drink or breathe? And that inheritance determined your odds of survival, not based on genes but on access to basic resources? It is OK if hard work is rewarded with money. However, it is not OK if people use that money against the rest of us, who made different life choices. Since land is a limited resource, there is a problem there.
- iso1631 5y ago
  Back in 1600 someone declared they owned all the land in a valley. Their descendants still own it, or have benefited from selling it off at various points. It seems wrong that a decision 400 years ago has bearing on people today. In the UK it's even worse -- much of the land is still owned by the families that were mates with William the Conquerer back in 1066. About 1500 years ago the king fell out with some landholders (monasteries) and confiscated it, giving it to his mates, who still own it. Land should not be owned, it should be rented from the people. You improve its value? Great, you shouldn't be charged for that, but the unimproved value of that land is something that should be of benefit to society as a whole.