14 ms·

The housing space metrics seem very far off from my experience, looking at numbers it seems "Tokyo" means "Tokyo Metropolis", which includes the countryside, mo

The housing space metrics seem very far off from my experience, looking at numbers it seems "Tokyo" means "Tokyo Metropolis", which includes the countryside, mountains, etc. So it's not really comparing the city. If we look at the numbers for Tokyo 23 wards[1] (what would traditionally be called "the city"), we can see they are virtually half than those from Paris or London: 16.5-19.7sqm/person is the range that falls in the median (50%) for Tokyo 23 wards[1]. Only 30% of houses have the minimum recommended of 25sqm/person (so, 70% live UNDER in under 25sqm/person). If the other cities in the graph are correct, that makes Tokyo median size around half of the average of those other cities[2]. So yes, definitely Tokyo housing is tiny. I know it since I live here and talk with people; when I invite someone who is not in tech to my place they all comment on how big my 37 sqm "house" (studio/single room) is, to which I can only agree and laugh/cry inside. I'm happy because I am well for living in Tokyo, but it's still a tiny place compared to my hometown where everyone lives like kings. [1] https://resources.realestate.co.jp/living/how-much-living-space-does-the-average-household-have-in-japan/ https://resources.realestate.co.jp/living/how-much-living-sp... [2] I believe I'm using median/average correctly here, but happy for corrections! I check "at what sizes it's 50% of the # of households" and then took that measure. Sorry for mixing medians and averages, but I cannot calculate averages with the numbers I found.

WeylandYutani 4y ago
It is the price one has to pay for living in the city and being fashionable. I see this in Amsterdam: rich expats who barely grasp that there is a country outside the city.
cannam 4y ago
I don't know about NY or Paris, but the comparison against London seems fair enough. They seem to be using a Tokyo metropolitan area of about 2000 km^2, and comparing it with Greater London at 1572 km^2. And indeed, people throughout Greater London are entirely used to living in small, damp, shared boxes.
- franciscop 4y ago
  The geography of the "cities" is very different though (look at the density of population maps provided), where "Tokyo Metropolitan" is one third pure mountains, then one third low-density living (think L.A.) and then one third what people normally thinks of the city of Tokyo, all of these in a sausage-like shape, while "Greater London" grows in a circle and so it's a circle-ish area. See this image with the labels, we should compare the green one instead of the 3 of them. Ideally "Tokyo" would be something more like the purple one, but the purple one is nothing. So we have "23 wards" (green), or Tokyo Metropolitan (the 3 together), neither of which is the best comparison, but def the green one vs London is much better than all of them (the purple dashes are how I think London would look like approx): https://imgur.com/a/nCmkE80 https://imgur.com/a/nCmkE80
  - GuB-42 4y ago
    And even for the "green" area, a good part of it is not that dense. I mean, it is still packed, but most of it is made of small 2 story houses rather than large apartment complexes and high rise buildings. The real dense part that looks like the pictures of Tokyo you have most likely seen is around the Yamanote line, a train line that circles an area that is about 1/10 of the green area.
    - franciscop 4y ago
      I see it everyday since I live here, no need for pics :) But yeah I agree, one of the first things that surprised me is that you can walk for 20 mins (in the right direction) from any major train station and find yourself in a tiny 1-2 stories houses area.
  - ouid 4y ago
    If you want to take a more principled approach to size here, you should use a metric that corresponds to how humans interact with the region. Pick a point to call the center and find all the points with a round trip time less than some number.
  - throwaway2037 4y ago
Jach 4y ago
Thanks for the additional info, I found it a rather terrible article. Even taking its numbers at face value, it makes me sad for non-Americans. The difference between the NY average of 43 sqm vs the rest is essentially an extra room.
SECProto 4y ago
> The housing space metrics seem very far off from my experience I have friend living in Tokyo paying <10万円 in rent for a (very small) single unit. A couple other friends share a larger unit and pay similar per person. All are in the 23 wards. This is unimaginable for other friends living in Paris (one of the 20 Arrondissements) and New York (one of the 5 boroughs), regardless of size. I have no anecdata on London. Regarding size, I was far more comfortable living in a ~550sqft 1LDK in Japan than I ever was in 800sqft-1000sqft apartments in North America - everything is geared to living in tighter quarters (from furniture to fridge to food packaging) making it much more convenient than trying to fit a full size couch into a small western apartment, or trying to save by bulk buying ingredients when you don't have the space to store it. So I think the title of the article is half right (rent is cheaper than you'd think), missing some key info (wages are also cheaper than you'd think), half of it is roughly incorrect (housing is not any more spacious than you'd think), and the article itself doesn't back it up well.
- Konichivalue 4y ago
  Yes, the numbers are a bit skewed by the fact that more people live alone in Tokyo than Paris or NYC, but it's definitely true that you get more square meters per $ in Tokyo. Also, it is true that people on Tokyo on average earn less than NYC, London and Paris, but they also spend a smaller percentage of their total income on housing, so housing is cheaper in PPP terms too. I'll dig out the exact numbers tomorrow if anyone is interested, but now I'm out in one of Tokyo's extremely cheap bar districts having skewers and beers for less than $10
  - franciscop 4y ago
    Do you know numbers about how much housing is sponsored by the companies in Japan? Maybe that's what is making the difference since it's not counted neither as salary, nor as the price of the house? I know some large companies sponsor partially or totally the housing of thousands of their employees, again skewing prices greatly. For example if Tanaka's salary is $500 lower because the company is partially paying for their place, that means on paper his salary is lower, the price of the place is MUCH lower, and the ratio of housing/salary is also lower, than if he received those $500 and then used it to pay for the house.
wst_ 4y ago
I'm sure you've researched this and sure some apartments in Tokyo are small. I'd like to touch upon the big-house comment, though. It may be that your Japanese friends say that simply because it is polite, and very common, thing to say when you visit someone's house for the first time.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
odiroot 4y ago
> The housing space metrics seem very far off from my experience, looking at numbers it seems "Tokyo" means "Tokyo Metropolis", which includes the countryside, mountains, etc. So it's not really comparing the city. Yep. In that case half of Berkshire, Hampshire, Kent, Surrey etc. should count as well.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
scelerat 4y ago
I’ve had the good fortune to visit Tokyo several times, and visited a few apartments of friends who have regular middle class jobs: animators, cooks, tailors. Every apartment was tiny. Like less than half the size of any apartment I've ever lived in at any point of my life living in Los Angeles or San Francisco. I’ve stayed many times with a friend whose father is a well-known Japanese movie actor and even they live in a house which would be modest by any US suburban standard, in a quiet part of a nice neighborhood (kichijoji) but still an 8-10 minute walk to trains and very bustling, active parts of town. The thing I’ve found remarkable with Tokyo is how walkable it is and how, despite how crowded and dense it can seem, the street level experience can feel very accessible and not at all overwhelming. Many good parks, walking paths and general accommodations for people not in cars.
golemiprague 4y ago
camkego 4y ago
If they are considering Tokyo Metropolis, they might be including Ogasawara, which is 1000km from downtown Tokyo.
cthalupa 4y ago
When I thought I was going to be living in Tokyo for work for a couple of years, I had started to spend some significant time looking for places to rent, and yeah - I had to go out to Saitama or Chiba to find anything that I would be comfortable living in without paying absurd prices. Which, honestly, wasn't the worst. 40 minutes to an hour on the JR is 10-30 minutes more than my current commute, but I could have dealt with that in exchange for more space.

WeylandYutani 4y ago

It is the price one has to pay for living in the city and being fashionable. I see this in Amsterdam: rich expats who barely grasp that there is a country outside the city.

cannam 4y ago

I don't know about NY or Paris, but the comparison against London seems fair enough. They seem to be using a Tokyo metropolitan area of about 2000 km^2, and comparing it with Greater London at 1572 km^2. And indeed, people throughout Greater London are entirely used to living in small, damp, shared boxes.

franciscop 4y ago
The geography of the "cities" is very different though (look at the density of population maps provided), where "Tokyo Metropolitan" is one third pure mountains, then one third low-density living (think L.A.) and then one third what people normally thinks of the city of Tokyo, all of these in a sausage-like shape, while "Greater London" grows in a circle and so it's a circle-ish area. See this image with the labels, we should compare the green one instead of the 3 of them. Ideally "Tokyo" would be something more like the purple one, but the purple one is nothing. So we have "23 wards" (green), or Tokyo Metropolitan (the 3 together), neither of which is the best comparison, but def the green one vs London is much better than all of them (the purple dashes are how I think London would look like approx): https://imgur.com/a/nCmkE80 https://imgur.com/a/nCmkE80
- GuB-42 4y ago
  And even for the "green" area, a good part of it is not that dense. I mean, it is still packed, but most of it is made of small 2 story houses rather than large apartment complexes and high rise buildings. The real dense part that looks like the pictures of Tokyo you have most likely seen is around the Yamanote line, a train line that circles an area that is about 1/10 of the green area.
  - franciscop 4y ago
    I see it everyday since I live here, no need for pics :) But yeah I agree, one of the first things that surprised me is that you can walk for 20 mins (in the right direction) from any major train station and find yourself in a tiny 1-2 stories houses area.
- ouid 4y ago
  If you want to take a more principled approach to size here, you should use a metric that corresponds to how humans interact with the region. Pick a point to call the center and find all the points with a round trip time less than some number.
- throwaway2037 4y ago

Jach 4y ago

Thanks for the additional info, I found it a rather terrible article. Even taking its numbers at face value, it makes me sad for non-Americans. The difference between the NY average of 43 sqm vs the rest is essentially an extra room.

SECProto 4y ago

> The housing space metrics seem very far off from my experience I have friend living in Tokyo paying <10万円 in rent for a (very small) single unit. A couple other friends share a larger unit and pay similar per person. All are in the 23 wards. This is unimaginable for other friends living in Paris (one of the 20 Arrondissements) and New York (one of the 5 boroughs), regardless of size. I have no anecdata on London. Regarding size, I was far more comfortable living in a ~550sqft 1LDK in Japan than I ever was in 800sqft-1000sqft apartments in North America - everything is geared to living in tighter quarters (from furniture to fridge to food packaging) making it much more convenient than trying to fit a full size couch into a small western apartment, or trying to save by bulk buying ingredients when you don't have the space to store it. So I think the title of the article is half right (rent is cheaper than you'd think), missing some key info (wages are also cheaper than you'd think), half of it is roughly incorrect (housing is not any more spacious than you'd think), and the article itself doesn't back it up well.

Konichivalue 4y ago
Yes, the numbers are a bit skewed by the fact that more people live alone in Tokyo than Paris or NYC, but it's definitely true that you get more square meters per $ in Tokyo. Also, it is true that people on Tokyo on average earn less than NYC, London and Paris, but they also spend a smaller percentage of their total income on housing, so housing is cheaper in PPP terms too. I'll dig out the exact numbers tomorrow if anyone is interested, but now I'm out in one of Tokyo's extremely cheap bar districts having skewers and beers for less than $10
- franciscop 4y ago
  Do you know numbers about how much housing is sponsored by the companies in Japan? Maybe that's what is making the difference since it's not counted neither as salary, nor as the price of the house? I know some large companies sponsor partially or totally the housing of thousands of their employees, again skewing prices greatly. For example if Tanaka's salary is $500 lower because the company is partially paying for their place, that means on paper his salary is lower, the price of the place is MUCH lower, and the ratio of housing/salary is also lower, than if he received those $500 and then used it to pay for the house.

wst_ 4y ago

I'm sure you've researched this and sure some apartments in Tokyo are small. I'd like to touch upon the big-house comment, though. It may be that your Japanese friends say that simply because it is polite, and very common, thing to say when you visit someone's house for the first time.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

odiroot 4y ago

> The housing space metrics seem very far off from my experience, looking at numbers it seems "Tokyo" means "Tokyo Metropolis", which includes the countryside, mountains, etc. So it's not really comparing the city. Yep. In that case half of Berkshire, Hampshire, Kent, Surrey etc. should count as well.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

scelerat 4y ago

I’ve had the good fortune to visit Tokyo several times, and visited a few apartments of friends who have regular middle class jobs: animators, cooks, tailors. Every apartment was tiny. Like less than half the size of any apartment I've ever lived in at any point of my life living in Los Angeles or San Francisco. I’ve stayed many times with a friend whose father is a well-known Japanese movie actor and even they live in a house which would be modest by any US suburban standard, in a quiet part of a nice neighborhood (kichijoji) but still an 8-10 minute walk to trains and very bustling, active parts of town. The thing I’ve found remarkable with Tokyo is how walkable it is and how, despite how crowded and dense it can seem, the street level experience can feel very accessible and not at all overwhelming. Many good parks, walking paths and general accommodations for people not in cars.

golemiprague 4y ago

camkego 4y ago

If they are considering Tokyo Metropolis, they might be including Ogasawara, which is 1000km from downtown Tokyo.

cthalupa 4y ago

When I thought I was going to be living in Tokyo for work for a couple of years, I had started to spend some significant time looking for places to rent, and yeah - I had to go out to Saitama or Chiba to find anything that I would be comfortable living in without paying absurd prices. Which, honestly, wasn't the worst. 40 minutes to an hour on the JR is 10-30 minutes more than my current commute, but I could have dealt with that in exchange for more space.