4 ms·

Why were the people living in that house so greedy that they cheeped out on buying/renting housing? There is soundly built housing in Turkey. If they were ric

Why were the people living in that house so greedy that they cheeped out on buying/renting housing? There is soundly built housing in Turkey. If they were rich enough to buy sturdier housing then they could have done that. I'm not pointing this out to blame those people in any way, but it may be legitimately they can't afford better housing and this is the best they could do and the risk of dying in an earthquake was better than their alternatives. Maybe sturdier housing everywhere would mean some those people would have been dead long ago from exposure.

tablespoon 4y ago
You're assuming the people affected did some kind of rational cost/benefit analysis, and just whatever choice they made was worth the chance of people dying. I very much doubt that was the case. You also seem to be falsely assuming there's only three options: be rich, live in a death trap, or be homeless on the street. That's not the case. People can be tricked, be stupid, just have bad ideas, or similar. Building codes are a check against all that. And if they make a certain class of housing more expensive, there are always alternatives of other classes of housing.
ornornor 4y ago
Corruption doesn’t make things cheaper. Shoddy housing most likely costs the same as up to code housing, especially since you can’t tell if it complies or not (hard to see the rebar embedded in the concrete or its absence) See the market for lemons.
MisterTea 4y ago
> Why were the people living in that house so greedy that they cheeped out on buying/renting housing? Can you please point out in the article where it states these occupants knowingly purchased/rented a structurally compromised home? Because the article I read does not state this. Don't say foolish things before reading the article.
- notch898a 4y ago
  That they purchased/rented a structurally compromised home is self-evident from the news articles showing the post-earthquake rubble. They certainly may have not known it was compromised (never claimed they did), but they sure as hell didn't know it was sound (probably because they either could not afford reputable inspection or even if they could didn't have the money to afford sound housing.)

tablespoon 4y ago

You're assuming the people affected did some kind of rational cost/benefit analysis, and just whatever choice they made was worth the chance of people dying. I very much doubt that was the case. You also seem to be falsely assuming there's only three options: be rich, live in a death trap, or be homeless on the street. That's not the case. People can be tricked, be stupid, just have bad ideas, or similar. Building codes are a check against all that. And if they make a certain class of housing more expensive, there are always alternatives of other classes of housing.

ornornor 4y ago

Corruption doesn’t make things cheaper. Shoddy housing most likely costs the same as up to code housing, especially since you can’t tell if it complies or not (hard to see the rebar embedded in the concrete or its absence) See the market for lemons.

MisterTea 4y ago

> Why were the people living in that house so greedy that they cheeped out on buying/renting housing? Can you please point out in the article where it states these occupants knowingly purchased/rented a structurally compromised home? Because the article I read does not state this. Don't say foolish things before reading the article.

notch898a 4y ago
That they purchased/rented a structurally compromised home is self-evident from the news articles showing the post-earthquake rubble. They certainly may have not known it was compromised (never claimed they did), but they sure as hell didn't know it was sound (probably because they either could not afford reputable inspection or even if they could didn't have the money to afford sound housing.)