3 ms·

That's a big claim with nothing backing it up.

kortilla 4y ago
https://www.builderonline.com/money/economics/80-percent-of-americans-prefer-single-family-homeownership_o https://www.builderonline.com/money/economics/80-percent-of-...
- mixmastamyk 4y ago
  And I prefer Ferraris. Too bad I can’t afford.
- frosted-flakes 4y ago
  Absent anything else, of course most people prefer to live in single-family homes (SFH). But that's not the question most people have to face in reality, because SFH have other trade-offs that that survey completely ignored, including: - significantly higher cost (absent widespread R1 zoning, which drives the cost of apartments up), - locations in the middle of desolate suburbia, - dead neighbourhoods because almost no one lives there, - very few nearby stores and restaurants, - no or limited public transit because it costs far too much to run in sprawling suburbia, - utter dependence on personal automobiles, and the complete lack of independence for children, young adults, and other non-driving members of society, - the necessity of maintaining the grounds of your own personal park, - poorly maintained or missing public infrastructure because everything is so spread out, - having to endure endless traffic because of your 1hr commute to work, and I could go on. Given the above, if apartment living wasn't so heavily restricted by law, so many more people would choose to live in them rather than SFH. You only need to look at cities like Montreal or entire countries like the Netherlands to see that this is true. In Montreal, housing is still cheap and most people live in multiplexes (walk-up two-to-four storey buildings with private front doors and small back yards) and live very close to where they work, but there are still a lot of different styles of SFH that people can choose to live in if they want, and many do. Again, look at the video I linked above for examples.
  - rocket_surgeron 4y ago
    >locations in the middle of desolate suburbia, I love the constant description of suburbia as being desolate. My suburban neighborhood is pretty typical and we have a vibrant community, including little free libraries, bike trails, conservation clubs, birdwatching orgs, garden clubs, needlecraft clubs, kids running lemonade stands, teens hustling to shovel driveways in the winter, a community pool, bake sales, plant sales, strawberry festivals, and more. We even all banded together and got rid of a lot of the streetlights so now I live in a Bortle 3 (or VERY low Bortle 4) dark sky. And because I have a yard I have a huge-ass amateur radio antenna farm and a fire pit where people come over to chill out. I raised three daughters here and they turned out fantastic, and spent their youth doing some real Stranger Things stuff without all of the upside-down bits. If I want to feel hip and urbane I drive the 20 minutes to the train station and go into town, pay my $20 for a cocktail, see an overpriced show, and then retire to my awesome house. I'm beginning to think that people who think suburbia is desolate are miserable shitheads who a: people don't want to be around, or b: don't want to be around other people.
  - twblalock 4y ago
    > - significantly higher cost (absent widespread R1 zoning, which drives the cost of apartments up), Also significantly higher return on investment. Homeowners build equity, renters don't. Houses increase in value faster than owned condos/apartments/townhouses. > - locations in the middle of desolate suburbia, It's not desolate. We have everything -- parks, stores, restaurants, schools, nearby downtown areas... > - dead neighbourhoods because almost no one lives there, Not dead at all. Plenty of kids playing all the time, people walking their dogs, etc. > - very few nearby stores and restaurants, Not true at all. There are hundreds of stores and restaurants where I live. They just aren't jammed between people's houses. > - no or limited public transit because it costs far too much to run in sprawling suburbia, Plenty of transit in my suburb. > - utter dependence on personal automobiles, and the complete lack of independence for children, young adults, and other non-driving members of society, Not true at all. People have ways to get around. Kids ride bikes. There are buses and trains not all that far away. > - the necessity of maintaining the grounds of your own personal park, It's not usually a big deal to maintain your yards. Most people seem to manage. Some hire gardeners, but many also take care of it themselves. > - poorly maintained or missing public infrastructure because everything is so spread out, All the infrastructure in most suburbs is fine. It's not like we all live in the 1800s or something. The roads are even paved! > - having to endure endless traffic because of your 1hr commute to work, A 1-hour commute is an outlier. It just is. The US average, last I checked, is something like 30 or 35 minutes.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

https://www.builderonline.com/money/economics/80-percent-of-americans-prefer-single-family-homeownership_o https://www.builderonline.com/money/economics/80-percent-of-...

mixmastamyk 4y ago
And I prefer Ferraris. Too bad I can’t afford.
frosted-flakes 4y ago
Absent anything else, of course most people prefer to live in single-family homes (SFH). But that's not the question most people have to face in reality, because SFH have other trade-offs that that survey completely ignored, including: - significantly higher cost (absent widespread R1 zoning, which drives the cost of apartments up), - locations in the middle of desolate suburbia, - dead neighbourhoods because almost no one lives there, - very few nearby stores and restaurants, - no or limited public transit because it costs far too much to run in sprawling suburbia, - utter dependence on personal automobiles, and the complete lack of independence for children, young adults, and other non-driving members of society, - the necessity of maintaining the grounds of your own personal park, - poorly maintained or missing public infrastructure because everything is so spread out, - having to endure endless traffic because of your 1hr commute to work, and I could go on. Given the above, if apartment living wasn't so heavily restricted by law, so many more people would choose to live in them rather than SFH. You only need to look at cities like Montreal or entire countries like the Netherlands to see that this is true. In Montreal, housing is still cheap and most people live in multiplexes (walk-up two-to-four storey buildings with private front doors and small back yards) and live very close to where they work, but there are still a lot of different styles of SFH that people can choose to live in if they want, and many do. Again, look at the video I linked above for examples.
- rocket_surgeron 4y ago
  >locations in the middle of desolate suburbia, I love the constant description of suburbia as being desolate. My suburban neighborhood is pretty typical and we have a vibrant community, including little free libraries, bike trails, conservation clubs, birdwatching orgs, garden clubs, needlecraft clubs, kids running lemonade stands, teens hustling to shovel driveways in the winter, a community pool, bake sales, plant sales, strawberry festivals, and more. We even all banded together and got rid of a lot of the streetlights so now I live in a Bortle 3 (or VERY low Bortle 4) dark sky. And because I have a yard I have a huge-ass amateur radio antenna farm and a fire pit where people come over to chill out. I raised three daughters here and they turned out fantastic, and spent their youth doing some real Stranger Things stuff without all of the upside-down bits. If I want to feel hip and urbane I drive the 20 minutes to the train station and go into town, pay my $20 for a cocktail, see an overpriced show, and then retire to my awesome house. I'm beginning to think that people who think suburbia is desolate are miserable shitheads who a: people don't want to be around, or b: don't want to be around other people.
- twblalock 4y ago
  > - significantly higher cost (absent widespread R1 zoning, which drives the cost of apartments up), Also significantly higher return on investment. Homeowners build equity, renters don't. Houses increase in value faster than owned condos/apartments/townhouses. > - locations in the middle of desolate suburbia, It's not desolate. We have everything -- parks, stores, restaurants, schools, nearby downtown areas... > - dead neighbourhoods because almost no one lives there, Not dead at all. Plenty of kids playing all the time, people walking their dogs, etc. > - very few nearby stores and restaurants, Not true at all. There are hundreds of stores and restaurants where I live. They just aren't jammed between people's houses. > - no or limited public transit because it costs far too much to run in sprawling suburbia, Plenty of transit in my suburb. > - utter dependence on personal automobiles, and the complete lack of independence for children, young adults, and other non-driving members of society, Not true at all. People have ways to get around. Kids ride bikes. There are buses and trains not all that far away. > - the necessity of maintaining the grounds of your own personal park, It's not usually a big deal to maintain your yards. Most people seem to manage. Some hire gardeners, but many also take care of it themselves. > - poorly maintained or missing public infrastructure because everything is so spread out, All the infrastructure in most suburbs is fine. It's not like we all live in the 1800s or something. The roads are even paved! > - having to endure endless traffic because of your 1hr commute to work, A 1-hour commute is an outlier. It just is. The US average, last I checked, is something like 30 or 35 minutes.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]