3 ms·

As far as I know (please correct me if I'm wrong), you can look at price per square foot and see the same story. Prices of 100-year-old 1400-sqft homes are goin

As far as I know (please correct me if I'm wrong), you can look at price per square foot and see the same story. Prices of 100-year-old 1400-sqft homes are going up too, faster than consumer prices and faster than wages. > more people wanting to live in fewer areas > Housing would probably be cheap if we chose to live in the same types of remote areas we did 60 years ago As far as I know, people wanting to live in remote areas was a relatively short-lived phenomenon in American history, facilitated by a number of economic and political factors that are not repeatable. My personal belief is that improving mass transit (think: Netherlands) is the best and most sustainable way to mitigate the current crisis, especially in the Boston area.

xnx 3y ago
Cost per square foot hasn't changed much in 40 years: https://www.supermoney.com/inflation-adjusted-home-prices/ https://www.supermoney.com/inflation-adjusted-home-prices/ That doesn't even account for the higher code requirements for insulation, fire, and wind resistance. > As far as I know, people wanting to live in remote areas was a relatively short-lived phenomenon in American history, As the US left its agrarian roots, more people have been living in fewer places: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Urban_and_rural_populations_in_the_United_States_(US_Census_Bureau_(1790_to_2010)),_OWID.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_in_the_United_Sta... It will be interesting to see if the remote knowledge work can reverse this trend. The Netherlands is great, but I don't know if its successes can be repeated in the US.