4 ms·

At the time, it already costed a huge premium. If you get to the basic cost in terms of ressources, it is probably less expensive to do elaborate work like this

by 0wis 3y ago

At the time, it already costed a huge premium. If you get to the basic cost in terms of ressources, it is probably less expensive to do elaborate work like this today due to better knowledge and tools. But maybe today, most of (new) homebuyers prefer allocating more resources to less durable goods like tech or entertainment. Edit : Plus, cheap 100 year old homes do not exist anymore.

thorin 3y ago
At that time labour was cheap, now labour is a major part of the build. Housing was also cheap due to land being more plentiful. 100 year homes are pretty common in older cities of the UK and in the countryside. New homes are similar in price in a lot of cases. They have advantages such as better insulation, less to go wrong (in theory) but also disadvantages such as lack of parking, garden and "character".
- petesergeant 3y ago
  > At that time labour was cheap I was curious about this, but also a bit lazy, and the easiest figures to find were for the US. A carpenter in 1921 in Boston MA (which is upper-end of the range given, but not outlandish) earned $1/hour or $40/week. According to this[1], that's $17/hour or $680 a week. That's just over half of what they get paid now, at ~$30/hour. As to: > At that time labour was cheap For the random example I picked, in the US, labour was about 50% the cost it is now. 0: https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/union-scale-wages-hours-labor-3912/union-scale-wages-hours-labor-may-15-1921-492986?start_page=68 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/union-scale-wages-hours-... 1: https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ 2: https://www.indeed.com/career/carpenter/salaries/Boston--MA https://www.indeed.com/career/carpenter/salaries/Boston--MA
  - thorin 3y ago
    Thanks for posting that, ironically probably the biggest driver of inflation in the UK is increases in house/land prices!

by 0wis 3y ago

thorin 3y ago

At that time labour was cheap, now labour is a major part of the build. Housing was also cheap due to land being more plentiful. 100 year homes are pretty common in older cities of the UK and in the countryside. New homes are similar in price in a lot of cases. They have advantages such as better insulation, less to go wrong (in theory) but also disadvantages such as lack of parking, garden and "character".

petesergeant 3y ago
> At that time labour was cheap I was curious about this, but also a bit lazy, and the easiest figures to find were for the US. A carpenter in 1921 in Boston MA (which is upper-end of the range given, but not outlandish) earned $1/hour or $40/week. According to this[1], that's $17/hour or $680 a week. That's just over half of what they get paid now, at ~$30/hour. As to: > At that time labour was cheap For the random example I picked, in the US, labour was about 50% the cost it is now. 0: https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/union-scale-wages-hours-labor-3912/union-scale-wages-hours-labor-may-15-1921-492986?start_page=68 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/union-scale-wages-hours-... 1: https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ 2: https://www.indeed.com/career/carpenter/salaries/Boston--MA https://www.indeed.com/career/carpenter/salaries/Boston--MA
- thorin 3y ago
  Thanks for posting that, ironically probably the biggest driver of inflation in the UK is increases in house/land prices!