Apartments So Small They Can Only Be Photographed From Above • Hacker News Board

Re: Apartments So Small They Can Only Be Photographed From Above

#111

Post by HeyLaughingBoy » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 4:13 PM UTC

derleth wrote: post #8

berlinbrown wrote: post #2

I live in apartment. Not a micro-one. But I imagine you can find solace in just having only the things you need. Why do you need a ranch size home and 20 acres?

> But I imagine you can find solace in just having only the things you need. No. You, maybe, but not me, and certainly not everyone. And that's not even fully addressing the unstated assumption that everything you 'need' would even fit in an apartment, let alone a micro apartment. Getting rid of things isn't always a good thing to do. Having the ability to be fully packed and ready to move in an hour is a tactic, not…

Oh, it can certainly be a life philosophy, but like everything, people change.

It really seems to be age related. When you're younger, you tend to have nothing, so embracing minimalism seems like a good way to go. As we get older and achieve some level of success, a better quality of life tends to follow, and with it more material possessions.

Later, perhaps when we become aware of the number, and perhaps the burden (maintenance, storage space, etc) of all those things, minimalism again starts to look good.

Right now I'm waiting for the kids to grow up and leave so I can talk the wife into us living on a boat :-)

Re: Apartments So Small They Can Only Be Photographed From Above

#112

Post by seanmcdirmid » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 4:15 PM UTC

steholmes wrote: post #82

irmbrady wrote: post #32

As someone who is moving from the UK to HK in 3 months, with no job or visa secured, and attempting to bootstrap my (first) startup; this scares the crap out of me!

Are you moving to HK for a specific reason? As it's one of the world's most expensive places and although things are slowly improving it's not a particularly great place for startups.

Ya, HK is pretty much dominated by financial; no one goes there to work in tech, and there isn't much of a talent pipeline. Singapore, Bangkok, Shenzhen, shanghai, Beijing are better.

Coincidentally, I'm in HK on holiday going back to Beijing tomorrow. I'm suffocating in this small hotel room....my wife did a lot of shopping, though.

Re: Apartments So Small They Can Only Be Photographed From Above

#113

Post by king_jester » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 4:18 PM UTC

wilfra wrote: post #78

tehwalrus wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to rebut this sticking to your libertarian premise (which I don't agree with, but you might actually listen then!): Government intervention caused this. The government strictly controls which land can be built on, and restricts supply so much that this is what is left. If government stopped restricting which land developers could buy, build on, and sell as housing (which is a bad idea for another reasons, but not lib…

Libertarians are not the only ones who believe it is not the governments responsibility to provide for the poor.

It is the responsibility of society and communities to end situations that even allow for the poor to exist, otherwise we are simply sending people to their doom.

Re: Apartments So Small They Can Only Be Photographed From Above

#114

Post by ctdonath » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 4:22 PM UTC

hmsimha wrote: post #48

rhplus wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 'cage' appears to be so that resident can lock their belongings inside when they aren't there (you can see padlocks hanging on the doors of some). I can't really offer much of a useful statement on the realities of being chronically homeless (which is what these men essentially are) in a big city or on the root causes of the situation in Hong Kong, both social and economic. But I can say that the immediate needs…

That was the second thought that occurred to me as well (the first was to be absolutely horrified). The reporter said the rent for one of those cages is 12 (AUD I believe) per month. Likewise, that only left each cage dweller with 13 AUD per day from their welfare check for other expenses (which the narrator said was not enough to afford 3 meals every day after other expenses). So if the cost of living in a cage for…

$1 per meal: http://abuckaplate.blogspot.com

Re: Apartments So Small They Can Only Be Photographed From Above

#115

Post by acgourley » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 4:24 PM UTC

barry-cotter wrote: post #76

icebraining wrote: post #69

I find it odd that whoever build those houses decided to make tiny apartments instead of larger shared ones. For cooking, having a shared kitchen - even if used by many families - would probably help a lot, specially since it's cheaper and easier to make a big communal meal than having to cook for each family.

People value not sharing space a lot . In first world countries most of the worst things about being poor come from being surrounded by other poor people. Communal cooking is more efficient at basically every scale from 2 peson household up, where at its most egalitarian it's just taking turns to cook. But I am aware of no modern culture where most people eat communal meals; in fact the only exceptions I'm aware of a…

Nearly all dinners are communal in the many cohousing[1] communities in Denmark.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohousing

Re: Apartments So Small They Can Only Be Photographed From Above

#116

Post by will_work4tears » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 4:26 PM UTC

cmarschner wrote: post #18

vecinu wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comes down to having freedom and experiencing life on 'a ranch and 20 acres'. If you've never experienced life in such a way, it is almost impossible to understand why people live this way. I for one love having my own washroom and bedroom where I can rest, relax and find silence. Do you think a family of 4 would find comfort in an apartment? I'm fairly sure if money were no object and transportation was near in…

I've grown up in a spacious house and am living now on about 800 sq ft with my wife and a baby. That's more than those people in Hong Kong but, given where I am coming from, it is constraint. My wife is coming from a former communist country. There, 60 sq m were regarded enough for a family, and she feels perfectly comfortable in our space. She wouldn't want more. And in fact it does have some merits: I can clean the…

I don't live on a ranch, and don't really have any desire to, but let's play devil's advocate.

With a ranch and lots of land, you can grow your own food, raise your own animals and not be tied down to requiring (as much) other people. You don't have to deal with traffic (foot or road), generally anyway, and your neighbors are probably pretty friendly - probably because they don't have to deal with masses of people on a daily basis and aren't stressed out / overly stimulated.

You get the night air, the country views and peace and quiet. That goes a long ways for some people. That is something you don't get in a urban setting.

Re: Apartments So Small They Can Only Be Photographed From Above

#117

Post by ledge » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 4:50 PM UTC

cantbecool wrote: post #24

daeken wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the exact same. Then I lived in NYC for a year and a half in something like 180sqft. Never, ever again. Even things like having two other people in the place was uncomfortable. There was space for a full bed and a small desk and nothing more. There was no usable kitchen. It seems like something that can be dealt with, but doing it really, really sucks.

I mean isn't that twice the size of a dorm room? It could not have been that bad.

The size of the rooms in the dorm I lived in my freshman year were as follows:

" Single: 14’4” x 7’ ; Double: 14’8” x 14’4” ; Triple: 15'3" x 15'5"'' "

So the single room comes in at about ~100 sq. feet, and the double ~210 sq. feet.

Some of our facilities, like kitchens, bathrooms and showers, were communal however (I can't tell if this is the case in these apartments, but I can't see any bathrooms). Another big difference is that for nearly all college students, the dorm is not really their only home; everyone I know had a significant amount of stuff stored in their parent's house. I believe we were also provided a communal winter storage area for things like bikes, boxes of summer clothes, etc.

Re: Apartments So Small They Can Only Be Photographed From Above

#118

Post by jordanbaucke » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 5:15 PM UTC

Just stayed in hong kong for a week earlier this month, and I can testify to the multigenerational apartments, and government subsidized ownership.

I stayed in an apartment I rented from AirBnB which was awesome (for 2 people). I noticed other families in the same building where staying in the same sized places but had parents, adult children, and grandchildren living in bunk-beds.

This was in "Central", which struck me as a poor place for a family (apartments of this size ~350sqft were being listed for close to $1 million usd ($7.5~$8 million HK) but than if you had some sort of government price control when the building was built than it made more sense.

Re: Apartments So Small They Can Only Be Photographed From Above

#119

Post by dllthomas » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 5:16 PM UTC

saosebastiao wrote: post #110

bjourne wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the alternative is to have the government build subsidized housing and then enact strict price controls so that even poor families can afford to live reasonably. That's how it was done in Singapore for example and is why they can live in "spacious" 30-70 m^2 apartments despite having a higher population density than Hong Kong. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Singapore .

Public housing or housing vouchers are one thing. Price controls are another. Price controls are absolutely, without a single empirical doubt, the worst policy you could enact. You might as well start torching your housing supply...the effects are the same.

Hyperbolic, but accurate when you've accounted for that.

Re: Apartments So Small They Can Only Be Photographed From Above

#120

Post by acrooks » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 5:30 PM UTC

cantbecool wrote: post #24

daeken wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the exact same. Then I lived in NYC for a year and a half in something like 180sqft. Never, ever again. Even things like having two other people in the place was uncomfortable. There was space for a full bed and a small desk and nothing more. There was no usable kitchen. It seems like something that can be dealt with, but doing it really, really sucks.

I mean isn't that twice the size of a dorm room? It could not have been that bad.

My dorm room is 200 sq ft. I have a reasonable amount of floor space but fitting a kitchen in here would be a stretch.