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

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

#141

Post by zem » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 8:05 PM UTC

frogpelt wrote: post #130

lclarkmichalek wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do these people have access to cooking facilities? Also a lot of the stuff there is being bought in bulk, and I imagine that storing stuff might be a problem. And of course, there is the omnipresent fact that many poor people do not have the time/knowledge to prepare many kinds of meal.

I would think time would be more abundant for poor people.

why? if you're poor, the amount of time you need to spend just taking care of life's basic necessities goes way up. getting things done efficiently, getting other people to do things for you, and deciding you can sacrifice a few hours' earning potential to do something else, are all things that require you be well-off first.

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

#142

Post by tehwalrus » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 8:46 PM UTC

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #126

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…

Let me get this straight. You think that if it were allowed to build on every square foot of HK, that there would be no housing problem in HK? What additional problems do you imagine would be created by the paving-over of every unit of land?

> which is a bad idea for another reasons, but not libertarian ones

I don't think it's a good idea, Libertarians do.

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

#143

Post by rokhayakebe » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 9:03 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…

It certainly can be a philosophy. For the past 6 months I've lived in a tiny place away from my apartment, where (the apartment) I only spent 6 nights in during the same time. I am being convinced increasingly I do not need, or even WANT, the extra space. Were I to find a companion who shared this view, I think I could live this way for several years, if not for the remainder of my natural life.

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

#144

Post by cma » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 9:37 PM UTC

wilfra wrote: post #81

antihero wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, take money from people who are minted and have lots of money and use said money to make these poor people's lives less awful. Wealth distribution on this planet is fucking terrible.

That works once, then it stops working in the future and backfires because people would no longer be motivated to create wealth in that jurisdiction. Which means no jobs and no tax revenue.

Not really. Wealth attracts people primarily due to change in relative status as compared with other people. So if you do progressive taxation, someone who makes 1 million before tax still ranks higher than someone who makes 2 million before tax, even if ends up that they make 700,000 and 1,200,000 respectively. Due to the marginal utility curve of having more money, they really aren't that different off in other non-status related respects either.

It certainly can have adverse affects on investment payoffs that distort market logic; if you could figure out a way to progressively tax consumer consumption instead of income you could get around that.

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

#145

Post by eigenvector » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 9:45 PM UTC

cglace wrote: post #100

EricDeb wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is absolutely the governments job to give people places to live if they are unable (not unwilling) to do so on their own. The difficulty lies in determining who is truly unable and who is simply unwilling.

It is absolutely your opinion that it is their job.

It is the job of the people to determine what the job of the government is.

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

#146

Post by eliben » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 9:46 PM UTC

It's funny how every piece of news can be immediately retargeted as a diatribe against the ever-evil "rich bankers".

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

#147

Post by adrinavarro » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 9:47 PM UTC

redact207 wrote: post #61

greggman wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that really how it works in SG? I've been told housing prices are outrageous there and if you're too poor to afford public housing you get shipped off to the poor house and are not allowed to leave unless you can find someone to take responsibility for you. Note: I've only visited SG so this is 2nd hand info through my friends in SG.

That's sort of how it works here. The Singaporean housing market is divided into HDB (public housing) and Condo (private housing). Condo's nowadays start at around SGD 1m for something small and basic, but aren't such a bad deal with banks charging interest of just 1.8% on a 40 year loan. Most Singaporeans can't afford this with an average monthly wage of just SGD 2,000 per month. Public housing on the other hand is…

Well, that makes around 1200 EUR.

So, that's even better than the "common" (not avg) monthly wage in many places in Europe. Indeed, cost of living in Singapore must be over the roof…

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

#148

Post by wilfra » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 9:49 PM UTC

cma wrote: post #144

wilfra wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That works once, then it stops working in the future and backfires because people would no longer be motivated to create wealth in that jurisdiction. Which means no jobs and no tax revenue.

Not really. Wealth attracts people primarily due to change in relative status as compared with other people. So if you do progressive taxation, someone who makes 1 million before tax still ranks higher than someone who makes 2 million before tax, even if ends up that they make 700,000 and 1,200,000 respectively. Due to the marginal utility curve of having more money, they really aren't that different off in other non…

Rich people who live in Hong Kong do not view their relative wealth like people who live in Manhatten, because they surely travel frequently and are thus acutely aware of just how much richer they are than everybody else on the planet, while rich people in Manhatten can get trapped in the cognitive bubble you are describing and misunderstand their relative wealth.

Singapore, being a rich island nation, works the same. If they started taxing the shit out of their rich it would certainly result in many of those people leaving the country and many, many more not setting up shop their in the first place.

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

#149

Post by pessimizer » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 10:05 PM UTC

frogpelt wrote: post #130

lclarkmichalek wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do these people have access to cooking facilities? Also a lot of the stuff there is being bought in bulk, and I imagine that storing stuff might be a problem. And of course, there is the omnipresent fact that many poor people do not have the time/knowledge to prepare many kinds of meal.

I would think time would be more abundant for poor people.

Only if you wrongly assume that poor people don't work.

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

#150

Post by eropple » Sat, Mar 09, 2013, 10:20 PM UTC

will_work4tears wrote: post #116

cmarschner wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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.

Country views, not so much, but I live in a city on Massachusetts's South Shore and I get fantastic night air and the place is quiet as a grave after about 9PM.