Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apartments So Small They Can Only Be Photographed From Above

theatlanticcities.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 212 posts

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

#201

Post by Evbn »

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #123
yskchu wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you quantify this? HK has one of the best welfare systems in the world.

I think the problem in HK is the number of undocumented immigrants. No papers, no open borders, surrounded mostly by water, these people are easy to exploit. I was told that many of the construction workers' (building skyscrapers) wages barely amount to the cost of the day's food.

It's sort of amazing the people in these conditions care enough about quality of work to build buildings that don't fall down.

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

#202

Post by Evbn »

hollerith wrote: post #105
redact207 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>Condo's nowadays start at around SGD 1m for something small and basic 1,000,000 SGD is about 800,000 USD.

But effectively half that with the (subsidized?) interest rates.

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

#203

Post by onlyup »

wilfra wrote: post #137
onlyup wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide a source/study for this?

You need a source to confirm that if you take the wealth away from the rich people in your tiny island nation, other people are not going to be motivated to create wealth there in the future? Hong Kong and Singapore thrive because they are low tax, low regulation havens for the rich. Start enacting 'eat the rich' policies and the rich will go elsewhere.

Yeah, you're saying it as a fact so I assume the scenario has played out before and has been documented.

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

#204

Post by wilfra »

onlyup wrote: post #203
wilfra wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need a source to confirm that if you take the wealth away from the rich people in your tiny island nation, other people are not going to be motivated to create wealth there in the future? Hong Kong and Singapore thrive because they are low tax, low regulation havens for the rich. Start enacting 'eat the rich' policies and the rich will go elsewhere.

Yeah, you're saying it as a fact so I assume the scenario has played out before and has been documented.

You're implying that it could possibly be inaccurate, so I assume the opposite scenario has played out before and has been documented. Can you provide a link or source?

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

#205

Post by ahoyhere »

IgorPartola wrote: post #151
wilfra wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree it is the governments job to give people a place to live. From the sounds of it, Hong Kong already does a lot of this. At some point, people need to take care of themselves.

A hungry homeless person is everyone's problem and a huge risk. No matter how you slice it, you end up paying the price: the value of your house goes down, the crime rate goes up, etc. It is a myth that you can escape poverty. Sure, you can move to an expensive gated community with a white gloved guard shooing away the "undesirables", but why do you think it's so expensive? Moreover, a hungry homeless person is a sec…

Not to mention the toll on the children of the poor who do not get enough good nutrition, education, or a sense of safety and permanence to grow up to be respectable, law-abiding citizens.

That's what I don't get about allegedly intellectual, allegedly fiscally conservative people who are anti-welfare. They think that it's about not "giving a free ride" to people who "don't deserve" it. They are neither intellectual nor fiscally savvy enough to understand that there is always a cost, and to help and house people with welfare -- even people who will never "contribute" -- will cost far less in the long run than the ripple effect from feeling righteous.

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

#206

Post by dman »

vecinu wrote: post #179
seanp2k2 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bay Area resident here. Most families of 4 are living in a 1br if they're lucky. Plenty of families of 10 doing 2brs etc. Bay Area is seriously a bad choice if you're not in IT or making at least 6 figures combined yearly.

This is absolutely the truth. I know folks that make 6 figures yearly and still cannot convince themselves to pay $4000-$5000/month for a 2 bedroom.

And I used to think NYC was bad.

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

#207

Post by notimetorelax »

JackFr wrote: post #152
notimetorelax wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have children? Or a dog? It is usually a good idea to have one extra room per each member of the family. This way if you want to be alone for a while you can. Or if you want to listen to the music that others don't appreciate you can (headphones can be tiresome to wear).

Baseless. Start it with "I like..." and then it's true.

Maybe it is baseless but I wanted to give a little perspective, to show that it's not always about your wishes. If you live with someone you have to accommodate for their needs as well.

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

#208

Post by notimetorelax »

greggman wrote: post #67
notimetorelax wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have children? Or a dog? It is usually a good idea to have one extra room per each member of the family. This way if you want to be alone for a while you can. Or if you want to listen to the music that others don't appreciate you can (headphones can be tiresome to wear).

plenty of cultures don't generally have room to be alone at home. Not saying I don't like the idea. Just pointing out that depending on where someone grows up the idea that they might have alone time at home might seem strange.

Could you name me some of those cultures? What interests me is given the choice would they want to have extra space or not? IMHO good indicator of it is how their rich live.

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

#209

Post by dagw »

lilsunnybee wrote: post #165
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?

Who is wealthy enough to live on a 20 acre ranch anyways? This is not a real issue.

If I don't care about the location of said ranch, I just found several options that I could buy for basically the same price as my current 650 sq ft. apartment.

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

#210

Post by dagw »

VLM wrote: post #195
barry-cotter wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

"no modern culture where most people eat communal meals" The blue collar lunchroom. A direct descendant of the school lunchroom. As for anecdotes, the last time I ate in a communal lunchroom was the last manual labor job I had around 1994 while in school, since then its all been eating at the desk, runnin errands, going out. My employers have all had empty lunchrooms as an anachronism, more a place to keep the coffee…

In Sweden bringing your own lunch to work and eating it in the lunchroom is quite common even among more 'white'-collar workers. At the last two engineering firms I've worked at, I'd say that roughly half the employees do that.
Post reply on HN