US unemployment up: 500K+, 34-year high

[Magus]

How do you know they want caviar? As the economy has contracted, so have people's definitions of what they can afford to pay for housing. If enough people try to move into cheaper housing, it can leave the more expensive homes empty while the affordable housing is hard to find. Empty homes don't do you any good if you can't afford to pay for them.

They can live in apartments. No one said that everyone has to have his own house.

That's true, nobody did. However, it's entirely plausible that the affordable apartments are filling up as well. "Housing" covers more than simply houses - any residence can be considered housing.

[Singular Intellect]

Of course, whining about the cost of houses and refusing to move into an apartment if there are any available is inexcusable.

It can be morbidly funny how quickly someone can go from "I would NEVER live in an apartment!" to "I don't care if the ceiling is falling in and the sink leaks - I'll take it" when the alternative is sleeping in a cardboard box under a bridge in a Chicago winter.

Let's just say a lot of people are reevaluating their previous bias.

Just last night I was spending time with my friend's ten year old daughter, and explaining to her the importance of not being spoiled and appreciating what you have, especially around Xmas. She's an awesome kid, but spoiled in alot of ways and I'm doing my best to nip that in the bud.

I swear, some people really need a good dose of real poverty to appreciate how lucky they are in many of their 'unfortunate' conditions they'll often whine about.

[Darth Wong]

If the problem is that there are no apartments available because people only built McMansions, then why can't more than one family get together and pool resources to live in one of those giant empty McMansions which are being dumped on the market at fire-sale prices?

[Singular Intellect]

If the problem is that there are no apartments available because people only built McMansions, then why can't more than one family get together and pool resources to live in one of those giant empty McMansions which are being dumped on the market at fire-sale prices?

Doesn't that involve the concept of 'sharing', something many Americans aren't exactly enthusiastic about? Or maybe that would simply be a smart thing to do, and I'll leave that one alone...

[Broomstick]

If the problem is that there are no apartments available because people only built McMansions, then why can't more than one family get together and pool resources to live in one of those giant empty McMansions which are being dumped on the market at fire-sale prices?

Because in most areas it is illegal to subdivide a single-family residence without a zoning change. If you have unrelated adults living in the same single-family house there is a risk of the situation being brought into court as a zoning violation (renting out to boarders is also prohibited by many local codes) and indeed this has been used against both homosexuals and non-married heterosexuals at times. If it's just two adults it's usually overlooked, but if it's three or more unrelated adults it can result in major legal hassles.

It requires either changing the laws, or massive numbers of people ignoring the laws.

[Singular Intellect]

Because in most areas it is illegal to subdivide a single-family residence without a zoning change. If you have unrelated adults living in the same single-family house there is a risk of the situation being brought into court as a zoning violation (renting out to boarders is also prohibited by many local codes) and indeed this has been used against both homosexuals and non-married heterosexuals at times. If it's just two adults it's usually overlooked, but if it's three or more unrelated adults it can result in major legal hassles.

It requires either changing the laws, or massive numbers of people ignoring the laws.

Aw, my Canadian bias has been spotted then. I stand corrected then.

During my previous search for accomodations, it wasn't hard to find plenty of places available for rent that had several tenants already.

[Broomstick]

It does vary - for example, in some college towns there is no bar on unrelated adults co-habitating (usually for student housing). A McMansion could, I suppose, be run as a Co-op, which allows multiple owners, but again, there are zoning issues and starting a co-op requires legal maneuvers which cost money.

It's not impossible, but the new-built McMansion neighborhoods are precisely those most likely to have laws and zoning that make sub-division difficult.

[Starglider]

If you have unrelated adults living in the same single-family house there is a risk of the situation being brought into court as a zoning violation (renting out to boarders is also prohibited by many local codes) and indeed this has been used against both homosexuals and non-married heterosexuals at times. If it's just two adults it's usually overlooked, but if it's three or more unrelated adults it can result in major legal hassles.

That's quite literally insane. I've never heard of that happening in the UK and I don't think it's even legally possible. Lots of people I know rent rooms or have lodgers and none of them have ever had an issue, other than possibly failing to declare the rent on their tax returns.

The next time a US neocon harps on at me about how the UK is less free than the US I'm just going to point this out then laugh at them.

[Beowulf]

If you have unrelated adults living in the same single-family house there is a risk of the situation being brought into court as a zoning violation (renting out to boarders is also prohibited by many local codes) and indeed this has been used against both homosexuals and non-married heterosexuals at times. If it's just two adults it's usually overlooked, but if it's three or more unrelated adults it can result in major legal hassles.

That's quite literally insane. I've never heard of that happening in the UK and I don't think it's even legally possible. Lots of people I know rent rooms or have lodgers and none of them have ever had an issue, other than possibly failing to declare the rent on their tax returns.

The next time a US neocon harps on at me about how the UK is less free than the US I'm just going to point this out then laugh at them.

It's a result of anti-prostitution laws. More than one girl living in a house is obviously a whore house.

[DaveJB]

Hopefully in the event of a major housing crisis they'd make exceptions for situations were people were being forced into co-habitation... but damn, that's fucked up.

[ArmorPierce]

If you have unrelated adults living in the same single-family house there is a risk of the situation being brought into court as a zoning violation (renting out to boarders is also prohibited by many local codes) and indeed this has been used against both homosexuals and non-married heterosexuals at times. If it's just two adults it's usually overlooked, but if it's three or more unrelated adults it can result in major legal hassles.

That's quite literally insane. I've never heard of that happening in the UK and I don't think it's even legally possible. Lots of people I know rent rooms or have lodgers and none of them have ever had an issue, other than possibly failing to declare the rent on their tax returns.

The next time a US neocon harps on at me about how the UK is less free than the US I'm just going to point this out then laugh at them.

It's a result of anti-prostitution laws. More than one girl living in a house is obviously a whore house.

I believe that was shown to be a myth

http://www.snopes.com/college/halls/brothel.asp

There is a limit but it doesn't have anything to do with brothel laws.

[Broomstick]

If you have unrelated adults living in the same single-family house there is a risk of the situation being brought into court as a zoning violation (renting out to boarders is also prohibited by many local codes) and indeed this has been used against both homosexuals and non-married heterosexuals at times. If it's just two adults it's usually overlooked, but if it's three or more unrelated adults it can result in major legal hassles.

That's quite literally insane. I've never heard of that happening in the UK and I don't think it's even legally possible. Lots of people I know rent rooms or have lodgers and none of them have ever had an issue, other than possibly failing to declare the rent on their tax returns.

The next time a US neocon harps on at me about how the UK is less free than the US I'm just going to point this out then laugh at them.

The irony is that this is an outgrowth of a lack of Federal control, and to some degree, State level control over housing. Housing and zoning are, by and large, a local level of law which results in a wildly inconsistent patchwork across the nation.

Historically we did have boarding houses and my parents' generation were able to rent out a room or two of a home without issue... again, ironically, a lot of this is an outgrowth of neo-cons trying legislate morality (only married adults or blood relatives under one roof or Who Knows What Might Be Going On?) combined with pernicious local housing authorities trying to drive up property values to protect everyone's "investment".

If the crisis becomes severe enough I do believe we could overturn these overly restrictive laws very quickly... but it has to become quite painful before that happens.

[Big Phil]

Standards have changed significantly as well. The average starter home in the 40's and 50's was a rambler with maybe a thousand square feet and a car port. Today's starter home is more like 2000 or 3000, so people's expectations of what they need to be buying right out of the gate are somewhat skewed.

I have a co-worker who lived in a 5500 square foot home with her husband and three children. Since they both worked full time, and the kids are little (the oldest is seven or eight), I have no idea how they kept up the housework on a home that large. That's three times as big as my house, for chrissakes!

[Edi]

WHAT?!

Square foot must be the most retarded measure of area for anyone used to the metric system.

The girlfriend and I live in a 61 square meter (657 square feet) flat and it's plenty enough for us. 5500 square feet is fucking 510 square meters. My parents' place is 120 square meters, so 1300 square feet approximately, it has a retarded floorplan and it still fit them and us three kids quite well even when we were all finishing high school.

The only conclusion I can draw from this is that Americans are used to an utterly ridiculous and unaffordable amount of living space as the expected standard.

[Darth Wong]

I think I can see how the "property values" idea might have been used to ban boarding houses. The argument would be fear of precisely what I proposed: poor people trying to pool their resources so they can live in houses which they could not afford to live in alone. What self-respecting suburbanite wants poor people moving in next door?

[Master of Ossus]

WHAT?!

Square foot must be the most retarded measure of area for anyone used to the metric system.

The girlfriend and I live in a 61 square meter (657 square feet) flat and it's plenty enough for us. 5500 square feet is fucking 510 square meters. My parents' place is 120 square meters, so 1300 square feet approximately, it has a retarded floorplan and it still fit them and us three kids quite well even when we were all finishing high school.

The only conclusion I can draw from this is that Americans are used to an utterly ridiculous and unaffordable amount of living space as the expected standard.

Space is cheap in a country as large and sparsely populated as the US. In the bigger cities, apartments and condos are much smaller and much more expensive, so it's largely dependent on where people live.

[Broomstick]

Indeed.

My first apartment was approximately 10 x 20 feet or 200 square feet for one person, which according to my converter is 18.5 square meters. At the time, it was adequate for my stuff, except for what I had stored in my parent's basement (mostly books). It was also in the middle of Chicago, at the time the second largest city in the US (it's since dropped to #3)

My current apartment is 1100 square feet, or 102 square meters. That's 550 square feet for two people, or 51 square meters. It doesn't feel adequate because it's a mess and I have a lot more stuff, but frankly, you could raise a couple kids in this place if you had to do it. Yet I know people in this area who maintain that's not sufficient for even one person! I'm on the edge of rural Indiana, where there's a LOT more space. People and their stuff tend to expand to fill the available space.

(I believe my current landlord did have at least one of his kids while living here before he bought his current 5,000 square foot/465 square meter home. Given his current heating costs, he has been lamenting building such a large house and considering closing off the second story to save money now that one of his kids is off to college and his income has taken a hit.)

[Starglider]

The girlfriend and I live in a 61 square meter (657 square feet) flat and it's plenty enough for us. 5500 square feet is fucking 510 square meters. My parents' place is 120 square meters, so 1300 square feet approximately, it has a retarded floorplan and it still fit them and us three kids quite well even when we were all finishing high school.

I don't know, that strikes me as a bit small. We have a terraced house on an ex-council estate and it's about 140 square metres (plus loft storage space and sheds). It's moderately spacious for two of us but would be a little cramped if we had two kids. My parents have about 400 square metres (not including lofts and outbuildings), which was comfortably spacious for a family of four but somewhat oversized for just the two of them (though very handy when relatives visit). One of my relatives in Belfast has a lovely historic country house with something like 600 square metres, and the space does make it look good inside.

I'd say anything up to 100 square metre per person is justifiable on utilitarian grounds (playrooms, home offices, dining rooms etc are something of a luxury but can still be used regularly). Anything beyond that is most likely for stylistic reasons, enjoyment of space for it's own sake, or just conspicuous consumption. Generally though having excessively large houses is a relatively inoffensive luxury, if people can afford it. Problems come if quality is compromised in favour of size (but frankly, most US houses seem to be built like crap), if finding the land forces silly commute distances, or if people are so convinced they must have this luxury that they take on unrealistic mortgages.

[apocolypse]

If you have unrelated adults living in the same single-family house there is a risk of the situation being brought into court as a zoning violation (renting out to boarders is also prohibited by many local codes) and indeed this has been used against both homosexuals and non-married heterosexuals at times. If it's just two adults it's usually overlooked, but if it's three or more unrelated adults it can result in major legal hassles.

That's quite literally insane. I've never heard of that happening in the UK and I don't think it's even legally possible. Lots of people I know rent rooms or have lodgers and none of them have ever had an issue, other than possibly failing to declare the rent on their tax returns.

The next time a US neocon harps on at me about how the UK is less free than the US I'm just going to point this out then laugh at them.

Well, before bringing this up, it is worth noting that this is apparently a local issue, not a Federal one. I've never heard of there being an issue with unrelated adults living in single family homes around here.

[Broomstick]

Yes, to reiterate, this is because of local laws and local laws are sometimes a tyranny of the majority or a tyranny of the rich/powerful.