New York micro-appartments

[viper37]

Oh I'm not really outrage in this. I agree with you that it usually makes no sense to be outrage of what rich people do with their money. I prefer to be outraged with how they made it in the first place.

like creating a terminal software system that gives you up to date and historical info on anything you can think of about a country or a publicly traded corporations and charging 3000$/month for it?
I'm not outraged.  I just wished I could afford a Bloomberg terminal

[The Larch]

For the record, 300 sq feet is 27.9 sq meters. It's not huge by any conceivable standard but for non permanent housing in a city it's ok. I lived in one for 6 months, turned out fine.

this.

you should see what they do with 22 m² at Ikea. Now that's a frightenly small sardinecan only fit for asians

Mine could have been slightly smaller and, with a better layout, it wouldn't be too different. I mean, I even had a bathtub, total waste of space. A simple shower would've been enough. And I was lucky to have a separate bedroom and everything!

Oh yeah, I had a 300 sq ft studio when I lived in Chicago for 3 months. It was nice enough as an intern on summer break for school but I'd never do that again as a place I planned on living in for a while.

Yeah, I didn't intend to live for a long time in mine either, one year tops. For such an amount of time it is a great option.

[Eddie Teach]

1m=3,28m. 

Uh, that can't be right.

Sure, if m = 0.

[garbon]

The windfall comes from the availability of the apartments.  In rent-controlled city, that availability is very limited, but that develops over time.  You don't pay the availability price until some time down the road after enactment of rent control.

I don't understand. Aren't you saying that rent-control hampers availability?

Decreased cost of living?  Not chasing away young but not rich residents?  Higher quality of life due to more abundant housing?  Much more efficient allocation of resources?  Increased mobility of the population?  Those are not little things, those things are very important for the city's economic vitality.

Well, is the notion that people would go around knocking down the current older buildings (/I guess luxury construction)? There isn't exactly a lot of empty space in Manhattan, so I'm not sure I understand where all this abundant housing will come from? 

Besides, wouldn't the immediate impact be driving away tons of young residents with only the wealthy lasting around? Sure, you'd eventually get young residents back in, but it'd just be exchanging out one set for another...

Also what's that bit about more efficient allocation of resources?

[Martinus]

300 square foot?
That sounds pretty big to me. I know people here, in Tokyo and in London with much smaller places.
Looking at the diagram on the link...yeah, its huge for a big city place.

Metric would speak more to me but I have seen much smaller in Paris as well.

You divide by 10, roughly, so it's 30 square metres.

1m=3,28m.  So it's 3,28^2, closer to 11 if you need to do it in your head.

It may come as a surprise to you, but dividing a number by 10 is easier than dividing it by 11.

[The Larch]

For the record, 300 sq feet is 27.9 sq meters. It's not huge by any conceivable standard but for non permanent housing in a city it's ok. I lived in one for 6 months, turned out fine.

it's design to be as permanent as any appartment can be.

Yeah, well, I don't know you but other people tend to accumulate crap as their life goes on, their needs evolve and might neew more space for them, even gather other people around them, so at some point you kinda start feeling a bit cramped.

[viper37]

Even if you strip out housing costs, most things in New York are more expensive than in most places.  Not sure what that proves.

housing costs drives up the prices of everything.

[dps]

Well, is the notion that people would go around knocking down the current older buildings (/I guess luxury construction)? There isn't exactly a lot of empty space in Manhattan, so I'm not sure I understand where all this abundant housing will come from? 

I remember reading sometime around 1980 that the South Bronx had lost about 28,000 housing units in the past decade.  Apparantly, for the most part, those units weren't replaced with new development (residential or otherwise) but simply abandoned, so there should be room to build at least some new apartment buildings.

[Barrister]

For the record, 300 sq feet is 27.9 sq meters. It's not huge by any conceivable standard but for non permanent housing in a city it's ok. I lived in one for 6 months, turned out fine.

it's design to be as permanent as any appartment can be.

Yeah, well, I don't know you but other people tend to accumulate crap as their life goes on, their needs evolve and might neew more space for them, even gather other people around them, so at some point you kinda start feeling a bit cramped.

I find that your collection of stuff tends to accumulate until it fills whatever space available.  If you live in 300 sq ft you would by necessity have to be more diligant at throwing stuff out.

[viper37]

That is basic order though. Most places I've lived have had people who had shit homes and people who have had dazzling homes.

you won't see that in Montreal or Quebec city in the same neighbourhood.  Well, not that I know of.

[viper37]

Yeah, well, I don't know you but other people tend to accumulate crap as their life goes on, their needs evolve and might neew more space for them, even gather other people around them, so at some point you kinda start feeling a bit cramped.

what I mean, is that people usually don't live all their life in the same spot.  They move around, they buy houses or condos.  Temporary housing to me means like a few weeks in a room with multiple people around.  An appartment here is typically a one year contract, from 1st July to June 30th.

[viper37]

It may come as a surprise to you, but dividing a number by 10 is easier than dividing it by 11.

easier, but less accurate.  You overstated the apt size by nearly 3 square meters.  Basically, you got room for one less Chinese.

[Valmy]

It is NYC so you expect to live in spaces that small anyway.  The only thing outrageous about it is the rent, more than double my mortgage.  But realestate cost is about three things and all...

I couldn't figure out why they kept comparing them to the size of Bloomberg's place.  I would hope billionaires could live well.

[viper37]

1m=3,28m. 

Uh, that can't be right.

I meant feet.  1m=3,28'

[viper37]

I would hope billionaires could live well.

if being billionaire can't let you live well, then America is really fucked up