Best
59 Comments
Post
  • #4
    !
    that's ridiculous how are 2 grown men going to live in that little apartment? they would literally have to be on top of each other the whole time.... oh wait it is San Francisco.... yeah this could work
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • R Load more replies

  • #45
    !
    Can someone tell me why I should care? I have enough land to make sure I can't seey next neighbor. Let San Fransicko do what it will, it's one of the great cradles of filth as far as I am concerned.
  • #29
    !
    This sounds less concern about "families" and more like concern by corporate whores about selling McMansions. Small homes cost less to build and less to heat. They're more efficient financially AND environmentally. The only people who would be against that are the stupid and those who want to make money off the construction of homes.
  • #32
    !
    Agreed. Plus do single people need a 3,000 sq ft house? I live in 500ish sq ft units for the longest time before I got married. Now more space is needed. But I do not see single people as the newest tin foil hat conspiracy.
  • #18
    !
    @Keyjo At least in "Westbridge, W.VA" I would have more rights and privileges (not to mention more living space). I lived in CA once, once is enough for me...
  • #21
    !
    @MarkJM
    And that's good. I moved from L.A. to Oregon for much the same reasons. Plus I needed to get away from that meth monkey on my back.
  • #47
    !
    Much ado about nothing much. Slow news day? We're only talking about 375 apartments, not 375,000. Sheesh. Tiny accommodations for 375 single adults is not going to impact the precious American family.
  • #43
    !
    if they were really that concerned about their family they wouldn't, want to false their children in a place like that anyway,and its nobody,s business except the property owners what they build there
  • #41
    !
    What's wrong with it? These apartments appear to be as good as or better than the old one room efficiency apartments of years past. Who is attracted to them will depend upon the cost to live in one. But, they may actually be attractive to a certain group of people. The only problem may be greedy developers that cram more and more units into less and less space. If you are claustrophobic you might not want to live in one. It would be kind of like living on a small island...you may quickly tire of being there. A very short term lease may be the best idea.
  • #33
    !
    This is the future folks. Welcome to the new America. Same as the China. People living in cubicles. And you can thank the new world order for this. The rich get richer and the rest of us get trendy cubicles to live in. Wonderful.
  • #40
    !
    there is no finite pie of wealth. because some people make more does not mean others made less. if you want more, go out and earn it.
  • #42
    !
    @woodtick57 I have no problem with your statement. But this is nothing more than a greed situation. We have come to the point where corporate America can get away with warehousing people in 200 sq feet for 1,500.00 a month. That's absurd to my way of thinking. Criminal actually.
  • #19
    !
    No. 375 units are not going to harm "family housing", but I've been in travel trailers with more space! Their layout was smarter too. Heck, the layout of a room at Comfort Suites is more spacious than this. Not my cup of tea. I don't want to live in the middle of any city, but I am aware there are plenty of people who do.
  • #22
    !
    Well, when i first starting building my winter home off the grid up here in Northern MN, I lived in a 12x20' house.(then my GF joined me and her two 100# dogs...cozy!) most of the people up here build small houses. big houses take a lot to heat.

    it''s not just people who live in the city that live in small homes.
  • #30
    !
    @woodtick57 I know that. We moved from our "family" home to a two bedroom condo two years ago and are enjoying the smaller energy bills ourselves. My comment was more along the lines of understanding there are a large number of people who are willing to live in smaller homes in order to enjoy the city center life style. I'm a country girl at heart, but around here, the land costs more than the suburbs, so that is where I have spent my life.
  • #15
    !
    San Francisco changes rules to allow entrepreneurs to develop new models for housing, a fine example of government reducing "job killing regulations," and the conservatives on Politix seem only able to complain that San Francisco (and San Franciscans) exist in the first place.#cantpleaseeveryone
  • #11
    !
    Wow! That Beijing "pod" is roughly the size of a cardboard box for a large refrigerator! Only presumably, it doesn't leak.
  • #26
    !
    That would never fly in America. Not that the guv-ment wouldn't mind stuffing people into spaces that small, but America is a materialist/hollow society. People must have room for their stuff to make them feel complete.
  • #9
    !
    OMG...... The cost of housing in S.F. and N.Y. is so astronomical.
    Not sure what the complaints are though, those are only 375 small apartments out of thousands, maybe millions of rentals in the bay area.
    There was a time when I could live in an area that small, if fact I did. But now, I have acquired far too many items. My apartment I currently live in is 1643 sq.ft. and that's about right.
  • #14
    !
    I have never been to either SF, or NY. I have read about their outrageous housing costs though. I just do not understand why someone would want to live like that. I live in a 2200 sq ft. 4 bedroom, 3 bath home, on a 8000 sq ft. Lot. I pay 700 bucks a month for it. Granted I am in a place which does not hold a candle to either city, but to me that's the best part. I guess you could say I am happy people will live like that, it allows me to live the exact opposite for way less money.
  • #17
    !
    @Big-R
    A little south of Saint Louis, aren't you? At least you have Kansas City for a little culture. No offense to you or Saint Louis, but I've been to both and I find K.C. has a little more style.
    What's the temperature there this morning?
  • #20
    !
    @Keyjo KC is much better, I hate Stl. It's 29 this morning, supposed to be about 50 later. Don't worry I take no offense, I have very thick skin. Another cool place in the state is the Lake Ozark area.
  • #23
    !
    @Big-R
    Yeah, I've been there. My parents used to own some property down there somewhere. I was very young, but I remember riding horses there.
  • #24
    !
    @Keyjo I have family in Lake Ozark, we go there quite often. Someday I would love to get out your way. Everything I have seen on video is beautiful. Have a great day over there, I gotta get back to work unfortunately.
  • R Load more replies

  • #5
    !
    Lots of large Russian families would agree to move into a 'tiny apartment' in SF if they had a chance ... So, stop bitching about it, for god's sakes!
  • #3
    !
    "tenants' rights advocates"....Almost every big city has a "cheap" housing crunch. Reason. Value of land. If the "tenant's" have a problem with it, band together and buy you some land, build you some housing and maintain it yourself. Otherwise, quit complaining!
  • #46
    !
    How many tenants would it take to outbid, say, Donald Trump on a piece of land?
    Would these tenants be able to borrow at the same interest rate as Donald Trump?
    Would they have to attract investors to carry the majority of expenses, the way Trump uses other peoples' money to earn himself a profit?
  • #48
    !
    @Chrigid Hmmm....good questions. But, why would "tenants" want to compete against a Donald Trump type anyway?(drives up price, move to next purchase choice) Do "beginners" get the same interest rate as a proven investor or buyer?(no, not in this credit world...that's the rule,,,,live with it) Why would they want to attract investors to carry the majority of expenses?(this is THEIR home. My home in NOT funded by investors, except me) Now, those questions don't sound so good, they almost sound silly and naive!
  • #49
    !
    @stepped_in_it Where would you find land [1] fairly convenient to jobs [2] that tenants could afford? A lot of people all over the country drive hours and hours to and from work because they can't afford housing closer to work, because the Trumps have raised the value of that land, and buy it with other people's money. I think you're talking about co-op housing, which is a great idea, but you still have to buy conveniently located land and pay top rates on your mortgages.
  • #50
    !
    @Chrigid The "Trumps" didn't raise the value....lack of land raised the value! And how they "buy" the land is no different than everybody else. Unless you have the cash in hand, you get a LOAN.....so put that idea out of your mind (unless you are the walking rich). A little FYI, investors do what's best for them, not what's best for the "whiners". If I had 5 acres of land, is it best for me to build 20 homes or build 200 townhomes/condos? As for "conveniently located land", with over 7 BILLION people, that is and always will be the problem....and rates on mortgages I've already addressed!
  • #51
    !
    @stepped_in_it
    So then why are you suggesting that tenants "band together and buy you some land, build you some housing and maintain it yourself. Otherwise, quit complaining!"
  • R Load more replies

  • R Load more comments...
Post