← Back to context

Comment by typewithrhythm

2 days ago

They are going down the same path of making a lower quality product available, then using deceptive averages.

I have not seen anything that would create a supply of equally desirable properties (compared with detached dwellings).

Most families being able to afford a detached SFH was a historical anomaly that came with massive costs, and won’t be sustainable long term.

  • The "anomaly" happened when we were less productive overall. What change made it possible, and why can't we go back?

    Western societies are naturally below replacement rate, getting back to sfh as the norm seems like the inevitable outcome without the significant efforts at the national policy level.

    • >What change made it possible?

      Massive federal investment (paid for by the entire nation but often only able to be capitalized on by white Christian nuclear families) and municipal bonds that pushed the costs of building infrastructure out decades.

      >why can't we go back?

      The original loans are still due and/or replacement costs for the infrastructure require new funding, at 2025 inflated prices, and civil rights and demographic changes mean that the old resistributive model can't work (not the least of which because of the outsize costs that will be incurred to maintain quality of life for the oldest Americans in the next two decades). There's probably more.

      Not to say that reimagining the sfh couldn't lead to it still being viable. But 2500 sqft on an acre probably isn't tenable.