The dumb thing about this thread is that in the time it took to write any of the multiple paragraph emails, the author could have looked to see whether there are any organizations in SF (or berkeley) lobbying to make building new housing housing easier. <div>
<br></div><div>Whether or not you can have a relationship in a single bed is irrelevant. Everyone agrees here, rent is too damn high. Part of the cause of this is artificially limited supply. <span></span><br><br>On Tuesday, May 21, 2013, Georgio510 wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
Re. Romy-<br>
<br>
Yes, apts in HK and Tokyo are small, but not so small that you can't
have a double bed and a dinner table (Tokyo apts even have space for
small washing machines & small wall-mounted dryers). And in any
case, Japan has a decent social safety net, something we shredded
starting with Reagan. <br>
<br>
If you're interested, I can show you some floorplans I've created
for micro living spaces. The stuff I designed is geared toward the
hacker/maker lifestyle with a strong emphasis on sustainability.
I'd happily live in a tiny space of my own making, but not a
developer's design that can't be hacked or modded and is geared
toward the media-consumption lifestyle. <br>
<br>
Agreed, the large houses Americans have had for the past century or
so are ridiculous, not to mention _lawns_. But there's a difference
between a wasteful 4,000 square foot suburban sprawl, and an
apartment that's smaller than a camping trailer. <br>
<br>
Something else about those tiny apartments: if your best friend
loses his/her job, s/he can't sleep on your couch when there's no
room for a couch. Sleeping on the floor in the tiny aisle next to
your bed gets old after about the second time s/he gets stepped on
when you get out of bed at night to go to the bathroom. <br>
<br>
The Oligarchy likes to have it both ways: Big houses for people who
can afford to buy more stuff. Prison-sized apartments for people
who can't. Increase the class divide: more at the top, less at the
bottom. <br>
<br>
The profit motive for those prison-sized apartments is that
developers get more per square foot. $750 for 200 square feet
translates to $3.75 per square foot. Contrast to $2,000 for 800
square feet, which translates to $2.50 per square foot. <br>
<br>
See how that works? Fifty percent increase in price per square
foot. Clever racket, eh?<br>
<br>
Decrease in cars is a factor of available public transport for the
hours and places needed. Someone who works the late shift across
the Bay and comes home after BART stops running, is probably going
to end up with a car, even if they have to play parking space
roulette every day. BART running 24/7 would do more to decrease car
commuting in the Bay Area, than squeezing people into shoe-boxes.<br>
<br>
Larger apartments mean you have more choices as to how you live and
who you live with. Smaller apartments mean fewer choices. Again,
we're not talking about multi-thousand-square-foot sprawl, but about
having enough space for someone to choose whether to live alone or
with a friend, or offer their couch to an unemployed friend, or the
options available for single parents with kids who are toddlers or
older. <br>
<br>
200 square feet also means you can't telecommute or telework,
because there's not enough space for even a small desk for a
computer. Using a tablet while sitting on the edge of the bed gets
old real fast too. And forget about modifying the space in any way:
those places are like hotel rooms, no user modifications or space
hacks allowed. What's important is _choice_. The choice to work
and play at home sometimes, and in communal space sometimes. <br>
<br>
How these neo boarding houses are worse than work lofts: for one
thing, you can't work there. And no space for a kitchen table, so
forget about inviting friends over for dinner. No space for
anything that involves having more than one other person over for a
brief visit.<br>
<br>
I don't know what'up in SOMA, but at this point nothing would
surprise me. Back in the day, a bunch of friends of mine were able
to rent a funky space with rabbit holes for bedrooms, affordably,
and with a common room big enough to play live music. And they
could build what they liked in that space. <br>
<br>
Less materialism: more than made up for by increased media
consumption, which is materialism "de-materialized." All that
matters to the Oligarchy is that they harvest money from the proles:
they don't care whether they do it by selling you physical stuff or
digital stuff. Digital stuff is easier & more profitable
because it doesn't require pesky factory workers to produce, and
because it's a crime to share digital media. <br>
<br>
Healthier eating: Those prison-sized apartments have enough space
for a dorm-sized fridge and a small microwave. Forget about keeping
a decent supply of fresh food on hand unless you want to go shopping
every two days. Eating at common workspaces such as SR should also
be a _choice_, not something forced by absence of a kitchen. <br>
<br>
If you prefer working in a communal space, that's your choice. But
it really ought to be _your_ choice, not forced by way of not even
having room for a desk where you live. Personally I can't
concentrate in high-stimulus environments, but I'm set up for
working from home and that works for me. A close friend &
coworker of mine likes to do both, occasionally working at home and
occasionally in a communal space (TechLiminal). The point is the
right to choose, just like with reproductive rights. <br>
<br>
-G.<br>
<br>
<br>
=====<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div>On 13-05-21-Tue 5:39 AM, Romy Ilano
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>Aren't apartments in Hong Kong and Tokyo even smaller, the
size of closets?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I don't understand the need for large houses americans have.
Most don't even have time to maintain them. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I feel like any "profit driven oligarchy" would be against
smaller apartments: </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>- larger homes mean you have to buy more. Even large
apartments.</div>
<div>- small apartments in the city mean probably no car. You
always buy more when you have a car </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Larger apartments mean you have room for a traditional
nuclear family. Single people or people who hang out in communal
spaces need not apply </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>How does this relate to sudo room?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>--/well I and many others could be spending all their time in
their garage or their backyard instead of sharing & hanging
around the sudor (although I feel like sometimes its harder for
people to share skilled information ;) than beer and burritos)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>/- these tiny apartments remind me more of the boarding
houses of the turn of the century.</div>
<div> They can definitely be improved but I don't understand how
they are worse than live work lofts .. Those soma live work
lofts enable fabulously wealthy people to move into poor school
districts and worm their way out of supporting school taxes </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-- you have to be minimal to be in a Tiny space. Again less
materialism </div>
<div>SudoRoom helps me avoid eating out needlessly at cheesy
trendy cafes and I can eat healthier too... Instead of fast food
I can fill the fridge with fruit </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-- no work from home... I don't work at home personally. I
prefer communal spaces as long as I don't get exploited or
harassed. Sudoroom has been pretty fine so far . </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
<div>---</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
On May 20, 2013, at 15:28, Sonja Trauss <<a>sonja.trauss@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>The obvious evil - doer is the laws that make it hard to
build new housing in sf.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There are strong home owners associations suppressing
supply over there and keeping rent high. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
Does anyone know of an org that tries to counter that, or
are developers the only entities that lobby on the other
side?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Gtwog you amaze me with every post - you're just finding
out now that we're none of us free, huh. <span></span></div>
<div><br>
On Monday, May 20, 2013, GtwoG PublicOhOne wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
<br>
No-Sex Apartments.<br>
<br>
(Creative commons, with attribution to "G.")<br>
<br>
In cities across the USA, a new "solution" to affordable
housing is<br>
being promoted: micro-apartments of less than 200 square
feet. New<br>
York's conrol-freak in chief, Mayor Bloomberg, is
promoting them (New<br>
Yorkers call them "Bloom Boxes"). A developer in San
Francisco is<br>
promoting them. And developers in Seattle WA are building
them by the<br>
hundreds.<br>
<br>
The Seattle apartments were recently covered in a CBS News
article, here:<br>
<a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57582327/tiny-apartments-are-creating-a-big-backlash-in-seattle/" target="_blank">http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57582327/tiny-apartments-are-creating-a-big-backlash-in-seattle/</a><br>
<br>
If you look at the picture, something immediately stands
out: a TWIN BED.<br>
<br>
As the article says, "...(the) apartment comes with a
small private<br>
bathroom, a microwave and a mini-refrigerator. There's
</blockquote></div></div></blockquote></blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>