Re: [sudo-discuss] Dystopia News: No-Sex Apartments.

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. 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. On Tuesday, May 21, 2013, Georgio510 wrote: Re. Romy- 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. See how that works? Fifty percent increase in price per square foot. Clever racket, eh? 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. -G. ===== On 13-05-21-Tue 5:39 AM, Romy Ilano wrote: _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss mailing list sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss