logoalt Hacker News

necovektoday at 7:14 PM4 repliesview on HN

Isn't this obvious?

Yes, per-adult, multi-generation family homes are even more cost-effective than for couples (even accounting for smaller pensions compared to salaries), and both are more cost-effective compared to singles.

Apart from growing prices, my experience (not in Canada though) is that living spaces are growing too, as we are not satisfied to live in the same cramped 20m2 studio as singles were 30 or 50 years ago.


Replies

KK7NILtoday at 7:46 PM

> we are not satisfied to live in the same cramped 20m2 studio as singles were 30 or 50 years ago.

I conjecture that this is, at least partially, caused by modern people being more isolated and even when they do socialize there's less "third spaces" to get together with friends so someone ends up having to host the superbowl watch party in their apartment, for example.

darth_avocadotoday at 7:52 PM

> living spaces are growing too

Median home sizes have gone from 1400 sqft in the 70s to 2400 sqft in recent years.

https://www.bankrate.com/real-estate/average-home-size/

Part of it is the economics of construction. Part of it is growing threshold for “bare minimum”. In unit laundry was optional in the 70s and I’ve heard people wanting a “laundry room”. Pandemic has pushed the need for an office. Larger kitchens and more storage space is also a big difference in newer units vs older ones.

show 1 reply
bryanlarsentoday at 7:57 PM

30-50 years ago, a cramped 20m2 studio as a single was a luxury; the standard was to have roommates if you didn't have a partner.

jeffbeetoday at 7:54 PM

30 years ago I did not need to rent a 20m² studio. As a young college student I rented a spacious 750 sq. ft. 1-bedroom, furnished apartment that was more than affordable on my paycheck from driving a forklift at the pipe yard.

show 1 reply