Hacker News Reader

Comment by icebraining | Hacker News Reader

But do micro-apartments not just exacerbate the actual problem--that decent, reasonably sized homes for people in good locations are too rare or too expensive?

If there are both families and individuals bidding for those reasonably sized homes, giving the latter a cheaper alternative should reduce for the larger houses, no?

View on HN

It's not at all clear that only individuals would go for the cheaper alternative.

We also already have cheaper alternatives in e.g. studio apartments, and we currently have families living in those.

I don't see how building downwards will solve these problems in a decent way going forward--it seems that it could only continually reduce peoples' living conditions.

There is a high end product. I don't need a high end product, but that's all there is. So I have to go for it.

Suddenly, there's a cheaper, lower end product that meets my needs. I go for that, someone who needs or wants the higher end product can go for that.

The point is that for many decades the low end product was something like a one bedroom with a kitchen. Now that's being seen as a luxury that we need to build under.

If families are already living in too-small housing arrangements like studio apartments, wouldn't this be because they could not afford larger accommodations? This is actually a sign that more housing needs to be build at the high and the low end.

The article is not saying "build micro-apartments instead of normal ones". It is saying "make it possible to build micro-apartments alongside normal ones".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com