Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The comparison of homes from 1955 to today by just looking at price is absurd.
An average home in the 1950s was about 900 square feet (versus 2200+ today), had no insulation and crap thermal efficiency, no central air conditioning, far less advanced and safe electrical and plumbing systems, garage dishwasher disposal high ceilings etc. go ask a home inspector or fire investigator what they have to be more concerned with in homes built in that era that haven't been extensively upgraded.
The comparison of homes from 1955 to today by just looking at price is absurd.
An average home in the 1950s was about 900 square feet (versus 2200+ today), had no insulation and crap thermal efficiency, no central air conditioning, far less advanced and safe electrical and plumbing systems, garage dishwasher disposal high ceilings etc. go ask a home inspector or fire investigator what they have to be more concerned with in homes built in that era that haven't been extensively upgraded.
Same with cars, it's apples and oranges.
And have you compared apples oranges today with apples and oranges of the 50s? Especially oranges.
Oranges of the 50s had thin peels that came off in small pieces--very hard to peel. And they had seeds. Lots of seeds. Oranges today are much better than oranges of the 50s.
The comparison of homes from 1955 to today by just looking at price is absurd.
An average home in the 1950s was about 900 square feet (versus 2200+ today), had no insulation and crap thermal efficiency, no central air conditioning, far less advanced and safe electrical and plumbing systems, garage dishwasher disposal high ceilings etc. go ask a home inspector or fire investigator what they have to be more concerned with in homes built in that era that haven't been extensively upgraded.
Same with cars, it's apples and oranges.
Some would chose the craftsmanship and the love they put into tract homes back then instead of the incremental improvements of the bloated McMansions they build today. I would choose 1000 square feet of love over 3000 of decadence
Some would chose the craftsmanship and the love they put into tract homes back then instead of the incremental improvements of the bloated McMansions they build today. I would choose 1000 square feet of love over 3000 of decadence
Tract homes, not so much.
OTOH, there were some carefully built homes outside the suburban tracts that were very well built. I recently lived in a 1959 home--about 1500 sq ft with a full basement--that I'm convinced the contractor built for himself or his parents. The architect's plans were still available (I was just the third owner), and I could see that the house had been overbuilt from the plans. For instance, the plans called for sistered 8x10 boards as the main supports...the house actually had steel I-beams. The interior walls were drywall covered with 1/8 plaster (as done for lathe-and-plaster walls). And the exterior walls were insulated. All the plumbing was copper. Despite its age, it was a solidly built home.
And the house next door--built in 1956--had been designed to be "the house of the future." It had a number of design innovations such as open area that had become popular, but also some ideas that didn't make it--but were still neat. For instance, it was "backward designed" in that the kitchen window had the view of the street while the living room window had the view of the back yard. The house didn't have conventional ducts and vents--warm and cool air vented from the baseboards around the entire room. All the interior doors were frameless pocket doors.
And have you compared apples oranges today with apples and oranges of the 50s? Especially oranges.
Oranges of the 50s had thin peels that came off in small pieces--very hard to peel. And they had seeds. Lots of seeds. Oranges today are much better than oranges of the 50s.
Plus the all-season availability we take for granted these days because of more efficient national/global food distribution networks. You want an orange or apple in January? Just drive through the snow to the nearest grocery store. In the 50s out of season fruit usually came in cans, and it wasn't nearly as easy to obtain things like kiwi, mangoes, avocados, etc.
You want to go out for sushi, Thai, or Mexican food? Good luck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perma Bear
Some would chose the craftsmanship and the love they put into tract homes back then instead of the incremental improvements of the bloated McMansions they build today. I would choose 1000 square feet of love over 3000 of decadence
My eyes just rolled so far one got stuck and I should send you the optometrist bill.
Nobody put "love" into tract homes, they were built from prefabricated components with their advantage being reduced labor and material costs due to cookie-cutter designs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
