Hacker News Reader

Comment by vouaobrasil | Hacker News Reader

Well I actually think it's a good idea. A lot of people scoff at not having a real house/apartment or address, but I don't see why. As long as you can basically take care of yourself, living in a car should be totally feasible. We need to embrace more alternative living situations anyway such as tiny houses and minimalism because everyone owning big properties just isn't sustainable for our population.

View on HN

So is living on the street. I see lots of cats and they are liking it and look quite healthy.

On a serious note: proper housing is a bit more than a bed. You need good ventilation, heating or cooling, a toilet/shower, etc...

Housing is much more expensive than it needs to be, and I'm saying that as a landlord.

But "a car" isn't the solution. I've seen some very nice looking van conversions that look merely cramped, but at least manage to fit in a proper bed, a food preparation area, and basic hygiene stuff like a toilet.

Likewise for actual houses, "sustainable" isn't the same thing as "small": The new house I live in in Berlin needs around half the power to stay warm as the apartment in the UK a third its size that I rent out.

This means the one I live in stays warm from (as an annual average) slightly less than the body heat of the two occupants.

Proper insulation and ventilation costs a lot as well... meaning more debt.

I think we're not tackling the root cause in this whole discussion. People having to bottom their lifestyle because of debt.

A lot of debt is avoidable, for example student debt, if you live in a country with a well built education system. Owning a house could also made be more affordable.

It's a pitty that in the US half op people still seem to be voting for the most capitalistic side.

There is a difference between 'totally feasable' and 'inhuman and stupid'.

Its totally feasable in an emergency situation or if you just want to live like this.

But otherwise? its not okay. Peple want save spaces. A toilet at night, a bed. And not random poeple looking into your car and not shitting on the side of a street.

Trying to receive mail or apply for public benefits can be difficult without a permanent address. There's a stigma associated with applying for jobs if you can't list an address.

Edit: I agree single-family homes are insane, the solution is affordable apartments close to transit, not the rugged individualism of people living in cars.

"Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control." [1]

Where do you want to draw the line between "everyone needs big properties" and "living off your car should be considered as adequate housing"?

[1] https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-huma...

Positive rights such as that are no rights at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rights

I'm happy to dismiss any argument that involves a hand-wavy dismissal of a declared human right.

Won't there be a bunch of empty houses in 2 or 3 generations anyway due to the fertility rates crashing down globally below fertility replacement levels?

For what its worth this guy should have his own tag. He joins every AI thread and talks about the use of natural resources and downfall of humanity.

There’s already a bunch of empty houses. But not in places where people want to live.

People don’t want to be in an empty house in a cheap place, it’s cheap for a reason.

The promise of WFH could have reduced this factor for many (most?) office workers. Unfortunately, we're dialing back hugely on that. So we're right back to people clustering in extremely HCOL areas while they're surrounded by ample space and housing.

Nobody wants to commute 3 hours to work. And nobody wants to build an office in the middle of nowhere. The end result is obvious.

Also, Americans as a whole are allergic to affordable housing. A commie block or two could solve this, but we're still making "luxury" two story apartments out of glorified popsicle sticks and vinyl.

You’re neglecting to consider immigration.

Fertility rates crashing down globally is my quote - globally means I didn't forget anyone. Also fertility rates of immigrants are the same as their hosts after 1 generation.

I am skeptical that a lot stuffed with "tiny houses" is actually more resource-efficient than that same lot with apartment buildings.

And, uh, the only resource that "big properties" exhausts is density. If you don't mind having to drive half an hour to get to town, there's plenty of room.

I am under the impression that tiny houses value decrease over time though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com