347
‘Seismic shift’: driving unaffordable for many in US amid push toward SUVs
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2024
347 points (97.5% liked)
News
23360 readers
1671 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I’ve heard it said that Americans purchase based on the maximal use case as opposed to the typical use case. As an American, that description makes so much sense. As an example, I live in an area where there are a lot of hills and it snows rarely, but just about everyone who can afford a 4WD SUV has one. Heaven forbid they can’t drive around on those 1-2 days a year that it snows! Meanwhile, they get shitty gas mileage driving to work the other 300-odd days of the year.
The maximal use case! That's a good way of thinking about it!
I'm struggling with my SO to buy a reasonable house in a high cost of living area. They want a massive 2000 Sq ft monstrosity because we plan to have a kid soon, and I'm thinking 1500 is more than enough. They're reasoning it's we need space for each other and entertaining. My reasoning is I want to eat out at the nearby fantastic restaurants nearby more often and buy cheese and wine and stuff.
The more walkable the location of the house, the less space you need because that space is outside your house.
US cities are rapidly running out of 3rd places. There's almost no neighborhood commercial centers with a cafe and a pub/bar that you can visit for extended periods of time.
The net result is that the home and the workplace are the primary locations we can spend time in.
That somehow sounds like the primary space people spend time in should be a bar and not their home. That's insane. Though maybe it's some kind of an extrovert dream.
That's quite the straw man of my statement. You've read a ton into what I wrote.
Given that, I get to turn right around and say "okay, then we'll have no absolutely no places outside of work and home. All supplies delivered to a drop box on your doorstep so introverts never have to talk to a human."
My point was that communities historically have had places where people can choose to go and spend time in the shared space. Common examples of these spaces include cafes and bars/pubs. Geez you made me have to be stupid pedantic.
I enjoy going to shared public spaces and businesses that welcome sitting and relaxing. So sue me. I also make friends with every housecat, dog, hamster, and houseplant (if no pets are available) at parties I get roped into. I am, at best, a light duty introvert.
I spend way too much time in my house because going out to places in the US is extra work. The accessibility of places to sit and relax around my neighbors is next to nil. This isn't true when I get to visit international cities that aren't capitalist car-centric hellscapes. There, I walk to nearby places to sit and enjoy my city, not just my apartment. The world should have places to be outside the home, even if hiding in your four walls is both an introverts dream and a capitalism goal.
No, they're just saying it would be a part of that space. Like with a veterans club. You don't have to buy anything to be there. (Of course you do need to pay your membership, which is why we're talking about spaces that are just funded as a government item)
Meanwhile COVID loves extroverts!
Running out of 3rd spaces? LOL you only see those in museums now. See the smilodon exhibit next to the woolly mammoth exhibit and next to that is the American 3rd Space exhibit!
I had to use a unit converter, but I've lived in places housing up to seven people that weren't that big. Comfortably.
This is a conversation I had here recently as well when I pointed out to a car thread that for the money Americans pay for pickup trucks you can also buy a hatchback and a proper van, cover most use cases and not drive a tank to take kids to school. They did NOT like that.
Ok. We raised 4 kids in an 1800 sq foot house with one bathroom. I do not recommend the one bathroom, but the space was more than adequate.
Having said that, it does make a difference, we have the same size house now and only 2 kids left at home, but this house has a bigger main kitchen/dining area, smaller bedrooms, a separate living room for the kids, an enormous back porch/deck adding to the useable space and entertaining space is really helpful more than I had imagined.
1500 arranged right with small bedrooms and enough common area, and at least 2 bathrooms sure. It's not a small house, that's a medium size house. With an enormous porch? Hell yeah. We used to live in one of those with two other couples, it was fine. But I do think you are undercounting the value of common space.
We have two kids in a 3 bed/2 bath 1350 sq ft home. We do have a full basement, but the kids aren't really allowed down there (power tools, toy stash, etc). I guess I do hang out there some nights, but that's only because my gaming computer moved downstairs years ago when our oldest started to be able to reach the keyboard and pull key caps off it.
In our experience, you're probably not going to do a lot of entertaining while you have young kids. While one of your kids is under 3-4, and sometimes older, they're going to need naps. They're also going to have early bedtimes. Naps are mostly behind us, and we do have afternoon play dates, but the kids don't really care what space they're in as long as they're engaged and have things to do. Having an adult gathering is... very rare. We have a nice sized yard, so we tend to have gatherings outside.
I don't think we need extra bedrooms or bigger bedrooms/bathrooms. An office might be nice, but working from the basement works just as well. A toy room could be nice, but to me it would be wasted space as the kids get older and have fewer, but larger/more engaging, toys. At least around here, the extra room comes with extra walls that result in a space that's not often used (think a formal dining room).
There's also the financial side of things. We could afford a larger house, but would rather be putting any extra into 529s, our own 401ks, etc. Kid related expenses really add up before you start also thinking about a bigger mortgage payment.
On cars I agree wholeheartedly. It's way too expensive to maintain that capacity. We rent a minivan to travel but buy small car for daily use.
House I am not convinced, the value proposition is different. It really is nice to have a little extra space. Not some monstrous McMansion, but not cozy, and space for the kids to have their gaming computer stuff not inside their bedroom and my home office stuff not inside my bedroom. And moving is a pain in the ass and expensive, absolutely don't want to have to scale up if the family gets bigger.
Oh yeah the "office" they keep trying to delete from apartments and town houses. There's good evidence for psychological health in separating sleep, work, play, and relaxation spaces.
It's the issue of "but sometimes". People want to use a worse solution because the better solution has an issue that happens only rarely.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GiYO1TObNz8
My hybrid SUV (Ford escape) has awd and gets low-mid 40s mpg on my 12gallon-600 mile tank. The trick is the awd isn’t permanently on, it’s only on when it needs the traction or I change the drive mode to AWD when I’m expecting ice/snow.