Tiny House equals Appropriation

[jp1]

I agree with the studio apartment thought. I lived in one for 12 years in NYC that was only 250 square feet. Heat was provided so I have no idea the carbon footprint although it couldn't have been much. My only outside facing wall was 10 feet wide by 9 feet tall with two double pane standard issue double hung windows. In the summer I had a window unit a/c and using it as much as I wanted added roughly $20-$25 per month to my electric bill back in the mid/late 90's. Maybe 200 kw/hours per month. And cleaning was quick and easy. The only outdoor space I had was 9 blocks away in central park, but most of NYC doesn't have private outdoor space either. No one was going to do a tv show about my lifestyle (I mean really, who's going to do a tv show called "Typical NYC Apartment Living") but I really liked living there.

[Tybee]

I had a great studio apartment in Chicago when I was young--I was on the 7th floor, amazing view, pool on the roof, walkable to everything, including work if I really hoofed it--it was about two miles. I could go running on the lake, heat was included, and there was airconditioning.

[Yppej]

A commentator on one of my local TV stations did not use the term poverty appropriation but was mocking new pre-muddied jeans for sale. Designed to look like the wearer has been doing manual labor outdoors they cost over $400.00. He said just buy a $24.00 pair of jeans and go roll in the mud and you will come across as more authentic.

[catherine]

A commentator on one of my local TV stations did not use the term poverty appropriation but was mocking new pre-muddied jeans for sale. Designed to look like the wearer has been doing manual labor outdoors they cost over $400.00. He said just buy a $24.00 pair of jeans and go roll in the mud and you will come across as more authentic.

Dave Ramsey just had a podcast on that. Of course you can imagine what he thinks of $425 "dirty" jeans, but his main comment was also a societal one: People want to spend $425 for "dirty" jeans but don't want to do the work to earn the real dirt. I guess you could call it "manual labor appropriation" and all the landscapers and construction workers should be offended and stage a walk-out.


Re the tiny house appropriation: I don't get it. If tiny houses were built for poor communities or by poor people as an affordable housing situation I could understand. But they were created and built for the "elite simple liver" who could afford $50k for 82 highly-designed square feet. The IDEA was then appropriated by some as a potential solution to homelessness and natural disasters (i.e. Katrina) etc. No appropriation in my book.

[LDAHL]

Living in a small space can be a very sensible thing to do. Status-seekers may take the idea a bit far, and give the simple trailer the extreme pretentious treatment Starbucks gives coffee. But I can think of many more stupid or destructive things one could do with one's money. I don't think these people are somehow appropriating or disrespecting the experience of the poor.

[oldhat]

I've been living in a 450 sq. ft. studio apartment for the past 11 years--it's actually smaller than it sounds, since some of that space is only good for storage due to an odd configuration. I too had a studio in Chicago that I loved--less than 400 sq. ft. in one of the nicest neighborhoods in the city, and literally a stone's throw from work.

So, I've long favored small spaces, although lately I've started feeling a bit constrained. As I look toward retirement, I'm starting to think that a small (not tiny) house might be the best way to go. I'd like to have a bit of land, and a garage.

I still like tiny houses, though. Though they may not present big advantages in practical terms, I think they have a nice aesthetic. A lot of the ones I've seen pictures of are very appealing. Plus, unlike an apartment, you can actually own one for a comparatively small investment.