“@WSJ: In 73 newly built home avg 1,660 square ft. Today most over 2,500 sq ft. http://on.wsj.com/1b9HvSA ”/ But middle class is doing worse??
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
“
@WSJ: In 1973, a newly built U.S. home was an average of 1,660 square feet. Today most are over 2,500 square feet. http://on.wsj.com/1b9HvSA ”Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@WSJ Biggest part of this story was 2 school administrators buying a $550k house. Really, Illinois? How about investing in the kids?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@WSJ and less people in that space. If it was China there would be 20 people in that size houseThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@WSJ the last two homes I closed: 4600 sq ft for 7 people. 3800 sq ft for 2 people.#newconstructionThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@WSJ families are getting smaller while material used to build these homes are significantly lower in quality to meet selling price pointsThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@WSJ "In 1973, a new...U.S. home was..1,660 square feet. Today most...over 2,500..." a consequence of Greenness & NIMBYism: build expensiveThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
“
@WSJ: In 1973, a newly built U.S. home was an average of 1,660 square feet. Today most are over 2,500 square feet. http://on.wsj.com/1b9HvSA ”Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@WSJ Aww... my house would fit inside those.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@WSJ maybe that why we have mortssge crisis's from time to time. The rise in sq feet costs.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@WSJ Wonder if this is because it’s cheaper to build higher now? Wonder how big lots are vs back then. -
@premal2000@WSJ "Wonder how big lots are vs back then." About equal. Build big & costly. House more people working more jobs (not the yard) -
@aitepaeapaea@WSJ So same size lots but bigger houses. Doesn't that suggest building up more? Wouldn't surprise me if costs lower -
@premal2000@WSJ "...Doesn't that suggest building up...?" 2 stories is more common now. Not much cheaper. Green/NIMBYism land makes costly.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Hoarders!
@WSJ: In 1973, a new U.S. home was an average of 1,660 sq ft. Today most are over 2,500 sq ft. http://on.wsj.com/1b9HvSA#homeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@WSJ the reason so many 20 something's still live at home. There's room.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@wsj IS DUE TO CURRENCY VALUE OR LIFESTANDARDS CHANGE? HOW ABOUT GLOBAL DEMAND OF HOUSING COZ OF OVERPOPULATION?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.