- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The “time price” of square foot of housing is 24% lower than the 1950s
Posted on 6/1/26 at 9:32 pm to JohnnyKilroy
Posted on 6/1/26 at 9:32 pm to JohnnyKilroy
I wonder if he owns any livestock in Big 12 country
1
Posted on 6/1/26 at 9:33 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
His wife takes her family’s plane to buy Louis Vuitton purses
This post was edited on 6/1/26 at 9:34 pm
Posted on 6/1/26 at 9:36 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
I want rainbolt to chime and and give us an address because depending on location I bet that house is at LEAST the national average and wouldn't surprise me if it was in the 75th percentile for home prices regardless of square footage.
I got you:
3507 W 78th St, Prairie Village, KS 66208
Estimated $550,000, and it doesn't look as nice as the touched up images
LINK
Posted on 6/1/26 at 9:39 pm to Ingeniero
quote:definitely an old school blue collar home like hhtm said
3507 W 78th St, Prairie Village, KS 66208
Estimated $550,000, and it doesn't look as nice as the touched up images
Posted on 6/1/26 at 9:40 pm to Ingeniero
quote:
Estimated $550,000
shite the wife can probably stay at home with the kids as long as the pest control job is steady
Posted on 6/1/26 at 9:41 pm to Ingeniero
Just looked at a few 3/2s 2k sqft in that zip code currently for sale. Upper 500s lmao
Posted on 6/1/26 at 9:42 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
This is the “dream house” that a 1965 auto worker in Michigan was living in
Zillow’s estimated market value for the house in that photo is $548,000.
quote:
This house being built today would not sell above construction costs:
According to Zillow, that exact house sold in 2023 for $1.3 million.
Here’s a Street View link if you doubt it’s the same house.
ETA: I see you’ve already been called out on this. But damn, I’m impressed at how well you managed to undermine your own point with those examples.
This post was edited on 6/1/26 at 9:46 pm
Posted on 6/1/26 at 9:42 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
People enjoy bitching about perceived ills. An undeniable fact of human nature.
One of the keys to happiness is learning to enjoy being thankful. It’s why so many are miserable. People focus too much on the house they have, the one they want, what someone else has…it’s just a place to keep your stuff and lay your head between living your life, at least that’s my take.
Posted on 6/1/26 at 9:49 pm to fallguy_1978
quote:
And they are 50% more expensive than 8 years ago.
So they basically kept up with inflation; shocking
And your 50% more expensive is BS as well F150 4x4 Lariat was $60K MSRP in 2016; Same vehicle MSRP for 2026 is $75K.
Expensive yes; but it's more like a 25% increase not 50%
This post was edited on 6/1/26 at 10:00 pm
Posted on 6/1/26 at 9:57 pm to lostinbr
I'm just assuming HHTM is memeing the stereotypical boomer that appears in these types of threads.
Hell in the last one there was a poster who posted a whole list of "affordable" homes and I think the average price per sqft was nearly 300 dollars lol.
Another posted a 350k house that was being listed for lot value.
Hell in the last one there was a poster who posted a whole list of "affordable" homes and I think the average price per sqft was nearly 300 dollars lol.
Another posted a 350k house that was being listed for lot value.
Posted on 6/1/26 at 10:04 pm to JohnnyKilroy
Nah,
I consider myself a “Thomas sowell conservative”
I let data and *context* of data guide my views.
You can 100% disagree, but I think there is a lot more nuance (to say the least) in the housing doomerism. The people who claim that homes were cheaper and easier to get in the 1960s-90s are leaving out context that at the very least explains some of the cost differences.
An honest interpretation of the data, for example, would compare a x square foot house in 1979 with a x square foot house in 2026, and would include amenities. I’d go a step further and include person per household and average real income/wages
I consider myself a “Thomas sowell conservative”
I let data and *context* of data guide my views.
You can 100% disagree, but I think there is a lot more nuance (to say the least) in the housing doomerism. The people who claim that homes were cheaper and easier to get in the 1960s-90s are leaving out context that at the very least explains some of the cost differences.
An honest interpretation of the data, for example, would compare a x square foot house in 1979 with a x square foot house in 2026, and would include amenities. I’d go a step further and include person per household and average real income/wages
Posted on 6/1/26 at 10:07 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Nah
I believe you
Posted on 6/1/26 at 10:20 pm to JohnnyKilroy
You can call me what you want lol
I just don’t buy the idea that modern life is worse than life in the 50s-90s.
I do think the data at the very least makes that assertion questionable.
Housing, crime, real wages, etc
I just don’t buy the idea that modern life is worse than life in the 50s-90s.
I do think the data at the very least makes that assertion questionable.
Housing, crime, real wages, etc
Posted on 6/1/26 at 10:33 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
It's just another Doomer pity party.
Posted on 6/1/26 at 11:27 pm to Sun God
Laugh, bitch. Its the truth.
I'm camping and fishing all week while you pitches are working all week.
I'm camping and fishing all week while you pitches are working all week.
Posted on 6/1/26 at 11:37 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Median home size has almost doubled, rising from about 1,150 square feet in 1956 to roughly 2,210 square feet today. Over the same period, average household size has shrunk from 3.3 people to 2.51. The result is a dramatic increase in living space per person—from just 348 square feet in 1956 to about 880 square feet today. That’s 532 more square feet per person, or a 153 percent increase. Had space per person stayed at its 1956 level, the typical home today would measure only about 874 square feet.
Here's an idea to help make homes more affordable: build smaller homes.
Obviously bigger homes aren't needed, especially bigger homes than they had in the 1950's if the household size is also smaller.
874 square feet per person is a pretty large amount. Most one bedroom apartments are smaller than that
Posted on 6/1/26 at 11:56 pm to magildachunks
Home builders have tried to build smaller homes and they just aren’t in demand
Posted on 6/2/26 at 1:24 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
Lol at zelllinials or whatever they're called
Posted on 6/2/26 at 3:22 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
I LOVE this...The crybabies who don't want a low sq foot starter home, and are too spoiled to not start with what their parents had accumulated in their 40's and 50's, just had their poor me narrative blown right out of their arse.
Stop whining and lower your ridiculous instagram ready standards.
BTW ...cut your own grass and quit eating out every meal....it's helps pay that mortgage.
Stop whining and lower your ridiculous instagram ready standards.
BTW ...cut your own grass and quit eating out every meal....it's helps pay that mortgage.
Posted on 6/2/26 at 4:56 am to Joshjrn
quote:
Interesting choice in year to cherry pick. I’m sure that wasn’t intentional…
I did not see anything in your chart that made 1956 seem suspicious? And note that your chart did not correct for the size of the home.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News