If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Smug people are living large in tiny homes (w/pics)   (cnn.com) divider line 128
    More: Cool, Hari Berzin, building codes, Blue Ridge Mountains, request for proposal, Whatcom County  
•       •       •

18793 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Sep 2012 at 7:47 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



128 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-22 12:14:30 AM
Moving from a 1400-1500sq ft home to a 3100sq ft home was the best thing we ever did. The kids have privacy and room to spread out; we have privacy now too and we each have a favorite area to pursue our hobbies and such. I imagine that I would eventually have snapped and wood chippered the whole lot of them had I had to live all cramped up like that for much longer. I think these people are insane. And no we aren't mortgaged to the hilt or anything; housing is relatively cheap here.
 
2012-09-22 01:40:17 AM
images2.wikia.nocookie.net people live in dwarf homes
 
2012-09-22 07:50:51 AM
Not smug, just smart.
 
2012-09-22 07:52:39 AM
More like "snug people", amirite?
 
2012-09-22 07:55:30 AM
No way I could do that. I love my family, but if I didn't have space to call my own and retreat to, I'd go nuts.
 
2012-09-22 07:58:59 AM
I would struggle living in an incredibly tiny house, but my wife and I live in a 600 sq ft apartment, and when we end up owning our own home we want it to be 500 sq ft or a little bit less. Besides the obvious reasons like being cheaper, more environmentally friendly, and easy to clean, living in a small space with limited storage helps fight the relentless pressure to buy material things. I have lots of respect for people who can downsize even further.

If you're into this sort of thing, look at Tumbleweed Tiny Houses
 
2012-09-22 08:00:33 AM

Deedeemarz: . And no we aren't mortgaged to the hilt or anything; housing is relatively cheap here.

Not everyone has the benefit of cheap homes, and that's where the small homes are growing in popularity. It's a choice between cramped spaces and the stress of paying the morgage/rent. From the article's perspective, cramped is making people happier.
 
2012-09-22 08:01:13 AM
There's also the intangible delight derived from cooking in a kitchen where everything is within arms' reach, or eating off the beautiful china set that was locked in a cabinet when they lived in a 1,500-square foot home, she said.

They couldn't eat off their good china when they lived in a bigger home for some reason?
 
2012-09-22 08:01:58 AM

The concept is interesting. Having a small house on a relatively large lot would be ok, as long as it wasn't in the city or burbs.

Squeeze out a couple rugrats though, and that goes to hell. Also, where do these people put all their shiat? I'm not talking extraneous BS, but necessities like food, clothes, arsenal, etc?

Also...

imageshack.us
 
2012-09-22 08:05:18 AM
The guy has a dog, two kids and a wife in 168 sq ft? I bet he spends a lot of time at the bar.
 
2012-09-22 08:05:37 AM
I've lived in multiple places, including a 3,000 square foot house.

Right now I'm in a 500 square foot apartment. Just me and the cats. I'd like a little more space for a laundry and a dishwasher, but this feels about right. I can easily get by under 1,000 square feet.
 
2012-09-22 08:12:13 AM
Yes please on the sailing boat. Yes, it's a hole in the water that you pour money into, but dammit it's a pretty hole in the water.
 
2012-09-22 08:16:08 AM
I have an super green tiny house for rent in my back yard. Let me just get that lawnmower out of your way and spray down this wasps' nest.
 
2012-09-22 08:18:35 AM
i bet they're gonna be doing alot of doobie rolling now than they're living in a van shack down by the river

/someday i hope to live in a van down by the Pacific coast
 
2012-09-22 08:18:53 AM
This is kind of awesome.
 
2012-09-22 08:19:09 AM
Fark that! No lib is going to convince me that living in farking cracker jack box is "smart", the first tornado that comes their way is going to make that home more mobile than intended!

Clearly these people have no kids, if they did they've already given into their primal instincts and devoured the the little cretins after being in such close proximity to them during the first week of living in this utopian fantasy.
 
2012-09-22 08:19:15 AM
It all depends upon the needs of any particular person or family. I'm a single male, so living in a small home is just fine by me. I don't need a mansion, much less a mansion-sized mortgage.
 
2012-09-22 08:22:09 AM
Meh, there have been whole communities of people living in self contained living spaces of only 80 sq ft for years, they're called prisons
 
2012-09-22 08:26:20 AM

kyrg: Meh, there have been whole communities of people living in self contained living spaces of only 80 sq ft for years, they're called prisons


Some people are so hard up that they'll even commit petty offenses just to get in.

/I'd rather join the army instead
 
2012-09-22 08:27:10 AM

esteban9: Not smug, just smart.


A cat box in 168 square feet? I'll agree with everything you say except the word "smart".
 
2012-09-22 08:28:46 AM
Hell to the no. My hobbies require a fair bit of space (doesn't have to be conditioned space, just indoors) and i'm a huge pacer. I pace when i think, when i read, while talking, etc. In a tiny house, i'd be leaving footprints on the ceiling.


/living in 1300sq feet now
//about twice that seems right
 
2012-09-22 08:31:40 AM
Came for the South Park smug references. Disappointed.
 
2012-09-22 08:34:03 AM
So they decided to live not just within their means, but well within?

Why that's just downright un-American.

We are supposed to be free to enslave ourselves to credit cards, mortgages and perpetual corporate bondage in order to live in this free country.

Get out Hippies!

/Could live in far less than the 1450 square feet I have now, if it is designed right
 
2012-09-22 08:36:01 AM
I wonder who gets the ahem, "closet" space...
 
2012-09-22 08:36:27 AM
Tiny_House_Geico.jpg
 
2012-09-22 08:37:27 AM
www.slate.com
This is NOT awesome.
 
2012-09-22 08:40:29 AM
you can heat em in the winter with a couple gaming rigs and cool em in the summer with an extra tarp and a little air conditioner.

what's to lose? dancing room, a place to watch horse rape?


Don't mock someone who can have their house moved by someone who doesn't have a CDL
 
2012-09-22 08:40:32 AM
The irony being, in many places, you can buy a nice, already built house for the cost of building some of these little ones. Not to mention, if you're so worried about using up resources, these things aren't made out of unicorn shiat and pixie wings, versus buying an already built house.
 
2012-09-22 08:42:26 AM

morbo: There's also the intangible delight derived from cooking in a kitchen where everything is within arms' reach, or eating off the beautiful china set that was locked in a cabinet when they lived in a 1,500-square foot home, she said.

They couldn't eat off their good china when they lived in a bigger home for some reason?



Obviously, they could have - I think the point is that when they had the excess room to store it away, that's exactly what they did. Now that they don't have the space to relegate the good china pieces to a cabinet, they've decided to use them for their everyday dishes.
 
2012-09-22 08:46:37 AM
Remember: Suicide is also "green".
 
2012-09-22 08:56:28 AM
I can see the appeal. I've considered the possibility of selling all of my unnecessary crap and doing much the same thing, only with a good travel trailer. Drag it somewhere pretty, work and live there til we get sick of it & move on to somewhere else. It's just my wife & I, and we like to be together as much as possible anyway. A notebook computer with HDMI output hooked up to a wall mounted LCD monitor & a pair of good, powered studio monitor speakers, and voila... all of your home entertainment needs are met. The utility bills would be a lot less, too.

The older I get, the better this idea looks.
 
2012-09-22 08:57:37 AM
My wife and I moved from a 3000 square foot house to a 2000 square foot house. We have no kids, and find the smaller footprint more comfortable. We still have plenty of room for a living room, dining room, kitchen, master bedroom, guest bedroom, and office.

For us, what makes it possible is the advancement of technology. We had a library with 5000 sci-fi and fantasy books. Now the books are in storage and we just use Kindles. We also had a separate room to support my computer gaming habit. Now I just use our TV as the monitor. We used to have a third guest bedroom too, that we never used.

By "right sizing", everything is easier to access and maintain. For us, 2000 square feet is about the right size.
 
2012-09-22 08:58:38 AM
Nothing better than living in a house where when you fart, everybody knows it.
 
2012-09-22 08:59:39 AM

Nick Nostril: Remember: Suicide is also "green".


Oblig
 
2012-09-22 09:00:19 AM

topcon: The irony being, in many places, you can buy a nice, already built house for the cost of building some of these little ones. Not to mention, if you're so worried about using up resources, these things aren't made out of unicorn shiat and pixie wings, versus buying an already built house.


Preservationists like to say the greenest home is one that's already built. That said, I think the small house movement should be looked at not necessarily as prescriptive, but more as a reaction against the idea that two people and a kid need 3,000 sq. ft. just to get by. Builders should think more about things like ergonomics and how space will actually be used. Virtually every house I see, you could end up with a much better, smaller house if the builders had thought more about how space would be used and less about making sure you could list "3 bedroom, 2.5 baths" on the sale sheet.

And when you make a home smaller, you can do all sorts of great things with it: finishing is cheaper so you can have nicer floors and fixtures and so forth, heating and cooling is going to be cheaper, and you'll end up with more yard space. So think of it more as showing what's possible to do with homes.
 
2012-09-22 09:00:32 AM
168 sqft maybe, but 3 acre farking farm.

I'm sorry, that's not downsizing.
 
2012-09-22 09:04:12 AM
Well I applaud the general idea but this is taking it to a stupid extreme. If your house is so small you have to make some serious concessions in your life, then you are being silly about it unless you simply can't afford anything else (and it is clear they can). It is just as silly as living in a massive house that you don't make any use of. This trend of massive McMansions needs to stop, but the right answer is not to run to the opposite extreme and try to pack in to a broom closet. Get something that has the space you need without lots of excess.

If you live alone, ya less than 1000 sq ft is easily doable and even preferable as it is less to clean. If you've a family of 6, then no, don't make all your kids share one bedroom, get a bigger place.
 
2012-09-22 09:05:21 AM
I not only want a tiny house, I want it to be in a big tree. That would be awesome.
 
2012-09-22 09:05:39 AM

Deedeemarz: Moving from a 1400-1500sq ft home to a 3100sq ft home was the best thing we ever did. The kids have privacy and room to spread out; we have privacy now too and we each have a favorite area to pursue our hobbies and such. I imagine that I would eventually have snapped and wood chippered the whole lot of them had I had to live all cramped up like that for much longer. I think these people are insane. And no we aren't mortgaged to the hilt or anything; housing is relatively cheap here.


I don't think any of those people have kids. Many of them are living alone.

I just moved into a one-bedroom apartment that is probably 400 square feet. That's plenty for one person just to live in, but you definitely need other places to do certain things, like certain types of art, car repair, etc.

The problem with big houses is a) somebody has to clean them, and who the hell wants to do that? b) maintenance is a constant pain in the ass and very expensive and c) they make it easier to accumulate a bunch of useless crap that weighs down your life like Jacob Marley's chains.
 
2012-09-22 09:08:23 AM
In other news, small homes are great when they are sat on huge tracts of land....
 
2012-09-22 09:11:09 AM

tedbundee: More like "snug people", amirite?


Smug people living in snug places while handicapped people make handicapped faces.

/I think I'm still a little drunk
 
2012-09-22 09:12:14 AM

Und Becks: tedbundee: More like "snug people", amirite?

Smug people living in snug places while handicapped people make handicapped faces.

/I think I'm still a little drunk


u know u really are an asshole!
 
2012-09-22 09:12:30 AM
I want one. I have for years.
 
2012-09-22 09:15:41 AM
Most men appear never to have considered what a house is, and are actually though needlessly poor all their lives because they think that they must have such a one as their neighbors have. As if one were to wear any sort of coat which the tailor might cut out for him, or, gradually leaving off palm-leaf hat or cap of woodchuck skin, complain of hard times because he could not afford to buy him a crown! It is possible to invent a house still more convenient and luxurious than we have, which yet all would admit that man could not afford to pay for. Shall we always study to obtain more of these things, and not sometimes to be content with less?
 
2012-09-22 09:16:05 AM

gweilo8888: Yes please on the sailing boat. Yes, it's a hole in the water that you pour money into, but dammit it's a pretty hole in the water.


Hell yeah. That was the only awesome one. It's like boat designers learned stuff about managing space centuries ago that the people who make the rest of this crap haven't yet. Very poor management of the space they have in some of these. Look at #7. Why in the hell would you have a round table in the corner of a tiny trailer? Those little triangles of space you can't use add up.
 
2012-09-22 09:16:40 AM
Welcome to Manhattan.
 
2012-09-22 09:21:11 AM
My girlfriend and her two kids are moving into my 1,800 sq foot home, which seemed large when it was just me and my dog. I think it'll still be okay, since the kids will have their own rooms, but I'm wondering if it's going to feel cramped anyway, simply because I'm not used to sharing my living space. That's all in my head, and I'd probably feel that way even if I had 3,000 sq ft.

I think a single person with no kids could easily live in under 1,000 sq ft. Kids, however, change that dynamic. They need their own space, and you need space from them, too.
 
2012-09-22 09:22:31 AM

sycraft: Well I applaud the general idea but this is taking it to a stupid extreme. If your house is so small you have to make some serious concessions in your life, then you are being silly about it unless you simply can't afford anything else (and it is clear they can). It is just as silly as living in a massive house that you don't make any use of. This trend of massive McMansions needs to stop, but the right answer is not to run to the opposite extreme and try to pack in to a broom closet. Get something that has the space you need without lots of excess.

If you live alone, ya less than 1000 sq ft is easily doable and even preferable as it is less to clean. If you've a family of 6, then no, don't make all your kids share one bedroom, get a bigger place.


Mediocre people have to do *something* to distinguish themselves from the "great unwashed".

/my tattoo. let me show it to you
 
2012-09-22 09:26:11 AM

StrandedInAZ: My girlfriend and her two kids are moving into my 1,800 sq foot home, which seemed large when it was just me and my dog. I think it'll still be okay, since the kids will have their own rooms, but I'm wondering if it's going to feel cramped anyway, simply because I'm not used to sharing my living space. That's all in my head, and I'd probably feel that way even if I had 3,000 sq ft.

I think a single person with no kids could easily live in under 1,000 sq ft. Kids, however, change that dynamic. They need their own space, and you need space from them, too.


I have no idea why a single person with no kids would need 1,000 square feet. Of course, it depends on how the home is designed, but my apartment is about 430 square feet, very light and airy, and it's perfect for me.

I'd love to have to worry about finding housing to share with someone, but that doesn't seem to be in the cards.
 
2012-09-22 09:30:09 AM
I don't need the space to acquire more stuff, I already have stuff, and it needs to go somewhere. Sometimes the stuff you have isn't all that exciting, like the vacuum cleaner, a necessary item but it takes up space, so I'd like to have the space to put it somewhere out of the way when I am not using it.

And yeah, tiny spaces for one person might be okay, but add more people and someone might end up in the wood-chipper. Especially if they are hippies. I hate hippies.
 
Displayed 50 of 128 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report