Why Other Countries LAUGH at American Homes

[@Mike_Fortin]

Are houses in other countries better than the US? 🏠🤔 What do you think?

[@overseer7004]

you forgot that when including gang nails, hurricane ties and new treatment methods for most materials and furniture, the wood framed homes in the usa are more disaster proof/replaceable/safe when taking into account certain kinds of disasters, tornados for instance. also Europe; don't feed the pests, enough said.

[@Mike_Fortin]

@@overseer7004 While I see the value of hurricane ties and other code required reinforcements (which other countries may not have), our wood homes are often wiped out by hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires, and more. A solid structure home is going to do a much better job of surviving the aforementioned disasters. Even more so if combined with a conditioned, unvented attic.

[@rogerbradbury9713]

Hard to say, as I've never been to the US. But I'm quite happy with my English bungalow, an early 1960s single story home with a cavity wall. The outer skin is brick, the inner is (I think) some sort of block. The cavity between was originally an air gap which prevented water ingress, now filled with cavity wall insulation; polystyrene beads. Many claim that's not a good idea, but I've had no problems with it. Windows and doors are double glazed, though would have probably been steel framed windows and wooden doors when first built. There's about eight inches of fibreglass loft insulation above the ceiling. If I seem a bit obsessed with insulation, it's because England is cold and damp for much of the year and energy prices are high. I'm amazed at the size of many US homes; my bungalow may seem small to you at 600 square feet but I live on my own and it's the right size for me. It's larger than many other one bedroom bungalows here.

[@horstmerkle9114]

You said in your video: It depends. I am of German decent and lived in Switzerland. I came to appreciate the typical US wood house for it’s flexibility to make design changes. The biggest draw-back however is energy efficiency. For the vast majority of US houses HVAC is a must - even in northern states like Wyoming, Montana, whereas the vast majority of houses in Europe including Southern Europe do only provide heating for the winter months. The summers in Europe may not be the most comfortable, but people make it through those hot weeks and few months. The other issue is the increase in natural disasters: Hurricanes, wild fires, tornadoes, flooding. In other words: I think in the US, concrete / CMU based buildings should be more seriously considered for energy saving and overall safety reasons at least in certain areas / states. As for Europe: Innovative sustainable, environmentally friendly composite materials are coming to the market there in big box stores, combining the features of both worlds wood, concrete and stone! Finally, I feel the US is much slower in adopting innovation in home building in which I include also plumbing, electrical, interior design, heating. As said, I am not unhappy with my house here, but I feel we could do better.

[@SymphoniasStories]

A home should be built in a way that works with its climate. I grew up in a regular wood-framed home. I live in an apartment (probably brick). I would love to have a concrete home as long as it could stay dry inside and not have any pest problems. What do you think of monolithic domes?

[@meow3343]

The problem I see with US homes is their quality doesn't fit to their price

[@napalm_lipbalm86]

Most definitely!!

[@chicagoan81]

We have $800k homes being built that won't last 10 years if they're lucky

[@algaeninja6806]

American homes are on average twice the size for the same price as european homes.

[@psidvicious]

@@chicagoan81 Uhh, please give an example this. 🤨

[@brunsheimmasterbaitwilfrie2811]

The price for those houses is what got to me too every time. I get that one wants a home and light wood framing is there to make that easy, fast and cheap. So why are they so expensive?!

[@joshuanorman2]

In the UK it's not just not rare, but it's extremely common to walk past houses that are older than the United States

[@Josh.1234]

Yep and no one wants to live in old European houses either. Poorly conditioned spaces, unergonomic and downright depressing.

[@oov55]

@@Josh.1234 correct -- they stand the test of time .....but only if your 'time' is happy to be spent in a house the size of a rabbit hutch ... and as cold as one.

[@joshuanorman2]

@ That's very untrue, the older the village the more expensive it is to live there, as a general rule. People love the cosy old homes and will even pay to replace the thatch roofs every year. They are fitted with double glazed windows, sealed and given better heating, they're not bad to live in at all.

[@houghi3826]

Why are they more expensive? Supply and demand.

[@joshuanorman2]

@ note that supply and demand requires there to be demand, which is exactly my point! Also, there's quite a lot of them

[@iaminhere6022]

When you punch a American Wall, you can grab a coffee. When you punch a wall in germany, you get a trip to the ER

[@BananaBlooD9517]

Why would you punch your wall? When you want to change the layout & size of room you can do it easily in NA because you have quick access to electrical wires & plumbing, I doubt they're easy to move when your inside walls are made of bricks, concrete or other heavy material.

[@tealkerberus748]

I'm not a fan of walls that fight back - I've seen too many people, particularly the elderly, with injuries from falls. But a solid masonry wall with an air gap and a plaster sheet over the air gap will give you a wall surface that breaks before your hand does *and also* a wall structure that will stand the test of time. The air gap behind the plaster is also a handy place to run your plumbing and electrical.

[@darknessml6145]

​@@tealkerberus748 "Walls that fight back" my brother in christ it is a WALL. its WHOLE thing is that its a solid slab that does not move what do you MEEEAN fight back?!

[@W4iteFlame]

​@@BananaBlooD9517they just don't put wires and plumbing inside the walls

[@arnodobler1096]

In Germany, you don't have to worry about hospital costs either!

[@combongi1]

Not just in Europe, even us in Africa are wondering

[@ryanmcgowan9199]

Europe is Africa now

[@Osama_Zyn_Laden]

😂

[@peterschmidt2702]

😂👍

[@TimEssDub]

Homebuilding in the US is designed to make a quick buck for investors rather than to build decent homes.

[@starventure]

You cannot remodel a concrete house. Remodeling is an integral part of the home owning experience in the USA, which is alien to Europeans.

[@kh2099-z5f]

How much more do you want to go into debt buying a home.

[@rogerphelps9939]

@@starventure You certainly remodel a house built using concrete blocks. I have done it twice here in he UK.

[@Matt-yg8ub]

Well, just look at the difficulty of trying to sell a more expensive home. The developer purchased is 40 acres and they have to try to make money on this development so they can’t make them large plots or else they’d have fewer homes and they’d make less money so they have to be smaller to start with and then they have to have as many amenities as possible, but they can’t cost too much or else they priced themselves out of the market for people looking at smaller homes on smaller plots. You can’t build million dollar homes on postage stamps and expect people to be willing to buy them when there are much larger homes for cheaper next-door. That’s the problem…. It’s a bigger country, you’d think we’d have more land, but it doesn’t work that way because land prices are dependent upon their proximity to downtown…. Many Europeans are forced to make do with a real estate culture where your grandparents purchased a home after the war and your parents inherited the house and someday you might inherit the house, but that’s the only way you’re ever going to own one because they’re just too damn expensive That’s just not how things work in the United States because we have a much more mobile culture where people don’t plan on buying a house and living in it for 60 years in order to justify the massive expense, they buy a starter home and they worked their way up

[@dochi1958]

@@starventure 'Remodeling' is done for only two reasons- 1 To install the latest fixtures to keep up with latest fads to impress the Jones, 2. To replace the flimsy, crappy material used in the original build. Only the USA does this greedy, narcissistic idiocy.

[@mirkostanic92]

there is a story for kids it is called “three little pigs” it’s quite educational

[@Mike_Fortin]

Maybe I should do a video on it lol

[@iuliandragomir1]

Posted also on another channel the same! AMERICA !!!! MAGA!!! and they build cardboard buildings! So Shame!

[@J-1410]

As is seeing brick walls toppled on top of people after a tornado, especially in schools. 2013 in Moore, OK is an example.

[@ContraVsGigi]

​@@w8stralWell, the added cost of rebuilding, etc. compensates those extra costs. In the problematic areas, not everywhere.

[@НевенаНиколова-к6ы]

@@J-1410 Creating a stable construction only with bricks is a different branch of civil engineering. You can make a seismic steady brick construction if you know how. For such a collapse of a wall you need to blame lousy masonry with sub-standard mortar.

[@MarkWatson-xi1ry]

Everyone on here saying wood is better for earthquakes than concrete. I lived in Japan 17 years and always in solid concrete apartment/townhouses. They have earthquakes every month where I was. They chose concrete for a reason. They were built to withstand severe earthquakes. There is more to earthquake-resistant construction than just the material used. They also use some kind of shock absorbing within the foundation. Also lived in California about 7 years and have seen the wooden houses broken to bits.

[@Mike_Fortin]

Thank you for this Yes, absolutely true. Concrete can be designed to stand higher magnitude earthquakes than wood framing. This is accomplished through the use of seismic joints that allow for movement and reinforced foundations. I think in CA, concrete homes require additional engineering and approval. However l, money doesn’t seem to be the issue and at a minimum homes should be of steel construction

[@fnorgen]

yeah, wooden structures can be extremely solid, but not when heavily optimized for material costs and ease of construction. Unless you have an abundant supply of decent quality lumber it quickly gets more cost effective to use other materials if disaster resistance is a concern. I've seen a 100+ year old wooden house originally built at a time when they just threw more lumber at every problem. Walls of solid lumber, backed by 2 layers of planking and one layer of particle board! Presumably they just kept adding layers in renovations over the years. Mind you, this was built in a sawmill town at a time when lumber was the region's primary export, so it would have been silly to build with anything else. Obviously you always want to adapt your construction techniques and material choices to local conditions. The pain sets in when builders compete on construction price alone, slapping together structures they know will have issues in the long run.

[@neverfinishedstory]

Mediterranean too. Stone and concrete

[@alanmay7929]

exactly! thats why apple built their round office using japanese eartquake proof foundations in california

[@Jeffhowardmeade]

When did you see wood house splintering to bits in an earthquake? I lived in California for six decades, and lived though a number of earthquakes, and the only time wood houses failed was when their concrete foundations heaved. By far the greatest damage was to steel and concrete structures.

[@spinewrenched848]

I’m a carpenter in the US, and our houses are cheap shit! You could literally cut through the walls with a utility knife! Cut the vinyl siding, then the Celetex, and then thru the drywall! It’s shit. Heavy timber, and stone, and earth homes will last way longer!

[@Culpride]

And while old layouts (like built for hundreds of years) are often not fitting very well for modern way of living (plumbing, heating, cables, space needs etc.), the fact that they are still standing after centuries testifies for a durable building style. Slop of yesteryear fell over long ago. Those ugly roof overhangs that take up all the light? They keep the rain away from the walls. The steep roofs that make the top floors cramped? They collect less snow before it slides off. The blocky, boring, rectangular footprint? Inside corners are prone to failure, water ingress and the roof becomes more segmented/flat with the same problems. New building techniques allow for new styles, but are they adressing all the issues that this style caused before?

[@ChillEconomistEM]

I dont understand, in a place were wild fires are prevalent, you build with Wood. In a place prone to Hurricanes you also build with Wood. Why? Why? When there are better options.

[@thelight3112]

It's cheap and it's what the local construction labor force knows. I agree, places like California and Florida should not be building wooden homes. Here in the northeast USA, wooden homes are OK because they can be insulated far easier than concrete structures (it goes below -20C here) and hurricanes/wildfires aren't a concern.

[@napalm_lipbalm86]

This was my exact thought🤔

[@flippos]

​@@LondonEE16that sounds stupid In greece we have brick homes, even in the Ionian Islands, Europe's most earthquake prone zone. They have lower failure rates than wooden homes. The secret lies in good foundations and solid support structure, as well as arches.

[@ryushogun9890]

You didn't watch the video did you.

[@hanisrosli5484]

​​@@LondonEE16think as simple as this,who its better?wood vs fire or earth vs earth??and most important thing fire are more common then rare major earthquake

[@Gretschbeach]

I can tell you the answer from experience rather than internet research: I was a carpenter in the USA for over 20 years. I also spent a year building houses in Sweden. The big difference that in Europe, designs are led by architects and engineers. In the USA architects and engineers are led by lawyers. The Simpson Tie company has a monopoly on how homes are built in the USA because they paid engineers to test their product. Engineers always specify what has been tested. If you don’t use exactly what the engineer put in the plans, the inspector makes you take it out. No USA architect will specify local materials without a hefty price tag because engineers won’t sign off on something that Simpson tie hasn’t paid some engineer to test. Because they are all afraid of being sued. You won’t get permits for anything that hasn’t been signed off by an architect and an engineer. Building codes are solely for avoiding lawsuits. Not safety. You won’t get insurance for a house that hasn’t been built in outdated inappropriate, light timber houses because it has been tested. Without insurance no one can get a mortgage. If no mortgage, nothing gets built on spec. So there is basically one residential building style for all climates, because Simpson Tie paid an engineer. That’s a sham! Forget the ancient adobe houses in the southwest. The ancient stone buildings are curiosities. Forget the 200 year old hay bail house in Missouri. To get a permit you have to prove that a building will potentially last. Actually lasting doesn’t count as potentially lasting. That’s why everyone laughs at Americans.

[@janosik150]

You should make a video about this

[@Sphendrana]

So it's all because of Corpo Trash. Makes sense.

[@DallasGunther]

And every year that goes by I put more and more of Simpsons products into houses. It's obviously based on politics.

[@bernhardmichaelfux308]

By the way, Here in Europe, we don´t need Companies to test some equipment. Everything you can buy here is already tested, and no Inspector can tell us to take it out, Everything here is already tested according to our laws. Otherwise, no one is allowed to sell this stuff here! You simply cannot buy a thing here that´s not firmly tested.

[@roman45678]

Many thanks for explaining. This makes sense. In the Europe every contruction material must have certification to be placed on market. Certification require testing of material acc specific methods. There is no monopoly for testing in the Europe. It seems to me, in the USA is main issue by monopoly system for everything. Too much centralised power for private companies which then are allowed to "lobby" (allowed corruption by law) at politics and authorities.

[@silvio6904]

In the city of Porto Alegre in Brazil, there was a major flood, and practically the entire city was submerged. Most of the houses are made of concrete and bricks. After the flood passed, it was necessary to throw the furniture in the trash and wash the houses in order to live in them again. The people who were left without homes were the poor and who had houses made of wood in remote places. In Brazil, houses made of wood are associated with poverty.

[@franquil85conn]

Well the average home price there is 150,000USD..... thats damn near poverty level here in America

[@silvio6904]

@franquil85conn I do not deny in any way that Americans have a higher "purchasing power", but among us Brazilians, whose culture comes from the Mediterranean, building wooden houses is associated with poverty. When someone gets some money, they build a house made of bricks and concrete. It is completely unimaginable for Brazilians to build a wooden house. No one would understand that someone who has money would build a wooden house. And we have a large colonization of Germans in the south of Brazil, who went to live in an area rich in wood. For about two generations they built wooden houses, but as soon as they got better financial conditions, they started to build only with bricks and concrete. The wood industry was completely abandoned, few people know how to work with wood. And all houses must have a civil engineer in charge, otherwise construction is not authorized.

[@franquil85conn]

@silvio6904 the problem is that Americans do know how to build with wood because timber was a major commodity in the past, and while you can have unscrupulous builders of wood (and bricks and concrete) you can also have amazing structures, though i do not deny concrete and brick are stronger. My wood built home is 3400sq ft and cost 650,000usd to build, if I built this same house out of brick and concrete it would probably be double. My first house i bought was a wood built Victorian home from 1893 (though I admit it was built with stronger wood than my current home built in 2020.

[@markomarjanovic7643]

It's a bitch to to get the moisture completely out of the walls after flooding, may take years, decades, or never, won't be exactly as pre-flood but still livable.

[@lucasljs1545]

@@franquil85conn but a 150k USD house in Brazil is the size of a 800k house on the US and is made of BRICKS. The average house price here is not 150kUSD. It is 30k USD. With 150k USD you can buy an entire mansion with a giant garden space.

[@ruffyvanhoun]

I‘m born and raised in Bavaria, Germany. My house was build by my dad in 1986, which was the cold war peak time. The next mayor city is Munich and so for, my dad decided his home has to be bomb safe, because munich is a nuclear target, so our two basement floors got a 110cm/35“ thick ceilings out of steel concrete. Above the ground level, everything is reinforced too to withstand nuclear blasts. But you couldn’t tell from the out- or inside, besides the outside walls are also a bit thicker that usual. It would be really cool to have a hurricane over here, to see if there would be actually any kind of damage to the houses in our little village. Also we got 3 houses in our village that are 400 years old or older. The church should be like around 500-550 y/o

[@jetmangti6475]

Imho roofing and windows would not be able to withstand. But core would be fine.

[@josebadia1493]

Believe me the walls and frame would stand,the roof,the Windows and every inside won't,the real damague of an Hurriacanes comes from the floods not from the winds in a strong one can put your house under the water.

[@Will-d9z1d]

Living conditions in the USSR in the 70s and 80s were not bad. The only thing that poisoned our thoughts was the possibility of a nuclear war, BUT THE WAR CAME FROM THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

[@wokeydokey6885]

​@@jetmangti6475Roofing will withstand the hurricane if it's a concrete roofing. Houses nowadays has roofs build with concrete instead of using other roofing solutions. A house build to withstand a nuclear blast will certainly withstand a huricane. Windows will break either way, but it can be replaced quickly and cheaply compared to building an entire house again.

[@Bare36]

Last year,in eastern Croatia,we had a 200kmh,strong huricane wind. Strong winds in past, where maybe up to 50kmh.. Not one house was destroyed. Only few houses had blown roof-only the ones with small balcony under the roof. My house is in a open area, without protective buildings around it. I lost just a few roof tiles. And my house was a standard build,nothing special,or reinforced. There where houses from 1920s,also,just roof tiles went off,and same thing happened with very tall houses with 2 or 3 floors.

[@cantorsteve]

I live on Manhattan Island. It has been illegal to build with combustible materials here since the Great Fire of 1835. All utilities have been underground here since they all came crashing down in the Blizzard of '88. That's 1888, not 1988. This is what a city does to solve glitches in the system. On another note, this is a 10 minute city, never mind a 15 minute one. I am within 10 minutes of two supermarkets, three banks, a public library, elementary school, university, post office, hospital, 3 parks, 2 pharmacies, shoe repair, and a myriad of other destination ON FOOT! I was born and raised in Los Angeles. They've never known how to "city" there. And the rest of the country has forgotten how.

[@ColonizerChan]

Def a stark difference between east and west coast cities. The age of eastern ones really makes a difference for this sorta stuff here

[@AnnatarTheMaia]

That someone would leave Los Angeles for New York, now that is truly insane.

[@CC-gu3ze]

Its amazing what you can build for $3000 per square foot. However, the rest of the country gets by on $200 per square foot or less and we can't hear our neighbors fart.

[@clutchboi4038]

Is no cash bail for violent criminals the proper way to "city"? Because that's what y'all do.

[@fredflintstone2234]

It’s called infrastructure.

[@jman2903]

How to turn Sawdust and glue onto a million bucks, come to America and see the new houses

[@jumpnalamp]

True and then HOA comes and wants to throw you out of your property because you have 3 cars parked in the driveway or something

[@u_solutions_lv]

Yet wooden homes in US are stupidly expensive compared to what you get

[@napalm_lipbalm86]

Seriously 🤦‍♀️

[@feandil1713]

The US also has a crazy expensive healthcare system and education system. However, you have lower taxes. I think I prefer to live in Europe, where only the state robs me to that extent.

[@u_solutions_lv]

@ I think every US citizen who needs just a diploma should move to europe to get a bachelor for 3-8k dollars and move on with their lives instead of having 100+k in student loan debt

[@AlRizz187]

@@feandil1713 as a german i would have no problem with high taxes if those would actually benefit the people not just the rich and being used for stupid things especially construction that gets demolished or abandoned 5 years later

[@feandil1713]

@@AlRizz187 Oh yes, I get your point. I've heard about the contemporary political situation in Germany and I'm quite worried. I wish you the best from the depth of my heart, also because I'm convinced that Germany's stability affects Europe a lot. May Germany grow strong and always have wise governors. Greetings from the direct east neighbor country.

[@Ikari-5an]

Basically what you're saying is that americans prioritized low cost and just building things as fast as possible because the houses are supposed to be temporary and basically disposable in America.

[@yeetube-ghostedMoose]

... the USA builders of the woodchip & sawdustboard made with polymerized petrol glue. Results: The so-called, "Affordable Housing" deathtrap fire hazards that explode into flaming infernos even before the pos 'housing' is even finished! - As seen on teevee! 'News' that is.

[@supertyp9148]

I remember seeing a video on KZbin a couple of years ago about a guy in the USA presenting the windows he installed in his new house. He ordered the windows in Europe. Triple layer glass with Aluminium frame. This is the highest grade of windows you could buy. He explained that he paid less for these windows including transportation from europe in comparison to whatever alternative is available in the USA of lower grade. My impression of this and other stories is. That the construction material market in the USA does not have fair prices for anything.

[@raaf4678]

Not just the construction market. The first thing I think about in this regard is what I keep reading about your health care system. Being super capitalistic apparantly does not create cheaper prices.

[@ShermanistDruid]

​@@raaf4678 Dude just explained how capitalism allowed the guy to buy a better product at a lower price on the free market.

[@leandrolahiteau8162]

​@@ShermanistDruidFrom a continent that mostly regulates said capitalism instead of letting it "regulate itself"

[@roman45678]

People in USA are not teached to realise value/price. That is the reason why in capitalism can prices grow way up to the sky. In the Europe we dont have regulated prices (except maybe energies in some cases) but we, people, are counting approximate cost to make such product and actual price of the product. We would never buy something with 10-20x higher price if there are other options. In the Europe we have much healthier concurrence market price fight than cartels in USA.

[@NothingXemnas]

Honestly, from all stories I have seen, NOTHING is fairly priced. No regulation over medication cost, private healthcare and largely exploitative private education, merely trying to survive sounds like a burden on the wallet. It constantly sounds like there is no regulation AT ALL, even though there is.

[@DT-wt5ku]

We visited Europe in 2017, and stayed with friends in their rented suburban townhome in Warsaw. The home was a spacious three level, and build quality was eye opening, compared to the stick and drywall we have in the States. I did not expect solid concrete walls, throughout, quality stone stucco roofs, built like the proverbial bunker. Warsaw was 90% destroyed in WWII, and rebuilt largely from the bombed remnants. Frow what I saw, they build their homes to last.

[@Rhaspun]

Concrete homes are available in the US. But they won't be a tract home. Custom home only.

[@Zygmunt-Zen]

Polish builders subconsciously build for war.

[@frenchyroastify]

@@Rhaspun Same in Canada.

[@Rhaspun]

@ I wonder if tract house developments happen in Europe like it is here in the US. If they do are they still built to the standard they use.

[@archmad]

Thats probably the reason, they expect to get bombed again

[@walsakaluk1584]

American mass construction methods evolved from building film sets for Hollywood. They just have to look good on camera.

[@0zzburn313]

😂

[@iamjaspernoir]

🤣😭😭😭🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 you cooked

[@Ne0LiT]

Just a little correction on the "Concrete technology was lost" part. It never was lost. The Byzantine Empire continued using the method, it just became a much rarer occurance to use concrete because of the availability. Romans relied on Volcanic Ash for the production of Concrete, which was disrupted by the fall of the Western Roman Empire. The Eastern Roman Empire(Byzantine Empire) never lost the technology, it just became a much less used method precisely due to availability, plus because even if there was availability, it was much harder to work with. The Romans relied on huge projects run by the state to make buildings built out of Concrete. In the fall of the Empire, the successor states never reached the power Rome ever had, so for them it was much harder to run such projects, plus they were much more costly, and again, availability for the materials was scarce. That being said there are buildings built in the medieval ages in Western Europe out of concrete, just there aren't much of that. What happened in the 19th century was the invention of modern cement, which is much easier to produce and doesn't require Volcanic Ash for example, lmao. Plus, countries had become richer and more stable, so they were able to run bigger projects, and with the industrial revolution the process of creating concrete has been simplified a lot, so pretty much most people can afford it. Though it is important to note that modern concrete is nowhere near the level of Roman concrete, precisely because of it's make up. The volcanic ash part is very important here. Hopefully we can one day recreate this in a more convenient manner, where we do not need Volcanic Ash.

[@kriskris998]

Very nice video! Every European who lived in USA are shocked from two things. The wooden homes that come with ridiculous prices and the lack of pedestrians on the streets

[@LW1Tok]

Some people prefer to live in quiet neighborhoods, not tiny streets with constant public foot traffic.

[@TheVistula]

Cars are.much louder than pedestrians.​@@LW1Tok

[@kiraamv5507]

​@@LW1Tok or Americans don't prefer to walk and have terrible public transport, We have 4 vehicles at home but I would still prefer to take metro, bus, or train while going somewhere firstly more cost efficient, 80% time faster, also you can take a nap or relax,

[@ericholdsworth6611]

People like their wooden homes and we have it in abundance. I have worked the building trade for years, nobody wants a steel stud building or concrete, it's ugly, cold and cheap. Who cares what Europeans think anyway, they live mostly on postage stamps in characterless homes unless they buy historic ones, which are built with wood and stone and would cost millions today.

[@jimbothefuzzy]

@@TheVistula Cars are louder than pedestrians, but a couple cars per hour is much less noise than the pedestrians would make in order to have sufficient density for a purely-walkable area to make sense. There are even some places I know that are so rural that the people who live there can't even justify the cost of an asphalt street and use gravel instead. Gravel is louder than asphalt, but is one car per hour along asphalt more noisy than a lot of pedestrians? It depends on your definition of "noisy."

[@davianoinglesias5030]

In other countries wooden houses are a sign of poverty

[@zb4847]

Not quite right. It's cheap, energy effective and durable. It works for Eastern Europe and ex soviet states.

[@dariusalexandru9536]

@@esyr well in Brazil they are seen that way

[@dariusalexandru9536]

@@zb4847 he is right tho

[@B5Scheuert]

​@@zb4847 "In eastern Europe and ex Soviet states" - so in poor countries, got it

[@zacheryhernandez7298]

Yeah if I think of someone living in a concrete home or something made of cinderblocks I'd feel bad for them, that makes me think of poverty and dystopia, like something out of 1984. All homeowners I know that live in wooden house radiate prosperity to me.

[@sharonishere]

I'm from Sri Lanka. We are currently building a home using Brick and reinforced concrete frame. 3 stories, around 4,500 fq.ft with a luxury finish with air conditioning, floor tiling, swimming pool. Total cost around 170,000 USD.

[@BigBlobProductions]

That's it, I'm moving there

[@general_merten]

Hahaha for that price they dont even unload the lumber for your House in the usa

[@Pixel_FX]

​@@BigBlobProductions you should. People are very welcoming too. And the awesome climate.

[@fritzmeier1717]

If you would pay the workers a decent wage...

[@trollfake9578]

14:18 - "who's building concrete houses?" - EVERYONE IN EUROPE :P

[@zubairhasan9434]

Not only in Europe but also large part of south and east asia. Pretty much most nations except USA.

[@AKuTepion]

Family houses in Czechia are typically built out of bricks or blocks ("large bricks"), not concrete. Concrete is only used for the foundation.

[@EBSantos123]

90% of Brazilian houses (if not more) are brick and cement, with metal and concrete structure. Surely, most of LatAm does the same.

[@hectorrodriguez2686]

I have worked abroad, and YES, our homes do not compare to foreign countries. USA construction is NOT durable.

[@horstmerkle9114]

As said earlier, this is also part of the US culture and philosophy: Why build for generations, when I can foresee I will only live in that house / region for 10-20 years? Or, why committing to a certain construction / style of house when I know designs and technology as well as my income will change over the years? Per se there is nothing wrong with this thinking except maybe (only maybe) from an environmental perspective. But I personally have no proof of the validity of the environmental statement.

[@geoh7777]

@@horstmerkle9114 "there is nothing wrong with this thinking except maybe (only maybe) from an environmental perspective." As we have already learned, there is also the fire resistance perspective. Homes in very many developments in the U.S. are built close together. With the right wind and dryness conditions, fire can easily destroy them.

[@garymccallum4152]

@@tj92834 Irrelevant if you build a home to last four centuries

[@comment6864]

@@horstmerkle9114 but then that doesn’t explain why life in the US is so darn expensive! What you describe is actually more applicable to some other countries than the US🥴

[@comment6864]

@@tj92834 who’s benefit and who’s cost?

[@VeselySmertokog]

Hello. I'm from Russia and was several times in the US (Ohio and Texas) in the mid-2000s as a work and travel program participant. Your houses sucks. Even village cottages (summer houses), built in the mid-1970s and 80s near Soviet towns, were made from far more resilient materials. I was shocked by how poor the sound insulation is (you can hear a car passing by through the walls). Even lower-middle-class houses in the southern part (we don't have strong winters, especially now, usually always above 0 Celsius) are built from better materials. You just have some nice-looking decoration for houses built from paper. You know, when I was watching action movies where people easily throw each other through thin walls, I thought that this was just for entertainment purposes. But you can do this in real life.

[@christschool]

Most of the Russian homes I saw when I traveled across the country in the 2000's looked like third world slum houses. Most Russians live in very large communal soviet style housing projects that are dreadful places. Russians really shouldn't be critics of anyone else. It is basically a third world shithole from the black sea to the pacific.

[@FobosLee]

in California they excuse it with earthquake danger. “Wood will flex, concrete/brick will crack and collapse”. But then there’re skyscrapers definitely made not out of wood

[@lifeonmars4088]

I've been living in a seismic zone in a concrete panel house. It stand earthquakes just fine. Americans gonna protect their shitty houses with their life rather than admit problem

[@effingcool1780]

I also always used to think those are "movie set" houses were temporary and built so weak to make action scenes more dramatic. But later I started watching US home renovation shows and yeap. Their real houses were really just some woods and drywall. It is ok if it is just some summer house but for real houses. In our country wooden houses are not considered as immovable property.

[@NingreenGupta]

Russia doesn't exist in this video, don't even bother

[@Neotokyo6]

American : we biuld to reap profit as fast as possible Europe : we build to last Japan : we build to save life , home can rebuild

[@DaisyBee11]

To be fair, a proper concrete/rebar building can survive a tornado or a hurricane. But japan experiences earthquakes that can topple even those

[@임수경-o8m]

Not Laughing , but you building yourself coffins , these houses get easy washed away, easy to break in , easy blown away by a storm, hard to heat up and they burn like a torch. This is a very cheap way to have a Home or to call it a coffin, which is not save at all. The only plus is , the Wood does not emit so much CO2 then all the concrete. In Germany our government wants to do the same idiotic sht building houses from wood because of climate change, but with the climate impacts you need concrete , the more the better and not wood at all to survive.

[@Stephster11]

In New England, there are plenty of centuries old buildings made from the now extinct "old growth" forests. These timbers are rock solid and fire, pest, mold resistant. My house is 250+ and doing fine. The Europeans that came here started the wood building trend because of the abundance of forests. The wood now is garbage, and will always be.

[@killingtimeitself]

you can't build a house to be flood resistant, and it's very trivial to build a house to be less prone to break ins, it's about the simplest thing you could really. They don't get blown away by storms (it gets windy in the US sometimes, hard to believe i know) and they most definitely do not burn like a torch, drywall is literally non flammable, most exterior siding is flame retardant, all insulation is flame retardant, all homes have firebreaks, and the wood isn't exactly prone to burning down considering its not exposed. You have to try pretty hard to burn down your house, or literally get engulfed by a wildfire, a thing even cars cannot manage without melting into piles of metal.

[@kriszukowski4530]

Hi there, I’m an architect from Europe so I know, at least to some degree, what I’m talking about here. Modern building techniques in Europe do result in not only modern but in more durable single-family houses, indeed. We use primarily non-combustible roofing (metals, ceramic roof tiles), hollow bricks, plaster, etc. We do not use cheap asphalt shingles, stick framing and cheap vinyl siding widely used across the US in Canada. And strangely enough, our houses are still not more expensive. Go figure.

[@Mike_Fortin]

Thanks for the info! What’s the average cost of a single family home in Europe as you’ve seen it? From what I saw in my very limited research home ownership seems to be lower, rentals / multifamily are preferred and houses could be quite a bit more expensive , almost double the cost in some locations

[@mrparts]

House pricing on the US is not a function of materials or construction technique. It is a function of location. That’s why California became an extremely expensive housing market despite all the shitty mass produced housing built there in sprawling suburbs.

[@Aortadetroit]

@@mrparts accurate but it is a function of materials too. Wonderful homes are being built but they're coming in at $1100 a foot plus. In other words another American story of haves and have nots.

[@kriszukowski4530]

@@Mike_Fortin Thanks for responding. It really depends on the area. Generally it’s cheaper in the East (like Romania, Bulgaria, etc.), then it gets more expensive when one goes west. But rural Spain or rural Portugal is cheaper than urban Poland or Czech Republic, for example. Anyhow, a construction of a modern single-family house of 150 m2 (1 m2 is around 10 sq ft) in the East or even Central Europe would cost about $1500.00 per 1 m2. Again, with non-combustible roofing, hollow bricks (they have an excellent thermal properties) and plaster.

[@kriszukowski4530]

@@mrparts The construction cost in Europe also depends on the location. It’s cheaper in the East (like Romania, Bulgaria, etc.), then it gets more expensive when one goes west. But rural Spain or rural Portugal is cheaper than urban Poland or Czech Republic, for example. Anyhow, I think that those price differences are not as predatory as in the US (hey, just like the European capitalism seems to be less predatory than that of the American variety).

[@CharlieZenenour]

People from other countries don’t criticise american construction for it being timber frames but rather for it’s poor workmanship and constant use of the lowest quality materials. Even swedes criticise american buildings for being too weak and poorly constructed, it’s very clear why when you compare the average Swedish tradesman’s work versus the american counterpart doing the exact same job.

[@jwg9338]

Aren't Swedes paid something like four times more than the relative wage of an American tradesman?

[@CharlieZenenour]

@ Americans get paid more, drywall installers, roof crews and so on get paid a lot more than swedes for doing the same job. And cost of living in Sweden is higher than most american states, higher taxes and higher cost for goods.

[@mysterioanonymous3206]

Europe also has a tradition of apprenticeships with very elaborate training programs to get craftsmen up to a good standard. And many are quite proud of their work. In the US you're looked down upon if you haven't got a college degree. What's an apprenticeship? Let me just slap that pipe in here that'll be 100 bucks please....

[@NotThatKraken]

You can buy a better quality home. They just cost more per square foot, and most people prefer a larger house instead.

[@joewoodchuck3824]

​@@jwg9338You'd need to balance the salary statement with cost of living in order to sell it.

[@gloofisearch]

Sorry, not catching up fast. Your last type of home was done in Germany about 35 years ago. I used to work in installing communication systems in Germany and saw all these new technologies used for building houses. They are at least 20-30 years ahead of US. However, as you mentioned, wood framing as done in US is the cheapest and fastest and not much skill required. That is the only reason it is and will be done that way in the future in the US. To prove that point, look at the Paradise fire a few years back in California. The county wanted to implement stricter building rules after the fire, using concrete, however, the huge building corporations opposed that as it is to expensive, eating into their profits, and at the end they won. No change! Profits over safety.

[@Matt-yg8ub]

Since you are using California as an example, there are a couple different things to consider California has extraordinarily strict, stringent, environmental protection laws that make any kind of construction, extraordinarily difficult, California has earthquakes, which makes anything made of concrete or stone or masonry. Extremely difficult to pull off without risking the structure because of the earthquakes. What is preferred in California because of that however, California also has huge fire risk and so there should be a trade-off to mitigate that as well. You’re also has a lack of trees compared to North America. There are trees there are forests, but they are very heavily protected because there aren’t many of them by comparison. Wood is far more expensive in Europe, closing the gap between wooden construction and Mason reconstruction, the lack of earthquakes also favors concrete and masonry.

[@LavitosExodius]

Putting up a concrete or masonry construction in Californian is prohibitively expensive, and it's not that it cuts into their profits. They simply know no one will pay the price associated with it partially because yes it is expensive and partly because it has to be built earthquake resistant in Cali. There is a reason only large corporations or rich people build from stone or brick in Cali. Moving to the Midwest and Tornado alley area it wouldn't matter F4 and F5 Tornadoes destroy stone and brick homes just as easily. As for Florida it's a retirement community people moving there can afford it having sold homes in other areas and having retirement to draw on.

[@gnomechump-stiny7128]

Eating their profits ?? Wouldn't they just pass the cost to the consumer?? And make it even less affordable??

[@DavidDLee]

Paradise IS being rebuilt with stricter building codes and fire resistant components, though not concrete.

[@comment6864]

unfortunately, I think actually even RUSSIA is getting ahead of the US in methods for building new homes. Interestingly it has also become common there for a small new house to have all radiant floor heating. What that tells me is it’s becoming an economy in which common sense takes lead over greed, and that bodes well for the long-term future. Not so in the US.

[@TheDutchGuy110]

As a Dutch interior decorator i can say that our homes have changed for the worst in the last years, while the exteriors are great quallity concrete and brick cavity walls the inner walls shift more toward drywall cladding. On more than one occasion i had my drill bit dissapear into an empty space or had drywall blowout cause there was no wood backing behind the drywall. All these suboptimal materials are used in the name of insulation Quallity went down while the prices went up

[@blocker1928]

My wife and I live in an Earthship, it keeps us warm in the winter and cool in the summer, our home is built to withstand strong winds, it's fire resistant, and earthquake resistant, we grow food in it year round, and we have no utility bills.

[@steveperreira5850]

Good for you. If you have a lot of time and money, a home like that can be built, because it’s very expensive and time consuming to use recycled materials not meant to build a home, to actually build a home, such as all those tires

[@garymccallum4152]

They have good aspects but do not work well with high density surburban housing. Nice in the right climate with a large acerage

[@NOWAR-q7s]

We are building something similar to earth ship. A combination of rammed earth, straw bale and a large conservatory. I would never build a stick home anymore after renovating 3 of them.

[@garymccallum4152]

@@NOWAR-q7s They have their qualities and drawbacks. I would guess I've built or worked on 150 minimum. When it comes to flexability it is difficult to surpass. I'm currently in a double wall 14'' passive, active solar superinsulated one that is all wood and cellulose insulation. I wouldn't do it any other way in Canada.

[@garymccallum4152]

@@NOWAR-q7s Renovating is not the same as building

[@C0mmander]

A few months ago, I was in California for a private showing of a mansion. Asking price was mid to upper double digit millions. I couldn’t believe my eyes - and ears. I kept knocking on the walls and looked at the estate curator. I asked him: “What’s this? Why does it sound hollow?”. Estate Manager: “Sir, I can assure you it’s solid construction”. Me: “Yeah, no, I don’t consider it solid when I punch through it with my fist, sorry.”. I also confronted him about the price. “So, the high price reflects the prime location and the size of the surrounding property, but not the quality of construction of its buildings, right?“. He was speechless for a while, then added: „Sir, the quality of construction is in line with the high standards and the exclusivity of the area“. Me: „Oh, yeah? Funny. Coincidentally I have been to a different showing 2 days ago, not even 200 meters from here. Same neighborhood, similar size and price. Here, I could punch a hole into the wall and over there I would break my hand. Now, you tell me: Why is that?“. Needless to say, he didn’t have an answer and I didn’t buy. Ended up buying not even in the same state, due to California‘s „interesting rules and regulations“, but in Florida. It’s just crazy to most Europeans that even if you are in the market for a high end estate, they still seem to find a way to screw you over in the US. If there was a way to build a house with no walls and charge double, they would do it.

[@boinqity4621]

and then everybody clapped

[@sherlockholmes8528]

And you mae a good.choice..Look the fires in Cal.

[@AdmiringEarth-lm5fh]

Not only is he incredibly wealthy but extremely intelligent. Well done sir. Please tell us more of this fascinating story.

[@arewestilldoingphrasing6490]

Weird flex but okay

[@wokeydokey6885]

Even in the poor countries, they build with concrete or bricks. So the "concrete houses are expensive" point is just something to fool their citizens.

[@Savvas1640]

Fun facts : - "The Three Little Pigs" fairy tale originated in England and became a famous classic in USA by Walter Disney, teaching every generation ever after, but still most Americans are building their houses like straw-cabins. - A usual theme in American horror movies is an evil guy who breaks-in through the window, but most Americans still have windows made of only a thin wood frame and glass and a curtain behind that.

[@ikaustralia]

Funny, we know about this tale from childhood in Russia and our houses are built of brick

[@GangstarComputerGod]

Because people want to have clear views. Most break-ins aren’t even through windows. Additionally, double pane windows are the norm.

[@Jeffhowardmeade]

Other fun fact: in the US, we don't rely on walls to keep us safe from predators.

[@BoylenInk]

Does someone have to point out horror movies are not real.

[@ri-oj1ul]

@@Savvas1640 can confirm, live in a “luxury” townhouse built just a few years ago and you can feel a chill within 2-3 feet of the windows when it’s particularly cold outside (about 20°f right now)… this wasn’t a thing in any house or apartment I’ve ever lived in, in the US or otherwise…

[@VoidScytheX]

As a European, I don’t know anyone who laughs at U.S. houses. You have to consider the history and context here. Historically, U.S. houses were always built to be cost-effective because people used to move frequently back then. A solidly constructed house made of concrete and bricks was significantly more expensive and, in earlier times, often not feasible to build everywhere. Nowadays, location is no longer an issue, and houses have become much larger over time, but the building style has remained the same. In Europe, it has always been different; people chose a place to live for their entire lives. It made sense to build a house that would last for decades.

[@starventure]

The US has plenty of structures for residence made of concrete! They are called prisons and public housing.

[@Mike_Fortin]

Our prisons are built better than our homes? 😮🤔🏠

[@rogerphelps9939]

@@Mike_Fortin Of course they have to be. Otherwise prisoners could easily escape by punching holes in the tticky tacky walls.

[@steveperreira5850]

So funny, so true!

[@steveperreira5850]

@@Mike_Fortin: all government construction projects are over planned and over engineered, they are way more durable than housing built for dwelling units, on the open market. But no one could possibly afford the kind of construction the government uses. Notice the government has insurmountable debt, that’s how I did it. And most of those buildings are empty or underutilized

[@starventure]

@ Well, do you see prisons getting walls moved around?

[@andreycham4797]

Insurance companies are leaving Florida and California this is all over the news. So if Americans want to live in houses they have to make them insurable again.

[@Mike_Fortin]

Right, The idea of “building better is too expensive, the insurance will cover it” does not work when there are major disasters, We need to build to last .. it’s not that much more and it’s worth every penny

[@mg8383ffdryhh]

Yeah they have to make houses that float in Florida and make houses that can put out massive wildfires in California. Insurance companies are just predicting possible futures with existing climate change models. Insurance companies will always try to minimize their risk if they can

[@Mike_Fortin]

I spoke to someone recently and regulations prevent them from building high enough above flood level in FL. Our solution was to design a home that was built to flood and then dry out on the first level. Flood vents, concrete walls, steel joists and a concrete slab supporting 2nd floor. In the event of flooding / hurricanes, the homes can survive without collapsing or damaging the living space above

[@richdobbs6595]

In both Florida and California, the issue of insurability is being driven by government intervention in the industry, rather that intrinsic benefits of particular construction methods. If companies were able to accurate charge premiums based on actual risk, the best construction tactics would win out, as balanced by disaster mitigation tactics and infrastructure. But, we don't trust insurance companies, given that we make insurance obligatory, by either government edict (motor insurance) or the wide spread practice of mortgages (death loans). So, we are evolving to insurance rates being determined by special interest groups, that want to keep rates low to protect us from rapacious insurance companies. But when the resulting rates aren't adequate, you find that some properties are not insurable.

[@h2s-i9o]

Insurance companies have no issue absorbing individual home losses. However when you build homes in flood plains or your base flood elevation is 15’ ie florida it doesnt matter if you built with cmu or wood its the amount of homes that will be damaged and the rebuild costs. The california urban wildfire as an issue of property setbacks and material. Concrete(icf) is cost prohibitive for California and a state that leads the nation in green nonsense would have to explain why a government that fights co2 is supporting an industry that is the largest producer of co2

[@ChrisHolzer]

"fast and cheap" sums up the USA really well.

[@brandonmoreno1752]

Because we’re in a housing crisis

[@ochayethegnu2915]

The vast majority of modern houses in Scotland have insulated timber frames with a cavity and rendered concrete block or facing brick outer leaf.

[@jameshorn270]

My father worked his way through seminary as an usher at the Academy of Music. home of the Philadelphia Orchestra As such, he came into contact with a number of celebrities in the immediate post war period. One story was that he came into contact with Le Corbusier smoking in the hall outside the auditorium. He told him that smoking was not permitted. Le Corbusier said Young man, do you know who I am. Dad said Yes, and you, of all people, should know this place is a fire trap. He then went on to note that Le Corbusier was in town scouting out possible sites for the UN, and that he may have caused Philadelphia to lose out to NYC. : )

[@Mike_Fortin]

That’s an awesome story, thanks for sharing

[@AlexandreLollini]

Here in Nice, France my parents built a prestressed reinforced concrete frame house with double walls cinderblocks in 1975 with a flat vegetal roof (kitchen garden). 7 forest fires came destroying things around, including wood stored against the walls. People protected themselves by going into the house, including firefighters at the worst time. Gas tank did not explode, trees grew back. A forest fire is to me the worst nightmare, but I know I'm secure in the house if the worst happens. I'm alive thanks to concrete. It is devastating to me to see the houses of L.A. and Paradise before that burn down in minutes. I have seen in front of me pines that are 150 years old burn and explode in seconds. I took the blast of a super scooper dropping close to me. You should build concrete and cinder blocks. It's also good for earthquakes.

[@fnamelname9077]

Except American homes *don't* cost a million dollars. I bought a brand new, 3 bed, 2/1 bath, house, with appliances (except washer & dryer), with an attached 2 car garage, with a front and (quite large) back yard, in an only 3 year old neighborhood, for 280k$. It probably only cost half that to actually build.

[@pcno2832]

@@fnamelname9077 Exactly! If an American house costs $1million, it's usually either huge, or on a lot that costs $750K. Get away from the cities and there are still places where average houses are dirt cheap.

[@AlexandreLollini]

@@fnamelname9077 a concrete house is probably 3 to 5 times more pricey than wood, it is a different culture, like planting a tree for the children and granchildren, and also what is the price for a human life ? or the price of pain and loss of item with sentimental value? The very rich that lost a house and can build 10 more are also suffering from loosing part of their life, material is not only material, we attach to things and places. The new house does not taste the same as the old one. Nothing is really replaceable. In my mind it is good to build in stone/concrete and this adds confidence.

[@ekesandras1481]

@@fnamelname9077 houses in L.A. do cost a million dollars.

[@fnamelname9077]

@ So what? How much does a house cost in Tokyo or Seoul?

[@himenoinu]

when the 1977 earthquake wrecked a lot of houses in Romania, building codes have changed. When a disaster strikes any urban area in the US, what it seems to happen is that everyone rushes to... send out thoughts and prayers. Considering that your light houses don't sound much cheaper than the sturdier alternatives (million dollar light wooden frame homes, like you've said), it becomes quite weird that this construction style is still the most used one.

[@NumbaOne]

Because we live in a country that priorities companies 1st and people 2nd, and the people are breed to be consumers and workers of said companies, not leaders or thinkers, so nothing changes.

[@WYO_Dirtbag]

The US is a country of 350 MILLION people. Imagine the cost and shorages caused if this entire country required comcrete construction?

[@RufianEmbozado]

@@WYO_Dirtbag Europe is some 750 million people. Come on.

[@bbdest3082]

Europe also deforested most of their forests, so wood is expensive there. In France, wood buildings cost twice as much to build than CMU or concrete buildings.

[@Telecolor-in3cl]

After the great fire of Bucharest in 1847, more brick houses where built.

[@Dunbardoddy]

My 173 year old three story six bedroom house in Scotland is built with solid stone at mostly 3 feet thick and the roof is covered with heavy duty slates which was completely renewed after lasting with minor repairs for150 years. It retains heat better than most houses of its age, we have no damp.

[@AnnaSzabo]

Wow! Incredible ❤

[@WhoTnT]

I'm in the Caribbean and if someone is living in a wooden house in my country, they would be considered poor. I remember when I was younger and saw people flying through walls in movies, I was confused about why they would let us see that it's just a movie set made out of fake walls, not realizing that that was what real walls were like in the US. I have started making use of "fake" walls in my house recently though, since it is cheaper and faster for interior walls that are not exposed to moisture and it would make future remodeling easier. The only downside is that it doesn't block sounds as well.

[@MarekFajkus]

Another thing which seems common here in Czechia where most of the residential housing is still build with bricks like blocks is that a lot of houses are still being build in large part by the owners themselves. You can build brick house alone or with one another preson relatively easily. It will take some times (few years) but it could be done even if you have 9 to 5 job. In US it seems most of the housing is build by relatively large teams of contractors quickly. I guess with timber framing can really be effective if you have many hands available to put everything in place timely etc. With bricks you can lay one row over the weekend and walk away for month and you can do it alone because brick is sized to be handled by single person.

[@ikaustralia]

2-3 weeks 😅 35 people working, sometimes 5-7 simultaneously

[@MarekFajkus]

@@ikaustralia that's crazy fast. In here it usually take 2 years or more even if you hire company for the job.

[@feandil1713]

I think that attitude towards employment in the US and in Europe makes a significant difference here. In Europe you more likely have some time after work to undertake such projects as building your house on your own (except for some parts like installations and roof e.g.). And there is a higher chance that your relatives live nearby and will be willing to help you. So it's also related to some social conditions.

[@naiveknight47]

​@@MarekFajkus the building should ideally last through a complete thermal cycle (winter and summer) before completion in order to "settle down" if using bricks + concrete foundations. So it doesn't matter much for self-built houses but for fast building it may be a bit annoying. It can be avoided with slight additional cost.

[@horvathbenedek3596]

​@@MarekFajkus Heads up, a concrete and brick home can easily be built by a skilled crew in 2 weeks. I've seen it happen. If it's a 1 storey house, they don't have to wait for the concrete to fully set before the next storey. I'm not.saying your experience is wrong, I'm saying quick construction is definitely available with concrete.

[@Quet00]

A lot of people seem to think that wood framing itself is the issue, rather than bad practices from companies that haven't yet been reigned in. Plenty of wood houses all over the world are still standing after centuries. Concrete and rebar can be used, but concrete with rebar is also only rated to last about 50 years due to material degradation. The rebar rusts and the concrete cracks and eventually needs to be replaced wholesale. Brick is definitely going to last the longest I would imagine.

[@Mike_Fortin]

When concrete is protected from moisture and/or uses corrosion resistant reinforcement, it can last for centuries

[@consultante1650]

@@Mike_Fortin You see a lot of concrete houses having said problems needing repair after very few decades. When it starts to rust good luck. Germany just discovered their tumbling concrete Bridge timebombs.

[@hanisrosli5484]

@@consultante1650 at my place concrete houses last far more then 60years so its not a major problem,when talking about degradation/rotting definitely plywood house more suffer from this,the needing to constant maintain it are worst then try to maintain concrete itself,conclusion to american plywood house its cheap to build but sell at crazy expensive by bloodsucker american developers then concrete house at another place in this world,the needing constant maintain it will add the cost and we all know how worst mortage,tax or whatever law about housing in america its worst almost same like a healthcare their department too,feel poor for average and low income american,for the rich american well their in their own world now😊they dont care anymore

[@smiechuwarte-qt8pn]

An alternative to classic steel are composite glass fiber reinforcing bars, which are an excellent substitute that is widely used in reinforcement technology, as well as in other related construction sectors. It is no longer necessary to use anti-corrosion protection for steel, nor to cover steel reinforcing bars with epoxy, which is very expensive and causes investment losses, it is enough to use composite bars for reinforcement. The cost of such reinforcement will be lower.

[@psidvicious]

Without doing much of any maintenance, reinforced concrete is given a 100 year useable lifespan. Much longer if preventative maintenance measures are done.

[@fanOfMinecraft-UAs_channel]

Haven't even started watching. But everyone knows the answer: your houses are made of gypsum cardboard, which is so popular in America, you literally decided to call it drywall instead. Like what's there NOT to laugh at?

[@ri-oj1ul]

One of the biggest shocks when we first moved to the US was that we had walls made out of paper. Some shelf fell against a wall in the garage and created a hole. My mother was absolutely shocked -- we had never lived in a building that was not made out of concrete... even then poorest homes in the villages out in the country (the homes with no running water and outhouses) were built out of thick logs or continuous boards, while more modern houses were built out of cinder blocks. Even the outhouses of were sturdier than the walls of this townhouse. America was also the first time I encountered furniture that was not made out of wood. It was a confusing time. And please tell me more about how we are "trending toward disposable" while the shack down the street from me that would be too small to be a proper 2 car garage is selling for almost half a million dollars...

[@robertm5969]

Walls in the US are made out of wood framing and drywall, not paper. There is paper in drywall, but its main purpose is to provide tensile strength for the gypsum. Drywall provides additional fire protection and an easy to work on substrate for renovation and furnishing work. Logs are a poor wall choice for housing as they're flammable, difficult to insulate and seal against bugs, and require extensive maintenance. Masonry exterior walls would be desirable, but most people cannot afford them and the construction workforce hasn't been trained around building that way.

[@Crushonius]

@@robertm5969 the us uses the flimmsiest drywall known to man and calling it paper is absolutely accurate

[@7_of_9]

Definitely paper, if a toddler can punch a hole on the wall then it is paper 😅

[@doomedwit1010]

Makes it a lot easier when I had to run 3 new electrical circuits and a couple of runs of cat5 through the house.

[@Nirioonossian]

@@robertm5969 "additional fire protection" for a house that's basically an elaborate campfire 😂 You wouldn't need additional fire protection if your house wasn't made out of furnace fuel to begin with.

[@aeliar]

Nah, USA is fine with their wood+paper buildings. At least the rest of the world has something to laugh about.

[@rumpel7550]

Since monday the US have another joke.

[@Critastic]

@@rumpel7550You’re right, we should have elected another establishment puppet that wanted us to offshore more of our production overseas and given more power to the government. That has certainly worked for us the last 70 years, you’re brilliant.

[@aeliar]

@@rumpel7550 Knock Knock?

[@anthonyk423]

Till they need our help with something which is daily

[@alekjanowski9847]

@@aeliar "The noise has reverbed across the entire house, as it's walls struggled to hold against the sheer strength of the kinetic barrage of the person's fist..." :D

[@diemes5463]

You can get a well built home in the US if you can afford a builder who cares or build it yourself. Stick framing is actually great if you use thicker lumber ("overbuild" as they say). The problem is corporate developers who are allowed to use cardboard sheathing, the minimum viable amount of lumber for the structure and don't waterproof or insulate their homes properly. Then there's the city/county building department that ignores the obvious problems until there's a disaster and we just get higher taxes and permit fees to cover their mistakes.

[@Mike_Fortin]

Even the luxury builders often don’t care about quality materials, it’s all about vanity. And even if you find one that does care, you by the time you get ZIP system, double walls, and or exterior insulation, smart membranes, etc. You could just build an ICF house for the same price. Better efficiency, longevity, SAFETY, sound reduction higher appraisal value, etc. Doesn’t make much sense to me to build stick frame

[@Aortadetroit]

No one is competing against the BlackRocks, VC's etc., anymore. It's all junk with a few exceptions where a developer also holds rentals long term.

[@diemes5463]

@@Mike_Fortin "luxury builder" is more a marketing term nowadays, you really have to find an experienced builder with integrity

[@NGC1433]

The problem is not the corporate whatever, but the sheeple who buys it.

[@sonstous4692]

Stick framing is basically firewood sooner are later.

[@blackoutnow]

Not only does your cheap wooden house burn down, but everything of value in it will also be gone.

[@ANONIM64564]

For roughly the same price, europeans build with concrete, americans with timber. Timber burns.

[@Simboiss]

Timber is a better insulant.

[@Thales_WH]

@@Simboiss European houses are mostly insulated, so heat loss is much less than American houses.

[@ANONIM64564]

You can put insulant separately for far cheaper than the price of a house. And concrete is still far fore resistant.

[@loneygamer7971]

As a Puertorican living in TX I can say that houses in the US are not worth to buy, they don’t gave me any type of security or solid structure everything is build with thin wood and soft material, one good hurricane and say good bye to your house.

[@freetolook3727]

Because we ask the wrong question when building. We ask how cheap is it when we should be asking how long will it last! 😂

[@AKuTepion]

Result: it's expensive and doesn't last. Why is that BTW? Is it because the land is so expensive or are the wood houses simply overpriced? If the houses were cheap, it would be perfectly fine... Build something out of renewable materials, use it for a while, then build something new. Makes sense when you have a low population density and can easily start building a new house while living in the old house.

[@cogboy302]

My Mum's parents lived in a stone built farmhouse in Northern Ireland. Solid walls, not cavity. It was passed down to them from family. I have seen photos of it from the 1800s when it was still thatched. My Granda extended it in height and put on a tin roof. No heating. No electricity upstairs. Oil fired range cooker in the kitchen & an open fireplace in the living room was the only heat it had. Outside toilet, which was only built in 1965. My Grandparents have both been dead since the early 1990s, and the house has been empty since, but it's still standing. I was told the house is about 300 years old, so it's older than the USA. Maybe building houses out of wood in places like 'The San Andreas Fault' and 'Tornado Alley' isn't the best idea?

[@Nakaska]

9:36 The knowlage of brickmaking was lost only in north-western Europe, brick continued to be widely used in Byzantine Empire and Italy and by the 12th century it spread all across central and eastern Europe where it became far more common than stone. Here in Poland most medieval buildings are brick.

[@Ionized-h3v]

Brickmaking was also used in the Netherlands during medieval times. Probably due to a lack of good stone in the more wet parts of the country.

[@zb4847]

Hey guys! Some fella from mid Russia here. So we basically have harsh winters and hot summers. -10°C in average winter(several days of -25° per year), +20°C in summer(+30 at peak). So the weather conditions demand some energy effective and durable housing: thick wood(whole logs, an old style in villages), concrete or bricks. Sticks and paper just wouldn't work here at all, excluding some southern regions. Nice vid, thx!

[@woofkaf7724]

Да работают каркасники.

[@astarodub]

Stop earning your bloody salaries by signing up to destroy your neighbors and their homes and lives. That’s more what you should be focusing on.

Just so you know. We don't laugh JUST because you build with wood, paper and hopes. We mostly laugh because you pay for this BS the same or more than we do for a building that not only takes way longer to build but will also survive much more and much longer.

[@BergenBelsen88]

Exactly 😁

[@Unmistakable0Me]

They are laughing at your McMansions mostly 😂

[@yen-hsiang_huang]

Do Americans have better options? Yes. Yet, many choose to buy an F-150 they rarely use for towing, then complain about oil prices instead of saving for a better home.

[@lecoureurdesbois86]

It's not about saving, I'd love to have a stone house. Who's going to build it? There's no expertise. I'm just going to make my wood frame house myself to ensure quality.

[@dominicmrkiwi3000]

12:04 Yes, you should show the flags for the Americans since they know geography so well

[@frederickclause2694]

Many don't want to admit it but the biggest problem with American homes, autos etc. is the lack of consumer protections and the drive to maximize profits and who care about quality. As long as it's going to last to the end of the warranty period it's good to go.

[@cyberfox981]

When somebody say "american house" first association for me is the story about 3 pigs and the wolf ... he he he Only difference is the price.

[@davidcarp5935]

Then we pay a crapload of property tax on it forever.

[@klaesregis7487]

Put it on wheels and make it a mobile home (with multiple segments)? Its wood right, should be doable :P.

[@markpalmquist]

I am an American who hates 95% of all US homes. I hate the mentality. I have always loved the architecture of Mario Botta, an Italian Architect who used large bricks or concrete and incorporated large windows with tall ceilings. I also love wood, but I would never build a house with sticks. I would use timber framing or log cabin method. Straw bail with lime covering is also a great method. I hate any home that looks like 2 or 3 different structures were smashed together, i.e., mc mansions with complex roof lines. A house should have no more than 2 roof lines. And a house should be well insulated. We currently live in a house that was built in 1917, with 2 courses of brick, no wood wall structure, 2 fireplaces that were covered up decades ago. The house is so cold in the winter. We go to Slovenia and we see double walled homes with over a foot of internal insulation and under the floor hot water heating and we are jealous. We go to Finland and the windows are triple insulated and gas filled and are totally operational opening in the summer. Half the windows in our house no longer open because previous owners painted them shut and we have mold on 1 wall that gets no sunlight but lots of prevailing wind and rain.

[@JRRodriguez-nu7po]

As a child I loved on a large adobe house in Cuba. The walls were completely fire and hurricane proof. Now I live in a concrete block with rebarb in the holes with concrete poured in the holes . Here in Miami it laughed off when hurricane Andrew went right over it. We only lost a few comcrete shongles. Windows are bullet proof steel framed hurricane proof. So CMU plus rebar plus poured concrete. Hanging a picture requires a concrete bit. Expensive but where there's no earthquakes it will stand time.

[@Mike_Fortin]

The sturdier the better! 💪🪨🏠

[@SkyBlue-nv2tb]

Could i have the name of the builder and when was it built?

[@JRRodriguez-nu7po]

@@SkyBlue-nv2tb First part 1953 in the middle of Coral Gables, a city inside Miami-Dade. A lot of the older homes here are built similar as the video points out about Florida though mine is exceptionally sturdy even for this area. Do not know the architect or builder but it was not a "cookie cutter" development. Additions to similar standard made in the 70s. There's steel girders holding up a part of the main celling that is a poured concrete slab. Several of the walls inside were originally outside walls. Half of the front is covered in marine fossils including sea fans, various size worm tubes, corals, mollusk shells and small crustaceans crushed together during the flood of Noah. Now get this: bought it for 340k back during the first Bush and pay less than 6k in property taxes! Like all the houses we have lived in, I tell my wife when to buy and how much maximum; then I see the house after the closing. My way of demonstrating I trust her. Don't hate me because I'm beautiful, but because my wife of 47 years still is :) No, I have no intention of selling. This is not a spam commercial.

[@Bigdoggobrien]

And its only double the price😂

[@Thales_WH]

@@Bigdoggobrien But it's quality, not a knockoff. For me, a good investment.

[@silviamunoz6863]

Well, what's happening in LA is the result of bad homebuilding. A good engineer would had prepared those houses to be safe in case of fire.

[@Симон-и5ь]

Most houses in the Usa are basically camouflaged chicken coops. They are flimsy. Almost never outlive a mortgage, so the banks will keep on parasiting forever.

[@bakters]

I built a garage recently, that's going to outlast most of American houses built in the same year.

[@christschool]

Hopefully, its large enough to fit a car in because most of the garages I've seen in Europe can only fit a Mini in them.

[@bakters]

@@christschool 7m by 5m measured outside. The walls are about 0.5m, so take that out from the inside space.

[@balikci77]

​@@christschool Triggered ameritard in his stick house detected

[@KurNorock]

My house was built in 1960. The studs and rafters still look brand new. My house is 65 years old and hasn't fallen over, blown away, burned down, or rotted away. Will my house last 1,000 years? Probably not. But i would bet money that the "death" of my house will come by way of a backhoe tearing it down to make room for some other building rather than because the structure failed in some way. Europeans need to realize that just because a stone building is strong, that doesn't mean wood building is weak.

[@frederiklogirush5607]

Obsolescence of homes is a possible reason in favor of low-cost, low-quality American homes. If a home design will be obsolete in 75 to 100 years, when it will be demolished, then there is no reason to build it to last hundreds of years. Homes built in the 1950s may be obsolete due to small closets, lack of bathrooms, small bathrooms or dark interiors. Homes from the 1950s homes will also likely have lead paint and asbestos, another reason to demolish. Here in Houston, desirable areas such as Bellaire have long been "tear-down" neighborhoods. However, new replacement homes tend to be very expensive, around $1 million, so this is not an option for most people.

[@sonstous4692]

@@frederiklogirush5607 Homes are expensive here but built of wood, very cheap labor and thrown together almost over night. Still firewood. Bellaire, River Oaks, Kingwood, all over. Not built to last at all.

[@majvorandersson4641]

Here in Sweden we mostly have wood buildings. In "Average age of building stock" for European countries, we have the same average aged houses as France however, proving your point! (Most buildings here are from the 40s, 50s, 60s)

[@KurNorock]

@@frederiklogirush5607 lead paint can be removed. Closets can be expanded. Rooms can be added. I've worked in construction and service industries for decades, going into people's homes to do services and repair work. There are plenty of 100+ year old homes still in use today. The only real complaint that would make an old house "outdated" is the fact that most older homes only have one or two electrical outlets per room, where more modern homes have at least 2 per wall.

[@SueLeo1]

Keep lying to yourself if it works for you 😂

[@interceptor6893]

We had hurricane force winds in Ireland last week and apart from the odd wall falling down or some roof damage most of the houses which are mostly built of brick and concrete didn't suffer any damage, the same storm in the US and it would be like a pile of matchsticks.

[@mccanlessdesign]

Our big ol' 1886 Victorian near Atlanta is doing fine. We spent decades restoring it while raising the kids; house is gorgeous and paid-for and kids are grown and gone. Ready for grandchildren!

[@MigotRen]

Just for comparison. I live in a small village in germany. That village itself is 3 times older than the us and many of the houses in the center are also several hundred years old. This is the case in many old towns and villages

[@totallyprofessional3571]

I think America is going to switch away from wood frame housing within the next couple decades because wood frame housing used to be a cheap option that was meant to be easily replaceable in case of a natural disaster. With the devastating fires in California, the massive amount of damage we seen with the hurricanes hitting South Carolina and Florida plus the tornadoes run through the south we’re seeing homes be destroyed in costing an insane amount of money to be replaced. Often times the replacing of these houses is poor quality because the builders are making bank. Often times these builders are building poor quality houses that meet the bare minimum of standards. I know for myself if I got the option to build a house I’m going to go with icf.

[@Mike_Fortin]

Couldn’t agree with you more, We are building with wood out of respect for tradition, but I think it’s time for a positive change. Building safer, higher quality homes. ICF is a great option, especially in disaster prone areas

[@davidparker9676]

Seismic events are a huge factor for California building materials. Stick framing can withstand significant earthquakes and typically only require cosmetic patching on walls. CMU and other masonry is not as forgiving without the use of cost-prohibitive suspension systems under the structure. Every region in the USA has different challenges building for the local climate and types of disasters. I live very close to the wildfire areas in Los Angeles and the problem wasn't wood framed homes, it was more related to landscape and lack of adequate brush clearance. Wood framed homes are not going to be abandoned in California, Perhaps metal or tile roofs will be a better choice for fire resistance as well as using a stucco or concrete board siding in place of wood siding. The fire spread due to hurricane force winds and delayed firefighting response.

[@Mike_Fortin]

Thank you for your comment, You make valid points, while there are concrete and ICF homes in CA, they do require additional engineering and approval to include seismic joints allowing for. Movement of the structure without it breaking apart. A properly designed concrete house with seismic joints can withstand an earthquake of greater magnitude than its wood counterpart and with proper design, is as close to fireproof as you can get (ie. Conditioned attic, fire resistant cladding and roofing, aluminum triple pane windows, defensive design, hard scapes, etc.) But this all costs more, in a place where homes are already VERY expensive Will CA abandon wood? No, probably not, Should they include more steel and concrete and fire safety? Yes absolutely. While I work against myself by saying this, I must admit, steel framing is likely the most cost effective option that can resist both fire and earthquakes. However if you’re spending $9,000,000 + on a house, I don’t see why not go ICF and have the additional engineering done, clearly money is no issue at that point and the extra rigidity protect against the unknown (car crashes, stray bullets etc. )

[@davidparker9676]

@@Mike_Fortin I like ICF for areas that do not have earthquakes. The California climate allows for a pretty low amount of insulation for homes as compared to the snowbelt. I have not used my heater since testing it for a few days when we first moved in and only use the A/C on the hottest days. The building materials and techniques need to fit the local demands and constraints. I recently bought properties on the other side of the US and have become familiar with the needs of a totally different environment to mitigate moisture and drainage issues as well as the need to minimize energy losses. Perhaps dustcrete will become the next inexpensive building material in the US outside of seismic zones. I remember when ICF was first being introduced and now has become common on new homes in several areas of the country.

[@Mike_Fortin]

That’s right, I forget you guys have perfect weather, I’m in IL , where we have 4 very different seasons 😅 The perfect building is going to vary based on location, budget, design, and more. In general, the US as a whole could do better in terms of disaster resistance. I’m the Midwest we have a decent amount of rain, snow, the occasional tornado. We already focus on heavy insulation (or at least we should) and to me, by the time we factor in all the extra material and labor, you may as well build an ICF house for about the same price. In a more temperate climate, I suppose it’s not as big of an issue. Although I would still opt for steel over wood 9 times out of 10

[@tobiasmills9647]

I think it's an issue with primary education; not enough children read "three little pigs"

[@SuperNovaRider]

Interesting topic. However, I'd recommend starting your video with what it is you actually want to show and why. My first thought was "what exactly is bad about American houses?". Therefore, I don't know what to look for in the various construction methods of houses from around the world. Hence, start with what you want to prove/look at first. In other words - there was no logical connection between your premise of "people from other countries look down on American houses" and "this is how other countries build their houses". The connection would obviously be "what problems do American houses have and how do other countries house construction methods solve these problems". A good/interesting video begins with formulating a question (or rather makes the viewer become interested and ask themselves a question) and then delivers the answer in a intersting, easy to understand, way. Good luck with your channel :)

[@jonpeley]

Whenever I watch some usanian house renovation TV shows (especially those ones with the twins) in which they tear entire walls with a single big hammer I chuckle. You could probably do that in Europe using the triple of time. Wood is mainly used as a decoration material.

[@Rickeeey1]

Wooden houses are the norm in Sweden, Norway and Finland, yet they seem to be far more durable than American houses. I wonder why that's the case. In the Podhale region in Poland, log houses are very popular. They are pretty much one of the symbols of the region and are often associated with Gorals.

[@spearen]

> they seem to be far more durable citation needed

[@dlorien7306]

Our trees have been bred to grow fast without knots - not for strength

[@Matt-yg8ub]

Cost. Those homes are twice as expensive.

[@rogerphelps9939]

They are built using proper wood with proper cross sections, no cheap cardboard, MDF or thin plywood.

[@Rickeeey1]

@@Matt-yg8ub Not really, from what I've seen, homes in America are very expensive. Sure, home prices in Sweden have also gone up but it's mostly due to factors other than the cost of building. There's no reason why a home built 15 years ago for a specific amount should be worth 2 times more now. Maybe it's also the case in America that houses are very expensive due to other factors rather than building costs. Let me know.

[@Pet_Hedgehog]

no one is jelous of america, when i imagine what if i lived in america i get shivers from thinking how fucking weird it would be and how much id waste my life

[@hu5116]

Thanks for great video! I had a reinforced concrete basement poured for a 2 car 2 story garage on a hill side. It was quite a project but turned out great. And my childhood home was cinderblock. The only issue with it was that it was stuccoed and the stucco would flake off in areas, particularly if moist. Modern materials might mitigate that. I very much like your foam form wall approach. This mimics what they do in Switzerland. We might think an all concrete house too expensive and in USA it might be because of low efficiency. But in Switzerland and Germany they are extremely efficient with their molds and basically will have poured the whole house (including the interior walls) in just a couple/few days. That is why they can do it economically. The only downside side of their concrete construction is that adding a water line, drain or electric socket or plug afterwards is cost prohibitive. But the Swiss and Germans are pretty good at planning such things out ahead of time so it’s usually not much of an issue. If I build a new house I will certainly look at that foam block method because that is the way to go. I think and metal roofs would have prevented all those losses in the California fires. It’s really the way to go. Thanks!

[@Mike_Fortin]

It sounds like you’ve got a strong understanding of the benefit of concrete / ICF construction. If you want to learn more, check out www.CrownICF.com

[@Rhaspun]

ICF construction works well.

[@hanshomesteading1276]

In the Netherlands the exterior walls are double (brick or brick&concrete), meaning 2 walls with air vents in between. this is not only better for insulation and noise, but it also makes sure that no mold builds up in the house due to over-insulation. The houses have a ventilation system and windows are triple layered. Our electricity cables are running in pvc pipes and new cables can be pulled when necessary. all cables are solid core copper and regarless of the purpose the wire have the same diameter (for maximum amperage). Many houses have redundant pipes for electricity installed. Circuit breakers come with residual current devices.

[@tiborkovacs1166]

The reality is in europe till this day it was normal that family and family members helped each other to build houses from bricks and the craft was given from generation to generation houses lasted and were quality build and normaly generations inherited these houses even tho today there is much more lazy milenials that dont want to build themselves and just buy fast and have expense later. While in USA there are corporations building cheap and from all info i saw they barely build to your glorified "code" houses or more like sheds are overpriced as hell and people just keep buying them so they build them cheap and fast and sell expensive. If people would stop buying these sheds and would want the quality build like the rest of the world they would have to cut from their huge earnings and build like rest of the world can why couldnt you.....

[@lukacsnemeth1652]

Hi. Here i am bragging about my earth home. Built in 1960 in Hungary 20 inch adobe brick walls and i added 4 inch insulation. Conforms to highest energy conservation standards. Only heating is less than 5 cubic meters of natural gas usage per sq m/year.

[@Mike_Fortin]

20” walls, WOW 😮 that’s THICK! Is everything plaster coated? How did you frame your windows in? What about floor system? I have many questions lol

[@lukacsnemeth1652]

@@Mike_Fortin Glad to share knowledge! The inside has the traditional coating of adobe spread over chickenwire. I have applied a layer of gypsum to even it out, and painted it with regular dispersion paint. When i bought the house in 2018 i replaced to windows with plastic, but i only removed the old windows, and left the original opening with wooden lintels (the open span is 170 cm). I inspected them and the lintels were in perfect condition, set in the adobe mud for at least 60 years. They are form black locust. The flooring was concrete slab with fiber boards over it set in half and inch layer of bitumen. I replaced that with PE sheeting and 2 inch estrich. The walls are traditional thickness, everything is from 10*20*40 cm sundried adobe bricks mixed with straw&treshing. Funny thing about the house that the walls are older than the foundation, as it was an original peasant house on traditional rammed earth foundation built in the 1920s, but when modern water proofing PVC bituminous sheets became available in the 60s the foundation was replaced, excavating on both inside and outside the house, laying brick foundation on the go, spreading the sheeting and connecting again to the wall. It was made in the 2 m sections as i can see from the overlapping of the sheets.

[@Mike_Fortin]

Super cool, thanks for sharing!!

[@onebridge7231]

Our houses are over priced junk from big builders. Poor design and no architectural flare. Need to build custom for a nice house.

[@Mike_Fortin]

We need a revival of classical architecture, even in our production homes! 🎨 🖌️ 🏡

[@Paulman-n5y]

In the Caribbean a wooden house is a status of poverty. Most people aspire for metal roof concrete houses. The materials are affordable and available.

[@karlgreene2177]

Why are American houses made out of thin wood and not brick or stone? Also why do you say America is great in what way?

[@aaregiel]

The big US tech companies are doing great, but average housing constructions in the US simply sucks. Actually, building housing in such a poor quality is illegal in many well developed countries.

[@williamj.dovejr.8613]

This might be something California should pay attention to...

[@RealDoomVoxel]

burgermutts have no attention span. it was bred out of the gene pool.

[@Gretschbeach]

Ironically, California is where modern stick frame housing was born; right down to the tools. The framing hammer was invented in California for guys building tract homes there.

[@angurissuez]

Looking at Victorian homes across the US built in the Mid-Late 1800s, I can partly see where they are coming from, you have houses that have been standing since 1860 and work practically perfectly fine, albeit needing repairs a lot more often.

[@bigjay875]

Well the fact is us homes are hit by massive tropical storms, tornados blizzards and cold snaps that the northern Russian people would recognize like home. So ya built to a cost, but to fit the environment

[@dvderek]

A better representation of whats wrong with American housing is when you said "steel is used for commercial and multi-family buildings.. not homes". There is nowhere else on Earth that mandates single-family detached housing as ubiquitously as the US and nowhere else where people are so conditioned to believe the only "real home" is a detached single-family home. The biggest difference between the rest of the world and the US is our land use policy and our building/zoning codes which ban most of the livable, well-ventilated and well-lit multifamily building layouts commonly used in East Asia and Europe (point access blocks, single stair buildings). Its not the building material that plays the biggest role

[@steve32627]

Having worked as a superintendent for a home building company, i definitely knew all sorts of ways that I wasn't going to build my personal house. We are currently building an ICF house with a steel structural roof frame and metal roof. The plan is for one of the grand or great grand kids to live there in the decades to come.

[@Mike_Fortin]

Cant beat that! That house will be standing for a longggg time 🪨💪🏠🇺🇸

[@icedcoffee8561]

Did this man call europe a country?

[@MeBe35]

No one cares

[@SueLeo1]

Americans have a terrible education system and seem to never be taught geography. They cant even find America on a map never mind their own state 😂

[@thepronow]

Perhaps this is not the most important thing but 3 years of war in Ukraine I realized that the best houses are brick buildings with thick walls of 1 meter. These houses can withstand the arrival of shell grenade launchers and allow the people inside to survive. Although we should not forget about the eastern slate roofs on wooden cans, unfortunately they are very prone to falling inside after the impact of the shock wave.

[@331SVTCobra]

Recommendation: Pacific Palisades should rebuild with concrete. (The evil insurance companies will probably still cancel the fire insurance policies)

[@ekesandras1481]

if you build with concrete and bricks and terracotta tiles, you don't need an insurance. And what about "adobe", isn't that supposed to be the local Californian traditional construction method. Even that is much better than woodframes with no foundation, put directly on the grass.

[@pawemackowski451]

3:25 Great examples of how houses used to be build. You see. Noone build like this nowadays. In US you build cheap (😂) houses to rebuild if needed. Just like in Japan, but they build especially because of earthquakes, and they don't brag about it. You think you made reaserch but you are making many mistakes, and you try to imply that Europe technology is old. But tell me. How our expensive technology of building houses is still cheaper than your paper houses.

[@Anonymous-sb9rr]

Solid structure is great for multi family units, because you won't hear much noise from your neighbours when there's a brick wall or concrete floor between homes. The heavier a material is, the more it will block sound.

[@Dukenukem]

Normal sounds yes, but it is exceptional in transferring drilling noise. If somone needs to hang a picture on wall we all know when he is using the drill and it can be anybody from whole apartment building and you cdan hear it like it is drilling in the wall next to you.

[@19KW86]

I'm building my house now, I choose concrete hollow blocks filled with reinforced concrete at the end, for basement, and ICF for first and second floors. Full concrete houses are not comon in Poland, definitly not faster or cheaper, but they are most solid. Wooden hous are good for summer house, but not for lifetime investment (because this is how we think about houses in Poland). On the other hand, My father build "canadian house" in 90' and is still standing, but there is constant fear of fire, storm winds and floating.. Classic new houses are: no basement, first floor from bricks, second floor start bricks for 1m then wooden roof for the rest of the second floor.