Vandie

I grew up in a very middle class area, and have since moved into one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in my state. One thing I've noticed is that the people here raise their children very differently than most Americans, so here are just a few very general trends I've seen: 🧵 

1. Rich people use contracts with their children. This can be for help buying houses, loans, setting up businesses. It's not because they're scrooges, it's because they recognize that the power of a contract is in managing expectations and avoiding conflict down the road.

2. Wealthy Americans tend to live by their children. They prioritize family and have the means to help kids stay close, usually through down payments on houses. It's super common to see rich kids live in the best neighborhoods within walking distance of mom and dad.

3. They pay their kids to stay fit. I've known several families that have made cash transfers for reaching weight goals. They pay for gym and country club memberships. Nowadays they're buying Ozempic for kids. Health is wealth, and in their case and wealth is health.

4. They travel incessantly with their adult children and grandchildren. It's hard to catch them at home. This isn't unique to rich people, but they have the means to pay for it. Second homes in Newport. Charter flights to Disneyland. A month in Coeur d'Alene.

5. Wealthy people often help their children start their own businesses. They see the harm in nepotism, so a common solution is for children to struggle and grow through starting their own company. But it always comes with safety nets, like dad's connections or low-interest loans.

6. If a kid is taking over the family business, it's usually because he's proven himself through education or doing his own thing for awhile. They're sensitive to the 2nd generation being perceived by the employees as not having "earned" it.

7. My anecdotal experience is that wealthy people have more children than the average. Is it because they can afford it? Or is it because family-oriented people make more? Probably both.

8. I think that a big part of the future success of children comes from seeing their father as an aspirational figure.

He's not Bluey's dad rolling on the floor with the kids, but he's also not a workaholic. He has a good career and civic life while making time for his kids.

9. Wealthy people, at least around me, all make their children work at a very young age. They have jobs as teenagers, they teach swim lessons, they're babysitting, they start little businesses and learn about cash flow management. The kids still do chores around the house.

10. The stereotype of nasty rich people is mostly not true. The people I live around are pleasant, likable, empathetic, and generous to a fault. They are smart, healthy, and well-turned out. They've become or remained wealthy precisely because they have these qualities.

The feedback to this thread already has been interesting. Some people saying I'm full of crap, some saying they've seen the same things. 

I think in hindsight a big caveat is that there are very different types of wealthy people. There are certainly regional differences. I've interacted with New England rich, but haven't got an authentic look at how they raise kids. I'm sure the California Asians live on a different planet than the people in my neighborhood. There's probably religious vs secular differences, etc.

However, I'm sure a lot of these principles are universal.

"They don't build them like they used to." 

X is filled with takes on the quality of modern residential construction, with the assertion typically being that it was better in the past.

I think that this is partially true, mostly wrong, and misses some key points.

🧵 

1. Survivorship Bias

The houses from the past that people see today are the ones that have survived depreciation, aging, abandonment, and natural disaster. Their owners over the years have felt that they were worth the effort and cost to maintain them. 

These homes are usually timelessly beautiful and in enduringly desirable locations, creating emotional bonds with owners over generations who feel a responsibility to maintain them.

A lot of these houses were also the homes of the Top 1% of society who could afford quality. 

Most houses throughout history did not enjoy this fate. The general rule of thumb is that roughly 1% of housing stock is demolished or abandoned per year, roughly turning over once per century.

Homes from the past that are gone were usually of very, very poor quality. 

2. Building Science 

Just like in the auto industry, the performance of houses has increased a hundredfold on every conceivable metric in the last hundred years. They are safer, more efficient, more durable, easier to maintain, more comfortable, and have longer lifespans. 

2.1 Safety

New framing methods like fireblocking prevent fires from quickly spreading between floors. Smoke alarms, sprinklers, egress requirements, and fire-rated partition walls have led to dramatic reductions in fire deaths. 

Both passive and active radon mitigation is built into many new homes. Furnaces and water heaters are vented better, reducing risk of carbon monoxide poisoning. We don't put lead or asbestos into building materials anymore. Tempered doors and windows reduce glass injuries.

2.2 Efficiency

The most complex part of a home is the building envelope, which needs to control for 1) water 2) air 3) vapor and 4) heat, while also allowing for light and ingress/egress.

We've seen dramatic improvements in building envelope construction over the years. 

Homes are much more airtight now than they were in the past. The most common complaint of people who live in old houses is how drafty they are. This makes them uncomfortable to live in and expensive to condition. Builders perform air tightness checks as part of code compliance.

2.3 Durability

Improvements in flashing and materials science has made the control of water and vapor much better as well.

Vapor movement between walls was poorly understood in the past, leading to rot and mold. Roofs and windows leak much less often now than they used to. 

2.4 Maintenance and Lifespan

New materials need less maintenance and have longer lifespans. We don't have to treat our wood shingles or clean coal soot off our walls every spring. There are dozens of examples of modern methods that don't need regular attention like in the past.

Even the most entry level homes are better constructed from a performance perspective than they were in the past. But that's not what people mean when they criticize new construction.

What people correctly sense and are dismayed by are 1) bad aesthetics and 2) mass-production. 

3. Good Aesthetics

Very few production home builders have the knowledge of timeless architectural principles necessary to create a pleasing, beautiful single family home.

This also goes for the vast majority of low cost architects and home designers that the builders hire. 

The men who run home building companies come from construction or business management backgrounds. 

I would argue that they would *like* to build more beautiful entry level homes, but they believe that they are constrained by cost. Beauty to them is a function of cost.

In reality, I think that they've largely strayed from the first principles of beautiful residential architecture that have been developed over centuries. Vernacular and simple local styles are cherished by homeowners for reasons that they don't completely understand. 

The book that really opened my eyes to this is A Pattern Language by Christopher Alexander. He lists hundreds of little rules, or patterns, that humans throughout history have naturally followed when building houses that make them delightful to the eye and pleasant to be in. 

And most importantly, these things don't usually cost more. This is the essence of good aesthetics that is mostly missing in production home building. 

Here are just a few examples I've turned to at random: 

For example, one thing that immediately cheapens a house is a window with a flange that is screwed into the exterior sheathing, as is common in all new construction. Houses used to have thick walls and recessed windows. The flanged window is not timeless and it belies thin walls. 

Roof pitches should be simple. Garages should be hidden or pushed as far to the rear as is practical. The 90s McMansion is mostly defined by its insane roofing made possible by prefabricated trusses held together by Simpson truss plates. 

Really, a return to traditional and timeless architectural styles is all that's needed. Simple forms are better aesthetically. A production builder that can provide modern building performance paired with timeless American styles will dominate his competition. 

4. Mass Production 

Homes used to be built entirely by hand. If the goal is to build an affordable entry level house, then the hardest criticism to avoid is the mass produced nature of our homes. Here are my tips:

Select organic materials that have natural variation in them. 

Spend your budget on low cost, highly visible craftsmanship. Hands down the best place to do this is in finish carpentry. All sorts of interesting and customized designs can add charm and interest to a home for not very much money. Use paint! No gray! 

Minimize your exposed drywall. Cover it up with panelling or wallpaper. Ceilings of different materials can make a huge difference. Wall finishes will give your home that handmade feel. If budget constrained, consider shrinking your square feet to accomodate these items. 

We can still build affordable, high performance, highly custom homes. It just takes some effort. 

Incorporate the latest building science.
Stick to simple traditional forms.
Follow ancient home building patterns.
Use organic materials.
Cover drywall.
Spend budget on finish work.