this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2025
1086 points (99.3% liked)

Good News Everyone

1542 readers
53 users here now

A place to post good news and prevent doom scrolling!

Rules for now:

  1. posts must link from a reliable news source
  2. no reposts
  3. paywalled articles must be made available
  4. avoid politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] unbanshee@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Honestly when I see "tech millionaire" and "altruism" in the same article, I don't expect to see someone actually using their wealth to do something decent.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago

Millionaires still have their humanity on occasion.

[–] Quadhammer@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Rent pricing is what the people should target first. Hard to fight the nutjobs when rent is so expensive

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

This is good, but if we address this at a systemic level, we don't need to put people in tiny low-density homes unconnected to anything for it to be affordable.

China addresses it by looking at how much labor and materials is required and ensuring the price of concrete, steel, glass, etc is sufficiently low for the number of homes they need constructed, and that there is enough of each type of skilled labor that goes into building a home.

Presumably local governments have some mechanism for when they know a house costs X materials and Y labor, and they see new construction costing significantly more than that.

The result is detached homes@avg 75USD/sqft and apartments@55/sqft. With current interest rates of 6.768%, you'd get ~400 sqft homes with a $200/mo 30 year mortgage at those prices, 600sqft if interest rates were 3%.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 week ago (14 children)

As for the residents of the houses, rent is kept at 30% of income, which means the large majority of residents pay a maximum of $200 — including all utilities and internet — every month.

How are they planning to sustain this long-term?

Surely, someone is paying for the difference. Unless I totally missed it from the article 🫣

[–] EchoCT@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's why the tech millionaire financing this isn't a tech billionaire.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago (9 children)

I get that he's financing it, but that's not sustainable if you want to implement something similar around the country.

I love the idea, and the tiny house village looks amazing! But if it relies on a millionaire to voluntarily subsidize the project, I can't see it lasting too long.

Now, that brings us to a wonderful new option: tax the rich more than we do.

The top 5 billionaires could fund 1000s of these tiny home villages with just a fraction of a percent increase on their hoarded wealth.

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Sure it is. You have to have government fund it, like a normal social democracy would do.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

When I lived in germany full time, I would've loved to live in a tiny home, but germany would've rather put me on the street than allow a tiny home lmaoo.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

These units may be basically sheds, but I've seen people pay half a million to have the same thing three floors up in central London.

[–] Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If I was homeless I'd take solid four walls the size of a medium-sized tent if it meant warmth, utility services, your own toilet and anything else I'd need to even be able to focus on caring for myself or even others more than merely survive. Those tiny buildings might be the minimum, but they ARE something you can call a safe home.

I'm wondering though, how was this more cost-effective to build than a long apartment complex...? Do those tiny things not need any concrete foundation, perhaps regulatory stuff…?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Etterra@discuss.online 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If it was possible to build co-ops of these it'd be what I've been suggesting for like 9 years.

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Look up "housing cooperative" in your area, there might actually be one, as there's a pretty substantial number of them scattered across many locations. My area has at least 10.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pdqcp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago

Impressive, it's even a walkable place seen that it is a mixed use neighborhood with commercial buildings too

[–] nihilist_hippie@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago

This is really great to see. So glad there are people like this out there willing to extend empathy to people who are struggling. I love that this project also respects their clients' autonomy as well. The fact that you don't have to stay sober to be there, I think it's great. Just give someone a stable roof over their head, a small support network, and I believe they can turn around their addictions and their lives.

[–] tacobellhop@midwest.social 7 points 1 week ago

My grandma lived in this trailer park for 40 years until she died. Pretty low overhead.

[–] viking@infosec.pub 6 points 1 week ago (18 children)

Damn, $200 sounds low, on the other hand 30% is a crazy share. I'm targeting 10-15% at most.

load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›