Finances in the Golden Era and today

[Lincsong]

$4000 got you a house in the "sticks" in 1946. But it was considered "affordable". That house in Oakland is indicative of it's value. Plus it's very "vintage".

 

[jamespowers]

$4000 got you a house in the "sticks" in 1946. But it was considered "affordable". That house in Oakland is indicative of it's value. Plus it's very "vintage".

 

[Lincsong]

There really were no "mass produced" houses until the 1940s. Therefore, with demand for housing high and materials scarces most of the 1940's homes, were shodily built. If it was a custom made house it was probably well built, otherwise they became run down neighborhoods by the mid 1960's.

 

[LizzieMaine]

There really were no "mass produced" houses until the 1940s. Therefore, with demand for housing high and materials scarces most of the 1940's homes, were shodily built. If it was a custom made house it was probably well built, otherwise they became run down neighborhoods by the mid 1960's.

Don't forget the prefabricated housing popular in industrial towns from the 1910s to the 1930s -- the Sears and Roebuck kit houses are the most famous examples of these. They were shipped as pre-assembled segments packed in crates, which were then put together at the building site. Many of these have held up surprisingly well. New England mill towns still have streets full of these houses, each one identical to the one next door.

 

[jamespowers]

There really were no "mass produced" houses until the 1940s. Therefore, with demand for housing high and materials scarces most of the 1940's homes, were shodily built. If it was a custom made house it was probably well built, otherwise they became run down neighborhoods by the mid 1960's.

Just about all those houses around here are still around. They weren't that shoddily built if they are still around nearly 70 years later. lol
Then again, all the custom built houses are still around as well over 80 years later.
The California climate is very forgiving for the most part. [huh]

 

[jamespowers]

Don't forget the prefabricated housing popular in industrial towns from the 1910s to the 1930s -- the Sears and Roebuck kit houses are the most famous examples of these. They were shipped as pre-assembled segments packed in crates, which were then put together at the building site. Many of these have held up surprisingly well. New England mill towns still have streets full of these houses, each one identical to the one next door.

Yes indeed, they still have plenty of those around out here as well. Build a house over a week and live in it the next. They were delivered right to the site. No fuss, no muss.

 

[Lincsong]

Don't forget the prefabricated housing popular in industrial towns from the 1910s to the 1930s -- the Sears and Roebuck kit houses are the most famous examples of these. They were shipped as pre-assembled segments packed in crates, which were then put together at the building site. Many of these have held up surprisingly well. New England mill towns still have streets full of these houses, each one identical to the one next door.

There is the house at the Richard Nixon Library, where he grew up, that was a Sears kit house. They're easy to spot, the siding is one piece, but made to look layered.

 

[Lincsong]

Just about all those houses around here are still around. They weren't that shoddily built if they are still around nearly 70 years later. lol
Then again, all the custom built houses are still around as well over 80 years later.
The California climate is very forgiving for the most part. [huh]

There's a lot of chicken koops that are well over 80 years old, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in one. Old homes are nice, but they are a money pit.

 

[Undertow]

Don't forget the prefabricated housing popular in industrial towns from the 1910s to the 1930s -- the Sears and Roebuck kit houses are the most famous examples of these. They were shipped as pre-assembled segments packed in crates, which were then put together at the building site. Many of these have held up surprisingly well. New England mill towns still have streets full of these houses, each one identical to the one next door.

We have a number of these throughout small towns in Iowa. Although I have still not had a chance to lay eyes on one, my grandfather and another middle-aged fellow have told me where to look. Evidently, the houses were placed there in respect to certain mining outfits, as well as (I believe) railroad lines.

 

[jamespowers]

There's a lot of chicken koops that are well over 80 years old, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in one. Old homes are nice, but they are a money pit.

To each his own.
You can have the modern stuff made with green wood, wallboard that will kill you and particle board construction. [huh]

 

[LizzieMaine]

I don't think it's just building materials, either -- I don't think the standard of workmanship today can hold a candle to that of the pre-war era. I work in a building that was renovated five years ago to the highest standards of current workmanship -- very expensive, highly detailed work. And yet, I'm dealing with doors that don't fit their frames anymore, cabinetry that's coming apart, leaks in the roof. If the work were fifty years old, I might expect that kind of thing, but five years is a bit ridiculous. If this is the best work that 21st Century money could buy, I'd hate to see what kind of work Joe Punchclock can afford.

 

[Paisley]

My hundred-year-old house is in good shape. In 2003, it had three feet of snow on the roof and didn't even creak. The floors are pretty beat up, but I think that's to be expected.

 

[jamespowers]

I don't think it's just building materials, either -- I don't think the standard of workmanship today can hold a candle to that of the pre-war era. I work in a building that was renovated five years ago to the highest standards of current workmanship -- very expensive, highly detailed work. And yet, I'm dealing with doors that don't fit their frames anymore, cabinetry that's coming apart, leaks in the roof. If the work were fifty years old, I might expect that kind of thing, but five years is a bit ridiculous. If this is the best work that 21st Century money could buy, I'd hate to see what kind of work Joe Punchclock can afford.

The kind of work that needs a fifty year warranty because in ten years it will be a ramshackle hut.
I overheard a few carpenters talking a few years ago. What they said is evident in todays building standards. "Is it your house? It isn't my house. Who cares?" :rage:

 

[jamespowers]

My hundred-year-old house is in good shape. In 2003, it had three feet of snow on the roof and didn't even creak. The floors are pretty beat up, but I think that's to be expected.

After 100 years of people trampling on them, I think they are given some kind of dispensation.
My rugs on the floor are over fifty years old---my grandfather had them installed over perfect hardwood floors because hardwood floors were "for poor people." Now the rug has holes in a few areas and the hardwood floor under it looks pretty darned good to me. That is a nice poor person floor for me.

 

[Miss 1929]

James, tear out the carpet!

Sounds like the floors will be lovely underneath! We did that in our house and discovered they were beautiful maple, not oak as we thought at fist, we had to remove the grime of the ages to see the real color, But worth it, and healthier for the little ones than carpet with lord knows what in its fibers...

Re these houses in Oakland, yes, 86th avenue really is the ghetto. I live in a neighborhood in Oakland that is not ritzy at all, but I don't go out there. When we were house hunting, our hearts were broken by a huge Craftsman with all its original detail... on 86th. The vibe was BAD out there.

I think besides housing, you have to look at the percentages people paid for everything, Food was actually much more expensive and not as varied as it is now (in the USA that is). People paid a bigger percentage for that, and medical care was all on the consumer - there were no benefits packages with jobs for the working class.

 

[jamespowers]

Sounds like the floors will be lovely underneath! We did that in our house and discovered they were beautiful maple, not oak as we thought at fist, we had to remove the grime of the ages to see the real color, But worth it, and healthier for the little ones than carpet with lord knows what in its fibers...

Re these houses in Oakland, yes, 86th avenue really is the ghetto. I live in a neighborhood in Oakland that is not ritzy at all, but I don't go out there. When we were house hunting, our hearts were broken by a huge Craftsman with all its original detail... on 86th. The vibe was BAD out there.

I think besides housing, you have to look at the percentages people paid for everything, Food was actually much more expensive and not as varied as it is now (in the USA that is). People paid a bigger percentage for that, and medical care was all on the consumer - there were no benefits packages with jobs for the working class.

I think I'll leave the carpet long enough to give the children the rug as a cushion and to keep the floor beneath it in better shape until they are out of the break everything stage. The carpet is actually wool so it isn't all that bad. I am sure my grandfather paid a fortune to have it through out the house. [huh]
Having lived in this area all of my life, I generally have a good idea where not to go around here.
Food was indeed much more expensive for your staple items as I mentioned earlier. Increased efficiency is partly responsible for that. Then again, there is more ancillary stuff that we are interested in acquiring that our grandparents never knew so that sucks up any savings and more. :eusa_doh:

 

[Miss 1929]

That's true, if you were excited to have that new-fangled Radio, you didn't miss the other electronics (including the computers we use to talk about this) as much.

Plus, people didn't all expect to have a car (or two or five)! That only became the norm after WWII. There was better public transportation most places that are now freeway-dependent.

 

[Lincsong]

I don't think it's just building materials, either -- I don't think the standard of workmanship today can hold a candle to that of the pre-war era. I work in a building that was renovated five years ago to the highest standards of current workmanship -- very expensive, highly detailed work. And yet, I'm dealing with doors that don't fit their frames anymore, cabinetry that's coming apart, leaks in the roof. If the work were fifty years old, I might expect that kind of thing, but five years is a bit ridiculous. If this is the best work that 21st Century money could buy, I'd hate to see what kind of work Joe Punchclock can afford.

Pre-war is the key word. Most of the War and Post War housing in the mid to late 40's were slapped together quickly and materials were shoddy; chewing gum, spit and tin foil. Going around house hunting and seeing some 1946 or 1947 built house; 800 square feet, two bedroom, single bath, most were made with green wood, cheap pine and fir doors and cabinets, uninsulated, bare wires, fuses, no 220 volts. They're just not worth the price or hassle. I know a rather rotund lady who lived in a 1946 built house, she was bent over cleaning the toilet, got up, slipped, hit the wall with her butt and caused a 3x3 foot hole in the wall.

Then there's the problems with old sewer lines that crack and leak causing sinkholes in driveways and sidewalks. Termites, dry rot, and other pests that burrow into wood and cause problems, which are found in all older homes. Some people just don't care if it's there. A friend of mine bought a 1929 Tudor about 6 years ago and sold it last year. He was surprised that when the home inspection went through there was foundation damage that wasn't found when he bought the house. Well, six years is a long time for dry rot, termites and such to cause damage. It probably wasn't noticable when he bought the house.

Pre 1941 housing was better built since the "production line" homes were virtually non-existant. Maybe there was a contractor who built 6 or ten homes in similar fashion with similar floor plans, but the 1000 home tracts with all the same plans didn't exist. Out here in California, the Spanish Revival homes of the 1920's and 1930's are quite nice, have solid construction and hold up rather good.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Pre-war is the key word. Most of the War and Post War housing in the mid to late 40's were slapped together quickly and materials were shoddy; chewing gum, spit and tin foil. Going around house hunting and seeing some 1946 or 1947 built house; 800 square feet, two bedroom, single bath, most were made with green wood, cheap pine and fir doors and cabinets, uninsulated, bare wires, fuses, no 220 volts. They're just not worth the price or hassle.

Absolutely. My mother's house was built in 1949 -- on a pile of landfill -- and before the attic was turned into bedrooms, you could see that much of the wood used was from old sign boards and packing crates. The idea in the postwar era was just to throw the houses up as quickly and cheaply as possible, the better to take advantage of desperate buyers with GI Bill housing loans.

Ma has lived in that house for over forty years, and the cost of keeping it in one piece has exceeded the $8000 she paid for it at least a dozen times over.

 

[Lincsong]

To each his own.
You can have the modern stuff made with green wood, wallboard that will kill you and particle board construction. [huh]

Unless you're going to sit down and munch on it like a beaver it won't harm you. Just like asbestos and lead paint, if you don't rub it in your face and nose you'll be ok.