Builders' profits get bigger; we get bigger... but our houses get smaller

A while ago I read in a report from the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, that Britain had the smallest new build houses in Europe. Indeed the average floor space in the UK was half that in Denmark. No surprise there though, I thought. If there’s a table of good things, like recovery from surgery rates, Britain has a habit of being towards the bottom of it; whist, if it’s a table of bad things, like single teenage pregnancy or dependency on drugs, Britain is heading up the table. So the smallest houses tag didn't really surprise me.

But the other day I read that not only are our houses smaller than others, they are actually under the size recommended by architects for living in. Apparently the average family house is 8% smaller than the recommended size. The most recently built houses are actually only 75% as big as they should be. In a typical 3-bedroom family house, this translates to the purchaser being diddled out of 2 double bedrooms’ worth of space!

Of course this means that builders, who already make a handsome profit (given that the price of a house bears absolutely no relation whatsoever to its actual worth), are making even bigger profits by cramming more houses per hectare on to their land.

So what, you might ask. So, I guess there is enough stress in living a family life without there not being enough room to swing a cat, or rather to store all the bits and pieces that people need, or at least think they need in today’s world.

In my block, I am the only person who lives alone, and I think that my flat is crowded. How the others in the block manage is beyond my comprehension. But think of the strain that living in a tiny box puts on relationships and on family life. In tiny rooms already crowded with oversized furniture, even a couple of items out of place makes the room untidy; bedrooms with just enough room to squeeze round the bottom of the bed, and up the sides must be a living nightmare.

At the same time as our houses get smaller and smaller, we get bigger and fatter. In 1951 the average British woman had a waist of 27". Today that average is 34". No comparable figures are available for men, however, army uniforms from that time suggest that the average man would have had a 32" waist, whilst now he has a 38" waist (and no... that's your waste, not where your trousers sit!)

Is it then any wonder that we read that 10% of Scots are on anti-depressants?

If I had to live in that room at the top, I'd be on Prozac!

====================================================================

I just had to mention this. I noticed a sign in the window of a (now defunct) Dundee Bar advertising:

MANAGERS SPECIAL'S

Here's to Scottish education...................... getting better.