4
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] olgas_husband@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

cardboard houses in places with high frequency of tornadoes and other natural phenomenons.

[-] ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago

Concrete and metal can not withstand the temperature fluctuations in the United States, that's why wood is used. If you take concrete from -10C to 40C, its going to crack and fail after a few years.

The problem is that the wood has gotten significantly more cheap over the years. But if you've seen actual wood houses, its absurd how they last centuries while concrete weathers and turns to dust, and metal corrodes.

Further, wood stands up just as well as brick and concrete do in the face of tornados and earthquakes... In that they don't. They all collapse. the foundations are made with brick or concrete but its cheaper to rebuild the top if its wood then another material. You're not saving your house if it gets hit with a tornado.

Also concrete requires steel supports in order to be load bearing, which is again very expensive. If you don't put structural steel in the concrete, then you've created a death trap.

[-] cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 1 year ago

The cost argument is probably the more correct one, i don't think that the temperature fluctuation excuse holds water. In Eastern Europe we have some pretty extreme temperatures too, in a continental climate you can easily go from double digit negative temperatures in the winter to 30-40 in the summer. And the use of concrete and bricks and so on is still very widespread.

[-] ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago

I didn’t say it was impossible, it’s not like if you use concrete it’s going to instantly vaporize and explode.

However it will require significantly more upkeep and repair, and will become dilapidated quickly without proper maintenance.

Just look what happened to all the khrushchevki after the Union fell. Many stop receiving support and fell apart quickly.

Also I don’t know what you mean by the reason not holding water. It’s not the end all be all, but it’s simply science. Concrete expands and contracts to much in the face of water and temperature to make a viable long term building material without constant upkeep.

[-] Shrike502@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 1 year ago

Except Khrushchevki were never designed to be long-term solution. They were a stopgap measure and have in fact outlived their projected service time by decades

[-] redtea@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago

Does that support ComradeSalad's point? I.e. because if they were meant to last longer, they'd have been built differently?

[-] Shrike502@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 1 year ago

Yes and no. They would have been built different, but not from wood. Don't have to go far for examples either: here's a house that was built to last in Stalin period. ComradeSalad does raise valid points regarding temperature jumps and the need for upkeep - but the latter is an issue with the economic mode, not the materials.

Besides, it's the XXI century. Surely we can build things with materials a tiny bit more advanced than basic concrete

this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2023
4 points (100.0% liked)

GenZedong

4302 readers
18 users here now

This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.

This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.

We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS