• zazo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    damn the free market works! it came up with commie blocks just based on space and energy efficiency! if only we could apply this on a larger scale 🙈

    • flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      We do. It’s called an apartment building.

      Idk why people insist on the false dichotomy between commieblock and other types of buildings. Sure there are some truly awful ones, especially in Eastern Europe that are basically high-rise slums. But most of the insanely expensive and luxurious housing is also high-rise residential.

    • redisdead@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      I lived in a commie block until I had enough money to move out.

      Easily the worst years of my life.

      I’d rather shoot myself than go back in one of these depression factories.

      • andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’ve slept in a dozen kinds of them. Some are better than others, obviously, and even the worst of them were better than makeshift barracks or no housing at all. If they are built properly they are nice and affordable.

        ed: Ask finns. IIRC they have a lot of these built right, with all their tech and a basic care about future homeowners, that is usually a flipping point in how livable commie blocks are.

      • Delphia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I feel like there has to be some way to design one so that it’s maximally space efficient while not being a depressing shithole.

        • flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          Not mutually exclusive. My pet conspiracy theory is that Soviet buildings were somewhat intentionally made to be awful, not so much to save on resources, but because the appearance of “suffering for the revolution” was desirable. Literally - we can’t let people have nice things, it uncommunist.

            • flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              2 months ago

              I’m sure there were buildings with nice artwork on them. Ironically, communist countries had a well defined ruling class who could get nice things. It’s the average that counts. Also, slapping a small artwork on an otherwise ugly building is not really a solution.

              My experience is mostly Romania, Hungary and ex-Yugoslavia. Those in Romania and Hungary are awful undecorated gray boxes, with substandard installations, paper-thin walls, and very depressing places to be in.
              Yugoslavia is a different story, visibly not a part of the Soviet bloc. While there are some bad buildings, on average both quality and aesthetics, are much much better. Fairly nice places to live in

        • MagicShel@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          Aesthetic is part of life quality. If that is required to keep people housed, that society is a failure. Ideally, population continues to fall and none of that will be necessary.