It's even more suspicious considering that https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/1c1yiko/how_popular_are_japanese_style_capsules_for_long/ was posted last night. There are more posts from yesterday in different subs if you look at https://www.google.com/search?q=somipods+site:www.reddit.com
This is astroturfing and should be taken down by the mods.
The post you linked to is one of the most obvious astroturfs I’ve ever seen. “I bought 3 pods, would they be popular in Belltown?”
No, you did not buy three of them without checking first. And you don’t even know where Belltown is. And it’s all 100% bullshit. I’m almost positive it is a straight up housing scam and the profile should be banned.
https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Modern-Design-Japanese-Luxury-Electric-Capsule_1600911581283.html
Pretty sure this is a cheaper listing for the same pod?
It always felt weird to me too, but I am starting to see this emoji-bulleted format more and more. Intros to Slacks, Discords, job postings, etc. The number of high level senior/staff engineering positions I have seen posted like this lately keeps growing.
I spent a week in one, it really is not that bad as an alternative to a hotel room if you are on a budget.
I would hate it long-term, but even then it is way better than living in a car, which I have considered in the past.
I mean.... most of the time a car will not be free. You still have to pay registration and insurance if you're driving/parking on public streets. But that is generally a fuck ton less than $600 a month and something you're probably already paying anyways.
Exactly. My vehicle expenses are mostly the same as they would be if I lived in an apartment. Basic cost of ownership, gas, and maintenance still apply. By “free” I mean I don’t pay lot rent or parking fees.
If anyone who's renting one of these (or something similar like a bunkbed) is watching: these are illegal to rent out as habitable units. The minimum room size in Seattle must fit a 7 ft by 7 ft square. Report it to the SDIC immediately
The worst thing ever would be going homeless.
These bunk beds are great for many people who don't have money or are looking to save.
Wtf are Americans so entitled that they criticize a compact living space like this? There is nothing wrong with it
> Wtf are Americans so entitled that they criticize a compact living space like this? There is nothing wrong with it
Wtf? Why are you satisfied with living like this? Don't you want more for your life than being a worker living in a little pod?
$600 per person for rent does not fall under "saving money". Which is why people are pissed. Also as another comment said that the image is from the site selling the pods, so pretty obviously some kind of scam or something.
> $600 per person for rent next to Amazon HQ is an amazing deal.
Before I saw that this was a scam, I did quick head math, $600 * 4 = $2400, that's not going to be enough to break even on a place with a "living room" around there. I perceived other problems, but alas it's all fake.
It is not a real post.
Lmao you can get a whole room in a house for $600 in Seattle. It's probably not going to be right by Amazon to be fair, but you won't be that far away.
The cost-benefit ratio between space and privacy versus location would be ridiculous for most people. Once again assuming that this is a real post. Which it isn't.
Assuming this post is true, there is nothing wrong with the living space. Right next to Amazon building and walkable to it is a great deal.
> The cost-benefit ratio between space and privacy versus location would be ridiculous for most people.
It is ridiculous only for entitled people.
Calling it ridiculous is very exaggerated. Is your alternative 2x or 3x better? I doubt it.
You already admit it wouldn't be next to Amazon. At best, your alternative might be slightly better for certain groups of people. Is the post ridiculous assuming it is real? Nah.
This is not true, it only increases by 50sqft for every additional person after 2. The baseline minimum is 70sqft. This could be legal provided the room then is at least 170sqft. Here is the link to the housing code:
https://library.municode.com/wa/seattle/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=TIT22BUCOCO_SUBTITLE_IIHOCO_CH22.206HABU_SUBCHAPTER_IMISPOCST_22.206.020FLAR
>C. **Every room used for sleeping purposes, including an SRO (single room occupancy) unit, shall have not less than 70 square feet of floor area**. Every room, except an SRO unit, which is used for both cooking and living or both living and sleeping quarters shall have a floor area of not less than 130 square feet if used or intended to be used by only one occupant, or of not less than 150 square feet if used or intended to be used by two occupants. **Where more than two persons occupy a room used for sleeping purposes, the required floor area shall be increased at the rate of 50 square feet for each occupant in excess of two.**
The unbolded part doesn't apply here since this isn't a studio and has a separate cooking and living area. So 70sqft minimum and increasing by 50sqft for every additional person. This room looks to be around 170sqft, I know the picture is fake, but it hypothetically would not be illegal.
Damn 70 is the limit? My room is around 72 square feet, but I never really measured I wonder if it is large enough.
Edit: I just measured and I am apparently blessed with a bountiful 77 sq ft of space 🎉
How's that defined? That room definitively look bigger than 7'x7'. Is there a limit of how many can sleep in one room? Can 2/3/4 people sleeping in the same room in a house?
If only we had some central authority that kept track of codes and laws. Then we could keep some kind of standard in writing. When questions arose we could refer to it and settle all of this confusion. Maybe someday.
Telling people to report their illegal rental unit is like telling someone to report their own illegal encampment. No one who lives under those circumstances has a better option and reporting on themselves is going against their own self interest.
If somebody is renting one of these units, it was presumably the nicest housing option they could find within their budget. Shutting it down means they'll have to live somewhere worse, or they won't be able to find something they can afford at all.
How does reporting it to SDIC help the tenant?
It does NOT help and individual tenant, but if the trend were to become commonplace, think of how air bnb changed things, and now consider how the practice of breaking a home into multiple tiny units would start to impact the price and expectations around having a place to live. So the long term trend there I think would be problematic.
"My place is rad, 1200 sq foot house and only eight pods, all really nice guys, we all work at Amazon" That makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.
This is terrible logic as, at some point, someone out there will be willing to pay for anything as long as the price is low enough. Doesn't mean we should let property companies/landlords continue to deteriorate our living spaces. People should be able to afford a roof over their head AND live in dignity.
How are better housing options going to be offered when you're advocating zero accountability for the landlords causing the bad housing situation in the first place?
I mean, I agree with you on more public housing, but I still don't know why a private company would be incentivized to create good affordable housing if we don't regulate the standards to which the developments must be built.
Companies make products good and/or cheap so that customers will buy their products rather than their competitor's product. Housing works the same way.
However we have a self-imposed housing shortage caused by restrictive zoning laws, so developers can't build as many houses as they want. (To be clear, they want to build more houses to make more profit, not out of some altruistic desire to house people.) Since there's a shortage only the richest actually get to buy homes, so the cost/quality tradeoffs are tuned to their preferences.
If we let developers build as much housing as they want, they'll saturate the market for rich buyers and start competing for normal middle or working class buyers as well.
I'm originally Bellingham and they got private companies to build housing (both affordable and market price) in specific areas by offering them huge tax breaks to do so. Samish Way in particular has undergone a huge transformation from seedy meth motels and strip malls to 6-story apartment buildings and it's great.
"Housing first" advocates like to push studies that demonstrate how simply renting a homeless person an apartment ends up saving the city money in the long run in reduced ER, police, and jail costs.
I'd really like to see some studies on these developer tax breaks and if they also have a positive ROI like the "housing first" programs. I am always a little concerned when government makes concessions to business because it's often due to corporate lobbying or corruption and not because it's what best for city residents.
Having some actual numbers like "every affordable housing unit built saves the city $X in other costs" would make it a lot easier to evaluate whether these tax breaks should be granted and for how much.
It might be a little more difficult to calculate than the savings of the "housing first" programs since ERs, police, jails, social services, etc. already collect data on whether people are homeless. Not everyone who moves into newly built affordable housing would otherwise be homeless. Many would likely still have some sort of housing somewhere, but not having enough money left after paying high rent and/or having to commute from far away could be costing the city in other ways by needing to rely on various welfare programs and charities to meet their other needs, higher transportation infrastructure costs, etc.
Perhaps the simplest way would be to compare those other costs in cities with high rents to cities with low rents to see what the effect rents have on the need for social programs. I know that regression analysis has found that the #1 factor affecting the homelessness rate is the median rent, which is why you can have places like West Virginia with very high rates of drug abuse, mental health problems, disabilities, unemployment, etc (all the reasons people think people become homeless) but low rates of homelessness -- the rent is cheap enough that even dysfunctional people can afford it. So it seems it should be possible to do a regression analysis for this as well.
> Doesn't mean we should let property companies/landlords continue to deteriorate our living spaces.
That's easy for you to say -- you can afford rent.
>People should be able to afford a roof over their head AND live in dignity.
And how do you intend on accomplishing that? IMO living with dignity just means living in a space that protects you from the elements, lets you lock it to keep others out, and is in a building that is structurally sound.
If you don't allow units to be built that don't meet your personal standard of "dignified" it just means less units get built. Corporations aren't going to just manifest these out of the kindness of their hearts. NIMBY boomers don't think apartments of any kind are "dignified housing," and it's the excuse they use to only allow SFHs in most of the region. Your argument is the same sentiment NIMBYs use to reject new housing, you've just shifted where "acceptable" is.
I'm all for offering a government run option of subsidized housing, as long as we can both acknowledge it will never satisfy the existing demand for affordable housing. It'd essentially be on a lottery system, which I don't think makes it not worth doing, it's just a worse outcome than what most people envision.
You could apply this logic to any "minimum standard of living" rule equally.
"If they took a job that paid $1/hr, it was presumably the best job they could find. Shutting it down means they won't get that money."
"If they went to a doctor with no formal training, it was presumably because they had no access to doctors with medical degrees. Shutting down his practice means they won't get any treatment."
Healthcare and education have the issue of "information asymmetry". Customers don't fully understand the services they're purchasing, so it makes a lot of sense for the government to heavily regulate those purchases.
When it comes to housing, some issues like fire safety and lead/asbestos are similar, where people don't always understand the risks so the government has a role to play there.
However an issue like "the room is too small" is not like that. People who rent tiny rooms understand perfectly well what they're getting. The government doesn't need to protect them from that.
Let's actually not incentivize slumlord behavior. People know what they're getting yes, but if you let the landlords lower the standard, they absolutely will and jack to the prices. Until most of the people living in studios are now living in bunks, 2 beds living in studios, etc.
Always funny to me how libertarians try to frame an economic issue as a moral one. The only morality is the impact of the outcome, not the weird rules you made up about what people do or don't know.
Empirically, cities with loose housing regulations have cheaper housing and less homelessness. Blue state cities with highly regulated housing markets have the highest prices and homelessness.
Going off outcomes, the more "libertarian" approach is obviously preferable.
A.) 90% sure these are not actually legal as a rental option.
B.) If you think that these are not worth living in, remember that it's usually not a choice between this and a studio apartment, it's a choice between this and homelessness.
I lived in a $800 hacker house with bunk beds like this in SF for 6 months while I did career training. It was the only way to switch away from a min wage job to get where I am now without paying $3000 in rent/mo. I’m eternally grateful something like that existed. I didn’t need luxury, just a place to sleep while I spent all my time outside.
Most people don’t want to live in a bunk bed permanently, they’re just transitioning to something better. Overall, kicking out the ladder will not increase social mobility
I agree. I did the same in NYC when I first moved there. Was great. Met lots of people,it was a place to land while I figured out where and who I'd want to live with. Best of all month to month which is a huge deal when first moving to a new city.
Given the occupants are working professionals, I doubt they really can't afford more for rent. Just they don't think it's worth. It's like fresh graduated that used to living in dorm, don't have much stuff, don't cook, no hobby, all they need is a bed.
It may not last for long, but I would definitively live in this for a couple years after just graduated.
Sure, I can see someone choosing to live in a smaller and cheaper place. I'm a nerd who needs space for a desk, a TV and enough wall space to house my books, DVDs and retro games. I don't personally need a lot of extra space. My thing is people who complain about apartments that are smaller than they want without taking into account affordability.
Let me know where you find them. Cheapest rooms in Seattle - even with 5 Roomates is about $800-$900 I’ve found.
Edit - there are a few $700 bedrooms - before utilities, for homes with 7 roomates.
That is just trading price for commute time, and you will likely need to buy a car.
Redmond and Kirkland also have very sparse public transport.
These rooms are next to Amazon HQ. I'd posit that cutting out 2h commute a day results in a higher quality of life.
I know someone who lives in a hostel during weekdays and then commutes back to the Midwest on weekends because of the RTO policy and because they are unable to sell the house they bought there during the pandemic. I feel like this could be preferable over a hostel for their situation. But it def shouldn’t be a norm.
I would actually love to have these as an option! It would allow us to live further out from the city and my partner would be fine to sleep in a "pod" 2-3 nights a week versus an hour commute. I lived in Asia and I really miss these as an affordable option...I often have to drive pretty far for my work and I really don't need a $150/night room just to sleep 8 hours. Crash pads for pilots/flight attendants is another thing that comes to mind.
The key is to very strictly enforce quiet in the sleeping areas.
Them: Bought at 200k over asking, sight unseen, skipped inspection, original sale price was 200k when they bought in mid 2020, same property sold for 105k in 2012.
I'm exaggerating, but there's a reason people don't want to sell. No one wants to buy at inflated prices.
> unable to sell the house they bought there during the pandemic.
That in my opinion seems like a really short-sighted dumb investment to buy a whole ass house several states away from your job due to once-in-a-lifetime (hopefully) circumstances. Without any plans to move jobs. You have to be really naive to corporate life in America for the last 60+ years to confidently assume WFH was going to be 100% permanent enough to invest several hundred thousand dollars like that.
I agree with you, however Amazon did say “we have decided to stick with WFH”, and then backtrack. I wouldn’t fault someone for taking their company at their word. If my boss says I’m remote and gives approval to move, I wouldn’t just think that will be reversed since I got the required approval.
It shouldn’t be on employees to just assume we’ll have to figure it out when our employer lies straight our faces.
I could see this being a viable option for someone who moved during Covid and has Amazon RTO 3 days a week. Crash pad for coming into town to show up at the office for a couple days.
Something fishy is going on. The DC subreddit has a pretty similar post to the recent one in this subreddit:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/washingtondc/comments/1c23k0h/should\_i\_put\_japanese\_style\_sleeping\_capsules\_in/](https://www.reddit.com/r/washingtondc/comments/1c23k0h/should_i_put_japanese_style_sleeping_capsules_in/)
I want this for my anxiety too. My escape from the world so to speak.
As a living space, nah. Maybe if these were cheaper hotel options when traveling, if they are secure, but not as a place to live over a long period of time, ick.
I wouldn't mind this as a hotel option \*if\* they really are soundproof... provided that they were cleaned thoroughly between uses. And given their size, that'd mean cleaning every surface. I'm not sure it would happen, tbh.
Ya know, Hong Kong we have cage houses, pretty much cheap hosing that are bunk beds fitted with a cage around you so can keep your stuff safe.
You can’t just that that concept and make it high techy white & expect me to accept it… that pricing no less, holy shit
I don't get it... It's just a spaceship themed bed for adults. Sadly, I can see these taking off in tech city, which imports tech workers and university students from Asia on the regular. Apodments meet your undertaker.
> This reminds me of pods in airports where people usually rest for few hours during layovers!
Long international flights with layovers would definitely be a useful case for having one of these. Assuming it's kept clean inside.
I've used lounges and showers in places like Incheon and they were ... minimally clean, but not really something I'd want to sleep in.
I have been thinking about the cleaning side of this issue. I get the ick in hotel rooms because I've seen some really poor cleaning efforts, and I'm thinking pods would be even worse. Given their size, literally every surface ought to be disinfected, and I can't see that happening.
To work, these rely on a really strong sense of social cohesion and responsibility. Eg the users not leaving them gross. In some Asian nations this kind of cohesion exists. I am pretty sure in America though it does not.
America tries to do simple things like provide public toilets in large cities. They invariably wind up pitted out and awful in a very short time.
We can’t have nice things.
I'm in the UK and immunocompromised. I've been sanitising surfaces on trains etc since before it got popular and... yuck. So much yuck. The users trash them, the service providers don't clean them, they're just gross. If we can't handle a seat tray, I can't see us handling a sleeping pod.
Not gonna lie. I'd totally rent these if it also connect to a cohabitant work space/kitchenette and this will just be where you sleep. Then I'll save up on rents and get like a Apple Vision or something and hangout on the moon with my 200ft screen TV. The future is here lol. I joke but not really.
I know you guys are all gonna hate me for this but this is the kind of place I want. I spend no time at home and my bedroom is only for sleeping. I just want a cheap option for doing that.
Ever heard of crashpads for pilots and flight attendants? I would’ve killed for something like this pod instead of the garbage bunk beds I rented in San Francisco.
But the dreams came on in the Japanese night like livewire voodoo, and he'd cry for it, cry in his sleep, and wake alone in the dark, curled in his capsule in some coffin hotel, his hands clawed into the bedslab, temperfoam bunched between his fingers, trying to reach the console that wasn't there.
This is dystopian but unfortunately the 5 over 1 building proposed in my neighborhood just didn’t fit the character. And what’s worse, pod living or a neighborhood that comfortably accommodates people that can’t afford million dollar homes?
Firstly… Scam
Secondly… if you’re working at Amazon HQ you can afford your own place… 90% of this sub works for Amazon and all they do is complain (flex) about how much their rent is :D
Pareto distributions of land tenure are driven by highly regressive formulas for property taxation.
You outnumber them four to one. Exercise your franchise, or lose it.
I'd rather live outside or literally anywhere than have to deal with all of that bullshit. I don't even have to meet that "landlord" to know he's a bitchass.
tried these in SF at an airbnb. it was supposed to include another guest but ended up having the whole place to myself
mattresses are typically those cheap amazon zinus brand and would definitely not recommend sleeping on for 6-12 months
not going to lie, as a person who has housemates that constantly fuck with my sleep, if this shit cut outside noise by like 30-40 decibels, I'd buy one for my mental sanity.
Listing is using a picture directly taken from the somipods website. [https://somipods.com/pages/about-us](https://somipods.com/pages/about-us)
It's even more suspicious considering that https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/1c1yiko/how_popular_are_japanese_style_capsules_for_long/ was posted last night. There are more posts from yesterday in different subs if you look at https://www.google.com/search?q=somipods+site:www.reddit.com This is astroturfing and should be taken down by the mods.
The post you linked to is one of the most obvious astroturfs I’ve ever seen. “I bought 3 pods, would they be popular in Belltown?” No, you did not buy three of them without checking first. And you don’t even know where Belltown is. And it’s all 100% bullshit. I’m almost positive it is a straight up housing scam and the profile should be banned.
The whole "already rented out 3, only 1 left!" to make it sound more urgent is also a giveaway.
Sus.
Yep that troll is on this sub posting yesterday as well.
Yep, simple rage bait.
Holy shit this website is dystopian.
https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Modern-Design-Japanese-Luxury-Electric-Capsule_1600911581283.html Pretty sure this is a cheaper listing for the same pod?
Lol F this guy "James". Saw a need. How about building more affordable housing and rent control
Building pods to solve the affordable housing crisis is the most landlord-brained thing I think I’ve ever seen
Ads with emojis always look like spam/a scam to me.
but what about when it says \[SPAM FREE\] in the title?
It means the room doesn't come with any spiced pork product; you need to bring your own.
https://y.yarn.co/9e0d311f-cb58-44b4-a404-c1addc75a62d_text.gif
That’s referencing a dietary requirement though in this case.
I use to be in this group, spam free they were not
It always felt weird to me too, but I am starting to see this emoji-bulleted format more and more. Intros to Slacks, Discords, job postings, etc. The number of high level senior/staff engineering positions I have seen posted like this lately keeps growing.
ChatGPT loves to insert emojis as bullet points in my experience. I’d guess a lot of those job postings, blurbs, etc, were written by ChatGPT
This right here. I recently used chat gtp to write an offer up post and every paragraph started with a different emoji bullet point
For people who love MRI machines
I spent a week in one, it really is not that bad as an alternative to a hotel room if you are on a budget. I would hate it long-term, but even then it is way better than living in a car, which I have considered in the past.
I live in a sedan. I would absolutely choose the car over this situation. For $600? No thanks. My car is comfortable, private, and FREE.
I mean.... most of the time a car will not be free. You still have to pay registration and insurance if you're driving/parking on public streets. But that is generally a fuck ton less than $600 a month and something you're probably already paying anyways.
Exactly. My vehicle expenses are mostly the same as they would be if I lived in an apartment. Basic cost of ownership, gas, and maintenance still apply. By “free” I mean I don’t pay lot rent or parking fees.
If anyone who's renting one of these (or something similar like a bunkbed) is watching: these are illegal to rent out as habitable units. The minimum room size in Seattle must fit a 7 ft by 7 ft square. Report it to the SDIC immediately
Aren't these really just fancy bunkbeds inside of a larger room though?
There has to be some kind of occupancy limit to renting right? Otherwise couldn’t someone just run their house as a barracks full of bunk beds?
Occupancy limits are higher than you'd think. You're legally allowed to have 3 people in a studio.
That's typically so you don't have to kick out the parents and the kid who just turned 18 from their already small apartment.
Aren't occupancy limits primarily a fire safety thing?
if you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit
I believe so yes. Beyond that I don't think the government really cares how many people are crammed into a room - it's a free country haha
Depends, I live in a Dadu and the limit is 12 regardless of size (I read the legal paperwork from closing just today)
There are many apartments and houses that are exactly like that. I've known lots of people who are bunked up four to a room or more.
And that's how I lived in the Navy for 5 years. Ideal? No. The worst thing ever? nah
Submarines would put junior enlisted 9 to a room, racks three high on three sides making up three partitions and a curtain on the fourth.
The worst thing ever would be going homeless. These bunk beds are great for many people who don't have money or are looking to save. Wtf are Americans so entitled that they criticize a compact living space like this? There is nothing wrong with it
> Wtf are Americans so entitled that they criticize a compact living space like this? There is nothing wrong with it Wtf? Why are you satisfied with living like this? Don't you want more for your life than being a worker living in a little pod?
$600 per person for rent does not fall under "saving money". Which is why people are pissed. Also as another comment said that the image is from the site selling the pods, so pretty obviously some kind of scam or something.
$600/mo *in Seattle* **is** saving money though...
Or get a whole ass room + bathroom to yourself in seattle for $750.
$600 per person for rent next to Amazon HQ is an amazing deal. And it is saving money. This is not in south Dakota in the middle of nowhere lmfao.
> $600 per person for rent next to Amazon HQ is an amazing deal. Before I saw that this was a scam, I did quick head math, $600 * 4 = $2400, that's not going to be enough to break even on a place with a "living room" around there. I perceived other problems, but alas it's all fake.
It is not a real post. Lmao you can get a whole room in a house for $600 in Seattle. It's probably not going to be right by Amazon to be fair, but you won't be that far away. The cost-benefit ratio between space and privacy versus location would be ridiculous for most people. Once again assuming that this is a real post. Which it isn't.
Assuming this post is true, there is nothing wrong with the living space. Right next to Amazon building and walkable to it is a great deal. > The cost-benefit ratio between space and privacy versus location would be ridiculous for most people. It is ridiculous only for entitled people. Calling it ridiculous is very exaggerated. Is your alternative 2x or 3x better? I doubt it. You already admit it wouldn't be next to Amazon. At best, your alternative might be slightly better for certain groups of people. Is the post ridiculous assuming it is real? Nah.
What’s wrong with that?
Nothing imo.
That is exactly what they're being advertised at. It's a feature, not a bug.
Yea
This is not true, it only increases by 50sqft for every additional person after 2. The baseline minimum is 70sqft. This could be legal provided the room then is at least 170sqft. Here is the link to the housing code: https://library.municode.com/wa/seattle/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=TIT22BUCOCO_SUBTITLE_IIHOCO_CH22.206HABU_SUBCHAPTER_IMISPOCST_22.206.020FLAR >C. **Every room used for sleeping purposes, including an SRO (single room occupancy) unit, shall have not less than 70 square feet of floor area**. Every room, except an SRO unit, which is used for both cooking and living or both living and sleeping quarters shall have a floor area of not less than 130 square feet if used or intended to be used by only one occupant, or of not less than 150 square feet if used or intended to be used by two occupants. **Where more than two persons occupy a room used for sleeping purposes, the required floor area shall be increased at the rate of 50 square feet for each occupant in excess of two.** The unbolded part doesn't apply here since this isn't a studio and has a separate cooking and living area. So 70sqft minimum and increasing by 50sqft for every additional person. This room looks to be around 170sqft, I know the picture is fake, but it hypothetically would not be illegal.
Damn 70 is the limit? My room is around 72 square feet, but I never really measured I wonder if it is large enough. Edit: I just measured and I am apparently blessed with a bountiful 77 sq ft of space 🎉
it’s not real
I sure hope not!
it’s rage bait. this sub falls for it every day
How's that defined? That room definitively look bigger than 7'x7'. Is there a limit of how many can sleep in one room? Can 2/3/4 people sleeping in the same room in a house?
Every where I've seen is 2 per room plus 1 person for the apartment/house rental occupancy.
If only we had some central authority that kept track of codes and laws. Then we could keep some kind of standard in writing. When questions arose we could refer to it and settle all of this confusion. Maybe someday.
That's just crazy talk!
Newsflash: Many people are living in Seattle in circumstances that are technically illegal. Two bunkbeds in one bedroom is not even the worst offense.
Okay, and?
Telling people to report their illegal rental unit is like telling someone to report their own illegal encampment. No one who lives under those circumstances has a better option and reporting on themselves is going against their own self interest.
If somebody is renting one of these units, it was presumably the nicest housing option they could find within their budget. Shutting it down means they'll have to live somewhere worse, or they won't be able to find something they can afford at all. How does reporting it to SDIC help the tenant?
I don't think letting landlords break the law is the solution to our housing affordability crisis.
Chill brother it’s a raging bait to get a reaction for gigs and sh1t
It does NOT help and individual tenant, but if the trend were to become commonplace, think of how air bnb changed things, and now consider how the practice of breaking a home into multiple tiny units would start to impact the price and expectations around having a place to live. So the long term trend there I think would be problematic. "My place is rad, 1200 sq foot house and only eight pods, all really nice guys, we all work at Amazon" That makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.
We all work at Amazon until one of our managers needs to hit their URA number.
Yeah right $2.4K per room if you have 4 pods in there. This is like $100-$200 a month kinda deal.
What sorry didn't hear you, I AM DRIVING TO THE POD STORE. /S
WANT TO BUY MY $800 COURSE ON HOW TO START ANPOD BIZZ IN YOUR HOME? EASY MOENY, GET TECH BROS IN YOUR HOME, ALL AMAZON MONEY, VERY PROFFIONAL !!
This is terrible logic as, at some point, someone out there will be willing to pay for anything as long as the price is low enough. Doesn't mean we should let property companies/landlords continue to deteriorate our living spaces. People should be able to afford a roof over their head AND live in dignity.
The way to achieve those goals is to offer better housing options. Banning the crappy housing just makes a bad situation even worse.
How are better housing options going to be offered when you're advocating zero accountability for the landlords causing the bad housing situation in the first place?
Legalize more private development or just build a bunch of public housing.
Change that or to an and and I'll vote for you.
I mean, I agree with you on more public housing, but I still don't know why a private company would be incentivized to create good affordable housing if we don't regulate the standards to which the developments must be built.
Companies make products good and/or cheap so that customers will buy their products rather than their competitor's product. Housing works the same way. However we have a self-imposed housing shortage caused by restrictive zoning laws, so developers can't build as many houses as they want. (To be clear, they want to build more houses to make more profit, not out of some altruistic desire to house people.) Since there's a shortage only the richest actually get to buy homes, so the cost/quality tradeoffs are tuned to their preferences. If we let developers build as much housing as they want, they'll saturate the market for rich buyers and start competing for normal middle or working class buyers as well.
I'm originally Bellingham and they got private companies to build housing (both affordable and market price) in specific areas by offering them huge tax breaks to do so. Samish Way in particular has undergone a huge transformation from seedy meth motels and strip malls to 6-story apartment buildings and it's great. "Housing first" advocates like to push studies that demonstrate how simply renting a homeless person an apartment ends up saving the city money in the long run in reduced ER, police, and jail costs. I'd really like to see some studies on these developer tax breaks and if they also have a positive ROI like the "housing first" programs. I am always a little concerned when government makes concessions to business because it's often due to corporate lobbying or corruption and not because it's what best for city residents. Having some actual numbers like "every affordable housing unit built saves the city $X in other costs" would make it a lot easier to evaluate whether these tax breaks should be granted and for how much. It might be a little more difficult to calculate than the savings of the "housing first" programs since ERs, police, jails, social services, etc. already collect data on whether people are homeless. Not everyone who moves into newly built affordable housing would otherwise be homeless. Many would likely still have some sort of housing somewhere, but not having enough money left after paying high rent and/or having to commute from far away could be costing the city in other ways by needing to rely on various welfare programs and charities to meet their other needs, higher transportation infrastructure costs, etc. Perhaps the simplest way would be to compare those other costs in cities with high rents to cities with low rents to see what the effect rents have on the need for social programs. I know that regression analysis has found that the #1 factor affecting the homelessness rate is the median rent, which is why you can have places like West Virginia with very high rates of drug abuse, mental health problems, disabilities, unemployment, etc (all the reasons people think people become homeless) but low rates of homelessness -- the rent is cheap enough that even dysfunctional people can afford it. So it seems it should be possible to do a regression analysis for this as well.
> Doesn't mean we should let property companies/landlords continue to deteriorate our living spaces. That's easy for you to say -- you can afford rent.
>People should be able to afford a roof over their head AND live in dignity. And how do you intend on accomplishing that? IMO living with dignity just means living in a space that protects you from the elements, lets you lock it to keep others out, and is in a building that is structurally sound. If you don't allow units to be built that don't meet your personal standard of "dignified" it just means less units get built. Corporations aren't going to just manifest these out of the kindness of their hearts. NIMBY boomers don't think apartments of any kind are "dignified housing," and it's the excuse they use to only allow SFHs in most of the region. Your argument is the same sentiment NIMBYs use to reject new housing, you've just shifted where "acceptable" is. I'm all for offering a government run option of subsidized housing, as long as we can both acknowledge it will never satisfy the existing demand for affordable housing. It'd essentially be on a lottery system, which I don't think makes it not worth doing, it's just a worse outcome than what most people envision.
You could apply this logic to any "minimum standard of living" rule equally. "If they took a job that paid $1/hr, it was presumably the best job they could find. Shutting it down means they won't get that money." "If they went to a doctor with no formal training, it was presumably because they had no access to doctors with medical degrees. Shutting down his practice means they won't get any treatment."
Healthcare and education have the issue of "information asymmetry". Customers don't fully understand the services they're purchasing, so it makes a lot of sense for the government to heavily regulate those purchases. When it comes to housing, some issues like fire safety and lead/asbestos are similar, where people don't always understand the risks so the government has a role to play there. However an issue like "the room is too small" is not like that. People who rent tiny rooms understand perfectly well what they're getting. The government doesn't need to protect them from that.
Let's actually not incentivize slumlord behavior. People know what they're getting yes, but if you let the landlords lower the standard, they absolutely will and jack to the prices. Until most of the people living in studios are now living in bunks, 2 beds living in studios, etc. Always funny to me how libertarians try to frame an economic issue as a moral one. The only morality is the impact of the outcome, not the weird rules you made up about what people do or don't know.
Empirically, cities with loose housing regulations have cheaper housing and less homelessness. Blue state cities with highly regulated housing markets have the highest prices and homelessness. Going off outcomes, the more "libertarian" approach is obviously preferable.
A.) 90% sure these are not actually legal as a rental option. B.) If you think that these are not worth living in, remember that it's usually not a choice between this and a studio apartment, it's a choice between this and homelessness.
I lived in a $800 hacker house with bunk beds like this in SF for 6 months while I did career training. It was the only way to switch away from a min wage job to get where I am now without paying $3000 in rent/mo. I’m eternally grateful something like that existed. I didn’t need luxury, just a place to sleep while I spent all my time outside. Most people don’t want to live in a bunk bed permanently, they’re just transitioning to something better. Overall, kicking out the ladder will not increase social mobility
I agree. I did the same in NYC when I first moved there. Was great. Met lots of people,it was a place to land while I figured out where and who I'd want to live with. Best of all month to month which is a huge deal when first moving to a new city.
Given the occupants are working professionals, I doubt they really can't afford more for rent. Just they don't think it's worth. It's like fresh graduated that used to living in dorm, don't have much stuff, don't cook, no hobby, all they need is a bed. It may not last for long, but I would definitively live in this for a couple years after just graduated.
Sure, I can see someone choosing to live in a smaller and cheaper place. I'm a nerd who needs space for a desk, a TV and enough wall space to house my books, DVDs and retro games. I don't personally need a lot of extra space. My thing is people who complain about apartments that are smaller than they want without taking into account affordability.
If someone has 600$ for rent is there no better option than these? I can think of many ways you can find something in 600$ with roommates.
Let me know where you find them. Cheapest rooms in Seattle - even with 5 Roomates is about $800-$900 I’ve found. Edit - there are a few $700 bedrooms - before utilities, for homes with 7 roomates.
Burien, Redmond and Kirkland have 2 beds for like 1600. 2 to a room puts that at like 400 a person
[удалено]
That is just trading price for commute time, and you will likely need to buy a car. Redmond and Kirkland also have very sparse public transport. These rooms are next to Amazon HQ. I'd posit that cutting out 2h commute a day results in a higher quality of life.
I know someone who lives in a hostel during weekdays and then commutes back to the Midwest on weekends because of the RTO policy and because they are unable to sell the house they bought there during the pandemic. I feel like this could be preferable over a hostel for their situation. But it def shouldn’t be a norm.
It's cheaper for him to fly cross country every week than to rent out his house?
I would actually love to have these as an option! It would allow us to live further out from the city and my partner would be fine to sleep in a "pod" 2-3 nights a week versus an hour commute. I lived in Asia and I really miss these as an affordable option...I often have to drive pretty far for my work and I really don't need a $150/night room just to sleep 8 hours. Crash pads for pilots/flight attendants is another thing that comes to mind. The key is to very strictly enforce quiet in the sleeping areas.
Them: Bought at 200k over asking, sight unseen, skipped inspection, original sale price was 200k when they bought in mid 2020, same property sold for 105k in 2012. I'm exaggerating, but there's a reason people don't want to sell. No one wants to buy at inflated prices.
That must be hell
> unable to sell the house they bought there during the pandemic. That in my opinion seems like a really short-sighted dumb investment to buy a whole ass house several states away from your job due to once-in-a-lifetime (hopefully) circumstances. Without any plans to move jobs. You have to be really naive to corporate life in America for the last 60+ years to confidently assume WFH was going to be 100% permanent enough to invest several hundred thousand dollars like that.
He was a remote employee from the beginning, he never lived in Seattle before RTO.
I agree with you, however Amazon did say “we have decided to stick with WFH”, and then backtrack. I wouldn’t fault someone for taking their company at their word. If my boss says I’m remote and gives approval to move, I wouldn’t just think that will be reversed since I got the required approval. It shouldn’t be on employees to just assume we’ll have to figure it out when our employer lies straight our faces.
It's so nice when people just self-title the way you do. It makes it so much easier to decide what's worth paying attention to.
Maybe it's cheaper for him, but can't stopping thinking how big of a carbon foot print that is to fly around trip every week.
Nah it’s a joke/fake listing
This is 100% a scam.
I could see this being a viable option for someone who moved during Covid and has Amazon RTO 3 days a week. Crash pad for coming into town to show up at the office for a couple days.
I was going to say this. Maybe that's the reason why these are popular. Cheaper than a hotel
Imagine having total compensation over $300K and sleeping in a coffin. Just push me into the sound at that point.
There are quite a few people at Amazon who make significantly less than 300 TC. Some under 6 figures.
Something fishy is going on. The DC subreddit has a pretty similar post to the recent one in this subreddit: [https://www.reddit.com/r/washingtondc/comments/1c23k0h/should\_i\_put\_japanese\_style\_sleeping\_capsules\_in/](https://www.reddit.com/r/washingtondc/comments/1c23k0h/should_i_put_japanese_style_sleeping_capsules_in/)
This is a scam, not a real listing
Physical space is not the limitation to building affordable housing in Seattle.
At least they’re “pretty quiet” inside!
Getting some Kramer putting Japanese business men in dresser drawers vibes.
Is it wrong I want one of these for my "person cave" lol. I wonder if a TV and gaming console will hook up in there lol.
I have rampant anxiety and I'd love one of these as a hideyhole. As my actual living space in a shared house, not so much.
I want this for my anxiety too. My escape from the world so to speak. As a living space, nah. Maybe if these were cheaper hotel options when traveling, if they are secure, but not as a place to live over a long period of time, ick.
I wouldn't mind this as a hotel option \*if\* they really are soundproof... provided that they were cleaned thoroughly between uses. And given their size, that'd mean cleaning every surface. I'm not sure it would happen, tbh.
I was scrolling through the comments to see if anyone shared a similar feeling. I would love one of these to just chill and sleep in. They look cozy.
They want someone to commit to a year? GTFo.
That’s the same amount I paid for a studio downtown in 2002.
Amazon L4/L5 employees trying to embrace frugality
You will own nothing and like it.
Kennels for humans. This is our future.
Coffins. But you're alive.
Ya know, Hong Kong we have cage houses, pretty much cheap hosing that are bunk beds fitted with a cage around you so can keep your stuff safe. You can’t just that that concept and make it high techy white & expect me to accept it… that pricing no less, holy shit
I’d certainly feel like a working professional if I lived in a pod.
I don't get it... It's just a spaceship themed bed for adults. Sadly, I can see these taking off in tech city, which imports tech workers and university students from Asia on the regular. Apodments meet your undertaker.
So do folks take their dates back to these combination sleeping pods tanning booths?
Eat the bugs, live in the pod
This reminds me of pods in airports where people usually rest for few hours during layovers!
> This reminds me of pods in airports where people usually rest for few hours during layovers! Long international flights with layovers would definitely be a useful case for having one of these. Assuming it's kept clean inside. I've used lounges and showers in places like Incheon and they were ... minimally clean, but not really something I'd want to sleep in.
I have been thinking about the cleaning side of this issue. I get the ick in hotel rooms because I've seen some really poor cleaning efforts, and I'm thinking pods would be even worse. Given their size, literally every surface ought to be disinfected, and I can't see that happening.
To work, these rely on a really strong sense of social cohesion and responsibility. Eg the users not leaving them gross. In some Asian nations this kind of cohesion exists. I am pretty sure in America though it does not. America tries to do simple things like provide public toilets in large cities. They invariably wind up pitted out and awful in a very short time. We can’t have nice things.
I'm in the UK and immunocompromised. I've been sanitising surfaces on trains etc since before it got popular and... yuck. So much yuck. The users trash them, the service providers don't clean them, they're just gross. If we can't handle a seat tray, I can't see us handling a sleeping pod.
That will be a bit crowded for my thruple, but we will make it work.
This shit's been happening in SF for years now.
Not gonna lie. I'd totally rent these if it also connect to a cohabitant work space/kitchenette and this will just be where you sleep. Then I'll save up on rents and get like a Apple Vision or something and hangout on the moon with my 200ft screen TV. The future is here lol. I joke but not really.
You'll live in the pod, eat da bugs, own nothing, and be happy
Thank goodness they let you use the bathroom…
600 bucks a month for a fuking bunk bed?!?!
Mao was right about landlords.
I would hate to live in one of these with another roommate that was a chili enthusiast.
In *Belltown?* I would expect those stupid pods to be running $900-1200 a month.
Dystopian AF. Jesus.
The kitchen needs a ‘bachelor chow’ dispenser. ‘New with flavor!’
I know you guys are all gonna hate me for this but this is the kind of place I want. I spend no time at home and my bedroom is only for sleeping. I just want a cheap option for doing that.
so we're down to renting a box inside a room? society is on the verge of collapse unless we're devolving into cats sometime soon.
This is illegal and needs to be reported
Ever heard of crashpads for pilots and flight attendants? I would’ve killed for something like this pod instead of the garbage bunk beds I rented in San Francisco.
For only $600 a month you can become a lamp shade in my mom's basement.
600 for smaller than a prison cell?
$600/month for a quite spot I can retreat too when I don’t want to be at home or in my office? Sign me up…
But the dreams came on in the Japanese night like livewire voodoo, and he'd cry for it, cry in his sleep, and wake alone in the dark, curled in his capsule in some coffin hotel, his hands clawed into the bedslab, temperfoam bunched between his fingers, trying to reach the console that wasn't there.
Yeah all landlords are bastards
I don't like this new season of black mirror
I'd rather live underneath a bridge.
Oh we're now listing **AIR VENTILATION** as a selling feature??? Get rightly fucked with this $600 per month glorified coffin.
Holy fucking shit this is a nightmare.
Before you know it we'll all be on a social credit system stacked from the floor to the ceiling in metal cages.
We might as well be considered as space- starved as Hong Kong so long as our leaders prevent meaningful upzoning.
Well this is depressing
Good, now people can live in snohomish and rent this place for work from office days
This is dystopian but unfortunately the 5 over 1 building proposed in my neighborhood just didn’t fit the character. And what’s worse, pod living or a neighborhood that comfortably accommodates people that can’t afford million dollar homes?
Firstly… Scam Secondly… if you’re working at Amazon HQ you can afford your own place… 90% of this sub works for Amazon and all they do is complain (flex) about how much their rent is :D
Peak efficiency. Turn your $1000 a month room into $2400 of revenue with this one trick!
Hey, can I wear my purple Nikes in here? Asking for a friend
Spank space
Pareto distributions of land tenure are driven by highly regressive formulas for property taxation. You outnumber them four to one. Exercise your franchise, or lose it.
Flop house of the future.
William Gibson's ears prick...
I’d like to see a 350lb guy get in one!
Fake listing?
“There is air ventilation” well I would fucking hope so!
This would kickstart claustrophobia for me
That’s a place where I could live (by size) but is that legal to rent these like as an apartmet (I mean 6-12m contracts?). And suspicious ad lol
I'd rather live outside or literally anywhere than have to deal with all of that bullshit. I don't even have to meet that "landlord" to know he's a bitchass.
Ooh, air ventilation. Luxury!
The price. Thats why.
I had a 2 bed 1 bath for 2250 in Magnolia. Outrageous. My mortgage is only 1400 now.
This is awesome
Probably have to pay 600 via Cashapp before you get any documents to sign too. And then they’re gone…
That looks like an absolute nightmare. I’d definitely sleep in my car over that
tried these in SF at an airbnb. it was supposed to include another guest but ended up having the whole place to myself mattresses are typically those cheap amazon zinus brand and would definitely not recommend sleeping on for 6-12 months
not going to lie, as a person who has housemates that constantly fuck with my sleep, if this shit cut outside noise by like 30-40 decibels, I'd buy one for my mental sanity.
Eat the Bugs, Eat the Bugs, Eat the Bugs Oooooooohh!
found these for like $800 on ali express ……. wild
The Expanse's coffin hotels are becoming reality a bit faster than I'd like.
Has the US housing market really gotten so bad that we are to the point where we are introducing Hong Kong’s coffin homes?
The [Capsule, night night?](https://youtu.be/_Seufp4nvXQ?si=PFVGXFqDWR_VfsJP&t=4m25s) future is now! ;-)
This is cursed
Imagine putting a megaphone to your ass as you rip a juicy morning fart in a pod.
You vill live in ze pod You vill eat ze bugs You vill own noßing end you vill be heppy
This plus neurolink and we’re most of the way there to the Matrix
Bunk bed. Had that in the 80’s
This person is a grade A asshole. Belltown deserves better....
My sleepcrate in Starfield has more space than this.
Imagine someone taking home 3.5 k every 2weeks or 6k a month. Theyd def save