Every year since 1984, the National Association of Home Builders (in the United States) has commissioned a home with the goal of showcasing new trends and technologies in the industry. At the same time, it also serves as a kind of dream home. This is what one should aspire to achieve. The initiative is called the New American Home (TNAH).

The first home was built in Houston by Village Builders. The architect was Booth/Hansen & Associates and the home was about 1,500 square feet. It cost $80,000. Last year the home was in Montverde, Florida and was about 10,690 square feet (6,676 square feet of air-conditioned space). Not surprisingly, these homes have grown over the decades.

According to a recent New York Times opinion piece by Allison Arieff -- called, The New 'Dream Home' Should be a Condo -- the square footage of this New American Home has been steadily rising:

This is, of course, reflective of what has been happening in the market as a whole. According to Arieff, the average size of a new U.S. home today is about 1,000 square feet larger than it was in 1973. The average space per human has increased from 507 to about 971 square feet. As our wealth has grown we have naturally become more consumptive.

But as Arieff asks in her article:

What if the next New American Home was a condo? And what if there was a new American dream, not of auto-dependent suburbia, but walkable urbanism?

She then contrasts last year's 10,000 square foot "Tuscan style" New American Home against this 6 unit urban infill condo project in Los Angeles, where the average home is about 1,800 square feet and the building in its entirety is around 11,000 square feet.

Which one would you prefer?

Charts: New York Times

Today the Partnership for New York City took out a full-page ad in the New York Times with an open letter to Amazon chief executive Jeff Bezos, asking him to reconsider the decision to pull out of NYC. The letter was signed by a long list of prominent leaders in the city. Here is a copy (a PDF version can also be found, here):

The New York Times has a recent article up talking about the disappearing “urban advantage” for low-skilled workers. It is based on the work of MIT economist David Autor.

Here is a chart from the article plotting wages against population density from 1950 to 2015:

The clear takeaway is that dense urban centers remain a place where wealth is created – but you probably need a college degree.

The economic advantages of dense cities for those without one appears to be disappearing. The labor market has diverged.

Interestingly enough, David’s research also suggests that college graduates may be starting to abstain from the suburbs – even when they have kids.

And that’s because the returns to being in the city are so great.

For the full NY Times article, click here.