There are a fair few timber-framed/lath-and-plaster houses that have survived in Europe for a few hundred years.
Eh, I grew up in a house built in 1930, in a neighborhood that was started in 1890 and slowly grew through the 1950s. Lots of people want those homes. It’s all down to what you like I guess. A lot of folks that move here haven’t ever lived in a house that old and don’t realize how small they really are on the inside until their furniture doesn’t even fit through the door. Locally, the neighborhood is a historic distric and has several locations on the national historic register. You can’t do anything to your house or property without a permit from 2 or 3 different agencies, it’s worse than an hoa. I won’t say old houses are bad, but it does take the right mentality to live in one.
Only if it’s really old or really badly set. A person died in the Elche earthquake from being hit by a falling tile, but it was from a centuries-old, condemned building.
One thing the OP doesn’t mention but which used to drive me up a wall and he may find interesting is this: how come so many houses in the US are built interchangeably, and in ways that do not take local weather into consideration? Why are old houses different depending on where you are, but newer ones so much less so? Turns out the answer is that during and right after WWII, lots of cheap housing was needed: houses were built quickly, the same plans and structures would spring up all over the country (usually for those “during”, with the idea that they were temporary; a lot of them ended up not being so). This allowed access to houses to a lot of people who valued this very much and who wouldn’t have been able to afford a house actually designed for local conditions, and in the way of things that are done a certain way by enough people and for long enough, it became normal.
In California, not really. Tropical storms dissipate before they reach California (in the U.S.), and at worst result in some rainfall in the late summer. Baja California in Mexico, however, does get the winds, etc. of tropical storms that can cause structural damage to houses.
In Romania and Bulgaria, all the homes I’ve seen are made out of concrete, even in the poor rural villages. The architecture puts any American “Mass produced” house to shame.
Yes, but what is the actual cost difference? If the tile roof is more than 3-4 times the cost of shingles then it is cheaper to just replace the roof every 20 years. People can get the more expensive roof if they want.
To the OP, it all comes down to cost. Houses in Germany, for example, are way more expensive than in the US. The middle class do not own homes for the most part. They sign long-term, 10-20 year leases with people who can afford to own a few houses and turn a profit. Owning a home is like owning a business. In America, it is like owning a car.
Also, your comment about 3rd world homes being built better? Laughable. Which homes? Which countries?
Housing prices in the US seem reasonable at first glance, but when you take into account the poor quality Chinese material they’re constructed of, and the fact that they’re slapped together in a couple months, they’re extremely expensive
I’ve been to West Africa before, the homes built for the middle and upper classes are far better built than ours, almost always out of concrete.
It’s not even a matter of “tiles vs shingles”; it’s both a matter of the rest of the structure and of the throwaway mentality of Americans vs the “build it to last” mindset of most of Europe. Also, you’re assuming that a tile roof will always be more expensive than a shingles roof: in Northern Spain, a shingles roof would be more expensive than a tile one because the price of natural slate is higher than that of cooked clay (clay we’ve got all over the place; slate, not so much).
“shingles” in much of the US mean asphalt shingles, not slate.
I actually agree with several of the points the OP makes but my feeling is that the reasons/reasoning change over time. Say 100 years ago it was because of how many town popped up quickly and cheaply to house workers from a “passing industry”. Examples would be the lumber camps of the east and mining town in various places. A sort of industry of its own providing cheap fast houses was sort of established. Today I would write it off more to our mobility. The chances of someone living their entire lives in their first home, or passing that house down to the next generation, seems pretty slim compared to the past. I could be wrong in all that but its basically my impression.
We don’t get a lot of hurricanes round these parts, but we had one in 1987. No, I don’t remember anything about tiles flying around - we had the barge boards ripped off the end of the roof. A friend had a chimney blown down. Generally damage to domestic housing was slight and in the main (from what I saw) caused by falling trees. How the severity of the weather compared to a “typical” US hurricane, I couldn’t say. I also don’t know if the “poster boy” image of a US homeowner sitting on a pile of what used to be his/her home is cherry picked or representative. But there was nothing like that round here.
This is Britain. They’re built for a lot of rain. Flooding is increasingly an issue, partly because land previously not used for building is now being used for building - but that’s a separate issue, as is climate change.
N/A. I mean, really N/A round here.
It’s an issue - see post 13.
Tile roofs need to be maintained. We’ve been in this house 20 years, and had our first maintenance this year, as a couple of tiles had slipped. Outside temperate climates - you need another contributor for that one.
j
I don’t disagree, but this is kinda off topic. FWIW the UK Building Regulations lay down insulation standards for new houses, modifications, extensions etc. I can’t find a handy ref right now, but the way current builds are insulated is very different from even the recent past. In an environment of corner-cutting and cost minimisation, it’s a rare encouraging point.
j
I know. But in Spain you can’t even find those unless you import them, which would make the price absurd even if you don’t think of those as being an inferior product. Anybody who assumes that the same price differentials which apply in their local market will apply in every other market is setting himself up for a nasty surprise or three, if they do move.
The proper phrasing is “huge tracts of land,” of course. 
But I agree with your point. There’s no reason why one shouldn’t be able to modify and add onto the house as needs change. Our lot is just over 1/3 acre - 150’ wide x 100’deep - and our house has a 40’ x 24’ footprint. We’ve got plenty of room to expand, which we’ll do one of these years.
Responding to other comments here, I’m not sure why the love for masonry walls. ISTM that 2x4 framing covered with drywall gives room for insulation in the walls, and allows flexibility with relocating wiring, pipes, and so forth, as is wanted or needed.
FWIW, my house is 27 years old, and is holding up just fine, thankyewverymuch.
In general, I agree. There is nothing appealing to me about modern homes or the way they’re packed together in subdivisions, except that they are, in general, more suited to modern living. They’re more likely to have family rooms instead of large formal dining rooms, adequate storage space instead of architectural details, electrical wiring that is up to code and so forth. Most people prefer modern conveniences and the market reflects that.
I have one of these new-fanged American houses. I didn’t pick it myself, it’s the family home and I inherited my interest in it. It took some getting used to but it’s grown on me.
As other have said, the “garage in front” probably stems from the narrow lots. We have a small front yard and virtually no side yard. Also, the “garage in front” is incredibly energy efficient. The garage itself provides a lot of insulation.
The strangest thing about the house was that it has what I would consider a “backwards” layout. The front door opens onto a large wide hall. Off that hall you will find the 2 secondary bedrooms and bathroom, the laundry room and utility areas. The main living area (one large “open concept” space with kitchen) and master suite are at the end of that long hall in the back of the house. And although the front and side yards are really small, the backyard is spacious and we have a large screened porch at that end of the house. The other thing I like is that the Master Suite and secondary bedroom are in opposite corners of the house, which is good for privacy and noise. And it has nice features ( good cabinets, stone countertops, high ceilings, state of the art appliances) not typically found in homes in that price range.
The house is 4 years old. I was around when it was purchased but I didn’t have a lot of input. Even though the houses on the street are tightly spaced, at least the development is small, 1 street with maybe 16 homes. The developer did a good job, every house is different and it doesn’t look “cookie cutter” And the geography is such that nothing else is ever going to be built near it.
The big advantages to the small lot were maintenance and price. The house was 50% less than identical homes on large lots.
That just sounds like a massive inconvenience. Especially here where it rarely stops raining for more than a week or so, replacing a roof could drag on for months, with a temporary, leaky cover. Who wants to live in a building site?
A house, to me, is a pretty well permanent shelter; regularly having to replace bits of it defeats half the purpose of having one. It’d be like having a car where the engine was only designed to last a year or so, with people telling you that’s a good thing 'cos it’s cheaper and you could put a faster one in when it broke.
eh? Most experienced firms which do roofing can do a typical asphalt shingled roof in a day.
I’d say it’s more like having a car which needs its brake pads replaced every so often. Which they do.
Of course, just as I read this post, we start having a pretty noticeable earthquake. Our apartment building sways back and forth when we have these things.
Round here it can take 'em two days to put the scaffolding up, then they disappear for a week on ‘another job’, then it starts raining and they can’t work while it’s wet…