US is becoming more like that over time too, if you look at a lot of the new builds in subdivisions it's hard to imagine them lasting that long.
I wonder if at some point the cultural attitude to "old houses" will become more like Japan's.
[edit]: I find the downvotes curious - I know plenty of people living in ~120 year old houses, and plenty living in 5-15 year old new builds in subdivisions. None of us can really see the new ones being in service in another 110 years. So what I am curious about is - will this (apparent) fact change attitudes towards houses over time? It may just be selection bias. Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of things about newer builds that are improvements; longevity doesn't seem to be one of them. Of course the older houses have their own set of problems.
I consider downvotes on HN to be a badge of honor. It means you are thinking of things that the small-thinkers don't like, and probably will never take the time to seriously consider. Don't let it stop you - there are still people here who want to hear different and innovative perspectives - and we won't downvote you for sharing a perspective that we may not agree with.
The US might have been heading that way before the 1980s.. I think it would take a few decades of invariant quality for pre-1950 to not be a frequent requirement.
(I would have supposed undamaged pre-war inventory established different tastes in the US, but that wouldn't explain Europe having the same demographic of new building skeptics as the US.)
That might also be because “120 year old” is now basically the XX century - when people stopped building stuff that lasts, preferring stuff that makes a profit.
It just depends on what kind of home you buy / build. Most people don't understand that "custom home" often implies that the builder puts in higher quality materials.
I wonder if at some point the cultural attitude to "old houses" will become more like Japan's.
[edit]: I find the downvotes curious - I know plenty of people living in ~120 year old houses, and plenty living in 5-15 year old new builds in subdivisions. None of us can really see the new ones being in service in another 110 years. So what I am curious about is - will this (apparent) fact change attitudes towards houses over time? It may just be selection bias. Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of things about newer builds that are improvements; longevity doesn't seem to be one of them. Of course the older houses have their own set of problems.