I'm a condo owner. My building was built in 1985. It is certainly larger and better quality than condo buildings built before then. Both because of improvements in building codes and because it was built as a luxury building and has been maintained that way.
But that's not the point. We're comparing the housing stock in existence in 1980 to that built since 1980. In what ways do you think my statement is untrue?
I don't think there is any doubt that houses have gotten bigger, on average. And, lo!, lookie
here. Census data showing that the mean and median size of new single family homes has gone up over time, both up about 50% between 1973 and 2010.
Now quality is a tricky thing. On the one hand, there might be less brick and stone and other stuff that feels sturdy and heavy. And of course there's the annoyance the new stuff doesn't seem to last as long.
But those new homes have more features (things like more bathrooms per bedroom, and, of course, air conditioning which didn't used to be universal), improved safety and code standards, especially when it comes to plumbing and electric, bigger garages, gas or electric heat instead of fuel oil or coal (going way back), and all kinds of stuff.
Seriously, do you people never visit the neighborhoods built in the 40s, 50s and 60s?
ETA: I'll grant you that modern subdivisions can be soulless and lacking in other ways, but the houses are bigger and better quality than their equivalents from earlier periods.
