Trump's addition to the White House is estimated to take $500m and 3 years to build. That's just an addition and that's with 2025 modern technology available. Of course since it's the White House, I'm sure there's a lot of logistical issues and other considerations but it's just an addition and Trump has billionaires backing the project.
Still, there are thousands of buildings all over the world as good of quality and MANY significantly better quality and larger than the White House. Some of these buildings supposedly had 1-3 year build times. Meanwhile, of buildings we know today that are of similar (or better quality) being constructed, we have one that started in the late 1800s and is still being constructed today (Sagrada Família)...
I used to dismiss a lot of the Tartaria stuff because most of it focused on the "free energy" stuff which I felt was a little far-fetched and too "utopian fantasy"-like but something about this old architecture doesn't seem to add up to me. It reminds me a lot like the moon landing. "We just lost the technology" aka we just confirmed how romans did concrete a decade ago.
Did guys in the 1800s really just pop out buildings of similar or better quality than the White house like it was no big deal? Then today, to get something build on a similar scale we need billionaires backing the project. What gives? I don't know if I buy the "it's too expensive" (now but it wasn't back then?) or "no one likes the style" (yet everyone is amazed by it). You'd think a place like Dubai with all its money and expensive "new-style" buildings would have thrown up at least one grand "old-style" building but they didn't even put up one. No pillars just glass boxes.
Something isn't adding up for me here. What are your guys' thoughts?
Now, as for when and why. American building quality started going downhill after ww2. Construction companies realized that it was easier and cheaper to build houses out of cheap lumber (not good lumber, but rather just wood composites) than it was to build them out of bricks, stones, and hardwood. It's even cheaper to just build a brand new house out of bullshit, should the previous house be destroyed for whatever reason, than it is to just build one out of stone and bricks. The baby boom, coupled with large amounts of unused land, hastened the building of suburbs constructed with shit-quality houses and mcmansions. By todays standards (in america) the baby-boom era houses are actually *high* quality constructions, but at the time they were the original manufactured houses and the worst quality buildings yet seen in the country. It got worse from there.
Now this is coupled with the following: the further streamlining of the process, the accessibility of even cheaper and even worse materials, the utterly outrageous price of a house vs what it costs to make it, and the fact that investors and speculators who have enough money will buy them anyways for that outrageous price. Regardless of how fast the house will end up falling apart, a massive profit will be gained from these enshittified houses anyways.
There is exactly 0 impetus for construction companies and realtors to shift to making higher quality, more expensive to produce houses, when they can rack up the price of a cheap piece of a shit to an absolutely ridiculous number and then sell off the house to Blackrock anyways. Having a house that falls apart also puts money into the hands of insurance companies, so there's that as well.
Furthermore, I consider that Israel must be destroyed