> Why do we permit such fire prone housing to be built just to save a few dollars.

I know you didn’t mean it, but this question isn’t a question. It’s a statement formed as a question. It’s a judgement. It’s not a curiosity legitimately asking why.

There are so many good reasons why houses in the US are built the way they are. Some of which are…

1. Concrete/Brick houses retain heat and are often harder to cool. They also don’t insulate well. US Houses have been built as a means of controlling moisture, humidity, and cooling efficiently.

2. Stick built houses cost less to repair. Brick/Concrete houses require much more demolition to repair, rebuild, or change. While replacing a load bearing wall in a stick house can be done easily, concrete and brick require the entire wall to be torn down.

3. Humidity, Moisture, and Wind matter. When moisture gets into concrete and brick then freezes it can cause huge structural cracks. Whereas in stick houses, it’s not as big a deal. I had a house with a raised driveway and a walkout basement. The basement and driveway had to be completely demolished due to moisture cracks. If the entire house was concrete it would have been a write off.

4. Soil composition matters. In some areas the soil is not capable of holding the weight of all the concrete and brick. Causing structure issues later and endangering folks.

Modern building codes today in most places are pretty solid. They require 2x6 framing, they require testing of the airways in the house to ensure proper air leaking/sealing. They require the structure of the house be built with specific bolts. They require the framing to be done in a way that resists wind sheer and twisting.

The US Building codes have been revised consistently over time. This started with the nuclear bomb testing in the 40s and onward. They built houses, and then bombed them to find out how to make them better. We’ve learned from Tornados, Hurricanes, and more. These all have resulted in major improvements to building houses.

Today in the US we have no shortage of housing methods. We have SIP Framing, ICF Concrete Framing, Recycled ICF, Modular designs, etc. Most still go with stick built because it’s the better option for the majority.

I lived in a 2x4 house in TN that was built poorly and improperly. I spent 200k in 4 years repairing that house. Now I live in a 2x6 built slab house. This house was built by a luxury builder properly.

The difference between the two is astonishing. The TN House couldn’t go less than 82 degrees when it was hot and humid. The luxury house is in Vegas, it can be 50 degrees inside when it’s 120 outside. You can cut costs on stick built, but you can also make some of the best houses with it.

Since we're on a wild tangent here, the US house construction is also held back by the sheer momentum of wood-framed buildings.

For example, aerated autoclaved concrete has better structural strength, doesn't need additional insulation, completely non-combustible, and is cheaper to build. Yet approximately nobody in the US uses it.

Also, to add to this what we’ve learned about fires and houses is that.. it’s less about how the house is built.

Whether a house catches fire or not is almost always due to the landscaping, maintenance, and roof of the house.

Traditional house siding and roof will resist flames and fires. However, if an overgrown bush catches fire it will cause enough heat to the side of the house to break down that protection and set it aflame. Same with leaves in gutters, etc.

No, it really was a question. Please don't inject your own biases and assumptions when interpreting my words.

It seems that you've invented a false dichotomy where the only options are wood frame or brick and concrete and then assumed me to be advocating for the latter. I was not. There are a variety of ways in which wood frame structures can be made less prone to external sources of fire. At least a few jurisdictions in california have adopted some of these methods into code as of late.

My question implied judgment to an extent, sure, but it was also genuine in that I truly do not understand why we as a society are not more proactive about these things. It isn't limited to fires either. In the face of all sorts of natural disasters we consistently optimize regulations for cost rather than safety. Consider the myriad examples of structures being built in flood prone areas.