• Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        That doesn’t make any sense. The housing sales market is enormous. Much more than the amount of “upper crust” buyers. The rich aren’t buying them all, and the investment/landlord buyers can only afford them if the actual renters pay the bills which would not be the “upper crust” super wealthy. Therefore the statement that 99% can’t afford them must be false.

        • MooseBoys@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          the statement that 99% can’t afford them

          That’s not what’s being said. The claim is that the median home price in 99% of regions is unaffordable with median income.

            • MooseBoys@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              It’s completely different.

              Imagine you have 10 people. 1 has $100, 2 have $50, and 7 have $20. Now imagine you have 10 stores selling pants. 1 store has a few pants for $50, and a bunch for $10. 1 store has a few pants for $80 and a bunch for $25. 8 have pants for $30, $25, and $10.

              In this scenario, the median wealth is $20, and in all but one store the median price is $25. So in 90% of stores, the median pants cost more than the median amount a person can spend. BUT, all but one still have plenty of pants that cost less than the median. Given this, you wouldn’t say “90% of people can’t afford pants”.

                • MooseBoys@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  You’re right. This is just an example to illustrate the statistics involved. At this point it doesn’t seem like you’re continuing this debate in good faith.

                  • Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    All I’m saying is it makes no sense. People keep buying houses which they couldn’t do if they were unaffordable. And it’s not just 1% that are using those houses. If those houses are bought by the 1% and rented to the 99% in order to pay the house off that means it is not unaffordable to the 99%.