• Tb0n3
    link
    fedilink
    English
    49 months ago

    If it’s getting paid for by renters or by owners, it’s not unaffordable.

      • Tb0n3
        link
        fedilink
        English
        19 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
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          29 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.

          • Tb0n3
            link
            fedilink
            English
            19 months ago

            And? It’s near enough the same to be no different.

            • @MooseBoys@lemmy.world
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              English
              19 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”.

              • Tb0n3
                link
                fedilink
                English
                19 months ago

                You don’t take out a 30-year loan for pants.

                • @MooseBoys@lemmy.world
                  cake
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  19 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
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    19 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%.