Of course there will be silly, it’ll just be wholly owned by the richest individuals and companies. You won’t be able to afford to die alone in the woods, let alone hike there.
According to recent data from NYC (pretty expensive example but still) the rent-to-income ratio (median yearly rent / median yearly income) is ~55% citywide but up to 80% in the Bronx (which has the lowest income of the 5 boroughs)
Edit for clarity: the median income number is also per “household” (I’m assuming per apartment in this case), so it accounts for multiple working people living together
That 55% figure has been true of New York for decades. The ubiquity of public transit has historically offset the costs: since people aren’t making car payments, the portion of their income that would go to that gets spread across other spending.
I would be more interested to see figures in more car-oriented areas for a better apples-to-apples.
Back in the 90s I’d get rejected by landlords if my take home wasn’t 4x the rent.
Get rejected now for less than 3x. The solution is juat ‘die on the street’.
No, that’s illegal. They’re pushing through legislation to scoop up the homeless and throw them in the camps, too.
living on the street is illegal, dear. The trick is to slip in on the technicality!
Gotta make a retirement plan, yo. I’m gonna die of exposure in a hike when i’m too old to work.
…assuming there’s still “the woods” by then.
Of course there will be silly, it’ll just be wholly owned by the richest individuals and companies. You won’t be able to afford to die alone in the woods, let alone hike there.
I would recommend dying in the bleakest way you can tjink of
In the 2010’s it was down to 3x. Are the kids being asked to pay more than half their income for rent?
According to recent data from NYC (pretty expensive example but still) the rent-to-income ratio (median yearly rent / median yearly income) is ~55% citywide but up to 80% in the Bronx (which has the lowest income of the 5 boroughs)
https://www.realtor.com/research/nyc-q2-2025-rent/
Edit for clarity: the median income number is also per “household” (I’m assuming per apartment in this case), so it accounts for multiple working people living together
That 55% figure has been true of New York for decades. The ubiquity of public transit has historically offset the costs: since people aren’t making car payments, the portion of their income that would go to that gets spread across other spending.
I would be more interested to see figures in more car-oriented areas for a better apples-to-apples.