Quote:
Originally Posted by 1stLand
People forget the 60's, 70's, 80's and even part of the 90's were a different time.
There werent as many dual income households. The norm was usually a stay at home mom situation, or a mother that had a part time job to supplement income.
Today, it is the other way around, there are more women enrolled in post secondary education and the rise in the number of dual income households is astonishing.
Dual income households are going to increase the price of a home a household can afford to purchase, and the amount of debt it can service.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava
I think that this is a really interesting point and probably brings that 4-11 times income figure down to half that in many cases, making the situation not as dire as laid out? Interesting take for sure though.
|
I could be wrong, but isn't this 4-11 times income . . . household income? Sure, you have dual income and so it goes up - but the ratio is still based on the household living in it. Having dual or single income doesn't really factor into it I think - other than the income being higher everything else being equal.
For example, the demographia report for Q3 2009 distinctly refers to the "household":
http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf
Vancouver's "severely unaffordable" is based on the median multiple of 9.3 times househould income (at Q3 2009 - probably a little worse now, for now?)