The housing market isn't for single people

Singles vs shared households

• Many argue it has always been financially harder for singles: couples and multigenerational households pool income, share fixed costs, and use space more efficiently.
• Others stress what changed is that dual‑income couples are now the norm, so a single earner is effectively competing against “two salaries” for the same housing.

Changing housing expectations and unit mix

• Several comments note homes have gotten larger and feature‑rich (laundry rooms, home offices, big kitchens), raising the “minimum acceptable” size and cost.
• Others counter that older generations managed with more people in far less space; today’s desire for private space and amenities is partly cultural, not necessity.
• Many say cities under‑build small, simple units; zoning and local opposition often block studios/SROs, despite strong demand from singles.

Roommates, co‑living, and risk

• Some see shared housing and co‑ops (private bedrooms, shared kitchen/living) as the obvious answer for singles, cheaper and more social.
• Others strongly dislike roommates due to lifestyle conflicts or U.S. lease structures that make all tenants fully liable if one roommate trashes the unit or disappears.

Two incomes, taxes, and financial structure

• Discussion of the “two‑income trap”: once both partners work, prices adjust upward, erasing much of the gain and making two incomes almost mandatory.
• Tax systems in different countries can advantage couples over singles with equal combined income, widening disposable‑income gaps.

Supply, zoning, and regulation debates

• One camp says core problem is restrictive land‑use rules: it’s effectively illegal to build enough housing in job‑rich areas; where permitting was liberalized (e.g., cited case of Austin), rents fell relative to incomes.
• Another camp says this is only part of it: they emphasize landlord profit‑seeking, financialization of housing, weak wage growth, and argue for rent caps, vacancy penalties, or large‑scale public housing.
• Counter‑arguments warn strict rent caps can halt new construction if projects can’t cover financing costs.

Investment, tourism, and short‑term rentals

• Housing as an investment asset is blamed for driving prices up in cities from North America to Tokyo.
• In tourist hotspots, landlords can earn several times long‑term rent via short‑term platforms; some now rent to locals only off‑season, shrinking year‑round supply.

Geography and “desirable places”

• Some note there are cheaper new houses in less popular areas, but many people refuse long commutes or poor amenities.
• Others say the U.S. has “lost its shitholes”: even marginal units in good cities are now priced like luxury, removing the old option of trading quality for affordability.

Social change: singledom, marriage, and families

• Commenters connect high housing costs with higher singledom and later marriage but differ on causality:
  • Some think many simply don’t want partners;
  • Others say people want relationships but face dating, economic, or social barriers.
• Economic incentives of marriage are debated. Some see it as increasingly “obsolete” or risky (alimony, child support, divorce); others point out it has always had a contractual/financial side and still offers benefits (caregiving, legal rights).

Travel and other “singles penalties”

• Beyond housing, singles face similar “per‑person” penalties in travel: hotel prices are mostly per room, not per head, and car costs are shared more easily by couples or groups.
• Backpacking and hostels remain viewed as relatively single‑friendly, but mainstream leisure travel is seen as optimized for couples and families.