zlacker

>>toomuc+(OP)
The ratio of housing cost vs real income almost tripled over the last 20 years in Sweden. Add a looming climate crisis and a self-fulfillment-oriented culture and you get very few new babies.

>>brtkdo+T5
One of the big issues in housing is ultra urbanization though, where everybody wants to move into a tiny handful of locations. This just drives housing costs upwards basically without end. This graph of Stockholm's population [1] is just completely bonkers. But beyond this it also creates environments that aren't especially good for raising a family in, at least in general.

[1] - https://worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities/stockholm-pop...

>>somena+6e
You can just build. Perhaps the "never lived lavishly, no reason to begin" attitude would have hepled.

[1] https://yandex.ru/images/search?text=мурино

[2] https://yandex.ru/images/search?text=кудрово

[3] https://yandex.ru/images/search?text=парнас

[4] https://yandex.ru/images/search?text=филатов%20луг

>>thrift+KT
I completely agree with the attitude, but not necessarily the implementation. Would you want to live in any of those places? Let alone raise a family in one? In the second link, I think the difference between the presumably idealized/proposed [1] version of one of these areas, and what it inevitably turns into [2] demonstrates the issue.

So it would probably be reasonably affordable, but only because you'd make it less desirable to live there. Then enter the general problem of people's complete disregard for other's property in many places in the Western world and those places would become highly unpleasant, if not unsafe, quite quickly - especially if they were very affordable. There's a reason "the projects", everywhere, end up the way they do.

[1] - https://avatars.mds.yandex.net/i?id=e67240f3f995f865b864bee1...

[2] - https://avatars.mds.yandex.net/i?id=05678345cd91e9579bd7e719...