> That’s not true. (howmuch.net map) I assume their methodology is technically mathematically correct, but I can tell you from experience, the ~"$45k/yr" numbe

> That’s not true. (howmuch.net map) I assume their methodology is technically mathematically correct, but I can tell you from experience, the ~"$45k/yr" number for Michigan is not accurate -- most people can not close on a home in livable condition (in a city with jobs) for that salary. That would require a closing price of only ~$120k, which is probably still possible in a few specific suburb/exurbs, and is easily possible in dying small towns, but is not happening for most people in any employable urban area in Michigan. If howmuch is using "average home closing price" for that calculation, that metric is very skewed -- in Michigan, that's dragged down artificially low by investor-purchase shenanigans, extreme abuse of Brownfield Tax credits or Income/Property Tax Abatement zones, Land Bank purchases and resales, "Just $1 in Detroit" homes that need $150k+ of work to be habitable, or have $50k of backowed-taxes attached to them, and more. We have people who make 50% more than median salary, who are still getting outbid by private equity firms that make all-cash zero-contingency offers. We have people with above-median salary who are struggling with housing insecurity. This is not just a "poor person" problem, a solid chunk of the middle-class are suffering here, even in our supposedly "low-cost-of-living" markets. If you haven't purchased a house in the last 4 years, you might not realize just how fundamentally broken housing is, even in bumblefudge nowhere midwest cities. As far as I can tell, our conventional housing metrics simply are not accurately capturing the size or severity of this problem.