The term "unaffordable" I think is too general here. The parent post seemingly defines it based on mortgages and income multipliers. It assumes this model of p

The term "unaffordable" I think is too general here. The parent post seemingly defines it based on mortgages and income multipliers. It assumes this model of people having to trade labour for their housing, in money, incrementally per week/month/whatever, rather than having absolute (ish) dominion over a bit of land and then trading their labour for objects to put on that land (e.g. maintenance of the property). In that sense, if a home in a rural area costs $5000, it might "unaffordable" if there are no jobs nearby and we assume the person starts with zero capital. I would expect the model for most _actually_ rural living (aside from people buying holiday homes or whatever) would be that the property is owned outright. Affordability concerns then come from things like being able to run a car, health insurance, etc.