Suggest retitling the article as.. The article is based only on the 55% of households in the top 50 US cities by size. The article wrongly states that rents gr

Suggest retitling the article as.. The article is based only on the 55% of households in the top 50 US cities by size. The article wrongly states that rents grew by 175% in excess of household incomes in these cities over this period. But on page 15 of the linked report in the caption to a figure it says that "Median rents increased 93% between 2001 and 2020 while median incomes increased by 58%." Ie so rents indeed compounded by 1% faster than wages over this period in this subset of US housing. But this is nothing like the implied excess compounding of rents over income of 5% per annum or 175% total. Did anyone else stop to think about the intuitively tight linkage between incomes and rents and how these could possibly diverge at such a rate implied by the headline?