If I'm following, this scenario is basically "as the higher income/wealth people invest more of their money into more property, prices and rent can both continu

If I'm following, this scenario is basically "as the higher income/wealth people invest more of their money into more property, prices and rent can both continue to increase even if demand is fixed until the lower-income people are spending 100% of their disposable income on rent"? Which is not entirely dissimilar to the general discussion around gentrification - those who can afford to pay more can displace those who can't - but a sort of special case that doesn't require migration. Seems like there would be some sort of game theory aspect - this only works if something close to every landlord is pushing prices up? I think what we're really seeing is more the high-migration "gentrification" case yet applied to populations that normally aren't who you think of as being the ones on the receiving end of gentrification: the 100M-dollar-buyers are pushing out the 10M-dollar-buyers are pushing out the 1M-dollar-buyers from California and then they go to Texas and push out the 500K-dollar-buyers... and it continues to flow out to touch everyone else too.