>First of all, we should separate the value of the house from the value of the land, which is determined by its location. I'd say this is fairly true in the US

>First of all, we should separate the value of the house from the value of the land, which is determined by its location. I'd say this is fairly true in the US. When you compare houses and the amount of similar quality property of say San Francisco or Austin to rural parts of say... Texas or Wyoming, you're going to find that at the same price point (a reflection of market value estimation), you get a lot more in Wyoming or rural Texas in terms of land and the quality of house than in the metropolitan areas described. When you compare metropolitan areas, housing and property is often significantly more expensive in areas where there is more opportunity for the working class or even businesses.