Somewhat all over the place. Some of his examples are San Francisco-specific so aren’t fully generalizable. But hot damn if he isn’t right that it takes hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars to get to $0, or at least a point when you can start to meaningfully acquire wealth by setting aside earnings for investment.
Question: doesn’t economics tell us that some competitor would, seeing all those juicy college tuition or housing profits, come in and outperform/overdeliver or otherwise lower prices for consumers? Why then are all these consumer segments getting more expensive than everything else, for nigh several decades now?