Rental prices in Europe are increasingly high. According to a Eurostat study, the average price for an unfurnished one-bedroom flat in the cities of London, Geneva and Dublin exceeds €2000. Eastern European cities generally have the lowest rental costs, such as in Skopje (€250), Pristina (€310) or Ankara (€410).
Do you think that Europe has already reached a housing crisis? And if so, how do you think we can get out of this situation?
Source: Eurostat
Whose idea was it to make it a circle so it’s massively hard to read?
Yeah I agree to me this design is so bad it feels like ragebait.
Also impossible to compare the different values.
It would fit in perfectly with the other terrible graphs at dataisbeautiful
I see one reason for the circular diagram: it’s a lot more compact than a single-column bar chart would be. It’s also, subjectively, more pretty to look at.
Also it’s not like a circle would add information here in any way, more like the opposite - London follows again after Skopje? If this diagram is really from Eurostat and not only the data, that’s kind of embarassing…
whose*
I recently saw a rent affordability chart, which was much more interesting (and more sanely formatted). Some of the locations listed as cheapest are actually the most expensive when adjusted for median income.
I was just gonna say, just listing the cost says nothing about how expensive it is.
Athens is just 200€ lower than Vienna. Athens has about 35-40% of the average salary that Vienna has. About 85% of the wage vs less than 40%. And Vienna usually includes utility bills…
Lisbon being the same as Paris is crazy.
While the median salary is half than in Paris.
Too many wealthy immigrants. Portugal got very popular.
This is forcing a ever growing number of Portuguese people to leave their own country to make room for healthy foreigners. It has all the signs of classic colonisation. It’s awful. Try to point that on Lemmy and you’ll be labeled a racist/xenophobe. We’re supposed to just be pushed out and like it.
The problem isn’t people immigrating, the problem is leaving housing to the “free” market. Having a roof over one’s head is as basic a need as food and water. States should pass laws to ensure everyone has a place to live. Let the rich speculate with mansions all they like, but protect the needs of normal people through rigorous laws.
The thing is, if housing is regulated there won’t be “cheap” housing for digital nomads and they won’t come. For richer immigrants the result is pretty much what is happening here: only houses being built are luxury ones but none for the working class.
I don’t think so. People aren’t going to Portugal because housing is “cheap”, they can get that anywhere. They go there because Portugal is beautiful, safe, and has a rich culture.
I think that’s a severe problem for our society and especially the younger generation.
This situation is somewhat a doomed circle, and for now I don’t see it becoming better.I have already a well paying job, but I don’t see myself paying nearly the half of my net income for a two rooms flat. I always ask myself how do people handle this, who are earning less money, or even have children.
Children*
ankara might look like one of the cheapest on this list but if you consider the median income in ankara it becomes bery expensive
Yeah, it should be listed as percentage of median income or something like that.
Also why is a city in Asia listed in a comparison with “Europe” in the title
They seem to be going for capital cities. While the Hague contains the parliament and ministeries, Amsterdam is the capital.
I’m not sure how they made the selection, but considering the inclusion of cities like Geneva, Munich, Reading, Karlsruhe, and Lyon, I doubt they had capital cities only in mind.
Still a bit weird to leave out Amsterdam.
Also they include Ankara but leave out Istanbul?
Both ought to be left out. Ankara ist completely in Asia and Constantinople is more than half in Asia.
Seeing that Constantinople doesn’t even exist, it should definitely be left out!
Having London and Reading, which isn’t far from London, as the examples isn’t really representative of the nation.
It is representative of the relevant parts though
runs and hides
Especially since it would be at the top of the list at 2275 for a 1br apartment
Ah yes, youre right! Strange list if you ask me
It’s not just capitals. There are some odd choices in general, Munich is listed, which is the third largest city in Germany, but the second largest which is Hamburg is missing, but for some reason Karlsruhe (22nd largest city) is listed. Similar for France, Lyon (3rd largest) is listed, but not Marseille (2nd largest).
Munich was picked because it’s the most expensive city in Germany. No idea why they picked Karlsruhe, though.
Geneva is not the capital of Switzerland, Bern is
Indeed, now I’m lost with this list
Keep in mind that these numbers are for above-average flats, ie in good locations, of good size (40-60m² or 60-80m², depending on the city) and for well-earning positions. Probably not the top 1%, but still generally well paid jobs. As such the presentation is inaccurate. Those are not “average prices in the city”, but “average prices for good flats in good districts, comparable with Brussels”.
source: 2023 CURRENT MARKET RENTS (pdf)
OBTAINED THROUGH SURVEYS WITH ESTATE AGENCIES, COVERING A SPECIFIC HOUSING SEGMENT
The rent data presented in this booklet are part of a wider work programme, whose objective is to compare the relative cost of living of international civil servants in any place of employment with that of Brussels, the reference city.
Since the aim of the entire exercise is to compare “like with like”, the neighbourhoods surveyed may not necessarily be in those areas where expatriates actually live but are comparable with those actually occupied by officials in Brussels.
These neighbourhoods are described as residential areas of good quality, favoured by expatriates and professional people such as international civil servants, university staff, doctors, managers, and similar professionals, who pay their rent by themselves (i.e. not paid by their employers).
2500 is a shit flat in Geneva. Complete shit. A nice one would be 3600, and really nice one 8000.
Sauce: am Swiss
Well I guess in some countries people have way too much money…
Switzerland is wealthy but not that wealthy. A typical monthly net salary for a normal person might be in the 5000-7000 area. So you can see that a rent of 3600 is not sustainable and one of 8000 is impossible.
Normal people just don’t live in the city centre unless they inherited ownership, share flats, or something like that.
I think a rent of 3600 with 5000-7000 income could be sustainable. Kinda depending on the price of living, but I think the best case of 3400 each month would be enough in most of Europe. Still paying over half your salary probably wouldn’t make sense for most people unless you live there 24/7 and the place is in a really good location (eg short transits to work, family and other places people frequently visit) and you really like it and/or it’s cheaper than comparable flats.
Spending 72% (3600 at 5000) is literally impossible if tax is 20% and mandatory health insurance is 7%. (Net income in Switzerland is before taxes and other mandatory expenses.)
In any case I’d seriously advise against spending more than 30% on living spaces.
Alright it wasn’t clear whether or not this was after tax. Makes sense!
I’m glad I could shed some light on it. I get mildly annoyed every time a non-Swiss European - only having heard of typical Swiss incomes and nothing else - acts as if we were super rich.
I mean we’re doing ok, but our prices more than match the incomes.
And these are mostly capitals – prices there are usually far above prices in our cities and towns in the same countries. And differences between capital cities and other places may differ in different countries. So it is not very representative for Europe as whole.
Yes, housing is a crisis, and it started years ago.
I used to live in Dublin for ages, but it’s just not worth it anymore.
Huh, seems kinda strange to include Ankara and not Istanbul.
First off, Ankara is deep into the Asian side of Turkey.
Also, Istanbul is a city I’d MUCH rather live in, that’s where the action is!…not Constantinople?
trust me you wouldn’t want to live in istanbul
Why would either be included? It’s about Europe, not Asia
I think Istanbul is actually in the European continent. Or at least most of it. Cross the bridge and you’re on the Asian continent. Remember EU is not the same as Europe.
One part of it, not even most of it. If a little part of something defines that something then France is an island in the pacific.
Fair enough, but you can still say France has an island in the pacific.
I’m only saying it wouldn’t be too strange to include Istanbul.
But no strong opinion it to be honest.
Interistinh choice to add Karlsruhe. How did that happen?
Karl III. Wilhelm founded the city on June 17, 1715, after a dispute with the citizens of his previous capital, Durlach.
I meant how it ended up in the list.
But interesting info anyway! Always nice to learn such things! Thanks!
Europe’s rental crisis
FTFY
This is weird, the hague more expensive then amsterdam?? Doubtfull
I think they just cherrypicked a few cities per country, it is definitely incomplete.
How did came up with this reasoning from what you are seeing on this image?
I don’t see Amsterdam on the chart, but that doesn’t mean it is more expensive, it simply isn’t part of the graph.
I understand you want it to be there but, I guess it would be simply to much to display every European city.
But why not display the capital, especially when it has higher prices than The Hague?
If housing is an investment vehicle for growing your money, then the people who can participate in that system will work to produce outcomes that fundamentally go against affordable housing. A society that believes in affordable housing as a right or a goal can’t allow housing to be used as a place to park wealth so that it grows akin to a stock.
Whatever prices are, they are higher when a landlord is involved. We must get progressively outlaw multiple pieces of land. Owning more than two homes/flats should cost the owner something every year, not generate wealth - and that second one should be nearly neutral.
Those figures seem inflated. I guess they only considered city centres.
Yes they only considered certain places. See “NEIGHBOURHOODS COVERED IN EACH CITY SURVEYED” in the surveys pdf for a list of cities and the respective neighbourhoods.
