Its common in British cities for most owners/renters to have terraced or detached housing while council houses (public housing) are in tower blocks or smaller apartment buildings.
I'm pretty sure anyone around there who owns his apartment does not fit the definition of poor - in fact most of the so-called rich would take more than a decade of saving up just so that they could own the same property.
The great tragedy of Europe is that asset wealth has far outpaced the earnings potential of the population.
Thanks to right to buy starting in the 80s plenty of economically inefficient people with shit jobs bought their houses in London for a tiny amount. Those are now worth a fortune.
They then rented them out and made even more money p
Strivers who actually pay market rates for rent see all their money drain away, often to “poor working class” people who now complain they can’t heat their £1m houses because we aren’t given them even more free money. Meanwhile those strivers who have a pension are about to have that ransacked to give a triple locked pay rise to those poor millionaires.
A lot of older council apartments in the UK seem to be a bit grim. There's some skepticism against apartment blocks and a lot of newer ones seem to have odd pricing.
I live in a nice apartment in Austria but I'd be a lot more critical looking for one to live in the UK.
Yeah, that and a lot seem kinda small while being a bit lower than the prices of some houses(but still too much imo). Been a long time since I dreamed of home ownership admittedly.
I thought grenfell pushed the leaseholder vs freehold pricing out in the open. I've seen stuff about leaseholders effectively in negative equity because of the cost of cladding and a previous government dropped a bill or amendment changing who had to pay for such things or the existence of leasehold.