>are you saying that ppl are bidding for mortgages that high that bank needs both of their incomes? wow.

I don't know about the US but that has been the case in the UK for a long time now, especially for family sized houses.

We went from married women not being able to work to not being able to not work. I'm not sure it was an improvement.

It might not be a strict precondition, but it's still a pretty strong precondition. Maybe "precondition" isn't the best word here, but I think my original point still stands. Suppose someone claims that people are deciding not to have kids for whatever reason (eg. global warming, unaffordable healthcare, expensive houses)[1], and I retort by saying that people aren't bothering finding a partner[2], so they're not meeting their "precondition". Sure, you can theoretically raise a kid without a partner, but if you're not even bothering to find a partner, then maybe it's fair to say that's the main reason, rather than blaming global warming or whatever?

[1] analogous to your comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29473019

[2] analogous to my reply https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29473223

When was the last time you asked for a mortgage? This is fairly standard nowadays, and has little to do with the size of your income. Banks prefer a mortgage in multiple names because it reduces their risk. If you're over 40, in my country it is all but impossible to get a mortgage on your own, regardless of income.

I'm making a far more banal claim: buyers with two incomes have more money than buyers with one income (all things being equal and across large numbers of people) and the latter will always be at a relative disadvantage.