There is real truth to the instinct: affordability caps prices, and the metric that actually matters is income-to-payment rather than income-to-price. Prices cannot rise forever. At some point enough buyers get priced out that demand slows. Josh's sharpening of the point: a buyer qualifies on the monthly payment, which folds in the interest rate, so payment affordability is what caps how fast prices can accelerate. The same price is affordable at a low rate and out of reach at a high one, which a raw price-to-income ratio misses entirely. The useful distinction is willing demand versus able demand. There is almost always plenty of willing demand, people who want to buy. The ceiling is set by able demand, the pool who actually qualify at prevailing rates. That pool shrinks as rates rise, which is why purchase-application volume falls when affordability tightens. On wages, we would push back gently on the premise that they are stagnant. Wage growth has generally run positive, with job switchers gaining more than those who stay, even when it does not fully keep pace with inflation. One caveat on speed: as long as there is no meaningful new supply, an affordability ceiling tends to slow price growth gradually rather than crack prices overnight, unless rates spike sharply. And nobody can promise where prices or rates go from here.