Once Upon a Time, 3 Was Enough

Not long ago, if you earned €3,000 gross per month, you could rent a decent home for €1,000. That was the rule of thumb: your rent shouldn’t exceed a third of your salary. Banks echoed it. Agencies quoted it. Landlords expected it.

Then, like a plot twist in a Kafka novel, something shifted: the new magic number is 4. That same €1,000 rent now demands proof of €4,000 gross income. The house didn’t move. The person didn’t change. But the threshold did. Quietly. Systemically. And without a conversation.

We’re not just pricing out people.

We’re reshaping the very definition of what it means to be “eligible to live.”

“Housing Costs Are Down!” Are They?

CBS statistics from 2018 to 2023 paint what looks like a hopeful picture:

The median housing ratio, how much of your income you spend on housing, has dropped. Tenants in social housing went from spending 31% of their income on rent in 2018 to 25.4% in 2023. Private renters dropped slightly too.

But don’t let ratios seduce you.

They’re only part of the equation, like checking the weight of a suitcase and forgetting it’s filled with bricks.

What the Numbers Don’t Tell You

Yes, housing costs grew slower than incomes. But life costs didn’t. Mobility? Up. Insurance? Up. Groceries? Laughable. A train subscription? For many, it now costs more than their childhood family vacation.

The cost of existing with dignity has gone up. And that doesn’t show in housing ratios.

A teacher commuting from Almere to Amsterdam now pays more to get to work than to live near it. A junior software developer with a €2,800 salary needs to beg for a raise, not because of ambition, but because their landlord moved the goalposts.

And employers? They're stuck in the middle, being asked to stretch payroll, not to reward value, but to sponsor survival.

The False Peace of Percentages

Here’s the trap: when you read “housing ratio down,” it feels like we’ve made progress.

But a system that demands €4,000 gross to justify a €1,000 rent is no longer a market, it’s a maze. One where entry is determined by artificial credentials and exclusion by design.

Yes, income rose by 33% for private renters since 2018. But median rent still jumped by 23%. That’s before you factor in the stress, the reshuffling, the psychological tax of applying for 10 apartments and being rejected for not being “strong enough financially.”

Who decides what’s strong enough, anyway?

Structural Fatigue: A Risk No One Calculates

Let’s talk risk, because that’s my territory.

This shift is not just economic, it’s systemic fatigue. It forces entrepreneurs into an awkward dance:

• Raise salaries to help staff access housing,
• Or face quiet resignations, burned-out teams, and growing internal resentment.

The economy may be expanding on paper, but the access to life is contracting. And when access contracts, trust evaporates.

We think we’re running businesses.

But more and more, we’re managing exceptions to an unspoken crisis.

Where Do We Go From Here?

This isn’t about left or right. It’s about clarity.

When the rules change without explanation, it’s not a market, it’s a trap.

We need to stop asking whether someone can technically afford a house.

We must ask whether they can realistically live.

As long as eligibility is measured in formulaic multipliers, while ignoring commuting stress, digital work costs, and the social penalty of living far, we’re building a system that looks fair on spreadsheets and feels like erosion in real life.

At Xtroverso, We Read Between the Lines

We don’t just serve entrepreneurs.

We translate the landscape they’re expected to survive in.

We unpack ratios, expose design flaws, and reconnect governance to its original mission: enabling dignity, not just documenting compliance.

If you’re a business owner wondering why your staff seem anxious, disoriented, or desperate for raises, it might not be about the job.

It might be about eligibility to exist in the structure they’ve been pushed into.