You didn't understand, I was referring to those "depopulated" places as well. So even thought a population of an area decreased prices don't show that.

▲

matherial 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That's not really true? Housing in depopulating / depopulated areas can be easily 5-10x cheaper than in premium metro regions.

In picturesque locations, there's upward price pressure because well-off urbanites sometimes buy vacation properties, but that's hardly a new thing.

▲

gfrecvh 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I take it you've never heard of the 1 euro houses in rural Italy then...?

▲

slaw 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

These 1 Euro houses are scam. You have to pay for renovation more than it is worth.

	▲	gfrecvh 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's true you have to pay for renovation. It's not true that it's "more than it's worth", and the proof is that people are buying those knowing about the renovation costs.

▲

igor_nast 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I take it you don't understand that nobody wants to live there - so considering it as a housing option is a joke. But ok, sorry for making a shortcut in my prev comment.

	▲	gfrecvh 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The point that I and the other commenters are making to you is that house are cheaper in less attractive places. I presented an extreme, but it's true across the spectrum.