For many middle-class families in India, buying a house was once seen as the biggest financial milestone and also the safest investment one could make. But now, with property prices rising much faster than salaries, many young professionals are beginning to question whether owning a home still makes financial sense in big cities.
That debate picks up again as Chartered Accountant and finance creator Nitin Kaushik recently shared a detailed post on X, where he said that the old advice around home ownership may no longer work for the current generation. According to him, the math behind buying a house today looks very different from what it was two decades ago.
He further pointed out that in the early 2000s, “a decent apartment cost roughly 2x to 3x an average professional’s annual salary, making the debt manageable and the growth potential massive.”
According to him, that gap between salary and property prices has widened sharply now, especially in Tier 1 cities where real estate values have climbed steeply over the years.
“Today, that same property in a Tier 1 city costs 6x to 8x the average annual income, forcing buyers into 20 year EMIs that consume nearly 50% of their take home pay,” he said in the post.
The comment struck a chord online because many working professionals have increasingly spoken about the pressure of high EMIs, rising rents, and stagnant salary growth compared to property appreciation.
He wrote, “While the older generation sees a safe asset, the numbers show a massive opportunity cost where all liquid cash is trapped in brick and mortar instead of high growth equity.”
The CA suggested that younger investors today may need to think differently because locking most of their savings into one physical asset could affect long-term wealth creation. Financial planners in recent years have also highlighted that younger earners now have more investment avenues than previous generations, including mutual funds, equities and systematic investment plans.
His post did not argue against owning a house completely, but rather raised concerns over affordability and whether buying property at current prices remains financially practical for everyone.
Kaushik ended his post by saying, “Emotional nostalgia shouldn’t be the foundation of a modern investment strategy when the price to income ratio is at an all time high.”
That debate picks up again as Chartered Accountant and finance creator Nitin Kaushik recently shared a detailed post on X, where he said that the old advice around home ownership may no longer work for the current generation. According to him, the math behind buying a house today looks very different from what it was two decades ago.
Why the old home-buying formula is becoming difficult
In his post, Kaushik explained how property affordability has changed over the years. He wrote, “The buy a house advice from two decades ago is mathematically impossible for the current generation to replicate.”He further pointed out that in the early 2000s, “a decent apartment cost roughly 2x to 3x an average professional’s annual salary, making the debt manageable and the growth potential massive.”
According to him, that gap between salary and property prices has widened sharply now, especially in Tier 1 cities where real estate values have climbed steeply over the years.
“Today, that same property in a Tier 1 city costs 6x to 8x the average annual income, forcing buyers into 20 year EMIs that consume nearly 50% of their take home pay,” he said in the post.
The comment struck a chord online because many working professionals have increasingly spoken about the pressure of high EMIs, rising rents, and stagnant salary growth compared to property appreciation.
‘Safe asset’ argument may not apply anymore
Kaushik also questioned the traditional belief that real estate is always the safest and smartest investment option.He wrote, “While the older generation sees a safe asset, the numbers show a massive opportunity cost where all liquid cash is trapped in brick and mortar instead of high growth equity.”
The CA suggested that younger investors today may need to think differently because locking most of their savings into one physical asset could affect long-term wealth creation. Financial planners in recent years have also highlighted that younger earners now have more investment avenues than previous generations, including mutual funds, equities and systematic investment plans.
His post did not argue against owning a house completely, but rather raised concerns over affordability and whether buying property at current prices remains financially practical for everyone.
Rising prices and changing priorities
Across major Indian cities including Mumbai, Bengaluru, Delhi and Hyderabad, property rates have continued to rise over the last few years. At the same time, home loan tenures have stretched longer, with many buyers committing to EMIs for two decades or more.Kaushik ended his post by saying, “Emotional nostalgia shouldn’t be the foundation of a modern investment strategy when the price to income ratio is at an all time high.”
