The answer was mentioned briefly in the beginning of the article, and then the implications discussed through the rest - it was not entirely obvious. Population rises and falls on long time scales. It acts like a commodity in that the supply and demand for people affects prices. When population is high wages are low and living space is expensive. The converse is also true. After WWII the population was very low (because the workforce slice of the demographic was more heavily affected than the other slices), now the population is relatively high (and the workforce slice of the demographic has expanded).
More people with money chase a fixed(-ish) number of homes through rent and purchase. Debt is cheap. The result is high prices. Most people in a job can be replaced with a large available pool of others, the result is low wages though lack of negotiating power.
The unanswered question in the article is whether Reagan/Thatcher caused these changes through their policies or simply rode into power on their effects. History is nothing but a long-term record of the effect of demographic change on political will.
More people with money chase a fixed(-ish) number of homes through rent and purchase. Debt is cheap. The result is high prices. Most people in a job can be replaced with a large available pool of others, the result is low wages though lack of negotiating power.
The unanswered question in the article is whether Reagan/Thatcher caused these changes through their policies or simply rode into power on their effects. History is nothing but a long-term record of the effect of demographic change on political will.