We shouldn't be lowering our "unreasonable" standards. If you're in the top 1% in income - you should have an complementary lifestyle. Not just be grateful that you're not in complete financial misery like everyone else your age.
Assuming you're single and in the top 3% of HH income (top 1% personal) - you have 2.1 less persons to provide for. You should probably be better off than two people with a kid. You need less bedrooms and floor space, that's for sure.
If you can't find a decent 1 bedroom in town - I feel sorry for the family shopping for a 3 bedroom on a slightly higher income that has most of that extra income going directly to the tax man.
It’s not necessarily the case that top 10% individual income means you’re top 10% household income (and the top 10% household income can obviously bid more for housing than the second, third, or farther decile of household income).
The following search for 3 bedroom houses [1] provides either flats, maisonettes and a few houses in areas with poor transport links, and many of these are still over budget.
[1]: https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?sear...
I agree with your general point that housing is too expensive! I'm just curious.
An usual downside is that technically you never own it.
Even in London £100k is above a reasonable income for one person. It's not enough to buy a house and provide for a family on one income and still have no worries, but expecting that is unreasonable. It's really easy to get stuck in a bubble where we forget that six figures is crazy out of the ordinary for an average person.
But as to your main point. Yeah finance and contracting really is the right way to go to get a high income. Though I think this might be changing with the contracting as there were some recent changes that make contracting less efficient tax wise, and could push high performers to either ask for more, or just move to being an employee.