You're missing the point. They are saying Houston having lower housing prices is not an indicator that Houston is "doing something right."

i'm not missing anything, i'm just pointing out that using Gary doesn't make any sense. if you're going to use other cities to counter the OP's point, then choose something like Dallas or Tampa, or Miami. Gary is literally decrepit.

That is the point you are missing. It is not just about price of homes but quality of life while the OP is just comparing $ vs $ when there is more to it than that.

i am saying that the example of Gary doesn't prove that Houston ISN'T a thriving city only based on housing costs. you need to use a city that is a bit more comparable to Houston to drive the point that low housing costs don't equate with a successfully run city.

it's a bit like someone arguing that Land Rovers are bad cars because they are built poorly, and then someone else coming in and saying well at least they don't cost the amount that a lamborghini costs, they must be doing something right. and then a third person coming into that argument and saying "well, actually you can't use price because a bicycle costs 200$ and that doesn't mean a bicycle is better than a Land Rover based on price alone" ...the point they're driving could be correct, but the comparison is apples to oranges. you can't compare bicycles to cars to drive the point, just like i wouldn't use Gary to make the argument that low prices does not mean a thriving city. a better argument would be to use something that is comparable to a Land Rover (Houston) like say, a car that is within 10-20k range that does the job but is still largely a piece of crap to argue your point that price alone doesn't dictate success.