If rent was only about paying other humans for shelter! It takes what -- a month of work? to house a person for a year. (Based on the assumption that about 8 % of the working population works in construction, building maintenance, and related areas.)

I'm happy to pay a month of my wages for a year of shelter. My rent is way, way higher than that.

Never judge value of something by how much it costs to produce, it's not fair. Judge it by how much people are willing to pay for it. And in most major metropolitan areas you're paying premium for your rent to outbid all other renters that would be ready to live in such a lucrative place.

In essence, you're paying back not only to people who work in construction, but to ask the people who made this city so desired, over many generations. It takes much more than a month of work per renter to create all the value that you get from living in New York or San Francisco.

If all you need is literally just shelter regardless of location, there's plenty of places around the globe where you could rent a perfectly good apartment for $300 per month.

Because it relegates your definition of a life purpose to society's value system.

If your purpose in life is caring for the infirm or teaching, or doing dance performances, society will not compensate you meaningfully in response.

What if your purpose doesn't align with society's definition of talent? Are you worthless as a human being?

What then, abandon your true purpose because of economics? These are rules of scarcity, not of life fulfillment.

The mere fact of paying rent doesn't. It just aligns your definition with society's to a sufficient extent to pay for essentials.

> What if your purpose doesn't align with society's definition of talent? Are you worthless as a human being?

From the perspective of the nebulous and not clearly defined 'society', sure.

The real question is why do you care about its judgements?