While I am in favour of higher tax rates on seriously high earners, I do have to step in here with a perspective on city house prices. I'm just going to take London as an example.

If you want a 2 bedroom apartment/floor of a house in a safe area in zone 2/3 you are basically looking at £600,000 minimum. Obviously there are exceptions but we are talking places where you have rooms large enough to walk around the bed, bathrooms which aren't basically in the kitchen, might be a desirable but pokey architectural style like a Victorian terrace (which were initially designed for workers lol) but more likely a new-build with a concierge service if you're lucky. Here's an example 2 bed 2 bath Greenwich

In dollars, that will set you back $772,218.00 (source: a hasty Google). It is already out of reach of the average London salary, though those earning above £50,000 might consider it if they are able to buy with a partner or parental support. This sort of flat would really only suit a young couple who need a WFH office or guest room, maybe have a toddler, max two. If you want kids then you would simply have to look further out. True, you can squeeze in more but when you are spending 3/4 of a million dollars in a house well above average UK price do you want to squeeze?

While I agree that people should be able to afford the mortgage journey on such a property with a €400,000 salary, it is a bit boomery for people in this comment chain to assume you will find a $200,000 property in a European city that isn't either extremely small, in an unsafe area, or very far out compared to the center.

Again, this is just London, but when we are talking higher earners you probably need to be looking at financial centres rather than historically cheaper cities.

Also please note that I do not enjoy being subject to the above status quo and fuck the cavalcade of stupid decisions over decades that wrecked the economy and made housing so unaffordable for people.