The purpose of this thread, I don't know the OP's reasons but it's certainly been eye-opening for me and many other posters.
It's highlighted the urgent need for more social housing.
And related to that, it's highlighted just why the welfare benefits bill is so high. Not only because of benefits needed to afford high private rents, but also because housing is heavily linked to health. Substandard, unaffordable, or insecure housing costs the NHS loads.
I read the article below a while back, which also shocked me.
Some people might read it and think "great, solves issue of 'burden of ageing population"...
Except, awful sentiment aside, it actually means more people in poorer health and unable to work (at younger ages than had they owned or had social housing).
The impact of renting in the private sector, as opposed to outright ownership (with no mortgage), was almost double that of being out of work rather than being employed. It was also 50% greater than having been a former smoker as opposed to never having smoked.
Note:
Living in social housing, however, with its lower cost and greater security of tenure, was no different than outright ownership
https://bmjgroup.com/renting-rather-than-owning-a-private-sector-home-linked-to-faster-biological-ageing/