I’m sorry, but that’s gobbletygook. It doesn’t work that way.
Let me try in short words.
With two people with jobs in the household (they were commonly married, after all), the household had more money to spend.
One household, two paychecks.
This meant a couple had more money that was not needed to pay the bills.
When there is 'extra' money in an economy on a widespread basis, some save, some spend, but prices tend to go up.
I live very close to a boom town (in North Dakota). When oil activity started going up fast, rent was not far behind. Keep in mind that these were units built before the boom, and rent went up by a factor of five or more as the boom started. Initially, it was not hard to find a place, but for many (not employed in the oil industry) it was hard to afford it.
Many of the folks living in campers up here did so to save money, not because there was no housing, at least until the boom had been going on for a year or so.
Had the money not been 'available', the prices and rents would not have been sustainable.
Now, envision on a national scale, half of households having that 'extra' disposable income.
If you don't think it worked that way, perhaps you can explain why prices rose the way they did during the period of transition from single wage-earner families to two wage-earner families.
Most economic theory is gobbledygook, anyway, but I'm game to hear your explanation.