Thus I am definitely leaving a bad carbon footprint. I’m not saying it’s wrong, per se, but I can see their point that a couple or even a couple with kids need very little space.

So we all don’t need the space, like we don’t need two cars. But we like the convenience. I have debated getting rid of my car because it costs me around $200/month but I just can’t. I like the convenience.

I don’t have a car payment, but when you factor in lost opportunity cost of a car value, even my $4k car, at 5% year that’s $200/year. But then you put in maintenance $50/month, insurance $50/month, registration, gas, depreciation, it’s around $200/month for the luxury. Is it a need? No. A want.

But one car is a need. When we lived in CA, two cars were a need because we drove in opposite directions. I used to drive 120 miles one way in the same day sometimes. So two cars were a need then.

Another factor that is gaining more popularity is the carbon footprint. I don’t think anyone would argue that 2 people living in a 3000 sq ft home is a poor use of resources for heating and cooling. I’m not suggesting mandating limits, but it is a consideration to ponder.

Regarding guests, we very much enjoy being hosts for friends and family, which is why we have a spare room (it gets closed off when not in use). I would be somewhat insulted if family or friends rejected my offer to stay and eat with us, and I would feel a bit unwelcome if family or friends put us up in a hotel when we came to visit (unless it was a large multi-family gathering).

Why does company have to stay with you? If you have a smaller place you could rent them a hotel with your extra savings.

I like the space personally. I find it quieter than apartment living. Something that is important in a non-financial aspect of my life. I used to sleep with earplugs because I couldn’t take it.

But I do acknowledge, like my non-frugal ways, that I choose to buy a home with more space because I enjoy it.

It’s still a want though, I only really “Need” for my DH and I 300 sq ft. We’ve lived before in a studio apartment.

Technically we could still be living like that until our first child. And even then we might only NEED, 700 sq ft and 2 bd/1ba at most.

So we don’t really need the space. But we WANT the space.

Of course it is a choice, but there are many considerations. For example, when company comes over with their 2 kids for a week, where are they going to sleep? Will there be enough room when you find out you’re having twins or a surprise child? How about room for an office? I’m not suggesting everyone go out and buy a 5 bedroom house, but kids can change the way you manage your space, so having the extra space is nice.

You can rent with kids. It is a purely emotional decision and not a financial one. I chose my mistake, but I don’t think that many people can argue that often times renting can be cheaper.

But I have to agree with your analysis that this was a financial mistake. In this case, it seems you allowed emotion to have too large a voice in your decision.

Stacey, what about maintenance? Typically renters damage the home more than owners. Thus insurance is typically higher when you rent out a home. So landlords have to carry more insurance in case something happens.

Plus typically maintenance is higher.

At the same time, is there any guarantee that rent will not rise faster than the rate of inflation, or the rate of tax increases? Surely landlords are including the price of taxes in their rent.