Can we really afford this, and will the bank support it?

Then you can also drive a Porsche instead of a VW, Louis Vuitton instead of a generic brand, etc. Then it’s no longer about practical use.

That’s exactly what this is about. The step from the E-Class to the S-Class.

But as soon as the financial side of a deal is also to be evaluated (and that is actually what this forum is for), other criteria come into the equation. And if the only argument left is: “then you just sell in an emergency, you don’t go into personal bankruptcy with your equity,” then that is a rather naive view for me. Maybe it’s also due to the perspective of a bank advisor who makes money with mortgage loans.

Yes, quite naive. Simply objective without emotions (of course also “learned” through the job). No considerations around it, just “is there a real, life-threatening risk.” A digital answer in black-and-white optics.

Even if only the consumption perspective counted, I wouldn’t want to put 50% of this income into my house, but would have other wishes that would then have to be correspondingly reduced.

You can want to do it that way. By the way, it is only 40% of the income. There remain approx. €5,000 net for living expenses after a loan rate of €3,500. You can satisfy a lot of wishes with that, although personally I wouldn’t know what wishes would still remain after a relatively short time that have not yet been fulfilled.

You can satisfy a lot of wishes with that, although personally I wouldn’t know what wishes remain after a relatively short time that haven’t been fulfilled yet.

Travel. A great car. Even more travel. There are already many countries worth seeing.

Traveling. A great car. Even more traveling. There are already many countries worth seeing.

At the OP:

often eat out, 3 cars, many trips, etc.).

The topic is probably already being addressed now.
The only problem with traveling is the limited vacation days. I could use more of them just like you.

Traveling. A great car. Even more traveling. There are already many countries worth seeing.

For us, travel is only limited by the fact that we work in different industries and there are different times when vacation must be taken or vacation bans apply. Additionally, two kids need to be considered, otherwise we would probably travel even more often.
The car wish has already been satisfied as well.

And to take some "steam" out of the income topic: I have a 5% salary increase ahead of me, and my wife found out last week that hers will even be 6%.
Of course, we couldn't finance the property alone despite our fairly evenly distributed income. The topic of unemployment also concerns us. But we have a relatively clear (if somewhat blunt) opinion on this. Those who work hard (and I don't just mean physically), are committed, a bit clever and skilled, should be able to find a job again that comes close to their old salary. And even if 1,000€ net per month are missing, a minimal reduction in consumption (first cars, then travel) should be able to compensate for that. And the probability that we both lose our jobs at the same time is so low that the risk of divorce or death is many times higher. And this risk is borne by all married couples with property, not just us.
And just staying in the current house because in an emergency one could afford it alone is, for us, the epitome of exactly wishing for this misfortune.
Now let's see how things will continue.

And the probability that both of us lose our jobs at the same time is so low that the risk of a divorce or death is many times higher. And this risk is borne by all married couples with property, not just us. And only staying in the current house because in an emergency one could afford it alone is for us the epitome of exactly wishing this misfortune upon ourselves. Now let's see how things go.

That is correct. Job loss as such is not the problem either. If prices continue to rise merrily despite job losses, then nordanneys’ logic applies. The problem is, however, that the probability of a job loss is statistically not independent of the general economic situation, which in turn significantly defines real estate prices. In plain language: if the job is lost, there is likely also pressure on real estate prices. This was by no means as pronounced in the last decade. Becoming unemployed during a boom is considerably more pleasant than during a recession.

In a marriage, the risk of divorce is independent of the economic situation (well, probably not entirely). But it is true: divorce is significantly cheaper in good times than in bad, if you have to sell the million-dollar house for less than desired.

For me, this has nothing to do with wishing misfortune upon oneself. I can certainly sleep much more easily if my existence is secured even in the worst case, and I am also mentally and emotionally freer if neither unemployment nor divorce ruins me financially. Of course, this cannot be prevented with certainty. But at least one can mitigate the scenario through one’s own actions in advance.

If I only look optimistically into the future and neglect risks, then it is rational to take on as much debt as possible. Real estate is the perfect tool for this. Great fortunes are always financed through borrowed funds. One can become rich like Rene Benko. But one can also lose everything again afterward. If things go badly, you don’t even have the years of the boom before. If you are clever, you eventually manage to jump off.

If I look to the future exclusively optimistic and neglect risks, then it is rational to go into as much debt as possible.

No one here has said this so extremely, because it would be downright stupid to neglect something.

You can get rich this way like Rene Benko. But you can also lose everything afterward. If things go badly, you don’t even have the years of the previous boom. If you are clever, you eventually manage to jump off.

Here too, extreme examples are not helpful and far from any reality in the house building forum.