11ant
2019-04-16 01:41:41
- #1
The attitude is sympathetic to me, but with that you fall far short of the "expectations" of the majority. Average earners here mostly assume between 160 and 180 sqm.- On the 250 m2, am I then opening a museum for "unused, beautiful rooms"? Over 160 m2 is certainly debatable – but anything beyond that seems a bit "too much" to me
Especially with above-average income, I would worry little about rebuilding in time for the enrollment of "Child I" and already existing "Child II". In anticipation of "Child II" the case is somewhat different, financially less so, but in terms of stress level one would prefer not to build again.140 sqm is too little ... you earn so much and are so young, in a few years you will notice that it is too small for you ....
In the TE’s situation, I would now also look for around 160 sqm and then upgrade later. After all, in your mid-twenties you are still young in ten years and can take on the adventure again. I find that better than carrying along still unused rooms. 160 sqm (even including a technical and storage room) is not immediately too tight with the first child. Living in a castle as two people wouldn’t occur to me.