3 ms·
10m^2 is probably too small for many people, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t some inflection point where the marginal cost of upkeep outweighs the marginal ut
by kd5bjo 7y ago
10m^2 is probably too small for many people, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t some inflection point where the marginal cost of upkeep outweighs the marginal utility of additional space. As an absurd example, would you want to live in a house the size of Montana, and be responsible for all of the maintenance, or would you prefer something more human-scale, like a 40-bedroom mansion?
- hexo 7y agoSize of Montana would be too big :-) But anything with at least 100m^2 would do, below that would be way too small for normal living