The concept of tiny house living is intriguing to me. The idea of keeping a small footprint and being mobile is appealing. I also like the idea of having less stuff. It all sounds great.

After all, the more house you have, the more there is to pay for, insure, heat, clean, pay taxes on and furnish. That means more money and more time spent on the house instead of on other things that may be important to you.

There’s a show called Tiny House Nation that follows homeowners as they design and downsize into tiny homes of under 500 square feet. Sometimes they’re very small and mobile. Sometimes they’re a little bigger and the owners have no plan to move.

I’m always amazed at the people who want to do this and how unrealistic they tend to be. A family of seven moving into 350 square feet in Montana from an enormous home with an attic, basement and garage? That one was painful to watch, partly because the wife was clearly struggling to let go of the family dining table. Plus, where do you store food for seven people and how do you handle the laundry?

The average 3 star hotel in the US offers rooms of about 300 square feet. I wouldn’t want to spend a night much less a lifetime with six other people in a space like that.

It seems like it’s always the clothes horse or the shoe collector, the entertainer, or the person with a room full of scrapbooking supplies. These folks seem genuinely surprised that they can’t keep all 96 pairs of shoes and that there won’t be space for a dozen friends to sleepover after a party. Really? What party? Where will everyone stand?

I always feel bad for the kids who have to leave behind favorite toys, teenagers with no privacy and the pets who will be cramped.

It makes so much sense for many people but I can’t help but wonder what some are thinking. At the end of the show they do a big reveal and it always looks so nice. But they come back for a follow-up interview in a couple of months and it’s always cluttered or the homeowners have had to retrofit something to make it livable.

I have some friends who downsized to tiny homes and they seem quite happy. All of them seem to have done it to save money to travel and were realistic about letting go of the extras.

I am not a materialistic person. I could walk away from most of my possessions. At the same time, I like to be surrounded by things that I associate with happy memories like family heirlooms and travel souvenirs. Decorating for the holidays is something I enjoy but there would be no room to store seasonal decor.

Houses have gotten too big and mass produced goods have created too much clutter. Prewar homes were about a thousand square feet. Closets were tiny, bedrooms were small and kitchens weren’t equipped with elaborate cabinetry. People did quite well in these homes for many years.

There has to be a happy medium for some of us wishing to occupy less space and to consume less stuff. Meanwhile, I guess I’ll stick with the bigger house – after all, it provides plenty of room for Scout to run around!