Interesting opinion piece.
Not one incident mentioned of WILL, but a whole lot of CAN.
Like... I CAN be the next American IDOL.
Ex-T remains a "one-trick pony" to drive people to his website.
Each person's case is different, and your house, to include being your domicile and a significant tax advantage, there are upsides to carrying 40%+ payments.
A lot of this remains "behavior scolding" about not living the way the writer/observer wants (think Al Gore). No one NEEDS a "McMansion" (otherwise known as the house that I want.) Surprising though... the Constitution says nothing about limiting yourself to what you NEED.
But, I do read Ex-T's postings... always entertaining.
I'm in the Bay Area, and I think that the article is fair and accurate. A lot of folks I know around here have >90% of their life savings tied up in their home, and they think that's fine because real estate is a can't-lose, zero-risk investment. There's a mentality that there is no possibility at all of a real estate bust (or even a significant decline). Very dangerous way of thinking, as investors in Japan learned a decade ago.