Taint

I'm really still not sure how the disaster that is Trump will shake out, but considering the (known, obvious) corruption, and his (very well known) tendency to pick sycophants over competent individuals seems like it's going to lead to some long-term problem for Republicans.  Not the least of which is: how can any [judicial] nominee put forward by this president be considered legitimate? Anything that Trump touches is tainted by Trump.  This maybe a problem for everyone if he manages to do something good, but so far that doesn't seem to be a concern.

Note: this is not entirely unlike Obama related things--particularly the ACA--but since Obama wasn't (isn't) a corrupt imbecile the "Obama taint" is really only something total fucking morons buy into. 

Also, yes, this works the other way too, lots of people felt Obama could do no wrong, even when he did (drone strikes, foreclosure crisis), and as per the link above, plenty of idiots think Trump is doing great...mostly because he pisses off the right people.

That's One Way to Put It

I find the real estate briefs in the local paper to be a bit odd.  It's clearly written by industry insiders (i.e. realtors, and realty companies) and in part it's just odd copy, but there is a bit of "news" at the tail end of it and in particular this line:

Millennials aren’t in the same hurry as previous generations to start a family and build wealth.

Again, I know that who this is written by and for is probably not actually interested in cause and effect, but it's not that they aren't in a hurry, it's that milliennials ain't got no money because all our economic growth gets ate by the rich and old(er upper middle class white folks).  Houses and family are not cheap, but they've effectively become luxury items for people under 30 (and maybe under 35) in our current version of America.

Nutjob

I'd be really happy if Elon Musk spun off (and sold off) Tesla auto as an independent company, without him at the helm.  He's always been a bit nutty, but between the growing pains that could probably be solved by someone [group] from a high volume large item manufacturing company (like any mass market auto maker, or large truck manufacturer, or even frickin lawnmowers or refrigerators), and his increasingly detached-from-reality public persona (boring company, hyperloop) and now we've got possible fraud.  He's a good "idea person" but probably shouldn't be in charge of a very large company.

Big Houses

I'm not a fan of the McMansion, and, consequently, a big fan of mcmansionhell and Kate Wagner.  One of the big problems with these houses is just the size for size sake.  My house is 2000 sq ft. (respectable but still large), has 4 bedrooms, 2.5 bath, kitchen, one living room, dining "room".  I've been in houses that were twice that size but had the same room breakdown (often with a 2nd living room).  That's twice as much space but no more functionality, and tends to lead to just weird useless spaces.  Do you need 600 sq ft for a master bedroom?  400 for a master bath?  How about a formal "living room" that's really just decorative?

That said, There are a lot of old houses around me that are 3000 - 6000 sq ft.  Many were built smaller and expanded over the years, but there are plenty of old houses that are quite large. They don't feel as monstrous and stupidly overbuilt as modern mcmansions, however, and while I'm not entirely sure why, I've a couple ideas. (Note: the 10000+ sq ft realm for older actual mansions is a different category...almost all modern "homes" in that size range are just more ridiculous versions of the smaller 4k sq ft mcmansions)

First is these older houses, unless they've been updated almost always have more closed off interior spaces (i.e. separate rooms) with normal height ceilings--up to 10' but often 8-9.  The necessary connecting hallways in this configuration add square feet, but don't feel as useless as the foyer of an open concept modern house.  Often a big block of the square footage is from a finished attic and/or basement, which may serve the same purpose of a second living area, but by not being on the main floor they don't seem as superfluous.  The other reason is that the architectural design and layout don't seem forced.  These houses are mostly boxes with fairly simple/straightforward/purpose-driven roofs, facades, and lines.  There just aren't as many weird not-spaces as you find in modern mcmansions.  (They also tend to have one car, and on rare occasion 2-car garages that are either detached, or basement, or behind the main house...garages--specifically the garage doors--are, in general, not attractive features on houses.)

This doesn't mean all these large, old houses are without wasted space, but they often don't feel as gross as their modern equivalents.