So writers are like “we will write a sitcom about this poor family of 10. Let’s give them a big house to fit them all”. That is ridiculous.
I won’t continue debating with you. I am amazed at how are you trying to justify everything about the show. Actually you are like the ones I saw on the fan sub on Reddit.
There were many episodes where there were more than 6 people in I Love Lucy. I mentioned All in the Family because it was realistic and was showing people financially struggling even with two jobs. They lived in a house but it was small with one bathroom.
Even Seinfeld had a small apartment. Many other shows manage to show people living in small apartments. And even with rent control, it isn’t realistic at all.
So that is clearly not the real reason.
That’s completely not the reason. How other shows manage to show small apartments and poor people houses?
Showing regular people living in big apartment is more appealing to the public. Shows from the 70s or before were more realistic. Mary Tyler Moore was living in a small apartment and sleeping in the sofa despite having a regular job. In All in the family, they were financially struggling especially because of the 70s inflation. Lucy and her husband were living in a small apartment.
Things did change in the 80s and we started seeing families living in big houses with cars. Even Roseanne who normally depicted a working class family was living in a big house and could afford many things.
Ça me fait marrer qu’au boulot on nous demande de faire des économies, genre partager des chambres d’hôtels à plusieurs, ne pas faire certains événements, prendre les billets de train les moins cher même si c’est long… De coup une personne a dit “X (qui C level) pour donner l’exemple a proposé d’organiser le meeting XX (un truc de C levels) chez elle”. Puis on montre les photos et on voit que la maison de la C level est une grande villa avec piscine. Les C level se sont tous déplacés (certainement avion en première classe) pour un meeting qui ne sert pas à grand chose.