Conversely, you can get a lot more space a lot more affordably if you don't have to live within commuting distance of a central business district filled with office buildings.

That's a pretty big commitment to ONLY work at home if you go a ways out, and I suspect where people live isn't entirely relative to their current job.

You don't necessarily have to relocate to a rural area or anything, but you'll have a lot more space and still be able to save money sometimes by living in a 2-3 bedroom in the suburbs rather than a studio apartment downtown.

Many people, especially more recent generations, would happily choose the studio apartment downtown over living in the suburbs even if they worked from home all the time. In my remote job, I personally see the requirement to have more space for a home office as a burden rather than a benefit.

Yeah, most people eventually outgrow that.

Not sure why you think this. Recent trends have shown a massive influx to urban cores, including those of older ages that have families. It has nothing to do with "outgrowing" and everything to do with the fact that people no longer romanticize cookie cutter suburban neighborhoods like they used to. If anything, society is "outgrowing" suburbanization.

Nobody ever romanticized "cookie cutter suburban neighborhoods", they were just a refuge from crime, vagrancy, and the high cost of living in urban areas. All of which are factors that led me to no longer romanticize cities the way you do. The Bay Area might be an exception because not even the suburbs there are affordable, but at least in the Seattle area there's a definite lifestyle split between families and single young men.

Oh yeah totally agreed there.

I do worry that this extends to a sort of class situation where folks again with fewer resources are at a disadvantage as for them they have to go out damn far most places to even start thinking about a home.