huju,
“The requirements I listed are more directly connected to Torah, Talmud and the mitzvos. The “requirements” you cited […] are the real-world consequences of the observance of the mitzvos.”
I don’t understand the distinction you are making here. The costs of raising children are a real-world “consequence” of the observance of pru urvu. The costs of yeshiva education and the time spent on a bench in kollel instead of in a cubicle at the office are a “consequence” of the observance of limud Torah. How is that categorically different than the consequent costs of kosher food or living near a shul?
“Please read my first sentence after my list of “requirements.” I think it answers your question.”
Your assertion is that the costs of a frum lifestyle as you defined are not sustainable, which others have disputed. My dispute is primarily with your conclusion that due to this non-sustainability it is inevitable that some of these “requirements” will have to be given up. I think that presents a false dilemma, and that there are other potential solutions. I also wanted you to clarify what giving up on these “requirements” looked like to you, because you can’t “save” frumkeit by giving up frumkeit.