I'm all for simplification. However, I don't think the other person that sleeps in my bed from time to time would appreciate me saying "we're sleeping on the floor now, honey! it's just like camping!"
Sure. Although I've given serious consideration to getting a bed that collapses away and only uncollapsing it when I'm expecting somebody other than me to be sleeping in it as well.
My current compromise is to arrange my bedroom so that there's room to sleep on the floor when I feel like it but to leave the bed set up constantly - since I have a study for my desk and computer, I don't really need the space for anything else anyway.
Here's a question for people who are working at a standing-level desk - how long can you actually type while standing? Do your knees and feet get tired? I'm intrigued, but... I have to type a lot if I want to get paid.
I slept on the floor in college, didn't even own a bed for about a year. Things change when you have an SO;) Extrapolating from that, simplification may need to take into account changing conditions - what was nice, simple code may need to take on complexities when the problem you're trying to solve changes. This often happens once you ship something the first time - the critical thing is being aware of it and refactor once you can see the next simplicity present itself. Often there is an interim complexity that is necessary when you don't have enough data to simplify further.
I think the distinction you are looking for is Fred Brooks' "accidental" vs. "essential" complexity. To paraphrase Einstein, your code should be as simple as possible but no simpler.
If you've ever tried to write your own code to handle dates you'll notice that much of the essential complexity comes from the crazy rules we use to define calendar years, etc.
