I'd take OS X over Windows any day of the week, but by all means, it's your pain.
I've only used VMs on beefy servers, never on consumer desktop or laptop hardware. Is there a performance reason you wouldn't live in the VM full time? The top level OS could be light; the only thing it is doing is handling the VM (and passing off messages between the VM and outside world? I don't know where VMs live on your OSI model.).
I use Ubuntu (to ensure same versions of stuff as Ubuntu servers we have) in a VM (Virtualbox, simple setup, open source, and highly recommended) at work. The VM is way faster than the Windows 7 host, as I've put the virtual hard drive on an SSD, and it's just not windows. I've got transparency, animations and all other kinds of baloney turned on. It's fast enough that, even though I don't need it, I can't possibly be bothered finding the off switch.
tl;dr: You can live in a virtualbox VM all day just fine - you just need RAM for 2 OS'es and applications.
LibreOffice doesn't read or write the constantly mutating, rubbish file formats of MS Office the way only MS Office can.
True. LibreOffice actually helped me salvage a Word 2003 file into Word 2010, as Word 2010 itself would scramble the whole darned thing. Libre is much better, in my (limited) experience.
Anyway, the point is that 128GB is plenty for most uses.
I agree fully with any other OS, but I'm surprised that it's even possible to get Windows 7 in on less than 40 GB.
Oh, and obigatory xkcd.
You guys already have a stick that's as big as everyone else's combined. How big do you really need it to be?
You can't be too rich, too thin, or have a too big stick.