@ixtap not sure we understand. This is not about the renting vs. mortgage discussion.
This is about the viewpoint:
I pay about 6000€ in capital gains to someone else every year. It's either through rent or through working were a part of my salary will be used to pay dividends to the owners of the company.
That's a negative cash flow equal to having a 180k debt.
So am I underwater equivalent to 180k? Or am I not? Maybe depends on the viewpoint. But if I hold 180k in debt an have to pay 6000€ in interest each year. Most people would say, sure you are in debt by 180k and you need to get rid of it.
While if I pay 6000€ in capital gains to someone else each year through renting and working, this seems to be more accepted, while cashflow-wise it has the same financial effect.
Maybe this is because most people already are working and renting, so if you put debt on top of that it becomes too much weight on you. Therefore the one is more accepted then the other.
For reference: I hold a bachelor in economics. So how I see this:
Our culture seems to accept the fact that "normal people" work about 50% of their time to pay capital gains for someone else. So from our
cultural viewpoint, surely someone who is renting and working with zero assets is not underwater.
Now from an economic standpoint, about 1/3 of total economic income is capital gains and 2/3 is labor. That means, an average laborer that does not receive any capital gains will pay (1/3)/(2/3)=50% of his wage to pay capital gains for someone else. Yes, this is just a back-of-the-envelope calculation.
From an economic perspective, that laborer is underwater equivalent to holding debt. Even if this whole process is culturally accepted and deemed normal. Even if it's not officially called debt. He's is still paying capital gains to someone even if the word describing the process is different.