I wish more people in the US believed that, it'd make my retirement planning so much easier. Incidentally if that statement were even vaguely accurate private equity would most likely not find residential real estate an attractive investment, which they most certainly do. All of my real estate has doubled in value over the last 5 years and through the magic of depreciation I'm on track to get back more in taxes over a 20 year span than the original purchase price of my investment property. Home ownership: shit makes perfect sense to me.

I think GP was talking about owning a primary residence, not owning investment properties.

(I still don't agree with GP's thinking or math, but I don't think you're arguing against what they actually said.)

I'm talking about owning both primary residence and investment property, both are great.

That thinking is very location-dependent. Cities and counties across the US vary wildly on the ratio of cost-to-rent to cost-to-own, and that number is sometimes less than and sometimes greater than 1, depending on where you are.

A big problem with renting is the capriciousness of the rental market in many places, which you can't solve with "basic math". That plus the availability of the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage in the US means that rental costs can be much more unpredictable than buying. Some people will -- very reasonably -- pay a bit more for peace of mind. And that's before we get into the topic of no-fault evictions, and how that can wreck a family's housing situation, sometimes with not too much notice.

Renter protections in the US are not great compared to in many other places, and that can make renting unpredictable and more "costly" in other ways.

It's not always about making financial sense, though. And if you stay there after it's paid off, I suspect the calculations look different.