With my first post, I am also speaking up here. We are currently dealing with home financing as well, and for us, it is the first time that we are taking on debt. On the premise that the financing is permanently affordable and paid off by retirement: In my opinion, it is also about the inner attitude towards it. The topic has already been mentioned, the good feeling of owing no one anything, which is given up when you sign a loan agreement. The alternative would be to inherit (unlikely), win the lottery (practically impossible), or rent forever. The possibility of buying property cash with the equity saved up by retirement age might exist, but 1. much less/slower equity is built up through rent payments. Sure, you can live modestly and pay low rent, but is that what you want? Especially in the active life phase of 30-60?? 2. you don't want a house only in your mid-60s, but NOW. You have to realize that if you want to live in an equivalent way to owning a home as a tenant, you don't pay off your own house, but your landlord's house. And every euro of cold rent is gone forever. When you rent, you don't owe anyone money, but there is the same risk that you might have to move if you can no longer afford the rent at some point. With a home, you at least get the proceeds minus the remaining debt at the bank. Rent paid until then is gone. Or the landlord suddenly claims personal use or renovates some nonsense (happens often enough) and justifies a hefty rent increase. So rent is also a form of dependence. I think this is a very important point that is often forgotten. Just today on the train, I read a few passages in a guide that helps to not see the thought of loan debt so black. You enter into a contractual relationship with the bank. Both contracting parties have rights and obligations. You do not become a serf to the bank. The bank lends me a huge amount of money!! The consideration is that I repay the money within a reasonably defined time frame, plus a bit on top. Consider it a partnership on equal terms; do not put the bank on a pedestal where it looks down on you with little appreciation. This equal-level perspective is already valuable during the loan discussion; the bank is also interested in a good deal. And if you are lucky enough to have sufficient equity, that also opens up some room for negotiation, not just regarding the interest rate. It is often acted as if you are making a pact with the devil. But it is entirely legitimate that banks want to earn something too. Of course, there are also examples where the bank is in a very advantageous position, for example, if it is the only one owning a row of properties that are also in a desirable location. If you then cannot afford the high prices, it is neither the bank’s fault, nor yours. The housing market (market = supply/demand) there is simply starving. In this case, politics should intervene and provide more affordable housing. It is also clear that this does not help you at that moment. I just want to say that you cannot hold the bank responsible. Because if I can sell something for €1000, I will not voluntarily sell it for €600 or €800. This has become longer than intended. I just wanted to contribute my thoughts and views (which I expressly do not consider universally valid!).