I think tech debt isn’t a great analogy for most situations. Usually, somebody did something quick, over architected something or otherwise didn’t do a great jo

I think tech debt isn’t a great analogy for most situations. Usually, somebody did something quick, over architected something or otherwise didn’t do a great job - or did a great job for the time but is now terrible for whatever needs to be done now. Alternately these situations never play out so no cost is ever incurred. The debt “payment” cannot be calculated up front so the analogy falls pretty flat in most cases. True technical debt analogies are more like introducing something that increases build time on a large team since this is paid continuously. We just need to accept that in software, sometimes stuff needs to be done that doesn’t have an obvious end user benefit in order to keep the code base viable.