If I can choose to pay full price for a luxury mansion or pay $1 for the same mansion, of course I should pay $1. That choice is not usually available, either

If I can choose to pay full price for a luxury mansion or pay $1 for the same mansion, of course I should pay $1. That choice is not usually available, either in real estate or in software. More likely, I'm choosing between a studio for $200k and a 4 bed for $1m (adjust for regional house prices), or a cheap fixer-upper vs an expensive new-build. The point of the debt analogy isn't to think about which parties are involved in the transaction; it's to think about the various kinds of costs involved in a decision, and the timescales over which they are paid. From that point of view, if I can't afford the $800 hedge maintenance, then I shouldn't buy the mansion, even for $1. The strict analogy with debt breaks down a bit because I'm not paying you the $800, but it's still an ongoing cost I have to bear. Edit to clarify, I'm still not saying debt is always bad. If I enjoy DIY and expect to have spare time, the cheap fixer-upper might be a great investment.