Spanish Forum Users Claim Renters Are 'Dead While Alive'
A group with fixed €400 mortgages argues renting is a dead end: €130,000 spent in ten years and no home for retirement.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
Is non-ownership a life sentence?
A group of friends, each owning two or three homes with fixed monthly mortgages of €400, reaches the same conclusion: renters are finished. One has paid rent in Madrid for ten years, spending €130,000, and sees no way to buy 25 years before retirement. He feels, he says, dead while alive. The phrase has gone viral, summarizing a silent war between owners and tenants that has lasted over a decade.
The calculation dividing Spain
The owner's thesis is simple: a fixed-rate mortgage makes housing a predictable expense, while rent rises annually without building equity. Those who bought in 2010 and switched to fixed rates boast of payments that seem like relics today. One cited case: a main flat valued at €500,000 and two secondary ones at €200,000 each, bought from banks in 2014 "for peanuts." It is a story of quiet wealth accumulation.
On the other side, the tenant's argument: housing is not an investment but a depreciating liability; money yields more in stocks or metals. Some claim they can fund nearly a month's vacation in Japan with their stock returns, asking sarcastically if the mortgaged person can do the same or must shop in the discount section. The usual reply is a profitability calculation: rent, in the medium and long term, is throwing money away.
What does renting in Madrid really cost for ten years?
The most cited case is the friend paying €1,400 a month in Madrid. Ten years of receipts total €130,000, used in the debate as evidence: that money will never return. The diagnosis is harsh: without savings, without a down payment, and with retirement 25 years away, the horizon is sharing a flat at age 80 or paying rent with a pension. The repeated conclusion: a primary residence should be seen as a covered need, not an investment.
Against this, the tenant's defense includes mobility: one can leave anytime for a village in La Mancha or another country to live cheaper. The owner, however, remains tied to where they signed. This freedom argument is countered by an image: sharing a flat at 72 because you cannot afford rent.
Those who bought in 2008 vs. those who waited
The conversation has memory. Thirteen years ago, some recall, mortgaged buyers were ridiculed and predicted ruin. Today, those same buyers show off fixed quotas and appreciated properties. The doctrine of tapayogurismo (the belief that buying was foolish and rewards would fall from the sky) has become a running joke among those who signed. Those who waited look at current prices and calculate what they lost.
Not all cases are equal. Some bought a small flat in Madrid in 2020 for €120,000, pay €280 a month, and rent it to civil servants for €940. This is cited as proof the window existed and was missed. Others remember that in 2008 the stock market fell 57% and the IBEX plunged from 16,000 to 7,000: those who invested then also lost, and only those who bought at the bottoms of 2009 and 2012 got rich.
Refuge outside Madrid
The emerging alternative is geographic. In small cities and large towns, it is argued, a flat costs €40,000 with all services, and some live by the beach with a €400 mortgage. Criticism of centralism is explicit: not all of Spain is Madrid or Barcelona, and ignoring this condemns one to capital-city prices. A participant notes that those who did their homework during the crisis find opportunities others ignore.
The other path is inheritance. Some propose the winning scenario: living in an inherited home with liquid investments. Most buyers will never sell; they need the roof to live and won't see the profit. The real benefit, they conclude, is for the heirs.
In the end, the figure that unsettles is not the ones debated. It is that of the person who has paid €1,400 for ten years and still lacks a down payment. With these numbers, internal migration should be massive. It remains marginal.
A group of friends, each owning two or three homes with fixed monthly mortgages of €400, reaches the same conclusion: renters are finished. One has paid rent in Madrid for ten years, spending €130,000, and sees no way to buy 25 years before retirement. He feels, he says, dead while alive. The phrase has gone viral, summarizing a silent war between owners and tenants that has lasted over a decade.
The calculation dividing Spain
The owner's thesis is simple: a fixed-rate mortgage makes housing a predictable expense, while rent rises annually without building equity. Those who bought in 2010 and switched to fixed rates boast of payments that seem like relics today. One cited case: a main flat valued at €500,000 and two secondary ones at €200,000 each, bought from banks in 2014 "for peanuts." It is a story of quiet wealth accumulation.
On the other side, the tenant's argument: housing is not an investment but a depreciating liability; money yields more in stocks or metals. Some claim they can fund nearly a month's vacation in Japan with their stock returns, asking sarcastically if the mortgaged person can do the same or must shop in the discount section. The usual reply is a profitability calculation: rent, in the medium and long term, is throwing money away.
What does renting in Madrid really cost for ten years?
The most cited case is the friend paying €1,400 a month in Madrid. Ten years of receipts total €130,000, used in the debate as evidence: that money will never return. The diagnosis is harsh: without savings, without a down payment, and with retirement 25 years away, the horizon is sharing a flat at age 80 or paying rent with a pension. The repeated conclusion: a primary residence should be seen as a covered need, not an investment.
Against this, the tenant's defense includes mobility: one can leave anytime for a village in La Mancha or another country to live cheaper. The owner, however, remains tied to where they signed. This freedom argument is countered by an image: sharing a flat at 72 because you cannot afford rent.
Those who bought in 2008 vs. those who waited
The conversation has memory. Thirteen years ago, some recall, mortgaged buyers were ridiculed and predicted ruin. Today, those same buyers show off fixed quotas and appreciated properties. The doctrine of tapayogurismo (the belief that buying was foolish and rewards would fall from the sky) has become a running joke among those who signed. Those who waited look at current prices and calculate what they lost.
Not all cases are equal. Some bought a small flat in Madrid in 2020 for €120,000, pay €280 a month, and rent it to civil servants for €940. This is cited as proof the window existed and was missed. Others remember that in 2008 the stock market fell 57% and the IBEX plunged from 16,000 to 7,000: those who invested then also lost, and only those who bought at the bottoms of 2009 and 2012 got rich.
Refuge outside Madrid
The emerging alternative is geographic. In small cities and large towns, it is argued, a flat costs €40,000 with all services, and some live by the beach with a €400 mortgage. Criticism of centralism is explicit: not all of Spain is Madrid or Barcelona, and ignoring this condemns one to capital-city prices. A participant notes that those who did their homework during the crisis find opportunities others ignore.
The other path is inheritance. Some propose the winning scenario: living in an inherited home with liquid investments. Most buyers will never sell; they need the roof to live and won't see the profit. The real benefit, they conclude, is for the heirs.
In the end, the figure that unsettles is not the ones debated. It is that of the person who has paid €1,400 for ten years and still lacks a down payment. With these numbers, internal migration should be massive. It remains marginal.
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (105 replies).
More summaries
-
Amancio Ortega Donates €100M to Spanish Flood Victims
The Amancio Ortega Foundation pledges €100 million to municipalities hit by Spain's DANA floods, sparking fiscal and political debate.
-
Feijóo Criticizes Free Cinema Subsidies for Spain's Richest
Feijóo opposes universal subsidies for cinema and trains, arguing they benefit billionaires like Amancio Ortega rather than those in need.
-
Spain's Freelancers: Journalist Criticizes €300 Monthly Fee
A Spanish freelance journalist denounces the €300 monthly self-employment fee, stating she is not Amancio Ortega's daughter. Critics highlight the contradiction with her pro-tax stance.
-
Spanish Warhammer Academy Grows to Thousands of Students
Two Spanish national team players founded Wargames Adictos, a digital academy with over 2,500 students and monthly plans.
-
Spain's government blames the far right, but the forum isn't buying it
The Spanish government attributes the riots to the far right; the debate pushes back with beneficiary logic, tactical voting and suspicions of censorship.
-
ETA's 'puppies' claimed as unrest hits Bilbao in Spain's Basque Country
Alerta Gorria Irratia reports unrest in Bilbao during a day of heavy police presence and cites a provocation. The tweet does not identify those responsible.