Another element of the buy-vs-rent-home issue that I think is important but it rarely mentioned is the whole illusion of "owning" a home.
In my lingo, if I own something, I'm done paying for it. I paid for it. Done. Now it's mine. I don't have to KEEP ON paying for it. In the typical "own a home" scenario, even after a mortgage is paid off, you have to keep right on paying for that house each month/year. At a minimum, you have to pay home ownership taxes. Notice you do not have to pay ongoing "just because you own it" taxes on most other items that you own. A computer. A book. Clothing. Once you own them, they are yours, you don't need to keep paying for them.
But if there's some fee an external entity is essentially forcing you to pay, either directly or indirectly by threat of force, then you do not really own it. You are renting it. The key question is if you were to stop paying a certain fee whether some big mean people will come and take it away from you. If that's true, you are only renting it.
Arguably the OA is about comparing one kind of renting to another kind of renting. There are advantages to each, but in both scenarios you will be paying for the home for the rest of your life. And so will the next "owner", and the next, and so on.
There is no spoon.