I agree with everyone 100% that the whole expenses of owning an airplane is a losing situation financially. I agree with you.
I guess let me try this a different way,
I currently spend $135 an hour to rent a 172. I have to fight plane availability all the time and I think it would be impossible for me to rent this plane for a length of time for a trip. There is a $165 an hour 172 in the area that has a glass panel and more availability, but more money, same slow airplane. The next step up is an SR22 and thats $225 an hour. So lets just for discussions sake say I rent the $165 an hour 172 for 30 hours a year, and the $135 172 for 50 hours a year, thats $11,700 I'm going to be spending a year weather I own a plane or not.
If the capital expense of the airplane was say $100,000 and I could buy that up front with cash(I know easy money these days use someone elses money but for discussions sake) for a 182 or similar, then all I have is the hangar/annual/fuel/insurance costs. My area hangar is not expensive(central Arkansas) so I'm lucky there.
So, lets say 5 years into this deal, renting, I have spent $58,500. Owning I spend potentially more than that $58,500, but probably a lot more flying hours, more enjoyment, more flexibility, and a faster aircraft. I can also still probably sell the airplane for the $100,000 I paid for it, a $10,000 gain or loss is not a big deal, that is how I'm looking at the aircraft as an "investment" probably won't make money, but, if I'm going to spend that money renting or owning and the biggest difference is the capital outlay up front, then doesn't it make more sense to own not from the financial sense, but from the enjoyment sense?
Sorry if I'm all over the place, I guess I'm just trying in my head and here to talk through justifying aircraft ownership vs just renting, and it may not be possible from a financial sense.