This is perhaps an example of the hazard of metaphor: it can encourage inaccurate or even misleading analogic reasoning. The theme of technical debt is intertwined with organizational issues. Accounting for tech debt is not done at an organizational level, it's done on a team or individual level. The organization has little idea of how much technical debt it 'carries' in its code and paying tech debt is notoriously difficult to make visible to those setting business level priorities. There is an expectation that technical debt will be managed locally, with individuals and teams devoting just enough effort to keep the debt low while still keeping the velocity of development high. Critically, technical debt is, by definition, appreciated prior to its creation, visible in code, and can be eliminated by refactoring.
"technical debt is appreciated prior to its creation"