People need to understand the history of squatting. It has served a useful historical purpose. Even after WW2, it was unclear who owned what and if they were st

People need to understand the history of squatting. It has served a useful historical purpose. Even after WW2, it was unclear who owned what and if they were still alive so squatting became a way to reclaim abandoned property. Even in the wake of the GFC, we've had unclear ownership on houses taht were foreclosed on (sometimes legally, sometimes not) where the foreclosing firm didn't have clear ownership of the debt and may have just gone out of business anyway. I, for one, am more interested in people having shelter than I am with a house sitting empty for decades because it has no heirs or the true owners own so many properties they don't even notice. Yet squatting can be (and is) weaponized with fake leases that turn the issue into a civil complaint with all that delays that entails. Squatters are getting sophisticated by finding out details of the owner to make their forged lease seem more realistic. Which brings us to the real problems: 1. Housing is unaffordable. Squatting is a symptom of unaffordable and/or unavailable housing; and 2. Private property (as opposed to personal property) as a form of wealth creation is fundamentally broken and incompatible with affordable housing.