4 ms·

I mean from a justice standpoint, squatting is wrong But from a societal standpoint, the laws being this way have a bunch of positive externalities 1. It prov

I mean from a justice standpoint, squatting is wrong But from a societal standpoint, the laws being this way have a bunch of positive externalities 1. It provides shelter to the homeless, with all the advantages we know that has 2. It provides an incentive to not leave property vacant. Very important in a country with high vacancy rates 1nd a hiusing crisis. Note also that this is done at the expense of investors. Whose role in a capitalist society is to take on risk. So while it is an injustice, i can definitely understand why it is this way.

lottin 2y ago
If investing in housing is made less profitable, there will be less investing and consequently less supply in the long run, thus making the housing problem worse.
- nephanth 2y ago
  Except in this case, what is less profitable is investing in land/infrastructure that could serve as housing but leaving it vacant. That is not investment in housing, simply speculation on land and buildings. Investment in housing (ie actively rented places) are unaffected, so there is no reason there woukd be less investing on that front
  - lottin 2y ago
    That's not how businesses work. Nobody spends millions building a house so that they can leave it vacant once it's finished.
    - nephanth 2y ago
      Except they do. That is the problem. See for example: https://m.murciatoday.com/almost_half_a_million_vacant_new_builds_in_spain_that_no_one_wants_to_buy_2174512-a.html https://m.murciatoday.com/almost_half_a_million_vacant_new_b... https://www.investigate-europe.eu/en/posts/the-empty-house-a-window-into-europes-vacant-property-problem https://www.investigate-europe.eu/en/posts/the-empty-house-a... It isn't a particularly Spanish problem either: following article about the American version of it https://www.cbsnews.com/news/empty-office-buildings-doom-loop-cities-60-minutes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/empty-office-buildings-doom-loo...
      - lottin 2y ago
        These aren't examples of houses kept vacant intentionally by speculators. The first articles literally says in the headline that the houses are empty because "no-one wants to buy them". The second one states that the reason the flats are empty is "unlikely to be property speculation".
victorbjorklund 2y ago
A middle class family that leaves their home for 2 weeks to go on vacation only to come back to find their apartment occupied? Are those the evil investors who should be punished? Now they are homeless instead
- juststartguide 2y ago
  A common misconception that people don't seem to get (and that most news outlets conveniently forget to report), it's that if someone enters your primary or even second residence, that isn't considered Okupacion, it's considered "Allanamiento de morada" (breaking and entering). Even if you were on vacation for a month. If that happens you call the police and they'll kick them out in 24 hours max.
  - dukeyukey 2y ago
    And that applies to a rental property that is the renters only home but the landlords 200th property?
    - juststartguide 2y ago
      Yes it does. It would be the renters primary residence, so it's "Allanamiento de Morada". (Breaking and entering). Now if the current renter can't afford to keep paying rent and decides to occupy the property, that's considered Okupación. And that process does take longer.
  - victorbjorklund 2y ago
    So it only applies to your third house? Seems a bit strange.
    - nephanth 2y ago
      Secondary residence here doesn't mean your 2nd house as opposed to the 3rd, it means a vacation home (ie a place you own for your own use, even if it's not you main residence. As opposed to a rental property)
misja111 2y ago
I lived in Amsterdam for a long time, and the Dutch government initially took a very liberal stance on squatting exactly for the reasons you mentioned. And initially it seemed to work, the squatters were a mix of idealists, artists and others, otoh property owners tried to find creative ways to make sure their properties didn't stay inhabited for too long, e.g. by renting it out temporarily. However after some years, the situation slowly changed: more and more squatters were drug addicts, who ofc couldn't afford to pay rent; also the word spread outside of NL that it was possible to go to Amsterdam and live there for free, so loads of immigrants came with no intention to rent at all. Apart from that, squatting exposed another problem: the squatters typically didn't care too much about their home or neighbourhood, after all it was not theirs and sooner or later they'd have to move out again. So they typically caused a lot of irritation with their neighbours because of garbage of noise. In the end, squatters in NL lost most of the goodwill they had with the Dutch government, and stricter anti squatting laws are now in place.

lottin 2y ago

If investing in housing is made less profitable, there will be less investing and consequently less supply in the long run, thus making the housing problem worse.

nephanth 2y ago
Except in this case, what is less profitable is investing in land/infrastructure that could serve as housing but leaving it vacant. That is not investment in housing, simply speculation on land and buildings. Investment in housing (ie actively rented places) are unaffected, so there is no reason there woukd be less investing on that front
- lottin 2y ago
  That's not how businesses work. Nobody spends millions building a house so that they can leave it vacant once it's finished.
  - nephanth 2y ago
    Except they do. That is the problem. See for example: https://m.murciatoday.com/almost_half_a_million_vacant_new_builds_in_spain_that_no_one_wants_to_buy_2174512-a.html https://m.murciatoday.com/almost_half_a_million_vacant_new_b... https://www.investigate-europe.eu/en/posts/the-empty-house-a-window-into-europes-vacant-property-problem https://www.investigate-europe.eu/en/posts/the-empty-house-a... It isn't a particularly Spanish problem either: following article about the American version of it https://www.cbsnews.com/news/empty-office-buildings-doom-loop-cities-60-minutes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/empty-office-buildings-doom-loo...
    - lottin 2y ago
      These aren't examples of houses kept vacant intentionally by speculators. The first articles literally says in the headline that the houses are empty because "no-one wants to buy them". The second one states that the reason the flats are empty is "unlikely to be property speculation".

victorbjorklund 2y ago

A middle class family that leaves their home for 2 weeks to go on vacation only to come back to find their apartment occupied? Are those the evil investors who should be punished? Now they are homeless instead

juststartguide 2y ago
A common misconception that people don't seem to get (and that most news outlets conveniently forget to report), it's that if someone enters your primary or even second residence, that isn't considered Okupacion, it's considered "Allanamiento de morada" (breaking and entering). Even if you were on vacation for a month. If that happens you call the police and they'll kick them out in 24 hours max.
- dukeyukey 2y ago
  And that applies to a rental property that is the renters only home but the landlords 200th property?
  - juststartguide 2y ago
    Yes it does. It would be the renters primary residence, so it's "Allanamiento de Morada". (Breaking and entering). Now if the current renter can't afford to keep paying rent and decides to occupy the property, that's considered Okupación. And that process does take longer.
- victorbjorklund 2y ago
  So it only applies to your third house? Seems a bit strange.
  - nephanth 2y ago
    Secondary residence here doesn't mean your 2nd house as opposed to the 3rd, it means a vacation home (ie a place you own for your own use, even if it's not you main residence. As opposed to a rental property)

misja111 2y ago

I lived in Amsterdam for a long time, and the Dutch government initially took a very liberal stance on squatting exactly for the reasons you mentioned. And initially it seemed to work, the squatters were a mix of idealists, artists and others, otoh property owners tried to find creative ways to make sure their properties didn't stay inhabited for too long, e.g. by renting it out temporarily. However after some years, the situation slowly changed: more and more squatters were drug addicts, who ofc couldn't afford to pay rent; also the word spread outside of NL that it was possible to go to Amsterdam and live there for free, so loads of immigrants came with no intention to rent at all. Apart from that, squatting exposed another problem: the squatters typically didn't care too much about their home or neighbourhood, after all it was not theirs and sooner or later they'd have to move out again. So they typically caused a lot of irritation with their neighbours because of garbage of noise. In the end, squatters in NL lost most of the goodwill they had with the Dutch government, and stricter anti squatting laws are now in place.