Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

idealista.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 930 posts

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#551

Post by orthecreedence »

Aurornis wrote: post #386
zrn900 wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's clearly a gap between imaginary noble okupas addressing housing crisis via occupation of unused bank property and reality of weed smoking anarchists and their collaborating deoccupying mafia harassing mostly not-so-rich middle class, who can't afford the security measures the rich can. Both of those groups serve the purpose of forcing the real estate owners to actually use their real estate instead of letti…

> real estate owners to actually use their real estate instead of letting them rot to benefit from value appreciation This is such an obviously false premise that I don’t understand how you even arrived at it. Real estate is expensive to maintain. You don’t let real estate appreciate in value by letting it “rot”. If you think the US housing crisis is due to investors letting houses “rot” then you clearly don’t unders…

> Real estate is expensive to maintain. You don’t let real estate appreciate in value by letting it “rot”.

In my neighborhood, there are at least 3 unoccupied homes within a 3 minute walk. We live in an area with accelerated entropy (the forest) and the homes are, by any useful metric, rotting. I will let you guess if in the past 10 years the value of the homes has gone up or down.

I would love if someone, squatters or not, lived in those properties. I understand things are different in different places, but where I live we have unoccupied homes that could house people. As it is, some private owner swings by once a year to throw another tarp on the roof and then fucks off, leaving an empty home to rot during a housing crisis. Yay, property rights.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#552

Post by TotalCrackpot »

ImJamal wrote: post #532
TotalCrackpot wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Homelessness is a problem, even having to pay rent to another person to have a place to live is a problem. Squatting is just a strategy to fight an inherently oppressive private property norm.

Are you willing to provide your address so we can stay at your place? It would be inherently oppressive if you don't. There are homeless shelters where people can have shelter without paying rent.

I am living under my address, I am occupying that place, so I am not fine with providing my address. But I am fine with people living in abandoned houses.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#553

Post by lukan »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #329
lukan wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In germany, if you see such a abandoned property, you cannot even ask the authority who owns it, if you have the plans to buy it (you would have to rely on local people knowing and telling you). There are quite some neglected properties around here and the owners are away, do not care anymore and the authorities do not care as long as the low property taxes are paid. There was a case close by, where a buisness wanted…

Surely, before considering expropriation, we should tell people who owns a property so that they can offer to buy it. If that's too much a privacy concern, the government could simply relay the offer.

Oh for sure. In the specific case I meant, the owner was known, but lived somewhere else around the globe and did not care, but it was his property. (where stones were falling off from the roof to the street)

Those are cases where I think expropriation would be warranted.

And if it would be easier to buy obviously unused land, less properties would end up in that rotten final state, so less need to even discuss forcing something.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#554

Post by s1artibartfast »

TotalCrackpot wrote: post #517
s1artibartfast wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. This is why in a society free from theft, one must build or make something for exchange to get things you want. I don't see why buying two plots and building two houses entitles someone else to one of them.

I don't agree with the notion of buying a plot. No one should ever have to pay for an empty plot of land.

OK, so you dont buy the plot and just build two houses on them. How does that change your logic.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#555

Post by orthecreedence »

atlantic wrote: post #519
diggan wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand of issues like this, is the people forced to move away from their neighborhoods because outsiders keep acquiring "investment properties" and price out the current tenants. We're finally getting more protections from this, but there been a lot of hurt because of this already. Entire neighborhoods in Barcelona (like Barceloneta) had generational families being forced away because of issues like this.…

That's true. The buyers of real estate on a large scale are often transnational investment funds. And they sometimes sit on empty properties for decades, waiting for them to accrue value. Some kind of regulation is certainly required. Or higher taxation of second homes. But squatting contributes nothing to solving this problem. It just promotes anarchy.

> But squatting contributes nothing to solving this problem.

Hang on, it actually does solve the housing problem by one important metric: an empty house has someone living in it now. I understand there are other metrics (cost to the owner) but it does do something to solve part of the problem, and I'd argue that the more a property is used as an invesment vehicle (sitting there collecting dust) the more it solves the problem. If someone is buying a house to fix it up and live in it as a primary residence, then squatters can fuck right off. But if I bought my sixth home and make my yearly visit to it and notice it has occupants, they aren't the assholes here. I am.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#556

Post by orthecreedence »

lottin wrote: post #531
amunozo wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be able to sell it in the future a higher price without worrying about people living there, or having to pay money to mantain a building that is not in condition to be rented.

Right, because a run-down building sells for the same price as one in good shape.

You're just making the bet that real estate value increases faster than the building deteriorates with minimal maintenance. That's often a really good bet.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#557

Post by diggan »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #533
diggan wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there is a clear "N amount of days away from the residence means you're not actively living there", the court would look at many factors. For example, if it's evident the owner is intending to return, there is personal belongings, utility contracts in the owners name and such, courts would (probably) consider it your primary residence even if you take an extended leave from it. On the other hand, if you…

In what case does it make no difference to me, a person who bought or built a structure, that I can no longer use it and it has been stolen?

I'm not sure what the question is, could you reformulate that?

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#558

Post by diggan »

TotalCrackpot wrote: post #550
diggan wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As always, there are extremists on both sides, that's no lie. Generally, most people aren't so extreme as to say private ownership shouldn't exist at all. At least from most of the people I interact with here in Barcelona. Besides what people think is right/wrong, the police does help you (quickly) to throw out people that try to invade your residence that you actively live in.

Calling people you disagree with extremists is just an insult and it's not nice. It's rude. There is nothing extremists about fighting for a world where no one is oppressed and everyone can develop to the heights of one's potential.

Who said I disagree with it? I'm just self aware enough to know where on the spectrum my own ideals, morals and opinions are.

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#559

Post by nec4b »

wyre wrote: post #487
rudnevr wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Mediterranean like in any resort area a lot of people live from housing, which requires not only owning, but also keeping it attractive, complying with local regulations, looks and the culture. It's nothing like rental company in NYC owning a garage full of rats, and charging a arm and a leg. Middle class is a family from Zaragoza having a vacation house in Maresme or some extra property in Alicante which were…

Not arguing that owning property in a tourist area requires work (unless you're paying a property manager to do it for you), but I could never imagine owning a vacation property to be squarely middle class. Upper-middle class, at the very least.

Building a small house or cabin in the woods with the help of friends and family is an upper-middle class thing for you, really?

Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem

#560

Post by em-bee »

spaniard89277 wrote: post #228
throwaway2037 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Singapore, I know about: A huge amount of decent public housing. Is Vienna similar? Is there no political pressure in Spain to build more decent public housing?

Vienna has a massive public, universal, rent system. Like 50% of the total housing stock. Everyone says they're going to make public housing here in Spain, nobody does anything.

more details on vienna: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40257927
Post reply on HN