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

Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 332 posts

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#281

Post by honestoHeminway »

Chico11Kidlet wrote: post #278

Spain's government is simply trying to hide the fact that it is the #1 problem in the Spanish economy. [after the 2008 recession, economic researchers at Univerisidad Rey Juan Carlos in Madrid put out an analysis of the government's investments in alternative energy, which had been lavish. Results: every alternative energy job created resulted in 2.2 jobs lost in the rest of the economy. The average alternative energ…

Alternative energy corruption is how related to money laundring fonds ghost-towning inner citys?

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#282

Post by lsiebert »

nradov wrote: post #172
lsiebert wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, in your view the banks are the victims? Banks wouldn't have these properties at all if they hadn't screwed the pooch financially with mortages. I find it offensive that after taking people's homes and properties, an immense transfer of wealth to them, they should allow them to sit empty, in order to turn a better profit on the misery they helped cause.

Banks lost money on most of those foreclosures, to the extent that some banks failed and others had to be recapitalized. It wasn't a transfer of wealth to them.

Losing money doesn't mean losing the underlying property. There were certainly some losers, but the vast majority of them were the people who lost their house, not the banks which foreclosed on them.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#283

Post by anticensor »

CydeWeys wrote: post #33
i_am_proteus wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cynically, one could claim the same about taxes.

Not paying taxes is a criminal matter, though. The fines being assessed are civil matters.

Fines are usually neither civil nor criminal, they are administrative matters.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#284

Post by fergie »

This is the argument for squatting in a nutshell. Allowing people or organizations to hoard unused property in urban areas is damaging and should be strongly discouraged.

Legalizing squatting in these scenarios is a nice low-regulation way of making sure that property is always being used.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#285

Post by pbhjpbhj »

gadders wrote: post #259
mcv wrote: post #242

In Amsterdam, any property that has been empty for over a year can be legally squatted, and once in, legal squatters may be hard to get out. For this reason, landlords tend to rent out their empty properties cheaply as "anti-kraak" (anti-squat), on the condition that the tenant moves out when the landlord needs the property again. This is quite popular for students because you often get a ridiculous amount of space f…

I've never understood the pro-squatting arguments. It's theft, no?

Liberation.

Most private property was at some point converted to private ownership by violent acquisition. Owning land is not a natural right -- of you're not using it for societal improvement it seems right that society can cease to recognise your right in that land.

A similar thing happens with IPR, whereby governments can coopt it in times of need.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#286

Post by winterismute »

narcindin wrote: post #279
cf141q5325 wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not wrong and not 30 years but 9 years out of date. I still think its noteworthy, that Amsterdam had such a rule for a long time until very recently. It shows that there are precedents for how to deal with empty buildings.

I think its noteworthy, but in the opposite manner. Amsterdam tried such a rule and then got rid of it. What do the Dutch know about the costs of this rule that isn't in this conversation?

Well, this is not always how it works: many factors can lead to a reverse of legislation, such as stonger lobbying, backfire from a government held together by strong opposite ideas, or simply the measure might have solved the problem and a different rule might have been adopted (btw, assuming you are from the US, I think the idea of undoing medicare is a good example).

I have lived in the NL just when the change in squatting legislation was happening (2009-2015). My impression was that more and more parties that were ideologically against it got popular and this changed the agenda of policymakers, given also the pressure estate investors that were hunting for a treasure. But existing squats were definitely well integrated with the cities I lived in (Utrecht, Amsterdam), sign that this law somehow became part of the city identity.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#287

Post by mprev »

Chico11Kidlet wrote: post #278

Spain's government is simply trying to hide the fact that it is the #1 problem in the Spanish economy. [after the 2008 recession, economic researchers at Univerisidad Rey Juan Carlos in Madrid put out an analysis of the government's investments in alternative energy, which had been lavish. Results: every alternative energy job created resulted in 2.2 jobs lost in the rest of the economy. The average alternative energ…

The story here is about something mayor of Barcelona is doing, rather than the national government of Spain.

Also, what does subsidising renewable energy jobs have to do with leaving residential buildings empty?

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#288

Post by jonstewart »

eli wrote: post #70

DC has a punitive property tax rate for vacant (and even more so for “blighted”) properties. Seems like it works ok, though there are loopholes and questions about how well it’s implemented. Also means that a developer who actually wants to clean up a blighted property and flip it now has to go through extra steps, since they surely don’t want to pay steep taxes in the meantime.

ANC Commissioner here. You can get an exemption from the vacant property status with a building permit.

There are a couple problems with implementation. First, DCRA is such a fucked agency that they widely miss out on rating properties as vacant. The property two doors down from me has been vacant for two years and I’ve reported it a couple times and they still won’t rate it vacant (and I’m an elected official). The DC Auditor released a report last year highlighting this problem, which costs DC tens of millions a year. Second, most developers will create a separate LLC for each property and they’re happy to not pay taxes and have a lien put out, etc., on the probability that they’ll be able to flip it before foreclosure happens. If they do run into problems, the LLC lets them cut their losses. DC needs to move faster and blacklist two-bit developers who do this (I have a blighted property in my district where this has happened, and the District is out of options).

DC’s new short-term rental restrictions might help free up some apartments. We’ll see.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#289

Post by richjdsmith »

NTDF9 wrote: post #49
pbiggar wrote: post #35

Does anyone know why is it that seemingly every major city is having an affordability crisis at the same time?

The rich got richer after the financial crisis and have nowhere else to invest. Classic example of massive misallocation of resources.

Not sure why you're getting downvoted. This is absolutely a cause.

Anecdotally, my parents did well during the recession using it as a time to purchase assets "on sale" as my dad put it. Now, 10 years later they've done well on everything they bought, and are seeking new places to put their money.

They've had success with real estate their whole lives and see no reason to change what works. As a result they are buying anything they can collect rents from.

The cycle continues.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#290

Post by vonmoltke »

lawlessone wrote: post #268
otherme123 wrote: post #233

A lot of text, but didn't read the obvious: Spain is having three elections in the next month. This is an electoral stunt with no reality behind. The statistics show that Barcelona (and Madrid) are at a historical minimum of empty houses available, yet the spanish population is migrating from smaller cities to the big ones. This is pushing the rents up, and the politicians are obligated to "do something". Colau, Barc…

>are at a historical minimum of empty houses available, yet the spanish population is migrating from smaller cities to the big ones. So doing this in Barcelona actually makes sense then?

I read that as "the properties aren't empty", not "there are lots of people keeping empty properties off the market".
Post reply on HN