Earlier quoted context omitted.
Said every tyrant ever.
Isn’t a tyrant someone that is above the law, not subject to the rule of law like other citizens?
Tyrants are still subject to the law. Why would they not be, given they make the law?
Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem
621–630 of 930 posts
Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem
#622Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe the housing crisis is related to the lack of legal security that owners have, which severely reduced the offer and obviously increased the prices. The housing law that the current government passed wasn’t very clever…
Wait so lack of legal security reduced supply... by what mechanism? How do you think this works?
Why would you build new housing when someone can waltz in and change the locks and youre shit out of luck?
Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem
#623Earlier quoted context omitted.
Im amazed your friend didnt come up with a swift solution, and what would the squatters do? call police and say they were squatting? show their rental agreement?? wouldnt have happened to me
There is no swift solution legally. At least not in California, and it sounds like Spain is similar. It can take years and six figures to get a squatter out.
The person you are replying to seems to be advocating for the use of force. A swift, extra legal solution
Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem
#624Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, It is in Spain: Article 47 of Spanish Constitution: All Spaniards are entitled to enjoy decent and adequate housing. The public authorities shall promote the necessary conditions and shall establish appropriate standards in order to make this right effective, regulating land use in accordance with the general interest in order to prevent speculation.
No, it's not. It does not mean you have the right to live in a flat en La Castellana for whatever you want pay. It means the State has to implement policies to help people access housing. Also, article 33 give citizens the right to private property. You cannot come squat in my house because article 33 should prevent it, even when article 47 exists.
Yep, good point.
Let's avoid considering outliers to maintain a balanced discussion.
While I don't believe anyone has the right to live in Castellana or the Royal Palace, it also wouldn't be fair to require someone to move to the desert to find a home.
Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem
#625Earlier 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. I had a friend who bought a house that needed a lot of work. Before he could get started on the remodel, someone broke in t…
Law abiding citizens are the suckers it seems everywhere. It's easy to be nobel and generous when you are not the one being taken advantage of. Regardless of who benefits from Lawlessness, it always ends up destroying the society
> Law abiding citizens are the suckers it seems everywhere.
True! When laws are made that benefit a few and harm everyone else, you'd be a sucker to follow them.
> It's easy to be nobel and generous when you are not the one being taken advantage of.
It's easy to abide by the law when you are the one the law benefits.
> Regardless of who benefits from Lawlessness, it always ends up destroying the society
Maybe it's not that surprising that those excluded from housing by society are okay with destroying society that actively harms them.
Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem
#626Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's besides the point what I think is morally wrong or right. There is a legal difference between "occupying" someone's primary residence, and occupying other types of properties. The first isn't considered "occupying" here but rather "breaking and entering", and the local police are very quick at acting on those types of crimes, especially if the criminals are still inside the property.
No. It doesn't matter whether it is a primary residence, secondary residence, or an investment property. It is the property of someone else. Without permission, opening the door or window and going into it is breaking and entering. And do not try to argue that breaking, entering, and squatting somehow reduces the housing shortage — the effect is the exact opposite. With insecure property access and rights, people wil…
There is a genuine difference though, as in, the law in Spain treats the two scenarios differently.
I'm not sure where the GP's situation took place but given the article is about Spain the person you're replying to could probably be forgiven for thinking it was there
Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem
#627It's kind of dystopian that it would even get to this point, but I wonder if there would be a business model that could sell "squatter insurance" to people, requiring that they follow particular security system procedures, but pay them out if someone successfully squats in their place.
Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem
#628Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you deal with a situation where some people don't have any land anymore to put their houses there?
They make something they can trade, or go somewhere where there is land.
How they can make something they can trade, if they have no land on which they can make it? Where can they go, if private property exists in most of the world?
Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem
#629Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it's not. Private property created a world where 8 persons control as much wealth as the poorest half of humanity. This is not common prosperity, this is exploitation.
So you’d rather the poor be even poorer as long as the rich wouldn’t control as much wealth or didn’t exist at all?
No, I think no one should get exploited and oppressed and everyone should have an opportunity to develop to the heights of one's potential.
Re: Squatting in Spain: Understanding Spain's "okupas" problem
#630Earlier quoted context omitted.
Squatters fight against private property which is usually protected by law, it's very rare that it goes the other direction. A lot of squatters want to abolish the possibility of someone having to pay rent to another person to have a place to live, considering that relation inherently oppressive and against a self-ownership of the individual.
Refusing to pay for a place to live is simply theft and entitlement. They expect people to build and maintain homes for them while doing nothing in return. If you abolish property rights, your two options are state slavery or anarchy where the strong take whatever they can. These misguided ideologies can only live parasitic ally on the fringe of a otherwise functional society. If they got their way, the society would…
> Refusing to pay for a place to live is simply theft and entitlement.
Holding other people's basic survival need for ransom is simply theft and entitlement.
What makes you think that people are going through all the complexity of squatting if they have the options of paying for a place to live?
> If you abolish property rights, your two options are state slavery or anarchy where the strong take whatever they can.
Anarchy where the strong (rich) take whatever they can is the situation we have now. Property rights as they currently exist are that rich people have property rights and nobody else does.
Unless you start talking solutions to homelessness, it starts to sound like you just don't care about the homeless and you're only interested in maintaining the power that exists.