[Malcolmlisk]

This is completely true, so if you work as a real estate investor, you need to check your knowledge and start studying or stop lying.

If you try to squat (okupar) the house where someone lives, you'll be evicted just when the police arrives to your house. And you'll get a criminal sanction (allanamiento de morada). The problem comes when your third house is occupied by someone, since this is not where you live, then you'll have a real problem since they can say they are living there right now, and that's when the time dilatation comes.

This "problem" is just for people with a lot of houses, rentist, that are part of the problem. Or the banks and vulture funds, who had most of the houses and flats in spain.

And the squatting problem in spain is ridiculous small. THe percentage over the poblation is ridiculous. This that, in this article, don't mention at all.

[curtisblaine]

> This "problem" is just for people with a lot of houses, rentist, that are part of the problem.

1) Is it illegal to have more than one house in Spain? 2) Do you pay proportionally more tax if you own more than one house in Spain?

[Malcolmlisk]

Who is saying that? Who are you talking to?

[curtisblaine]

You're saying that the "problem" is only for a cert class of people. People who bought their property lawfully and lawfully expect to make use of it when, if and how they desire. You seem to imply that they should not enjoy that right.

[Malcolmlisk]

You are interpreting that, I never said that they should not enjoy what they earned. I just said that rentist are the only one suffering this "problem" and vulture funds and banks.

Ofcourse someone whos earned a couple of houses has a right to enjoy them and live their lives as they please. But you cannot convince me to empathize with banks, vulture funds or people who has 50 houses (like, for example, well known families in politics).

[rozularen]

> This "problem" is just for people with a lot of houses, rentist, that are part of the problem. Or the banks and vulture funds, who had most of the houses and flats in spain.

And the squatting problem in spain is ridiculous small. THe percentage over the poblation is ridiculous. This that, in this article, don't mention at all.

This is a problem that *anyone* with more than 1 property might suffer. FTFY

It's unbelievable the way some people stretch it to defend squatters.

If it's not yours, you should not take it. Full pause.

[diggan]

> This is a problem that anyone with more than 1 property might suffer. FTFY

Yes, "lots" = more than one

Spain is still struggling with higher demand than supply, so people end up homeless. At the same time, Spain struggles with properties in high-demand areas being empty because the owner doesn't want to rent or sell it, so no one uses it at all.

Finally, we're getting "upkeep taxes" added to those places, so they can either be utilized, or the owner "penalized" of sorts.

But up until now, there wasn't anything like that, so the alternative for many is to hole up in a empty building no one cares about, or live on the street. And obviously, many take the first choice. It's hard for me to blame them when the other choice is living on the streets.

[rozularen]

there's a slight difference between one, a couple, a few, several and "lots". It's one of the first things you learn in English.

If I ran out of money it shouldn't be okay for me to rob someone's else money. The same way if I can't afford a house house I shouldn't squat a house.

If one can't afford a house, he or she should: - complain about the government house development policies - search for social housing if available - get a better job - not squat someone's else house - not have children and use them to justify squatting, which is very common - etc