Some arrogant writers have long argued that the welfare state defined in our European democratic constitutions includes the right to decent and appropriate housing very clearly and strongly. But 45 years after the Magna Carta was proclaimed, this right is still not adequately covered and basically remains in the hands of the free market. Moreover: While the political right does not explain why health or education should be controlled by the State and instead housing should remain primarily in the commercial realm, it understands that this should continue.
In Spain, according to the latest statistics released by the European Parliament, 76% of homes are owner-occupied, 2% are social and 16% are private rentals. We are somewhere in between Eastern European countries (95 percent of the residences in Romania are owned) and Germany, which does not reach 50 percent. In any case, the fact that the majority of Spaniards live in their own homes (which in many cases they barely pay for) does not solve the problem of generations and people who are actively engaged in life in critical times like today. those who do not have access to their own homes. You have to consider that late access to business comes with very low fees and does not allow you to hold a mortgage in an increasing number of cases.
In short, just as the State guarantees universal access and quality in major public services, housing should be intervened in a way that excludes the sector from speculation. It’s not healthy for homes to be financial assets that big savers use to generate returns. In addition, this fraudulent use of the immovables in question is prevented and public works concessions, dining halls, hospital facilities, industrial sites, office buildings, etc. It would be desirable to direct it to other real estate assets such as
This deterrence should be done by limiting rental income and imposing conditions that will benefit the tenant rather than the landlord. This creates a paradox: If the rental market is intervened without further ado, as critics of the housing bill, which is a timid intervention tool, the rental market will shrink, its profitability will decrease and the investor will go elsewhere. goes exactly in the direction indicated.
As such, the only solution to this contradiction will be the assumption of the public if the imposition of a ceiling on the rent and the obstacles to putting the right to housing before the right of property will reduce the offer. – provincial central government, autonomous communities and local organizations – a stock of rental housing that it can manage on its own or through private managers. As said earlier, only 2% of the population in Spain lives in social housing, compared to, for example, 26% in Germany. This will force the Spanish State to devote more resources to housing policy. Currently, the budget item does not reach 0.3% of GDP, to which the Netherlands allocates 3.3%, the UK 3.2% and Germany 2%.
In other words, the problem of lack of affordable, affordable rental flats, which is not inflated by the shortage of supply, has no solution unless the State also plays an active role in regulating and promoting. Logically, the fulfillment of these tasks will certainly force us to rethink land policies and regional planning. In any case, no one should be hasty to denounce this interventionism as leftism, or because the oldest and most respected European democracies have practiced it for decades.