To answer the question in general, yes, evictions should always be avoided, the important thing is to specify by what means.
The government has announced in recent days the prohibition to evict vulnerable families while the State of Alarm lasts. This measure will come into force next week in the Council of Ministers.
Socially speaking, the measure in itself seems good, as it favors the families that are having the hardest time. The problem is real, and the COVID crisis is leaving thousands of families out of coverage who are seeing their incomes cut and their expenses continue to rise.
Our state is currently a socially defined state, with a social-communist government that is committed to the equality of all of society.
On this basis, it is normal that they try to defend those people who are going through the worst, but the solution is not to prohibit evictions, it is a big mistake, and in this article I will explain why.
In Spain, the rental market is led by individuals, not by companies. It is estimated that between 75 and 90% of all homes for rent are owned by individuals, people who may be opting for extra income to supplement their pension, people who have become unemployed and only have the rental income to cover their basic needs, people who use this income to pay the mortgage on their home…
It is clear that we must help the most disadvantaged families in this crisis, but the government does not realize that, if it prohibits evictions, it will also be punching a punch to those people who depend on such income.
The government should think of another valid solution to control the problem without harming individuals who are also working class, who are only looking to obtain a supplementary income by renting. We must help these people, yes, but in another way.
On the one hand we have commented referring only and exclusively to the social, but if we talk about the economic, it does not leave us indifferent.
Let us put ourselves in the situation of a bank. You believe that if we establish a moratorium on evictions, the banks will continue granting mortgages, they will continue renting properties to people in a situation of special vulnerability, running the risk that they may stop paying the mortgage, and therefore, remain idle because they can do absolutely nothing. I think there is not much more to emphasize, we see that all the risk is assumed by the lender, causing the granting of mortgages to the most economically vulnerable to decrease, thus turning the measure into a double-edged sword.
What could be done then to control evictions?
Emergency rents can be created so that families can pay their rent and supplies. We have money to raise the salaries of civil servants, to create clientelistic networks, to squander it on measures that are not optimal in the short term… but not to create a fund to help those who need it most.
Another solution that occurs to me, with all the housing owned by the state, in this exceptional situation in which we find ourselves, could be rented to tenants, and with that income, create the emergency fund to help rent to families in need.
Even if they do not have a large number of homes, the State could invest in real estate to support families, but I repeat, INVEST, not to fix one dish by breaking another, not to protect some families to unprotect others.
