There are a million Spaniards, more or less, who have deleted themselves from receiving electoral propaganda. Surely there are many more who would like to remove themselves from the laws that are quickly approved also in the pre-electoral period. We take to Twitter to clarify about Housing, the effects of which promise to make it as big as that of the only yes is yes.
The banter comes to us as soon as we connect, accompanied by an avalanche of complaints/comments about the burden of proof in an eviction/occupancy passing from the alleged usurper to the alleged owner. Presumably everything, the impudent debate, public pardon, has evolved from rents to squatting, a buzzword that has already taken a preferred place in the battle of 28-M and what follows.
Mentioning the occupation, with K or C or even with H, is a magnet in the networks and outside them, it is enough for the totum revolutum to take human form. For example, that of Joan Baldoví ( Compromís ), who in the parliamentary debate turned the Virgin and Saint Joseph into biblical squatters in Bethlehem "because they were poor" and Vox into Herod: "I'm sure that if Vox had been estado entonces, he would have sent to the brave, the brave, the gallant Javier Ortega Smith to vacate the stable and throw them out of Egypt (...) Maria and José would not have given birth to Jesus in that stable, but in prison". But Bethlehem is not in Egypt...
Instead of talking about housing, the comments on the networks focused on the deputy's knowledge in religious matters: was Jesus really born of Nazareth in Bethlehem? Was it an occupation, when according to the Gospel they stayed in the manger because there was no room in the inn?
Taking into account that Núñez Feijóo had already turned to the Gospel to describe Sánchez's public housing as "the miracle of bread and flats", we can only conclude along the same lines: whoever is free from populist sin should cast the first stone .
Let's leave the religion class and return to the economics class. The melee of Congress moves to the networks. A tweeter complains that there is so much talk about employment when only 1% of the properties affected are private homes; the rest belong to banks. Another replies that even if the number is true, whoever gets it, gets 100%. And the previous one goes back to the burden: for them to occupy his house he would have to have one, which is not the case. And so ad infinitum.
Luckily, the housing trend soon took a back seat. There was other, more royal news.
