In the fight for affordable housing seems to be the time of the radical proposals come: A Berlin citizens ‘ initiative wants to take away large real estate companies, apartments. And the green, tübingen Lord mayor Boris Palmer does not threaten property owners with expropriation, when you can live off the Land.

In contrast to the Berlin Initiative Palmer’s proposal is reasonable and is not so radical as the word expropriation has been pulled. Palmer does not want to take away the owners just your country, but before the decision Is finally or sold. Only if they refuse both, to expropriate the city, in return for appropriate compensation. The building act gives the city the opportunity to counter-fallow plots. Homes and land are scarce currently, you should do that too.

But especially a lot of also use the is not. What if the owner simply sets a Villa on the plot of land and expensive rents? The Rent index is rising. Palmer has to hope that many can’t afford the construction or want to and your property prefer to the city to sell. That will be expensive for Tübingen. But then the city could build there, at least in social housing.

would expropriate Deutsche Wohnen and co. hurt

The Berlin-based Initiative of Deutsche Wohnen and co. to expropriate goes a big step further: it wants to ensure affordable housing by making the housing of the largest corporations to state property. Instead of Profit linked to the management of the common good.

The initiators invoking article 15, which makes the socialization of the land. The Authors of the basic law were not in the founding phase of the Federal Republic of Germany is not yet sure whether you need at some point in Germany, but a bit of socialism. The article was applied. Finally, the article allows for 14 of the expropriation, it says: “An expropriation is only for the benefit of the General public is permitted.”

Even if courts have no objections, could the referendum are achieving the opposite of what he should: He would be deterred investors, to build in Berlin, new apartments. The state would then have to also take care of the self. At the end, would be to Build and Live alone in the state’s responsibility. Socialism. In the GDR, all the apartments had officially – but what kind?

It is not enough place for all in the Berlin S-Bahn Ring

Besides, this risky Experiment, which would lead in the end to the new injustice: Even if the state was taking on all of the apartments and rented out at fair prices, could not, would so many people live within the Berlin S-Bahn ring, how much. The state select would – but according to what criteria? According To Income? In Munich, the Munich-based franchise have? If too many apply for an apartment, you will then be raffled off? Also the would not be.

The basic problem remains, in Berlin and Tübingen: The big cities and University towns are attractive, too attractive in comparison to the life in the countryside and in small towns. The state must, therefore, try to make life outside the big cities interesting. So far, it just pulls young people in the big city, because there are well-paid Jobs and a varied leisure offer.

The policy should therefore set out the billions in costly expropriations, but with them the offers in the rural areas and small towns improve: better transport links, more cultural offerings, and perhaps even subsidies for companies who offer outside of the big cities, jobs. Partly, there is the already, but much too little. Because the Problem is huge and will increase further in the future.

among the employers, there needs to be a rethink: the right to the home office could make some move to Munich-Schwabing superfluous. Finally, many people do not like to live in quiet areas – as long as you are quiet. Only if the life outside the cities is more attractive, will be relieved of the cities. This helps more than angry expropriation debates.