Jordi Wild sparks housing debate: is property a financial asset?

Jordi Wild and housing: the mess over an asset that isn't a Magic card

A YouTuber with millions of trinc says on a podcast that housing is not an asset. And half the internet throws its hands up in pavor. The scene is almost comic: the same guy who has spent years breaking down real crimes on YouTube sits down to opine about economics and drops a line that, by general consensus, sounds like heresy. But it doesn't end there. Behind the persona lies a serious issue that has been rotting for decades: housing stopped being a roof over your head and became just another financial product. And when that happens, the market stops behaving like a consumer market and starts behaving like a casino.

What people miccionan when they say housing shouldn't be an asset

The discussion starts with a tweet mocking the remark. From there, the issue drifts toward something more interesting: whether housing should ever have been a financial asset at all. Some argue that commercial premises, industrial warehouses and offices are a different matter; but that turning residential property into an investment vehicle turns it into an NFT, a Magic card or gold. In other words, an object bought not to be used, but so it rises in price and can be resold to someone else. Under Franco, it is argued, old-rent tenancies made housing a liability, not a speculative asset. The comparison is crude, but it points to something real: the financial regime of property changed with the 1981 law, when the Banco de España (Spain's central bank) began to allow 30-year mortgages and foreign money entered the market.

The scarcity and land argument

Against the thesis that housing should not be an asset, the classic argument appears: what drives prices up is scarcity or excess demand, along with extraordinary legal uncertainty. And that's where land comes in. It is claimed that the State bans construction on 94% of Spanish territory, a figure that circulates without anyone verifying it in the conversation, but which serves to illustrate the diagnosis: nothing gets built because it can't be, not because people don't want to. The conclusion drawn is that investors, funds and legal changes are needed so that construction happens. There is plenty of space, both upward and on the land around cities, it is said. And yet, prices don't fall.

Are empty flats being hoarded to speculate?

One of the most repeated accusations is that there are empty flats waiting to be rented out. The answer is emphatic: nobody builds and hoards to keep them shut, because it's a terrible investment. You build, you sell and you buy to get a return. And if anyone hoards without putting them on the market, the argument goes, it is purely out of antiestéticar of State interventionism, which tells them how and when they must manage their private property. The discussion gets tangled: how many empty flats are there? Are there too many or just enough? There are no figures in the conversation, only impressions. And there it stays.

The elephant in the room: immigration and housing

In the middle of the economic debate comes the topic that never fails to appear: immigration. It is argued that the arrival of foreign population puts pressure on housing demand and public services. The rebuttal is not long in coming: the official data, it is said, show that immigrants are young and use healthcare less. The discussion drifts toward the labor market: it is claimed that immigration weakens the bargaining power of native workers, while others respond that the Spanish worker's problem is himself, with only 3% union membership. Tempers flare. And the housing issue is, paradoxically, left in the background.

The 30-year mortgage as modern slavery

One of the most technical points of the debate is the role of banking. It is claimed that 30-year mortgages are not a concession from banks, but a consequence of affordability: without them, many people who can now access a home couldn't do so, even if it were cheaper. The counterargument is that those mortgages are precisely what keeps prices high, because without customers with access to 30-year debt and without foreign money, land wouldn't be worth what it's worth. A few points of interest rates, it is recalled, can shake the entire sector. The implicit conclusion is that the mortgage market and land prices have been feeding each other for decades.

The closing: the unsettling figure

In the end, the conversation comes full circle: is Jordi Wild ignorant for saying housing is not an asset? Maybe. But the debate generated around him proves the problem isn't him. The problem is that, in Spain, housing has become a financial asset bought and sold as if it were gold, and nobody really knows how to reverse that without breaking the market. Meanwhile, those without a home keep waiting. And those who have one, speculating. Or not. It depends on whom you ask.