It's hard to empathize with a belief system that thinks pricing a native population out of their own country is fair. I suppose if you hold that everything should be subordinate to economics, including community and nationhood?
But it isn't actually pricing the native population out of the country, just the most desirable cities. But, that was already happening to a huge swath of the native population beforehand by the native population, so what is different for majority of Portuguese who could never move to Lisbon or Porto? Not much. They couldn't afford to move to lisbon 20 years ago, and they can't move there now.
I see the same dynamic at play here in Boulder. People are claiming there is a housing affordability crisis because outsiders(commonly pejoratively referred to as Californians, Texans, and New Yorkers, even if they're not) are moving in and jacking up the prices, but commonly you'll see those people complaining have been here for, say, 10 years. But, 10 years ago when they moved here, the previous locals were saying...there's a housing affordability crisis and these newcomers are jacking up the prices!
How can you seriously think it's OK to push the native population out of their own countries' most desirable cities... The place most of them were born, that their parents fought for (politically/through work), and worked to make a good place. Then here come people with absolutely no regards for tradition, or any sort of emotional connection to said place, no interest in said country in particular besides being "insanely cheap, safe and sunny". Portugal is not the US, cities are markedly different from each other, and have a deeply rooted history, that goes back centuries. You cant dispassionately just move from one city to another like you replace your iphones.
Salami slicing. No single step will ever make much difference for the majority of Portuguese, until they suddenly find themselves a minority in their own capital, as happened to the English.
> until they suddenly find themselves a minority in their own capital, as happened to the English
When you say "the English" can you be more clear? Are you suggesting it's a problem if Scottish, Welsh, or Northern Irish people move to the capital of their own country, the UK? I don't think that's what you meant.
44.9% of people in London were white British according to the 2011 census, but 63% were born in Britain. The British are still a majority in London (according to the latest data). I don't think the 2021 census numbers for London by ethnicity are out yet (maybe I'm wrong).
The only way your comment makes sense is if you're suggesting it's a problem that white British being a minority is a problem.
> The only way your comment makes sense is if you're suggesting it's a problem that white British being a minority is a problem.
Why don't you tell me - do ethnic minorities without a country of their own face any challenges or dangers due to that? Is there reason to believe that native Britons won't face those same dangers? Perhaps because they are so beloved by other nations they now share their country with, there are yearly riots of gratitude held in their honor?
They're not even a minority yet, and we already have a preview of what's to come:
> But it isn't actually pricing the native population out of the country, just the most desirable cities.
Most of my family have lived within the same 10km for at least 4 generations... It's not the same thing to live where I grew up and close to my friends and family or 50km away. Especially on normal Portuguese salaries which seriously restrict travel.
Sure, if you're in tech (like I am) you can just work remotely from anywhere and you can afford the gas and tolls, but you can also just rent in the city.
Fair is generally defined to mean in accordance with established rules and without bias. Offering preferential renting rights or pricing to certain cohorts such as people of a given age, nationality, etc. would clearly not be fair under this definition.
If a nation cannot give preference to its own people, then that nation effectively does not exist. As for "established rules", the idea that nations should be reduced to economic zones is relatively novel, and not something most voters (i.e. the people nominally deciding on those rules) agree with.
It is something a lot of voters in the US agree with, which is where most commenters on HN are from.
The US as a nation is incredibly new and imported millions of people to build its population from almost nothing.
Communities being born and dying due to economics is something that has been happening in the US constantly, at a large scale, for its entire existence.
