gentrification is a problem. But it's hard to truly understand a problem if all sides try to make it extreme.

What does "Portuguese people can't afford to live in major cities anymore." actually mean? Does it mean that major Portuguese cities are no longer inhabited by a majority of Portuguese citizens? Or does it mean that there are some Portuguese people who no longer cannot afford to live there and that the blame for that is the few foreigners who contributed to raising prices in such a way that the those portugues who were already poor now crossed the line and couldn't affort to live in major cities, and joined the other portuguese who already couldn't afford to live there because of other causes of wealth inequality?

EDIT: It's not just mere nitpicking; I really think actual magnitudes are important in in discussions around these topics but the public debates I see often present the problem in very broad strokes and thus inevitably end up in shouting contests by people who have very strong opinions and the rest of us just looks the other way no longer believing what is being said. I know for a fact that that gentrification is destroying europeans city centres. It's very hard to afford to live in other places like Florence, Italy too. But is it really so clear cut that it's because of tax cuts for expats? Or it's just a result of a bimodal distribution of wealth including native wealth?