Real and Barca were the naturally dominant sides in spanish football. The reason they could spend so much was because they earned it, much like Man United did, or Bayern.
La Liga complaining about others engaged in financial doping
Barca (along with Bilbao) posed as a non-profit in order to lower their tax bill and Real sold land to the city of Madrid for well over its market value. The local government in Valencia used public guarantees to cover Valencia CF's commercial loans. When it came out that La Liga clubs had an outstanding tax debt of €750m with an additional €660m in unpaid social security (at a time when Spain was receiving bailouts from the EU) the Spanish Minister for Sport suggested the government cancel their tax debts. Spanish football was built on state aid giving them an unfair advantage. The only reason La Liga is complaining is that PSG and City are owned by states that can piss a lot more money up the wall than Spain can.
Barca earnt £1bn debt?
No, but they most certainly earned their success. It wasn’t purchased for them by some sportswashing sugar daddy dictator.
I think that’s a false equivalence. Clubs doing shady stuff to lower their tax burden isn’t exactly anything new is it? Nor is local governments providing support to local businesses and culturally significant entities. It’s completely different to the kind of shenanigans beings pulled at City/PSG/Newcastle and to a lesser extent Chelsea.
They’ve had years of sharing the majority of the TV income with Real and to a lesser degree Atletico whilst the rest get scraps. Despite that they have racked up a Billion in debt - even with qualifying for the Champions league every year and winning it a few times.
