4 ms·

> 'ordinary middle class' and 'the young' are somehow more valued than 'rich chinese people' If the chinese people are of Chinese nationality then that is exac

> 'ordinary middle class' and 'the young' are somehow more valued than 'rich chinese people' If the chinese people are of Chinese nationality then that is exactly true, from the perspective of the government of Canada. > Well not everybody wants to sell obviously but if everybody does want to sell, why shouldn't they sell to 'rich chinese people'? Because nurturing a foreign rentier class is not the best plan for retaining your sovereignty and keeping local people happy and wealthy?

diskcat 11y ago
Why does the perspective of the government of Canada matter? Their perspective might as well be that canadian citizens are tax-cows to be milked until dry. We should care about the people not the government.
- mthoms 11y ago
  I'm not the commenter, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that in this context, "Government of Canada" did also mean "the people of Canada". It's not as solid of a distinction outside the U.S. where there is so much anti-government "them vs. us" mentality (rightly or wrongly). If I say "the Government of Canada wants to legalize marijuana", it's generally safe to assume that is the will of the people unless evidence is presented to the contrary. Of course, the government can and does occasionally go against the will of the people but that's more the exception than the rule.
paganel 11y ago
> Because nurturing a foreign rentier class is not the best plan for retaining your sovereignty and keeping local people happy and wealthy? I'm an Eastern European living in a relatively big Eastern European city, and I'm now writing this from an apartment that I'm a renting from a very cool French guy, the owner, who is in his late 50s or so. At the height of the local real estate bubble (in 2007) the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund invested in buying 500 apartments in a local project, the investment flopped (I don't petty the Norwegians, though, that fund is huge). And I could go on and on with other examples of foreign-owned properties in the city where I'm living in. Point is, this is capitalism. I'm paying rent to the French owner of my apartment with the money I'm gaining from my current American oversees employer, and there's nothing wrong with that. You guys cannot choose which aspects of capitalism you want to like and which not, i.e. you cannot be allowed to invest freely in other parts of the globe (like Canada is now allowed to do) and in turn not allow other nations to invest in Canada (like not allowing Chinese real estate investors to buy property in Canada). Because if you do that you're economic colonialists.
- mahyarm 11y ago
  Most people are suggesting things like a non-occupied housing property tax, so people rent out unoccupied properties. And stronger money laundering enforcement so kleptocrats don't use housing as a bank account.
- ant6n 11y ago
  "You guys cannot choose which aspects of capitalism you want to like and which not..." Every country chooses which aspects of capitalism they want, via regulation, taxes, social programs. Even the most laissez-faire county does. There is no pure capitalism, it doesn't exist.
- learc83 11y ago
  >You guys cannot choose which aspects of capitalism you want to like Yes they can, all countries do this. Minimum wage laws, environmental protection laws, progressive taxation etc... All designed to restrict elements of capitalism we don't like. >You cannot be allowed to invest freely in other parts of the globe Their are all kinds of property restrictions on foreigners in many many countries. Until 6 months ago foreigners couldn't buy property in China without first living there for a year. If a country wants to restrict foreign property purchases that's their business. They don't owe anything to other countries who let their citizens buy property. The reason those other countries allow foreigners to buy properties is not altruistic, it's to attract investment. They would continue to allow Canadians to buy homes even if Canada completely shut their citizens out. But if Canadians started driving up local home prices to the point that they are causing problems, they would add restrictions.
  - paganel 11y ago
    > The reason those other countries allow foreigners to buy properties is not altruistic, it's to attract investment. So Canada doesn't want FDI, got it. Well, good for them, it means they're self sufficient. It's interesting because when the going was good, meaning when Canada was making tons of money out of selling their mineral riches to China, I didn't use to hear so many bad stuff about the Chinese. Now, when some of those Chinese people want to invest their money back into Canada somehow it's bad for the middle class Canadians. I'm missing something, because I can't make sense of all this, but I'm just a programmer.

diskcat 11y ago

Why does the perspective of the government of Canada matter? Their perspective might as well be that canadian citizens are tax-cows to be milked until dry. We should care about the people not the government.

mthoms 11y ago
I'm not the commenter, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that in this context, "Government of Canada" did also mean "the people of Canada". It's not as solid of a distinction outside the U.S. where there is so much anti-government "them vs. us" mentality (rightly or wrongly). If I say "the Government of Canada wants to legalize marijuana", it's generally safe to assume that is the will of the people unless evidence is presented to the contrary. Of course, the government can and does occasionally go against the will of the people but that's more the exception than the rule.

paganel 11y ago

> Because nurturing a foreign rentier class is not the best plan for retaining your sovereignty and keeping local people happy and wealthy? I'm an Eastern European living in a relatively big Eastern European city, and I'm now writing this from an apartment that I'm a renting from a very cool French guy, the owner, who is in his late 50s or so. At the height of the local real estate bubble (in 2007) the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund invested in buying 500 apartments in a local project, the investment flopped (I don't petty the Norwegians, though, that fund is huge). And I could go on and on with other examples of foreign-owned properties in the city where I'm living in. Point is, this is capitalism. I'm paying rent to the French owner of my apartment with the money I'm gaining from my current American oversees employer, and there's nothing wrong with that. You guys cannot choose which aspects of capitalism you want to like and which not, i.e. you cannot be allowed to invest freely in other parts of the globe (like Canada is now allowed to do) and in turn not allow other nations to invest in Canada (like not allowing Chinese real estate investors to buy property in Canada). Because if you do that you're economic colonialists.

mahyarm 11y ago
Most people are suggesting things like a non-occupied housing property tax, so people rent out unoccupied properties. And stronger money laundering enforcement so kleptocrats don't use housing as a bank account.
ant6n 11y ago
"You guys cannot choose which aspects of capitalism you want to like and which not..." Every country chooses which aspects of capitalism they want, via regulation, taxes, social programs. Even the most laissez-faire county does. There is no pure capitalism, it doesn't exist.
learc83 11y ago
>You guys cannot choose which aspects of capitalism you want to like Yes they can, all countries do this. Minimum wage laws, environmental protection laws, progressive taxation etc... All designed to restrict elements of capitalism we don't like. >You cannot be allowed to invest freely in other parts of the globe Their are all kinds of property restrictions on foreigners in many many countries. Until 6 months ago foreigners couldn't buy property in China without first living there for a year. If a country wants to restrict foreign property purchases that's their business. They don't owe anything to other countries who let their citizens buy property. The reason those other countries allow foreigners to buy properties is not altruistic, it's to attract investment. They would continue to allow Canadians to buy homes even if Canada completely shut their citizens out. But if Canadians started driving up local home prices to the point that they are causing problems, they would add restrictions.
- paganel 11y ago
  > The reason those other countries allow foreigners to buy properties is not altruistic, it's to attract investment. So Canada doesn't want FDI, got it. Well, good for them, it means they're self sufficient. It's interesting because when the going was good, meaning when Canada was making tons of money out of selling their mineral riches to China, I didn't use to hear so many bad stuff about the Chinese. Now, when some of those Chinese people want to invest their money back into Canada somehow it's bad for the middle class Canadians. I'm missing something, because I can't make sense of all this, but I'm just a programmer.