5 ms·
There's a lot of court cases about how making something absurdly expensive is the same as not allowing something. The rules exist because otherwise people act
by rtpg 8y ago
There's a lot of court cases about how making something absurdly expensive is the same as not allowing something.
The rules exist because otherwise people act in bad faith
- metei 8y agoPerhaps foreigners who flagarantly and repeatedly violate our laws should be prioritized for deportation. Why should some rich foriegner be allowed to break state and federal laws for years with no serious repercussions? Edit: If you disagree, please reply with an explanation!
- saagarjha 8y agoYour comment is xenophobic, and besides, Khosla is a US citizen, not a foreigner.
- metei 8y agoI'm not a fan of rich foreigners buying their way into citizenship, sure. But stealing from the public is illegal, no matter how good your lawyers are. Khosla is an immigrant who has applied for and been granted citizenship, but generally for less well to do immigrants, we hold them to high standards if they wish to retain citizenship (even though that results in us creating stateless people). Why is Khosla special?
- couchand 8y ago> generally for less well to do immigrants, we hold them to high standards if they wish to retain citizenship (even though that results in us creating stateless people) [citation needed]
- metei 8y agoTake a look at what'll cause denaturalization proceedings to take place: https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/Print/PolicyManual-Volume12-PartL.html https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/Print/PolicyManual-Volume...
- couchand 8y agoYep, it's basically just lying on your citizenship application and joining a terrorist organization. Not nothing, but also not a terribly "high standard".
- lutorm 8y agoPerhaps because you started a completely unrelated rant about "foreigners"?
- metei 8y agoIt is highly relevant to this discussion. Vinod Khosla is an immigrant from India, which I believe skews his views on public property such that he believes it is his right to take said property for his own use with no repurcussions.
- noobermin 8y agoThere are many foreigners, even rich ones, who don't have those views. It seems like a red herring.
- saagarjha 8y ago> Vinod Khosla is an immigrant from India, which I believe skews his views on public property such that he believes it is his right to take said property for his own use with no repurcussions. I think the more likely possibility is that he's just rich and his views come from that, rather than the country he's from.
- lutorm 8y agoIs your view of whether he should be allowed to do it skewed by what his origin is? (Meaning, do you think American property law applies differently depending on where you were born?) Edit: there are plenty of born-and-raised Americans who think it's fine to take public property, too. Just look at the "Occupy Bird Sanctuary" people and their kin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Malheur_National_Wildlife_Refuge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Malheur_Nati...) So the whole origin thing seems completely irrelevant to the discussion.
- tehlike 8y agoWhile i do not agree with vinod khosla, what you said is very dangerous. Also, i presume, he already got his citizenship through naturalization so not sure if you can deport him.