3 ms·
There are good arguments that foreigners should only be allowed to own real estate only in specific places and that citizenship should be by blood only for smal
by ReptileMan 4y ago
There are good arguments that foreigners should only be allowed to own real estate only in specific places and that citizenship should be by blood only for small countries - let's say under 100000 sq km and 50 million people. Too easy for them to be overtaken by global elite otherwise.
- foogazi 4y ago> There are good arguments that foreigners should only be allowed to own real estate only in specific places What are the good arguments ? Do you think the “global elite” is invading Portugal ?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ReptileMan 4y agoThe poorer part. The richer are busy fucking up London, New York and Vancouver and other desirable places.
- outworlder 4y ago> There are good arguments that foreigners should only be allowed to own real estate only in specific places In the context of receiving visas, that's exactly what already happens in Portugal.
- ReptileMan 4y agoNo. They can buy everywhere in Portugal. The idea is that you forbid them to buy near the desirable coast and force them into the heartland.
- notch656a 4y agoCitizenship-by-investment programs are dominated by small nations. Seems like smaller nations actually disproportionately favor absorbing richer foreigners. The most extreme example is probably Comoros, which up until a few years ago you could become a citizen for $45k over-the-counter.
- bogomipz 4y agoThe US and Canada are no strangers to these schemes though.