4 ms·

To be fair, your personal example would likely not be a quality argument in any case, and you not qualifying for a program in another country wouldn't necessari

To be fair, your personal example would likely not be a quality argument in any case, and you not qualifying for a program in another country wouldn't necessarily good or bad in itself. A strong argument should not only, as it is customary in modern times, to look at the advantages and the interest of the individual, but also consider the benefit of the commons, in this case the the country that (hopefully) designed their digital nomad program to the benefit of its population. It is their responsibility to attract and reject people accordingly.

ZoomZoomZoom 3y ago
> your personal example would likely not be a quality argument in any case Uh, thanks? > in this case the the country that (hopefully) designed their digital nomad program to the benefit of its population Well, I can agree and just note that this is orthogonal to the issue I'm raising: It's a rich people visa and as such is not helpful to many people who objectively qualify for a "digital nomad" moniker, so there's a mismatch between the name and the function.