4 ms·

GC holder of 25 years with citizen parents. I agree with you and I stress about this daily. It's always been a shitty deal though - we are taxed with no represe

by BowBun 5mo ago

GC holder of 25 years with citizen parents. I agree with you and I stress about this daily. It's always been a shitty deal though - we are taxed with no representation in government.

throw-the-towel 5mo ago
Genuinely curious why didn't you pursue citizenship though? (No pressure to answer of course, that might be a deeply personal thing.)
- BowBun 5mo ago
  We did not meet continuous residency requirements for 10-15 years due to travel for my dad's work. Afterwards, it took me nearly 5 years to meet that requirement due to the fact that I lived and graduated abroad for highschool. I tried around COVID, was denied based on truthfully admitting I had smoked some weed in the previous 5 years while I lived in Colorado. That reset my clock for another five years. I constantly wrestle with whether I even want to be associated with this country for the rest of my life. I'm prideful and a high earner, there's only so much I'll accept before moving my family and assets somewhere else. Hope that provides some color. To all the fans of the current immigration policies - you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
joe_mamba 5mo ago
>we are taxed with no representation in government. In which country can you emigrate to and be allowed votes in government representation just because you pay taxes? I'm an EU citizen and living in another EU country and am not allowed to vote in that country's government elections, just local ones. If you want to vote at government level then you need to apply and get citizenship which also comes with the responsibility(or obligation more accurately) of military draft. Everything about this seems pretty fair to me. I'm not sure why not to you. If you're not a citizen you shouldn't be allowed to vote at gov level since you're not subject to a draft, because in case the shit hits the fan militarily, unlike citizens, you can just pack your bags and go back to your home country and avoid dying in the front lines. So why would any country let people who aren't subject to draft vote? Makes no sense. You don't have the same skin in the game as citizens who are draftable just because you pay some taxes. Now if you're paying taxes in a foreign country where you can't vote, it means you're there voluntarily because you're getting a much better deal than being in your own country where you can vote. Probably you're in the US because you make orders of magnitude more money than in your own country, but nobody in the US dragged you there against your will to work and pay them taxes, you agreed to this situation voluntarily because it also benefits you personally, and you would just as easily leave if it stopped benefiting you.
- doix 5mo ago
  > In which country can you emigrate to and be allowed votes in government representation just because you pay taxes? There are a few, with varying degrees of residency time (and possibly other conditions) required. New Zealand requires being a resident for a year. The UK is particularly interesting, if you're a citizen of a common wealth nation you can vote in national UK elections if you're a resident. Personally, I agree with you though. I didn't vote in the UK despite being able too. Let the citizens decide the future of their nation, I have the privilege to leave (and have done so already). Feels wrong for me to influence the nation when I'm not fully invested in the outcome.
- geodel 5mo ago
  Indeed. Entitlement on immigration issues is through the roof here.
  - eschaton 5mo ago
    As a person, why should you not have a say in how things are governed where you live? The idea that you should be required to swear some loyalty to a government before you get a say in how the place you live is governed is the position that’s actually absurd. (Yes, I do think there should be a global republic and that there should be full freedom of movement. It’s way past time for that.)
    - decafninja 5mo ago
      Because as a non-citizen, you are technically still a guest? If you love the place you're living in and want to actively participate in its governance, including implementing any changes, you should obtain citizenship. And even if you do, your stake would still be less than those who've been living there all their lives, across many generations. Maybe the natives actually don't want the changes that the immigrants want to see implemented. (not going to argue the finer details of ethics like racism or xenophobia, etc. which I acknowledge can often come up in cases like this).
    - auyez 5mo ago
throwaway2037 5mo ago
> we are taxed with no representation in government This is true in most highly-developed democratic nations. If it is so important to you, then you should become a citizen, or return to your home country (so that you may vote). And curiously, does your home country not have the same rule? Do you find that position hypocritical?
- fweimer 5mo ago
  It's certainly possible to make different arrangements. Some European countries do that for local elections, for example.
- BowBun 5mo ago
  The choice is not so binary, as anyone seriously discussing this topic should immediately recognize. There are indeed ways for foreigners to participate in local politics in many countries, here is some data if you're interested in learning - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-citizen_suffrage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-citizen_suffrage My country does in fact provide this right to foreign residents who live a certain amount of time in the country. Even if it didn't, it would not be a hypocritical position to state something is bad. Do you think I wrote the laws? Hardly seems like a good-faith argument or even a sound one!
bubblethink 5mo ago
>we are taxed with no representation in government You have representation. Perhaps you mean suffrage.
- lotrjohn 5mo ago
  Perhaps they live in DC?
- gjm11 5mo ago
  Or perhaps they mean the same thing as was meant by the slogan when it was first coined, around the time of the American Revolution, and the same thing as was meant by the women's suffragists who used it in the late 19th century. Maybe in some sense "no taxation without suffrage" would be more accurate, but it would be a worse slogan. In any case, "no taxation without representation" is a well known phrase, it's been around for over 250 years, and I don't think much is achieved by nitpicking its wording.
  - bubblethink 5mo ago
    You do have congressional representatives and senators who represent you and your interests and can take action on your behalf just as they would if you were a citizen. I have had decent luck in getting assistance from them despite not being a citizen.
    - itsmek 5mo ago
      The person you're replying to knows this. You're missing their point.
      - bubblethink 5mo ago
        To exist is to be taxed. If you exist at all in the US, you will be taxed. You may even be taxed even if you are not in the US. So saying that taxation somehow implies voting ability would be quite absurd. This doesn't hold true anywhere in the world.

by BowBun 5mo ago

GC holder of 25 years with citizen parents. I agree with you and I stress about this daily. It's always been a shitty deal though - we are taxed with no representation in government.

throw-the-towel 5mo ago

Genuinely curious why didn't you pursue citizenship though? (No pressure to answer of course, that might be a deeply personal thing.)

BowBun 5mo ago
We did not meet continuous residency requirements for 10-15 years due to travel for my dad's work. Afterwards, it took me nearly 5 years to meet that requirement due to the fact that I lived and graduated abroad for highschool. I tried around COVID, was denied based on truthfully admitting I had smoked some weed in the previous 5 years while I lived in Colorado. That reset my clock for another five years. I constantly wrestle with whether I even want to be associated with this country for the rest of my life. I'm prideful and a high earner, there's only so much I'll accept before moving my family and assets somewhere else. Hope that provides some color. To all the fans of the current immigration policies - you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

joe_mamba 5mo ago

>we are taxed with no representation in government. In which country can you emigrate to and be allowed votes in government representation just because you pay taxes? I'm an EU citizen and living in another EU country and am not allowed to vote in that country's government elections, just local ones. If you want to vote at government level then you need to apply and get citizenship which also comes with the responsibility(or obligation more accurately) of military draft. Everything about this seems pretty fair to me. I'm not sure why not to you. If you're not a citizen you shouldn't be allowed to vote at gov level since you're not subject to a draft, because in case the shit hits the fan militarily, unlike citizens, you can just pack your bags and go back to your home country and avoid dying in the front lines. So why would any country let people who aren't subject to draft vote? Makes no sense. You don't have the same skin in the game as citizens who are draftable just because you pay some taxes. Now if you're paying taxes in a foreign country where you can't vote, it means you're there voluntarily because you're getting a much better deal than being in your own country where you can vote. Probably you're in the US because you make orders of magnitude more money than in your own country, but nobody in the US dragged you there against your will to work and pay them taxes, you agreed to this situation voluntarily because it also benefits you personally, and you would just as easily leave if it stopped benefiting you.

doix 5mo ago
> In which country can you emigrate to and be allowed votes in government representation just because you pay taxes? There are a few, with varying degrees of residency time (and possibly other conditions) required. New Zealand requires being a resident for a year. The UK is particularly interesting, if you're a citizen of a common wealth nation you can vote in national UK elections if you're a resident. Personally, I agree with you though. I didn't vote in the UK despite being able too. Let the citizens decide the future of their nation, I have the privilege to leave (and have done so already). Feels wrong for me to influence the nation when I'm not fully invested in the outcome.
geodel 5mo ago
Indeed. Entitlement on immigration issues is through the roof here.
- eschaton 5mo ago
  As a person, why should you not have a say in how things are governed where you live? The idea that you should be required to swear some loyalty to a government before you get a say in how the place you live is governed is the position that’s actually absurd. (Yes, I do think there should be a global republic and that there should be full freedom of movement. It’s way past time for that.)
  - decafninja 5mo ago
    Because as a non-citizen, you are technically still a guest? If you love the place you're living in and want to actively participate in its governance, including implementing any changes, you should obtain citizenship. And even if you do, your stake would still be less than those who've been living there all their lives, across many generations. Maybe the natives actually don't want the changes that the immigrants want to see implemented. (not going to argue the finer details of ethics like racism or xenophobia, etc. which I acknowledge can often come up in cases like this).
  - auyez 5mo ago

throwaway2037 5mo ago

> we are taxed with no representation in government This is true in most highly-developed democratic nations. If it is so important to you, then you should become a citizen, or return to your home country (so that you may vote). And curiously, does your home country not have the same rule? Do you find that position hypocritical?

fweimer 5mo ago
It's certainly possible to make different arrangements. Some European countries do that for local elections, for example.
BowBun 5mo ago
The choice is not so binary, as anyone seriously discussing this topic should immediately recognize. There are indeed ways for foreigners to participate in local politics in many countries, here is some data if you're interested in learning - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-citizen_suffrage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-citizen_suffrage My country does in fact provide this right to foreign residents who live a certain amount of time in the country. Even if it didn't, it would not be a hypocritical position to state something is bad. Do you think I wrote the laws? Hardly seems like a good-faith argument or even a sound one!

bubblethink 5mo ago

>we are taxed with no representation in government You have representation. Perhaps you mean suffrage.

lotrjohn 5mo ago
Perhaps they live in DC?
gjm11 5mo ago
Or perhaps they mean the same thing as was meant by the slogan when it was first coined, around the time of the American Revolution, and the same thing as was meant by the women's suffragists who used it in the late 19th century. Maybe in some sense "no taxation without suffrage" would be more accurate, but it would be a worse slogan. In any case, "no taxation without representation" is a well known phrase, it's been around for over 250 years, and I don't think much is achieved by nitpicking its wording.
- bubblethink 5mo ago
  You do have congressional representatives and senators who represent you and your interests and can take action on your behalf just as they would if you were a citizen. I have had decent luck in getting assistance from them despite not being a citizen.
  - itsmek 5mo ago
    The person you're replying to knows this. You're missing their point.
    - bubblethink 5mo ago
      To exist is to be taxed. If you exist at all in the US, you will be taxed. You may even be taxed even if you are not in the US. So saying that taxation somehow implies voting ability would be quite absurd. This doesn't hold true anywhere in the world.