4 ms·

What’s rich about it? You can live in Japan as a non-resident and still be following 100% of the rules. I agree with the GP. It’s their country. They set the r

by timr 4mo ago

What’s rich about it? You can live in Japan as a non-resident and still be following 100% of the rules. I agree with the GP. It’s their country. They set the rules. If they want to change the rules because those rules aren’t working for them, that’s their prerogative. As a USian, I’m actually sort of jealous that they have the ability to make changes so quickly.

klausa 4mo ago
>You can live in Japan as a non-resident and still be following 100% of the rules. Not for any reasonable definition of "live in", you can't.
- timr 4mo ago
  Well, it depends a little on what OP meant by “resident” - often that gets used by expats to mean “permanent resident”, which is a pretty high bar. But even if you just assume that OP is here on the digital nomad visa thing, you’re effectively living here. More to the point, you’re following the rules, and it’s not at all ironic or contradictory to have an opinion that the rules can be changed by the host.
  - klausa 4mo ago
    If they meant "permanent resident" when they said "resident" that'd be a pretty weird, given, you know, our 在留カード literally say "residence card" on them; but perhaps this actually common, and I'm one of today's lucky 10,000. But if they're here on a Digital Nomad visa, then their stay is limited to 6mo with no pathway to extending this — _I_ personally don't think that qualifies as "living" in a place, but perhaps reasonable people can disagree on this point.
    - timr 4mo ago
      Yes, I knew as soon as I wrote that that someone would chime in with the English definition of 在留. I thought about deleting it since it isn’t important to the argument, but I left it in because it’s a thing I’ve heard expats say here. Look, even if OP is just living here on a tourist visa and doesn’t have any form of residency at all, and (s)he’s still following the rules as established, it’s not even remotely ironic to say that the rules are the rules, and the host has the right to change the rules. It would be ironic if OP did that while admitting to violating immigration law.
      - klausa 4mo ago
        But that's the entire point! >if OP is just living here on a tourist visa and doesn’t have any form of residency at all, and (s)he’s still following the rules as established No, I don't think they are. I think if you're _living_ here on a tourist visa, that's very much "abusing the visa".
        timr 4mo ago
        It’s not the point. If you’re following the rules, you can call it whatever you like. If you’re not following the rules, then it’s at least ironic that you’d be calling for defense of the rules. It’s a weirdly motivated form of pedantry to get snarky at someone for using the word “living” when you know nothing about their situation. It’s almost like you’re looking for a reason to be upset.
        deleted 4mo ago
        [deleted]
    - cedws 4mo ago
      That’s correct, I’m here on a DN visa. I also stayed on one 6 months last year.
      - deleted 4mo ago
        [deleted]
akg_67 4mo ago
Double standards. He is an immigrant in Japan but he doesn’t want immigrants both in his host (Japan) and home (UK) countries. Pretty ironic come to think of. I guess he thinks his type are “good” immigrants, others are not so much.
- timr 4mo ago
  > He is an immigrant in Japan but he doesn’t want immigrants both in his host (Japan) and home (UK) countries Except that’s not what he said at all. He said if there’s visa abuse, the abuse should be stopped. How one gets “doesn’t want immigrants” from this is beyond me.
  - akg_67 4mo ago
    > As a *Brit living in Japan* (non-resident) I think they should protect themselves at all costs, lest *what happened to my country happen to theirs.*
    - timr 4mo ago
      Yes, keep reading…don’t just stop when the first part of the paragraph makes you mad.
    - aurareturn 4mo ago
      UK doesn't have an issue with visa abuse though.
- modo_mario 4mo ago
  The UK isn't exactly an assimilation success story. As someone with potential aspirations of moving to a different country I don't mind it if they tried to avoid that kind of scenario and to retain their state's character to some extent. The irony comment comes across somewhat innefective and petulant when I and others i've encountered with such views hold them in spite of the effects it could have for us. I don't see the point in laughing at that any more than i see it in calling out irony when a rich person calls for tax hoops to be closed and taxation to be fair.

by timr 4mo ago

klausa 4mo ago

>You can live in Japan as a non-resident and still be following 100% of the rules. Not for any reasonable definition of "live in", you can't.

timr 4mo ago
Well, it depends a little on what OP meant by “resident” - often that gets used by expats to mean “permanent resident”, which is a pretty high bar. But even if you just assume that OP is here on the digital nomad visa thing, you’re effectively living here. More to the point, you’re following the rules, and it’s not at all ironic or contradictory to have an opinion that the rules can be changed by the host.
- klausa 4mo ago
  If they meant "permanent resident" when they said "resident" that'd be a pretty weird, given, you know, our 在留カード literally say "residence card" on them; but perhaps this actually common, and I'm one of today's lucky 10,000. But if they're here on a Digital Nomad visa, then their stay is limited to 6mo with no pathway to extending this — _I_ personally don't think that qualifies as "living" in a place, but perhaps reasonable people can disagree on this point.
  - timr 4mo ago
    Yes, I knew as soon as I wrote that that someone would chime in with the English definition of 在留. I thought about deleting it since it isn’t important to the argument, but I left it in because it’s a thing I’ve heard expats say here. Look, even if OP is just living here on a tourist visa and doesn’t have any form of residency at all, and (s)he’s still following the rules as established, it’s not even remotely ironic to say that the rules are the rules, and the host has the right to change the rules. It would be ironic if OP did that while admitting to violating immigration law.
    - klausa 4mo ago
      But that's the entire point! >if OP is just living here on a tourist visa and doesn’t have any form of residency at all, and (s)he’s still following the rules as established No, I don't think they are. I think if you're _living_ here on a tourist visa, that's very much "abusing the visa".
      - timr 4mo ago
        It’s not the point. If you’re following the rules, you can call it whatever you like. If you’re not following the rules, then it’s at least ironic that you’d be calling for defense of the rules. It’s a weirdly motivated form of pedantry to get snarky at someone for using the word “living” when you know nothing about their situation. It’s almost like you’re looking for a reason to be upset.
        deleted 4mo ago
        [deleted]
  - cedws 4mo ago
    That’s correct, I’m here on a DN visa. I also stayed on one 6 months last year.
    - deleted 4mo ago
      [deleted]

akg_67 4mo ago

Double standards. He is an immigrant in Japan but he doesn’t want immigrants both in his host (Japan) and home (UK) countries. Pretty ironic come to think of. I guess he thinks his type are “good” immigrants, others are not so much.

timr 4mo ago
> He is an immigrant in Japan but he doesn’t want immigrants both in his host (Japan) and home (UK) countries Except that’s not what he said at all. He said if there’s visa abuse, the abuse should be stopped. How one gets “doesn’t want immigrants” from this is beyond me.
- akg_67 4mo ago
  > As a *Brit living in Japan* (non-resident) I think they should protect themselves at all costs, lest *what happened to my country happen to theirs.*
  - timr 4mo ago
    Yes, keep reading…don’t just stop when the first part of the paragraph makes you mad.
  - aurareturn 4mo ago
    UK doesn't have an issue with visa abuse though.
modo_mario 4mo ago
The UK isn't exactly an assimilation success story. As someone with potential aspirations of moving to a different country I don't mind it if they tried to avoid that kind of scenario and to retain their state's character to some extent. The irony comment comes across somewhat innefective and petulant when I and others i've encountered with such views hold them in spite of the effects it could have for us. I don't see the point in laughing at that any more than i see it in calling out irony when a rich person calls for tax hoops to be closed and taxation to be fair.