Stepping back regarding the Russian oligachs. I think a very key word here is “oligarch”.
Sanctions against an “oligach” during war is not the same as actions taken against any other normal citizen. Oligarchs are by definition the ruling class of a nation.
Its like sanctions against Kim Jong-un immediate family or his generals. Those are things we would do as a nation politically without it being equal to legal actions against ordinary citizens.
This is the situation with Russian oligarchs. If they are actualy oligarchs then they’re part of the political rulers of Russia and thus legitimate target for political actions. I dont’ know the evidence against all the oligarchs but I’m pretty sure at least one is known to have funded efforts to meddle with our election.
Google it. You’d be surprised. The “relatively rare” is actually a significant portion of the illegal immigrant population - 30%.
Think we should adopt the immigration policies of those countries too?
Here’s the thing. I know you guys aren’t racists. But in your rush to signal your disapproval of Russia and support of some random half-baked “eat the Russian rich” talking point from Biden’s state of the Union, you are actually supporting policies that would harm illegal immigrants here WAY more than a few Russian billionaires. I know you’re not doing it because you’re racist. Most people don’t support the minimum wage because they are racist even though it disproportionately harms black youth. I just think it’s funny that you haven’t thought your point through to its logical conclusion and end up sounding like Trump supporters when defending it for no real reason.
30% of ~11M illegals is 3.3M. I don’t know how many people live in the home they own (the ~65% homeownership rate only tells us how many housing units are owner occupied, not how many people live in them), I would guess it’s close to 200M. 3.3/200 = relatively rare.
Don’t know. Probably not, since they’re relatively homogeneous (esp Japan). If you’re suggesting that land ownership is (or should be) related to immigration policies, it may be a valid point worth considering if true.
I’m not suggesting anything. You are the one suggesting only citizens and permanent residents own property. It’s such a ridiculous idea that it was never even a policy goal for Mr. Build the Wall himself.
Almost as rare as 1000 children dead from COVID, Jan. (and I did say relatively)
It’s not that ridiculous of an idea. Even Switzerland has a bunch of restrictions. I think most (by count, not by relative size) countries in Europe have at least some kind of residency and citizenship related restriction. Many other countries limit the plot size or location (such as proximity to ocean or international border in Mexico or proximity to military bases in a bunch of countries).
I agree it’s very nationalistic, which isn’t always a good thing. I’m asking why it’d be so bad, and so far all I hear from you is ridicule without any good reasons (other than illegal immigrants).
Because of how many 10s of millions of non-citizens we have living here, because a significant portion of them already own property, and because it would create a class division line that immigrants would never be able to cross until we fix our immigration system (it’s difficult, expensive, and time consuming to become a permanent resident, and damn near impossible if you came here illegally). It also is a solution in search of a problem. Besides all of a sudden wanting to stop bad billionaires from Russia from having property rights here, what exactly is the reason you’re interested in making it harder for millions of people to own property? How come I have to tell you why it’s a bad idea when my idea is the status quo and your idea is something so detrimental to immigrants that Donald Trump wasn’t even trying to do it?
As far as I know, it’s none of those for legal immigrants. But I already agreed that this is a valid argument you’ve made.
I’m interested in the idea itself. I’m even more interested in how Croatia does it – they only allow foreigners to purchase property if Croatians can purchase property in the purchaser’s country of residence. It seems fair. If I can’t buy anything in China, why should the Chinese be allowed to own here?
Like I said, nothing specifically against Russian oligarchs, only that the subject came up. And don’t bring Trump into this discussion, he’s in real estate and something like that might not be in his self-interest. This isn’t an anti-immigrant position, just an idea that may impact illegal immigrants if an exception could not be carved out somehow. If one could somehow establish de facto residency and be excluded from such a change, then it wouldn’t impact them.
Then you don’t know many permanent residents. One of the easiest routes is marrying an American and that can still take a while. Without that or a family connection, it’s even harder and longer. During the process, you can only be here on a legal visa, and they only last so long. Since the process is lengthy, it’s expensive even if you don’t need much from a lawyer because you have to travel home repeatedly to renew your visa. If you are legally allowed to work under your temporary visa, you still can’t hold down a steady job wity all the travel back home. There are a lot of steps. It’s difficult. Ask someone who has done it.
Huh? Just have a kid, or marry a U.S. citizen … or if you’re a Jew hating communist, marry your brother.
Well then, it’s probably already making it’s way through congress. A few years (and consequences) later, it will be identified as a crisis and we’ll need several billion to study/fix it.
Then your breadth of knowledge on legal immigration is lacking. If it were that easy, why do you think all those poor, hard-working, down-on-their-luck, afriad-for-their-lives, starving, peaceful, upstanding souls are breaking the law coming here illegally?
The subject of confiscating/seizing/freezing Russian oligarchs’ possessions came up. I’m okay with the government trying to prove that those possessions are were ill-gotten. I’m not okay with them trying to do it in response to Russian aggression. If it was illegal, they should have tried to do it decades ago.
As for passing new laws, I don’t think they should be brought up in the heat of the moment, as frequently, the brain takes a back seat to heartstrings.
I know a few. The difficulties in the scenarios you described are caused by those people coming here before “the process” is complete. I understand the process can take a while, and they can wait it out in their country of origin. Once the process is complete and they’re granted permission to enter and stay, permanent residency is pretty much automatic after 1 year, and citizenship after 5.
I didn’t say it was easy to become a legal immigrant. I said that once you become a legal immigrant (i.e., the aforementioned process is complete and you’re allowed to enter the country and stay forever), then obtaining permanent residency is not difficult, expensive, or time consuming. I think it’s simple, close to free (maybe there’s a nominal green card application fee or what not), and doesn’t take much time once you’ve met the residency requirements (1 year).
Me: It’s difficult, time consuming, and expensive to become a permanent resident.
You: No it’s not.
Me: Yes it is, X, Y, Z are all difficult, take time, and require money.
You: Oh, I meant it was easy if you did all those things beforehand. Yeah, the process to become qualified to be a permanent resident is difficult, time consuming, and expensive, but after that process, it’s easy.
Me:
but … I believe the law and argument used to steal yachts from oligarchs right now is the same exact law our police already use to seize envelopes of cash that innocent citizens carry in their car during traffic stops. Its just the same civil forefitiure laws being used. Isn’t it?
Not that I think its a good law overall, but that I don’t think wer’re going from seizing yachts to stealing random foreigners money. We’'ve already had police stealing random peoples money.
I’m pretty sure the Russian oligarchs are major world class crooks. Thats why I’m OK with us seizing their assets as a response to Russias illegal war in an obvious land/money/power grab. Yes they may be due to their day in court. Thats OK. They can show up after we accuse them of crimes and have it.
I don’t agree with your conclusion. I don’t think your logic is solid. I don’t think any of its funny.
Theres no good reason to require citizenship for land ownership in the US. Doing so would only cause problems. If foreigners couldn’t own land here it would decrease immigration (legal or not).
Immigration is good for the USA.
Yes. But using a bad policy to take things from bad people doesn’t make it a good policy. Civil asset forfeiture is used to take things from bad people already and you aren’t defending us using it more. So why, all of a sudden, when those bad people are Russian oligarchs rather than drug dealers participating in violent crime, is it a policy we should use?
So if we’ve established that they should have the assets because they broke the law (somewhere) to obtain them, we still have your next point…
This is where you lose me a second time. They either deserve to have their assets taken by us because of how they got them or they don’t. Ukraine is irrelevant if the assets aren’t stuff they stole from Ukraine. Nor are all oligarchs generals, war cabinet secretaries, or elected officials that voted to declare war. Yes, I understand they have some “ties” to power. But their assets are either ill-gotten and should be seized for that reason, or they aren’t. A war started by the authoritarian leader of their country’s government doesn’t make them more ill-gotten.
Then you aren’t doing a good job of putting yourself in the shoes of a conservative reading posts from a liberal defending a policy that is so anti-immigrant (not just illegal immigrant mind you) that Donald Trump didn’t even suggest it.
Only legal immigration, properly approved by Congress as had been the case for decades prior to today’s illegal immigration insanity, is good for the country.
When we cease being a nation of laws, we cease being a viable nation.
Do not try to conflate legal and illegal immigration as long as I’m a poster here. And by the way, for whatever it is worth, I believe legal immigration IS good for our country; very good. Period.
If I asked you how long it takes to boil an egg, would you include the time it took for the egg to hatch, for the farmer to deliver it to the grocery store, and for you to go to the grocery store and bring it home?
It’s not difficult or expensive to become a permanent resident – it’s difficult and expensive to live in the USA without having a legal immigrant status. It’s neither difficult nor expensive to stay put while waiting for that status.
(and I did say relatively)
