Peter Thiel only spent 12 days in NZ before being granted citizenship | Hacker News Reader

Peter Thiel only spent 12 days in NZ before being granted citizenship

newshub.co.nz

41 pointsr72157 comments

As a Kiwi. The way they treat Kim Dotcom, and grant this guy citizen for little reason at all, makes me super disappointed in NZ. Just so sad we treat people differently based on politics that don't benefit NZ.

It's politics that benefits the 1%'ers in NZ.

Same reason why street crime is a real problem in NZ when it shouldn't be because it goes relatively unenforced, while they run arguably one of the highest War on Drugs cost/GDP per capita in the world. Makes no sense for the dignity of the average NZ citizen.

> Just so sad we treat people differently based on politics that don't benefit NZ.

Surely someone there benefits from it, or it would have never happened.

However controversial Thiel may be, there's no arguing the benefits his citizenship grants NZ. If millions of $$ of investment and hundreds of jobs created don't qualify him for citizenship, there's a fallacy needing fixing.

FYI - the US grants green cards to foreigners who invest $1M in new American businesses, NZ probably has an unwritten law that grants citizenship to those who stimulate it's economy

If his monetary support helps to get a figure similar to Trump elected in NZ then he'd have done way more damage than good for the country. Whatever your stance on his politics, his election has done immense damage to the image of the US in the rest of the world.

Edit: Wow, my first negative score comment. Could some of the people silently downvoting please specify whether they think my comment is factually incorrect or non-pertinent?

In NZ the conservative party makes the US democrats look like a far right party. It's hard to see a Trump emerging in a landscape like that.

Untrue - just look at their punitive drug laws for e.g.. Aus and NZ are nanny states. Maybe Thiel's libertarian influence would be good for the country.

I back you up. There's more than just a dollar figure to these subjective decisions.

E.g. Seychelles islands grants immunity to misdemeanors for a $2 million fee. But how can a society function with the rule of law suspended for the wealthy?

It only does so temporarily before people revolt.

It's called foreign investment. And not buyyourselfin investment.

And prostitues are called escorts because they only keep you company on your travels.

The rules are as they are. If someone stimulates your economy, they can get in. Nobody is going to ask why.

I'd be surprised (and amused) if they had refused him entry "because we think you may be doing it for yourself more than for us."

Call it what you want to. There are a few hundred xero employees (kiwis) supporting families, the economy, adding to the technical chops of NZ, ..., because of Theil's investment.

That can't possibly be so bad.

Do you have reason to believe Thiel was the last/only person willing to make that investment?

Edit: To be clear: point is, yes, investment is valuable, but it doesn't necessarily follow that there's no company or employment but-for his investment.

I think this mindset is largely harmful to the indigenous population of New Zealand, who will become increasingly margenalized in their home country.

I don't think people of New Zealand are marginalized by Peter Thiel.

By Thiel having NZ passport? How does that work? How many indigenous people were consulted before arriving to this conclusion?

There's no evidence to suggest that Thiel's presence will increase that marginalization, or if Thiel is actually interested in decreasing it in the first place.

"or if Thiel is actually interested in decreasing it in the first place"

So, even if hypothetically there were increased marginalization, it would only matter if it were against Thiel's intention?...

No, I simply mean that not only is there nothing to indicate that Thiel's presence will marginalize anyone, but also that Thiel himself doesn't seem likely to engage in any behavior that would marginalize anyone. Therefore the probability of it happening seems quite low.

Got it.

Let 1000 people in worth 1,000,000 dollars or let on 1,000,000 people in with 1000 dollars, which group will on average create more jobs?

Look I'd like to take the high road too and say everyone is equal, but we only begin that way.

(Note: I'm from the second group in this mind game)

My tangential comment to your comment would be: Which creates more jobs, 1,000 millionaires, or 1 billionaire. I would say 1000 millionaires would have a much greater chance of creating many more jobs.

At least 1000 immigrant millionaires have spent the million buying a house in Auckland over the past few years. These are houses that would have sold for only, say, 950,000 if those immigrant millionaires hadn't been in the buyers market, so I guess that's created an extra office job or two at the local banks and real estate offices.

An immigrant billionaire might buy a mansion with airfield attached for his armageddon hideout. Or he might grow a business employing immigrant workers on work visas. Some citizens might get jobs in the service sector servicing them.

What's "fallacious" about the view that countries shouldn't issue citizenship for capital as an investment vehicle might shares?

(Incidentally, pointing to the mere existence of somewhat analogous programs elsewhere in the attempt to justify the grant literally is fallacious. Inferring an ought from an is.)

Why shouldn't they?

Should they? If yes, what's the argument, and can the conception of "citizenship" it assumes be reconciled with how most people view the meaning of their own citizenship? I suspect there would be significant tension there, but in any case that's not really my point. It's that there's a distinction between fallacy and opposing viewpoint.

Full report from the NZ government [pdf]:

https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Peter-Thiel-rel...

It says he gave a $1 million donation to the Christchurch earthquake relief fund. That'll probably do it yeah.

It takes way less than $1 million to get citizenship in most countries:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/07/countries-selling-cit...

Including the US. You do have to spend quite a bit of time here to be granted citizenship, even if you invest.

So what? In Israel, you can become a citizen without spending even a whole day there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return

I don't see why if NZ thinks having Thiel as a citizen would be good for them, they can't give him citizenship at any moment they'd like.

So because other countries do the same or worse, it justifies this ? I'm impressed.

How is this worse? What is bad in it?

That's so f* up! Money can buy you everything. Even a citizenship. The NZ-gov should asked themselves why a close Trump supporter and VC is looking for a safe haven outside of the US. Will this person really add value to the society? Or will he build a massive mansion with a wall around it and an airport?

Of course you can buy citizenship. Here's a price list if you are in the market:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/07/countries-selling-cit...

Latvian citizenship at 35.000€ with no residency requirements looks like a steal, considering that you would be allowed to live anywhere in the EU, if I'm not misinterpreting.

You didn't finish your research. Process takes ten years and requires you to become fluent in Latvian.

>That's so f up! Money can buy you everything. Even a citizenship.*

The latter "money for citizenship" has been going on in most countries (including the USA).

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/07/countries-selling-cit...

I'd just like to see more commitment than spending money. sports people representing a new country i.e.

The government can receive money from this guy with no added costs, as it is unlikely that Thiel poses a threat to NZ or its citizens. Even if he builds a mansion or something that's still a net positive that would be irresponsible not to take advantage of. (assuming the funds are not lost to corruption)

Can granting Thiel citizenship create problems in the future, in terms of kickstarting negative trends? That's a possibility but it seems like a nebulous and remote one.

If buying citizenships was illegal, the pressures that causing citizenship purchases would not go away. They would just become an incentive to more corruption.

Virtually every developed country allows purchase of citizenship: http://www.econmatters.com/2016/07/the-price-of-citizenship-...

He is very wealthy and adds intellectual capital to any country he chooses to live, why is that controversial?

New Zealand as a nation is very suspicious of success. 'tall poppy syndrome'

He doesn't intent to live there, at least that's what he claimed in the application.

So why did Thiel chose NZ? USA allows dual citizenship to many other countries as well. NZ seem to have 33% tax rate so shouldn't that be off putting? Also, why take duel citizenship at all because US may then force you to relinquish USA citizenship.

Safest place to be in case of nuclear war (due to low number of nearby potential targets, opposite hemisphere of most targets, good wind patterns to avoid fallout from potential targets).

There's probably more playing into it. But being a relatively geographically far, politically stable country probably has a fair bit to do with it.

I'm not sure if NZ is a net food importer/exporter, but IIRC AU can produce enough food to cover AU population so I wouldn't be surprised if NZ was similar.

1 rule for the rich quite a different bunch of rules for the rest of us

It depends what you bring to the table and that's as it should be.

The rule is: if you're willing to spend a million for membership, welcome to the club!

...and it's the same rule for everyone.

It's funny a lot of people thinks it's not okay to grant citizenship because of Thiel's own opinion, or arguing whether Thiel will add value to the society. It's funnier when they themselves don't have the same net worth.

He's probably one of their 5 richest citizens at this point. Why would they not seize the opportunity to increase their tax base?

Most likely he doesn't pay personal taxes to NZ. If he still retains his American citizenship, the IRS expects him to file there.

There's a wider view of things than just personal taxes.

If he spends the plurality of days of a year in NZ, he will pay taxes there, and those are deducted from his US tax return (which usually means no US taxes, considering most countries' taxes are higher than the US').

Granted that's assuming he actually has any meaningful personal taxable income, which is somewhat doubtful.

I'll take any motherfucker's money if he given' it away - Geoff "Clay Davis" May

That's ridiculous.

How can it take that long for funds to clear?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com