We have a different image of China and China has done a great job posing as next superpower but the reality is very different on the ground.
Rich Chinese want to get away from China by paying whatever price they can afford, this is not surprising at all!
No conflict between these. Lots of Americans have second passports, including Peter Thiel.
Thus, as with other countries that don't allow dual citizenship (e.g., Japan, India, Austria, Malaysia, Singapore) getting another nationality is probably a stronger exit signal.
Of course, most schemes start by giving permanent residency, which is different and sort of the best of both worlds.
My girlfriend and her family have Taiwanese, Chinese and US citizenship/passports though. Wonder how that works
No such restriction exists at least generally.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/travel-lega...
The US allows dual citizenship: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/dual-citizenship-all...
> The United States will not ask naturalizing citizens to take any steps to formally renounce the citizenship of their home country. Nor will it stop U.S. citizens from later adopting citizenship in another country – though if their intention is to give up U.S. citizenship, they can certainly do so. You may continue to vote in your home country, if it allows it.
> All this does not mean that the U.S. will tolerate divided loyalties. Dual citizens must obey U.S. laws, uphold the U.S. Constitution, and in every other way adhere to the naturalization oath that they take. They are also required by the I.N.A. to carry their U.S. passport when leaving the U.S., and to present it upon reentry.
> I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen;...
They won't require you to formally tell the other country you are renouncing it, which is good enough for practical purposes, since most other countries don't allow you to renounce your citizenship simply by telling some US bureaucrat you renounce and abjure it.
It's also an easy vector for foreign states to become 'addicted' to investment money generated from their industrial base and I.P. 'borrowing.'
Not everyone has an equal opportunity to make it big in China. If you care about freedom and a better future for your children, make money and move out!
1. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/indepth/national/how-peter-thiel-...
He has no credibility when it comes to immigration.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/indepth/national/how-peter-thiel-...
This is a thread about immigration. If Thiel's opinions on immigration are to be considered, then his own behaviour in that regard are absolutely relevant.
No, it's not. It might be germane if (1) his behavior demonstrated that he was particylt untrustworthy on this topic and (2) fact claims were being made that could only be accepted based on trusting Thiel.
It might also be germane if we were discussing the credibility of his claim to believe in the position he lays out rather than the merits of that position (this is actual a special case of the preceding.)
It's also potentially useful as a filter as to whether it's worthwhile to both considering his opinions and participating in the discussion in the first place; many fallacies are pragmatically useful in terms of whittling down the universe of ideas to decide which one are more likely to ve worth spending more time analyzing. But once you jump into the discussion on the merits, well, there is a reason fallacies have been identified.
The comment is definitely off topic and doesn’t add anything to the discussion, however.
It literally asks that his argument be dismissed because of his his personal conduct; it is textbook ad hominem.