Hacker News Reader

Comment by jellicle | Hacker News Reader

The only beneficiaries I can think of for this program would be rich capitalists from China and the Middle East who are exporting their gains and sinking them into foreign property already, and who would now get a fast-track for immigration as well.

I guess Congress would like to get campaign contributions from these people (once you have a green card, you can legally make political contributions to U.S. politicians).

Still waiting for Congress to do something - anything - for people who aren't millionaires (or indeed, are U.S. citizens).

View on HN

They're not the only beneficiaries. I can think of a few moderately-wealthy foreign-born H1Bs (and equivalent) living in Northern California who might have half a million spare and wouldn't mind buying a $500K house and getting a free greencard if it'd save them the trouble of going through the usual immigration process. Picking, just as a random example, say, me.

I'm not even sure whether I want to remain in the US long term, but if offered a free greencard I'd say yes.

The direct beneficiaries are American homeowners, who get higher prices for overvalued assets and financial institutions holding housing as collateral. The losers are lower-income Americans (often also recent immigrants) for whom the cost of housing remains out of reach.

Excellent conclusion, David. I have seen this play out in vancouver, british columbia. Look it up.

"The only beneficiaries I can think of for this program would be rich capitalists from China and the Middle East ..."

Actually, Canadians are largest percentage of foreigners buying homes in the U.S. at 23%.[1]

[1] Canadians Warm to Phoenix, Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020401060457659...

They would extend the offer only to those that spend half a million dollars on a home. I have a feeling that excludes most of the Canadians bargain hunting for property in Phoenix.

Pass this proposal and half a million dollars will be a bargain.

You misread, it is only $250,000 for the first home, and the rest can be investment.

I didn't realize there was a slumlord shortage.

In most of the country, $250,000 is quite a nice house. Let your mind think outside the Bay Area every now and again.

I just did a search in the most distant Chicago suburb I could name off the top of my head, and this was the closest I could come to exactly $250:

http://www.trulia.com/property/31925157-723-Tiller-St-Elburn...

What do you suppose that would run you in, say, Los Gatos?

Try coming to the midwest. That buys a pretty good size house.

It's not the half to buy the primary residence which sparked the comment.

It's the half which is expected to be invested in income producing property.

I once worked as a city planner.

If you are ever around people who enforce housing standards, you will learn that absentee landlords correlate with problematic rental property.

There is also tends to be a correlation between what people view as acceptable rental housing management and the culture in which they were raised.

There is no Valley bias in my post...I've always lived in the South East.

Canada has an over-inflated real estate market, especially in Vancouver, which is equal to the bay area or even more expensive and the best weather we can get within Canada is Seattle style around Vancouver. Canadians finding US houses attractive in these two cases is not surprising.

I don't see a problem in these being the only beneficiaries, right now, they are already getting EB5 visas if they invest in a business. This approach would be similar, except with the added benefit of solving the issue (or at least help) of the housing market. I think this is a really creative approach.

The problem with housing is that it is too expensive for the common man. Propping up prices artificially is not a solution.

The prices now will be less artificial, since more people will be involved in setting them.

More artificial, since they are buying a visa with a free house attached.

It is for the financial elite. They want to OWN and let the "common man" RENT.

Not like they don't have any other choice if this proposal doesn't pass, if you look at immigration patterns to Vancouver and Toronto.

This would just put US in competitive position with other countries catering to these customers. Potential visa troubles are a non-trivial deal-blocker for many.

Are you referring to business class immigration? In Canada, its $800k, and you don't get a house ([http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/business/index.asp]). But yeah, point.

Think of it this way: Schumer is (partially) owned by the finance industry.

This doesn't do that much for the finance industry since it has to be a cash purchase.

Still, I guess it'd drive prices up somewhat. The effect couldn't be huge, though... there's not that many foreigners with half a million bucks cash who want to leave their home countries and reside in the US.

On the other hand, given a choice of all possible immigrants, I don't think there's any problem with the US moving "those with half a million bucks" to the top of the list.

Well, the finance industry does seem to have a backlog of repoed houses, no?

You'd be surprised how many people would take them up on this, Canada, China, the middle east and Asia in general have a lot of rich folks who's kids come to the US for university.

You're forgetting people in with houses to offload and banks with foreclosed $1M homes that they might want to make 50% return on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com