Hacker News Reader

Comment by Danjoe4 | Hacker News Reader

This is good. The central claim here is: if you can afford to pay $1 million, then you are almost certainly going to be a net benefit to our society.

That's a far better and more meritocratic vetting process than some lotto visa with a 10 year backlog.

View on HN

> if you can afford to pay $1 million, then you are almost certainly going to be a net benefit

Have a look at the outcomes in other countries that do this.

There's usually so many loopholes that any economic benefits just don't materialise.

Specifically govts usually specify investment, but then the applicants just buy assets or property that doesn't actually help the recipient country.

NZ gave a passport to Peter Thiel. I can only hope our government introduces a taxation law specific to him!

Citizenship by investment revenue was 20% of St Kitts’ GDP in 2023. Look at the Henley & Partners website - pretty much every developed country (much of EU, Singapore, Switzerland, many Asian countries) offer at least offer residency by investment. And they still offer it despite pressure from the EU to shut these programs down, so there must be some benefit to it.

These are usually designed for wealthy people. The benefits might only accrue to the wealthy in the target country. For example my government in New Zealand keeps talking about being able to sell land to foreigners if it's more than 2 million. That benefits people that own land worth 2 million. The theory is that it trickles down to benefit the majority, but I wouldn't bet that actually occurred.

The bar should not be investment, instead it should be how much is spent. That could also cover nomadic workers. So long as their expenses are bringing overseas income then everybody in the target country is likely to be advantaged.

Investment can benefit both parties (it doesn't have to be zero sum) but savvy investors don't give a shit whether there is any benefit to the country. Applicants naturally don't like to spend money without gain, yet the purpose of the golden visas should be to encourage applicants to spend money!!!

Or investors often just invest in static assets that just hold their wealth. That doesn't help the target country.

Just my opinion from looking at the schemes and wondering how I would get around the rules so that I had no dead weight expenses.

Another argument for why it's good: if you're rich, you can either pay lots of money to an immigration lawyer to make sure your visa gets approved, or you could cut out the middleman and pay the government directly. Why wouldn't they just cut out the middleman?

Since congress didn't authorize this how is it legal? If it's not authorized by congress and there's no rules about where the money goes, where does it go? How is it being tracked and where will the details be published? These are the questions answered by legislation. Here, it's a black hole into a pocket with no oversight.

Wealth = merit?

90% of the time, yes.

This is bad. Borders should be open.

Citizenship should not be devalued.

I don't believe participation in democratic society requires borders or citizenship.

It might do in Ukraine, or anywhere small with a big autocratic enemy.

So the son of some oligarch more worthy to immigrate than a poor but brilliant PhD?

Your edge cases don't refute my claim

You provided zero evidence for your claim that millionaires “are almost certainly going to be a net benefit to our society.”

Plenty of millionaires are sociopathic, corrupt, and power-hungry people. The millions may even be a testament to this fact.

I don't need to. Just look at your immediate surroundings and ask yourself "who are the millionaires responsible for these products I enjoy?". Every component in your phone, computer, the chair in which you sit, the building you are in, the clothes you wear, and the car you drive. As a rule, people get rich because they create things, not because they exploit others. That's how capitalism works and it does work

I have a feeling Trump has a lot of crooked buddies that can pay $1m and will get preferential treatment.

And if it’s a good idea, make it a law so it’s harder for future administrations to undo.

Why would getting a lot of millionaires to your country be better than getting a lot of hard working but poor people? Wouldn't it matter mostly how they got their money?

Because I am willing to bet that Donald Trump will be able to attract mostly crooked people who know how to game the system, not people who have amassed their fortunes by hard work.

Sorry, no. Malta and Portugal had similar programs. The people who came were rent seekers an oligarchs in their own countries. Portugal had a massive amount of Chinese, and not the kind who build an electric vehicle factory.

Trump of course is familiar with these circles, so it is no problem for him.

This isn't investment based citizenship (which yes, has loopholes because you can funnel the profits out of the country). You pay the government directly

Reply on news.ycombinator.com