Should New Zealand citizenship be for sale?

Forums › Off topic › Should New Zealand citizenship be for sale?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

4336 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2072

#1714417 2-Feb-2017 12:04

networkn:

Geektastic:

Of course. No problem and anyone who applies for citizenship this way still has to pass the usual background checks, health checks and so on.

The only difference is that they do not need to prove that they have a job or useful skills - which, given that they already have a heap of money is hardly necessary.

Why would you not want to bring entrepreneurial people and wealthy people to NZ? We have to get the income of the nation up somehow and whatever we've been doing for the last 150 years has hardly achieved a lot in that respect. We still have far too much of the tax burden falling on too few people.

The question for me, is WILL he provide any value. Time will tell, but I'll be pretty surprised if he spends significant funds here other than buying land, so I expect his tax contribution to be minimal.

pretty sure he wont be a drain on it either.

Common sense is not as common as you think.

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1714420 2-Feb-2017 12:08

Rikkitic:

networkn:

I'd like you to cite which different rules were applied to him than anyone else. Specifically.

Can you show which rules he has breached in any way?

I'm not sure any rules were applied to him. I think he just threw a ton of money around, got some other rich people to write letters of support, and received his citizenship.

I doubt he breached any rules, since none were applied to him. Anyway, that is not my question. My question is whether people think this is a good thing or not. For my part, I'm not sure. It offends my sense of fair play but I also see the positives. I'm not sure where the line should be drawn, so I am asking what others think. Even you.

You can read the entirety of the rules that were applied and the advice given to the Minister in the OIA released documents currently on the web here

networkn

Networkn
32864 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15455

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1714421 2-Feb-2017 12:09

Rikkitic:

networkn:

I'd like you to cite which different rules were applied to him than anyone else. Specifically.

Can you show which rules he has breached in any way?

I'm not sure any rules were applied to him. I think he just threw a ton of money around, got some other rich people to write letters of support, and received his citizenship.

I doubt he breached any rules, since none were applied to him. Anyway, that is not my question. My question is whether people think this is a good thing or not. For my part, I'm not sure. It offends my sense of fair play but I also see the positives. I'm not sure where the line should be drawn, so I am asking what others think. Even you.

You stated as fact, that different "rules" apply to the rich, which you have yet to substantiate (again). "I think he threw a bunch of money around". Based on what exact evidence?

If you don't think he breached any rules, how is it unfair? How can this affect your sense of fair play? Do you have any evidence he was provided an easier route to citizenship than anyone else?

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 537
Inactive user

#1714423 2-Feb-2017 12:21

Rikkitic:

I think one of the main issues with Thiel's citizenship is he doesn't live here and never has, but has only visited a few times, just like many tourists. Different rules for the rich.

But the rich have more to offer, so why wouldn't they be treated differently?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19067 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16308

Lifetime subscriber

#1714427 2-Feb-2017 12:33

networkn:

You stated as fact, that different "rules" apply to the rich, which you have yet to substantiate (again). "I think he threw a bunch of money around". Based on what exact evidence?

If you don't think he breached any rules, how is it unfair? How can this affect your sense of fair play? Do you have any evidence he was provided an easier route to citizenship than anyone else?

There are plenty of links that go into this, such as those on RNZ and Stuff. If you are interested, look them up yourself.

The $1 million he gave to the Christchurch rebuild is a matter of public record and Rod Drury mentions some of his investments. He didn't even have to come to New Zealand for his citizenship ceremony, let alone spend any significant amount of time here. That sounds like an easier route to citizenship to me.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

darkasdes2

448 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 83

#1714432 2-Feb-2017 12:37

No it shouldn't, plain and simple to me.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

networkn

Networkn
32864 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15455

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1714433 2-Feb-2017 12:42

Rikkitic:

networkn:

You stated as fact, that different "rules" apply to the rich, which you have yet to substantiate (again). "I think he threw a bunch of money around". Based on what exact evidence?

If you don't think he breached any rules, how is it unfair? How can this affect your sense of fair play? Do you have any evidence he was provided an easier route to citizenship than anyone else?

There are plenty of links that go into this, such as those on RNZ and Stuff. If you are interested, look them up yourself.

The $1 million he gave to the Christchurch rebuild is a matter of public record and Rod Drury mentions some of his investments. He didn't even have to come to New Zealand for his citizenship ceremony, let alone spend any significant amount of time here. That sounds like an easier route to citizenship to me.

Err I think you are confusing the two matters. He donated some money to NZ causes, as did a lot of people NOT looking for citizenship. Even if it WAS for that reason, I see that as proving his value.

There is no evidence (unless you can show me) that suggests he was not made to comply with all the regulations of anyone else applying, let alone because he "threw some money around".

It's not mandatory to attend citizen ceremony. There are provisions for this in the regulations (Outlined above for your information). Nor is it mandatory for him to spend time here as a citizen. You might be interested to know lots of wealthy Kiwis who are citizens don't spend much time here.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19067 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16308

Lifetime subscriber

#1714436 2-Feb-2017 12:48

dickytim:

But the rich have more to offer, so why wouldn't they be treated differently?

This is actually an interesting point and worth thinking about. If they invest in local enterprise, either by forming new companies or helping existing ones to grow, and also create jobs, especially high-quality ones, that hardly seems like a bad thing. But money has the potential to corrupt, as well. If it is used to build mega-industries that destroy the features and values that make New Zealand special, then maybe that isn't so good. If many wealthy people settle here, the mere fact of their wealth can distort the local economy, putting things like beach holidays and stunning views out of the reach of ordinary people. Great wealth can create great wealth disparity, actually resulting in more poverty for more people. If the rich are able and willing to pay more for things, those things become inaccessible to the less rich. Money can be a good thing, but not if people allow themselves to be blinded by it.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1714440 2-Feb-2017 12:55

Rikkitic:

networkn:

I'd like you to cite which different rules were applied to him than anyone else. Specifically.

Can you show which rules he has breached in any way?

I'm not sure any rules were applied to him. I think he just threw a ton of money around, got some other rich people to write letters of support, and received his citizenship.

I doubt he breached any rules, since none were applied to him. Anyway, that is not my question. My question is whether people think this is a good thing or not. For my part, I'm not sure. It offends my sense of fair play but I also see the positives. I'm not sure where the line should be drawn, so I am asking what others think. Even you.

Please show me what you base this accusation on.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19067 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16308

Lifetime subscriber

#1714442 2-Feb-2017 13:00

MikeB4:

Please show me what you base this accusation on.

What accusation exactly? I said 'I'm not sure...' and 'I think...' Those are expressions of opinion, not accusation.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1714445 2-Feb-2017 13:12

The folks who argue that stateless refugees be offered no charity seem to be the same people arguing that they have "no issue" with citizenship for sale.

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
32864 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15455

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1714448 2-Feb-2017 13:16

Rikkitic:

MikeB4:

Please show me what you base this accusation on.

What accusation exactly? I said 'I'm not sure...' and 'I think...' Those are expressions of opinion, not accusation.

Now that people have shown you the regulations and there is no evidence to support he breached them, are you now prepared to change your position?

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1714449 2-Feb-2017 13:18

Rikkitic:

MikeB4:

Please show me what you base this accusation on.

What accusation exactly? I said 'I'm not sure...' and 'I think...' Those are expressions of opinion, not accusation.

Your statement infers that the officials did not follows the policy and this is because money was thrown around, that is an accusation. So again can you show evidence of this.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1714450 2-Feb-2017 13:19

Fred99:

The folks who argue that stateless refugees be offered no charity seem to be the same people arguing that they have "no issue" with citizenship for sale.

examples?

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19067 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16308

Lifetime subscriber

#1714455 2-Feb-2017 13:35

networkn:

Now that people have shown you the regulations and there is no evidence to support he breached them, are you now prepared to change your position?

I never suggested he breached any regulations so I'm not sure what you are asking.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7