World Politics

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

The fog in the videos of the search is crazy thick. They are looking on foot because they can't see anything from the air.

Which begs to question why did they that helicopter take off in the first place, but then maybe they miss judged the weather developing as it did.

[cuervo72]

Eh, if he's not found the Guardian Council will just pick another figurehead.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Eh, if he's not found the Guardian Council will just pick another figurehead.

The big deal there is this guy wasn't just a figure head. He was largely expected to take over for the Supreme Leader once he retires/dies.


The searchers finally got to where the helicopter supposedly crashed and can't find any sign of it.

[GrantDawg]

They did find the crash site and pronounced them all dead at the scene. Of course, they blame the United States since the embargo doesn't allow them to get parts for their helicopters to keep them in good service.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[NobodyHere]

That's a shame.

[RainMaker]

The civil trial against the Saudis is bringing to light some stuff that has long been suspected.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...awsuit/678430/

[miami_fan]

UK general election: PM Rishi Sunak calls surprise July vote as his party seeks to defy dire polls | CNN

I am envious of the 43 day election cycle.

Here is a link to the local election results that were held earlier this month.

Local elections 2024 results in maps and charts

Labour won 1,158 seats in the 107 council elections across England, an increase of 186 councillors. The party won control of 51 councils, a net gain of eight.

The Liberal Democrats increased their number of councillors by 104 to 522 and their number of councils by two to 12.

The Conservatives were always likely to lose councillors at this election, as the last time these seats were contested was in 2021 when the party was doing well in the polls in the context of a successful Covid vaccine roll out.

They ended up with 515 councillors this time round, a fall of 474 on 2021. And they lost ten councils, holding on to just six.

Question for the Brits on the board. Is it required that the PM stand outside of 10 Downing St. in in a downpour to announce the election instead of inside a building somewhere? Those pictures seem like a weird gift to provide his opponents at the start of a campaign.

[SirFozzie]

Not to mention pretty much being drowned (ha!) out by someone playing a Labour song loudly.

[Super Ugly]

Rishi Sunak is a dork and can't wait to lose the election, so announcing the election in the rain felt faintly metaphorical. He wants to escape to California to enjoy his wealth and presumably embark on his next career as a tech bro. The Conservatives purged any half-decent MP from the party years ago, and have been uninterested in governing for some time. My local MP closed her constituency office months ago - just upped and left.

The prospect of Starmer as PM doesn't exactly inspire me, and under his leadership Labour appear to have tacked to the right more than I'm comfortable with. But he has some serious people around him and after 14 years of political dysfunction I'm hoping that things in Britain will feel slightly less broken.

[Edward64]

Don't understand French politics. If voting showed a lack of confidence, I wouldn't call snap elections, I'd bide my time and try regain some of the confidence.

I can respect it but suspect he's not long for power.

I'm not clear on Le Pen's stance on Ukrainian war or Israel-Hamas. But her immigration stance is clear cut. A good of time to fix/control that mess but admittedly she is more on the extreme (Trump) range.


EDIT: okay, read a little more on Le Pen. My simplified summary is negative towards Ukraine, positive towards Israel, big negative against France's current legal/illegal immigration.

[JPhillips]

A close aid to Rishi Sunak has been busted for placing a bet on the date of the election a few days before it was called by Sunak.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Don't understand French politics. If voting showed a lack of confidence, I wouldn't call snap elections, I'd bide my time and try regain some of the confidence.

Best I understand it, it's a calculated gamble.

The notion being "well, if it's for all the marbles then voters won't go so far down the other path"

It's a bold strategy Cotton ...

[Flasch186]

I remember how this played out with Brexit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Best I understand it, it's a calculated gamble.

The notion being "well, if it's for all the marbles then voters won't go so far down the other path"

It's a bold strategy Cotton ...

Looks like a 2-7 off suit pair of cards … not much to work with.

I read that political categories/parties continuously shift left-right and once radical parties (like Le Pens) are now not as radical but more mainstream. Sounds familiar …

[flere-imsaho]

As I understand it, Macron has come increasingly close to losing no-confidence votes in the past 2 years, including a few weeks ago, a result which would remove him from office and (I believe) force a general election anyway.

At some point trying to rule like this becomes untenable as you're in more-or-less a permanent state of crisis.

He probably figured this was the best possible time to try and extend, as much of the country will be distracted by Euro 2024 and the upcoming Olympics during the campaining period and, heck, you never know.

[SirFozzie]

He does it because they can get into a runoff against the far-right, and there's enough "Sane ones" looking rightward and saying "You know, that's a bit further then I'm comfortable with) and staying home or voting for the centrist candidate

[Edward64]

Chinese citizens grapple with Florida law that bars them from buying property | CNN Business

‘They’re treating us like we’re spies’: Florida property ban has Chinese citizens fuming

Under SB 264, citizens of Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela and Syria are prohibited from buying property within 10 miles of any “military installation or critical infrastructure facility” in Florida.

For Chinese citizens without the permanent right to live in the US, specifically, the law goes a step further, barring the group from purchasing any property in the state.

Today's article above reminded me of the below discussion from May 2023, specifically bolded section.

Originally Posted by Edward64

I googled on "does FL bill 264 apply to US citizens". In the returned headlines, I got ...
:
I guess it's possible you are correct that the proposed bill is unclear in this specific topic and does really apply to US citizens/PR (whereas I believe it does not). That would mean the Bill's summary was wrong, and the media nor ACLU/Asian American Legal Defense teams have not picked up on this issue yet.

Per my earlier statement below ... as this point is central to my position and I've been unable to convince you otherwise, I'll avoid continuing this discussion until sometime in the future where (1) media does start reporting it applies to US citizens/PR, and/or (2) there is enough evidence to convince you it does not.

I googled to find the latest happenings. ACLU won an appeals case but it was specifically for 2 Chinese nationals who had pending land deals. The ACLU article mentions "immigrants" but does not delineate between (1) immigrants that have permanent residency vs (2) those that do not.

Below is the Shen vs Simpson motion that Shen won. The bolded lends weight to my orig POV that this bill does NOT apply to US Citizens or PR originally from China.

Chinese Immigrants Urge Appeals Court to Block Florida’s Discriminatory Housing Law | American Civil Liberties Union

Access Denied

The State of Florida recently enacted a statute that imposes new prohibitions on owning or purchasing land in the State. Among other provisions, Senate Bill 264 (“SB 264”) prohibits individuals who are not U.S. citizens or permanent residents and whose “domicile” is in China, or other so-called “foreign countries of concern,” from owning or purchasing real property.

And yeah, it does suck that regular Chinese citizens are restricted from buying/owning property in the Florida but until US citizens can do the same in China, I'm all for it (and should be for the whole US). This should be one of those reciprocal understandings between US and any other country.

[miami_fan]

Can't we have Chinese people just wear some sort of badge or other symbol to identify them as a means to segregate them, to watch and control their movements, and to prepare for deportation just in case they are spies? If they are not deported, because they are all segregated to specific zip codes, we can then deny them access to home loans credit based on where they live.

Policies similar to these have worked in the past and would accomplish the same goal without the unnecessary confusion over what "domiciled" means and frankly would be much more honest than the scary spies.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Can't we have Chinese people just wear some sort of badge or other symbol to identify them as a means to segregate them, to watch and control their movements, and to prepare for deportation just in case they are spies? If they are not deported, because they are all segregated to specific zip codes, we can then deny them access to home loans credit based on where they live.

Policies similar to these have worked in the past and would accomplish the same goal without the unnecessary confusion over what "domiciled" means and frankly would be much more honest than the scary spies.

There may be some confusion on what "domiciled" means, but there is no confusion between "US Citizen/PR immigrated from China" (rule does NOT apply) vs "from China, not a US Citizen/PR" (rule mostly applies with some exceptions being worked thru the courts).

No need for badges (or scarlet letter) but there should be a clear record of US Citizens/PR vs non US Citizens/PR regardless of national origin. There may have been an excuse back then, but nowadays with <30 min background checks for gun purchases, the technology is there.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Edward64

There may be some confusion on what "domiciled" means, but there is no confusion between "US Citizen/PR immigrated from China" (rule does NOT apply) vs "from China, not a US Citizen/PR" (rule mostly applies with some exceptions being worked thru the courts).

No need for badges (or scarlet letter) but there should be a clear record of US Citizens/PR vs non US Citizens/PR regardless of national origin. There may have been an excuse back then, but nowadays with <30 min background checks for gun purchases, the technology is there.

What does any of that have to do with preventing members of the Chinese Communist Party buying and owning property within 10 miles of a military installation?

“Florida is taking action to stand against the United States’ greatest geopolitical threat — the Chinese Communist Party (CCP),” DeSantis said in a statement last year.

“The Chinese Communist Party, a dangerous foreign adversary, should not own Virginia’s farmland,” Virginia Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin said on social media last year. “That’s common sense.”

If the goal is to prevent members of the CCP from owing or buying property in the United States as is being claimed, then the law would state that members of the CCP are not allowed to own or buy property. Ironically, that would also be consistent with US law which says the following:

U.S. immigration law says that any membership in or affiliation with the CCP or another totalitarian party makes you “inadmissible” for a U.S. green card. Being “inadmissible” means that you are not permitted to enter the United States and not allowed to obtain U.S. permanent residence.

I agree. Based on the above law, worry about members of the CCP owning and buying property seems a bit unnecessary. Regardless, the law even went through the trouble to clearly define what inadmissible means in relation to the law and provides a few exceptions to the law on the USCIS website. See, it is possible to write laws without a bunch of blurry language to tie up the court system.

If you don't want non US Citizens/PR to purchase or own property then write a law that does not allow non US Citizens/PR to purchase or own property. If the reason you don't want that software engineer in the CNN article (a recipient of an H-1B visa so I assume a clear record exist for him btw) to purchase a house is because we can't own property over in China, say that when you are making your justification. Preventing all Chinese people who are non US Citizens/PR from owning/buying property with legislation supposedly designed to prevent members of the CCP from buying/owning property at the very least suggest that all Chinese people who are non US Citizens/PR are linked to the CCP.

Susan Li, a 47-year-old small business owner in Orlando, Florida, who holds a green card, said she “really felt the discrimination” when she learned about the bill.

Like Bian, Li had been searching for a new home when the law passed. Despite the fact that she is a legal resident of the US, her family decided to halt their housing search for fear of potential legal complications.

“I thought maybe it’s too much to bother, so I’m not looking right now,” she said. “No matter if I have a green card or I’m a citizen, I still have a Chinese face.”

Teresa Jin, a mortgage lender in Florida, said she no longer works with clients who are not permanent residents or citizens of the US, but the grey area around the law’s definition of “domiciled” has created uncertainty. Other lenders have agreed to close on deals that she previously rejected for fear of legal repercussions.

“The law has caused us so much confusion,” she said. “It definitely hurts business.”

Zhu said that some mortgage lenders and brokers in Florida have even begun refusing to work with clients with Chinese passports — even if they are legal residents.

Again, I know. These people should be brave, sue and if the courts agree collect huge settlements. By putting on actually badges and scarlet letters, I am suggesting the lawmakers can be brave about their intentions instead of hiding behind flawed legislation and the legal system which ends up having the same effect on those people.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

What does any of that have to do with preventing members of the Chinese Communist Party buying and owning property within 10 miles of a military installation?

If the goal is to prevent members of the CCP from owing or buying property in the United States as is being claimed, then the law would state that members of the CCP are not allowed to own or buy property. Ironically, that would also be consistent with US law which says the following:

The net casted is all non-US Citizen/PR from China being restricted, not just CCP. The CCP population is a subset of the broader group.

Per the summary of the bill, it says below. The bill as written reinforces it is not just CCP. I'm going to guess that you'll say the original intent was about CCP. I won't deny that, but like the other FL bill, it doesn't matter what the intent was, it matters what was written in the bill itself.

Prohibits China, Chinese Communist Party or other Chinese political party officials or members, Chinese business organizations, and persons domiciled in China, but who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents of the U.S., from purchasing or acquiring any interest in real property in the state.

I agree. Based on the above law, worry about members of the CCP owning and buying property seems a bit unnecessary. Regardless, the law even went through the trouble to clearly define what inadmissible means in relation to the law and provides a few exceptions to the law on the USCIS website. See, it is possible to write laws without a bunch of blurry language to tie up the court system.

See above. Not just about CCP card holders.

If you don't want non US Citizens/PR to purchase or own property then write a law that does not allow non US Citizens/PR to purchase or own property.

? that is what the bill does for Chinese non-Citizen/PR.

The bill was written for several "foreign countries of interest". Specifically, it calls out those from China and gives them extra treatment. Definitely discriminatory ... but so what? China discriminates against US citizens buying land in China.

If the reason you don't want that software engineer in the CNN article (a recipient of an H-1B visa so I assume a clear record exist for him btw) to purchase a house is because we can't own property over in China, say that when you are making your justification.

That is not DeSantis' justification, he's doing it for politics, optics etc. I've never claimed or quoted any article (that I remember) that says it's DeSantis' pov.

That is my rationale. Instead of talking about geopolitical stuff, it comes down to "why not, they do it to us". Sorry for any confusion.

For the H1-B, he is up to 5 years away from getting a PR (last I checked). He can wait, get vetted by INS, become a PR and then get the privileges. I wonder how long it'll take a black American citizen to do the same in China (maybe like never).

Preventing all Chinese people who are non US Citizens/PR from owning/buying property with legislation supposedly designed to prevent members of the CCP from buying/owning property at the very least suggest that all Chinese people who are non US Citizens/PR are linked to the CCP.

See above. Not just about CCP card holders.

Again, I know. These people should be brave, sue and if the courts agree collect huge settlements. By putting on actually badges and scarlet letters, I am suggesting the lawmakers can be brave about their intentions instead of hiding behind flawed legislation and the legal system which ends up having the same effect on those people.

I'm all for them suing.

But why should you expect lawmakers be "brave" about their intentions? It happens all the time and not just these FL politicians. It's a given vast majority of politicians will be as nebulous, vague, flexible etc. as much as possible until they can't be anymore.

Question - why are you against discriminating against these citizens from these "countries of concern", specifically China? Is it because it is discriminatory?

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Edward64

The net casted is all non-US Citizen/PR from China being restricted, not just CCP. The CCP population is a subset of the broader group.

Per the summary of the bill, it says below. The bill as written reinforces it is not just CCP. I'm going to guess that you'll say the original intent was about CCP. I won't deny that, but like the other FL bill, it doesn't matter what the intent was, it matters what was written in the bill itself.

Are you intentionally choosing ignore the Governor's own words I quoted? How about the words he used when he signed the bill?

“Protecting Floridians and Florida’s infrastructure from agents like the Chinese Communist Party and other foreign adversaries is important to our state’s security,” said Governor Ron DeSantis. “I am proud to have signed the strongest legislation in the nation to fight back against foreign malign influence.”

At any point, the Governor or one of his minions could come out and mention that the is in retaliation for the Chinese government not allowing Floridians to own property there. That is not what he or anyone else besides you have said. I am not speculating on what the Governor's justification for the bill. I am actually quoting what he has said was his justification.

Question - why are you against discriminating against these citizens from these "countries of concern", specifically China? Is it because it is discriminatory?

Because why would I deprive a 31-year-old software engineer who has lived in the US for 12 years from buying a house because I disagree with the government policies of the country he was born in and that he has no control over? Because I know how long it took and still takes for a black American citizen to do the same IN THE UNITED STATES based on such policies from the past and today. Because I know what this state's and this country's history is when it came to the treatment of citizens from "countries of concern" AND U.S. citizens who share similar ethnicity and/or national origin. I know what we supposedly believed after we have reflected on said history and the discernment or lack thereof we showed when it came the treatment of citizens of "countries of concern" and U.S. citizens of similar ethnicity. Unfortunately, if the stories are true in that CNN article, that history is repeating itself.

Why do you keep advocating for the government specifically for Ron DeSantis to be discriminatory against people who seem to be well ... different?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Are you intentionally choosing ignore the Governor's own words I quoted? How about the words he used when he signed the bill?

Per my statement, regardless of what he says, what matters is what ends up in the bill. And in the bill, it is NOT isolated to just CCP, it's all Chinese non-Citizens/PR. So sure, CCP card holders are definitely being targeted, but the bill is broader.

Originally Posted by Edward64

Per the summary of the bill, it says below. The bill as written reinforces it is not just CCP. I'm going to guess that you'll say the original intent was about CCP. I won't deny that, but like the other FL bill, it doesn't matter what the intent was, it matters what was written in the bill itself.

At any point, the Governor or one of his minions could come out and mention that the is in retaliation for the Chinese government not allowing Floridians to own property there. That is not what he or anyone else besides you have said. I am not speculating on what the Governor's justification for the bill. I am actually quoting what he has said was his justification.

Can you please provide a source where DeSantis said this bill is "in retaliation for the Chinese government not allowing Floridians to own property there (China)" or similar.

If he said this, I honestly missed it and would like to read more.

Because why would I deprive a 31-year-old software engineer who has lived in the US for 12 years from buying a house because I disagree with the government policies of the country he was born in and that he has no control over?

Because we are all caught up in the larger geopolitical cold war 2. And in the bigger picture, tit-for-tat seems pretty good to me, especially when we are talking about our biggest enemy.

Because I know how long it took and still takes for a black American citizen to do the same IN THE UNITED STATES based on such policies from the past and today. Because I know what this state's and this country's history is when it came to the treatment of citizens from "countries of concern" AND U.S. citizens who share similar ethnicity and/or national origin. I know what we supposedly believed after we have reflected on said history and the discernment or lack thereof we showed when it came the treatment of citizens of "countries of concern" and U.S. citizens of similar ethnicity. Unfortunately, if the stories are true in that CNN article, that history is repeating itself.

Then fight for US citizens/PR. No problem with that at all. Why fight for rich Chinese who buy up property and, arguably, messes up house prices (source: see Vancouver)?

Why do you keep advocating for the government specifically for Ron DeSantis to be discriminatory against people who seem to be well ... different?

Because this discrimination is "in kind". If China allowed US citizens to own land in China, somewhat different story.

[RainMaker]

I don't think females from Saudi Arabia should be forced to cover themselves and be accompanied by a male in the United States. I don't think a Malaysian citizen should be caned for being in a same-sex relationship within our borders. Feels like we should operate the country fairly for everyone and not create special rules for certain people based on some outdated Cold War cosplay.

[RainMaker]

I'm against foreign businesses from investing in land in the United States as a whole, but people concerned about China owning some land sure as shit are quiet about the Saudis who are buying up some valuable real estate and have actually committed massive terrorist attacks against our infrastructure.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Per my statement, regardless of what he says, what matters is what ends up in the bill. And in the bill, it is NOT isolated to just CCP, it's all Chinese non-Citizens/PR. So sure, CCP card holders are definitely being targeted, but the bill is broader.

What the Governor said is the only thing that allows me to give him and the legislature the benefit of the doubt and not call the law a 2024 attempt at bringing back the Jim Crow era.

Can you please provide a source where DeSantis said this bill is "in retaliation for the Chinese government not allowing Floridians to own property there (China)" or similar.

If he said this, I honestly missed it and would like to read more.

I can't. So since we both don't believe he did for retaliation and we agree he did not do it for national security, what else does that leave and why are you okay with him doing so given the harm you can see it is causing?

Because we are all caught up in the larger geopolitical cold war 2. And in the bigger picture, tit-for-tat seems pretty good to me, especially when we are talking about our biggest enemy.

You really are advocating for countries to punish another country's citizens residing in their country for their government polices? All righty then.

Then fight for US citizens/PR. No problem with that at all. Why fight for rich Chinese who buy up property and, arguably, messes up house prices (source: see Vancouver)?

I am. Why aren't you fighting for the small business owner/green card holder who knows "“No matter if I have a green card or I’m a citizen, I still have a Chinese face.” Why aren't you fighting for the citizen who has the opportunity to have Chinese investors to pay once in a lifetime top dollar for their family home or property while also allowing Chinese investors to pay top dollar to the Forbes family for their magazine? What US citizens are you expecting to buy land in China and how will that benefit the country not just an individual or corporation?

Because this discrimination is "in kind". If China allowed US citizens to own land in China, somewhat different story.

Um ok. I guess

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

What the Governor said is the only thing that allows me to give him and the legislature the benefit of the doubt and not call the law a 2024 attempt at bringing back the Jim Crow era.

I don't know what you are referencing re: "what the governor said". That it was for national security or that (supposedly, you claim) in was in retribution for Floridians not able to own land in China or something else?

IMO comparing this to Jim Crow is a step too far. If this bill was truly discriminating against US Citizens/PR of Chinese descent, I can see it. But I believe we have established that it does not.

I can't. So since we both don't believe he did for retaliation and we agree he did not do it for national security, what else does that leave and why are you okay with him doing so given the harm you can see it is causing?

He primarily did it for politics and to win votes. There may be some piece for national security also, especially CCP buying land around military bases.

But I guess we have now also established it was not for "in retaliation for the Chinese government not allowing Floridians to own property there (China)".

I don't see much harm this is causing. Again, if it was US Citizens/PR of Chinese descent, different story. But it is not.

You really are advocating for countries to punish another country's citizens residing in their country for their government polices? All righty then.

Can't save the world. Sometimes just have to think about US Citizens/PR first regardless of the negative impact to foreigners.

Question: let's take this to an extreme. So, you are okay with CCP card holders or businesses buying land near military installations?

I am. Why aren't you fighting for the small business owner/green card holder who knows "“No matter if I have a green card or I’m a citizen, I still have a Chinese face.”

If a US Citizen/PR of Chinese descent (or has a Chinese face) is discriminated against, easy fix. Sue (and in 4-5 years, have a nice hefty check for your troubles).

But that's in the extreme. More likely it'll be resolved pretty quickly in vast majority of cases.

Realtor: sorry, can't show these places to you because you have a Chinese face
Chinese: I am an American citizen/PR. I'll be glad to email you copy of my passport
Realtor: oh sorry, my bad. Let's get into my Escalade and go check out these condos

Why aren't you fighting for the citizen who has the opportunity to have Chinese investors to pay once in a lifetime top dollar for their family home or property while also allowing Chinese investors to pay top dollar to the Forbes family for their magazine?

Source: see Vancouver real estate market

Why is Vancouver housing so expensive?

But the truth is that the Vancouver real estate market has felt the impact of foreign money—particularly money from wealthy foreigners. Much of which comes from Asia, particularly mainland China. Not a very Canadian thing to say, we know, but it's true. How do we know? Because this situation has been tracked, studied and recorded

re: Forbes, not sure what's going on there. But absolutely no problem if we don't allow Chinese to buy US businesses.

What US citizens are you expecting to buy land in China and how will that benefit the country not just an individual or corporation?

I'm not sure I understand the question? If China allowed US ownership of property (with the appropriate protections), I am pretty sure there would be a good deal of western money going into China.

What does "benefit the country (China)" have anything to do with anything? Of course, it has to benefit the individual or corporation, why else would they invest?

Um ok. I guess

Pretty simple to me, let me restate ... If you don't give X privileges to US citizens in your country, don't expect to get X privileges for your citizens in the US ... especially if you are enemy #1.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I don't know what you are referencing re: "what the governor said". That it was for national security or that (supposedly, you claim) in was in retribution for Floridians not able to own land in China or something else?

IMO comparing this to Jim Crow is a step too far. If this bill was truly discriminating against US Citizens/PR of Chinese descent, I can see it. But I believe we have established that it does not.

The Governor said that it was done to protect us from the CCP. You said it makes no difference what he said. Without the CCP justification or any other explanation, the basis of this law is is national origin/race. That is what is in the law.

Zhu said that some mortgage lenders and brokers in Florida have even begun refusing to work with clients with Chinese passports — even if they are legal residents.

I know until they get a legal judgement we can't officially say it is discrimination. You prefer they suffer a bit while the case is going on.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Edward64

That is not DeSantis' justification, he's doing it for politics, optics etc.

Simply fwiw, as an observation or two goes ...

In some thread or another, I believe a finely tuned search would turn up me saying something months ago to the effect that "I've never seen anyone want to be President more than DeSantis".

People who actually see/hear me in person definitely heard it. I'm pretty sure people on my social media saw it. Hence I figure I said it here at some point too.

And I say that as someone who would have voted for him in a heartbeat throughout the primary campaign, as my overwhelming #1 choice.

I long ago stopped caring much about motivations when my approval of an action(s) was strong enough. That was frequently the case with DeSantis.

And with THAT said, I file most of this measure (aside perhaps from the military/security installations proximity limit) under the same heading of "silly shit straining at problems smaller than a gnats ass" same as I do with stuff like TikTok bans.

[miami_fan]

Apologies, I did not realize I hit send earlier.

He primarily did it for politics and to win votes. There may be some piece for national security also, especially CCP buying land around military bases.

But I guess we have now also established it was not for "in retaliation for the Chinese government not allowing Floridians to own property there (China)".

I don't see much harm this is causing. Again, if it was US Citizens/PR of Chinese descent, different story. But it is not.

The only people who saw the harm in Jim Crow were those who were being punished by Jim Crow. The people who wrote Jim Crow saw no harm in it at all.

Can't save the world. Sometimes just have to think about US Citizens/PR first regardless of the negative impact to foreigners.

You mean like the business owner? The PR who Us Citizens/PR who are residing in other countries or don't they count? The business owner? What about the PR's who mortgage lenders and brokers refuse to work with?

Question: let's take this to an extreme. So, you are okay with CCP card holders or businesses buying land near military installations?

Nope I am not which is why I would be okay with a law preventing members of the CCP from owning land near military installations. I think that is a national security issue. What does that have to with prevent a software engineer from buying a house closer to his job? Do you think he is a member of the CCP?

If a US Citizen/PR of Chinese descent (or has a Chinese face) is discriminated against, easy fix. Sue (and in 4-5 years, have a nice hefty check for your troubles).

But that's in the extreme. More likely it'll be resolved pretty quickly in vast majority of cases.

Your desire for people who are different to suffer discrimination unnecessarily is troubling. Really close to sadistic if I am being honest. I suggest you do a little research on how the discrimination cases work and the damage that the court process does to the victims.

Source: see Vancouver real estate market

Except we are talking about Florida.

A state everybody knows was made into what it is today almost exclusively because of the money of wealthy non Chinese foreigners. A state that has been and continues to be fueled by money from non Chinese foreigners that are coincidentally are associated with governments that are not exactly the U.S.'s best buds. Non Chinese foreigners using money gained very often by not the most legal means. Non Chinese foreigners who have also used money gained through associations and dealings with the same people we are banning back in their home country, brought that money over here to buy real estate and drive up housing prices under their name not their associates. Finally, a state that just so happens to have seen an increase of visiting Canadian citizens and citizens of other friendly countries who just so happen to be of Chinese decent purchasing real estate over the last three or four years.

So again, why are you fighting for those people and not the software engineer who actually lives our community every single day? Because at least in Florida, we have a long history of not necessarily picking US citizens/PR first to purchase real property here. Our first and most likely only pick is who is cutting the largest check.

I'm not sure I understand the question? If China allowed US ownership of property (with the appropriate protections), I am pretty sure there would be a good deal of western money going into China.

What does "benefit the country (China)" have anything to do with anything? Of course, it has to benefit the individual or corporation, why else would they invest?

First off, are you talking about buying property or buying land. Americans can buy property in China. Americans can't buy land. I am not sure that is discriminatory because no one can buy land in China. Not Americans, not other foreigners, not even Chinese citizens. So what U.S. citizens are you expecting to be allowed to buy land in China when no one else can do so and if by some wild chance it was allowed to happen how does that benefit the country as opposed to just benefiting that individual or corporation because supposedly Chinese nationals buying land and property here in the States benefits China.

Pretty simple to me, let me restate ... If you don't give X privileges to US citizens in your country, don't expect to get X privileges for your citizens in the US ... especially if you are enemy #1.

From what I can tell, when it comes to purchasing land, U.S. citizens are treated no differently than anyone else including Chinese citizens. If you want to argue that the Chinese should be limited in how many pieces of property than can purchase, maybe. However much like the ol' Don't Say Gay bill, all this law does is create a air of suspicion around for a minority group of people. I suspect much like the other bill every one is going deny that that was the case after the fact as we get further and further away from the initial hysteria.

[RainMaker]

Saying Florida did it to keep housing prices down is the funniest part. The state that has spent the past few decades making it as easy as possible for foreigners to launder money through real estate investments is totally concerned about rising housing costs.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Saying Florida did it to keep housing prices down is the funniest part. The state that has spent the past few decades making it as easy as possible for foreigners to launder money through real estate investments is totally concerned about rising housing costs.

I thought they did it through black diamond Disney VHS tapes on ebay

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I know until they get a legal judgement we can't officially say it is discrimination. You prefer they suffer a bit while the case is going on.

Er no. They can sure as heck say its discrimination before a legal judgement. I mean that'll be the basis of their lawsuit? Yes, the early ones will suffer a "little bit" but nothing extraordinary. All they need to say is ...

Realtor: You look Chinese, not going to work with you
Chinese: I am a US Citizen/PR, here let's read the bill together where I've highlighted. And BTW I've got Morgan & Morgan on speed dial

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

The only people who saw the harm in Jim Crow were those who were being punished by Jim Crow. The people who wrote Jim Crow saw no harm in it at all.

There is degree and scale. Let me quote wiki.

In practice, Jim Crow laws mandated racial segregation in all public facilities in the states of the former Confederate States of America and in some others, beginning in the 1870s. Jim Crow laws were upheld in 1896 in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, in which the Supreme Court laid out its "separate but equal" legal doctrine concerning facilities for African Americans. Moreover, public education had essentially been segregated since its establishment in most of the South after the Civil War in 1861–1865. Companion laws excluded almost all African Americans from the vote in the South and deprived them of any representative government.

This law is nothing like Jim Crow in (1) degree or (2) scale. Is there some resemblance? Sure. But on a scale of 1-10 where Jim Crow is a 10, this law inadvertently impacting US Citizens/PR of Chinese descent is a 1 or 2 on the basis of degree or scale. And especially since there will be a ton of willing legal representation & remediation that the person will likely win.

You mean like the business owner? The PR who Us Citizens/PR who are residing in other countries or don't they count? The business owner? What about the PR's who mortgage lenders and brokers refuse to work with?

Asked and answered. See below

Realtor: You look Chinese, not going to work with you
Chinese: I am a US Citizen/PR, here let's read the bill together where I've highlighted. And BTW I've got Morgan & Morgan on speed dial

Nope I am not which is why I would be okay with a law preventing members of the CCP from owning land near military installations. I think that is a national security issue.

So, you are okay with some level of discrimination ... specifically of CCP card holders, a political party? Why discriminate against a CCP card holder living in the US when it's NOT proven that he/she is a national security threat? I mean, per below, you are punishing CCP card holders just "for their government policies" when they've not been shown to be a threat.

Originally Posted by miami_fan

You really are advocating for countries to punish another country's citizens residing in their country for their government polices? All righty then.

What does that have to with prevent a software engineer from buying a house closer to his job? Do you think he is a member of the CCP?

CCP is irrelevant. It is being Chinese and not a US Citizen/PR. The Chinese software engineer is caught up in the larger geopolitical struggle (and DeSantis politics).

Your desire for people who are different to suffer discrimination unnecessarily is troubling. Really close to sadistic if I am being honest. I suggest you do a little research on how the discrimination cases work and the damage that the court process does to the victims.

I see discrimination all over Asia (and lesser extent in Europe & US). We have different backgrounds, experiences etc. So I see this discrimination differently from you.

There's big stuff and there's small stuff. Worrying about small stuff, dwelling on it, woe is me victim mentality etc. only holds one back. My personal philosophy is the world is not fair; the world will never be fair; don't make a big deal out of it or waste energy on the smaller things; bypass or ignore the idiots; find another way/alternative; and keep on going ... and if you are a foreigner in another country, certainly don't expect equality in how you are treated on the streets, in business, real estate, dating etc.

This is discrimination. However, on a scale of 1-10, this is small stuff level 1 or 2. See my rebuttal re: above Jim Crow section and on degree & scale. So, where you see me "close to sadistic", I see myself as not living in la-la land and not worrying about the inevitable small stuff that has relatively easy resolution/remediation.

Examples and personal opinion on ROM (rough order of magnitude) on discrimination on the Jim Crow scale.

• If you are an untouchable/dalit in India, that's true Jim Crow level at 10+
• If you are of Indian ethnicity in Malaysia, that's a 7-8. If you're of Chinese ethnicity in Malaysia, call it a 4-5. If you are a Bumi, you are golden with extensive government handouts & support
• If you are much darker skin color female in Philippines, Thailand, and South Korea (I haven't live in SK) it's a 5-6 in the big cities. Arguably more.
• If you are not a size 1-3, attractive female in any Asian airline carrier, 7-9
• If you are Rohingya, you are definitely discriminated (and killed) in Myanmar. But you are also heavily discriminated in any country you end up as a refugee. Call it a 8-9
• If you are female in many Asian countries, anywhere from 3-10
• If you are LGBTQ+ in many Asian countries (Thailand is a notable exception), call it 6-10
• If you are black guy, walking around in many Asian countries, you'll be discriminated, call it a 3-6 (depends on $ you have to spend)
• US Citizen/PR of Chinese descent, encountering some discrimination by a realtor while buying land which can be easily confronted (and won), 1-2

So when you try to draw a comparison with this bill's unfair but relatively minor inconveniences (e.g. bring a passport) for a US Citizen/PR of Chinese descent to Jim Crow ... based on my different perspective & experiences, I'll pass

A state everybody knows was made into what it is today almost exclusively because of the money of wealthy non Chinese foreigners. A state that has been and continues to be fueled by money from non Chinese foreigners that are coincidentally are associated with governments that are not exactly the U.S.'s best buds. Non Chinese foreigners using money gained very often by not the most legal means. Non Chinese foreigners who have also used money gained through associations and dealings with the same people we are banning back in their home country, brought that money over here to buy real estate and drive up housing prices under their name not their associates. Finally, a state that just so happens to have seen an increase of visiting Canadian citizens and citizens of other friendly countries who just so happen to be of Chinese decent purchasing real estate over the last three or four years.

Yes, Chinese people from China, not US Citizens/PR are being discriminated against. Yes, many non-Chinese foreigners can buy US land that the former cannot. So, the world is not fair, especially if you are enemy #1.

So again, why are you fighting for those people and not the software engineer who actually lives our community every single day? Because at least in Florida, we have a long history of not necessarily picking US citizens/PR first to purchase real property here. Our first and most likely only pick is who is cutting the largest check.

That is right, the largest check. Like in the Vancouver markets. Lots of discrimination against Chinese citizens buying real estate now in Vancouver now. Any much Vancouver citizens complaining about those rules & regulations now?

If you're not a Canadian citizen or permanent resident, buying a home in Canada may be off the table for the next couple of years. On January 1st, 2023, the foreign home ownership ban—formally known as the Prohibition on the Purchase of Residential Property by Non-Canadians Act—went into effect in Canada.

First off, are you talking about buying property or buying land. Americans can buy property in China. Americans can't buy land. I am not sure that is discriminatory because no one can buy land in China. Not Americans, not other foreigners, not even Chinese citizens.

Good clarification. It's about owning more than buying. Land and homes on land. I believe US citizens/PR can buy condos. They can buy land. They can buy homes on land.

However, the gotcha is the land or the land the house is on is for up to a 70 year term. So, they can buy, but they can't own. So for any future discussions, when I use the word "buy" I really mean "buy & own".

So what U.S. citizens are you expecting to be allowed to buy land in China when no one else can do so and if by some wild chance it was allowed to happen how does that benefit the country as opposed to just benefiting that individual or corporation because supposedly Chinese nationals buying land and property here in the States benefits China.

I don't understand your question. I am not claiming US citizens/PR buying land in China will benefit China. But I think I'm not catching the nuance of your question so let me say

US buying land in China will primarily benefit the individual or business, why else would they do it? If there is a benefit to China, that benefit is way secondary in consideration.

From what I can tell, when it comes to purchasing land, U.S. citizens are treated no differently than anyone else including Chinese citizens. If you want to argue that the Chinese should be limited in how many pieces of property than can purchase, maybe.

I am saying the US is discriminating against Chinese that are not US Citizens/PR.

I am NOT saying China is discriminating against US Citizen/PR (I reread my posts, let me know if I'm wrong). So your comparison with how Chinese government treats Chinese citizens and US citizens "equally" is not relevant

I am saying China does not allow US Citizens/PR to buy land, it's their policies, and therefore so we should do "in kind".

With that said, I seriously doubt China and Chinese provincial agencies will treat (1) Chinese citizen living in a 70 year "lease" and (2) US citizen living in a 70 year "lease" the same when the 70 years comes up.

However much like the ol' Don't Say Gay bill, all this law does is create a air of suspicion around for a minority group of people. I suspect much like the other bill every one is going deny that that was the case after the fact as we get further and further away from the initial hysteria.

It absolutely creates this air of suspicion. My contention is, for US Citizens/PR of Chinese descent, no big deal. Or let me quote myself

Realtor: sorry, can't show these places to you because you have a Chinese face
Chinese: I am an American citizen/PR. I'll be glad to email you copy of my passport
Realtor: oh sorry, my bad. Let's get into my Escalade and go check out these condos

Realtor: You look Chinese, not going to work with you
Chinese: I am a US Citizen/PR, here let's read the bill together where I've highlighted. And BTW I've got Morgan & Morgan on speed dial

[Edward64]

@miami_fan

For future exchanges, I think we should move this conversation to the other thread for "extended & contentious discussions" if you are agreeable?

Our exchanges have not been contentious but obviously extended & detailed, and I can see how it'll be distracting to others.

Thread to hold extended & contentious Discussions - Front Office Football Central

I can do the swap over on our next set of exchanges.

[miami_fan]

No need to go any further.

The last post confirms that you and I have fundamental differences on discrimination of all sorts that I don't think can ever be reconciled. Any law can be ranked on a Jim Crow scale for any ethnic groups that is unacceptable in the United States IMO. I feel we have made that decision and I hope we are not trying to bring that back. I don't think we should be telling others to accept levels of discrimination based on their national origin because it is I don't think it is that bad for them to be treated that way based solely on their national origin. There is a desire for a caste like system to what you are encouraging that goes beyond the benefits of U.S. citizenship/permanent residence that goes against what I believe U.S. values should be. Life is not fair. I don't see any need to actively make it more unfair for others based solely on their race, national origin, ethnicity, etc especially if it based on some other government doing so someplace.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

No need to go any further.

Fair enough. I appreciate our civil discussion.