Canada now bans foreigners from buying houses- should we do the same?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:China bans foreigners from owning land (well, even nationals are granted land in a very long term basis, not in perpetuity).

Rs will no go over it. This would be considered anti-capitalism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:China bans foreigners from owning land (well, even nationals are granted land in a very long term basis, not in perpetuity).

Rs will no go over it. This would be considered anti-capitalism.

And they’d be wrong. As usual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:China bans foreigners from owning land (well, even nationals are granted land in a very long term basis, not in perpetuity).

Rs will no go over it. This would be considered anti-capitalism.

And they’d be wrong. As usual.

sure, they are wrong on many things, but that doesn't mean it changes anything.

Foreign corporations used to not be able to hold majority stake in broadcasting companies in the US. Then, in 2017 (remember who was POTUS then), the FCC allowed 100% ownership of a US broadcasting company. Prior years, the FCC still banned majority foreign ownership of any company that owned stake in a US broadcasting company.

https://www.broadcastlawblog.com/2017/02/articles/fcc-approves-for-the-first-time-100-foreign-ownership-of-us-broadcast-stations/

Rs will never not allow foreign ownership of property in the US. This is how they think they will MAGA. Or, maybe it was because the POTUS in 2017 was beholden to rich foreigners. Who knows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:China bans foreigners from owning land (well, even nationals are granted land in a very long term basis, not in perpetuity).

Rs will no go over it. This would be considered anti-capitalism.

And they’d be wrong. As usual.

sure, they are wrong on many things, but that doesn't mean it changes anything.

Foreign corporations used to not be able to hold majority stake in broadcasting companies in the US. Then, in 2017 (remember who was POTUS then), the FCC allowed 100% ownership of a US broadcasting company. Prior years, the FCC still banned majority foreign ownership of any company that owned stake in a US broadcasting company.

https://www.broadcastlawblog.com/2017/02/articles/fcc-approves-for-the-first-time-100-foreign-ownership-of-us-broadcast-stations/

Rs will never not allow foreign ownership of property in the US. This is how they think they will MAGA. Or, maybe it was because the POTUS in 2017 was beholden to rich foreigners. Who knows.

Just selling off America off to the highest bidders. MAGA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I met a guy (covered in tats and didn’t look like he had any money) on a flight from DC to Dallas. He was flying to Dallas to check on his rental properties. He owns 40+ properties, essentially controlling the FMR in one neighborhood.

I was staying in a nice suburb in Dallas and my friend who was hosting me told me the bulk of the SFH neighborhood was owned by a few Asian families who rent out the properties. Rents have jumped dramatically and they quickly purchase any homes that go on the market.

This is a problem.

capitalism at its finest. Also, how do you know if the "Asian" families aren't Asian Americans? Because they have accents?

Asian here (as in, born in Asia, grew up here, have US citizenship). Whether 'Asian' or 'Asian Americans', real estate is a time honored investment vehicle for Chinese and Koreans. I think the Chinese Communists had a deep complex with the 'landlord' class. (Not the clergy, the nobility, the aristocracy - the classic villians for Marx). In feudal Asian society, there were only two classes - the peasants and the landlords. Can't be a landlord in China so do it here in North America.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Was talking to a trucker the other day who’s a foreigner. You’d be surprised at the amount of help the government gives immigrants regarding funding, credit scores, etc. More than our own citizens.

grateful if you have cites for that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What we need to ban are Air BnBs, short term rentals, home flipping, and corporations from owning homes.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:China bans foreigners from owning land (well, even nationals are granted land in a very long term basis, not in perpetuity).

Rs will no go over it. This would be considered anti-capitalism.

And they’d be wrong. As usual.

sure, they are wrong on many things, but that doesn't mean it changes anything.

Foreign corporations used to not be able to hold majority stake in broadcasting companies in the US. Then, in 2017 (remember who was POTUS then), the FCC allowed 100% ownership of a US broadcasting company. Prior years, the FCC still banned majority foreign ownership of any company that owned stake in a US broadcasting company.

https://www.broadcastlawblog.com/2017/02/articles/fcc-approves-for-the-first-time-100-foreign-ownership-of-us-broadcast-stations/

Rs will never not allow foreign ownership of property in the US. This is how they think they will MAGA. Or, maybe it was because the POTUS in 2017 was beholden to rich foreigners. Who knows.

Murdoch had to cha he his citizenship status to extend his media empire in the US …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:China bans foreigners from owning land (well, even nationals are granted land in a very long term basis, not in perpetuity).

Rs will no go over it. This would be considered anti-capitalism.

And they’d be wrong. As usual.

sure, they are wrong on many things, but that doesn't mean it changes anything.

Foreign corporations used to not be able to hold majority stake in broadcasting companies in the US. Then, in 2017 (remember who was POTUS then), the FCC allowed 100% ownership of a US broadcasting company. Prior years, the FCC still banned majority foreign ownership of any company that owned stake in a US broadcasting company.

https://www.broadcastlawblog.com/2017/02/articles/fcc-approves-for-the-first-time-100-foreign-ownership-of-us-broadcast-stations/

Rs will never not allow foreign ownership of property in the US. This is how they think they will MAGA. Or, maybe it was because the POTUS in 2017 was beholden to rich foreigners. Who knows.

Murdoch had to cha he his citizenship status to extend his media empire in the US …

But now being a US citizen didn't stop him from continuing to expand his Newscorp media empire in Australia, UK, New Zealand etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I met a guy (covered in tats and didn’t look like he had any money) on a flight from DC to Dallas. He was flying to Dallas to check on his rental properties. He owns 40+ properties, essentially controlling the FMR in one neighborhood.

I was staying in a nice suburb in Dallas and my friend who was hosting me told me the bulk of the SFH neighborhood was owned by a few Asian families who rent out the properties. Rents have jumped dramatically and they quickly purchase any homes that go on the market.

This is a problem.

capitalism at its finest. Also, how do you know if the "Asian" families aren't Asian Americans? Because they have accents?

Asian here (as in, born in Asia, grew up here, have US citizenship). Whether 'Asian' or 'Asian Americans', real estate is a time honored investment vehicle for Chinese and Koreans. I think the Chinese Communists had a deep complex with the 'landlord' class. (Not the clergy, the nobility, the aristocracy - the classic villians for Marx). In feudal Asian society, there were only two classes - the peasants and the landlords. Can't be a landlord in China so do it here in North America.

PP here.. I'm Korean American.

My parents don't speak much English. They are looking at moving back to Korea for retirement and renting their place out here.

If someone like the "those foreigners are purchasing homes in our country" poster didn't know my parents, they would assume, just like the ^^PP assumed that they were Chinese who are buying up property in the US.

My spouse and I are thinking of doing something similar when we retire. We are also both immigrants, and American citizens. I'm sure people like the ^^PP would assume we are also "Chinese foreigners buying up property".

Once again, you have no idea if those people are foreigners or American citizens who live abroad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:China bans foreigners from owning land (well, even nationals are granted land in a very long term basis, not in perpetuity).

Rs will no go over it. This would be considered anti-capitalism.

And they’d be wrong. As usual.

sure, they are wrong on many things, but that doesn't mean it changes anything.

Foreign corporations used to not be able to hold majority stake in broadcasting companies in the US. Then, in 2017 (remember who was POTUS then), the FCC allowed 100% ownership of a US broadcasting company. Prior years, the FCC still banned majority foreign ownership of any company that owned stake in a US broadcasting company.

https://www.broadcastlawblog.com/2017/02/articles/fcc-approves-for-the-first-time-100-foreign-ownership-of-us-broadcast-stations/

Rs will never not allow foreign ownership of property in the US. This is how they think they will MAGA. Or, maybe it was because the POTUS in 2017 was beholden to rich foreigners. Who knows.

Murdoch had to cha he his citizenship status to extend his media empire in the US …

Yes, in 1985. Under Trump, he wouldn't have had to do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yep.

Ban foreign nationals as well as investors (including Americans). It’s not just airbnbs; regular joes have amassed huge portfolios of housing they rent out, driving rentals as well as purchase price up.

We should have addressed this issue during the early 2000s housing bubble. It’s a little late now, but still worth a shot.

People should only be allowed to own 3 homes; that gives wiggle room to own a vacation home and rental property. And no loopholes for corporations.

The SF Bay Area prices were driven up by foreign investors. Ditto for countless other cities. It’s a crisis.

I think any limit on ownership would be easily subverted. I would be in favor of an occupancy tax, however. With a forced sale as an eventual remedy if the dwelling is not occupied. Too many stories of tons of empty apartments and condos being held as investment properties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I met a guy (covered in tats and didn’t look like he had any money) on a flight from DC to Dallas. He was flying to Dallas to check on his rental properties. He owns 40+ properties, essentially controlling the FMR in one neighborhood.

I was staying in a nice suburb in Dallas and my friend who was hosting me told me the bulk of the SFH neighborhood was owned by a few Asian families who rent out the properties. Rents have jumped dramatically and they quickly purchase any homes that go on the market.

This is a problem.

capitalism at its finest. Also, how do you know if the "Asian" families aren't Asian Americans? Because they have accents?

Asian here (as in, born in Asia, grew up here, have US citizenship). Whether 'Asian' or 'Asian Americans', real estate is a time honored investment vehicle for Chinese and Koreans. I think the Chinese Communists had a deep complex with the 'landlord' class. (Not the clergy, the nobility, the aristocracy - the classic villians for Marx). In feudal Asian society, there were only two classes - the peasants and the landlords. Can't be a landlord in China so do it here in North America.

PP here.. I'm Korean American.

My parents don't speak much English. They are looking at moving back to Korea for retirement and renting their place out here.

If someone like the "those foreigners are purchasing homes in our country" poster didn't know my parents, they would assume, just like the ^^PP assumed that they were Chinese who are buying up property in the US.

My spouse and I are thinking of doing something similar when we retire. We are also both immigrants, and American citizens. I'm sure people like the ^^PP would assume we are also "Chinese foreigners buying up property".

Once again, you have no idea if those people are foreigners or American citizens who live abroad.

We’re talking about the government in particular. The actual governments of China and Saudi Arabia are buying property. It’s a documented problem. Along with AirBnBs and corporations buying up homes.

Some of us have nowhere else to flee to when America goes full on Lorax and we’re all paying rent to foreign countries. We’d like it to be addressed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I met a guy (covered in tats and didn’t look like he had any money) on a flight from DC to Dallas. He was flying to Dallas to check on his rental properties. He owns 40+ properties, essentially controlling the FMR in one neighborhood.

I was staying in a nice suburb in Dallas and my friend who was hosting me told me the bulk of the SFH neighborhood was owned by a few Asian families who rent out the properties. Rents have jumped dramatically and they quickly purchase any homes that go on the market.

This is a problem.

capitalism at its finest. Also, how do you know if the "Asian" families aren't Asian Americans? Because they have accents?

Asian here (as in, born in Asia, grew up here, have US citizenship). Whether 'Asian' or 'Asian Americans', real estate is a time honored investment vehicle for Chinese and Koreans. I think the Chinese Communists had a deep complex with the 'landlord' class. (Not the clergy, the nobility, the aristocracy - the classic villians for Marx). In feudal Asian society, there were only two classes - the peasants and the landlords. Can't be a landlord in China so do it here in North America.

PP here.. I'm Korean American.

My parents don't speak much English. They are looking at moving back to Korea for retirement and renting their place out here.

If someone like the "those foreigners are purchasing homes in our country" poster didn't know my parents, they would assume, just like the ^^PP assumed that they were Chinese who are buying up property in the US.

My spouse and I are thinking of doing something similar when we retire. We are also both immigrants, and American citizens. I'm sure people like the ^^PP would assume we are also "Chinese foreigners buying up property".

Once again, you have no idea if those people are foreigners or American citizens who live abroad.

We’re talking about the government in particular. The actual governments of China and Saudi Arabia are buying property. It’s a documented problem. Along with AirBnBs and corporations buying up homes.

Some of us have nowhere else to flee to when America goes full on Lorax and we’re all paying rent to foreign countries. We’d like it to be addressed.

This!

But it’s not just the Chinese government. Chinese foreign nationals are buying significant amounts of US real estate. This isn’t an opinion; google it. The data indicates that Chinese citizens are purchasing real estate—not Chinese Americans.

The pp who keeps calling out racism or misinformation should google and educate herself.

[Anonymous]

I think it’s very reasonable that any property owned by either a company or a non-greencard-foreigner (i.e. not a US citizen or permanent resident) should pay much higher property taxes (like double or even triple) and also not benefit from things like the props in California that freeze property taxes over time instead of relating them to the market value.

That increased tax revenue can pay to improve our schools, local infrastructure, etc.

I would also super an outright ban on foreign ownership of property although it would need to be done carefully to not track the market.