What national governments do within their own borders and affects their own citizens is the individual nation’s business, but citizenship of one nation also confers EU citizenship, which is definitely the business of the EU.
The EU is open to mass migration, over 3 million people arrived in 2023 alone, many of whom will take years, if not generations, to integrate economically.
But offer to invest ~ €1M, create jobs, and pay more in taxes than most citizens contribute in decades?
You’re the villain.
It’s incoherent. Instead of shutting down these programs, the EU should be designing frameworks to align incentives and distribute benefits across member states.
Now compare that to the U.S.:
“Bring $5M, we’ll welcome you; and we won’t tax your income abroad.”
Different mindset; very different operating system.
Which model do you think makes more sense for the 21st century? What’s your take?'
In my comment I was simply stating what may or may not be the business of the EU as opposed to the business of individual nations. But as you asked for my opinion, I thinks it’s relevant to point out that Europe’s “mass migration” is a result of the worldwide refugee crisis, which is a different topic of discussion, like comparing apples to oranges. As for which model is better, buying citizenship doesn’t necessarily equate to creating jobs, and I’m honestly sick and tired of being continuously told how “precious” the so-called job creators are and how we should give them everything they want. They create jobs to create wealth for themselves, which is great, but they are not benefactors that we should all be expected to bow down to and thank. My question is, why are they not asking for citizenship from China or India or Pakistani or Bangladeshi, etc. where they invest a lot more and make billions?
What national governments do within their own borders and affects their own citizens is the individual nation’s business, but citizenship of one nation also confers EU citizenship, which is definitely the business of the EU.
This is my point of view, I shared earlier on X:
'This is Europe’s Immigration Paradox
The EU is open to mass migration, over 3 million people arrived in 2023 alone, many of whom will take years, if not generations, to integrate economically.
But offer to invest ~ €1M, create jobs, and pay more in taxes than most citizens contribute in decades?
You’re the villain.
It’s incoherent. Instead of shutting down these programs, the EU should be designing frameworks to align incentives and distribute benefits across member states.
Now compare that to the U.S.:
“Bring $5M, we’ll welcome you; and we won’t tax your income abroad.”
Different mindset; very different operating system.
Which model do you think makes more sense for the 21st century? What’s your take?'
In my comment I was simply stating what may or may not be the business of the EU as opposed to the business of individual nations. But as you asked for my opinion, I thinks it’s relevant to point out that Europe’s “mass migration” is a result of the worldwide refugee crisis, which is a different topic of discussion, like comparing apples to oranges. As for which model is better, buying citizenship doesn’t necessarily equate to creating jobs, and I’m honestly sick and tired of being continuously told how “precious” the so-called job creators are and how we should give them everything they want. They create jobs to create wealth for themselves, which is great, but they are not benefactors that we should all be expected to bow down to and thank. My question is, why are they not asking for citizenship from China or India or Pakistani or Bangladeshi, etc. where they invest a lot more and make billions?
Paint yourself brown and enter any European country illegally. They'll beg you to accept citizenship.
USA $5m any oligarch welcome. The more corrupt the better.