[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Admiral Yi]

Mono has Canadian citizenship, doesn't he?

[Valmy]

Mono has Canadian citizenship, doesn't he?

Yep. He, ironically, plans on using it to escape should something go down in Hong Kong.

[Grey Fox]

Yes.

A solution could be simple. Charge taxes on oversea citizens.

[Valmy]

That is what we do. It does succeed in getting people to give up their citizenship.

[Malthus]

So, the big fear is that we may end up having to rescue people from terrible violence? Or argue on their behalf for due process, or against death penalty?

How about - the big fear is that, when choosing to "rescue people from terrible violence ... Or argue on their behalf for due process, or against death penalty ... ", certain people - those capable, usually because of their relative wealth - will gain a huge advantage over others less capable (and so usually the more truly wretched). They will be able to artificially claim to be "Canadian Citizens".

In an ideal world, of course, Canada would perform these feats on behalf of everyone ... but as long as they differentiate based on citizenship, allowing the wealthy of other nations to claim priority because they have the money to jump through the correct loopholes seems ... somewhat regressive.

[Malthus]

Well it's a lot easier to identify the problem than it is to name a solution.

I am still not sure what the problem is and so I was trying to get at that by what you think the solution might be.

Viper says taxes are not the issue, you seem to think it is.  Viper seems more vexed with people who are not born here claiming citizenship.  You seem more vexed with anyone living abroad.

I have to confess some confusion as to what is really the issue.

The issue seems to be those using Canadian citizenship merely for the benefits it confers, without any intention of actually living in the country or, potentially, performing any of the duties of citizenship. A classic "free rider" problem.

I am not sure what the 'duties" might be and so I am not sure what the free rider problem is.   Additionally even if the necessary duties of citizenship are defined, I am still not sure how free riding occurs.  Provinces are free to dictate when medical coverage lapses because of absence (as an example) so what is the real concern?

edit:  BB has identified the same issue - and so I ask again - what is the problem to be addressed here?

Do you believe that citizenship has any responsibilities? 

[Admiral Yi]

Yep. He, ironically, plans on using it to escape should something go down in Hong Kong.

Just like a billion Canadian citizens on the mainland.

[Oexmelin]

How about - the big fear is that, when choosing to "rescue people from terrible violence ... Or argue on their behalf for due process, or against death penalty ... ", certain people - those capable, usually because of their relative wealth - will gain a huge advantage over others less capable (and so usually the more truly wretched). They will be able to artificially claim to be "Canadian Citizens".

Clearly. But Canada, along with many other countries, is already selling its citizenship ("immigrant investor"), so those dubious distinctions are already in play. (I'd be in favor of heavily restricting *those* citizenship cases). Which is why this should go hand in hand with a robust commitment towards asylum seekers, refugees, etc. But people who are complaining about free riders strike me as unlikely to agree...

[Barrister]

So, the big fear is that we may end up having to rescue people from terrible violence? Or argue on their behalf for due process, or against death penalty?

How about - the big fear is that, when choosing to "rescue people from terrible violence ... Or argue on their behalf for due process, or against death penalty ... ", certain people - those capable, usually because of their relative wealth - will gain a huge advantage over others less capable (and so usually the more truly wretched). They will be able to artificially claim to be "Canadian Citizens".

In an ideal world, of course, Canada would perform these feats on behalf of everyone ... but as long as they differentiate based on citizenship, allowing the wealthy of other nations to claim priority because they have the money to jump through the correct loopholes seems ... somewhat regressive.

Nicely put Malthus.

I'm not hard-hearted, and certainly would like to see Canada help people from around the world.  But how much extra responsibility do we have to help people because, 10, 20 years or more earlier, they had enough knowledge and money to go live in Canada for a few years in order to obtain citizenship?

[Barrister]

How about - the big fear is that, when choosing to "rescue people from terrible violence ... Or argue on their behalf for due process, or against death penalty ... ", certain people - those capable, usually because of their relative wealth - will gain a huge advantage over others less capable (and so usually the more truly wretched). They will be able to artificially claim to be "Canadian Citizens".

Clearly. But Canada, along with many other countries, is already selling its citizenship ("immigrant investor"), so those dubious distinctions are already in play. (I'd be in favor of heavily restricting *those* citizenship cases). Which is why this should go hand in hand with a robust commitment towards asylum seekers, refugees, etc. But people who are complaining about free riders strike me as unlikely to agree...

I believe "immigrant investor" has been cracked down on.

BUt if you have means, it takes some time but it is quite possible to become a citizen.  Apply to be an international student - you have to pay extra fees so university loves these kinds of students.  Proceed to live in Canada the next three years while studying.  You are then eligible to apply for permanent residence, and then citizenship.

[crazy canuck]

That is what we do. It does succeed in getting people to give up their citizenship.

What the US does is different. It is not a surtax but your citizens are taxed on world wide income.  I think the rest of the world should move to that model - but the devil in the detail is going to be how the tax treaties deal with who actually gets what when citizens are working abroad.

Do you believe that citizenship has any responsibilities? 

Non sequitur?

[viper37]

So, the big fear is that we may end up having to rescue people from terrible violence? Or argue on their behalf for due process, or against death penalty?

How about - the big fear is that, when choosing to "rescue people from terrible violence ... Or argue on their behalf for due process, or against death penalty ... ", certain people - those capable, usually because of their relative wealth - will gain a huge advantage over others less capable (and so usually the more truly wretched). They will be able to artificially claim to be "Canadian Citizens".

this.

[viper37]

Which is why this should go hand in hand with a robust commitment towards asylum seekers, refugees, etc.

what do you define as "a robust commitment" ?  And how would you decide who's a refugee or not differently than the current system?

[crazy canuck]

So, the big fear is that we may end up having to rescue people from terrible violence? Or argue on their behalf for due process, or against death penalty?

How about - the big fear is that, when choosing to "rescue people from terrible violence ... Or argue on their behalf for due process, or against death penalty ... ", certain people - those capable, usually because of their relative wealth - will gain a huge advantage over others less capable (and so usually the more truly wretched). They will be able to artificially claim to be "Canadian Citizens".

this.

It all sounds great until one considers what is meant by the phrase "artificially claim to be Canadian".  How is one an artificial Canadian.  It seems to me that there is an underlying concept that people don't actually want to come out and say.

[Barrister]

So, the big fear is that we may end up having to rescue people from terrible violence? Or argue on their behalf for due process, or against death penalty?

How about - the big fear is that, when choosing to "rescue people from terrible violence ... Or argue on their behalf for due process, or against death penalty ... ", certain people - those capable, usually because of their relative wealth - will gain a huge advantage over others less capable (and so usually the more truly wretched). They will be able to artificially claim to be "Canadian Citizens".

this.

It all sounds great until one considers what is meant by the phrase "artificially claim to be Canadian".  How is one an artificial Canadian.  It seems to me that there is an underlying concept that people don't actually want to come out and say.

"Artificial Canadian" is not at all the phrase I would use.  There is nothing artificial about it - they have gained Canadian citizenship.

What about "Canadian citizens with no meaningful tie to the country besides their citizenship papers".