Citizenship

[Libertarian666]

To try to dispel what seem to be widely held myths even among otherwise knowledgeable people (:P), here is a thumbnail sketch of the current possibilities for second citizenship for those without any fairly close family connections in another country:

If you have at least an 8-figure portfolio, stop reading and call your family office manager. He can do the necessary research for you.

Otherwise, there are exactly two countries that sell citizenship without residence requirements. The requirements are:
1. A clean police record.
2. A very expensive background check to verify the above.
3. Filling out reams of forms on everything you have ever done in your life, medical history, and much more.
4. Approximate costs of either $200,000 or $500,000, depending on the country.
5. 6 months or more for the process.

The countries are:
1. A third-world pesthole that no one in his right mind would live in.
2. A nice Caribbean island country that has very expensive real estate, e.g., $450,000 for a condo.

Needless to say, the cheaper option is the pesthole.

Ok, what do you get for your money?

For country 1, you get citizenship there and could live there if you wanted to, which you won't. You also get a perfectly legal passport, but there aren't that many countries that will allow you in on that passport without a visa that may be hard or impossible to get; visa-free travel is the ideal.

For country 2, you get citizenship and might actually want to live there, but it is expensive to live there. The passport is considerably better also.

In the first case, you have solved the citizenship problem but not the residency problem. Solving the residency problem is also going to cost you either a bunch of money or a lot of additional paperwork and time spent in yet another country before you can ditch the US citizenship, if that is your goal.

In the second case, assuming you can afford to live on an expensive island, you might be all set. But that is going to mean a total outlay of somewhere around $1 million+ if you want a house to live in there.

So which of those sounds like the easy way to get away from the US government that everyone seems to think exists?

[moda0306]

Do either of those islands have no coercive government or taxes?

If so, 1) if it's expensive I guess that's the price of civilization and freedom from the US.

2) move to one of one of the millions of deserted islands if freedom is so precious.... You wouldn't have found it at one of these islands anyway.

[Pointedstick]

I guess I just don't see where all the negativity comes from. You make it sound like this awful slog... what's wrong with buying a boat with your FRNs, cashing out the remainder of your accounts and buying gold, silver, and equipment, sailing to one of those unclaimed islands, and living there? What's the American government going to do to you? Are they really going to care about one person, especially one non-high-net-worth person who is not using it as a tax shelter or money laundering operation? realistically, I don't think they're going to care.

Nowadays, the price of freedom from government is withdrawing from every aspect of the society that the government touches. That's the cost you pay. I don't like it either but we have to deal with what life hands us. And for my money, the internet is a pretty awesome consolation prize. 

[D1984]

To try to dispel what seem to be widely held myths even among otherwise knowledgeable people (:P), here is a thumbnail sketch of the current possibilities for second citizenship for those without any fairly close family connections in another country:

If you have at least an 8-figure portfolio, stop reading and call your family office manager. He can do the necessary research for you.

Otherwise, there are exactly two countries that sell citizenship without residence requirements. The requirements are:
1. A clean police record.
2. A very expensive background check to verify the above.
3. Filling out reams of forms on everything you have ever done in your life, medical history, and much more.
4. Approximate costs of either $200,000 or $500,000, depending on the country.
5. 6 months or more for the process.

The countries are:
1. A third-world pesthole that no one in his right mind would live in.
2. A nice Caribbean island country that has very expensive real estate, e.g., $450,000 for a condo.

Needless to say, the cheaper option is the pesthole.

Ok, what do you get for your money?

For country 1, you get citizenship there and could live there if you wanted to, which you won't. You also get a perfectly legal passport, but there aren't that many countries that will allow you in on that passport without a visa that may be hard or impossible to get; visa-free travel is the ideal.

For country 2, you get citizenship and might actually want to live there, but it is expensive to live there. The passport is considerably better also.

In the first case, you have solved the citizenship problem but not the residency problem. Solving the residency problem is also going to cost you either a bunch of money or a lot of additional paperwork and time spent in yet another country before you can ditch the US citizenship, if that is your goal.

In the second case, assuming you can afford to live on an expensive island, you might be all set. But that is going to mean a total outlay of somewhere around $1 million+ if you want a house to live in there.

So which of those sounds like the easy way to get away from the US government that everyone seems to think exists?

Is the "third-world pesthole" also in the Caribbean? If it's the country I'm thinking it is, then the quoted costs for citizenship were around $120K or $125K IIRC (for a single person, not a family...that WOULD be a little over $200K) and not $200K. Also, if this country is the same one you are talking about, doesn't it offer visa-free travel to many of the British commonwealth countries and may soon offer visa-gfree travel to the Schengen area by 2014-15 or so?

Finally, for the "non-pesthole" option, wasn't the requirement to "invest" a certain amount (around 500K) in their economy meetable by buying a condo (yes, I know 450K is pricey but at least you don't just give up your money for nothing--besides citizenship--like with country #1) which could legally be resold five years later?

[Benko]

There are age limits, and only certain type people would want to live there, but NZ has a certain attractiveness and if you fit the list of occupations they want I think it can be done fairly easily.  AUstralia as well.

Not sure why you are talking about 2nd citizenship.  Personally I'm not sure if I moved to e.g. NZ why the hell I'd want to keep the US one (given the point to moving to NZ would be to escape the inevitable "what cannot continue will end" scenario). 

YOu do need to be healthy but I don't believe this applies:

4. Approximate costs of either $200,000 or $500,000, depending on the country.

[Libertarian666]

There are age limits, and only certain type people would want to live there, but NZ has a certain attractiveness and if you fit the list of occupations they want I think it can be done fairly easily.  AUstralia as well.

Not sure why you are talking about 2nd citizenship.  Personally I'm not sure if I moved to e.g. NZ why the hell I'd want to keep the US one (given the point to moving to NZ would be to escape the inevitable "what cannot continue will end" scenario). 

YOu do need to be healthy but I don't believe this applies:

4. Approximate costs of either $200,000 or $500,000, depending on the country.

I believe old people, i.e., those over 55, are out of luck. Even without that issue, citizenship takes years after you get residence, which itself is difficult to get:
(from http://www.dia.govt.nz/Services-Citizen ... itizenship)

"To be eligible for a grant of New Zealand citizenship you must have New Zealand residence.

Residence means that Immigration New Zealand has allowed you to live in New Zealand indefinitely. You are required to have:

    Been present in New Zealand;
        for at least 1,350 days with New Zealand residence during the 5 years immediately before you make your application; and
        for at least 240 days with New Zealand residence in each of those 5 years; and
    Fully met any conditions imposed by Immigration New Zealand in regard to your New Zealand residence.


New Zealand residence
‘New Zealand residence’ means you have a residence permit, a residence visa, or a permanent residence visa issued by Immigration New Zealand or you are an Australian citizen or permanent resident.

Please Note: If you can show that there are exceptional circumstances that warrant a reduction, you may be considered as long as you have a minimum presence in New Zealand of 450 days with New Zealand residence in the 20 months before you make your application. "

[Libertarian666]

To try to dispel what seem to be widely held myths even among otherwise knowledgeable people (:P), here is a thumbnail sketch of the current possibilities for second citizenship for those without any fairly close family connections in another country:

If you have at least an 8-figure portfolio, stop reading and call your family office manager. He can do the necessary research for you.

Otherwise, there are exactly two countries that sell citizenship without residence requirements. The requirements are:
1. A clean police record.
2. A very expensive background check to verify the above.
3. Filling out reams of forms on everything you have ever done in your life, medical history, and much more.
4. Approximate costs of either $200,000 or $500,000, depending on the country.
5. 6 months or more for the process.

The countries are:
1. A third-world pesthole that no one in his right mind would live in.
2. A nice Caribbean island country that has very expensive real estate, e.g., $450,000 for a condo.

Needless to say, the cheaper option is the pesthole.

Ok, what do you get for your money?

For country 1, you get citizenship there and could live there if you wanted to, which you won't. You also get a perfectly legal passport, but there aren't that many countries that will allow you in on that passport without a visa that may be hard or impossible to get; visa-free travel is the ideal.

For country 2, you get citizenship and might actually want to live there, but it is expensive to live there. The passport is considerably better also.

In the first case, you have solved the citizenship problem but not the residency problem. Solving the residency problem is also going to cost you either a bunch of money or a lot of additional paperwork and time spent in yet another country before you can ditch the US citizenship, if that is your goal.

In the second case, assuming you can afford to live on an expensive island, you might be all set. But that is going to mean a total outlay of somewhere around $1 million+ if you want a house to live in there.

So which of those sounds like the easy way to get away from the US government that everyone seems to think exists?

Is the "third-world pesthole" also in the Caribbean? If it's the country I'm thinking it is, then the quoted costs for citizenship were around $120K or $125K IIRC (for a single person, not a family...that WOULD be a little over $200K) and not $200K. Also, if this country is the same one you are talking about, doesn't it offer visa-free travel to many of the British commonwealth countries and may soon offer visa-gfree travel to the Schengen area by 2014-15 or so?

Finally, for the "non-pesthole" option, wasn't the requirement to "invest" a certain amount (around 500K) in their economy meetable by buying a condo (yes, I know 450K is pricey but at least you don't just give up your money for nothing--besides citizenship--like with country #1) which could legally be resold five years later?

Yes, that was the family price. I didn't know about the Schengen area option, which would make it more desirable as far as the passport is concerned; maybe that's why they recently increased the price substantially. But travel is still not residency, which is another kettle of fish.

For the other option, the most expeditious approach is their "charitable contribution" plan:

"    Single Applicant — US$250,000
    Applicant and no more than 3 dependents — US$300,000
    Applicant and up to 5 dependents — US$350,000
    Applicant and up to 6 dependents — US$450,000

Due diligence fees:

    Main applicant — US$7,500
    All other dependents (over 16)— US$4,000 each"

The real estate one takes a lot longer and comes with taxes and other fees. But you still need residency somewhere, so that might be better overall if you want to live there. However, it apparently has its own problems:

"The government is currently working to combat an influx of illegal weapons onto the islands. Violent crime—including murder, petty street crime, automobile break-ins and burglary continue to occur. To combat these problems, xxxxx has hired a new police chief to guide the police force and implement higher standards in crime fighting."

[Libertarian666]

I guess I just don't see where all the negativity comes from. You make it sound like this awful slog... what's wrong with buying a boat with your FRNs, cashing out the remainder of your accounts and buying gold, silver, and equipment, sailing to one of those unclaimed islands, and living there? What's the American government going to do to you? Are they really going to care about one person, especially one non-high-net-worth person who is not using it as a tax shelter or money laundering operation? realistically, I don't think they're going to care.

Nowadays, the price of freedom from government is withdrawing from every aspect of the society that the government touches. That's the cost you pay. I don't like it either but we have to deal with what life hands us. And for my money, the internet is a pretty awesome consolation prize. 

If I wanted to take my chances with the US government, I could do a lot of things that I don't do. What I want is simply to be left alone, and that is not available unless you have a tremendous amount of money, and maybe not even then (I wouldn't know).

I would think that a self-styled libertarian would understand that. Apparently I was wrong.

[Pointedstick]

If I wanted to take my chances with the US government, I could do a lot of things that I don't do. What I want is simply to be left alone, and that is not available unless you have a tremendous amount of money, and maybe not even then (I wouldn't know).

I would think that a self-styled libertarian would understand that. Apparently I was wrong.

Well you and I both know that it's basically impossible to be left alone by a government in today's world and still enjoy the fruits of civilization. Sucks, but that's just the world we live in.

Now, if having more money makes it possibly easier to avoid or deal with government, then wouldn't that be priority #1? I guess it's like taxes. If the government takes 40% of my earnings, I could be angry and stew in rage and declare myself to be enslaved and bitch and moan about the confiscation of the value of my labor. Or I could earn more money and not care about it.

In the end, what I think we all want from life is happiness. What I guess perplexes me is that you seem to have a low to moderate level of anger all the time that government exists and could oppress you at any moment, and this appears to make you bitter and unhappy. But given that none of us can change this basic aspect of the world we live in, wouldn't it be more productive to learn how to psychologically cope with it?

* * *

As for being a libertarian, I'm really not sure what I am anymore. One problem I have with libertarianism is that it exposes you to all manner of unpleasant facts, but offers no salve for the anguish you undergo in learning them and coming to realize just how un-libertarian the world really is. This is where Harry Browne's How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World helped me so much; in may ways, I had to break free of certain unproductive and damaging chains of libertarianism, just as I did years before with liberalism. So now I don't know what I am.

[Libertarian666]

If I wanted to take my chances with the US government, I could do a lot of things that I don't do. What I want is simply to be left alone, and that is not available unless you have a tremendous amount of money, and maybe not even then (I wouldn't know).

I would think that a self-styled libertarian would understand that. Apparently I was wrong.

Well you and I both know that it's basically impossible to be left alone by a government in today's world and still enjoy the fruits of civilization. Sucks, but that's just the world we live in.

Now, if having more money makes it possibly easier to avoid or deal with government, then wouldn't that be priority #1? I guess it's like taxes. If the government takes 40% of my earnings, I could be angry and stew in rage and declare myself to be enslaved and bitch and moan about the confiscation of the value of my labor. Or I could earn more money and not care about it.

In the end, what I think we all want from life is happiness. What I guess perplexes is is that you seem to have a low to moderate level of anger all the time that government exists and could oppress you at any moment, and this appears to make you bitter and unhappy. But given that none of us can change this basic aspect of the world we live in, wouldn't it be more productive to learn how to psychologically cope with it?

* * *

As for being a libertarian, I'm really not sure what I am anymore. One problem I have with libertarianism is that it exposes you to all manner of unpleasant facts, but offers no salve for the anguish you undergo in learning them and coming to realize just how un-libertarian the world really is. This is where Harry Browne's How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World helped me so much; in may ways, I had to break free of the unproductive and damaging chains of libertarianism, just as I did years before  with liberalism.

It's basically impossible to be left alone by a government in today's world, period.

As for coping with this fact, I cope with it fine for the most part. I do admit, however, to getting pissed off when people who should know better make ignorant comments about "just moving to another country (or an 'unclaimed island') and getting another citizenship", when I have done the research to know exactly what it takes to actually get another citizenship (and that there are no "unclaimed islands"). Obviously I still have more work to do to reach the state of enlightenment being discussed on the other thread. 

[Pointedstick]

I do admit, however, to getting pissed off when people who should know better make ignorant comments about "just moving to another country (or an 'unclaimed island') and getting another citizenship", when I have done the research to know exactly what it takes to actually get another citizenship (and that there are no "unclaimed islands"). Obviously I still have more work to do to reach the state of enlightenment being discussed on the other thread. 

Don't outsmart yourself, though. I used to feel this way about building codes and just feel totally trapped with the ridiculous maze of bureaucracy... then one day I realized that all around me are buildings that got built somehow and that since the open secret is that neither the inspectors nor the builders really know the whole code, it's just a game of under the table bribery in the form of "permits" and "impact fees" and the like. Money solves all problems, especially at the level of local government where the people you're dealing with are probably greedy and underpaid, and where the system itself is practically set up for kickbacks and bribes disguised with official-sounding names.

So if I want to build the house of my dreams, I just need to make more money. And if you want to gain citizenship in a country that requires you to inject half a million into their economy, well, time to earn more money! It's a solvable problem. May not be easy, but at least you have a path forward, right?

[Libertarian666]

I do admit, however, to getting pissed off when people who should know better make ignorant comments about "just moving to another country (or an 'unclaimed island') and getting another citizenship", when I have done the research to know exactly what it takes to actually get another citizenship (and that there are no "unclaimed islands"). Obviously I still have more work to do to reach the state of enlightenment being discussed on the other thread. 

Don't outsmart yourself, though. I used to feel this way about building codes and just feel totally trapped with the ridiculous maze of bureaucracy... then one day I realized that all around me are buildings that got built somehow and that since the open secret is that neither the inspectors nor the builders really know the whole code, it's just a game of under the table bribery in the form of "permits" and "impact fees" and the like. Money solves all problems, especially at the level of local government where the people you're dealing with are probably greedy and underpaid, and where the system itself is practically set up for kickbacks and bribes disguised with official-sounding names.

So if I want to build the house of my dreams, I just need to make more money. And if you want to gain citizenship in a country that requires you to inject half a million into their economy, well, time to earn more money! It's a solvable problem. May not be easy, but at least you have a path forward, right?

Yes, I have a plan. I usually do, for anything I consider important.

[moda0306]

I really doubt that an individual couldn't find an unclaimed island and have a 99% chance of being left completely alone.  Now if they tried to develop it, that might raise some eyebrows.

Either way, people could buy an island and form a "free society"... But they haven't yet.

Tech, it sounds like your problem is less that the US government and others are so oppressive, and moreso that other people that might like freedom have done the math and figured that civilization in the western world is too cool to build a "free society" somewhere else.

In the worldwide marketplace for political ideas, there is no reason these places shouldn't pop up all over the place, unless:

1) They're inherantly undesirable to almost everyone for some reason, in comparison to what we get living in our current civilization.
2) There is some kind of multi-government conspiracy that won't let this type of society exist.

Or some kind of combination of the two.

So what's the big holdup?  Why don't educated, wealthy people develop these free societies all over?  We can blame it on governments being tyrannical, but then where does that leave us if we disband our government for the sake of a free society?  Annexed by Canada and Mexico?

So if by your own definition any free society is going to be at risk from being engulfed by a tyrannical society, then it stands to reason that we actually run the risk of losing freedoms by abolishing our government, as there are far-worse ones out there.

In the end, there is no "government."  There are a ton of small governments out there, some far worse than others, and we likely need enough of one to prevent ourselves from being consumed by another. If we don't, then there should be free societies all over if people really want them so badly and our society is such horseshit.

[Libertarian666]

I really doubt that an individual couldn't find an unclaimed island and have a 99% chance of being left completely alone.  Now if they tried to develop it, that might raise some eyebrows.

Either way, people could buy an island and form a "free society"... But they haven't yet.

Tech, it sounds like your problem is less that the US government and others are so oppressive, and moreso that other people that might like freedom have done the math and figured that civilization in the western world is too cool to build a "free society" somewhere else.

In the worldwide marketplace for political ideas, there is no reason these places shouldn't pop up all over the place, unless:

1) They're inherantly undesirable to almost everyone for some reason, in comparison to what we get living in our current civilization.
2) There is some kind of multi-government conspiracy that won't let this type of society exist.

Or some kind of combination of the two.

So what's the big holdup?  Why don't educated, wealthy people develop these free societies all over?  We can blame it on governments being tyrannical, but then where does that leave us if we disband our government for the sake of a free society?  Annexed by Canada and Mexico?

So if by your own definition any free society is going to be at risk from being engulfed by a tyrannical society, then it stands to reason that we actually run the risk of losing freedoms by abolishing our government, as there are far-worse ones out there.

In the end, there is no "government."  There are a ton of small governments out there, some far worse than others, and we likely need enough of one to prevent ourselves from being consumed by another. If we don't, then there should be free societies all over if people really want them so badly and our society is such horseshit.

#2 is correct, as otherwise there would be some government that would cede sovereignty on land if offered enough money.No government in the world will do that, no matter what price is offered, even those that desperately need the money. What other explanation is there for that fact?

[moda0306]

Tech,

So some governments of the world are so dangerous that people can't even risk forming a free society somewhere for the fear that it will be devoured, and your solution is to try develop that society anyway?

Isn't it obvious that the only logical conclusion to maximize freedom in the real world is to have a government of your own, even if it does some undesirable things?

Plus, are you sure that no country would engage in that transaction?  It seems a bit odd to me that none would.

[Libertarian666]

Tech,

So some governments of the world are so dangerous that people can't even risk forming a free society somewhere for the fear that it will be devoured, and your solution is to try develop that society anyway?

Isn't it obvious that the only logical conclusion to maximize freedom in the real world is to have a government of your own, even if it does some undesirable things?

Plus, are you sure that no country would engage in that transaction?  It seems a bit odd to me that none would.

Yes, I'm sure no government would do that. Maybe you should consider the possible explanations for that fact.

And "having a government of your own" is not an option. It is always a government of someone else's.

[moda0306]

Tech,

So some governments of the world are so dangerous that people can't even risk forming a free society somewhere for the fear that it will be devoured, and your solution is to try develop that society anyway?

Isn't it obvious that the only logical conclusion to maximize freedom in the real world is to have a government of your own, even if it does some undesirable things?

Plus, are you sure that no country would engage in that transaction?  It seems a bit odd to me that none would.

Yes, I'm sure no government would do that. Maybe you should consider the possible explanations for that fact.

And "having a government of your own" is not an option. It is always a government of someone else's.

Actually I should have said that differently... You actually need a government of you and enough other people to be big enough to defend from other people.  A one man government is about as useful in a world as harsh as you say as a one man marketplace. It's just meaningless.