Everyone is ignoring the elephant in the room: the imminent end of US imperial hegemony over the planet. It's not a question of globalization or deglobalization; I think that's the wrong paradigm. Since World War Two, the planet has mostly been controlled by indirect US economic interests. This includes the EU - where the super-elite heavily overlap with the American elite through intermarriage, business interests, education, common culture, etc...
The situation with Malta reflects the fact that the EU is a satellite empire of the US, and like the US, wants to eliminate ways for its wealthy citizens to escape its grasp. Countries will end their citizenship by investment programs if they feel the pressure from empires.
In a world where the empires start faltering (which many people are mislabeling as "de-globalization") then countries will do more things like this.
The people who oppose this type of project are fundamentally people who believe that either the American-European empire will never fall or should be saved at any human or economic cost. They rarely consciously understand that this is their perspective - because it is so ingrained in our cultural DNA.
Probably a hot take: what is wrong with moving around? Not sure if I want that rhetorical... At any rate, our ancestors, everyone's ancestors, had family that were planters, and family that were vines. As long as the investment, yes money, stays in the country, why not reward it. I say, THAT is the bigger issue = Canada & the US just don't reward their citizens for buying and investing in home. I have often lived in France for a time, and have family in Europe. These last few years, it's f*kn expensive. I mean I don't think "young" ppl (such a broad category btw) can even afford it like they are guessing and estimating. How many of these adventurers are going to deplete their nestegg anyway, and probably have to live a very tiny old life. I say we start teaching free economics classes of all ages.
Everyone is ignoring the elephant in the room: the imminent end of US imperial hegemony over the planet. It's not a question of globalization or deglobalization; I think that's the wrong paradigm. Since World War Two, the planet has mostly been controlled by indirect US economic interests. This includes the EU - where the super-elite heavily overlap with the American elite through intermarriage, business interests, education, common culture, etc...
The situation with Malta reflects the fact that the EU is a satellite empire of the US, and like the US, wants to eliminate ways for its wealthy citizens to escape its grasp. Countries will end their citizenship by investment programs if they feel the pressure from empires.
In a world where the empires start faltering (which many people are mislabeling as "de-globalization") then countries will do more things like this.
The people who oppose this type of project are fundamentally people who believe that either the American-European empire will never fall or should be saved at any human or economic cost. They rarely consciously understand that this is their perspective - because it is so ingrained in our cultural DNA.
Probably a hot take: what is wrong with moving around? Not sure if I want that rhetorical... At any rate, our ancestors, everyone's ancestors, had family that were planters, and family that were vines. As long as the investment, yes money, stays in the country, why not reward it. I say, THAT is the bigger issue = Canada & the US just don't reward their citizens for buying and investing in home. I have often lived in France for a time, and have family in Europe. These last few years, it's f*kn expensive. I mean I don't think "young" ppl (such a broad category btw) can even afford it like they are guessing and estimating. How many of these adventurers are going to deplete their nestegg anyway, and probably have to live a very tiny old life. I say we start teaching free economics classes of all ages.