BC Money Laundering Report Released Today - BC Ranks 4th in Canada

[-DLC-]

On 5/10/2019 at 5:32 PM, Rob_Zepp said:

You bet I won't what?   You saying I don't declare my global income in Canada?    Uh, ok.   Thanks for assuming I am involved in criminal activity.   Nice.   Just assume everyone is a criminal or do you pick/choose based upon some criterion?    

 

 

You read it wrong.  I wasn't referring to you declaring your income.  At all.

 

I was saying I bet you won't answer the question of how people are living in mansions in the richest part of town here and have multiple luxury cars in the driveway but zero income to declare.  You don't understand the magnitude of what's happening here.  Google corruption in Richmond BC for a start and see the multiple things taking place at this, the hub of the corruption.

 

There is so much criminal stuff taking place in the Lower Mainland that it's hard to keep up with it all.  But I'm glad David Eby's trying to.

 

So what do you know about the real estate and luxury car market in Richmond?  The casino.   I'd like to hear it. 

 

[YummyCakeFace]

Well there goes the value of my properties.  Thank you to the morally superior!

Edited May 12, 2019 by YummyCakeFace

[Rob_Zepp]

On 5/11/2019 at 7:15 PM, canuckistani said:

Since i am yet to meet very many Canadians in Canada with as much of a globalist past as me, your attacks are meaningless. I have been an expat in a country before where expats have no right to property - i am okay with that. Globalized economy does not override the sovereign right of a country to do whatever it wishes to foreigners, as long as their basic human rights are respected. 

Foreigners are foreigners, end of story- no amount of kumbayaas and snooty psuedo-liberal attitude is gonna override that fact as long as the nation state exists and continues to be THE source of authority in today's world, in every field of power. 

Wow.   I really am amazed that people with your perspective (protectionism etc.) actually exist even though I read about the concept.   Wow.

[Rob_Zepp]

On 5/11/2019 at 9:32 PM, debluvscanucks said:

You read it wrong.  I wasn't referring to you declaring your income.  At all.

 

I was saying I bet you won't answer the question of how people are living in mansions in the richest part of town here and have multiple luxury cars in the driveway but zero income to declare.  You don't understand the magnitude of what's happening here.  Google corruption in Richmond BC for a start and see the multiple things taking place at this, the hub of the corruption.

 

There is so much criminal stuff taking place in the Lower Mainland that it's hard to keep up with it all.  But I'm glad David Eby's trying to.

 

So what do you know about the real estate and luxury car market in Richmond?  The casino.   I'd like to hear it. 

 

Why would you bet I don't answer that?   First, I am not even sure how to answer that as you seem to have answered it for me.   

What I am saying is not allowing people to purchase property isn't going to solve your crime issue.   Removing numbered companies, having transparency of ownership and clarity on income source will help and that is where I think your Province should head.   To simply ban someone from owning property in a country other than the one they are a permanent resident sounds at odds with the logic of a global economy.    Protectionism is something the Orange haired bozo to the South of you is advocating - taking the world back two or three generations.   We are all from the same species and all share the same planet.   It is like natural resources - to not share them is insane.   

 

By all means attack the crime but whether I know about real estate or luxury car markets in Richmond or not isn't going to solve the issue.   What will solve the issue is actually exposing the criminal activity and right now Canada has some of the loosest laws in the world (BC included) when it comes to what is required to buy property in terms of disclosure.   

[canuckistani]

5 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Wow.   I really am amazed that people with your perspective (protectionism etc.) actually exist even though I read about the concept.   Wow.

why would it be 'amazing' ? 

I gather from your judgemental responses, instead of cogent arguments, that you have nothing to say against the basic premise of ' when power resides in the concept of nation-states, nation states have zero obligations towards non resident foreigners in any sphere of life beyond basic human rights'. 

 

PS: I am not a protectionist. But unlike most of the western world, i am simply not an extremist of any ideals - all ideals - even the good ones- can be taken too far and have utilitarian limits on them. Property rights of non resident foreigners are such.

[Rob_Zepp]

1 minute ago, canuckistani said:

why would it be 'amazing' ? 

I gather from your judgemental responses, instead of cogent arguments, that you have nothing to say against the basic premise of ' when power resides in the concept of nation-states, nation states have zero obligations towards non resident foreigners in any sphere of life beyond basic human rights'. 

 

PS: I am not a protectionist. But unlike most of the western world, i am simply not an extremist of any ideals - all ideals - even the good ones- can be taken too far and have utilitarian limits on them. Property rights of non resident foreigners are such.

You are clearly one of Provincial thinking.   I think of a world without borders and believe that the sooner we get there, the sooner a lot of crap that people use as an excuse to divide people (race, sex, religion etc.) will no longer be the wedges that they are to impose a life of "have" or "have not" by some weird life lottery that is dictated by where you were born and/or born to.   

 

The "judgment" comes from how you respond.   You seem to have some form of "I have this life here, no one should take it from me" attitude.    Good luck with that but I firmly believe a global perspective when, for example, one Province in a democracy like Canada is supposed to be doesn't tell another "give me oil but I will never let you give it to anyone else" or that someone living in, say, Germany shouldn't be able to buy a piece of property in, say, BC because they are not Canadian.    I like the concept of everyone is 'human' first and foremost and are then allowed to go forth and live their lives without being pushed into silos by protectionism.

[canuckistani]

7 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Why would you bet I don't answer that?   First, I am not even sure how to answer that as you seem to have answered it for me.   

What I am saying is not allowing people to purchase property isn't going to solve your crime issue. 

The 'crime issue' in relevance, is money laundering. Show us evidence of your claim that restriction of foreign property rights has zero effect on foreign money-laundering in the nation that has banned foreign property purchases. Infact, i can show you decisive evidence that banning property rights of foreigners has direct correlation with lowering of foreign money laundering in a given nation. 

Quote

 Removing numbered companies, having transparency of ownership and clarity on income source will help and that is where I think your Province should head.   To simply ban someone from owning property in a country other than the one they are a permanent resident sounds at odds with the logic of a global economy.   

There is nothing 'odd' about it in a globalized economy. Globalized economy does not mean every sector of the economy has to be globalized. Farming industry is mostly protected in most countries, depending on the produce in question. India and China subsidizes rice and sunflower oil industry. Australia subsidizes ranching industry. 
Certain sectors are not privvy to globalization either - defense industry for eg. No matter how advanced their aircrafts can get, Sukhoi or Tupolev cannot bid for USAF contracts and Boeing or Lockheed cannot bid on RuAF contracts. 

 

Throwing around 'globalization philosophy' in this debate exposes only one thing - that you have zero idea of what globalization means or the scope of it in practical terms. 

Quote

Protectionism is something the Orange haired bozo to the South of you is advocating - taking the world back two or three generations.   We are all from the same species and all share the same planet.   It is like natural resources - to not share them is insane.   

Wrong. Orange hair bozo is advocating protectionism of industrial consumer goods sector. All nations have protectionist policies, depending on what industry they choose to. A nation has a right to choose what industry to protect of its own citizens because a nation's obligations first and foremost, are advancement and quality of life of its citizens and residents. 

Quote

 

By all means attack the crime but whether I know about real estate or luxury car markets in Richmond or not isn't going to solve the issue.   What will solve the issue is actually exposing the criminal activity and right now Canada has some of the loosest laws in the world (BC included) when it comes to what is required to buy property in terms of disclosure.   

What will also solve the issue is banning foreign non-resident purchase of property. Worked for New Zealand. 

[canuckistani]

1 minute ago, Rob_Zepp said:

You are clearly one of Provincial thinking.

There is nothing provincial about pointing out facts and blowing away nonsense re: globalization. Name a nation and i will name what industry that nation chooses to protect. 

1 minute ago, Rob_Zepp said:

   I think of a world without borders and believe that the sooner we get there, the sooner a lot of crap that people use as an excuse to divide people (race, sex, religion etc.) will no longer be the wedges that they are to impose a life of "have" or "have not" by some weird life lottery that is dictated by where you were born and/or born to.   

You will say that, because you have vested interest in such a world, being a foreign property owner.  World without borders is a nice concept in theory, but doesn't work in practice. And in anycase, it is not the world we live in. Nor is there any evidence that it is something that most human beings want. So what you like, is irrelevant to the reality of what the world is. 

1 minute ago, Rob_Zepp said:

 

The "judgment" comes from how you respond.   You seem to have some form of "I have this life here, no one should take it from me" attitude. 

 

I beg to differ. Your judgement comes from the fact that you have a castle in the cloud dream of what the world should be and when people point out facts towards how and why your idea is nonsense, there is no logical response. 

1 minute ago, Rob_Zepp said:

  Good luck with that but I firmly believe a global perspective when, for example, one Province in a democracy like Canada is supposed to be doesn't tell another "give me oil but I will never let you give it to anyone else" or that someone living in, say, Germany shouldn't be able to buy a piece of property in, say, BC because they are not Canadian.    I like the concept of everyone is 'human' first and foremost and are then allowed to go forth and live their lives without being pushed into silos by protectionism.

Whether I let you in my house or not, is MY choice. Its not a right you have, but its my right, as a property owner, to do so. Same concept applies to the nation state. They exist. That is the fount of all rights and almost all power ( barring rebel groups creating their own de-facto governments) in the world. The only reason you are alive and not dead for arguing against your dictator, is because your nation state affords you said power, while Kazakhstan does not. As such, nation states have the right and the mandate handed to them by their citizens to do whatever they wish towards foreigners as long as their basic human rights are respected. 

 

You can go forth and live your life however you wish - provided your nation state grants you that right. Its not an objective, empiric right that 'cant be snatched away from you'. To claim that it is some sort of mandate of humans, is factually incorrect. 
If tomorrow Canadians want to make ALL non-resident Germans persona non grata in Canada, they have the right to do so, should be able to do so and its perfectly legal to do so. 

 

Your POV is flawed because you fail to discern between rights and luxuries. Owning property when you are not resident in a said nation, is a luxury and not a right. And if such a luxury is adversely affecting the access to housing and quality of life of the said nation's citizens, the said nation has an obligation to go 'bye bye foreign non resident home owners'. If said nation decisively takes posession without compensation, that too, is their right. 

[Violator]

Hasn't been alot of traction about this.

This article is long but it goes deep in depth over the recent casino mansions that were busted in Ontario and BC.

 

https://globalnews.ca/news/7416772/markham-illegal-casino-mansion-b-c-casino-link/

 

Few people of notice are Justin Trudeau who received donations on multiple occasions.

 

Hopefully with the election over well here more about this but I highly doubt it.

Edited October 27, 2020 by Violator