nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Why don't we just sell the entire country?

beejee

A tangent opened in some work that led me researching foreign investment in ireland.

A rabbit hole!

I find it difficult to identify good sources of land/property/utility ownership owned or essentially run by non state actors.

But the million examples of what you think is "irish"... But isn't... Is scarily significant.

Homes, businesses, stock exchanges, property, land... You name it, it's apparently all up for grabs, and is indeed being grabbed.

At what point, without hyperbole, is a country not a country? If China owned 20% of the value of Ireland, isnt it really like saying Ireland is now 20% smaller? If not, why not?

The information and record keeping is so poor or non-existent you'd almost think it was done on purpose

Any thoughts or insight on this phenomena? Seems to be a rapidly growing problem in a lot of countries.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Force Carrier

First define your terms. So what is 'country'?

Is it a collection of economic resources and assets?

Does the definition also include culture, ideas, people, heritage?

ToddyDoody

beejee wrote: »

A tangent opened in some work that led me researching foreign investment in ireland.

A rabbit hole!

I find it difficult to identify good sources of land/property/utility ownership owned or essentially run by non state actors.

But the million examples of what you think is "irish"... But isn't... Is scarily significant.

Homes, businesses, stock exchanges, property, land... You name it, it's apparently all up for grabs, and is indeed being grabbed.

At what point, without hyperbole, is a country not a country? If China owned 20% of the value of Ireland, isnt it really like saying Ireland is now 20% smaller? If not, why not?

The information and record keeping is so poor or non-existent you'd almost think it was done on purpose

Any thoughts or insight on this phenomena? Seems to be a rapidly growing problem in a lot of countries.

DeValera would be spinning in his grave.

dxhound2005

beejee wrote: »

A tangent opened in some work that led me researching foreign investment in ireland.

A rabbit hole!

I find it difficult to identify good sources of land/property/utility ownership owned or essentially run by non state actors.

But the million examples of what you think is "irish"... But isn't... Is scarily significant.

Homes, businesses, stock exchanges, property, land... You name it, it's apparently all up for grabs, and is indeed being grabbed.

At what point, without hyperbole, is a country not a country? If China owned 20% of the value of Ireland, isnt it really like saying Ireland is now 20% smaller? If not, why not?

The information and record keeping is so poor or non-existent you'd almost think it was done on purpose

Any thoughts or insight on this phenomena? Seems to be a rapidly growing problem in a lot of countries.

You are using hyperbole.

Fr_Dougal

beejee wrote: »

A tangent opened in some work that led me researching foreign investment in ireland.

A rabbit hole!

I find it difficult to identify good sources of land/property/utility ownership owned or essentially run by non state actors.

But the million examples of what you think is "irish"... But isn't... Is scarily significant.

Homes, businesses, stock exchanges, property, land... You name it, it's apparently all up for grabs, and is indeed being grabbed.

At what point, without hyperbole, is a country not a country? If China owned 20% of the value of Ireland, isnt it really like saying Ireland is now 20% smaller? If not, why not?

The information and record keeping is so poor or non-existent you'd almost think it was done on purpose

Any thoughts or insight on this phenomena? Seems to be a rapidly growing problem in a lot of countries.

Will swap for anything in my ads. Can you deliver?

beejee

Force Carrier wrote: »

First define your terms. So what is 'country'?

Is it a collection of economic resources and assets?

Does the definition also include culture, ideas, people, heritage?

Not easy to define for useful conversation.

But I suppose a quick and dirty definition could be "it's a home"... Thereby including all the necessities of running a home.

Sure, there are a lot of economic factors at play in maintaining your home, but selling it off bit by bit wouldn't be very smart?

odyssey06

Arent our territorial waters much larger I think than our land mass.

So we already included them in the package of sale to Europe.

beejee

dxhound2005 wrote: »

You are using hyperbole.

No I'm not, I'm using analogy, not exaggeration. The question stands.

BENDYBINN

Definitely,should sell the arran islands.......

dxhound2005

beejee wrote: »

No I'm not, I'm using analogy, not exaggeration. The question stands.

Impossible to answer because the record keeping is non-existent.

Allinall

I know what a tracker mortgage is.

But for the life of me, I’ve no notion what this thread is about.

Force Carrier

beejee wrote: »

but selling it off bit by bit wouldn't be very smart?

Well it would be smart if total revenue after sales > cost of house to you plus expenses.

dxhound2005

BENDYBINN wrote: »

Definitely,should sell the arran islands.......

Arran belongs to Scotland.

beejee

odyssey06 wrote: »

Arent our territorial waters much larger I think than our land mass.

So we already included them in the package of sale to Europe.

Well, we are essentially allowing the use of our territory. But not selling it outright.

Could be argued! But there's a clear technical difference at least.

In contrast, I was just reading that 1 in 5 homes, potentially, is being bought by cuckoo funds. And the overall increase in their purchases has risen 60% this year (iirc)

So, technically, we can boot the other eu countries out of our waters, but these homes are 100% not "irish" anymore. We no longer own them. If you live on a residential road, just picture every fifth house belongs to a foreign company. Wild, don't you think?

dxhound2005

beejee wrote: »

Well, we are essentially allowing the use of our territory. But not selling it outright.

Could be argued! But there's a clear technical difference at least.

In contrast, I was just reading that 1 in 5 homes, potentially, is being bought by cuckoo funds. And the overall increase in their purchases has risen 60% this year (iirc)

So, technically, we can boot the other eu countries out of our waters, but these homes are 100% not "irish" anymore. We no longer own them. If you live on a residential road, just picture every fifth house belongs to a foreign company. Wild, don't you think?

Four out of five a'int bad.

beejee

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Impossible to answer because the record keeping is non-existent.

It's not centrally recorded, no. But go looking for the fragmented information and you'll get a strong flavour!

Why is that? Why is such a fundamental source of information unavailable?

It could be that I haven't found it yet, maybe.

dxhound2005

beejee wrote: »

It's not centrally recorded, no. But go looking for the fragmented information and you'll get a strong flavour!

Why is that? Why is such a fundamental source of information unavailable?

It could be that I haven't found it, but I certainly haven't found it yet.

Needs more research.

beejee

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Four out of five a'int bad.

And last year it may have been 4.5/5...next year it could be 3/5...in 20 years it could be one out of 5.

Im not the kind of person that loses a finger but is happy about the situation because I've got some left

dxhound2005

beejee wrote: »

And last year it may have been 4.5/5...next year it could be 3/5...in 20 years it could be one out of 5.

Im not the kind of person that loses a finger but is happy about the situation because I've got some left

Would you sell your little finger for one million Euro?

nkl12xtw5goz70

beejee wrote: »

At what point, without hyperbole, is a country not a country? If China owned 20% of the value of Ireland, isnt it really like saying Ireland is now 20% smaller? If not, why not?

Because buying property in Ireland is not the same thing as buying Irish sovereignty.

If a Chinese company buys property in Ireland, that property does not become part of China. It is still part of Ireland and subject to Irish laws, taxes, etc.

beejee

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Would you sell your little finger for one million Euro?

There's a Stephen King novel that pops into mind.

A surgeon is stranded on an island with a load of heroine. Rather than give in, he starts to surgically remove pieces of himself to eat, using the heroine as an anaesthetic. He keeps going until there's nothing left he can eat. In the end, he can't control himself from drooling at the prospect of eating a bit more. Grisly.

I'm not that kind of person, I don't believe in giving up parts of who you are, doubly so when it's only going to keep the vultures away until next time.

Not good enough. No, I wouldn't sell my finger for a million. Evidently, there are people who would. Better yet, there are people who will sell other people's fingers for the sake of greed and complacency!

dxhound2005

England sold London Bridge to an American, and he brought it over to the States. We could sell some stuff to the Chinese to take away.

beejee

Claire Scarce Roadside wrote: »

Because buying property in Ireland is not the same thing as buying Irish sovereignty.

If a Chinese company buys property in Ireland, that property does not become part of China. It is still part of Ireland and subject to Irish laws, taxes, etc.

Sovereignty isn't worth a damn when the collective agency and power of a group outsizes the so-called sovereign.

You'll be waiting a long time to see our government say boo to the likes of Google. Now imagine that scale growing exponentially. And worse, practically "secretly".

CalamariFritti

When a Chinese person (for example) buys Irish land it doesnt become Chinese territory. The Irish state still has ultimate power over private land no matter who owns it. If push came to shove it could simply be taken off any private owners. And it does happen all the time for example when CPOs are issued. Just think of the farmer who doesnt want to give his field for the motorway r something like that.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

beejee wrote: »

A tangent opened in some work that led me researching foreign investment in ireland.

A rabbit hole!

I find it difficult to identify good sources of land/property/utility ownership owned or essentially run by non state actors.

But the million examples of what you think is "irish"... But isn't... Is scarily significant.

Homes, businesses, stock exchanges, property, land... You name it, it's apparently all up for grabs, and is indeed being grabbed.

At what point, without hyperbole, is a country not a country? If China owned 20% of the value of Ireland, isnt it really like saying Ireland is now 20% smaller? If not, why not?

The information and record keeping is so poor or non-existent you'd almost think it was done on purpose

Any thoughts or insight on this phenomena? Seems to be a rapidly growing problem in a lot of countries.

If your hyperbole holds water than the USA is currently 48% owned by foreigners.

beejee

dxhound2005 wrote: »

England sold London Bridge to an American, and he brought it over to the States. We could sell some stuff to the Chinese to take away.

Sure why would they need to move anything from here? Just set up shop and derive all value back to the home country. Much cheaper.

dxhound2005

beejee wrote: »

Sovereignty isn't worth a damn when the collective agency and power of a group outsizes the so-called sovereign.

You'll be waiting a long time to see our government say boo to the likes of Google. Now imagine that scale growing exponentially. And worse, practically "secretly".

If something is happening exponentially, it will be impractical to keep it a secret.

Ipso

How much of Bulgaria does Ireland own?

nkl12xtw5goz70

beejee wrote: »

You'll be waiting a long time to see our government say boo to the likes of Google.

As long as Google continues to employ around 8,000 people and obey Irish laws, what's the issue? Ireland should be very thankful to Google for providing all those jobs.

beejee

Channing Faithful Sometime wrote: »

If your hyperbole holds water than the USA is currently 48% owned by foreigners.

Why is it hyperbole?

If someone else owns 62% of your home, do you call it your own owned home?

If someone eats half your dinner, do you still tell yourself you've had a full meal?

If your arm was transplanted onto someone else's body, is that person now "you"?

That kinda stuff is reaching into hyperbole, but the core principle is not exaggerated. And the question is based on that core principle.

dxhound2005

beejee wrote: »

Why is it hyperbole?

If someone else owns 62% of your home, do you call it your own owned home?

If someone eats half your dinner, do you still tell yourself you've had a full meal?

If your arm was transplanted onto someone else's body, is that person now "you"?

That kinda stuff is reaching into hyperbole, but the core principle is not exaggerated. And the question is based on that core principle.

If they owned 62%, I would call it their home.