Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Scott, the article you posted is astounding in the amount of money being spent to keep the economy of the U.S.A. afloat. All I can say is, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Please read the article below that adds to my certainty that indeed things will not change and more of the same is all that is on the menu. There will be no change in how the world’s economy works. Just short term pain for ordinary folks with a few sacrificial lambs, like a bank or two or even an automobile company thrown in to appease some of the anger.
“Advice from Japan: Keep on Spending”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081115.wkoo15/BNStory/International/It strikes me as an enlightened policy on the part of the Costa Rican government to grant residency status to artists. Other countries have the same policy (Ireland comes to mind) and serves to increase the quality of life rather than just the raw economic benefits that others may bring.
Another good reason to choose Costa Rica as a place to reside. However, the new proposed rules will make the choice moot as most will not come with such high monetary thresholds.
scottbenson, stick to discussing policy without casting aspersions. I am surprised that your postings have not been deleted by the moderator. maravilla, please don’t play his game.
“…the new changes will only affect those applying for residency NOW or in the future.” How is this possible considering the law has not been changed yet? So, retroactivity will be included in the new law if it gets passed? We were planning on applying for rentista status in December/January so I guess that eliminates the chance of slipping in under the wire before these increases come in.
BTW, according to the ARCR and Residency in Costa Rica websites, it is still $1000 per month for a rentista.
davidcmurray, even though I have not extensively researched pensioner programs in other countries (I have a little while to go yet before reaching that esteemed status), I would seriously consider Thailand and Malaysia. Both have excellent medical facilities and both offer the benefit of being able to hire reliable caregivers at reasonable rates. There are cooler areas in both countries as well. I seem to remember a Malaysian program named “grey hairs program” that specifically catered to pensioners. Check it out.
You hit the nail on the head regarding your comment on the issue of uncertainty for residents be they actually resident or in the process of applying. Raising the requirements of one category by 350% or so and the other by 500%, makes many people very nervous of the very same thing happening again in short order. So why be nervous when one can go elsewhere?
sumaSAL, long term economics and letting in tens of thousands of pensioners would make some sense as long as they were financially solvent and your comment about inflation is well chosen. The Costa Rican government has paid too little attention to this threat to people’s income, both foreigners and Ticos. Is $600 per month too low? Highly likely as it gives too little leeway to those individuals who will be faced with inflationary pressures. Catering to pensioners and their unique set of desires is a lucrative business and Costa Rica with its’ many people and sustainable natural resources would be well placed to make considerable money in this industry.
Sociologically, it is important to remember that the country has to learn to walk before it can run. There is a lot of development that still needs to take place before developed nation wages can be paid. But, Costa Rica is well on its’ way and that is praiseworthy.
Come January, we will enjoy the sun in Costa Rica for a couple of months. Unfortunately, it will only be for a couple of months though.
To my friend sumaSAL,
Just enjoying the sun in a gated community is not such a bad pursuit is it?
You ask for figures about how many pensionados/rentistas will be affected by this law. Considering no one keeps accurate figures, this simply will not be known and in the long run, it is irrelevant. If Costa Rica is perceived as being unfriendly to foreigners then not only will foreigners move to the next destination du jour, Costa Rica’s reputation will greatly suffer and Costa Ricans will suffer those consequences in addition to the global financial turmoil that is taking place right now.
Keeping pensioners out of the country is short sighted. Numerous, well regarded studies convincingly prove that the supposed drain on a medical system that pensioners are reputedly guilty of is simply not true. Older people can thrive and remain healthy in a positive and friendly environment that Costa Rica can provide. And Costa Rica can profit from these people.
I will only speak for myself and my wife as potential rentistas but we had plans. Good plans, no big rush, but we had the idea that we would start a business a few years down the line and hire Ticos and not at dollar an hour rates. But we would have done it in an environmentally sustainable way. Costa Rican people would have gained and, more importantly, nature would have been minimally impacted. Not now.
We’ll move on. We can. We are in the fortunate position of being able to pick and choose where we go. We would have been more than happy to contribute to the country of Costa Rica but it is a two way street. We can forsake some things for ‘pura vida’ but not to the extent that we feel that we are being taken advantage of simply because we are perceived as being rich foreigners.
sumaSAL, this policy is wrong headed and will rob the country of needed capital and brainpower. It seems you support this new policy. Please reconsider.
It seems that the wheels of progress are turning all that much faster. According to A.M. Costa Rica this morning, we now have a new immigration bill that has been officially published in La Gaceta with the bill being sent to the full legislature next week. This seems to be very quick but more to the point, very determined.
We were planning to come in as rentistas but $5,000 per month per person is simply not going to happen. We think Costa Rica is a great place but it is not worth $10,000 per month or $600,000 in a bank deposit. Presently, we live in a first world nation that we feel safe in, we have all the efficiency, comforts and ease associated with that very lucky happenstance and we were willing to sacrifice some of that for adventure and learning in a place that is beautiful and welcoming.
We realize that there would have been trade offs coming to Costa Rica but we were more than willing to make those trade offs because affordability is a major attractor. With this new immigration bill, affordability has been removed as something that offsets the very real negative factors that Costa Rica has e.g. crime including graft, inefficiency and poor infrastructure.
There are many beautiful and welcoming places in the world. Costa Rica has to compete with these places for people like us and be realistic in what it has to offer. Perhaps the present Costa Rican administration has made a calculation and decided upon this course of action for what it considers good reasons. Peripherally, it is interesting to note that there was a senior minister on a raid of the Hotel del Rey this past week. Perhaps, this was an indicator that the present administration has had enough with the continued gringo predilections for prostitution and the associated crime surrounding it. The Government may see the raised entry requirements as a way to remove, at least for part of the year, people with unsavoury associations from the country.
Sadly, it seems that our plans to move to Costa Rica as residents may be over due to these new requirements. I suspect we are not the only ones.
Perhaps a little more of a sense of humour and an appreciation of irony would make us less sanctimonious. Please insert smile here.
Getting back to the topic? Now, that’s novel.
Reasons for upping the requirements? I’ll just say upfront that I have no idea whatsoever. But I’ll surmise nonetheless.
1. The amounts are that high because it’s a trial balloon and they know there will be a stink so perhaps it’s about starting off really high knowing full well that they will settle for less or they’ll relax other conditions to make up for the high entry amounts.
2. They’re stupid.
3. They’re xenophobic.It’s exceedingly unlikely that they’re that stupid but it can’t be totally dismissed. After all, the past eight years would tend to support the idea that stupid people can get elected. Xenophobia could be an issue but unless there has been a marked uptick in negative feelings to foreigners by the populace, this seems unlikely as well. Of course, this doesn’t really account for the feelings of the ruling class in Costa Rica. Anybody have ideas on that?
My assumption is that the amounts as they presently stand are low and need revising upwards. Possibly the thinking behind this is to attract better off residents so that they can start taxing them more and improve government income. In addition to mandatory involvement in the Caja, there has been talk in the past of taxing worldwide income as well as the new policy of taxing property over US$180,000 or so. Right now that particular tax is affordable. That could change.
Scott, thanks for the history on Churchill and poison gas but I’m still trying to figure out why you threw that in. I know, I know… I’m thick.
Ah well, if you can’t beat ’em, might as well join them.
It seems to me that this entitlement culture that keeps getting referred to is not limited to the lowest rungs of the economic ladder. There certainly is government welfare that has the perhaps imperfectly implemented policy goal of alleviating poverty which seems to be a laudable goal.
But then we also have corporate welfare where corporate bigwigs are not content enough to settle for multi-million dollar salaries but also need huge swathes of redeemable stock options that rewards them for being alive because, as we can all see, it certainly isn’t related to performance. And then there is the golden parachute waiting if someone gets wise to their shenanigans. Sweet deals for the boys but more importantly, it does call into question just how great this system called capitalism is.
Perhaps, a little socialism might not be such a bad thing.
Imxploring, just a question but why do you always write in sound bites and SHOUT particular words? Your name isn’t Rush by any chance? 😉
Why is it that too many of the threads started in the discussion forums slide into political slanging matches? Occasionally, I enjoy a political slugfest. I emphasize the word occasionally. I have a suggestion for everyone. How about starting a new thread beginning with the word “political” and then the topic of your choice. That way, when people want information on a topic specifically addressing Costa Rican issues, they don’t have to wade through a morass of tit for tat political posturing.
Would anybody hazard a guess as to what could be the fastest time that this could be made into law? It seems that the recently floated idea of taxing homes worth over $120,000 has already passed second reading in the Assembly so it might be law seemingly quite shortly. This certainly appears to be quite rapid. Would the same time frame apply to this massive increase in monthly requirements for residency?
Also, if one was to secure residency before these increases became law, how long would one have before the new monetary requirements kick in? One, two, maybe three years? What are the rules now?
Alfred, actually, that seems to be right on topic as opposed to, for example, some spurious sniping on the relative merits, or lack thereof, of US military largesse.
It certainly does seem to be the case that the arsonists that started this entire conflagration are the ones who are being invited to rebuild the whole sorry mess. If that doesn’t remind one of how organized crime works, I don’t know what would.
There are plenty of grim looking political figures in the world today who are busily trying to convince each other and the rest of us of the imperative of redesigning the world economic regulatory system so as to deal with any future economic shock of similar magnitude.
But, as you suggested, the plundering will continue. The obscene greed that is so often demonstrated by these capitalists run amok will continue unless some boundaries are instituted.
How about legislating maximum yearly pay at US$5,000,000 per year (including bonuses), maximum house size of 7,500 square feet (700 sq.m.), and no cars over US$100,000 worldwide. Perhaps with less motivation to be greedy, making money to the exclusion of all else will become a thing of the past?
People, let’s try and keep partisan rancor on your respective party websites. And how did we start on the topic of the USA being the world’s policeman? Would love to discuss it but how about sticking to the topic unless there is at least some vague correlation with what we are discussing.
I must admit I have had the same fantasy regarding change being effected due to some drastic problem rearing its’ ugly head. I must also admit that I have felt strangely exhilarated by the idea that, yes, now things have got to change even if it is hitting me in the pocketbook. I guess it is the radical versus the bourgeois in me fighting.
But I have this sneaking suspicion that it is not to be. The powers that be do value stability when anything remotely questions democratic capitalism and even with the mounting evidence that it is simply not the panacea for all our ills, they will throw unimaginable amounts of money to justify that it is.
Up to now there has only been one rather half-hearted defence of capitalism . Good to know that I can look forward to meeting a bunch of revolutionaries when I arrive in the New Year.
Should we be screaming, hysterically angry with Wall Street and the greedy denizens who feed there? I have lost money and would love to blame someone for that but it’s happened before, it will happen again and given the likelihood that the root causes of this debacle won’t even be acknowledged let alone changed, I am not going to allow myself to be caught up in fruitless finger pointing.
Some communist phraseology is just too tempting not to be used at this time. “Running lapdogs of capitalism” springs to mind. These lapdogs with humongous salaries and bonuses are simply being consistent with the principles of capitalism, get as much as you can as quickly as you can. And they certainly aren’t the only canines running in this pack. How about the professional sports players with their multi-year, multi-million dollar contracts? How about lawyers who have managed to somehow warp the system in such a way as to make everything revolve around the issue of liability and make millions along the way?
Looking for fall guys in a system that rears them, socializes them, educates them and then rewards them for doing what they do well strikes me as being bipolar at best.
If we have just gotten religion and think that the behaviour of these apparently newly discovered debauchees requires extreme measures, then by all means, off with their heads! And then regulate the hell out of everything. If it was a building we were talking about, it would be like taking a place that was totally rotten and covered with mold and mildew, using some really toxic but effective cleaning products to get rid of the mold, slapping up some new wallboard and paint and then declaring the problem solved. Meanwhile, the rot continues.
President Sarkozy is calling for a reformed capitalism in recognition of the fact that the system has brought us, in the developed world and some nations in the developing world at least, higher living standards. These living standards are nothing to be sneezed at but there are tradeoffs or as economists call them, externalities. The Mother of all externalities, but by no means the only one, is the ruination of nature by the relentless pursuit of possessions which powers the capitalist economy.
Reforming capitalism is all very well and good, but it begs the question whether it’s just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
