Governor Parson Bans China-Owned Agricultural Land Near Critical Military Facilities

https://governor.mo.gov/press-relea...wned-agricultural-land-near-critical-military

I always have had reservations with this type of government intervention in who can, and can't own land.. however this makes total sense to me in these tumultuous times.

However... I would like to get perspective of others.

 

The way China behaves, I have no issue with this.

 

Generally speaking, I share your reservations, but if it's constitutional the Federal government should follow suit.

 

have no issues with it

 

Good idea. Should be a national law.

 

I agree with this but even 10 miles is too close.

 

Is China designated a foreign adversary?
Sure we/USA, have our differences.
But much of our country does a lot of business with China.

I would assume the USA already has such a designation.
Afterall, We were dead set against USSR setting up to close in Cuba.

 

I do not like other countries buying real estate for renting, heck even other States... why, because they have less empathy as they feel disconnected from the people of the area

it's like when they buy Mobile home parks and double the rent, they just don't care

 

According to the article cited in the OP, yes, China - or more accurately, the Chinese Communist Party that runs China - is designated a foreign adversary, and given its adversarial behavior and agenda this should could come as a surprise to no one.

And this magically negates China's adversarial behavior and agenda how?

We do too much business with China, imo, and it's cost our country dearly. Our over-reliance on that country is a threat to our economic and national security, but hey, let's make America more reliant on China because the Climate Commies and Xi Jinping man in the White House think that's a great idea.

I guess you'll be thrilled to know that the ChiComs are already setting up shop in Cuba.

 

China has had a strict land purchase policy in China for decades and in many cases, you never own the land, but merely lease from the federal government with tight, TIGHT restrictions. Maybe we merely model the China property rights policy?

 

We sorta do in a backwards way.
Any property we own, is only true if we never default on the property taxes.
Fail to pay taxes, the gov't owns your land. So, all we kinda do is rent it.

 

Watched an interview with a farmer and he was talking about how the Chinese were buying up as many large plots of farm land, making it really hard for the american farmer to purchase.

 

I have a problem with any foreign country being able to own our land, whether directly or indirectly.

 

I don’t think a foreign country with malicious intentions should be able to own land in the country they’re trying to destroy. Seems logical they’re not doing it for the betterment of said country.

 

Why should that make a difference

 

It is the first step to "nationalize" certain industries and it creates a slippery slope to whom we can sell. How do we define "adversaries?" What about countries that are economically competitive with us? Are they adversaries too. Do we include the EU now and its member states, or how about Great Britain or France, or even Israel when they disagree with our government? Will we be that petty? We have the freedom to choose to sell our property to whom we see fit, do we not? Or that is no longer a freedom that totalitarian-minded GOPers have in mind nowadays of those who want to rule instead of govern in a Republican form of government.

But this goes back to the countries that top the list of who owns what in the US. China is not even in the top ten in agricultural land. We have The Netherlands, Germany, Canada, and other European countries listed here.

The Executive Order is listed below
https://www.sos.mo.gov/library/reference/orders/2024/eo1

what bothers me is any "citizen" without regard to LPR. Two countries listed in the CFR that is mentioned is North Korea and China. It makes no mention of those who are here legally, green card holders, of who can purchase land. Thus, a North Korean Defector who has not yet required citizenship would be barred because technically, they are Citizens of North Korea. By definition, any Cuban is a citizen of Cuba whether they are US Citizens or not. And the same can be said with those from PRC who are here as LPRs, even married to US citizens. If a US Citizen married a Chinese wife who is not yet a US Citizen but a green card holder, would be denied such if they must purchase the land together as husband and wife. Thus, it would also bar USC in certain situations. Again, the slippery slope.

 

Do you know if US investors can buy up land near or adjacent to Chinese military bases? And if we cannot, do you agree in reciprocity?

 

Why not, but only those policies that are legal under the Constitutiion.

 

No, it in't a measure to "nationalize" anything. It's a protective act to disallow intelligence collection by the ChiComs in the US. Do you disagree that the US and its states have both the right and the obligation to protect the nation from foreign hostile nations?

 

1. We have intelligence agencies that so that protect the nation from any and all nations. These agencies include the NSA, FBI, CIA, DIA, and others.
2. All communist countries used your argument to protect against the nation from foreign ownership, not to mention local ownership.
3. Any North Korean defector in the US is not spying on anyone and it shows you don't trust them whatsoever, even if they become USC.
4. This will affect USC as well, especially those who are married to LPR, Green Card holders, who are technically and literally still citizens despite the fact they have already gone through the scrwen8ng process to get here, married for love, might have a kid from their marriage and so forth. Will you deny the purchase of land because it seems the person is a USC married to a chinese citizen who also is a green card holder?
5. Any clandestine operations, spying, is not that obtuse l. China does spy on us, but will use USC to do it, pay them handsomely for it. Two Navy Sailors were offered huge sums of money to get sensitive documents not too long ago, and yes, they were caught. And it had nothing to do with purchasing land or whatever. This is just another internet fantasy by a group of people who literally don't thing things through.

 

I think its a good policy and should be adopted nationally/federally for ALL foreign nations - adversary or not.

 

That will go against some of the freedoms we have. But the number one country that owns US Agricultural land is Canada, and that is not going to change that fact

 

Can you expand on that? Is it the freedoms of those who want to sell their land?

 

What? Enemies buying land next to USA military establishments?

 

Does China have the same laws as USA?
I merely asked if China is listed as a US adversary. The thread topic.