Does a government have the right to nationalize foreign assets?

Peter Grimm said:

Does it make a difference to you if the leadership of the country that's taking over the farm was elected by the people, or if it was a coup?

Click to expand...

Not really. Hell, it barely makes a difference whether the people are my countrymen or aliens-- the only things I truly own are the things I can stop people from stealing. It doesn't matter whether they're stealing them with paperwork or at gunpoint... because at the end of the day, the paperwork just boils down to a more polite form of gunpoint.

Peter Grimm said:

I mean, what if a dictator took over but the people didn't really want him there. If that dictator then tries to nationalize your farm, is that any different than if it were a more legitimate government?

Click to expand...

The only legitimacy a government can have is whether or not people obey its orders. If nobody obeys the order to steal my land, I have nothing to fear.

Peter Grimm said:

Should you be allowed to sue that island nation in a US court? What recourse should you have internationally, if any?

Click to expand...

Good luck you will need it. Where are you gona get recourse? UN? Please. Like I said there is no real recourse unless you want it in blood. If its just property and I got away with my life, its bad, but not that bad. If they shot my dog in the process, well there aint no room in this world for no dog killers. Kill em all and let god sort em out.:gunsmilie:flame:

Peter Grimm said:

I left the question in the realm of the hypothetical because I don't want people's political affiliation or national identity to bias how they answer this question.

This scenario has played out many, many times during the course of history... and the response to it has varied.

My question is do you think the island nation has the moral right to take the farm, because it's part of that country, or do you think your claim to the farm as the owner of that farm entitles you to some recourse?

Click to expand...

You won't like my answer but...it depends? How did that person get the farm land? Did it include bribing and kickbacks to the old dictator? Did the old dictator take over through some military coup? In this case the bananna farmer is like someone knowingly buying something that "fell off a truck".

Whose land was it before? Whose property rights weren't sufficiently protected by their supposed government?

When we're talking about these Bannana Republics there's much more to the story than the actual taking of land.

Peter Grimm said:

Hypothetical situation...

Let's say you own a company that sells bananas. Say you buy a farm on a small island nation for $100,000. The reason you do this is because the quality of the bananas that can be grown on this island nation is superior to anything we could grow here in the States due to the natural climate and soil. The bananas you grow are extra yellow, and extra bendy. High quality, delectable bananas. So you sell a lot of them to happy American breakfast consumers, and your farm is very profitable.

Now let's say there is political unrest in this little island nation. Poverty is high, and the locals view your success with envy. Say a benevolent dictator takes over, and promises to take your farm (and all other foreign assets in the island nation) and give it to the locals to run.

Question - DOES THAT NATION HAVE THE RIGHT TO TAKE YOUR FARM?

Click to expand...

I think so. And before we throw stones, check of what the Supreme Court says our own government is constitutionally allowed to do. Supreme Court Expansion of eminent domain--Sandra Day O'Connor smelled the rat

But yes, not every country is founded upon freedom and individual rights like America and that why our founders came here. Is it a nice thing to do? Probably not. Is it within the legal authority of the foreign country under their laws? Absolutely.

Another question is to American interest operating in foreign counties always come into possession of that country's natural resources by ethical means in the first place? To add to your hypothetical, suppose the banana plantation owned by the American was formerly a family farm operated by Hector and his family in Latin America. Hector lived under a corrupt and brutal dictator who might have even been aided in a power grab by the US operating covertly. The dictator's Army shows up one day with guns and tells Hector he has to move because his farm is being taken over by the government, and here's 10,000 Pesos ($5,000 in US dollars). The dictator then sells the farm to the American entrepreneur for $100,000, which is a steal of a deal since its worth $250,000. The dictator pockets $95,000 to buy a new Mercedes Benz and the US gets to have "friendly relations" with the dictator country while the every citizen there hates our guts. A grass roots push for socialism is started because from their perspective, freedom and capitalism has been unfair and exploitative, not because freedom and capitalism are not the best economic system on earth but because they have consistently gotten the short end of business deals and nobody stood up for the little guy.

They have the right, but there could be international repercussions, such as compensation.

How would want a bendy banana?

iliveonramen said:

Whose land was it before? Whose property rights weren't sufficiently protected by their supposed government?

Click to expand...

It isn't like there's a square inch of land on Earth currently owned by any person that was not forcibly seized from another person in the past.

Land belongs to whomever is strong enough to hold it.

Fact of the world.

"Sovereign immunity"

And the USA jsut did it to a China Company that was building "wind farms" (wink wink) near several USA sub bases.........

I just realized, with a few minor modifications this same scenario could apply to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. I would also be willing to bet most here who support an American's right to not be forced off of his banana farm, would not support Al-Khalid's right not to have his olive grove or goat pasture not taken over by the newly installed Israeli government.

no, they don't have a right to, but they can.