Page 544 of 1076 FirstFirst ... 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 ... LastLast
Results 13,576 to 13,600 of 26889
  1. #13576
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Matchbox 20
    Posts
    2,313
    Quote Originally Posted by altasnob View Post
    From my understanding, an American who is not a Canadian citizen or permanent resident can go to Canada for up to 180 days at a time. So yes, you can go for 180 days, step outside the country for 1 hour (anywhere) and then return for another 180 days. However, if you are repeatedly staying in Canada for more than 180 days each year it is likely the Canadian immigration officials will think you are trying to live as a permanent resident when you are not.
    Not sure if changed, but as of 5 years ago, Canadia did not stamp passports on exit. The USA stamps on enter and exit. So as long as you could show a return plane ticket from USA to Canuckistan and had a good excuse, you could just rinse and repeat the 180 days. Some just overstayed and then also did the rinse-repeat. Naturally, people would just cancel the return flight portion after arriving. The maple leaf may Track that better now. By god, they better.
    OH, MY GAWD! ―John Hillerman  Big Billie Eilish fan.
    But that's a quibble to what PG posted (at first, anyway, I haven't read his latest book) ―jono
    we are not arguing about ski boots or fashionable clothing or spageheti O's which mean nothing in the grand scheme ― XXX-er

  2. #13577
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    27,308
    Quote Originally Posted by puregravity View Post
    Not sure if changed, but as of 5 years ago, Canadia did not stamp passports on exit. The USA stamps on enter and exit. So as long as you could show a return plane ticket from USA to Canuckistan and had a good excuse, you could just rinse and repeat the 180 days. Some just overstayed and then also did the rinse-repeat. Naturally, people would just cancel the return flight portion after arriving. The maple leaf may Track that better now. By god, they better.
    I'm pretty confident they have a record of all your entries into Canada. Bottom line is that a U.S. citizen can live in Canada up to six months a year. If you want to live there longer than that you need permanent residency (you don't need Canadian citizenship).

  3. #13578
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    13,370
    As someone who crosses borders for a living I can 100% confirm that the US and Canada share entry/exit info.

    There's even a searchable I-94 database that's open to the public.

    That said, spending a winter in Terrace would be easy border-wise. It's the healthcare coverage that would be a little tricky.

  4. #13579
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Matchbox 20
    Posts
    2,313
    OK. But that is new. https://www.cicnews.com/2020/07/cbsa...s-0714898.html I guess the overstay era is now a thing of the past.
    OH, MY GAWD! ―John Hillerman  Big Billie Eilish fan.
    But that's a quibble to what PG posted (at first, anyway, I haven't read his latest book) ―jono
    we are not arguing about ski boots or fashionable clothing or spageheti O's which mean nothing in the grand scheme ― XXX-er

  5. #13580
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Keep Tacoma Feared
    Posts
    5,266
    Quote Originally Posted by The AD View Post
    Bottom line is that a U.S. citizen can live in Canada up to six months a year.
    You'll read that all over the internet on Canadian immigration attorney's websites. But I don't think that is an accurate statement of the law. The law does not say an American is limited to 180 days in each calendar year. The law says Americans get a 180 day visa each time they enter. The cya, simplified advice is that Americans are limited to 180 days in a calendar year. But, for example, if you stayed 180 days, left for five months, and then returned for 180 days, then left again, I think you would be ok even though you would have stayed for more than 180 days in a single calendar year because you would have strong evidence that you do not live full time in Canada. But if you stayed for six months, left for a week, and then came back for another six months, you would likely get denied because it would be evident you are living in Canada full time. Can I guarantee this? No, but any entry into Canada is at the discretion of the border guard so I can't guarantee anything. And as Ted says, it is milking the social safety net that they are really concerned about with illegal Americans.

    Bottom line, we need an American to buy that new condo in Rossland and report back to us on how many days they can get away with staying in Canada each calendar year.

  6. #13581
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Matchbox 20
    Posts
    2,313
    Quote Originally Posted by altasnob View Post
    But, for example, if you stayed 180 days, left for five months, and then returned for 180 days, then left again, I think you would be ok even though you would have stayed for more than 180 days in a single calendar year because you would have strong evidence that you do not live full time in Canada. But if you stayed for six months, left for a week, and then came back for another six months, you would likely get denied because it would be evident you are living in Canada full time. Can I guarantee this?
    I can't guarantee this. But I can corroborate this. And things may have changed. That's why people that do this like enter via airport with a return flight ticket. When the see the return flight, they wave you on. It can be for 2 weeks later or 3 weeks later even. You are entitled to stay 180 days after entry. If you don't have a job (they ask this often) and/or don't have a return ticket then the flags get raised. There are good forums online that cater to the crowd wishing to do the 180day cycle thing.
    OH, MY GAWD! ―John Hillerman  Big Billie Eilish fan.
    But that's a quibble to what PG posted (at first, anyway, I haven't read his latest book) ―jono
    we are not arguing about ski boots or fashionable clothing or spageheti O's which mean nothing in the grand scheme ― XXX-er

  7. #13582
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    cb, co
    Posts
    5,035
    I never had problems spending winters in Canada. I'd bring a bank statement so they knew I had money and wouldn't be trying to steal a job from a Canadian and that was that. But I also never tried to stay year round.

  8. #13583
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    LV-426
    Posts
    21,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
    As someone who crosses borders for a living I can 100% confirm that the US and Canada share entry/exit info.
    Quote Originally Posted by powder11 View Post
    if you have to resort to taking advice from the nitwits on this forum, then you're doomed.

  9. #13584
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    13,370
    Low and slow, baby! What could go wrong?

  10. #13585
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Looking down
    Posts
    50,491
    Great twitter feed. Money certainly does not buy taste.

    Check out Guillotine-Worthy Zillow Listings on Twitter.
    because money can't buy taste. DM for submissions. https://twitter.com/Zillotine?s=20

  11. #13586
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    in a freezer in Italy
    Posts
    7,183
    Is that an observatory? Or maybe a particle accelerator?

  12. #13587
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Looking down
    Posts
    50,491
    More like a Mars station.

  13. #13588
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    30,885
    From Ripped Bum its only a 2-3 hr drive to where you can cross the completely unprotected American border to the southarn tip of the panhandle and get Hyderized,

    so you will have technically been out of Canada, there is a Canadian border control on the way back and they will probably be fucking useless

    I can't believe that Trump didnt put up a wall

    Gona have to pass on the old fuckers you guys are trying to fix me up with, I'm kinda committed to the Yogini
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  14. #13589
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    2 hours from anything
    Posts
    10,734
    Quote Originally Posted by altasnob View Post
    You'll read that all over the internet on Canadian immigration attorney's websites. But I don't think that is an accurate statement of the law. The law does not say an American is limited to 180 days in each calendar year. The law says Americans get a 180 day visa each time they enter. The cya, simplified advice is that Americans are limited to 180 days in a calendar year. But, for example, if you stayed 180 days, left for five months, and then returned for 180 days, then left again, I think you would be ok even though you would have stayed for more than 180 days in a single calendar year because you would have strong evidence that you do not live full time in Canada. But if you stayed for six months, left for a week, and then came back for another six months, you would likely get denied because it would be evident you are living in Canada full time. Can I guarantee this? No, but any entry into Canada is at the discretion of the border guard so I can't guarantee anything. And as Ted says, it is milking the social safety net that they are really concerned about with illegal Americans.

    Bottom line, we need an American to buy that new condo in Rossland and report back to us on how many days they can get away with staying in Canada each calendar year.
    My non lawyer self agrees with you. Also, if an American is living in Terrace, not getting healthcare and other govt benefits, and paying Canadian sales tax, is that a negative to Canada? While I know the law isn't written like that I could see how it is something where as long as you aren't causing any problems they are just looking for you to leave at least once every 180 days. You get on their radar for something and they may have a problem with you being there more than 184 days a year.

  15. #13590
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Tejas
    Posts
    11,859
    Re: Water rights - WTF is up with Nestle?! I've heard of them being controversial in the past, but seems they're doing their part to screw over the San Bernardino mountain area:
    Nestlé threatened with cease-and-desist over alleged illegal water use
    https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...gal-water-use/

  16. #13591
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    245
    Interesting that they sold NA holdings a few months before legal action started. Think they got wind and split? They also take a shit load of water from Shasta area - crystal geyser- I think. It is nuts how much we fight over water just to export it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...e_iOSApp_Other
    The draft order comes two months after Nestlé, which is based in Switzerland, sold its US- and Canada-based water brands to equity firms One Rock Capital Partners and Metropoulos for $4.3bn.
    Sent from my 5007Z using Tapatalk

  17. #13592
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5,013
    Fuck all these bottled water corporations.

  18. #13593
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tahoe-ish
    Posts
    3,141
    Quote Originally Posted by simple View Post
    Fuck all these bottled water corporations.
    Bottled water in developed countries with reliable water supplies should be taxed so heavily that it becomes unaffordable. It's one of the most egregious examples of a private company not paying for the externalities of its business.
    ride bikes, climb, ski, travel, cook, work to fund former, repeat.

  19. #13594
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    1,218
    Unless you live in Flint.

  20. #13595
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    10,953
    Quote Originally Posted by climberevan View Post
    Bottled water in developed countries with reliable water supplies
    Quote Originally Posted by old_newguy View Post
    Unless you live in Flint.
    Hmmmm....

  21. #13596
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Almost Mountains
    Posts
    1,883
    Quote Originally Posted by climberevan View Post
    Bottled water in developed countries with reliable water supplies should be taxed so heavily that it becomes unaffordable. It's one of the most egregious examples of a private company not paying for the externalities of its business.
    Mostly agreed. There are places where it seems to make sense, kinda like there are places where canned beer makes sense, but I'd be shocked if most bottled water consumption in the US wasn't a matter of convenience (i.e. can't be bothered to refill a container) or a taste preference vs local tap water. Maybe a little less so during a pandemic, as using a water fountain right now does seem a bit sketchy.

    As to the "what about Flint?" question, waive the tax for those who don't have potable water in their primary residence.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using TGR Forums mobile app

  22. #13597
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Sandy, Utah
    Posts
    14,410
    Up 14% in a year and this doesn't take into account any upgrades/improvements as all the pics are still before we gutted. House across the street, 200sq ft bigger, and a "horse lot" (just over 3 acres I have 2) waaaaaay outdated just went for $399k.

    We bought foreclosure..205k cash, then financed a 30yr at 3.15% at $205k. Put about $90k into it.

    Cray cray. Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screenshot_20210428-165512~2.jpeg 
Views:	91 
Size:	33.0 KB 
ID:	372984

    Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using TGR Forums mobile app

  23. #13598
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Tejas
    Posts
    11,859
    Quote Originally Posted by anotherVTskibum View Post
    Mostly agreed. There are places where it seems to make sense, kinda like there are places where canned beer makes sense, but I'd be shocked if most bottled water consumption in the US wasn't a matter of convenience (i.e. can't be bothered to refill a container) or a taste preference vs local tap water. Maybe a little less so during a pandemic, as using a water fountain right now does seem a bit sketchy.

    As to the "what about Flint?" question, waive the tax for those who don't have potable water in their primary residence.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using TGR Forums mobile app
    Or better yet, let's see if the Biden admin or the CA govt has the stones to drop the hammer down on megacorp assholes like Nestle or freaking stupid farming practices like growing almonds in the CA desert. (spoiler alert: they won't)

  24. #13599
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Bellevue
    Posts
    7,431
    Lots of nasty water in the central valley. Among other places.
    https://www.reuters.com/investigates...-lead-testing/
    The map's at the bottom, you can scroll down instead of reading it.

  25. #13600
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,707
    Quote Originally Posted by MontuckyFried View Post
    Or better yet, let's see if the Biden admin or the CA govt has the stones to drop the hammer down on megacorp assholes like Nestle or freaking stupid farming practices like growing almonds in the CA desert. (spoiler alert: they won't)
    Agree - Almonds should be grown where there’s more water.

    Almonds are a $6 billion a year industry and 70% of the crops are exported.

    Republicans in CA, each POTUS for the last 50 years, and conservative politicians elsewhere have been passionately arguing to halt the tree nut industry because it uses too much water and they’ve been overridden by environmentally irresponsible liberals.

    Yep. Makes complete sense to lay it on the fledgling Biden administration or Governor/legislators in CA (who don’t want to get a penny of substantial Tree Nut PAC money) to stop the almond industry and move it somewhere less arid.

    Should we also expect politicians in coal mining states to fully embrace solar and wind power?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •