> The reason being rich non-Samoans would quickly buy up the entire island and there would be no Samoa / Samoan culture anymore.
isn't this more of a class (rich vs non-rich) issue than an immigration issue?
> I don't know how to resolve that.
allow only people who live long-term and actually reside there to buy property might be one strategy?
> On the other hand, something will be lost, something that seems to have value, which is the cultures of the people there currently.
its true but its also true many of those cultures most prized traditions come from the intersection of native and foreign creating something new in the first-place... something might be lost but another gained...
--
btw, slight tangent but i think there is also a contradiction with immigration policy in regards to attracting rich foreigners: many countries want them because its supposed that they bring capital/money with them in the hopes of spurring investment and local economy but the flip-side is what you describe where the rich foreigners start owning/dominating things to the detriment of locals... and countries conversely don't want the non-rich to stay long-term because they aren't perceived as high-class/desirable yet they are the ones that work in the 'productive economy' which might help the locals more in the long and short term....i think there is an issue there as well...
> isn't this more of a class (rich vs non-rich) issue than an immigration issue?
That Doesn't really seem to matter if there are few rich Samoans and lots of rich foreigners. Their culture will still disappear if they have no where to collectively live and access to the things the culture cherishes.
> allow only people who live long-term and actually reside there to buy property might be one strategy?
That's one idea. It has the issue that you can't sell your house if you can't find a local to buy it, even if you desperately need the money.
--
btw, slight tangent but i think there is also a contradiction with immigration policy in regards to attracting rich foreigners: many countries want them because its supposed that they bring capital/money with them in the hopes of spurring investment and local economy but the flip-side is what you describe where the rich foreigners start owning/dominating things to the detriment of locals... and countries conversely don't want the non-rich to stay long-term because they aren't perceived as high-class/desirable yet they are the ones that work in the 'productive economy' which might help the locals more in the long and short term....i think there is an issue there as well...