Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
What Country?
MindGate
United States Veteran
So, when I get older and so forth, I hope to desperately move out of the USA. I dislike this place very much.
I know I want to move, but I don't know where. What countries do you like? I want a country with a government that promotes freedom and such and where their citizens aren't assholes.
I know I want to move, but I don't know where. What countries do you like? I want a country with a government that promotes freedom and such and where their citizens aren't assholes.
0
Comments
Personally, I wouldn't mind living somewhere that had decent public health & health insurance.
It's even colder though - but that's just weather.
I'm sick of Denmark though and almost anywhere would be better for now. I don't like capitalism (it puts money before humans), but as the development in Denmark is towards real market-economy and capitalism I would rather live in a capitalist society which is at least liberal and free from nationalist, racist movements (just ruled out most European countries).
So I think I'm saying: don't go to Europe, especially don't go to Denmark. France and Greece would be good to stay clear of too - in France the government hate immigrants for some reason and in Greece (as you know) there is no economy left. Oh, and Italy is ruled by a corrupt government (which doesn't even try to hide it anymore) so don't go there either..
I would suggest Norway to anyone, anytime
The only drawback imo is the culture. But I don't like northern europe much in terms of culture. People are nice, but kind of too weird and unapproachable for my taste.
I'm thinking of maybe going to Vancouver. I definitely want to emigrate myself. Has to be english speaking country, good standard of leaving and COOL people. I don't give a rats arse about the whether. The people are the most important element in my decision.
http://www.thedailyplanet.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4434:canada-wins-top-brand-despite-un-rating-drop&catid=19:off-campus-news&Itemid=261
I haven't heard good things about how Australia and New Zealand (Aotearoa) treat their women and Indigenous people. The Nordic countries have done pretty well by the Saami. Canada is used to absorbing Yanks, but there's a faction in the government that wants to do away with the free medical system and institute a US insurance-based system. (This sounds incredible, but it's true.)
Really, MindGate, you'd do best to do a lot of research on your own. Good luck, and please stay in touch and let us know how you do, or if you ever do emigrate.
what i want to say is, if we find fault with others, the fault is with us and we have to change it
i hope you understand what i mean
happy landing!!
Otherwise I would choose some island off the coast near Vancouver.
I love the social system, and I think taxes are too low on the expense of society as a whole. In my perfect world education, health care and day care is free (tax paid - not really free). That's the way it is in Denmark today, but the public debate it toxic and more than 14% voters vote for the racist right-wing. I cannot live under those conditions (well I can, but I won't).
My education will ensure me that I can get a job almost anywhere when I'm done in 4½ (maybe 7½ if I want to take the lawyer education after law school) years. I don't think I owe this country my future tax money, 'cause the government (chosen by the voters) are ruining everything I loved about this place. Then I might as well move to the next-best thing.
@Dakini (and a little Epicurus)
I think most people from abroad misinterpret a large space for reservedness. There are two sides to it, I think:
1) Scandinavians don't want to approach other people unnecessarily, because there is the unspoken assumption that people want to be let alone if they do not seek contact. They could be thinking about or doing something important. Foreigners also typically has a smaller space and therefore stand closer to Scandinavians than they like when talking to strangers, making the situation a little awkward. Furthermore Scandinavians only answer exactly what they are asked - again it's assumed that what you ask for is what you need. People really want to help and are eager to do so, but you don't have a chat afterwards unless it's obvious to do so - you're maybe waiting for the same train and chat about it being late. If you're waiting for the train and ask someone waiting for an appointment about something, the person won't be ready to enter dialog. I know that is very strange and unfriendly in the eyes of foreigners. I also find that foreigners think Scandinavians are way too direct when speaking. It's not meant as unfriendliness though.
2) Scandinavians do like Scandinavians best and especially the generations before mine (I'm from '89) can have a tendency to view foreigners as a kind of interesting alien. That's not very nice and I'm ashamed of it.
I’ve read most of these comments and I’ve given thought of living elsewhere myself. I’ve asked myself why did we ever elect Ronald Reagan for President when he shifted national monetary policy towards the upper 2%--focusing American interests on preserving natural resources through military efforts and fictionalizing our place in the world as holy and unassailable. I wondered why so many progressives aggressively supported Bill Clinton who helped facilitate global capital markets, continued deregulation in key areas, and supported objectionable policy such as “Don’t ask-Don’t Tell.” I wondered how it was possible we could have elected Bush Jr. twice-seeing how that administration involved us in two wars, compromised our sacred Bill of Rights for national security sake, and led us into the worst financial disaster since the Great Depression! “How?” I wondered is all this-and more-possible? Why aren’t the people more enlightened? Why can they not see that their hopes and dreams are built on empty rhetoric of a well-financed class with only its interests in mind?
Why would I call myself an American at all? I wonder why didn’t the Native Americans up and leave when their people were plunged into the depths of genocide and all of its ugly consequences? Why didn’t Martin Luther King just “go” when he had behind him a history of slavery, suppression, and racist filth as a heritage and a present savage social civil rights war in front of him? Why didn’t the Hispanics stay secure enough away from the pointless wars of domination, racist suppression, and open rejection of them as equals to the white-Euro- race? Why would women fight for freedom of rights when no one listened in the 18th century or won a major victory only because we were in the midst of WWI? Why go on fighting? Why continue at all?
Many here have suggested Europe, Australia, or Canada as alternative places to live. Indeed, these are quite nice places, filled with proud histories, and good people who have moved along our human understanding and have helped to relieve suffering in the world. But these places are not free from blood, bigotry, and bias! In France the Muslims and other Arabic peoples suffer from open prejudice, and in homogenous nations like those in the Scandinavian region of Europe the people there are also leery of mass foreign intrusion-many believing that there tiny populations cannot maintain the social policies they do in much larger and more diverse groups. It is easier when a nation is similar in race, culture, and economic background to get along and get most others to “go along.” Australia is beautiful but not cheap-nor is Canada. These places too battle strong conservative religious and economic groups. Australia’s history with its own native born is hardly one to be proud of. In Canada, conservative religious and economic groups are making much stronger headway than many more liberal Americans here would be comfortable with. It is always easier to look across the human divides and see green grass of pure peace awaiting the other side. The reality, however, is quite different oftentimes.
It is true that many older people from here wish to move to a more political friendly place. Also, the huge majority of these people were also white, Anglo-Saxons of similar religious descent! It is interesting to me that those minorities that saw something worth fighting for stayed, fought, and in the end of a long struggle, succeeded and helped bring greatness to this country’s history and place in the world. Why do these white middle class types not find worthy to struggle in the present circumstances? Do they have it as badly as those minorities that came before?
I say America is much like Buddhism! The self is many different things all struggling for domination under self perpetuated illusions of an “ego.” America has its national fictions and struggles with diversity and little agreement over the collective answer to human suffering. Once one comprehends these struggles, however, one does not see them as awful or something to push away from. In fact, the Dali Lama advocated that we embrace our enemies-whoever they may be-and be thankful for them. It is when we embrace them that we can understand their value to our own enlightenment and our world as a whole! Through the struggles we find our voice, our deepest values, and our highest goods. For without them, without those disagreements, we have no need of any further push towards a better understanding of them, our world, and ourselves. It is through struggle, not moving away from it, that we gain an appreciation for others and our world all the more.
To such a task America, unlike many other nations of the world, virtually stands alone-indeed! How unlikely a people we are! Out of many we struggle for unity! Is this not familiar? Sure, many countries claim to be tolerant and open to diversity, and there are many countries that attempt to enforce equality-policy around the world. But America must do so within its own boarders with no common bloodline, no common culture, and no common social-economic situation at its disposal. She must do this on a social scale of hundreds of millions of people! Through this bloody-uphill battle-we are seeing ourselves grow and emerge towards a new era. One like all those previous—mixed and mingled with blood, sweat and tears. But also triumphs and joy. Our history is not one of commonality and agreement! Ours is a history of interpreting histories! Each man and woman having to wrestle with the meaning of his or her own life, country, and happiness. Ours is not just a bloody history! It is also a history of triumphs through battles, the achievements of science, and material well-being of which the world has never known!
We do have a long way to go. But that is the case for any people! We may be moving backwards. Again, this too is the threat that looms large for any and all nations! We have something worthy of our best efforts-however! A Declaration of Independence, a Constitution with a Bill of Rights! Far from perfect, just like each of us, but worth the struggle-worth fighting for, and worth preserving even when the struggle seems lost to us in the moment. So, for me, a liberal-Buddhistic fellow, I’ll stay because this is my home, my people who I love dearly, and my time to be in the midst of the struggle-with understanding and hope in my heart that this nation shall not perish from the earth.
This is my stance! Others who wish to move on anyway will. I just hope that those other equally good people on the fence might consider a different notion. One that also sees that this may not be the place we want-but it is a place that is also worth fighting for!
Thanks all for the discussion,
Eric D.
but instead of react with impulse we have to act considering the facts how could we know for sure what would happen?
according to Buddha's Teaching not only the people (consciousness) but there are four more elements in the universe that changes everything sure
To tell someone who is reporting crime or corruption, etc. that the fault is with the victim or the whistleblower is completely unacceptable.
true
but instead of react with impulse we have to act considering the facts
If we're not to find fault with others, then South Africa would still be an obscenely repressive regime causing horriffic suffering to millions.
how could we know for sure what would happen?
according to Buddha's Teaching not only the people (consciousness) but there are four more elements in the universe that changes everything
We must be careful how and when we use these platitudes.
sure
Now Reagan, they did elect, it's true. Reagan won in part because of Carter's inability to resolve the Iranian hostage crisis. Carter wanted to get the economy on a more solid footing, but Reagan won by telling voters there was nothing wrong with the economy. Crazy stuff.
Reagan didn't fictionalize the US as holy and unassailable, the Founding Fathers did a good job of that. That's where the idea of Manifest Destiny came from, and notice the "In God We Trust" on the money (so much for separation of church and state
Ficus, I'm not sure if Scandinavians are all that much alike. My experience (over several summers of living in Norway, Sweden and Denmark) was that Swedes and Danes were pretty friendly. And it wasn't just the young people--all generations. I wouldn't worrry too much about the hostility towards non-European immigrants. This is a new phenomenon for those countries to deal with; hopefully over time they'll mellow out.
I'm getting kind of excited for you, MindGate. Have you thought about what to study in school/university, so you can make yourself marketable in your new home?
You'd only have to go on stormfront (a White nationalist forum) for a couple of minutes to see how pride can degenerate otherwise good people. Sadly, many of them believe with all their heart that what they support is good.
Anyway, my point is that the history is only there to learn from (though nobody does anyway), not to judge. There's also no reason to be proud, especially for things which weren't done with your own hands.
:-/
Sorry, had to say that.
As far as standard of living goes, I don't think anyone in the top 10 countries should be complaining. Hmm, I am a little surprised at how low UK ranks.
I'm pretty happy in the United Kingdom and like the idea of moving to Sweden or the Netherlands... I'm not sure. I really like the Scandinavian and/or ancient Norse countries- also, for some reason I dig white hair (though not on old people) LOL. Norway, Sweden and Iceland have full gay rights, but England's only one step behind... Apparently the Netherlands had the highest acceptance rate with 82%. I haven't visited any of these countries though, it's only what I've read about them, but I'm gonna do some serious checking-out-ze-countries when I get to choose my own holidays. I'm thinking of Scandinavia, the Nordic countries, Canada, Switzerland, Germany or the Netherlands... or home, LOL. At the end of the day I probably won't move. I think some parts of the Lake District even would be hard-matched for breath-taking beauty- if anywhere it may well be there. Plus I save a few complications like paper work, language and family LOL.
As a result of Buddhism expanding exponentially in Canada through Asian immigration and conversion, it is estimate that roughly 600,000 Canadians will count themselves Buddhist on the 2011 census. That would make Buddhism Canada's third-largest religion, after Christianity and Islam. [in 1991 the number of Buddhist equaled 163,415... in 2001 they grew to 300,345... This shows a consistent doubling every 10 years... I would contend that when the baby boomer's are no more that this growth with grow much faster...]
Pema Chodron is the resident teacher at Gampo Abbey, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Also in Nova Scotia we have the Dorje Denma Ling (Canada's only Shambhala International residential program centre.)
The umbrella organization that encompasses many of the distinct institutions of Shambhala Buddhism is called Shambhala International. Shambhala International, which is based in Halifax, Nova Scotia, links a worldwide mandala of urban Buddhist meditation centers, retreat centers, monasteries, a university, and other ventures, founded by the Tibetan Buddhist teacher the Trungpa Rinpoche under the name Vajradhatu.
Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche and Sakyong Wangmo Khandro Tseyang, the king and queen of the Shambhala Buddhist communityalso live in Halifax.
Halifax, Nova Scotia also has the Atlantic Chan Buddhist Association
For a broader view of Buddhism in Canada (as of 2005) here is a link to show the Buddhist centers across the country: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:-Jbb8FJdqLEJ:www.buddhist.ca/buddhism_religion_canada_links.html+Buddhism+Nova+Scotia&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca&client=opera
There is a great hunger across Canada for alternative belief systems than Christianity... Buddhism being one of the main alternatives... It will continue to grow and Christianity will continue to decline...
That's only my opinion though but I think its pretty accurate.
Do they teach German in your school, Luv? If you take German, the Scandinavian languages will be a piece of cake, afterwards.
But you're right--sometimes there's no place like home.
...there's too many good options; but wait some weeks/month for the perfect timing.
But you're right--sometimes there's no place like home.
We get French twice a week and Spanish once a week- I can take both as GCSEs. My Spanish teacher can speak Spanish, French, Italian and Norwegian- she said you can take a wider range of languages at college and university and she learn Norwegian by teaching her self, classes, and visiting Norway. She can speak Italian because she's quarter Italian- though mainly American. An American Spanish and French teacher in England LOL. We have three main language teachers. One of my French teachers can just speak French but the other can also speak Spanish and German- we don't get taught it though.
Compassionate warrior wrote:
“The US voters did NOT elect GW Bush, not the first time, not the second time. It has been well documented (and investigated by Congress) that in both instances, the elections were stolen. John Kerry won in the 2nd GW Bush election, Congress investigated it and proved it (look up the Congressional Record). Please don't perpetuate this misconception that the American people elected George W. Bush.”
Actually there is still an enormous debate over the first election. It was decided by the Supreme Court that the re-count would end in the manner it did guaranteeing a victory for Bush, this is true prior to a full accounting of the issue. However, we are talking about a few hundred voted in separation. Moreover, it is still not clear that the Supreme Court acted outside its authority. One must keep in mind that our governing institutions are often put in positions that are unique enough to history that to act would be a divergence from traditional roles played prior. However, that hardly means much of anything. It is a constant struggle for our institutions to figure out what and how they should behave under new situations that emerge in our history. Like most Supreme Court case rulings your response to it will likely depend on your political affinities.
As far as the second election is concerned, I know of no Congressional record stating the victory of John Kerry over Bush. This is a “notion” that many have about how voting machines and voting laws (which are in Congressional records) in many districts are managed. Yet, both sides of the political spectrum have reasonable complaints and worries concerning this issue. As far as the official record goes on the election of 04 the stats are well published and neither side debated the issue as to who won. I certainly can provide you the info if that is really needed. No one, certainly not the Kerry camp, has made any complaints about voting malpractice or what have you. There are some conspiracy theories out there that assert that the elections—when Republicans win and not when Democrats win, interestingly—are fixed by voting manufactures and key computer –tech insiders. There has been investigations done this and nothing of significance was found. I think voting laws and practices in some states do need to be more thoroughly looked at-however.
Reagan did win for a number of reasons. Yes, the Iran ordeal played a huge role in the matter. But so did other factors-such as the fact that when Carter came into power he did so with enormous support from the religious right and throughout the South. When it became fairly clear that Carter did not fully support their agenda, the course of event s moved in a direction that eventually united extreme conservative social agendas with old capitalist-upper class economic theories. Reagan represented this synthesis and was able to represent his position of “big evil government” convincingly to the American people. He did most certainly say that things were wrong! His view was adopted over time and grew into the neo-conservative movement that now occupies our current political discourse.
Thanks all,
Eric D.
To the question/statement,
“Native Americans didn't leave because they're "Native" Americans; this is their land. Their culture, their ancestry, everything is tied to the land. Why should they leave, when we're the ones who are the immigrants, children, grandchildren of immigrants? How would they have left even if they'd wanted to? Where would they have gotten the money for passage to another continent? How convenient it would've been if they had left; the settlers could have grabbed what remained of Native land.”
I agree that the Native Americans were mistreated. I also agree their leaving would have been more difficult, although moving Natives into new regions of the country or having them leave into Mexico and South America or Canada would have been preferable no doubt to many Euro-Americans. None of those issues are what I was after, however. My point is that many Native American activists could have left throughout the 19th-20th centuries. They chose to stay and work out their place in our history. Unless your point is that it was economically-or socially harder for them to do so and since many more privileged others can-they should or can if they so choose! In other words, those who are more “enlightened” and well off should leave a country whose victims will be the poorer or more socio-economically challenged of us. I’m not comfortable with that position or one even approximating it-and I don’t think that’s your intention either.
Which Founder fictionalized America in the way Reagan and Reagonomics have pictured our place in the world? It is true that our Founders-perhaps as a group did so-but no differently than others of that day. Manifest Destiny was a doctrine dealing with the spread of Euro-American culture Westward--it is primarily a 19th century doctrine. Whatever the Founders have done that made such doctrines possible, it is hardly comprehensible why a president living in the late 20th century—in the post-Civil Rights Era-- would continue to do so--that was my only point with that issue.
Our Founders were hardly perfect—but given the rest of the world at that time-the documents that emerged from their endeavors were truly revolutionary in a way we can hardly appreciate today-living in a world where most states attempt some version of a Republic-or Modern-state organization.
Thanks all,
Eric D.
You wrote,
“Eric, there is no such place withing samsara.”
I think that was my point Vangelis.
Thanks though for the comment,
Eric D.