ShadowTemplar Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 In the case of Denmark, the relevant www-pages appear to be: This and this. I haven't checked the quality of either site (both are official, but official Danish websites can really be a mess to navigate sometimes). If you do decide to move to Europe, I'd recommend a Scandinavian country: Norway, Sweden or Denmark. Wouldn't be my first choice. Language is important. You need to be able to speak the local language pretty fluently. OK, need may be a little too much, but it certainly helps. Originally posted by toms weird, what with the loss of the right to silence, the right to trial by jury, the right to free education, the right to an unbiased trial and the UK's attempts to go down the patriot act route i'm thinking of emigrating myself... i just can't work out where to. Could you fill me in on that please? (I don't mean to derail the thread, but you don't seem to be able to recieve PMs) -Spain Seems like a decent enough country. Not too extreme politically. But it has got trouble with seperatists. Dunno much about it besides that. -France Probably one of the countries I'd choose if I could speak French. -Italy Wouldn't live there if I was paid to do so. Nice to visit on holidays, but corruption is crazy, politicians are crazy, and if Silvio Berlusconi (called Silvio Corrupzioni by some) doesn't get his act together pretty damn soon, it's gonna have the rep of a banana republic. And it's got the Vatican. That can't be good. -Greece Halfway into the Middle East. Very poor compared to the rest of Europe. A tad too close to the Balkans and the Middle East for my taste. In a state of semi-war with Turkey (at least the would be if it wasn't for all the UN troops on Cyprus). As a rule of the thumb going North and West you find less corruption and more left-wing politics. If I was an American, I'd choose primarily based on what languages I knew. As I said before, language is important. In most of Europe most people understand and speak English, but mastery of the native tounge is always a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 that was what i hear too... although of course i have no first hand knowledge. I heard you'd get chucked out of even the extreme evangelical churches if you started trying to be political a few years back... the one exception has always been african american churches, who have been fairly political since around the civil rights movement. --------------------- Barcelona and madrid are awesome cities... barcelona is my fave, but it will rain more in the winter and probably has less jobs (except in tourist service industries). I'm thinking of japan, as i loved tokyo... but you do have to work and play very hard their and i may be too much of a slacker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Also, France and Italy are actually more rightist that you think, IMO Italy, yes, but France? I have great admiration for France. France has been a stable bastion against Catholic influence in the European Union and is now beginning to prove its worth in the struggle against Islam. True, Chirac is probably corrupt and certainly right-wing - and Le Pen seems a shady kind of guy. But compairing France to Italy is, IMO, downright unfair. The Scandinavian countries aren't as cold as many people think But they also have some of the toughest languages in Europe. Those soft "d"s really are a pain to most foreigners. Personally, I'd choose Britain or northern Germany, depending on whether or not I spoke German. Originally posted by Kurgan quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Darth333 Oh yes just for your info, they did a survey in Spain (can't find the link right now) about the American Elections and the difference was not so big: 53 % wanted Kerry to win and 47 % would have voted Bush.... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Intersting. With so few differences between them, I can see how that would not be so shocking. The point you're missing is that the European average was about 80/20 Bush is not a popular figure in Europe. Now, at the considerable risk of derailing the thread, I feel that it is nessecary to comment a bit on this fact. I can't speak for all Europeans, but for me it's less an issue of what the candidates are going to do than who's backing them. Politicians are - with a few notable exceptions - full of bull. I think that their policies, in the end, boil down to sucking up to those who prop them up. Add to this the fact that Europe is far to the left of the US. From my POV, dubya looks like he is backed by people like the Evangelists, the KKK, the big corporations and suchlike. Additionally, I look at who a leader surrounds himself with. And I don't like Dick "Fürher" Cheney, "Darth" Rumsfeldt or Paul "Wolf". Any political camp will try to present a likeable face to the public. But that is not where I think the real power lies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Originally posted by ShadowTemplar Italy, yes, but France? I have great admiration for France. France has been a stable bastion against Catholic influence in the European Union and is now beginning to prove its worth in the struggle against Islam. True, Chirac is probably corrupt and certainly right-wing - and Le Pen seems a shady kind of guy. But compairing France to Italy is, IMO, downright unfair. True it is unfair to compare them but he did not. LePen is a right wing extremist, he wanted to boot out immigrants(now that's just racism). There has also been a rise in anti-semite acts of vandalism in France. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Haider was made out to be a right-wing extremist too, but turned out to be nothing more than a crook. A dislikeable crook, but nothing to seriously threaten Austrian democracy. While I certainly don't hope that Le Pen gains influence, I guess my point is that most Le Pen-like politicians simply collapse on themselves should they actually gain any real foothold. And anyway, Le Pen was a protest candidate. I think that most of the votes he got was from people who were pissed at the two main candidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth333 Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Originally posted by ShadowTemplar The point you're missing is that the European average was about 80/20 Bush is not a popular figure in Europe. I am conscious of this: I regularly follow news from European countries and I was surprised by the result of this survey in the Spanish paper El Pais. The survey was carried on among readers only and more than 16 000 people answered. But the result is still interesting (and no, I am far from being a Bush partisan, I think he is very dangerous and his re-election is the worst thing that could happen in terms of world stability and safety and social policies). But one fact is true is that every country, has its problems and good sides. It all depends on what you want and what you chose to privilege (and on immigration policies of course). It can be language, economy and political stability, style of life, mentality and culture, religion, geography, employment, etc...and of course, fluency in the local language is mandatory unless you are working for a specific organization (still I don't understand these people that work abroad without bothering to learn the local language when they are not "obliged"). I lived in different countries, rich and poor, peaceful and violent, from big cities to the jungle (used to move every 3-4 yrs) and I regularly visit Inuit villages in the Canadian artic , in every place, despite the problems, I was able to find something good. I think that if Vagabond really wants to go abroad he has to see what is most important to him and his family. Every place you go there are things you gain and others you have to leave behind. For sure, the Scandinavian countries, France, Britain, Germany, although significantly different in many aspects, are more similar to what we have in North America than Spain or Greece. Personally I would go for Spain but it is a very personal choice (language, style of life mainly but they have lower salaries and some terrorism and some other problems). Edited 11-10-2004: correction of horrible typos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Originally posted by Darth333 I am conscious of this I was replying to Kurgan. Grüss, ST Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider AL Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Personally, I'd choose Britain or northern Germany, depending on whether or not I spoke German.Don't choose Britain, it's turning into America. Oh, and it's ruled by a malevolent elf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipperthefrog Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 Originally posted by Vagabond! Austrailia is VERY hard to get in! just HOW hard? it's not impossible right? does anybody know just WHAT you have to do to get in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider AL Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 just HOW hard? it's not impossible right? does anybody know just WHAT you have to do to get in?Well basically Kipper, to get into a country that has a strict immigration policy, you have to show them that you'll be a useful member of their society. Thus, you might for instance... send the immigration office your CV, in the hope that your qualifications would get you a ticket. And you might send details of the work you've done in your community, in the hope that that would sway their decision. But realistically countries like Oz and Canada want people who have skills that are in short supply. So say there's a shortage of printers in Australia, well, if you're a printer they'll fast-track you. Otherwise, it's a numbers game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipperthefrog Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 THANKS spider al! Ill se if I can find out about PRINTING! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Remember the language issues as well. Moving to Norway, France, or Germany means having to learn another tongue. Austrailia is VERY hard to get in! Scandinavia as well. Darth333 posted a very wise post. You have to study the country and figure out what political view it has. For example, Norway is far-left with a big public sector; Switzerland is isolationistic, and so on and so fourth. Scandinavia is thinly populated, not so Germany, England and France. Is there an agency that one would need to contact in the new host country that I would need to contact? When we moved to the USA, first stop was the immigration office at the airport. I'd call the American embassy in one of the cities of the country you're planning to join, as above mentioned. I'd recommend obtaining a VISA (with a work permit for you adullts) and staying in the country for two or three years before making up your mind, though. VISAs can be extended and give you a good deal of rights (although you of course can't vote or anything). You also get schooling, and of course you get to rent or even buy a house. etc. I warmly advice you to live in the country for a few "trial years" before making up your mind. How difficult is it to gain residency in a European country? Being a specialist of a high proffesion (doctor, IT technician, engineer, etc.) helps. Getting in isn't too hard, but many countries in Europe (like Norway) are getting a high load of refugees in these uncertain days. You'll probably get in, though. Is preference given to people from one country over another? Sadly, yes. The governments in power in Norway, for example, is pretty strongly anti-immigrationist (unfortunately), and tend to turn away dark people. It's a disgrace, but a fact. How long does the process take to be granted permission? How do the taxes work - do American expatriots still need to pay U.S. income tax? No, once you seize being a resident of the USA you stop having to pay taxes to Bush, except if you still own a house there or something. Do they pay taxes in the host countries? Do they get to vote in the host country? That varies from country to country. I'm Would our existing children ever be granted citizenship? As for Norway, whoever is born within our borders automatically are granted Norwegian citizenship. Existing children? Definatly. It might take a few years, though. weird, what with the loss of the right to silence, the right to trial by jury, the right to free education, the right to an unbiased trial and the UK's attempts to go down the patriot act route i'm thinking of emigrating myself... i just can't work out where to. The scandinavian countries definately have more freedom, but i really need more sun than that. There just don't seem to be many democracies that live up to what my idea of a democracy should be. I wonder if i can just move to a desert island somewhere and let GW colapse the world aound it while i chill out in the sun.... I consider moving to some remote place, too, like Iceland or Greenland... - - - - OT: It's pretty surprising that so many people are fleeing the USA because of Bush's re-election. New Zealand received 15 000 immigration applications in the week after Bush got re-elected alone.. I'm unsure as to whether or not I should call Americans leaving Bush behind "refugees", but I think it fits the definition. No worries, though, you have to be brown-skinned to be an "official refugee" in people's eyes . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurgan Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/purple_america_2004.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elijah Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 This really reminds me of my Anarchist punkrock friends... They scream and rave about how thier government sucks and they would shoot them all in the back of the head and yada yada yada... The anarchists who dont realize they have the freedom to believe what they want... try acting that way in china or somthing. I can see how you would be disapointed with some aspects of your government, but surely you see that you only have that opporunity because of your freedom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 So since we have the freedom to voice our dissent and not get thrown in prison means we should just be happy with the state of affairs? I tire of that oft repeated statement, "Try being like that in china" It doesn't matter if we have more freedom than this country or that country. What DOES matter is that our country is FAR from perfect, and at the moment I'd say it's hardly more than just good. At least your anarchic punk friends are willing to exercise their rights to make sure that they are never taken away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider AL Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 The anarchists who dont realize they have the freedom to believe what they want... try acting that way in china or somthing.I can't count the number of times I've heard this frankly unoriginal fallacy. You imply that they should stop criticising their lovely government because their lovely government is allowing them to criticise? That doesn't make any sense. Either they have the freedom to be anarchic and criticise the government who is doing things that they don't like, or they don't. What YOU seem to fail to realise is that criticising government is the most patriotic thing that anyone can do. It keeps people aware, it makes people ask questions, it at least forces the government to maintain the semblance of honesty... And of course people realise that they could be lynched in other nation states for the same satire and sundry criticisms. How should that affect their criticism? Not at all. The right not to be lynched is as protected as their right to criticise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elijah Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 You are correct Spider AL. I am simply saying that if your going to criticise your gorvenment, at least know that you have the freedom to do so, and appricate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider AL Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 I think you'll find that they DO know that they have the freedom to criticise their government. That's why they do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loopster Posted November 14, 2004 Share Posted November 14, 2004 You couldn't be more wrong, Spider AL. Previous generations fought and died for our right to free speech only so we would never exercise it in the future while systematically taking a **** on the Constitution and in turn the ideas of the Founding Fathers, causing the ink of the First Amemndent to bleed into the surrounding text and become as irrelevant as the people who never used it. Didn't you know that was the whole purpose of the United States' Revolutionary War, Civil War, World War II, and beyond?! They all bled and died on the battlefield so we could brag and cherish rights we're not really supposed to use! Like, duh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.