Slashdot Mirror


Emigrating To a Freer Country?

puroresu writes "I currently reside in the UK. In recent years I've seen privacy, free expression and civil liberties steadily eroded, and I can't see anything changing for the better any time soon. With people being banned from the UK for expressing (admittedly reprehensible) opinions, the continuing efforts to implement mandatory ID cards and the prospect of a Conservative government in the near future, I'm seriously considering emigrating to a less restrictive country. Which countries would you recommend in terms of freedom and privacy? Distance is not an issue, though a reasonable level of stability and provision of public services would be a bonus."

169 of 1,359 comments (clear)

  1. What languages? by squisher · · Score: 2, Informative

    Oh come on, if you're asking about this issue seriously, how can you omit what languages you speak?

    If you only speak English, then your options are obviously limited, the English speaking countries are quickly enumerated.

    Or, if you are willing to learn a language, then that is an important piece of the puzzle, isn't it?

    1. Re:What languages? by jlechem · · Score: 4, Informative

      I live in the US and have looked at migrating to another country. Of course one that speaks english. I am a high skilled worked I guess (programmer/IT) and on paper it would appear many countries would value my skills even though I cannot speak the native language. However in practive I have found it incredibly difficult to do this. There is a metric shit ton of paperwork involved and unless you want to spend a lot of time dealing with it your employeer usually handles it. Also I live on the west side of the US and have been looking at getting a job on the east coast for a change of pace. I'm having trouble even getting a serious look because employers only seem to want to deal with local candidates. So I can't imagine dealing with another country in all practicality.

      --
      Hold up, wait a minute, let me put some pimpin in it
    2. Re:What languages? by Fallen+Kell · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The east coast companies response of looking for local candidates is simply telling you that they are not willing to spend a dime on relocation costs. Your response for getting past that is to let them know that you are already planning on moving there on your own and that you are simply looking in advance for work in the area. Their reluctance is stemming more from the fact that they are tight on the budget and have no room to deal with things like signing bonuses and relocation costs at this time for any talent that they may hire.

      You need to learn to read between the layers a little.

      --
      We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
    3. Re:What languages? by whoever57 · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you only speak English, then your options are obviously limited, the English speaking countries are quickly enumerated.

      Many of the European non-English speaking countries are actually quite suitable for English-only speakers who work in a high-tech job. In those countries (France and French-speaking excepted), it is necessary to have some level of English in order to become qualified for any high-tech job. Also, multi-national companies tend to look for (or require) English speakers. I speak from personal experience of living in a non-English speaking country and when I moved there I spoke none of the local language.

      On the other hand, Norway is top of the "Human Development Index", but would you want to deal with the long winters and seasonal affective disorder? Much of Canada and Ireland are at a similar latitude, so the SAD issue remains if you choose there.

      If you are starting from the UK, Ireland has to be the easiest country to move to.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    4. Re:What languages? by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you are starting from the UK, Ireland has to be the easiest country to move to.

      Ireland is broke. Companies (and people) are abandoning it en masse. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/may2009/irel-m06.shtml Ireland: Unemployment expected to reach 17 percent
      By Steve James
      6 May 2009

      A report released early May by the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) states that Ireland is expected to go through the sharpest economic contraction of any industrialised country since the 1930s. The ESRI's spring quarterly commentary predicts that Ireland's gross domestic product (GDP) will fall 9.2 percent this year.

      The report continues, "Ireland's economy will contract by around 14 percent over the three years 2008 to 2010. By historic and international standards this is a truly dramatic development."

      It continues: "Prior to this, the largest decline for an industrialised country since the 1930s had been in Finland, where real gross domestic product declined by 11 percent between 1990 and 1993."

      The 9.2 percent figure for 2009 doubles the scale of contraction predicted only three months ago in the institute's previous quarterly commentary, where a contraction of 4.6 percent was anticipated. Even the figure of 14 percent over three years assumes a "moderation of the pace of decline" and a "bottoming out" in the latter part of the year.

      Unemployment is expected to continue rising. The ESRI predicts unemployment will average 292,000 over 2009, or 13.2 percent, and by 2010 will peak at around 366,000, or 16.8 percent of the workforce.

      Wages are expected to fall by 3 percent on average, while the impact of recent budget changes is expected to reduce average household incomes by around 4 percent.

      The ESRI also predicts annual net emigration from Ireland, historically an escape from appalling conditions that was sharply reversed over the last two decades, to reach 30,000 between 2009 and 2010. Emmigrate to Ireland? Sounds like the drunk driving the wrong way down a one-way street who, when asked where he thought he was going, replied "I don't know, but I must be late. Everyone's already coming back."

    5. Re:What languages? by Nazlfrag · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Let's see, for English speakers we have:

      UK: Getting worse
      USA: Getting worse
      Canada: Not too bad, probably following the US downhill though
      Australia: Getting worse
      New Zealand: Not too bad, probably following Australia downhill though

      Best bet is somewhere with English as an official (or unofficial but popular) second language.

      Ireland: Not too bad, probably following UK/EU downhill though
      Fiji: Not too bad
      Samoa: Not too bad
      Tonga: Not too bad
      India: Not too bad
      Singapore: Getting worse
      Hong Kong: Getting worse

      So I'd say New Zealand, Ireland or Canada for less culture shock, but be prepared to shift again in a few years, or somewhere in the South Pacific, just watch out for the coups that happen every few years.

    6. Re:What languages? by dangitman · · Score: 4, Funny

      Canada: Not too bad, probably following the US downhill though

      Canada is an English-speaking country?? I've watched all episodes of Degrassi Junior High, and that ain't English they're speaking.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    7. Re:What languages? by Zaffle · · Score: 5, Informative

      Fiji: Not too bad

      you are shitting me... Right?

      --

      I use to have a funny sig, but slash cut it off, and I forgot what the punchline was.
    8. Re:What languages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Look on the bright side: if you can support yourself there anyway (perhaps you're independently wealthy, or you can work remotely, or do big international stuff) then everything will be dirt cheap. Except maybe taxes.

    9. Re:What languages? by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 5, Funny

      [quote]You need to learn to read between the layers a little.[/quote]

      Delicious mixed metaphors. Return tomorrow, I'll be Bach.

    10. Re:What languages? by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As a New Zealander currently in Australia, I'd agree with this. Here, I have to present (and have recorded) ID to get a cell phone, or to post an international parcel, and the government has been trying to bring in compulsary internet filtering. I'd rate NZ better than Australia better than USA better than UK.

      As another poster has noted, Fiji is very much 'too bad.' The current governemnt was installed by military coup, and no longer even has a free press.

      --
      Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
    11. Re:What languages? by supernova_hq · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you are looking at Canada, the west coast's climat is VERY different from the East. Here is lower B.C. we barely even have a Winter. In fact, we've only had a white Christmas twice in the last 5 of 6 years! If you stay in the large cities, the summers are also quite mild (quite warm, but not exhaustively hot). The Rockies and Vancouver Island protect us from a lot of the cold weather systems that plague Montreal and Quebec and Vancouver Island keeps a lot of the hot, muggy weather away as well.

    12. Re:What languages? by Jurily · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you are starting from the UK, Ireland has to be the easiest country to move to.

      Considering every second person I've met in the UK speaks a totally different dialect of British English, Bad English or Bad English-(insert language reflecting their ethnic background) mixture, learning a new language shouldn't be too hard.

      (Seriously, it was hard at first, then I realized they're so used to it they rephrase every sentence at least three times, and don't even realize it.)

    13. Re:What languages? by BalleClorin · · Score: 5, Informative

      In Norway and the rest of scandinavia (and the rest of western Europe), language will not be an issue. Only really old people will have trouble communicating in English. The exceptions in western Europe is France and Germany.

      Norway values freedom of speech and privacy. It's not legal to monitor Internet use for locating illegal filesharers, and ISP's won't and can't identify someone from and IP address.

      Norway has a relatively high tax rate, (I pay about 30% of my income) plus a 25% sales tax. But, you get almost free healthcare, sick-pay, mandatory 5 weeks paid vacation (12% of last year pay), unemployment, 12month paid birth leave (that can be divided between mom and dad as you like (except min 6 weeks for mom and 6 weeks for dad)).
      Alcohol is quite restricted in Norway, you can buy beer and similar in grocery stores until 20:00 in weekdays and 18:00 on Saturdays. Alcoholic beverages with an alcohol content higher than 4,7% you'll have to buy in special stores. Alcohol and tobacco are highly taxed so it's quite expensive.

      The winter can be quite depressive sometimes, in the northern parts of Norway the sun never gets up in the middle of the winter. But then again you have midnight sun in the summer...

      If you want liberalism on alcohol, drugs and hoockers Norway is not you country, then I'd go for the Netherlands.

    14. Re:What languages? by TihSon · · Score: 2, Funny

      ... of course, if he really wants to know what it's like here on the west coast of Canada, just buy everything Michael Moore ever did and imagine everyone you know espousing THAT all day long, and then pour all of your money into the pocket of the nearest political leader. That should give you about the same feeling I get every morning when I wake up ... oh yeah, and don't forget to litter your lawn with junkies and drug dealers for the real west coast experience.

      --
      In B.C., our fascism is green.
    15. Re:What languages? by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Informative

      Edmonton, Alberta would be the northernmost city in North America, and it's at the same latitude as Liverpool.

      Bullshit. There are plenty of Canadian and American cities further north ... heck, there are whole states and provinces and territories ... Alaska, Yukon, Nunavut, NWT, Labrador ...

      Here - go to Environment Canada and look at the f'ing map - see all those cities north of Edmonton?

    16. Re:What languages? by TheoMurpse · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The guy doesn't even define what he means by "freer"! Since it's not well-defined, let's look at various freedoms (restricted to Anglophonic countries):

      Freedom of the Press
      1. NZ
      2. Jamaica
      3. Ireland, USA (tie)
      5. Bahamas, Barbados, Canada, Marshall Islands (tie)

      Economic Freedoms
      1. Australia
      2. Ireland
      3. NZ
      4. USA
      5. Canada

      There are other freedoms to look at, but I don't need to look at more. Ireland, US, NZ, and Canada seem to be the best under those two criteria (and granted those criteria are more like metacriteria themselves).

    17. Re:What languages? by Wise+Dr+Funk · · Score: 5, Informative

      As a former benefits consultant I can tell you that very very very few companies offer relocation benefits. In my anecdotal experience 95% didn't offer their relocated employees anything and I saw data from hundreds of companies. There are usually not even differences between high or low demand jobs, most companies have a blanket benefits package that all the employees get.

      Of course companies will make a one off exception from time to time to a relocating employee, but only if they dearly need them and have run out of local options.

      That said, it's no skin off of a companies back if you are willing to relocate without any compensation. My guess is they were too impatient to wait for someone to travel across the country and interview two or three times when the process for local candidate would be a whole lot faster.

    18. Re:What languages? by Sneeka2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If he was serious about this question he wouldn't be asking.

      Come on, asking other people what country to move to? Grow a pair, travel to the country that seems most interesting (and acceptable) to you, then figure out the rest. If you try to find a job from your "safe home", possibly even expecting relocation costs and all covered, you'll have to be a serious superstar or have really good connections to find anything decent. If OTOH you can walk into somebody's office anytime for a chat you'll have much better chances. The world doesn't evolve around you after all.

      Switching countries can be quite a big deal, more so than you apparently think. Expect to burn through a bit of cash in the beginning until you figure out the local lifestyle and land a steady job. Obviously, the closer the cultures are, the easier the beginning. I made the switch thrice: Once to Ireland, once to Holland, then to Japan. The first two were easy but boring, as I went because of a job. Japan was the hardest obviously, but also the most rewarding. I improved my English tremendously (2nd language) and learnt Japanese (3rd language). After a year of keeping myself afloat doing random stuff in Hokkaido I found the most satisfying job I ever had in Tokyo. I'm also in the programming/IT sector.

      You'll never know if a country is acceptable for you until you go there.

      --
      Bitten Apples are still better than dirty Windows...
    19. Re:What languages? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I'm also a New Zealander.

      It is not commonly known within this country but an agency of the NZ Government monitors all internet traffic and telephone calls. While we are signatories to UN Human Rights treaties we don't have a constitution so there is actually no constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech, freedom from unreasonable seizure etc.

      Scott McNealy of Sun once said, "Privacy is dead, get over it". Unfortunately this appears to be true, even in little 'ole NZ. It is a shame that governments the world over feel that in order to combat crime and terrorism they are justified in stealthily eliminating privacy. It is also a shame that most citizens are far more concerned with Britney Spears latest escapades rather than the erosion of the freedoms established by their forefathers.

    20. Re:What languages? by ishobo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Find a position in a multinational in the United States and make it known that you are open for international travel and/or work assignments. Most multinationals use English as their working language. You can get by with English in the EU, where the majority of the population speak it as their second language. This is espeacially true for folks younger than 35. In large cities, English is the most spoken non-native language. That said, it will be easy for you to learn the native language once there; emersion is a better way to learn.

      --
      Slashdot - The great and glorious cluster fuck of Internet wisdom.
    21. Re:What languages? by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Real unemployment is already higher than that in California. Ireland here I come!

    22. Re:What languages? by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Informative

      You know what I meant, don't be deliberately obtuse. Edmonton has a million people... most people would agree that that's a "city". The only place further north that comes close to being a major city would be Anchorage at 350k, but that's obviously much further north and off the beaten path, as it were.

      Dont' be silly. According to your pseudo-definition of a city being least 1 million people, that would mean that in 1950, there were only 83 cities on the whole planet. And only 12 in 1900. and even today, only 411 in the whole world. http://www.prb.org/Educators/TeachersGuides/HumanPopulation/Urbanization.aspx

      Your definition would mean that the US currently has only 9 cities http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population.

      I think most of the world would disagree with your definition of a city. Here's a definition for you http://geography.about.com/library/faq/blqzcitytown.htm

      Here's the definition of an "urban area" http://geography.about.com/library/weekly/aa060997.htm. Notice how it varies depending on locale.

      In Sweden and Denmark, a village of 200 people is counted as an "urban" population but it takes a city of 30,000 in Japan. Most other countries fall somewhere in between. Australia and Canada use 1000, Israel and France use 2000 and the United States and Mexico call a town of 2500 residents urban.

      Or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City#The_difference_between_towns_and_cities - note that NO country uses 1,000,000 as the definition of a city. Many have no formal definition, others vary from as small as 5 people (US) up.

      In New Zealand, according to Statistics New Zealand (the government statistics agency), "A city [...] must have a minimum population of 50,000

      Brazilian law defines a "city" (cidade) as the urban seat of a municipality and establishes no difference between cities and towns; all it takes for an urban area to be legally called a "city" is to be the seat of a municipality, and some of them are semi-rural settlements with a very small population.

      In Canada the granting of city status is handled by the individual provinces and territories, so that the definitions and criteria vary widely across the country. In British Columbia and Saskatchewan towns can become cities after they reach a population of 5,000 people, but in Alberta and Ontario the requirement is 10,000. Nova Scotia has abolished the title of city altogether, In Quebec, there is no legal distinction between a city and a town

      There is a formal definition of city in China provided by the Chinese government. For an urban area that can be defined as a city, there should be at least 100,000 non-agricultural population.

      Chile's Department of National Statistics defines a city (ciudad in Spanish) as an urban entity with more than 5,000 inhabitants

      Venezuela's Department of National Statistics defines a city (ciudad in Spanish) as an urban entity with more than 5,000 inhabitants.

      The German word for both "town" and "city" is Stadt, while a city with more than 100,000 inhabitants is called a Großstadt (big city).

      Italy: There is no population limit for a city

      Norway: The status of "city" is granted by the local authorities if a request for city status has been made and the area has a population of at least 5000

      There has traditionally been no formal distinction betw

    23. Re:What languages? by agrif · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In fact, we've only had a white Christmas twice in the last 5 of 6 years!

      This is off topic, but this sentence is ridiculously hard do decipher.

      If you had a white Christmas 2 times in the last 5 of 6 years, then we can assume the one year was omitted because it was a white Christmas, to make the fraction more impressive. Then, there was a white Christmas 3 out of 6 years.

      I love it when "half the time" becomes "twice in five of the last six years".

      ... of course, it could just be a typo. Fun exercise though!

    24. Re:What languages? by davester666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course, IMO, 'freer' is only a relative term. You may not be able to X in your current country, but you can in country Y, next year, country Y is fairly likely to also not permit X, in the name of security, terrorism, whatever.

      It really seems like if you want to move to a freer country, you're looking at a space trip...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    25. Re:What languages? by dargaud · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In those countries (France and French-speaking excepted), it is necessary to have some level of English

      Not true. Let me preface that by saying that I worked and lived 4 years in the US, 6 years in Italy, 3 years in Antarctica and spent many months in several others before coming back to France. Tech jobs in France require english just like anywhere else. I have an british coworkers and there are many foreigners in the company. For a while we toyed with the idea to have a weekly lunch break in english (shot down because one guy didn't want to, although he does speak it).
      This being said, back to the topic at hand, I'd say NZ. Mainland European countries are a bit better in terms of 'free' than the 51st state right now, but those things tend to fluctuate (see HADOPI law currently in France).

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    26. Re:What languages? by MooUK · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also, don't forget that chewing gum is illegal, and vandalism GETS YOU FUCKING CANED.

      Where was the downside again?

    27. Re:What languages? by Nethead · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My solution was to move to an native American fishing village on tribal land and lease my land from the tribes. This is not your normal Indian reservation. We have our own broadband, water & sewer system, telco (360-716-NNNN), data services w/fiber at the curb (VZN also offers 3.5Mb/s DSL at my home), police, fire and clinics. We also have a 110 unit premium outlet mall, a WalMart, Home Depot and various chain eateries. For your gaming and relaxation enjoyment we have a 4-star resort and casino with the best food in the county (and rivals anything that Seattle has.)

      It does help that the tribes have a nice bit of land on I-5 between Vancouver, BC and Seattle, WA with 3 exits, and have made the most of it.

      The laws here are interesting. We don't have to follow county or state law (although most of the traffic laws are equivalent.) US Federal laws apply but require the intervention of the BIA, FBI, and etc, and they have to go through the Tribal Police first.

      And we can blow shit up when we want.

      Now granted, if you are going to do something that costs the community, you'll get busted (don't do shit in a casino for fucks sake, they watch everyone all the time.) But if you live on a rez, there is a community communication system that beats anything that twit or myface called knowing your neighbors.

      If you want security then live in a small village and get to know everyone, help your community and be a neighbor. That's the hardest thing for Big Bro to bust. Treat your IP access like you're doing it over ham radio, your phone like it's a CB, your mail like it's a pin-up board at your local market.

      What the hell do you have to worry about your communications for anyway? Are you trying to overthrow your government or just BTing some US network show. This "I own it because it's part of my culture" shit is crap. They play it on the radio and TV so you'll hear the ads and buy shit. That's crap that someone you don't know made and some marketing dweeb broadcast over and over guessing that you'll take it to heart and make it your own. Just like an football club trying to fill the stands. You don't know these fucks, bugger them! Find REAL people in your community that have talent and support them.

      Granted there is some music and shows that I like but I've found a service that provides it with time shifting (and commercial free or commerical skipping) for a price I'm willing to pay, and it keeps my bird happy.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    28. Re:What languages? by digitalchinky · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It took me about 7 years before I even remotely began to feel comfortable in Asia - as in having both a good understanding of the culture, and losing my "direct" response mode to normal life circumstances. There are a staggeringly large number of local customs you need to relearn, lest you become the stereotypical friendless bar circling ex-pat, angry at the entire world, believing that 'back home' is the only place on earth were people do things the right way.

      And speaking of friendless, unless you bring your family with you, you really will need to be able to function alone for a long time (and by this I mean probably for a few years) While there might be a lot of people to interact with on a daily basis, smiling, happy, and so on, this sea of faces will remain a mystery until you get the common use language as second nature. You don't really know people like you know your old military buddies or whatever - it's the cultural thing, history, understanding the sense of humour, body language, thousands of things really.

      Hard work, I don't know that I'd ever want to do it again.

      Places like China, Taiwan, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, and so on, these countries have tremendous amounts of personal freedom, much more so than in any 'western' country I've been to. If it's political freedom one is looking for, then Asia is probably the wrong place to be.

    29. Re:What languages? by 4D6963 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ha ha let me guess, you're American and half of what you know about Ireland consists in leprechauns, alcohol and the potato famine?

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    30. Re:What languages? by Admiral+Ag · · Score: 3, Interesting

      New Zealand was recently rated the most peaceful country on earth to live in. Race relations in NZ, while not perfect, are considerably better than the US, Canada or UK and streaks ahead of Australia. Be aware that a lot of right wing New Zealanders constantly talk the country down because it doesn't conform to their vision of a racist free market paradise.

      You are unlikely to make a fortune in New Zealand, but you don't really need one.

      I've been away for ten years, but I'm moving back early next year because it's a good place to raise a family, the beaches are clean and not crowded, and the fly fishing is great.

      There's also another good reason to move there. Food security is never going to be a problem in New Zealand, since it produces far more than its people could ever hope to eat. Given the way things look to be going 15-20 years from now I think that is going to be an enviable position.

      --
      "by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots" DECS
    31. Re:What languages? by Kjella · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But Norway isn't that extremely free in my opinion. It's a very comfortable nanny state, but that I can't buy a damn beer at 7PM on a saturday is just the tip of that iceberg. Sweden and the Pirate Party is the first ones I've seen to really kick back on the massive surveillance efforts being passed by the EU, thus coming to Norway too because we're the EU's bitch. Denmark has a wonderfully more relaxed attitude to everything, but they're not exactly heading on the barricades. The netherlands has legalized soft drugs and hookers, if that's your idea of freedom.

      The vast majority of Norway's population live south of the polar circle, same in Sweden so you won't have all dark days or midnight sun, that's up north where we send the tourists. Of course there's some cities up there like Tromsø with 65k people if you want to be there, but the typical job in Norway is not. Depending on where you're coming from, expect colder winters wtih snow though. Driving in the winter is a skill I see many immigrants struggle with, no you can not just pretend it's summer and expect to accelerate or break in no time. For the most part a good country though, and one of the better things is that if you become citizen of an EU country, you can always change your mind. I can move anywhere in the EU without issue if I think the going is crap. Then again, a lot of the anti-freedom crap is coming from EU....

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    32. Re:What languages? by Kjella · · Score: 4, Informative

      Long story short, EU does not make law. The EU passes directives, that each member country has to implement their variation of. This is very typically used by lobbyists and others to push unpopular directives to be made on the EU level, for then the national government to throw up their hands and say "we must pass this, it's a directive". For the most part, the general population doesn't learn about it until it's being implemented nationally, and there's a delay in that system. So basicly now in 2009 they're implementing directives passed maybe like 2007, and if you try to protest it's like "the decision's already been made, you should have complained to the EU two years ago". For most people that sounds like a scene from the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy where the files have been on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'.

      A good example is the mandatory data storage directive that says everyone must keep logs for 6-24 months of who, what, when and from where you've been communicating on the Internet or on your cell phone. It was passed in the EU around 2006 I think, passed into law in some countries last year and some still haven't. But you can't undo the directive, the national governments can't really say no without getting ESA (no, not the space agency) on their backs. It's a ugly backdoor to the democratic process and the Lisbon treaty isn't really fixing it. There's a vast democratic deficiency in the EU system.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    33. Re:What languages? by Teancum · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This may be true for US citizens, but for UK ones, the whole EU is a free reign, they can go and live in the country, and get a job there for many years, and then become a citizen simply by pointing out they've been there for a long time.

      I happen to know many UK citizens in the USA right now.... several that even still have British passports for various reasons. Still, if it is emmigration to North America from the UK that you are looking for, Canada (or so I've been told) is a much easier to get into and has much less red tape.

      Don't even get me started with Canadians living in the USA.... prior to 9/11 you wouldn't have even known that your neighbor was Canadian unless you explicitly asked, and getting the answer that they were from casual conversation would get the same reaction as saying they were from Texas or New York. Most Americans considered Canada to be merely another state that figured out a cute trick to avoid paying taxes to Washington, DC.

      The point being here is that somebody deliberately trying to move to the USA could go through Canada if they are from one of the commonwealth countries, although times are changing along those lines and I will admit that movement within the EU is now much easier than movement within the former British Empire of old (aka the "Commonwealth" countries). It still is a unique situation for people from the UK that their status as both a EU country and ties to their former colonies give many options if you want to move on and go somewhere else because you don't like the political philosophies that have crept into your local government, and are trying to "vote with your feet".

      This is, unfortunately, not something as easily done in America once you get here, and the number of options for emmigration are practically none once you get an American passport.

    34. Re:What languages? by raju1kabir · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I live in the US and have looked at migrating to another country. Of course one that speaks english. I am a high skilled worked I guess (programmer/IT) and on paper it would appear many countries would value my skills even though I cannot speak the native language. However in practive I have found it incredibly difficult to do this. There is a metric shit ton of paperwork involved and unless you want to spend a lot of time dealing with it your employeer usually handles it. Also I live on the west side of the US and have been looking at getting a job on the east coast for a change of pace. I'm having trouble even getting a serious look because employers only seem to want to deal with local candidates. So I can't imagine dealing with another country in all practicality.

      You're making it much too difficult. I've lived and worked in a bunch of countries (Australia, all over Europe, the Middle East, and now Southeast Asia, though at the moment I'm on a few-week gig in Paris). The trick is to spend less time sitting at home fretting about paperwork and about how complicated you imagine it will be, and to spend more time shopping for plane tickets and getting your ass over there.

      With the exception of Saudi Arabia, where there was no real way around having a job in hand before arrival, the sure-fire plan has always been this:

      • Land.
      • Find a cheap place to stay.
      • Hit the bar.
      • Make friends.
      • Get job leads.
      • Get a job - either over or under the table, depending on local conditions.
      • Enjoy.

      I do IT work and get paid well, so it's not like you have to be stuck tending bar in tourist joints either, as some would have you believe.

      Unless you work for a multinational that can transfer you around the globe as easily up two flights of stairs, you've got to take matters into your own hands and stop trying to do the conventional thing like you've done at home. Live a little. Take a risk. Get outside your comfort zone. You will be well rewarded.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    35. Re:What languages? by postbigbang · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There's always the alternative: stay and fight. Stand up, be heard, be diligent, don't take no for answers, get answers. Repeat. Privacy, as other rights (remember 1066?) take tenacity to achieve and hold on to. As a bonus, they'll know all about you.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    36. Re:What languages? by raju1kabir · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Try Malaysia. It's the easiest place for westerners to integrate culturally and socially, by a long shot. People speak English well and are genuinely interested in and knowledgeable about the outside world (unlike, say, Thailand). My social life in Kuala Lumpur is the best I've ever had in my life (even compared to undergrad) and my friends are 80% local. I've been invited to countless homes, met everyone's families, gone on long road trips and even international trips with my local friends (2 road trips to Singapore and one trip up to Bangkok this year alone), play on a couple local sports teams, and attended more weddings than I can recall. I'll go weeks in a row with dinner/drinks invitations 7 nights a week.

      This stands in stark contrast to my prior existence in Washington DC, where despite having a lot of acquaintainces, I met few people I'd really consider friends, and often felt quite alone, voluntarily sequestering myself at home and spending my weekends on long solo bike rides because I couldn't bear another night out of shallow idiotic conversation with people who really only seemed to tolerate each other because they were familiar faces.

      Places like China, Taiwan, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, and so on, these countries have tremendous amounts of personal freedom, much more so than in any 'western' country I've been to. If it's political freedom one is looking for, then Asia is probably the wrong place to be.

      Here I agree with you. There's an overall slack casualness that means in daily practice you have a lot more liberty than you do in more structured, developed societies. Park wherever the hell you want, sit outside until 5am buying beer from a guy with a pushcart, etc. Just watch your step around Sensitive Topics of National Interest.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    37. Re:What languages? by Lord+Dreamshaper · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As a bonus, they'll know all about you.

      Yeah, unless you mean employers, "They" are usually the reason for considering emigration. I don't want to be on anyone's radar screen except for times and purposes of my choosing.

      --
      When all of your wishes have been granted, many of your dreams will be destroyed - Marilyn Manson
    38. Re:What languages? by beelsebob · · Score: 4, Interesting

      1. Why does getting an American passport reduce the options that he has through his British passport?
      Because a british citizen can work anywhere in the EU, an american citizen can't. A british citizen needs *no* paper work more than their passport, he just picks up his bags and leaves, while an american citizen must jump through many legal hoops like getting work permits, etc.

    39. Re:What languages? by Glove+d'OJ · · Score: 5, Funny

      And by "emersion," you mean "immersion," yes?

      Or do you really think that his "coming out" is the best way to learn a language?

      (BTW, those Engrish lesions are combing along nicly.)

    40. Re:What languages? by scorp1us · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Languages? C, C++, Python, some Perl. Andon days where I want to feel dirty, VB.

      I would like to point people to the Economic Index of Freedom
      Looks like other than USA, Hong Kong (which I like), Singapore, Australia, Ireland,New Zealand. Of these, only HK and Singapore would fit because the English-Speaking countries are all embarking on the erosion of liberties/privacies.

      Of those two, you could probably find a tech job in HK. Singapore isn't as tech heavy, but I think you could manage there as well.
       

      --
      Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    41. Re:What languages? by postbigbang · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Welcome to the 2000s.

      A certain event in the tip of Manhattan caused sufficient paranoia to allow the government in the US, then the UK, to lurch into action. Then there was one in Spain, Germany, and so on. Each event allowed their respective governments to feast on control. One of those controls was the ability to watch you.

      You are, by your virtue of being on /., now a potential suspect. Your Canadian Yahoo address means the NSA and CIA and M5 can peer down your webtubies into your conversations.

      You're on the radar screen now; we all are. Fight the fuckers, give them no quarter, make governments understand that we're the citizenry, and they are at our behest. Folly, you might think. What has eroded can be restored, unless the capable decide to split for a nirvana that doesn't exist.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    42. Re:What languages? by iksrazal_br · · Score: 3, Interesting
      As an American programmer who has successfully emigrated to Brazil, I have two pieces of advice:

      1) Marry a local in your destination choice. Your spouse will teach you the local language. That will solve most paperwork issues.

      2) If you decide on a country with a weaker curreny, start your own company focused on international clients. You will be competitively priced in your clients country, and the foreign currency will convert favorably. Be prepared to wait a while until you have clients. You might be able to find local work until then.

      Neither of those two is easy or right for everybody, but moving to another country isn't for everyone either.

      As for Brazil, imho the government tries as hard as they can to ignore you, and complaining to the government is part of the culture so you can do it as much as you like.

    43. Re:What languages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Tribal reservations are as free as the state allows.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Law_280

    44. Re:What languages? by nizo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only problem is, if the very people who are needed to fight against this all flee somewhere else, that makes it much harder to keep it from getting worse here. And if you think that it will stop at the borders of America or the UK, think again.

    45. Re:What languages? by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you are a slashdot poster, you could do worse than hop over the pond - no visa, similar culture, etc.

      Non-EEC citizens are required to get a work permit (the application fee is 500 euros for 6 months) that binds them to only that employer. Get fired/laid off - out you go asap.

    46. Re:What languages? by raju1kabir · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's been a while since I looked at any stuff like this, but I believe that to become a US citizen you have to renounce citizenship to all other countries. The exception is if a country does not allow you to renounce your citizenship, in which case you get a dual-nationality. I'm not sure how citizens-by-birth are affected by this.

      That is entirely incorrect. The US makes no requests or demands with regards to other citizenships, in fact policy is to pretend that they don't exist.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    47. Re:What languages? by raju1kabir · · Score: 2, Informative

      Could you please give some first-hand clues about criminality rates and cost of living?

      Crime seems to be about the same as you'd get in UK or France - bag snatching, burglaries predominantly. In 5 years I haven't experienced any crime personally, despite frequent post-bar walks through dark alleys at 3am. Nor has my petite western wife, who walks everywhere with her laptop.

      Cost of living in Kuala Lumpur (which is a lot more expensive than most of the rest of the country):

      • 1500ft2 3-bedroom apartment with pool and tennis court in nice part of town: US$1200/month.
      • 1200ft2 3-bedroom apartment with no pool in typical neighbourhood: US$600/month.
      • Cheap meal out: US$1
      • Fancy meal out: US$15
      • Mobile phone service w/400 minutes per month: US$15
      • Broadband internet, 4mbps: US$50
      • Broadband internet, 1mbps: US$25
      • Car: twice whatever you'd pay elsewhere, due to huge protectionist policy for local car industry
      • 15-minute taxi ride: US$3
      • Typical metro ride: US$0.50
      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    48. Re:What languages? by raju1kabir · · Score: 3, Informative

      In fact, YOU are entirely incorrect. When my father was naturalized a few years ago he was required to renounce any allegiance to "all foreign potentates."

      As of 1990 the State Department has stopped pursuing this issue. You can make all the oaths you want in front of the naturalization court judge but it's basically considered to be a matter of heart and mind rather than legal status. You do not have to follow up with your original country of citizenship and make any renunication to them, so effectively you can maintain your original citizenship. Whether or not your father was aware of this is, of course, another matter. It's not something the naturalization officials advertise.

      I invite you to read the long-standing and well-respected dual citizenship FAQ from Rich Wales.

      Or, as I've done (not necessarily for the purpose of this discussion on Slashdot) date a lawyer who works on this stuff.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
  2. Sorry but ... by Augusto · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But to be quite honest with you, with what is going in Iran at this moment, your request seems frivolous.

    I know I'm being a bit unfair, and that the mere existence of Iran doesn't excuse any violations into your privacy that you feel exist, but considering what is going on in the world this post seems ill-timed at best.

    I think the word "freer" in this case is misleading, it almost sounds more like you crave for a society were privacy is respected and more protected, which I see as a different thing.

    --

    - sigs are for wimps.
    1. Re:Sorry but ... by 0123456 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But to be quite honest with you, with what is going in Iran at this moment, your request seems frivolous.

      Yes, that's always the excuse the statists use: 'sure, Britain is a bloated, high-tax surveillance state where the police are more concerned with screwing fines out of the middle class than protecting them from real criminals and at any moment you can be dragged from your house and locked up for six weeks without being charged, but what about Zimbabwe, eh? You can't complain about Britain when you could be living in Zimbabwe' (though presumably now it's Iran that's the scapegoat).

      I fled the UK a couple of years ago, and would never even think of going back unless the Tories throw out everything Labour have done to destroy the place over the last sixty years.

    2. Re:Sorry but ... by PachmanP · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But to be quite honest with you, with what is going in Iran at this moment, your request seems frivolous.

      uh no.

      Iran is a reminder of what happens when the government becomes too authoritarian and the people finally realize it. You could then notice that one's own country was rapidly sliding down the authoritarian scale. You then have to decide if you want to leave or hang around until the shit hits the fan. You also have to consider that the point where you can freely leave is much sooner than the proverbial shit storm.

      You wouldn't shout down the frog in the 75 deg C water for saying "gee it's getting warmer in here" just because the pot next to him is finally boiling. (assuming of course hypothetical frogs that can stand 75 deg C temps some how...)

      --
      You're thinking small. Why miniaturize the laser, when we could instead enlarge the sharks? -John Searle
    3. Re:Sorry but ... by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I left the UK in 1996 before all this started happening. Very glad I did as I look now and it upsets me to see what the country I once loved has become. I used to be proud of being from England.

      Not anymore.

    4. Re:Sorry but ... by RsG · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While I understand where you're coming from, I strongly disagree. The existence of tyranny abroad does not excuse the erosion of liberty at home. Hell, forget Iran, I could think of a dozen far worse places to live without thinking hard, and yet I still see the point of the person who posted the article.

      Simply put, the attitude you're expressing, namely "it's much worse over there, so why are you complaining?" is a common one, and very problematic. How is a person in a country that is relatively free, but headed in the wrong direction, supposed to agitate for change in that worldview? There is, after all, always someplace worse.

      We, in the rich, safe, peaceful developed world, should aspire to do much better than Iran. We ought to make ourselves a bastion for civil liberties, human rights and responsible self-governance. Iran has a bad situation made worse by factors beyond the control of the average citizen; we have no such excuse.

      That being said, my suggestion to the person who posted this article is the improve the local situation instead of fleeing from it. If you are among those who see the current trend as a step in the wrong direction, then fight it. If enough people did that, the situation would change. It's getting enough people to realize this that poses a problem.

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    5. Re:Sorry but ... by Warlord88 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also, UK has one of the highest standards of living in the world. Is the privacy situation so bad that you are considering emigrating? I really don't think it is possible for you to find a country with standard of living at par with that of UK and where you can put your skills (if any) to full use.

    6. Re:Sorry but ... by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Also, UK has one of the highest standards of living in the world.

      LOL. I now earn less than I did in the UK, but my standard of living is dramatically higher... I suspect that's true of most of Europe and North America.

      I don't know how anyone can suggest that Britain has a high standard of living, unless you're comparing it to some third-world crap-hole. The cost of living is among the highest in the developed world and you get crap for it.

    7. Re:Sorry but ... by Allicorn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      +1 Informative can be yours if you remember what the question of the thread is and tell us where you went and whether it was any better ;-)

      --
      OMG!!! Ponies!!!
    8. Re:Sorry but ... by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2, Informative

      I left the same year and feel exactly the same way. However, being a Yorkshireman, I can still be extremely proud of that (well as long as we ignore the last European parliamentary elections!). I'm now living in Canada and extremely happy here.

    9. Re:Sorry but ... by jabithew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Politicians overwhelmingly don't have support for what they're doing. Turnout at the last general election was something like 36%. which means that the winner was "none of the above". The trouble is that our Westminister politicos have no power now. It's all been sent up to Brussels and Strasbourg or sent across to QUANGOs (e.g. NICE). New Labour has completely undermined Parliament at the Westminister level by allowing the Government to treat Parliament as a minor detail. MPs are now, broadly speaking, a waste of valuable London air.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    10. Re:Sorry but ... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Informative

      By getting them not to rubber stamp it?

      Not possible. The Treaty of European Union means that they have to or face various penalties. It's odd that the grandparent complains about the electoral system for the British Parliament, and complains that this government has no power, but completely ignores the fact that the European Parliament has a much fairer electoral system.

      A lot of the problems we have with the EU now are due to the compromises put in place by Eurosceptics. We gave more power to the Council of Ministers than to the European Parliament because the Council is made up entirely of national government leaders. Unfortunately, this means that they are not directly elected. In the UK it's particularly bad because the people vote for the legislature, the legislature selects the executive, and the executive selects the members of the Council.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    11. Re:Sorry but ... by jez9999 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd seriously love to move to work and live in Canada, have wanted to for ages, but can't because finding a job there as a UKian is spectacularly difficult (anyone have any suggestions, by the way? I'm a skilled programmer with good working knowledge of things like C#, C, Perl, SQL Server, MySQL, (X)HTML, Javascript, etc.)

      I thought I'd enumerate a list of reasons I hate the UK so much I want to emigrate, which I'm sure some people will partially disagree with, but which I think that the UK really *is* that bad, alas.

      * Surveillance. We're the most watched country in the world, and the majority of people don't have too much of a problem with it. This sucks.
      * Speed cameras. They're regularly used, all over the place, by local authorities as a means of revenue generation. Get caught going 57 MPH in a 50MPH zone 4 times (these zones can be and frequently are dual-carriageways), and you're banned from driving for half a year. North America would respect a lot more that cars are downright necessary for many people and would not ban you for such frivolous infringements.
      * Apalling electoral system. Ours is one of the most antiquated, useless electoral systems in the Western world... not surprising considering it's one of the oldest and hasn't been reformed much at all. It's widely accepted that a one-MP-per-constituency system is a Good Thing and somehow makes MPs more accountable, precluding the possibility of us ever getting a decent system of proportional representation. This sucks.
      * Soft drugs are illegal. This is generally the case in the Western world, but at least there are pro-cannabis movements in Canada and the US. Over here, there's very little debate about this matter, it's just generally 'accepted' that (soft) drugs are guaranteed to be a bad thing for society, in large part because of...
      * The BBC. Yeah, this one's gonna be contraversial, but I personally strongly object to being forced to pay a licence fee because of one fucking broadcaster that I consider mediocre at best, and certainly very biased with its news output. It chooses what to report very selectively, not to mention how it reports it, and has quite a few agendas (it tends to be in favour of big government, ever-more police, banning as much as possible including soft drugs, and just generally being apologists for the government-du-jour's authoritatian policies). As far as I'm concerned, the BBC is to some extent responsible for a lot of the bullshit opinions many people in the UK hold, because they have so much sway over people's opinions and use it to make people think stupid things.

      I could go on, but I feel this post has gotten long enough. Suffice it to say... if anyone knows how I could get a half-decent programming job (I'll be a team leader too! I wouldn't mind trying management!) in Canada, please contact me. :-)

  3. List of Countries by hansoloaf · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Here's a list of countries by Human Development Index http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index#High

    1. Re:List of Countries by hardburn · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's a huge difference in marginal cost between health, education, and the military. Doubling healthcare costs probably won't double life expectancy. Doubling education costs probably won't double the number of geniuses. But doubling military costs may do better than double the size and effectiveness of your units.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    2. Re:List of Countries by bmgoau · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why not stay in your own country and fight for those rights? Run as an independent for government. Organize resistance to the plans.

      How about Australia or Canada?

      I'm in Australia at the moment, broadband prices arn't amazing, and they're trying to implement a useless filter, but generally speaking the police are nice and we're universally known for hating our politicians (more then most countries).

      Even if the government wanted to implement some scheme to restrict freedoms, it would mean they would have to actually go about doing some governmental work. That's something that rarely happens here. For example our *entire* government, including some state governments, spent the last two weeks trying to work out who made up some email about some car dealer.

      We're also notoriously fickle when it comes to freedoms and politics. The public doesn't vote along party lines so much as they do for a lesser wanker (idiot).

    3. Re:List of Countries by mrbcs · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Buddy you're seriously mistaken. Looks like Canada is #3 on that list. There's no way we spend more on military than health care.

      I live in Alberta and frankly, I think it's the best place on earth right now. We have lots of oil, clean water, food, great doctors and hospitals and on and on.

      The province is not for everyone though. We have very strong libertarian tendencies. People are nice, but also want to be left alone to do their own thing.

      To the submitter: you want a place more free than UK? Come to Canada, specifically Alberta. If you can take the culture, you'll love it.

      --
      I'm not anti-social, I'm anti-idiot.
    4. Re:List of Countries by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Informative

      Dude that list is horse shit. Every single county with high HDI invests more in their military than health care or education. Propaganda bullshit.

      Dude, your comment is propaganda horse shit. Here are the top 5 in the HDI index:

      Iceland- #1 - Military $26 Million, Education $219 million (amounts converted from Kronas)
      Norway - #2 - Military $6 Billion, Education $19 Billion.
      Canada - #3 Military $18 Billion, Education, $68 Billion.
      Australia - #4 - Military - $3 Billion, Education, $40 Billion
      Ireland - #5 - Military - $1.3 billion, education $10 Billion

      Similar story for health care ...

    5. Re:List of Countries by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Informative

      Iceland- #1 - Military $26 Million, Education $219 million (amounts converted from Kronas)

      That number is surprisingly high as Iceland does not have anything even resembling an army or military...

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Iceland

      " Iceland does have limited military forces with the Coast Guard and Crisis Response Unit. Iceland maintains a well trained Coast Guard, National Police forces, Air Defence system as well as a voluntary expeditionary peacekeeping force. These services perform many of the operations Iceland's NATO allies relegate to their standing armies.

      Iceland holds the annual NATO exercises entitled Northern Viking; the most recent exercises were held in 2008[7], as well as the EOD exercise "Northern Challenge". In 1997 Iceland hosted its first Partnership for Peace (PfP) exercise, "Cooperative Safeguard," which is the only multilateral PfP exercise so far in which Russia has participated. Another major PfP exercise was hosted in 2000.

      Iceland has also contributed ICRU peacekeepers to SFOR, KFOR and ISAF.

      The Government of Iceland contributes financially to NATO's international overhead costs and recently has taken a more active role in NATO deliberations and planning. Iceland hosted the NATO Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Reykjavík in June 1987.

      The Icelandic Crisis Response Unit (ICRU) (or Íslenska friðargæslan which in English means "The Icelandic Peacekeeping Guard") is an expeditionary peacekeeping force maintained by the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.

      The Unit is manned by various personnel from Iceland's other services, armed or not, including the National Police, Coast Guard, Emergency Services and Health-care system. Because of the military nature of most of the ICRU's assignments, all of its members receive basic infantry combat training. This training has often been conducted by the Norwegian Army, but the Coast Guard and the Special forces are also assigned to train the ICRU. "

      There's more ... just follow the linky ...

    6. Re:List of Countries by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The US has defended Canada? The last time Canada was invaded, it was by the US!

      Nobody's invaded any of the top 5 countries since WW2. What *did* happen was that the US and the USSR decided to have a series of proxy wars. NORAD wasn't about protecting Canada from the Soviets, but about using Canadian bases as advance posts for monitoring the USSR.

      The covert deployment of nuclear weapons on Canadian soil didn't enhance Canadian security - it made Canadians targets.

      The Star Wars scheme to intercept missiles during their coasting phase meant that Canada, not the US, would have to deal with the detrius of a succesful intercept.

      Did you listen when Canada said "Don't go into Iraq"? Noooo ... and how much has it cost since? Both in money, and in reputation, and in lives? You didn't enhance your security by invading Iraq - you inflamed your existing enemies, made new ones, weakened key allies, and disgusted others. It was all about oil. And what's the #1 oil consumer in the world? The US military. Eisenhower warned about this sort of stupidity.

      Then again, what can you expect from a country that now classifies pocket knifes - even non-spring-loaded ones - as "switchblades" in a further war on its' own citizens rights, and that, rather than jailing the people behind the global frauds that led to the global financial meltdown, gives them "retention bonuses?" That wants to bail out millions of people who committed fraud by filing bogus mortgage documents, while penalizing those who were honest and sat out the bubble. Only in America, where corporate social welfare runs rampant under the guise of capitalism. It's pretty bad when the US is in so many ways more like the old Soviet Union than Russia is. With more people in jail than any other country in the world, can't you at least find some space in one of those jails for the biggest crooks in the worlds' history?

      The US wasn't just protecting other countries - it was also protecting its' own interests, and is currently the largest destabilizing influence - both financially and militarily. With the deficit soaring, and set to double again over the next decade, "too big to fail" is fast becoming "too big to save." Unfortunately, you're taking down the rest of the world with you.

      There was a time when the US stood for freedom, straight dealing, honesty, fairness, and integrity. Enlightened self-interest instead of greed. Independence rather than "where's my bail-out" entitlement. Opportunity rather than "your papers, citizen." It took George Bush 2 terms to reduce that to tatters. More than 2 centuries of effort undermined, trashed in less than a decade.

      Your war in Iraq didn't contribute to world security - and it certainly proved to be a distraction from getting that bin Laden guy. So much for "mission accomplished." then again, it was all about oil and pork-barrel politics, so maybe it really WAS "mission accomplished" - if the mission was to screw over the American people, blatantly burning through the social capital of goodwill and trust that most people had, overall, for the US.

      A generation ago, 76% of Americans said that, overall, they trusted their government to do the right thing. Now? Unsurprisingly, 80% of Americans said they now perceive their government as serving powerful special interests rather than the interests of the people as a whole.

      If your own people don't trust you, why should anyone else?

  4. Anarchy? by Sporkinum · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A Banana republic with a little anarchy thrown in for good measure would probably be the most "free". Obviously, most people would like a little civilization thrown in for good measure. The trick is finding the right balance. My guess would be maybe one of the old eastern block countries. I would have no idea which one though.

    --
    "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
  5. Public's problem. by enigma32 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think one of the primary issues is the general lack of interest by the general public in maintaining freedom.

    I've had extended conversations with people about why the requirements for air travel are such a bad thing and had them tell me they have no problem bearing their entire lives when they go through the airport -- they even have no problem with people monitoring them by video 24 hours a day if it means that they will be "safe".

    Honestly, the general population is so unaware of their circumstances and has so little imagination that they have no idea how bad it can get.

    If you find someplace better (I certainly wouldn't move to the UK from the US but it isn't so good here either) let me know.

    1. Re:Public's problem. by tirerim · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Power corrupts. This is not just a pithy saying, it has happened time and again throughout history. See the Stanford Prison Experiment for an empirical view, as well. We've already seen the beginnings of this in the U.S.: when law enforcement is given the ability to search people, take away their rights, and lock them up without presenting evidence, that is exactly what they do. Constant surveillance means constant suspicion of everyone, and when everyone is under suspicion, no one is presumed innocent.

      You may say that you have nothing to hide, but I really doubt it. Have you ever jaywalked? Gone even a mile above the speed limit? Or not even broken the law, but done something that might be just a little bit suspicious: talked to someone in another country? Snuck some food into a movie theater? Gone for a walk late at night? And how would you feel about a camera in your bathroom? Your bedroom? The voting booth?

    2. Re:Public's problem. by internewt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Please, explain exactly why the police watching you & everyone else all the time in public is bad. What, exactly, is the problem there?

      Are you afraid of corruption? Of a change in the law? Do you somehow think that either one would be hastened or slowed by mere video surveillance of public places?

      I'm with the general population -- liberterians who think anything government is bad, or that anything even vaugey orwellian will inevitably lead to Big Brother re-writing the past and instituting a 2-minute-hate, are the unimaginiative ones, reacting like ludditeis smashing machines without ever thinking and actually applying real principles.

      Why on earth should you or I be watched by law enforcement in a supposedly free country? Being constantly watched means sooner or later the police will see something they don't like or don't understand. All of a sudden people in a free country (that past generations laid down lives to protect) are having to justify their actions to an authority figure.

      The constant surveillance and encroachment on civil liberties has had the effect that we are answerable to the government, not the other way around as it should be in a democracy.

      Corruption is obviously a concern, and the recent MP expenses fun and games have shows how widespread corruption can simmer away unnoticed. Giving these people more power over us is not a good idea when they seem perfectly willing to use powers for their own ends. History is full of examples of abuse of power, so restriction of power is necessary.

      Video surveillance is just a facet of the encroachment on us by government, and as it is the most visible and widely understood it gets talked about a lot. Considering how small cameras can be, huge great things are appearing on the sides of buildings all over the country. The cameras are an easy solution for politicians to public demands for clamp downs on street crime - demands whipped up by certain parts of the press.

      Many people question the effectiveness of cameras compared to other crime reduction measures, like simply more police on the beat, or dealing with poverty. Of course the 2nd 2 are much harder for politicians, and probably won't be very effective before the next election they face.

      One of the issues privacy advocates have is that as many people are willing to give away their privacy (because they have been told it is good for them), they are also willing to give away other people's privacy too. Just because you are happy to be watched by some council employee when you do your shopping doesn't mean I am, and it is very frustrating to lose privacy this way. Unsurprisingly people then express themselves dramatically, and try and warn what we could be moving towards. A dystopian future won't happen overnight, it'd be over multiple generations if it did happen, but I don't want to think that I will leave a world going that way at all.

      --
      Car analogies break down.
    3. Re:Public's problem. by arkhan_jg · · Score: 2, Informative

      While I don't particularly object to local realtime CCTV surveillance of a public space, I do object to the much larger surveillance state CCTV has become a part of; permanent footage recording, number plate recognition cameras on all major roads, logging of phone calls, emails and recording websites visited, substantial databases of government interactions, financial records and medical records, the largest DNA database in the world, and of course coming things like ID cards which will be must-carry, and will be needed for every interaction with the state or public services, which will also be recorded.

      Here's some of my objections off the top of my head:

      - Corruption - local government has access to such personal data as my email, and can even setup surveillance units to me to follow me around for accusations as trivial as littering. Someone with a personal axe to grind could use this for personal reasons, i.e. stalking an ex lover, digging up personal info on her new partner, etc. We only have to look at businesses using facebook profiles to refuse to hire someone; how much longer before they get to dig through more private and personal details of your life?

      - Incompetence - it wasn't long ago that the tax service lost a CD containing the personal details of 25 million adults and children, including the full financial details of 8 million families. Such information losses are becoming alarmingly common, and the more data is held, the more can be lost by accident, and that's a serious risk of identity fraud.

      - identity theft - such databases are vulnerable to accidental loss; they're also vulnerable to deliberate attack, in order to gain substantial info about people; gaining access to bank accounts, setting up fake credit accounts in someone else's name, even getting a real passport or ID card in someone else's name, cloning car number plates to get other people sent the bill for the congestion charge in london; the more data is held, the more likely it will fall into the wrong hands

      - misidentity - as more people get put on the DNA database for trivial accusations (no proof needed, no conviction needed) the odds of false positives rise; especially since they go on fishing expeditions to match marginal trace dna; the odds of someone being falsely convicted rise - there have already been cases with DNA records being factually incorrect. The criminal records database designed to stop pedophiles becoming teachers has had a number of failures, both not stopping those who should have been stopped, and flagging people by mistake, causing them to lose their job for having done nothing wrong. Or the poor brazillian man who had his block of flats under surveillance; he was tentatively misidentified as the suspected terrorist, so they followed him onto a tube train and shot him repeatedly in the head. Or the several people who were thought to have illegal firearms, were dawn raided, then shot while unarmed. The bigger the databases, and the more the police rely on them, the greater the odds of fatal mistakes in data quality.

      - chilling effects - persistent surveillance can lead to a chilling effect on the participation in democracy. If protesters are video'd, then their cars tagged on ANPR watchlists so they get stopped constantly for 'random' checks, their house put under surveillance, their friends questioned (all of which have happened to protesters over the heathrow runway expansion) then people will be less willing to protest government decisions that affect them and their community. Sit down, shut up, or we'll be seeing you...

      - too much noise - vast surveillance of the public space generates so much noise, it drowns out the signal. Looking for a needle in a haystack doesn't get any easier when you massively increase the size of the haystack. Intelligence led policing and targeted surveillance on those under suspicion - with civil rights protected by court oversight - is far more effective and less likely to target the innocent than the security theatre most of us endur

      --
      Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
  6. The only free place is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Your imagination

  7. Where to go? by Aldenissin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I hear that Sweden is nice this time of year, unless you consider not being able to post any torrent files you wish against freedom.

    --
    Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
    1. Re:Where to go? by mikael_j · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually up until quite recently it was perfectly legal to share copyright-protected information to your heart's content as long as you only shared it with a few select friends, then they changed the law to make it completely illegal and in true Orwellian fashion the media industry shills are now pretending that it's always been this way.

      /Mikael

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
  8. Re:Economic Freedom by evenmoreconfused · · Score: 2, Informative

    I was actually looking forward to reading your link until I read the footer: "The Heritage Foundation is a research and educational institute - a think tank - whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies...".

    Clearly unbiased, then.

    --
    No. Well...maybe. Actually, yes. It really just depends.
  9. Wilderness by tpstigers · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't be stupid. There's no such thing as a free country. Sooner or later, they all end up being run by bastards. If you're really looking to be free, I suggest you move as far away from civilization as you can. The only way to achieve actual freedom in this world is to separate yourself from the rest of humanity.

    1. Re:Wilderness by PachmanP · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't be stupid. There's no such thing as a free country. Sooner or later, they all end up being run by bastards. If you're really looking to be free, I suggest you move as far away from civilization as you can. The only way to achieve actual freedom in this world is to separate yourself from the rest of humanity.

      A sentient computer and a rail launcher on the moon might do it...

      --
      You're thinking small. Why miniaturize the laser, when we could instead enlarge the sharks? -John Searle
  10. End of the Universe by kramulous · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hear the end of the universe is a pretty cool place to hang out.

    Apparently some good restaurants.

    --
    .
  11. Seems like I need a subject line to post... by Snarky+McButtface · · Score: 3, Informative

    Canada, eh?

  12. Science Fiction author by mrmeval · · Score: 2, Informative

    Dave Freer is having to get out of Africa. It's getting very bad there. It is a beautiful land and based on his and several other peoples comments it's like having to leave paradise so he has not been quick to leave.

    Some of his books are in the Baen free library
    http://www.webscription.net/s-45-dave-freer.aspx?CategoryFilterID=1&ManufacturerFilterID=0&

    --
    I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
  13. Come to the USA! by Planesdragon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Don't listen to the crap you might see from the libertarians on /. The USA is a great place to come if your own country is becoming more repressive than you like. Here's my best argument ("best" at 12:30 saturday morning.)

    #1: We have rights of expression, assembly, thought, speech, and, yes, privacy enshrined in the Constitution. All the UK really has is the continued good will of the crown (or, if you rather, the respect for history in Parliament.) We do, in fact, have the 2nd amendment (right to bear arms) specifically so we can unseat any tyrant who tries to take our rights away.

    #2: As a culture, we prize freedom the way Israel prizes "never again" or Iran prizes "Islam". "I just want to be left alone" is the only argument you'll need to get any American on your side. Our two major political parties argue about how we collaborate on things, and where we should extend legal privileges -- NOT on how free we should be. (At least, not the serious ones.)

    #3: America is currently in the beginings of its post-Bush era. We do reactions VERY well in this country -- and that means the principle sin of the Bush, era, "sacraficing liberty for security", is likely not to be repeated in the next 10-20 years. If ever.

    #4: you'd be in the same country as /.!

    #5: From a feudalistic standpoint, you would go from being a subject of a crown to a citizen of a country -- theoretically speaking, from a king's slave to a king's peer.

    1. Re:Come to the USA! by novalis112 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      #1: Good point, but good luck exercising any of those constitutionally recognized rights.

      #2: "I just want to be left alone" is absolutely going to get many Americans on your side... until they want something from you.

      #3: Man I hope you're right about this one! But so far, it's not looking too good. Obama is putting the same crooks, criminals and downright villains in office as his predecessor (as far as I can tell, I admit I haven't been keeping up here).

      #4: Uhh, woot?

      #5: Here here!

    2. Re:Come to the USA! by xednieht · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wake up - if you're the "king's peer" how come he takes money from you but gives nothing in return?

      --

      Hope is the currency of fools
    3. Re:Come to the USA! by memoryhole · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We do, in fact, have the 2nd amendment (right to bear arms) specifically so we can unseat any tyrant who tries to take our rights away.

      Oh puhleeez. Seriously? You think the weapons that civilians have on hand can take on the best-funded military the world has ever seen? You know, the one that has more resources than the next five biggest militaries COMBINED? I don't think you've thought about this very seriously. Yes, I know that's the same thing "they" said about facing down the British back in 1775, but we're living in a different world. How many civilians have access to Abrams tanks and Apache helicopters? Cruise missiles? Not to mention: in what terrain has the US military been *training* for the last two hundred years? To paraphrase an awful movie, "When the day comes that we have to go to war against Utah, we're [the US military] really gonna kick ass".

      The 2nd Amendment right puts guns in the hands of civilians. Thick-headed civilians who can't think very far ahead work like gang members who get their first chrome-plated .45: they immediately feel invincible, and that leads to the assumption that the guns are for the purpose of standing watch over the government. Don't kid yourself that any politician in the history of the US has ever thought (or will ever think) to themselves "well, I WANT to do X, but since the citizens have so many guns, maybe that wouldn't be a good idea."

      If you want to know what the 2nd Amendment is really for, look no further than St. George Tucker, a lawyer, Revolutionary War militia officer, legal scholar, and a U.S. District Court judge (appointed in 1813), who wrote about the amendment: This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty... The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. It is a right to defend yourself from the government, not an establishment of the power to overthrow the government. It's an important distinction.

    4. Re:Come to the USA! by Abcd1234 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      #1: We have rights of expression, assembly, thought, speech, and, yes, privacy enshrined in the Constitution.

      assembly: Three words for you - Free speech zones
      thought: Didn't we just see a story about a man arrested for possessing child porn that didn't actually depict children?
      privacy: Well, minus the wiretapping... and the GOP's insane desire to dictate what goes on in people's bedrooms.

      Speech I'll give you, though... the US has been pretty strong about protecting speech... to the point that donating money even qualifies as speech, hence why bribary... err, that is, lobbying is legal.

      #2: As a culture, we prize freedom the way Israel prizes "never again" or Iran prizes "Islam".

      Well, unless you're caught using harmless drugs, or urinating in public, in which case you'll get a disproportionate sentence, and in the latter case, a scarlet letter as a bonus.

      And if you want to be free to, say, marry the person you love, well, you're screwed there, too.

      Basically you're free to do whatever you want as long as the moral majority has decided it's okay.

      #3: America is currently in the beginings of its post-Bush era.

      I'd ask the LGBT community how that's going. They might disagree.

      Alright alright, yeah, he's better than Bush... but that ain't saying much, and thus far, I'd say the jury's out on just how much better.

      #4: you'd be in the same country as /.!

      I thought this was a list of reasons to move to the US... :)

      #5: From a feudalistic standpoint, you would go from being a subject of a crown to a citizen of a country

      *snicker* Please... anyone who's lived in a commonwealth country will tell you that the "subject of a crown" BS is nothing but a formality. You know, kinda like American representative democracy. *duck*! ;)

    5. Re:Come to the USA! by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We libertarians tend to think we are the freest country on Earth. We just don't have any illusions about it being 'free enough'.

      You however seem to have bought into our great myths. I'll break it down:

      #1: Our rights to freedom of expression are often curtailed, sometimes with the blessing of the Supreme Court, depending on what mood it's in. Obscenity is still regularly prosecuted. Girls "sexting" (what a dumb term!) are charged with producing CHILD PORNOGRAPHY by taking nude pictures of themselves on cell phones! Make no mistake, we are better than many European countries because we won't necessarily slam you in jail for expressing the wrong political opinion (though it can happen) like with holocaust deniers or such, but don't pretend that theory is practice here. Also, the second amendment is constantly being reinterpreted by those that dislike it, and heavier and heavier controls are continually being placed on it. I expect to see the 2nd amendment repealed in my lifetime, athough not without some redneck-caused violence (and "bless" some of those rednecks!).

      #2: We say we do, anyways. Well, we do moreso than many countries, there's a reason why those libertarians (whom you show contempt for, it seems) are far more numerous in the USA than anywhere else in the world. But you have a very rose-colored view of our two political parties. They are like two cartels guarding the political gates and frequently compromising and collaborating with how to leech more money off of American workers and have no problem with taking away rights when it suits political ideology or is expedient for the government to do so. Hell, I think the only serious politicians DO talk about how free we should be, and they are saying FREER. It seems you're content with compromise after compromise in our political proceses, compromising our rights...!

      #3: The corollary is, however, that we are in the Obama era now, and that's not much better. Take off those rose-colored Democrat glasses again. You're boss is not much better than old boss. "Sacrificing liberty for security?" Hello? FISA? Obama's great flip flop? That's not the only one.

      #4: Are you trying to encourage him...? In any case, you couldn't think of any more than 4 reasons so you threw one in the middle to make it seem like you had the nice round number of 5...

      #5: That's all symbolic nowadays, not that I support the ridiculous monarchy in the first place but you need some perspective. As for king's slave to king's peer? Hah! Hahahahaha! I'd like to see what kind of weight YOU hold in regards to Congress? You're nothing at all! The "king" today is Obama, and it's his signature on bills that matter, NOT YOURS. You have actually very little say at all. King's peer... that's a good one. I'd like to see me get the same type of say and treatment as even a Congressman...!

      You've totally bought into the American nationalist pride--the left's version. Obama is president! Joy! Joy! Change! Hope! Sorry, Charlie, but Obama is just another politician. Everyone wants, needs, a hero, but politicians--people that use your rights as bargaining chips for their own self-interest or ideologies--should never be the object of one's admiration, at least not one that isn't dismantling the whole evil machine.

    6. Re:Come to the USA! by evilviper · · Score: 4, Insightful

      All the above points are good ones, but others may be more important.

      The US is HUGE and extremely diverse. Pick your climate, scenery, culture, government, etc., and you'll find it somewhere in the US.

      Few countries allow such a large number of immigrants as the US, though there certainly are hoops to jump through.

      With the exchange rate what it is, you'll find yourself pretty well off after converting your savings.

      While jobs may not pay what you'd expect, with the considerably lower cost of living in most areas, less expensive products, and much lower taxes, I expect you'll find yourself better off.

      I just happen to know 3 British Ex-pats here in Southern California, all of them all seemingly content with their near minimum-wage jobs.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    7. Re:Come to the USA! by CodeBuster · · Score: 3, Informative

      Don't listen to the crap you might see from the libertarians on /.

      In defense of us Libertarians here on Slashdot I feel that I must point out that we are all about freedom and against violence and coercion. In fact, we have always held the United States Constitution and especially the Bill of Rights in very high esteem and wish that our Federal Government would conform more closely to the limited role outlined in those documents instead of experimenting with socialism as Obama seems determined to do. However, as Bush and others have demonstrated, there is really only so much damage that one President can do and in the long run the United States has some pretty well engineered self correcting mechanisms (our founding fathers saw to that when they set the whole thing up). In response to the emigrating author, I would definitely recommend the United States in general and the Free State Project states (New Hampshire and Wyoming) in particular if he is looking to maximize his freedoms. Although, compared to what we see and hear coming out of the UK these days, just about anywhere in the United States is going to be a breath of fresh air by way of comparison. The United States also has the advantage that the residency requirements and path to citizenship are easier when coming from the UK which enjoys the "special relationship" with the United States. So he really should take a second look at the United States; we really do have a lot to offer as a free country.

    8. Re:Come to the USA! by carping+demon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I gotta say, man, Planesdragon speaks truth. No matter how else we may f**k up, you just can't beat that 1st amendment, and I've never heard of another place which has anything like it. I can stand on the street corner and shout as long as I want that Muslims and queers and cops stink, and several decent people may wait in line to beat the crap out of me, but I have nothing to fear from the state. Even as a visitor, you would have the same freedom. Of course, there's a constant struggle between those who value that freedom and those, some very powerful, who , for their own benighted reasons, seek to suborn and disfigure it. But that happens everywhere. Three hundred years isn't a long time, compared to how long the UK has been there, but every time there's been a serious threat to that right, and there have been several, Americans have risen to reaffirm it. For that reason alone, I would say the US would be your best bet. And most people here would agree. Just sayin'.

    9. Re:Come to the USA! by Rogerborg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed. The US and UK spell some things differently. "Color" vs "colour", "gray" vs "grey" and "politicians" vs "robber barons".

      Democracy needs to come with a "none of the above" option. Choosing the sock puppet on the left or the sock puppet on the right is not real choice.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    10. Re:Come to the USA! by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you even knew why the Bill of Rights were ratified in the first place, you'd know how false that was.

      The militia part is what I'm imagining you're referring to, and a historical analysis will make it pretty clear what context this is in and what the intent was. Here's a hint: the militia was composed of "the people," the same "the people" the government is supposedly serving.

      Not that I particularly care, the 2nd amendment could spell out "NO-GUNS" and I'd oppose it because the constitution is just as illegitimate as the government itself. Like all governments.

    11. Re:Come to the USA! by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Seriously? You think the weapons that civilians have on hand can take on the best-funded military the world has ever seen? You know, the one that has more resources than the next five biggest militaries COMBINED? I don't think you've thought about this very seriously.

      125,000 troops in Iraq, the a country the size of California (with fewer people, I might add), you'd think we'd have this mopped up by now, except that somehow after the set-piece battle is done, it takes a whole lot of troops & police to create effective positive control over a civilian population. This is something Americans learned after the civil war -- the North won the war but the South very clearly won the reconstruction as the North (unfortunately) had neither the resources nor the political will to police the entire South to guarantee rights to the now-freed-slaves.

      The military is a blunt weapon, not one that can be effectively used for fine-grained policing work. This is why the Soviets & company invested so much in secret police, becuase they needed a subtle way to control the masses in a fashion that didn't raise the public ire against them like the tanks did (the Chinese, since 1989 have advanced quite a bit in this respect). The E. German Stassi in particular had a file on every citizen -- this wasn't a massive waste, it was an integral part of a very effective system.

      Now imagine that 125,000 man army spread across the entire US (or even just a region of it) with 60 million rifles and 65 million handguns (in 1994, gun ownership has only gone up since, especially after the last election). Even if the entire national guard joined the army (doubtful, many would defect and bring their weapons over the rebels anyway), there's still be ~500 armed civilians for each soldier.

      Cites:

      "A National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms (NSPOF), conducted in 1994, indicates that Americans own 192 million guns, with 36% of these consisting of rifles" from wikipedia.

    12. Re:Come to the USA! by Korey+Kaczor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As someone who is kind of militantly for less government and taxation (libertarian???), I agree with your post. I think a lot of these people just think the US is worse than it is just because they haven't been elsewhere.

      #2 is right... but in a bad way. Both parties are no different in the scheme of things and continue to run their scams alongside of their owners/lobbyists.

      I will add two more points:

      #6: The US is huge and has a lot of fertile, sparsely populated land. If worse comes to worse, if you can't find freedom from government, you could theoretically get freedom away from it. Theoretically, though.

      #7: Chicks love guys with accents, and that's no secret. You can be the mysterious British gent and you can take any girl you want home who will think you're James Bond.

    13. Re:Come to the USA! by H0p313ss · · Score: 2, Informative

      p> #5: From a feudalistic standpoint, you would go from being a subject of a crown to a citizen of a country

      *snicker* Please... anyone who's lived in a commonwealth country will tell you that the "subject of a crown" BS is nothing but a formality. You know, kinda like American representative democracy. *duck*! ;)

      *nods*

      I'm born in Britain, I've lived in Canada most of my life and I've spent a lot of time with Americans (Even have an american HS diploma!). I'd rather be as subject of the crown than American any day.

      Americans spend a great deal of time talking about freedom, Canadians actually are free.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    14. Re:Come to the USA! by Abcd1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Americans spend a great deal of time talking about freedom, Canadians actually are free.

      Well, I'm not sure I would take it that far. As a Canadian, I think we do a pretty good job overall (our record for personal privacy, for example, is quite strong, and I think our system of democracy is more representative of the people's wishes, thanks to the weaker influence of lobbying groups), but things like the Canadian Human Rights Commission, a "court" system completely outside the regular system of jurisprudence, would suggest we still have plenty we could improve on.

      Really, my post wasn't to illustrate why the US sucks and <insert country here> is better. Rather, certain Americans (and Canadians, for that matter) sometimes need to be reminded that their nation *isn't* the greatest, most free, most awesome country in the world... that it is flawed, and often *doesn't* live up to its lauded ideals.

  14. Re:Economic Freedom by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That's a bit easy. What exactly do you disagree with in the listing? Or do you just go by the source, without actually doing an analysis of the presented facts?

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  15. Come to India by gopla · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes. In theory, we in India too have restricted freedom of speech and government constantly telling citizens how to behave.

    But, India is such a huge country with huge population that government is overwhelmed. It cannot monitor everybody. And the society as a whole is lot more tolerant. So in practice every individual experience a true freedom and anonymity. This remains true until you become too popular and catch eye of media. Which I think is very less probability again due to huge population. May be 10000 popular people in set of 1 Billion.

    1. Re:Come to India by gopla · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A lot more tolerant? I tend to disagree. Maybe there isn't as much government interference, but the social pressure in India more than makes up for it. India is a nice place to visit, but as I foreigner I would never be able to live there. The lack of infrastructure, electricity cuts in most cities, flocks of touts and beggars, men who gawk (if you're female and unaccompanied by a man, even if you dress conservatively), and uptight attitudes towards alcohol and tobacco would take it off my list.

      I don't know whether you are Indian or not. But India is HUGE, and you might have experienced just a small bit of India.

      It has a place for everybody. From poorest of poor to one of the richest man on earth. You can be atheist or you can be most religious person. There are many saints who stay naked for their whole life, without even getting a second look from anybody. You can belong to any race, religion, caste, creed and still feel at home in India. People may gawk at you, but they welcome all with open heart.

      These are sign of open society. May not be open in western civilization's sense, but open nevertheless

      India has be described a an elephant as experience by 5 blind people. The blind person touching its trunk may think elephant is like a water hose, while person touching its tail may describe the elephant as a rope, and still one touching its legs will experience it as a tower.

      Come and experience the Incredible India. You will get in it what you are looking for. This has been true since the age of Alexander and before.

    2. Re:Come to India by davidbrucehughes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Absolutely right! I am American by birth but have spent over 10 years of my life in India at various times from the 70s through the 90s. Now I am retiring and getting ready to move to South India. Of course it helps that I am a high initiate in a Vedic esoteric school, study Sanskrit and speak tolerable Hindi. But I would agree with the parent, you can find pretty much whatever you want there.

      The cultural diversity in India is inconceivable to a Westerner. The Western educational gulag trains up everyone to be a conformist. In India you have at least 13 major cultural/linguistic/ethnic/religious groups, and countless minor and regional variations. Going to India from the West feels like getting out of jail. The biggest shock on coming back to the West is how boringly the same everyone is.

      In India you can find everything from aborigines and hill tribes to the most sophisticated intellectuals in the world. I know, I have debated with some of them and come away with deep respect for the cultural traditions. And there is nothing to compare with the Indian cultural tradition of hospitality. Just don't forget your micropore water filter...

      --
      om namo bhagavate vasudevaya
  16. Avoid the Failed or Failing States by Leemeng · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well, you could weed out the countries NOT to emigrate to. The 2009 Failed State Index is out:

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/06/22/the_2009_failed_states_index

    I found their rating criteria exhaustive, but fair. It's basically a shopping list for what a good country should have.

    1. Re:Avoid the Failed or Failing States by cryptoluddite · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't think it's any coincidence that the stable countries are in the far north and south, and the most unstable parts nearer the equator. If you don't have to plan in order to keep from freezing then you can get into a lot more trouble. People living where there's a cold winter face likely death every year if their societies fall into chaos.

  17. Communist is best.. by WittyName · · Score: 3, Funny

    Generally south east asia is pretty good. China is communist, so is Vietnam. But this is really in name only. They do not make any effort at being friendly or fuzzy to the population. But as a foreigner living there, you can say what you want about the government, and pretty much do what you want. They do not want a story about you being arrested on some BS in the international papers.

    They are busy building infrastructure so there is no money for fancy ID cards, camera networks, or much spying. Even in china, the internet spying is looking for chinese words, not english..

    Language is not a big issue, as the last 20 years english is taught to all school kids.
    Weather is nice, internet works good, 5 minute walk to the beach, cheap standard of living.

    Go communists!

    --
    The law is a weapon of the government, not a protection for the likes of you. Surely you understand that.
  18. No country is 100-percent free. by reporter · · Score: 2, Interesting
    No country is 100% free, but the most free countries are located in the West. If freedom of speech is your primary concern, then the United States is likely the "most" free. Speech is generally not censored. Both the Reverend Jeremiah Wright (of Trinity United Church of Christ) and the leaders of the Daughters of the American Revolution are free to make speeches.

    You are free to say that you love America or that you hate America. Most Americans respect free speech. It is codified in our constitution, and the Supreme Court has consistently favored free speech.

    The flip side of that freedom is that you are also free to die or, more likely, free to suffer serious health problems, and no one will care. The USA is undergoing the worst recession in decades. Many families have lost health insurance due to job loss. They cannot afford COBRA-mandated health insurance. The end result is that minor medical problems endured by insurance-less folks are simply ignored. These problems can eventually become lethal. For example, a tiny lump in a woman's breast can lead to death within a few years years.

    In Europe, the state places more restrictions on speech, but the state also tends to provide more support to you in times of crisis.

    Now, here is a revolutionary idea: tying more freedoms with more support from the state. In other words, the state provides universal healthcare but, at the same time, supports your right to utter any kind of speech that you want.

    This revolutionary idea is taking hold in France. President Nicolas Sarkozy greatly admires American freedoms but supports state-sponsored social welfare programs like universal healthcare. I would bet good money that he personally wants to maximize freedom of speech -- including allowing outright condemnation of Islam. Such condemnation is considered hate speech in some European countries, and anyone who utters such speech can be banned from entry into those countries.

  19. New Zealand by Binkleyz · · Score: 4, Informative
    Jokes about "Flight of the Conchords" (and sheep) aside, New Zealand is a modern, English speaking, very politically free and open country.. They are very much a part of the "First World", but so far have avoided many of the more "Police State-y" laws and regulations that you seem eager to be away from.

    They have a "Quality of Life" score just below the US and considerably better than the UK.

    1. Re:New Zealand by neuroinf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Absolutely. Carbon neutral by 2025 as an added bonus.

    2. Re:New Zealand by drdoot · · Score: 2, Interesting

      New Zealand is a modern, English speaking, very politically free and open country.. They are very much a part of the "First World", but so far have avoided many of the more "Police State-y" laws and regulations that you seem eager to be away from.

      + 1 for NZ. NZ is the only country in the world where, on average the women have had more sexual partners than men. It has the highest non-religious population in the world - meaning no laws are influenced by religion. Housing is cheap given the recession. And if you earn an income from outside of NZ while living there, you enjoy 4 years 100% tax free income.

    3. Re:New Zealand by Gnavpot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      NZ is the only country in the world where, on average the women have had more sexual partners than men.

      How does that math work?

      Are there more lesbians in NZ?

      Are there a lower female/male ratio in NZ?

      Those are the two only reasons I can imagine.

  20. Re:Not the U.S. by Planesdragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Civil War is brewing. Should be a whole lot of fun with nukes, Raptors and Abrams on the battlefield.

    Bullocks. Civil War requires geopolitical division -- and we don't have that. If Obama fails, the Republican Party gets a new rallying cry. If not, then they'll just reform or go the way of the Whigs.

    There have been panderings of a coming "race war" or "civil war" or "red invasion" for longer than my father's been alive. And they're all crap, with an amazing ability to underestimate the religious feeling that "America" inspires in its citizens.

  21. Stay away from Canada by Linegod · · Score: 4, Funny

    Stay away from Canada. It's horrible here. No freedom. You wouldn't like it. Try the US, I hear they have a magic president or something.

    wanker...

    --
    -- I care not for your foolish signatures.
  22. Canada would be a very good choice! by uchar · · Score: 3, Informative

    I would recommend you to go to Montreal, Quebec, Canada... you would love it for sure, as for privacy, services and so on... you will have everything you wish for!!! Privacy is one of the top sensitive subject here, even inter-governmental institution doesn't share personal information on citizen... If there's camera on some street, they aren't allowed to record anything... Here you have nature minutes away, beautiful women on every corner and lots of entertainment... Most of all, you won't find a city offering that much for that cheap!

    --
    -I swear by my life-and my love of it-that I'll never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another to live for mine
    1. Re:Canada would be a very good choice! by FooAtWFU · · Score: 4, Informative

      Be aware that Canada has some interesting challenges to freedom of speech with regards to the political process, including campaign finance limits (note the US has some too) and something about a media blackout of election coverage. There also exist certain "hate speech" provisions (for some criticism, do a quick Google search and/or see here here and here, warning, these sites may contain bias independent of their stance on freedom of speech... that's kind of the idea behind freedom of speech, though, so I hope you can cope).

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    2. Re:Canada would be a very good choice! by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2, Informative
      These seriously are challenges to unrestricted free speech, and they seriously exist. For someone who self-identifies as being concerned with "privacy, free expression and civil liberties" and people being "banned in the UK for expressing (admittedly reprehsensible) opinions", these challenges represent something that must be seriously taken into consideration (especially the bits about hate crimes).

      Perhaps you're confused because I'm simply pointing out the existence of these issues while trying to refrain from passing additional forms of judgement as to the ultimate desirability of these measures? Perhaps my laziness in selection of my first set of links resulted in a set of sites which you did not find worthy of being taken seriously? Here, have a slightly less biased ("neutrality disputed" notwithstanding) Wikipedia article on Canadian Human Rights Commission free speech controversies. Does that help?

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  23. Bobby Fischer's a good guide by BountyX · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The famous american chess player was notoriously anti-american. He fled the US to several countries. You can trace his life as an emigre. It serves as a good guide. The wikipedia corruption index may be of use, although I cannot vouch for its accuracy. I favorite Turkey, Japan, Sweden, Austria, or Denmark. Good luck.

    --
    Trying to install linux on my microwave, but keep getting a kernel panic...
  24. what kind of freedoms? by wizardforce · · Score: 2, Interesting

    some countries have better economic freedom while less social freedom, which country you wish to move to depends on which of these are more important. if it's econ then pick one of the top countries listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom_historical_rankings

    if you want social freedom, countries in soe parts of europe are better; sweden, denmark, new zealand if outside of europe is ok.. overall between the two, switzerland is high on my own personal list.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  25. Finland by pbaer · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Finland has the best privacy laws in the world, and Finns enjoy a lot of rights, such as "right to roam". Finland also had women's suffrage in 1906, much earlier than most countries. Finland is also a highly technological nation, which since you post on slashdot, is probably a plus. Most of the people there will speak english to some degree, which should make communicating a little easier.

    Finland, however has disadvantages such as, a very difficult native language, immigrating will be tougher than other nations, cold weather, and possible invasion from Russia. If you like Finland, but can't handle the language, you could try a different Scandinavian country, as they all share the same basic values.

    You should find this link helpful, it has an immigration section. http://www.finlandforum.org/index.php

    --
    There are 11 types of people, those who know unary and those who don't.
    1. Re:Finland by Threni · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As countries become more and more populous, and are filled with duller and duller people, all the freedoms and rights which were fought for and protected by smart/selfless people will be slowly taken away in the name of safety, lower taxes or being `tough on crime`. I'm sure Finland will suffer from this just as the UK has. The only solution is fewer, smarter people.

    2. Re:Finland by udippel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Having no mod-points, I just want to thumbs-up your comment verbally!

      It is so frustrating to live in an ever more homogeneous world, at least on the outside of life. A world ever more Anglo-Americanised, with the unwashed masses in principle trying to follow, if not imitate, the 'American Way of Life'. When I ask the people around me what they dream, do, aspire, the usual answer is pretty much skewed versus McDonalds, Coke, 3G-iPhone, and wealth.
      Let's face it, there is about no choice left. Country-wise. We'd need another revolution before we can pinpoint to what the OP was asking for: A country worthy to migrate to; a country inhabited by essentially responsible libertarians. Sad.

    3. Re:Finland by jez9999 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Finland has the best privacy laws in the world, and Finns enjoy a lot of rights, such as "right to roam" [wikipedia.org]. Finland also had women's suffrage in 1906, much earlier than most countries. Finland is also a highly technological nation, which since you post on slashdot, is probably a plus.

      Out of interest, I just thought I'd point out that Finland has, in my opinion, the best electoral system in the world. Open-list Proportional Representation, with a unicameral parliament (IMHO, the only reason you ever need a second chamber is because the first one is so shit it needs to be slapped down occasionally - make the first better, and you don't need a second one). Maybe a coincidence, but I doubt it. Anyone who says first-past-the-post is better is, well, wrong.

  26. Stay. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Stay in the UK. Its YOUR fucking country, damn it. Stand up for it.

    See, the problem with emigrating to another country because you won't stand up for freedom is that you have a problem in the first place. You won't safe guard your freedoms. So you move to another country and you will eventually loose your freedoms there too, since you (the people) aren't taking care of them. Freedom is like muscle, if you don't exercise and use it, you will loose it.

    So stay my friend. Be that guy/gal, like Gandhi or Thoreau or Rosa Parks.
    Unless your life is at risk, stay.

    1. Re:Stay. by sydneyfong · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Where are my mod points when I....

      oh wait I posted a comment :(
      Lame jokes aside, this is very very true.

      I always wonder why in these days nobody is standing up for their values any more, and are simply choosing the herd they identify with, despite knowing that if you don't pay the price of standing up and voicing your concerns, you'll lose your rights no matter where you go?

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    2. Re:Stay. by ChienAndalu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Stay in the UK. Its YOUR fucking country, damn it.

      It is not. It is a random place on earth where he was born. He didn't choose to be there, he doesn't have any obligation to stay there and no obligation to the people who want to make his life miserable. By choosing to move to a better country with more freedoms, being a productive member of a free society and contributing to the prosperity of a better country, he supports freedom.

      Vote with your feet.

    3. Re:Stay. by iserlohn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Let's face it. A lot of the people that say they are leaving a particular place because certain political reasons are just doing so because it's convenient to do so. Apart from people that are really under political oppression, those that emigrate would most likely be because of a better standard of living, weather, career opportunities or to be closer to family and friends, etc.

      Slashdot is probably the worse place to ask for immigration advice. If you want to move to a country which has good protections on privacy, free speech and civil rights in general, but you don't fight to keep those rights, then you are a net liability to that nation, whichever you might wish to choose to settle in.

      No matter how people of markets as the magical solution to everything, it is unlikely that privacy and civil liberty protections in law was drafted with immigration policy in mind.

      Freedom is not a thing, a state of being or something you can achieve. Freedom is a balance; a balance of self and society, a balance between individual satisfaction and collective well-being. When this balance is lost, then to one extreme there is oppression, or to the other there is anarchy.

    4. Re:Stay. by Dracophile · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Oops. It IS his country. He gets to moan about the state of affairs is he tries to do something about them, and if he prefers to just go somewhere else where that's been done for him then he gets to STFU.

      And you don't vote with your feet. You vote with the ballot box, the soap box, the jury box and then the ammo box of all the others have been compromised.

      --
      Athy, athier, athiest.
  27. Re:Economic Freedom by Mogster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    or Meccano

    --
    ACK NAK RST
  28. Re:Economic Freedom by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Funny

    PCs == Lego; Macs == Barbies; Linux == a pile of I-beams and a box of nuts and bolts.

    You had a deprived childhood if you don't know the term "Erector Set" and have to resort to "a pile of I-beams and a box of nuts and bolts". THOSE were fantastic toys.

    Or his corporate spyware will flag as porn anything matching the regular expression /erect*/i;

    Or he's behind the Great Firewall of China, and they come after anyone who posts about "democracy or free erections" :-)

  29. Re:I'd recommend Australia or Canada...NOT the U.S by spiffmastercow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    yeah, we socialists were definitely the ones who decided to deregulate the banks and thus cause the collapse of the entire fucking world economy! Also, I love how you're telling someone seeking freedom you don't want him here because he doesn't share your views.

  30. Re:Hope you like guns by RsG · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Where there is great freedom for you, there is great freedom for others to take advantage of you.

    It doesn't have to be that way.

    Real life governance is not some sliding scale where total anarchy is one end and Orwellian tyranny is the other. Is any social question so one dimensional? Thinking that way boxes you in, because it starts to look like a damned if you do, damned if you don't, scenario. You begin to accept corruption, because the anarchy scares you, or you embrace anarchy, because you don't see any alternative to getting rid of tyranny.

    To give you a depressing example of why this line of thinking fails, consider this. A government can be corrupt, tyrannical and totally ineffectual, all at once, such as to leave a country in a state whereby the citizenry have no freedom, and no safety. That doesn't fit anywhere into the worldview that holds anarchy and tyranny as logically opposite extremes, because, hey, you have both. Usually this comes about when a corrupt government is in a state of strife or internal warfare, while still aspiring to ironclad rule - think Afghanistan.

    The reverse is also true. An accountable government with limited, but not nonexistent, power, can run a country without falling into the pitfalls above. It must be democratic, it must be as transparent as possible, and it must have a strong judiciary backed by laws that include some sort of bill of rights or equivalent document above all others. Checks and balances are the key. Cleaning out corruption when it occurs is also vital, and failure to do so is usually what trips the whole system up.

    The problem is, and always has been, that maintaining good government is a lot of work. Bad government is the default setting when it is not fought against.

    --
    Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
  31. Re:Economic Freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    too bad economic freedom breeds economic lockdown when those who got there first build sandboxes around everyone else.

  32. Immigrating loses you rights by Deag · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You may not realize this, but if as an immigrant in a different country you will be losing rights in a way. Citizens, especially natural born ones have more rights in a country than non citizens.

    You would be losing your right to vote, you would have a risk of deportation or not being able to renew for committing a crime that may not be all the serious for a citizen. You will probably have to submit a lot of documentation to your target country.

    If you don't like your rights in the UK (which is one of the better countries to live it), just wait until your very ability to stay living where you are is basically at the whim of some bureaucrat.

    Of course if you are immigrating from a country that is actually oppressive, you won't mind it.

    I am not saying it is difficult to be live in a foreign country, I am just saying if you are someone who is so afraid of big brother, perhaps living in a foreign land is not for you.

    1. Re:Immigrating loses you rights by Deag · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is true, but you would be surprised of how difficult it can be to become a citizen in some countries.

      The traditional immigrant target countries (such as the USA, Canada) are better in granting citizenship as they have long established traditions and procedures and a well defined path in regard to it.

      Other countries though can be a bit crazy. My native country Ireland has a fairly bad citizenship path that basically boils down to "at the minister of foreign affairs discretion".

      Switzerland requires (or at least used to) that your citizenship is put up for vote in the town you live.

      And those are two European countries.

      The problem is that such procedures rarely impact the people who make the laws or the vast vast majority of voters, so reform is never much of a priority.

  33. Re:I'd recommend Australia or Canada...NOT the U.S by spiffmastercow · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Fed is a bastardized institution that benefits nobody, and has very little real power. If we had a central bank where loans were given directly to those that need them for modest interest rates, we wouldn't be in this situation. But, as usual, greed prevailed. Oh, and by the way, communism != socialism, no matter what Rush Limbaugh tells you.

  34. Switzerland and perhaps Estonia! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I recommend Switzerland. They have the most democratic and fair government system on the planet (from what I know).

    The fairness of the election in their capital city is mathematically proven to be the fairest system possible!

    The control of the government is very grassroots-style. People have the last word. (Read more about it on Wikipedia.)

    The nature there is incredibly beautiful! I recommend living on the hillside of a green valley, with huge mountains around you, with snow on top. In the summer, it is hot. In the winter there is much snow.

    And from what I saw, people are very relaxed down there. We in Germany joke about them being a bit "slow" when speaking. But that is only a result of this.

    Also I don't think there are many other places in the world, that offer you nice broadband connections, and such a clean nature (with the water you are drinking coming directly from the glaciers!)

    Even their military is so cool, they have bunkers in the hills, were they hide their modern fighter jets. And they are so independent, that they don't even need to be in the EU. (As a military pilot, you have a good chance of flying a F-19. At least a guy who actually flew one, told me this.)

    The only thing you might miss, is the ocean. For that you have to drive to Italy. (Right below it. At Venice for example.)

    I dare you to beat that package. :D

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    1. Re:Switzerland and perhaps Estonia! by D+H+NG · · Score: 2, Informative

      About 1.5 million of the 7 million people living in Switzerland are not Swiss citizens. Switzerland has some of the toughest citizenship rules in the world.

    2. Re:Switzerland and perhaps Estonia! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Considering the OP is from the UK, I should point out another thing that a british coworker who moved here (to Switzerland) said: he loves the reliability and price of public transport. You can pay about a thousand swiss francs for an yearly pass to ride on all the ZVV network, which is extremely large (this price is for the 9 o'clock pass, which is only valid starting 9AM during the week, all day on weekends and it covers a lot of places. I can basically go almost to all cities around the Zurich lake. For those I can't , there's the Half Fare card, which is extremely cheap as well and even valid in some other countries).
      As for reliability, I know that during most hours, can just go to the station close to my house and at *:16 , *:36 and *:56 there's a train at the station that goes to Zurich main station. And at *:01, *:21, *:41, there's a train in the station close to work to bring me back home. (during peak hours, it's every 10 minutes, but I avoid peak hours even here). If the train gets delayed more than a couple minutes, they make sure to broadcast apologies at all stations in the way (I've been living here for about 4 months so far and I've only seen this happen only *once* and that happened due to a little construction issue in the Zurich main station that caused delays in all the Zurich network for a day).

    3. Re:Switzerland and perhaps Estonia! by anticharisma · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I found Switzerland to be the most beautiful place on earth, but I noted an unfriendliness to the swiss that made me think that Id never truly be accepted as one of them if i tried to stay there. They have I believe some exclusivist elements to their community. Its no point being emmerced in a community that dont accept you as much as everyone else. But yeh give me a shack on the mountains and a decent internet connection and walking in the mountains where theres hot sun green grass snow and herds of goats equiped with neck mounted bells that collectively make an enchanting symphony as you hike through the alpine forests and so on....But your not one of them...your an outsider! They aint multicultural like usa uk or NZ or australia.

      --
      http://www.anticharisma.com/
    4. Re:Switzerland and perhaps Estonia! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Many people there live in small towns, far away from others. They do not see many others, except for tourists. Who in winter are very annoying, because of their stupid after-ski partys. ^^

      Just *be one of them* (do not only play it), and they will accept you way sooner. :)
      (Of course you would also keep your own traditions.)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    5. Re:Switzerland and perhaps Estonia! by aralin · · Score: 2, Funny

      I dare you to swim in the ocean anywhere near Venice :)

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
  35. Lots of choices in Europe by WARM3CH · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My favorite list: Switzerland, Netherland, Finland, Sweden, Norway. I would love to live in Switzerland myself: I love the direct democracy there, the peaceful people and the beautiful nature and very high standard of living. Another option is to become really rich! Rich people enjoy much more freedom all over the world!

  36. Costa Rica by evil_aar0n · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I asked a similar question back before the US elections, just in case Bush, er, McCain won. Someone suggested Costa Rica. Apparently, they're "America-lite." They have similar institutions - three branches of govt - but just not as useless, I guess. Land is supposed to be cheap. It has coastlines on both oceans. I don't know about immigration laws, but it shouldn't be hard to look up.

    I feel for ya, brother. Good luck.

    --
    Truth, Justice. Or the American Way.
    1. Re:Costa Rica by ctmurray · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They also don't have a standing army. I lived there for months at a time as a kid. Have to get use to the Tico mentality, nothing is worth getting too excited about, so things happen slowly. I think it would be a great place to retire.

  37. An unfortunate choice of words.... by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2, Funny

    .....beautiful women on every corner and lots of entertainment... Most of all, you won't find a city offering that much for that cheap!

    I don't think that quite conjures up the picture of Montreal that you had in mind.

  38. Re:Economic Freedom by VanderJagt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Oh, I definintely recommend the Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom. Everyone must remember that economic freedom -is- personal freedom, and conservatism is the reduction of government. These words have become corrupted, as has the idea of "freedom". I urge you to consider the Heritage Foundation to be an excellent source of truth in our political world.

    To answer the topic question, I want to remind you how much of a duty you have to your fellow countryman. If possible, you need to stand up and change things, as a country full of people who don't do that will get trampled on by the first bully it encounters. And bullies are the ones who crave power. As a last resort, though, "voting with your feet" is effective, so long as you're willing to fight for your principles in your new country.

    And I love your sig. I need to remember that.

    -Ben Vander Jagt, a Ron Paul and Campaign For Liberty supporter

  39. Thoughts from a world traveler... by catapult01 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have lived on the east coast of the US, the west coast (in Silicon Valley), your fine country (in London, 2 years), and southern Chile (1 year. I arrived speaking no Spanish and was able to converse after about 4 months of constant studying/practicing).

    I think you'll find that if you leave your country for a freer country, you will find things in the new country that bother you just as much, if not more, than what you left behind. Don't get me wrong, I have very much enjoyed living in different countries. But I do find that every country is the same in that there are things you love and hate. It may seem obvious when I say it now, but if you really accept that ahead of time, you'll have a better experience, rather than just viewing it as going to a freer/better/whatever country.

    As for job opportunities, if you've got the skills and have the will, and patience, to make it work, then it will work out. Silicon Valley is still hiring and moving along just fine, despite the economic crisis (at least from what I can tell so far, having just returned from Chile).

    I am, obviously, recommending Silicon Valley in California. You'll find each state in the US is pretty distinct. I used to joke that when I moved from the east to the west coast that I moved to a different country. California is a great place to be. I've never lived anywhere that I felt more free. New York City would probably also be to your liking, if you are a big city person.

    But to keep it in perspective, I would also love to live in London again.

    Whatever you decide to do, I wish you all the best in your travels.

  40. Learn a language! by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Funny

    I live in the US and have looked at migrating to another country. Of course one that speaks english.

    Why "of course"? Are you incapable of learning another language? It is certainly a barrier but by no means an insurmountable one especially if you build on one of the foreign languages you learnt at school. Besides there is a non-negligible (but admittedly far smalller) language barrier between English and American so if you do move to an English speaking country you will still have to learn new vocabulary and, if your job involves written reports, how to spell. Failure to do so will provide you colleagues with many hours of amusement....

    1. Re:Learn a language! by Heebie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can attest to this, having migrated from the U.S. to the Republic of Ireland. The percentage of my vocabulary I have had to re-learn is definitely significant. Doing crossword puzzles from local newspapers in tandem with my native co-workers at lunch remains a huge help towards this end. After three years, there is still plenty of new/amended vocabulary for me to discover.

    2. Re:Learn a language! by cpghost · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why "of course"? Are you incapable of learning another language?

      What? I thought they'd speak PHP everywhere... Or was it Java?

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    3. Re:Learn a language! by Linzer · · Score: 5, Funny

      I live in the US and have looked at migrating to another country. Of course one that speaks english.

      Why "of course"? Are you incapable of learning another language?

      What part of "I live in the US" do you not understand?

      --
      Gravitation is a theory, not a fact.
  41. New Zealand Immigrant - Consider Many Things by michaelnz · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I'm an American that emigrated to New Zealand about 4 years ago and I might be able to share some insight from my experience. When you're choosing a country to emigrate to there are a lot of different aspects to take in to consideration and if you get hung up on just one, like privacy, civil liberties, language, environment or standard of living you're unlikely to be happy after the mood.

    When I meet new immigrants that don't take in to consideration a wide variety of factors in deciding whether or not a country is right for them they inevitably end up disappointed. Emigrating is huge emotional and financial commitment so I'd recommend spending an extended period of time in the country, either on a work visa or studying. On top of that the amount of paperwork to immigrate to any country is crazy unless, even for just a work visa. If you do settle for a long term work visa there's always the unsettling feeling that you can't truly lay down roots in a country which can be stressful.

    If you're considering particularly New Zealand (I don't know if you are but we get a large number of poms coming over here) there are some specifics to think of:

    -We're small so if you like big cities our biggest is pretty small by most country's standards.
    -Internet and technology is expensive here. Our iPhone plans (just as for comparison) on Vodafone are the most expensive in the world
    -We are a multicultural society, Maoris, Europeans, Asians and many others call this country home, if you're intolerant you'll have a hard time here
    -Wages are lower here and taxes are higher, you get a lot for it, including a good health care system and a no-fault society accident coverage, but you're disposable income will probably be less then what you make for the same work in other countries
    -New Zealand is a long ways away from other countries, it's expensive to get anywhere from her

    Things are nice here and I love it. I don't regret it at all. If you're interested in learning more about New Zealand immigration check out http://www.emigratenz.org/ and http://www.immigration.govt.nz/ It'd probably also be advisable to speak to an immigration lawyer, but unless you've got the extra cash, you can definitely do all the paperwork on your own.

  42. More sunlight... by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Edmonton, Alberta would be the northernmost city in North America

    Completely correct: in Edmonton we get considerably more sunlight than where I grew up in Yorkshire, UK (about 0.5 deg latitude north of Liverpool). The main reason being that we actually get a lot of sun! What is very nice about Edmonton is that the summers are like a warm UK summer with lots of sunny days. Coming from the UK I used to find the summers in places like Chicago unbearable - extremely oppressive heat (30+C) and humidity (70+%) meant that rather than sit outside on a sunny summer day you wanted to stay inside with the air conditioner on maximum.

    Of course nothing is free...the price you pay for the fantastic summers is a somewhat protracted and slightly nippy winter: -35C (before wind chill!) is common - but only for a few days. The snow usually melts in late April and the winters are at generally bright and sunny so there are some beautiful winter days to enjoy (just wrap up warm!). Having emigrated here from the UK I can thoroughly recommend it. I lived for a while in the US found their actual cultural values (not those they espouse) to be extremely different to mine which made it very hard/impossible to fit in - I always felt very much the foreigner. Canadian society has values that (at least from my point of view) are far more in line with European ones and I found it very easy to fit in and integrate into society here, especially since Canadians are so welcoming.

  43. Re:Economic Freedom by Bill+Dog · · Score: 2, Funny

    As a child my only "Erector Set" was my friend's dad's stack of Playboys you insensitive clod!

    --
    Attention zealots and haters: 00100 00100
  44. Fine print by apankrat · · Score: 2, Informative

    1. In Vancouver it rains only once, but for 6 months. Oct/Nov through Mar/Apr.
    2. Unbelievably expensive real estate.

    A very nice place otherwise.

    --
    3.243F6A8885A308D313
  45. You've already broken your search by Zylogue · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Distance is not an issue, though a reasonable level of stability and provision of public services would be a bonus."

    This alone limits your freedoms.

    Look at it this way, the more 'services' a government provides, then the more government there is. Consider how 'free' the UK or the US were 10, 20, and 50 years ago. Look into the size of their respective governments and how much the current governments 'supply' as services. With the increase of services the more restrictive the government becomes so the services are more needed. Government, when left to a general populace so easily swayed by FUD as the Brits and the Americans (which I am one) are, will always grow and become self-perpetuating.

    Zylogue

  46. Re:Not the U.S. by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2, Funny

    When life gives you Raptors, make Raptorade.

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  47. If you are rich by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A good place to start is usually economic freedom.

    ...but only if you are rich otherwise it is no freedom at all.

  48. re: Pacific NW by leftie · · Score: 5, Funny

    Eww...that right winger's correct. I live in Portland. Nothing here but rainy days, drug-addict-littered streets, and us communists. You right wingers should stay away.You'd hate it here.

    And tell your friends not to come, either.

  49. Re:Economic Freedom by Trepidity · · Score: 2, Informative

    Uhh, that's not true at all, if we're going to be complaining about words being corrupted here. Conservatism is historically the philosophy of a strong government that is specifically oriented towards protecting (i.e. conserving) the social status quo, public order, respect for tradition, a strong Nation, and public morals. The American founding fathers were mostly liberals in the liberal-conservative debates of their day, which is one reason there's a bit of confusion. Things like the banning of "obscene" literature, sodomy laws, blasphemy laws, anti-Communist laws, mandatory pledges of allegiance, and similar, are continuations of that conservative tradition though.

  50. Conservatives and ID Cards by dannywoodz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Interesting that two of your concerns about the UK are mandatory ID cards and a future Conservative government, given that the two are mutually exclusive.

  51. At a guess.. by malkavian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're under 30, and never really lived under a conservative government.. The current one loves to spin, lie, and rely on knee jerk fear to shape the populace.. All the restrictions on liberty you mention are proposed by the current government and actually opposed by the one you're afraid of? What's that logic? There is a government that will likely give back some freedom, but you don't want them because they're tre bogeyman because labour tell you so?

  52. Norway by C4st13v4n14 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just to correct a little of what you said. Norway values privacy, but yet publishes everyone's name, age, income, tax paid, and wealth information on the internet that is accessible to everyone. No, I'm not giving out the URL, I'm on there, too. Norway, in theory, values freedom of speech, but enforces divergent opinions and speech socially. If you say something that Norwegians don't like, they'll let you know it through passive aggression.

    It is legal to monitor internet use, but they've just stopped renewing the licences given to law firms to do this. Effectively, you could already share files and download as much as you want without fear of prosecution, but now the "large filesharers" don't have to worry, either.

    Norway does have a high tax rate. We all pay a minimum of 36% tax, but most people pay 50%. Foreigners are able to take 10% off this up to a certain sum for their first two years here. As of 2003, you are no longer able to import your own car tax and duty free. You can drive a foreign-registered car for up to a year, apply for a one-year extension, but then you're out of luck. The average car here is 3-4x more expensive than in the United States, but it depends on weight, engine size, and CO2 discharge of the car. A new Range Rover that costs 70 000$US will cost almost 500 000$US here.

    Health care is not free. Every time you see your GP or go to the "triage" centre for emergencies (legevakt) you have to pay a co-pay (egenandel) that isn't a trivial amount and varies according to the time of day and other things http://www.nav.no/page?id=354
    Sick pay and short- and long-term disability is what really sets Norway apart from the rest of the world, but this is seriously abused. You can get a couple of weeks paid time-off for "problems with your neighbours" and very mild miscellaneous psychiatric diagnoses.

    The 5-weeks holiday is not exactly mandatory, you do not have to take it, but you will be taxed at 50% for any work you do whilst you should be away, so almost everyone goes away. Depending on where you live, you get, for example, 12% of your salary so that you can go away on holiday. I will not attempt to explain how this works because it's very complicated, look up "ferieloven" if you want to know more.

    Maternity leave is 12 months, minimum of 4 weeks for dad. The part about alcohol, which fits in nicely with a discussion about maternity leave, was accurately reported already. A bottle of 20$US spirits (liquor) will cost 100$US here at the State-owned and run off-licence (or liquor store). Interestingly, Sweden has to do away with these now as they are against the European Union's ideas of free trade.

    The Winter here is quite depressing ALL THE TIME. If you don't like winter, then seriously do not come to Norway. This last one was hell, even in the southern part of Norway. Snow and cold every day for nearly six months! Dark, overcast days...you're asking for psychological problems if you are in any way affected by the cold and lack of light.

    The poster I'm replying to mentioned "hoockers" (sic). You don't need hookers in Norway. It's number one in terms of one night stands. You literally just go out, buy some girls some drinks, and if they're in the mood, they'll ask you to go home with them. If they aren't and you are, then it's slightly more complicated. It involves getting drunk together at least twice.

    The problems with Norway that can make living here unbearable are as follows. The Norwegian people up until 30 years ago were just farmers. They had no money, no culture, a poorly expressive language... Now, suddenly, there's a lot of money. The problem is, the farmer mentality prevails. There are, of course, exceptions, but the majority of the country is xenophobic, naïve, and follows the rules blindly. The people are very closed to outsiders, you as a foreigner will never be treated as an equal no matter how long you live here. In order to make Norwegian friends, you wil

    1. Re:Norway by BalleClorin · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you pay 50% or even more in taxes that means you have a high salary. There is something called toppskatt that means that if you make more than NOK 441.670 == EUR 48770,98 You pay about 50% of what you make over that. Normal people pay 36% minus deductions. So I could agree that beeing rich in Norway kind of sucks unless you are a social democrat, but for the average worker it's great. Sure the health system is not perfect, and will never be, but it's still great. And, we still complain...

      According to "ferieloven" 5-1 the employer is required to make sure the employee takes at least 25 working days of vacation. The same section also says that the employee has to use the vacation.

      The fathers part of the birth leave has been raised from four to five and now six weeks.

      I agree with you about that Norwegians are not good at expressing feelings etc. and the Norwegian language lacks a lot of words. That does not mean that Norwegians in general are unfriendly, but it's in our nature not to talk to strangers unless it's strictly necessary. And I understand why that to a foreigner might seem unfriendly or even rude. I actually struggle some times to find adequate Norwegian words, and have to substitute them with english ones.

      www.nav.no and most of the forms are available in among others english language.

      Datatilsynet is an organization that makes sure your privacy is not violated, and has the power to stop surveillance and other privacy violations within the boundary of the law.

      I live south of the polar circle, but not in Oslo as I guess you do, and here it never gets dark in the summer even though the sun sets. And the winter is not all that depressing, there's a lot of outdoor activities you can't do in warmer countries.

  53. Come to Italy! by Silvio+Berlusconi · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm working hard as Italy's Prime Minister to build a country where your criminal record counts as a job resume. Therefore if you're a thief, a drugs dealer, a money launderer for the Mafia, a murderer or simply someone who cheats on his wife using government's money to hire high rank escorts and let them fly on government's planes, you will have a high chance to become an honorable citizen over here and maybe also get a government job. To be honest, you could get badly beaten by our police if you talk in public about such nonsenses as democracy or freedom, and no newspaper or tv news would give a slight detail about that because I own them as well, but these are details only subversive communists should be concerned about. The country I'm building will be really nice to the right people like you.

  54. Counterpoint by subreality · · Score: 2, Insightful

    While I've stayed where I am through thick and thin, I have a Plan B in case things get worse. At some point, I may need to accept that the majority of the population where I am disagrees with my values, and are also willing to stand up for what they believe in.

    Why shouldn't I let them have their country the way they want it, and go somewhere more in line with the way I want things to be?

  55. None. Stay and fight by swordgeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Governments around the world are tightening the reins on their citizens. The only reason they can get away with it is because the citizens are allowing it.

    I would say stay and fight your government. Fight the oppression. Fight for fundamental rights and freedoms. If people stand up for themselves, the corrupt and power-hungry politicians will have to capitulate, and the pendulum will start to swing the other way again. For now, at least--governments will always want more control over the populace, and the only way to stop them is CONSTANT VIGILANCE!!!

    But if you leave, then things _will_ get more restrictive, because you are letting them. Then in Germany or New Zealand or Canada or anywhere else, they will start to feel pressure from the USA, Australia, and UK to tighten things up. The US is putting pressure on Canada to tighten its "lax" laws on immigration, copyright protection, and several other issues. If you walk away from the UK (or anywhere else), then it becomes harder for the countries that are more free to stay that way.

    Stay. Fight. WIN! And send a postcard from your newly open native country.

    --

    "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  56. Re:My Guess by petrus4 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd say the US comes closest to real freedom.

    I'm honestly trying to understand, here. How is it that there is a single American left in existent, who still believes this?

    Seriously, Americans; what will have to happen for you to finally stop drinking the ideological Kool-Aid which your education system pours down your throats? Will a future government literally have to start shooting you in the streets before you grow out of the fairy tales that you were raised with?

    If the mythology about American freedom was ever true, it certainly isn't after the second Bush government. You've proven that your government is no better than any other tyranny on the face of the planet, morally speaking. The only real difference is that they're slightly less blatant, and more careful about making sure they don't get caught.

  57. When liberal isn't liberal by tepples · · Score: 2

    The word that you really want to describe yourself is "liberal." The root word being liberty. That is, concerned with freedom. That may include economic freedom, or it may not. But if your primary concern is with freedom, you are a liberal, not a conservative.

    Perhaps "liberal" refers to freedom in some countries. But in the United States, it has come to mean "socialist" since the New Deal. And in order to support socialist ideals like universal health care, many socialist regimes limit the personal freedom to experiment with substances such as cannabis.

  58. How can they know about the outside world??? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 2, Insightful

    With all the ongoing censorship?

    I lived in Kuala Lumpur for a few years, and I have to say that your vision of Malaysia is quite rosy.

    Lets forget about the religious police and the de facto apartheid that exists in the country, you have no access to a free press of any denomination.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  59. Privacy? Easy, Greece is #1 by Ecuador · · Score: 2, Informative

    I didn't really have to read the privacy report which ranks Greece at a comfortable #1. I come from Greece and I happen to know first hand how obsessed the "Personal Data Protection Agency" is with privacy. I actually find it silly that they won't even allow google street view, or even police cameras in public spaces. The only area where Greece does not rank higher in privacy is telecommunications, my guess is due to the fact that there was a well known wiretapping case. Of course the fact that the wiretaps were on politicians of all parties and especially of the governing party kind of tells you that it was not the Greeks who were doing the wiretapping (if you get my drift). But I digress. Anyway, after 6 years in NYC I am going back to Greece as well. My wife especially is sick of the feeling she gets that she is in "1984" (your belongings are subject to search, thumbprints please etc), and of course the climate is really annoying to both of us. We briefly considered going to the UK, however we have the same concerns you have, plus the Greek climate cannot be beat. Well, actually it can be equaled by Spain and Italy, but people don't speak English there, whereas most not too old people speak English in Greece. Now, the wages are much lower than the UK, however people manage to have a much better quality of life than, for example, most parts of the US, and housing, services etc are not as expensive.

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS