Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Where would you rather live and why? England or Australia? watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HDS)
    Also - It wasn't voted second best place to live, it just ranked second on HDI, which, as mentioned before, is a hideously poor measure.
    All major Australian cities were ranked among the top 10 most livable. None from the UK. And any explanation on why the HDI is "hideous"? I thought it was a pretty excellent way to measure quality of life.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EskimoJo)
    For me it is. That's why I said it.
    No, it's a statement, it's the end without the means. Perhaps if you expanded why your (i presume) nationalistic ideologue warrants such prejudice?
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by neodymium)
    All major Australian cities were ranked among the top 10 most livable. None from the UK. And any explanation on why the HDI is "hideous"? I thought it was a pretty excellent way to measure quality of life.


    It isn't.



    Look at how it's calculated. In a hypothetical country where everyone was immortal and had infinite money but were illiterate and uneducated the HDI would be below South Africa and Tajikistan.


    + Look at the fave statistic of OP, Crime, it's FAR higher in australia, so arguably the cities are less liveable.


    As I said it's a matter of preference and prefrence alone. Statistics are relatively useless.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_D...dex#Criticisms


    I lived in Canada most my life, i promise you it has no place as #4 in HDI. Britain is by far superior in every way, I've lived in both:yep:



    P.s. Australia has 1 city in the top ten most liveable. If you're going to say something like that make sure your facts are right.

    http://www.mercer.com/referenceconte...8060#Top50_qol


    Also again from exprience - Toronto is LESS liveable than Luxembourg having lived in both rich and ghetto areas in both cities.
    Offline

    12
    Probably the UK still, I'd choose to live in America if I was going to go anywhere. I've been to Australia for a month on holiday and did love it though.

    I wiki'ed Aussie the other day and was quite impressed by their free-market economy, which has brought them a lot of growth year on year for a long time now, and the recession didn't hit them.

    Their restrictions on things like video games and porn sound nutty though.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HDS)
    It isn't.
    Look at how it's calculated. In a hypothetical country where everyone was immortal and had infinite money but were illiterate and uneducated the HDI would be below South Africa and Tajikistan.
    The only funny part is that there aren't any hypothetical countries like that, isn't it?

    + Look at the fave statistic of OP, Crime, it's FAR higher in australia, so arguably the cities are less liveable.
    Source?

    As I said it's a matter of preference and prefrence alone. Statistics are relatively useless.
    Not when you use wrong stats to back your preference.

    P.s. Australia has 1 city in the top ten most liveable. If you're going to say something like that make sure your facts are right.
    According to the Economist, Melbourne, Perth and Sydney are among the world's top 10 most livable cities.

    I don't disagree with your preference (neither do I've that right). But I would much rather live in Australia than the UK.
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by neodymium)
    The only funny part is that there aren't any hypothetical countries like that, isn't it?
    The point was that the HDI excludes very important things. Think of it like league tables for unis.


    Source?
    See above, I included some sources in a post responding to OP, all crime rates are simmilar if not higher (MUCH MUCH higher in the case of rape)


    Not when you use wrong stats to back your preference.



    According to the Economist, Melbourne, Perth and Sydney are among the world's top 10 most livable cities.

    I don't disagree with your preference (neither do I've that right). But I would much rather live in Australia than the UK.

    The rankings vary, however the Economist is the only one to include more than one Australian city in the top 10.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World's_most_livable_cities




    Everyone has their own preferences, thats why being human is awesome I just don't like flawed stats being used as 'proof'.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jeremy_Whiskers)
    No, it's a statement, it's the end without the means. Perhaps if you expanded why your (i presume) nationalistic ideologue warrants such prejudice?
    No. It may be a statement to you, but it's my reason. I don't see where prejudice comes into it. I think you may be seeing something in my reason that isn't there.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UNITUTS)
    Aussie land, simply because I am Aussie.
    Same, but opposite!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If you're more of an outdoors type, Australia will win hands down. Keep in mind though that Australia is far more culturally scarce than Britain and many folk, along with myself find it rather boring and shallow beneath the surface. After spending 25 years of my life there, I couldn't wait to get out of the place and would only consider returning again to see family and friends. For me personally, I love England.

    I think it really comes down to personality and your lifestyle more than crime statistics and quality of life surveys. I knew of quite a few British families who moved back to Britain when Aussie land didn't turn out to be a place they really wanted to be after all. People with trades will find Australia to be much more rewarding financially though.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apotheosis)
    A) Your information is still totally irrelevant, I don't think that interfering in people's sexuality in such a pervasive manner causes them to revere the police more or commit less crimes.
    B) Your reply is still asinine.
    C) My "fascist government" comment was a hyperbole to illustrate my distaste for their authoritarian legislation.

    I know it's hard to detect some things when they're not explicitly stated for you, but do try.


    Haha, so you provided information that was both irrelevant and ********? Great.
    Aren't you so terribly clever with your big words? Your replies are so mundane and childishly over written. If you are going to insult me, then insult me. Don't use words you think I wont understand you cretin and learn to have a real arguement. You may be a disgusting little geek who can calculate standard deviation in their head but when it comes to, being 'life smart', you are seriously lacking. Never over-complicate your arguement with big words because your opponent will just bring you down to their level and then beat you with experience, just as I am doing. For example, your point A is, for want of a better word, unreadable. I have no idea what you are trying to tell me. Go away and seriously re-think your life, paper-smart helps but so does having friends and you are quite clearly an unfriendly person. I hope I have given you something to think about in that strange mind of yours, and gosh, I seem to have gone through my reply without using five words with over 3 syllables in every sentence.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HDS)
    People also say english food is ****, while I absolutely adore it.


    Overall it's a matter of preference.



    Also - It wasn't voted second best place to live, it just ranked second on HDI, which, as mentioned before, is a hideously poor measure.
    we'll call this one a truce
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by dude55)
    we'll call this one a truce
    :yep:


    To each their own.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Okay I may be unjustifiably buying in to the stereotype but most Australians come across as racist, bigoted retards, so England, well the UK, England's not a country.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    We have the better tennis tournament.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Calm yourself, its not healthy to be so pro Australia.
    The nice comment and negative rep (which is actually neutral as I didn't lose any points) that I receive for my post. :mute:

    I wouldn't normally reply like this but given no name was left or a real explanation I kind of have no choice.

    There was a few stretches of the truth presented in this thread which in context where correct (i.e. weather some parts do have seasons and are not always hot) but without vastly incorrect. Likewise on the deadly insects and reptiles on a whole the majority of the populate and tourists especially will only see him in exhibits (unless in the bush/outback).

    Anyway I wasn't being "pro" Australia, my country like any other does in fact have its issues and problems (recent racist assaults in Melbourne for instance). However I can only assume because of the miss information some posters were not posting from facts or experience and were taking things out of context, I was merely setting context and correcting information.

    /rant.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Get rid of all the Australians and I'm sold.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apotheosis)
    tl;dr, too full of effusive anger. Making up random things about me doesn't detract from the fact that 1.you fabricated statistics to support your argument.

    I'm still right, though. I'd rather live in a country which is still kind of a liberal democracy rather than a country 2.fast approaching a controlling paternalistic mess.

    P.S.: The phrase 3."big words", just wow considering you accuse me of childishness. Reviewing my post I can see I used two quasi-uncommon words. 4.If you're unable to understand my post either your vocabulary is small (evidently) or you're just too stupid to use a dictionary (again, evidently). Perhaps reading a little more would solve your problem?
    1. I admitted I was wrong about the statistics? So why have you brought this into the arguement again?

    2. You are obviously very opinionated about things which you have absolutely no right to comment on. You haven't studied the government of Australia in depth, nor are you a politician. So why do you think you are justified in making such brass remarks?

    3. You really are clutching at straws here aren't you? Is this the best you can come up with? I used this phrase to emphasise the non-necessity of using stupidly long words, as you did. Simple style is the best way to communicate a message, it is built into the foundations of debate. I would know, seeing as I have completed a pre-undergrad course in English and Debate.

    4. I don't recall ever once saying that I didn't understand your post, I just commented on how over-written it was, so much so it seemed childish. You are just making assumptions here. Now who is the one fabricating the truth?

    I am really getting quite bored having to critisise everything you write, is there any chance of you giving a good arguement soon? All you seem to do is make one uneducated, unjustified point and I am continually having to embarrass this point, as well as all of the other rubbish you talk about. Hope not to hear from you soon,

    Kind Regards
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apotheosis)
    Apropos, I wouldn't have guessed that you've done any kind of course in English and debate from your fabrication of statistics, expression and misspelling of common words.

    1. I'm analysing your reasons for being so angry at irrelevant details such as my writing style (I laughed at you and called your statistics ********). And you did seem genuinely angry, not just benevolently concerned about my writing style, because you used so many ad hominem attacks against me.

    2. "You are obviously very opinionated about things which you have absolutely no right to comment on."
    Of course I do, partly because I have a right to express my opinion on this and any matter. But mostly because the policies of the government of Australia have over time become consistently more authoritarian. Therefore, my comments are both sensible and justified.

    3. My word choice in its current form poses no barriers to A) those with reasonably large vocabularies B) those able to use dictionaries or Google's definition tool, so I believe I'll continue to use it since I appreciate a wide range of vocabulary in what other people write. And as I said earlier, (perhaps not so apropos really), your posts sound so burbling and are so erroneous in simple spelling that I simply do not care what qualifications you have in any subject.

    4. "I don't recall ever once saying that I didn't understand your post"
    You said "your point A is, for want of a better word, unreadable. I have no idea what you are trying to tell me.", if you understand, why don't you have any idea what I'm trying to tell you? Amnesia? Or is that you understood but earlier covered up this point in order to make your criticism of me seem more credible? Or did you genuinely forget that you said "I have no idea what you are trying to tell me."?

    I do quite hope to hear from you, by the way! If you don't care to talk to me, just stop responding, but I don't mind at all. I dare say it'd be sensible for you to stop posting now, but I can't say I'm not enjoying myself.
    Misspelling of common words? You don't seem to have given any examples of misspelled words, although I will admit I am using safari, an American web browser which quite frequently changes some words to the American version. I hope this has cleared that up for you, if not, I am more than willing to accept my spelling errors, if you give me some examples. This is called evidence and you need it to justify what you are saying.
    Again you go back to the fabrication of statistics arguement. I did point out in my previous post that I had accepted that fact, Amnesia? Or did you just add it in to make your arguement more credible? If this is the fact, then it really is wearing thin.
    Maybe you misinterpreted my point about justifying your views. What I am trying to tell you is that your opinion is shallow due to your lack of experience and knowledge. I have never studied medicine, so I would not try and diagnose someone. It is a similar situation with you, I guess, you have never studied politics at degree level or had any work published on Government policy. Therefore, your opinion lacks credibility. If you want to back it up with published views then please do, I have absolutely no problem with this, but you seem to be constantly making this point about the Australian government with no evidence at all.
    As for not understanding your post, I was quite specificly referring to your point A, that was only one sentence? Your post I understood, but the sentence I referred to was the hideous sounding jumble of syllables. Your over-exaggeration is starting to seem desperate.
    Also, can we stop with the dictionary comment, I don't care if you use long words, I just pointed out how ridiculous they can sometimes sound.

    I think that just about covers every arguement you put to me in you last post. Seeing as your enjoying yourself so much, I shall expect a reply soon. But, if having an arguement with someone on a forum is what pleases you, the you seriously need to get out more. I am certainly not amused. But, alas, we both seem to be addicted to replying, this is what happens when the immovable object is hit by the unstoppable force. Game on!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    England. Australia is too hot and I don't really like barbeque food.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apotheosis)
    Examples of misspellings across your last few posts (correct spellings in bold):
    Argument instead of "arguement".
    Criticise instead of "critisise".
    Australia, England instead of "aus", "england".
    I've instead of "i've".
    That's instead of "thats".
    Specifically instead of "specificly".
    You're instead of "your", which I've highlighted in the post I'm quoting when it was used in the wrong context.
    NB: None of these spellings are acceptable in American English; all misspellings (even those due to laziness) have been purposely included in accordance with what you asked for.

    You really are very obtuse, it's wearing. Fun to argue when someone can understand the points you're making and is able to look past their random pro-Australian bias, not so fun otherwise. Here's a quick run-through of bits you didn't understand:
    - The fabrication of statistics was mentioned because A) I was doubting your ability at debate after you referenced your English and debate qualification and B) I was explaining to you why I kept bringing it up: I was analysing why you were so angry at me over irrelevant details such as my writing style. All of this is in the post you quoted.
    - What you suggest means that no one without a politics degree or with published work on government policy (which can be heinously uninformed depending on the author) can have a valid opinion on anything political. To use your fairly silly medicine argument: when I see the symptoms of a cold, I know it's a cold; when I see the symptoms of a budding authoritarian government, I know it's a budding authoritarian government. It's staring you straight in the face:
    http://www.inquisitr.com/59472/milli...e-ejaculation/
    The group Reporters Without Borders has also sent an open letter to Kevin Rudd:
    http://www.rsf.org/spip.php?page=art..._article=35379
    Ask yourself, why is there this concern over freedom in Australia from groups such as Reporters Without Borders? That letter shows that Google also questioned Australia's censorship plans. Again, why is there this concern?
    - How convenient that you apparently just didn't understand one line, however, saying "I understand the post" suggests a complete understanding. It's a contradiction to say you did not understand one part of it then say "I understood the post", because you understood the post except for the part you didn't understand. It's omission of information, and vague - even though you've already stated it you would have done very well to include the fact that you are incapable of reading certain simple sentences when you again made reference to the post's readability. Do you understand? Saying something that belies something you said earlier is confusing to other people. I'm willing to accept why you thought you were being clear, but you weren't. And of course, that sentence is perfectly easy and syllables have nothing to do with the difficulty of understanding a sentence - just because I think something sounds clumsy doesn't generally detract from my overall understanding.


    I can't say I want to take your advice on personal issues either, because going through your posts shows an Australia fetish and a few threads asking specifically for "girls" advice. Which is neither here nor there, but I laughed. How pathetic. Moreover, I'm home in the evening on a Tuesday night amusing myself on a forum - where am I to go out? I generally like to sleep before school instead of embarking upon a night out.

    P.S.: If your next post includes any of the following:
    - Denial of your spelling mistakes.
    - Confusion over why the fabrication of statistics was mentioned again.
    - Refusal to accept that concern over Australia's internet censorship by groups such as Reporters Without Borders and Google is extremely notable and worrying.
    - Assertions that "understanding" is the same as "understanding everything but one line" are the same thing considering that my thoughts on the Australian government's authoritarianism was an important part of the post.
    I will stop posting. You really are a miracle of stupidity.

    There are no miracles here. I will keep this one short due to an unexpected illness, that's right, your opponent has been weakened from his once great sovereignty. It seems you were correct, 3 incorrect words did slip past my eyes, but typo's I am not willing to except as spelling errors, and let this be the end of that.
    I am genuinely not angry with the mentioning of the fabrication of statistics comment. I was just curious as to it's constant reappearance. You mentioned it once, I admitted I was incorrect. That should have been the end of it, after that it just seems irrelevant.
    I did not use the word valid once when talking about your opinion. I never said your opinion was wrong, all I wanted to see was some well grounded evidence for what you were saying, which you have now provided, and as promised in my last post, I now have no problem with this.
    When I said I understood your post, I should have made myself extremely clear, I am trying to say I easily read your post for gist. But that sentence was sinful to English essay writing.
    The syllables comment was a joke, I used it to emphasise your use of long words.

    I think I have kept within your ultimatum. Although, I don't recall ever saying that there weren't concerns over Australia's government policy, I just wanted some evidence from yourself seeing as you employ that opinion.
    Due to the fact that this may be the last time we communicate, it is only polite to say goodbye. If some very, far greater power has decided this to be the end, then have a nice life you argumentative ****.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.