Best country to live in?

Title: Uh, I think we have more "nature" than Singapore, not that it matters that much though.

Hey, Compared to singapore, you have a long way to go in being eco friendly buddy.

Singapore is "eco-friendly?" Huh? When did that happen?

I thought Singapore was mostly all city, with towering highrises, and little of nature left, sort of like the futuristic The Jetsons cartoon. Not that that is "bad" or anything?

Oh yeah, I suppose you could count banning chewing gum, as eco-friendly to sidewalks? I hope they have similarly banned those nasty cancer stick cigarettes as well?
 
Title: Wouldn't it be easier, for most of us, to just stay where we are?

Lebanon is torn by a multitude of extremism, from all factions.
If you want the best of Lebanon without the violence, go to Syria! Same land, better cities, better economy and best of all, extremism is punished so it's hella safer.

Greece is beautiful. While I have never been there, you can, with some visual aid see Greece from Syria and you can travel there if you want by boat

Also Italy is beautiful but I've never been there

I was wondering when somebody would pick up on, that I said nothing negative about Syria. Mainly out of ignorance of what negative I should rant about, however.

But I was thinking, maybe I should give Syria credit for a more naturally high birthrate? Perhaps people still love their children there?

Italy? I wouldn't want to be in some country responsible for the triple axis-of-evil of World War 2. Didn't Mussulini (spelling?) dictator of Italy, try with Nazi Germany, to take over the entire world? That would be impossible, without the complicity of the gullible Italians.

And Greece probably has too many pagans, or at least the people talk funny?

I would rather go to Africa or Asia, where there is either lots of people or lots of babies being born, than to socialistic European Union. What a horrible "experiment" doomed to failure soon. At least we don't seem to be quite as far along, on the globalist socialist path to our potential destruction? Or are we?
 
Title: Yeah, but is Singapore currently welcoming outsiders to come and join them?



From what I hear, Singapore might be a great place to live, if you already happen to live there.

Very clean and civilized society, or so I hear?

But they have an extreme population density, crammed all on some little island. 40 times the population density of China. At least they deserve much credit for having the intelligence to encourage more childbearing, now that the devastation on natural population growth, of the rampant contraceptive peddlers has taken its toll, under the guise of the so-called "demographic transition" theory. So maybe they are even family-friendly these days?

But never having actually visited Singapore, I liken it a bit too much, to the scenario something like in the movie "Total Recall." In which proper colonization of Mars, is somehow thwarted or delayed, by a stupid ruling class mismanaging the resources, until they get "liberated" at the end of the movie. If ever bad rulers take hold, what problems then might be somewhat aggravated, by the extreme population density? Affordable housing, but only for the rich? Manufactured energy shortages? In comparison, the U.S. has lots of greatly underutilized land. People might even be able to hide out in the mountains for years, avoiding detection? We might just have a few more options, if the sorry liberals/socialists/communists and eco-freak/green-nazis don't soon wreck everything for us.

Anyway, right now, with low wages after taxes, I can't quite afford to check out Singapore as to whether they be a good place to live. And what good would it do, if they aren't so much into welcoming immigrants?

They welcome everyone, Unless you have a criminal record or are hunted. As with all first world countries, people from other first world countries are accepted more easily than others. Also , since they encourage foreign investment, expatriates from the USA, Australia and UK have lived there for ages.

The chances of bad rulers taking place is slim, Although the same party has been in power, It is still a democracy and any alternative to a bad ruler or changes to the lifestyle of its citizens can be countered.

As for Population density, It is manageable with capable infrastructure and resources. Currently land reclamation is underway to the south of the island, and eco friendly buildings are being built on sentosa, Pulau Ubin and other islands. Singapore is like any big city in the US, without the pollution, crime and racism.

You've correctly pointed out the problem of land, but the small size allows for tighter border security and interdiction so it works both ways. Since it isn't in conflict with any country, no one is going to nuke it despite its high density population.
 
Hey, Compared to singapore, you have a long way to go in being eco friendly buddy.

I'm at work, so I could only glance briefly over the wikipedia article. By what way have they become 17th wealthiest country?

Again, your promotion of Singapore is very subjective. To someone, it might be more important that they're only 17th wealthiest and that they're too close to the equator. The OP is really a stupid question....
 
Title: Uh, I think we have more "nature" than Singapore, not that it matters that much though.



Singapore is "eco-friendly?" Huh? When did that happen?

I thought Singapore was mostly all city, with towering highrises, and little of nature left, sort of like the futuristic The Jetsons cartoon. Not that that is "bad" or anything?

Oh yeah, I suppose you could count banning chewing gum, as eco-friendly to sidewalks? I hope they have similarly banned those nasty cancer stick cigarettes as well?

Eco friendly, Low emissions, Cars are regulated strictly. Buses powered by natural gas. SMRT safest in the world.
Recycled water. Carbon emissions lowest amongst developed countries.

Littering is banned, and Singapore is among the first Asian countries to ban smoking in bars etc.
 
Last edited:
I'm at work, so I could only glance briefly over the wikipedia article. By what way have they become 17th wealthiest country?

Again, your promotion of Singapore is very subjective. To someone, it might be more important that they're only 17th wealthiest and that they're too close to the equator. The OP is really a stupid question....

Yeah, I'll admit it is, but isn't everyone subjective here. If i were extremely biased, I would not mention the political factor at all.

But I'm speaking from a point of view of safety and standard of living, Weather is also consistent, predictable unlike in Australia, where you have had hot days in winter...
For its size and region, singapore has done extremely well.
 
Title: So should I try to retire early, in Singapore? Or in Mexico?

They welcome everyone, Unless you have a criminal record or are hunted. As with all first world countries, people from other first world countries are accepted more easily than others. Also , since they encourage foreign investment, expatriates from the USA, Australia and UK have lived there for ages.

The chances of bad rulers taking place is slim, Although the same party has been in power, It is still a democracy and any alternative to a bad ruler or changes to the lifestyle of its citizens can be countered.

As for Population density, It is manageable with capable infrastructure and resources. Currently land reclamation is underway to the south of the island, and eco friendly buildings are being built on sentosa, Pulau Ubin and other islands. Singapore is like any big city in the US, without the pollution, crime and racism.

You've correctly pointed out the problem of land, but the small size allows for tighter border security and interdiction so it works both ways. Since it isn't in conflict with any country, no one is going to nuke it despite its high density population.

Yeah, I know all about accomodating rising population density with technology and stuff, I'm all for that, as I see "birth control" as direct pollution of the body, and welcoming the natural flow of human life to go on spreading and rising, as respecting nature and nature's creator God. I agree that it is managable or mitigable. I encourage "unchecked" human population growth, even in Singapore. A human "population explosion" at already high density, merely "overspills" people to other areas that can aborb them, densifies the people, or stacks them up higher into the sky.

If I already lived in Singapore, I would welcome "all the children that God gives," and be proud to add my contribution to the rising population density. And encourage everybody I can, to do the same. My point is, since I don't already live there, why would I want to take the chance of moving to, where the population density is already high? When I can stay at home where the population density is low, and raise it here instead?

The U.S. supposedly has all these democratic elections, but the greedy, evil corporations and rich elites buy the public airtime, and American morons elect so many evil, unqualified people to public office, so how do I know that Singapore won't be taken over by some ruthless dictator or something? And with so many people, only 3 million actually, living in such a confined space, they have better be into developing resources and energy, or costs may soar.

Just yesterday, somebody at work told me, that he likes that I am "pronatalist," as he agrees that there's some special value in having children. So I came back later and told him, "You do know that Al Gore is anti-natalist, don't you?" He had lent to me his "An Inconvenient Truth," Al Gore's crock-umentary about "the sky is falling" alarmism "global warming." Me and somebody else, was trying to tell him, that we just don't buy Al Gore's claims that we need to do anything about this presumed, human-caused "global warming." I see it as well worth "crowding" or "warming" our environment, if ever it comes to that, in order for people to be able to go on having their precious darling babies.

Human population growth is beautiful, because it so expands the numbers of people who can then enjoy living.

The natural "blossoming" of the human race, increasingly filling the planet, helps keeps things interesting, children make the world so much less dreary-looking, and provides a very useful motivation towards innovation and technology growth. Besides, humans need a few "challenges" anyway, to keep us out of trouble and to keep from getting bored.
 
While those nations certainly have a respectable culture and natural beauty, technology is low. Not because of economy, but in those nations the people simply choose not to flood their streets with it.
 
If you could find a place in Western North Carolina that wasn't already completely overrun with Half-Backs, I think that would be one of the nicest places in the world to live. The elevation makes the summers mild enough, and also gives you a bit of snow in the winter, but not too much. Plus, you're only three hours from Charleston when you're ready to hit the beach.

Unfortunately the Half-Backs are driving up the real estate prices at a previously unimaginable clip. Damn hurricanes...
 
Back
Top