Is Europe still a better place to live Post Eurocrash

[lio45]

Originally Posted by isaidso

The number of Europeans that move here dwarf the number going in the other direction and its been like that for 150 years. There's a reason for that.

That reason being, that's it's pretty easy to be accepted into Canada compared to other places?

I mean, using your logic, places like Monaco, or even Switzerland, must be hellholes in terms of liveability, because they punch below their weight in the metric "how many people do they let in every year".

[Stryker]

Originally Posted by lio45

That reason being, that's it's pretty easy to be accepted into Canada compared to other places?

I mean, using your logic, places like Monaco, or even Switzerland, must be hellholes in terms of liveability, because they punch below their weight in the metric "how many people do they let in every year".

I'm still waiting to meet, a swede, german, dutch that came here(in the modenr era) because the old country offered such few options.

The only people that'll say that are generally comparing being the head of Siemens district office, making 100k a year in Bonn, versus making 150k in Toronto leading the national branch.

There are of course certain jobs where you do have to follow the work(oil and Gas) being an obvious example.

Even the Irish, I've met that have left after the 2008 crisis would more likely goto another part of europe if it weren't harder to go there.

That's ignoring the obvious issue that there are 700 million europeans, and only 35 million Canadians.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by theman23

Where abouts are you moving to?

Job opportunity I presume?

I really didn't want to say anything, but...a job? In Spain?


NACLE2, wikipedia.org

I'm only kidding, but that unemployment rate is nasty.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by lio45

I completely disagree with that. Even the worst hit German cities managed to retain street plans, and a culture/mindset, that favor density. A quick example using two cities I've personally visited, Frankfurt, "clock reset in 1945", today, versus a "newer"/freer Phoenix, Arizona, clock basically set in 1945 anyway (for most of the metro), today. What was built from 1945 on is very different.

Also, the other heavyweights in Western Europe (France, Britain...) are pretty full of pre-WWII architecture. Even Germany is, IMO.

I didn't mean in terms of buildings and street layouts, but in terms of society, politics, culture, law, and the people who make up the elite. I really don't think it's a stretch to say that many countries in Continental Europe had to radically reshape themselves after the war, so the way of "doing things" on that continent doesn't in any way reflect centuries' old processes that aren't open to change.

Never underestimate Europe's ability to change radically and suddenly. Whether it's the cloak of fascism, or the rise of communism, or the postwar Keynesian welfare state, or the fall of the Eastern Bloc, or the rise (and fall?) of the Eurozone, Europe can shift in the blink of an eye. And there's never a "last word" when it comes to Europe.

And not to go off topic, but if you really knew Phoenix, AZ, you'd know that what was built after the war was a continuation of what was built before the war. The United States has been basically suburban-minded since its inception, and automobile-oriented since at least Henry Ford. The 90,000, or so, people who lived in Phoenix before the war lived almost exclusively in low density, auto-oriented Jazz age suburbia.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by rousseau

I was referring to the sort of provincialism that was and still mostly is an American trademark in the postwar period: we're the greatest, we've got nothing to learn from anybody else, we can't imagine anyone ever wanting to be anywhere but here. We never used to have this kind of thinking in this country. But now you actually do see people entertaining these kinds of opinions.

Perhaps you should read and understand conversations before jumping in with unfounded insults.

Assuming that the United States is still the North American ground zero for braggadoccio and cocksuredness, I am not sure that that will still be the case a few years or decades from now.

Seems to me like our two countries are evolving, albeit slowly, in opposite directions.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

I think you're deluding yourself if you think there is some grander purpose to life. Things like culture or religion or nationalism or ethnocentrism or anything can seemingly give you some grander purpose to life. But ultimately it's just another way to amuse oneself.

Whether you conform to certain cultural prescriptions or not it's all the same shit at the end of the day.

I don't think I'm expressing myself accurately here. I am not at ALL saying that your preference is wrong in any sense of the term. Your preferences are entirely legitimate. I just feel that you shouldn't get pretentious and think that you're living some sort of meaningful life just because you chose to live in an area with an established culture. I think, that if one delves deeply into it, humans all over the world just happen to be where they are and are doing things to occupy the time they have between now and their inevitable death.

Whether you spend that time eating burgers and drinking coke, or eating some steak that was massaged by a masseuse before being slaughtered, with some wine from vineyards in France.... really makes no difference in the grand scheme of things. Do what you want, but I don't think it's necessary to look down on others' preferences.

You make some very good points.

There is however the question of what will be the historical take-away of these societies. What will people in 100 years retain from Wal-Marts, drive-thrus and Kim Kardashian celebrity gossip? Of course American society is not just limited to that, but a certain fringe of it (well described by kool) certainly dwells at that level. That level also exists to some degree in places like Copenhagen and of course it's an illusion as you say to think that everyone is involved in things more profound but geez, it just seems so much harder to find in so much of North America (even though it does exist here too in pockets).

It's not even only about the architecture, it's also about the topics people discuss. What are most people talking about at a café in Copenhagen vs. Tim Hortons in Anytown, Canada. Are they talking about ISIS, global warming, the evolution of society, or about the latest infotainment fluff? Because cities and even communities where people meet are supposed to be places where ideas are exchanged, where assumptions are challenged, and where new ways of doing things often emerge from that synergy.

A place where this does not happen (not saying there are none where it does in America BTW), is a "poorer" place in my view.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by P. Alouishous

This point really gets at what I like about diverse newer cities with less sense of place. In a city with a single dominant culture you are either part of that culture or you're an outlier/outsider. Like you said, some people are totally comfortable being an outlier. However, many of us do not fit into the dominant culture and are also not comfortable feeling like outsiders. This is why I feel that Toronto is the perfect city for me. The lack of one dominant culture (a complaint many visitors have about the city) is exactly what I love most about Toronto. There is no mainstream, so you never feel like an outsider.

I understand how you feel, but I would argue that there most definitely is a mainstream in Toronto, and that it not a total free for all.

See post 664 here:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...om#post6763812

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I understand how you feel, but I would argue that there most definitely is a mainstream in Toronto, and that it not a total free for all.

See post 664 here:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...om#post6763812

P. Alouishous spoke of a "dominant culture" rather than a "mainstream" but I was wondering if someone wouldn't react to his post. Surely one of the Toronto mayoral candidates is a textbook example of Toronto's dominant culture (in its elite iteration).

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by rousseau

I was referring to the sort of provincialism that was and still mostly is an American trademark in the postwar period: we're the greatest, we've got nothing to learn from anybody else, we can't imagine anyone ever wanting to be anywhere but here. We never used to have this kind of thinking in this country. But now you actually do see people entertaining these kinds of opinions.

Perhaps you should read and understand conversations before jumping in with unfounded insults.

That was a rhetorical question. American exceptionalism is not a unique phenomenon; many countries and cultures have their own variants of it. Believing in the exceptionalism of American exceptionalism is what I think is stupid. Moreover, it is entirely irrelevant and unnecessary to drag the United States into this discussion. If you felt that Canadians are becoming overly proud in some negative sense, then that's all that needs to be said. Canadians have this annoying tendency to constantly deride the US.

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There is however the question of what will be the historical take-away of these societies. What will people in 100 years retain from Wal-Marts, drive-thrus and Kim Kardashian celebrity gossip? Of course American society is not just limited to that, but a certain fringe of it (well described by kool) certainly dwells at that level. That level also exists to some degree in places like Copenhagen and of course it's an illusion as you say to think that everyone is involved in things more profound but geez, it just seems so much harder to find in so much of North America (even though it does exist here too in pockets).

just to clarify, my comment about life in la quinta/the coachella valley was not meant to imply that people there are necessarily disengaged or less engaged with important issues than are copenhageners or montrealers or whoever else.

it was merely meant to imply that the physical and social structure of the place — the expectations and the infrastructure — are heavily biased towards individualism and the private sector. this is the situation that some find very freeing and others, like myself, find symptomatic of a certain atomization.

this process is evident everywhere in the western world. the only thing with older places is that there remains a physical structure as well as a degree of population/inter-generational stability that communicates the idea that life is a phenomenon that exists beyond the self, that stretches beyond a single lifespan in two directions.

it is a difference of degree, not of type.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

just to clarify, my comment about life in la quinta/the coachella valley was not meant to imply that people there are necessarily disengaged or less engaged with important issues than are copenhageners or montrealers or whoever else.

it was merely meant to imply that the physical and social structure of the place — the expectations and the infrastructure — are heavily biased towards individualism and the private sector. this is the situation that some find very freeing and others, like myself, find symptomatic of a certain atomization.

this process is evident everywhere in the western world. the only thing with older places is that there remains a physical structure as well as a degree of population/inter-generational stability that communicates the idea that life is a phenomenon that exists beyond the self, that stretches beyond a single lifespan in two directions.

it is a difference of degree, not of type.

Of course. I was careful to acknowledge this in my post.

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Of course. I was careful to acknowledge this in my post.

no, i know. but you know how it is... one inattentive transatlantic statement and it all comes roaring back and suddenly you're oscar wilde touring the mining towns of colorado in 1882.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

P. Alouishous spoke of a "dominant culture" rather than a "mainstream" but I was wondering if someone wouldn't react to his post. Surely one of the Toronto mayoral candidates is a textbook example of Toronto's dominant culture (in its elite iteration).

True, but they are virtually the same thing in my view. There is a pressure to conform in Toronto just as there is in Carbonear, NL or Rimini, Italy.

Very, very few little 12-year-old girls in Toronto eschew stuff like Taylor Swift or Ariana Grande, regardless of origin.

They may also partake to some degree in the culture of their parent's country of origin (and it might constitute a semi-mainstream for them if they happen to have many friends from the same ethnic group), but it's as a complement to the mainstream, not as a full-blown alternative.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Acajack

True, but they are virtually the same thing in my view. There is a pressure to conform in Toronto just as there is in Carbonear, NL or Rimini, Italy.

Very, very few little 12-year-old girls in Toronto eschew stuff like Taylor Swift or Ariana Grande, regardless of origin.

If that's the case (and that's a big if - I doubt any of us are particularly familiar with the cultural consumption habits of 12-year-old Torontonian girls), it's because 12-year-olds are at an awkward age where there's a lot of pressure from their peers to fit in, and where they're easily impressionable and tend to be sold on what is advertised the loudest. They're not a demographic I'd use to gauge the cultural multipolarity of a place.

That generic mainstream North American Anglo culture (you know the one) might be largest and most commonly understood* one in Toronto, but that doesn't make it dominant either. Existing outside of that is not something niche or alternative or contrarian.

*Which leads me to another point: by its nature, that culture is largely passive and designed to be easily understood by the most people possible. It's more likely to be the type of thing that people will use to cross cultural boundaries than it is something they themselves really participate in or identify with. Not quite the type of thing to inspire deeply held allegiances.

I'm not familiar with Carbonear or Rimini and how much pressure to conform to the dominant culture might exist relative to Toronto, but you know these sorts of things can actually vary from place to place, right?

(for the record, I don't think the big Western European cities are all that different from us on this front. It's not really something uniquely Torontonian or North American so much as it is a broadly western metropolitan feature)

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by theman23

Where abouts are you moving to?

Job opportunity I presume?

Sort of. It's a teaching internship in the Catalan Central Depression. I'll be a "Conversation Assistant" and I stay with a host family for 8 months.

Originally Posted by JHikka

I really didn't want to say anything, but...a job? In Spain?


NACLE2, wikipedia.org

I'm only kidding, but that unemployment rate is nasty.

Yeah, but I'm staying in one of the lightest areas, so I think I'll be fine.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

If that's the case (and that's a big if - I doubt any of us are particularly familiar with the cultural consumption habits of 12-year-old Torontonian girls), it's because 12-year-olds are at an awkward age where there's a lot of pressure from their peers to fit in, and where they're easily impressionable and tend to be sold on what is advertised the loudest. They're not a demographic I'd use to gauge the cultural multipolarity of a place.

Those 12-year-old girls eventually grow up to become women, and retain a lot of the cultural cues they acquire when they were 8, 12, 16 and 21. Sure they branch out a bit as we all do, but someome who grew up watching American sitcoms and top 40 music will likely continue to do so at least to some degree in adulthood.

People who grow up in Toronto (or any place really) regardless of origin will have reasonably similar cultural cues that they follow. Unless they are forcibly segregated or self-segregate. Or if there is a far-reaching parallel reality that exists in a large enough segment of society (Anglo-Montrealers, African-Americans, etc.)

There is no true parallel locally-based cultural reality and production machine for, for example, Chinese-Torontonians or Indo-Torontonians. At least not yet even though there may be some small blips in that direction.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

Sort of. It's a teaching internship in the Catalan Central Depression. I'll be a "Conversation Assistant" and I stay with a host family for 8 months.



Yeah, but I'm staying in one of the lightest areas, so I think I'll be fine.

One thing that is often missed in talk of economic problems is that in an area with 15% unemployment, that means that 85% of the workforce is still working.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Those 12-year-old girls eventually grow up to become women, and retain a lot of the cultural cues they acquire when they were 8, 12, 16 and 21. Sure they branch out a bit as we all do, but someome who grew up watching American sitcoms and top 40 music will likely continue to do so at least to some degree in adulthood.

People who grow up in Toronto (or any place really) regardless of origin will have reasonably similar cultural cues that they follow. Unless they are forcibly segregated or self-segregate. Or if there is a far-reaching parallel reality that exists in a large enough segment of society (Anglo-Montrealers, African-Americans, etc.)

There is no true parallel locally-based cultural reality and production machine for, for example, Chinese-Torontonians or Indo-Torontonians. At least not yet even though there may be some small blips in that direction.

How anyone can argue that there isn't a mainstream in Toronto (or that it's less pronounced or whatever) is beyond me. The cultural niches that exist there exist just about everywhere else in North America, with the only difference being the breadth of cultures included in Toronto. I mean, maybe there isn't a large Macedonian or Jamaican immigrant community in Saskatoon, but frankly it doesn't really matter.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by esquire

How anyone can argue that there isn't a mainstream in Toronto (or that it's less pronounced or whatever) is beyond me. The cultural niches that exist there exist just about everywhere else in North America, with the only difference being the breadth of cultures included in Toronto. I mean, maybe there isn't a large Macedonian or Jamaican immigrant community in Saskatoon, but frankly it doesn't really matter.

Human beings who live together will inevitably converge, unless as I said there is a high level of segregation (imposed or self).

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Human beings who live together will inevitably converge, unless as I said there is a high level of segregation (imposed or self).

Absolutely. I mean, if you live in North Battleford or whatever most subcultures will be relatively small and less insulated from the mainstream... so even if you are a TFW from the Philippines working in the hospital, there's a decent chance that you will eat perogies and eventually join a curling team at some point. Maybe not quite as likely in Toronto, but really now... show me someone completely who eschews anything mainstream in favour of esoteric interests and I'll show you someone with a diagnosable condition.