If the UK is not ideal where should I emmigrate to?

Forum for general discussion of Peak Oil / Oil depletion; also covering related subjects

Moderator: Peak Moderation

Given the potential impact of peak oil where would you emigrate too?

Europe
7
32%
Australia
3
14%
Canada
8
36%
USA
0
No votes
South America
0
No votes
Russia
0
No votes
Middle East
0
No votes
Africa
0
No votes
Asia
1
5%
Desert Island
3
14%
 
Total votes: 22

fifthcolumn
Posts: 2525
Joined: 22 Nov 2007, 14:07

Post by fifthcolumn »

emordnilap wrote: So to finally get to my point, I've long thought that some people - a small percentage of the general population - simply don't belong where they're born. Most people do and I respect that. Is this a correlation between a typical PS contributor (you know who you are) and the notion of not belonging?
Ha. Yes I do know who I am.
Interestingly you have hit the nail on the head. I've always got along better with non-mainstream crowds and seriously feckin hate the politics of the general population back home. I have always spent significant chunks of time travelling too. And now I've moved for good and like you I feel much more relaxed here and feel that I've settled in to where I belong.

Which is not to say I don't miss back home to bits. In spite of all the angry wankers and the sense of entitlement etc I wish there was no peak oil and I didn't have to move out into the middle of nowhere and leave absolutely everyone behind.

But intellectually it doesn't matter. What I'm really talking about is a way of life. I don't want to live in the UK and watch it turn into a police state then a banana republic complete with mafia, express kidnappings and the whole nine yards either.
User avatar
emordnilap
Posts: 14815
Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
Location: here

Post by emordnilap »

fifthcolumn wrote:Which is not to say I don't miss back home to bits.
That's where we differ. Once or twice I missed Bradford's curry mile but that's it. I would have to be dragged back kicking and screaming.

A simple but huge turning point came when I found I couldn't buy stuff. You know, here, stuff is much harder to just go out and buy and you have to have stuff shipped at great expense. So those who like stuff move back.

I couldn't care less about stuff any more.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
fifthcolumn
Posts: 2525
Joined: 22 Nov 2007, 14:07

Post by fifthcolumn »

emordnilap wrote:So those who like stuff move back.
Or move to where the last bastions of industrial civilisation are likely to maintain a foothold.
I couldn't care less about stuff any more.
I don't personally have the same opinion but I respect your position.

That said, having grown up during the late 70s early 80s I had much less stuff as a kid that kids do now. I could easily make do with an 80s lifestyle. I don't mind taking the bus for instance.

On the other hand, going back to the 50s or (shudder) the 30s would be hard.
User avatar
Ludwig
Posts: 3849
Joined: 08 Jul 2008, 00:31
Location: Cambridgeshire

Post by Ludwig »

fifthcolumn wrote:
I couldn't care less about stuff any more.
I don't personally have the same opinion but I respect your position.
Part of the problem is that we have Stuff rammed down our throats - it's hard not to want something when it's constantly in reach.

I used to live in Lancaster, and at that time (early 90s), there was relatively little choice there as regards luxury items. So when I went to my parents' in Chester, I would start to drool over all the Stuff in the shops there; but it wouldn't take long back in Lancaster for me to get used to not spending money; in fact, it was rather satisfying to feel relatively free of the psychological shackles of consumerism.
That said, having grown up during the late 70s early 80s I had much less stuff as a kid that kids do now. I could easily make do with an 80s lifestyle. I don't mind taking the bus for instance.

On the other hand, going back to the 50s or (shudder) the 30s would be hard.
For me, the absence of modern luxuries in a PO world is the least of my worries. Health, food and personal safety are what I'm worried about.

As for the 50s... my grandmother once commented that although people were poorer then, in many ways life was easier. The pace of life was slower, people looked out for each other, and human relations (as opposed to just looking after one's own family) were more important for most people than getting rich.
"We're just waiting, looking skyward as the days go down / Someone promised there'd be answers if we stayed around."
ziggy12345
Posts: 1235
Joined: 28 Nov 2008, 10:49

Post by ziggy12345 »

Ludwig wrote:
fifthcolumn wrote:
I couldn't care less about stuff any more.
I don't personally have the same opinion but I respect your position.
Part of the problem is that we have Stuff rammed down our throats - it's hard not to want something when it's constantly in reach.

I used to live in Lancaster, and at that time (early 90s), there was relatively little choice there as regards luxury items. So when I went to my parents' in Chester, I would start to drool over all the Stuff in the shops there; but it wouldn't take long back in Lancaster for me to get used to not spending money; in fact, it was rather satisfying to feel relatively free of the psychological shackles of consumerism.
That said, having grown up during the late 70s early 80s I had much less stuff as a kid that kids do now. I could easily make do with an 80s lifestyle. I don't mind taking the bus for instance.

On the other hand, going back to the 50s or (shudder) the 30s would be hard.
For me, the absence of modern luxuries in a PO world is the least of my worries. Health, food and personal safety are what I'm worried about.

As for the 50s... my grandmother once commented that although people were poorer then, in many ways life was easier. The pace of life was slower, people looked out for each other, and human relations (as opposed to just looking after one's own family) were more important for most people than getting rich.
I agee. I think the simpler people in the world would be happy with a simpler lifestyle, but where does that leave us? :D
User avatar
Ludwig
Posts: 3849
Joined: 08 Jul 2008, 00:31
Location: Cambridgeshire

Post by Ludwig »

ziggy12345 wrote:
As for the 50s... my grandmother once commented that although people were poorer then, in many ways life was easier. The pace of life was slower, people looked out for each other, and human relations (as opposed to just looking after one's own family) were more important for most people than getting rich.
I agee. I think the simpler people in the world would be happy with a simpler lifestyle, but where does that leave us? :D
I'm not simple, thank you very much, but I would be happy with a simpler lifestyle if basic needs were taken care of.

I would classify as "simple" people who have swallowed the consumerist dogma that governments have rammed down our throats over the past 30 years.

I'd classify as "simple" people who are made happy, or who think they are made happy, by a TV screen 3" bigger than the one they bought last year.

And I'd classify as "simple" people who don't see the unsustainability of exponentially increasing technological and economic complexity.

If you don't like the idea of a simpler lifestyle, tough luck, because you're going to have to deal with one.
"We're just waiting, looking skyward as the days go down / Someone promised there'd be answers if we stayed around."
ziggy12345
Posts: 1235
Joined: 28 Nov 2008, 10:49

Post by ziggy12345 »

That was supposed to be a joke. I think life can be as complex as you make it. Just because you can't afford your foreign holiday or the next large TV as you mentioned doesn't mean to say your life is simple. I'm actually looking forward to it, apart from where am I going to get my N2O to fuel my rockets

Cheers
User avatar
RenewableCandy
Posts: 12777
Joined: 12 Sep 2007, 12:13
Location: York

Post by RenewableCandy »

Ludwig wrote:I used to live in Lancaster, and at that time (early 90s), there was relatively little choice there as regards luxury items...
I lived there (well not even in the town, just sort of nearby) in the 1970s, so I guess I could put up with all sorts of deprivations. :)

Hey I hope the Dukes Playhouse is still going!
Soyez réaliste. Demandez l'impossible.
Stories
The Price of Time
User avatar
lancasterlad
Posts: 359
Joined: 22 Jun 2007, 06:29
Location: North Lancashire

Post by lancasterlad »

Dukes Playhouse still going strong. Lancaster has everything we need although there are plans for a huge town centre development which many oppose - including me. OK, we don't have all the major high street stores or huge department stores - so what?

The traffic is still as bad as ever - remember the one way system in the town centre?
Lancaster Lad

Who turned the lights off?
User avatar
Ludwig
Posts: 3849
Joined: 08 Jul 2008, 00:31
Location: Cambridgeshire

Post by Ludwig »

lancasterlad wrote:Dukes Playhouse still going strong. Lancaster has everything we need although there are plans for a huge town centre development which many oppose - including me. OK, we don't have all the major high street stores or huge department stores - so what?

The traffic is still as bad as ever - remember the one way system in the town centre?
I went back to Lancaster a couple of years ago for the first time in about a decade. It felt a much nicer place than when I was there - almost lively, almost cosmopolitan: presumably thanks to the increase in student numbers and the economic pick-up (subsequently stalled of course).

Anyone planning a huge town centre development in Lancaster, in the current economic climate, needs their head examining.

I still retain an affection for the place - except the weather.
"We're just waiting, looking skyward as the days go down / Someone promised there'd be answers if we stayed around."
User avatar
RenewableCandy
Posts: 12777
Joined: 12 Sep 2007, 12:13
Location: York

Post by RenewableCandy »

Ludwig wrote: Anyone planning a huge town centre development in Lancaster, in the current economic climate, needs their head examining.
Never mind just Lancaster...anybloodywhere!

But yeah that one-way system...might be one of the few benefits of PO, getting shot of that!

Getting back to my one-and-only worry about La Belle France, there's always Heysham power station...and Sellafield...
Soyez réaliste. Demandez l'impossible.
Stories
The Price of Time
User avatar
emordnilap
Posts: 14815
Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
Location: here

Post by emordnilap »

fifthcolumn wrote:I could easily make do with an 80s lifestyle.
So long as we don't have to listen to Kraftwerk or Duran Duran or (shudders) Spandau Ballet aargh!
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
User avatar
Ludwig
Posts: 3849
Joined: 08 Jul 2008, 00:31
Location: Cambridgeshire

Post by Ludwig »

emordnilap wrote:
fifthcolumn wrote:I could easily make do with an 80s lifestyle.
So long as we don't have to listen to Kraftwerk or Duran Duran or (shudders) Spandau Ballet aargh!
That's part of the appeal for me (OK, perhaps not Spandau Ballet).
"We're just waiting, looking skyward as the days go down / Someone promised there'd be answers if we stayed around."
Prono 007
Posts: 291
Joined: 22 Sep 2006, 01:58
Location: Sheffield

Post by Prono 007 »

Interesting question and something I've thought over in my head sometimes, though I've no intention of moving due to family commitments.

One place I thought of was Norway. It's got huge (but now declining?) oil reserves, gas, is not over populated (at least compared to many countries) and is further north so as to avoid desertification by climate change. It also doesn't seem to get embroiled in wars too much either, so no obvious enemies.
User avatar
Ludwig
Posts: 3849
Joined: 08 Jul 2008, 00:31
Location: Cambridgeshire

Post by Ludwig »

Prono 007 wrote:Interesting question and something I've thought over in my head sometimes, though I've no intention of moving due to family commitments.

One place I thought of was Norway. It's got huge (but now declining?) oil reserves, gas, is not over populated (at least compared to many countries) and is further north so as to avoid desertification by climate change. It also doesn't seem to get embroiled in wars too much either, so no obvious enemies.
It got embroiled in WW2...
"We're just waiting, looking skyward as the days go down / Someone promised there'd be answers if we stayed around."
Post Reply