Melbourne ranked world's most liveable city by The Economist - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Kinversulath;32029688]So Australia banning a few "trivial things" makes their government worse than the American government, which suffers from a poor health care and welfare system? What? You're kidding me here, right?[/QUOTE] I don't require public health care or welfare so in my case that isn't an issue. In my situation the USA is superior to live in due to much greater civil liberties. But sure, overall Australia might be better for people in disadvantaged situations.

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;32029715]I don't require public health care or welfare so in my case that isn't an issue. In my situation the USA is superior to live in due to much greater civil liberties. But sure, overall Australia might be better for people in disadvantaged situations.[/QUOTE] Name a few things the Australian government has banned that you disagree with. I'm interested to know what things you would prefer to see protected over better health care and welfare.

My dad owned a condo in downtown Vancouver that was right by Rogers Arena, it was fucking amazing, the view as awesome. Unfortunately we sold it two years ago because he wanted to live closer to us, it was about a 1-2 hour drive, depending on traffic. ( Parents are divorced, we go to his place on the weekends.)

[QUOTE=Kinversulath;32029743]Name a few things the Australian government has banned that you disagree with. I'm interested to know what things you would prefer to see protected over better health care and welfare.[/QUOTE] Obviously you aren't comprehending my post correctly. I'm saying [b]I'd rather live in the USA over Australia, because I DON'T NEED WELFARE OR PUBLIC HEALTH CARE[/b]. Basically, as a person from an upper middle class background (which I am), I would rather live in the US. But in a different situation I might prefer Australia. ¿Comprendes tú?

This has made my day! i love living in melbourne

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;32029808]Obviously you aren't comprehending my post correctly. I'm saying [b]I'd rather live in the USA over Australia, because I DON'T NEED WELFARE OR PUBLIC HEALTH CARE[/b]. I'm not saying it shouldn't exist. I'm saying [b]I DON'T NEED IT, SO I DON'T CARE IF A COUNTRY HAS IT.[/b] I'm saying I'd care more about civil liberties than social services if I could choose which country to live in. ¿Comprendas tú?[/QUOTE] And what I'm saying that claiming Austalia banning a few "trivial things" as you so called them is not justification for claiming that the American government is "leaps and bounds" ahead of Australia. In fact, it's a retarded claim. The American government is a partisan piece of shit that's wracked with debt.

[QUOTE=Kinversulath;32029854]And what I'm saying that claiming Austalia banning a few "trivial things" as you so called them is not justification for claiming that the American government is "leaps and bounds" ahead of Australia. In fact, it's a retarded claim. The American government is a partisan piece of shit that's wracked with debt.[/QUOTE] Ok bud, I'll enjoy my uncensored Left 4 Dead 2 and $50 games, you can have fun with censored internet/media and overpriced goods.

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;32029885]Ok bud, I'll enjoy my uncensored Left 4 Dead 2 and $50 games, you can have fun with censored internet/media and overpriced goods.[/QUOTE] I live in Canada, dumbass. Nice try though. There is a difference though, Australia is working on the few problems it does have, while America continues to stagnate. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Autumn))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Kinversulath;32029896]I live in Canada, dumbass. Nice try though.[/QUOTE] I know, you fucking idiot. I'm implying that if Australia is so great then you can go live there and have fun with the shit state the country is in. [editline]30th August 2011[/editline] and at least after America fixes its debt, the people will still have civil liberties and uncensored media. Australia shows no signs of stopping its nanny state tendencies, in fact the media there seems only to get more censored each year. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Autumn))[/highlight]

snip

Just to reinforce my point: [release]Australia maintains some of the most restrictive Internet policies of any Western country and over the past two years has taken steps toward a nationwide mandatory Internet filtering scheme. Its neighbor, New Zealand, regulates the Internet considerably less rigorously. Australia’s constitution does not explicitly give the right to free speech, and in fact contains a clause giving the Australian government ‘‘communications power,’’ allowing it to regulate ‘‘postal, telegraphic, telephonic, and other like services,’’ including the Internet. A number of state and territorial governments in Australia have passed legislation making the distribution of offensive material a criminal offense, as the constitution does not afford that power to the national government. Australia’s and New Zealand’s approaches to offensive content on the Internet both rely on government-run content-classification systems. However, their approaches differ in terms of what is considered offensive and what is done about the offending content. Australian laws relating to the censorship of offensive content are based on the powers delineated in and protections omitted from the Australian constitution. Section 51(v) of the document gives Parliament power to ‘‘make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to: (v) postal, telegraphic, telephonic, and other like services.’’ With no explicit protection of free speech in the constitution, the Australian government has invoked its ‘‘communications power’’ to institute a restrictive regime of Internet content regulation. The Broadcasting Services Amendment (Online Services) Bill 1999, an amendment to the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, establishes the authority of the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) to regulate Internet content. The ACMA is empowered to look into complaints from Australians about offensive content on the Internet and issue takedown notices. The ACMA is not mandated to scour the Internet for potentially prohibited content, but it is allowed to begin investigations without an outside complaint.[/release] [url=http://opennet.net/research/australia-and-new-zealand]Source[/url]

The internet filtering really isn't going anywhere dude, and even if it is implemented it'll never be as bad as people purport it to be. And the ACMA doesn't just go around banning websites, I've yet to hear of anything short of violent rape porn that's been taken down here, and that's usually not a court mandated thing. If you actually listen to Facepunch users when they say 'hurr Australia bans x' then you're not even worth discussing this with. And for the record Left 4 Dead 2 was a mediocre game, even the uncensored version (which I bought, and wow I'm in Australia fuck) [editline]31st August 2011[/editline] But you're right, everyone should listen to you, somerandomdude16 because when one of the most prestigious political/economic magazines in the world releases its findings based on a tally system of dozens of categories judged on empirical data, it can't stand up to a personal claim from a rich teenage American about a country having no civil liberties because he can't play his video game with the violence turned up.

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;32030003]Just to reinforce my point: [release]Australia maintains some of the most restrictive Internet policies of any Western country and over the past two years has taken steps toward a nationwide mandatory Internet filtering scheme. Its neighbor, New Zealand, regulates the Internet considerably less rigorously. Australia’s constitution does not explicitly give the right to free speech, and in fact contains a clause giving the Australian government ‘‘communications power,’’ allowing it to regulate ‘‘postal, telegraphic, telephonic, and other like services,’’ including the Internet. A number of state and territorial governments in Australia have passed legislation making the distribution of offensive material a criminal offense, as the constitution does not afford that power to the national government. Australia’s and New Zealand’s approaches to offensive content on the Internet both rely on government-run content-classification systems. However, their approaches differ in terms of what is considered offensive and what is done about the offending content. Australian laws relating to the censorship of offensive content are based on the powers delineated in and protections omitted from the Australian constitution. Section 51(v) of the document gives Parliament power to ‘‘make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to: (v) postal, telegraphic, telephonic, and other like services.’’ With no explicit protection of free speech in the constitution, the Australian government has invoked its ‘‘communications power’’ to institute a restrictive regime of Internet content regulation. The Broadcasting Services Amendment (Online Services) Bill 1999, an amendment to the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, establishes the authority of the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) to regulate Internet content. The ACMA is empowered to look into complaints from Australians about offensive content on the Internet and issue takedown notices. The ACMA is not mandated to scour the Internet for potentially prohibited content, but it is allowed to begin investigations without an outside complaint.[/release] [url=http://opennet.net/research/australia-and-new-zealand]Source[/url][/QUOTE] I can thank your government for pressuring ours to increase our internet regulations. Thanks to that I can be disconnected from the internet at any time starting tomorrow.

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;32029885]Ok bud, I'll enjoy my uncensored Left 4 Dead 2 and $50 games, you can have fun with censored internet/media and overpriced goods.[/QUOTE] Since when does Australia censor the internet? And our R rating system for games has been approved, so that argument will fall through fairly soon (like next yearish)

[QUOTE=Half Kill;32030653]Since when does Australia censor the internet? And our R rating system for games has been approved, so that argument will fall through fairly soon (like next yearish)[/QUOTE] there was a filter set up to block things like rape and child porn which is a bad thing apparently

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;32029885]Ok bud, I'll enjoy my uncensored Left 4 Dead 2 and $50 games, you can have fun with censored internet/media and overpriced goods.[/QUOTE] Our average wage is what US district attorneys and astronauts get paid. Our goods are overpriced because we are significantly stronger than any other country in the developed world. [editline]31st August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=stealth_camo;32030697]there was a filter set up to block things like rape and child porn which is a bad thing apparently[/QUOTE] One of the government ministers talked about an ISP-level block, but they never happened due to the outcry and technical issues. There's a filter which you download for free so your kids don't look up porn, though. [editline]31st August 2011[/editline] I'm going to laugh when SomeRandomGuy needs heathcare and welfare programs because his family lost their jobs and money next time the American economy crashes.

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;32029715]I don't require public health care or welfare so in my case that isn't an issue. In my situation the USA is superior to live in due to much greater civil liberties. [/QUOTE] Like warrantless wiretapping and your government's ability to hold you without charge for an infinite amount of time while torturing you

I can see why they took first place. Nobody wants to live in a city where a basic home starts at $600000 and 80% of your income goes to pay off said house.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;32031283]Like warrantless wiretapping and your government's ability to hold you without charge for an infinite amount of time while torturing you[/QUOTE] please, they don't have that ability if you're referring to manning that was an isolated incident for reference, though, i'd much, much, much rather be in vancouver, northampton, or montreal than the US

what were the other citys?

[QUOTE=MIPS;32031393]I can see why they took first place. Nobody wants to live in a city where a basic home starts at $600000 and 80% of your income goes to pay off said house.[/QUOTE] Melbourne is pretty much the same

[QUOTE=Zeke129;32031488]Melbourne is pretty much the same[/QUOTE] Except for the bit about the income, anyway.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;32031488]Melbourne is pretty much the same[/QUOTE] any really nice city is usually like this

Inner city shitty townhouses are fucking stupendously expensive. I would sooner live in the Chernobyl sarcophagus than one of those two million dollar shit boxes. It just makes me angry.

Hooray, we have the most liveable city in the world with low crime, good areas and high pay. Wait, you mean I actually have to spend more money to live in such a nice place? FUCK THAT. First world problems.

[QUOTE=Mlisen14;32030202]The internet filtering really isn't going anywhere dude, and even if it is implemented it'll never be as bad as people purport it to be. And the ACMA doesn't just go around banning websites, I've yet to hear of anything short of violent rape porn that's been taken down here, and that's usually not a court mandated thing. If you actually listen to Facepunch users when they say 'hurr Australia bans x' then you're not even worth discussing this with. And for the record Left 4 Dead 2 was a mediocre game, even the uncensored version (which I bought, and wow I'm in Australia fuck) [editline]31st August 2011[/editline] But you're right, everyone should listen to you, somerandomdude16 because when one of the most prestigious political/economic magazines in the world releases its findings based on a tally system of dozens of categories judged on empirical data, it can't stand up to a personal claim from a rich teenage American about a country having no civil liberties because he can't play his video game with the violence turned up.[/QUOTE] Oh please, I hardly play video games. It was an example. I find a country lacking freedom of speech a pretty big flaw in the civil liberties department.

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;32032173]Oh please, I hardly play video games. It was an example. I find a country lacking freedom of speech a pretty big flaw in the civil liberties department.[/QUOTE] I find a country lacking money a pretty big flaw in the "best country in the world" department.

[QUOTE=Jelly;32032271]I find a country lacking money a pretty big flaw in the "best country in the world" department.[/QUOTE] Yes, because I said the US was the best country in the world right

[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;32032314]Yes, because I said the US was the best country in the world right[/QUOTE] No, but you said it was better than Australia. When Australia was barely hit by the financial crisis (caused by America), as well as it's not in debt and has better welfare and health system.

[QUOTE=Jelly;32032339]No, but you said it was better than Australia. When Australia was barely hit by the financial crisis (caused by America), as well as it's not in debt and has better welfare and health system.[/QUOTE] What I should have said is that I would prefer to live in the US over Australia, as that would better express my opinion