QuoteOriginally posted by: Traden4AlphaQuoteOriginally posted by: AnalyticalVegaQuoteOriginally posted by: Traden4AlphaBesides the US (Colorado), I'd give high marks to Singapore, New Zealand, and Australia. The range of cuisines in Singapore more than offsets the brutal equatorial sun.I liked Iceland and Norway in the summer but know that I could never tolerate their dark winters. The UK drops out for me on this issue, too. I once had a mid-winter business trip to London and never saw daylight. Switzerland has great landscapes, but the high costs and disadvantages of not being Swiss make it more of a place to visit than to live. Hong Kong has a really nice blend of high-energy city life and more natural non-city opportunities -- vastly better than sprawling metropolises like NYC or LA -- but friends who have lived their say that there's an undercurrent of people trying to take advantage of other people.I agree with you, but I would add Switzerland:1) US (Land of the free! Even with Obama, the US is still doing great) 2) Switzerland ( high costs, but lower taxes even things out a bit) 3) New Zealand (No real army is a minus) 4) Australia (Water shortages and high costs are minuses) 5) Singapore (Very small island, Risk of being wiped out by a tsunami, In a dangerous part of the world)Good points! I don't see New Zealand's lack of an army as a problem --they are so far from anyone dangerous. The Swiss, on the other hand, are also in a dangerous part of the world and their neutrality does not protect against radioactive fallout.You think Russia will attack central and western Europe with nukes? So far they only threatened to use tactical nukes against a large NATO force attack. They would probably only use large nukes against countries sufficiently far away from them. Still, if the Russians Nuke the UK or France, the fallout could drift over Switzerland. You have a point.
Last edited by AnalyticalVega
on September 22nd, 2014, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.