Just found this on SSC and i was wondering what are australian impressions, why Queensland is growing so fast? Ontario is growing that much because it settle 140K immigrants a year mainly (100K) in toronto

I didn't know australia was adding almost the same amount of people as Canada ( nearly all the increase here is from immigration ie 220K people a year). The canadian figures are jan 1 , 2005 estimated, i don't know when the australian figure are from.


Canada - 32,078,819 + 290,184

Australia - 20,507,264 + 249,282


Ordered by population

1 Ontario - 12,449,502 +137,081 can

2 Quebec - 7,568,640 +51,690 can

3 New South Wales - 6,819,565 +51,633 aus

4 Victoria - 5,064,365 + 58,168 aus

5 British Columbia - 4,219,968 +46,372 can

6 Queensland - 4,039,272 + 99,586 aus

7 Alberta - 3,223,415 +44,349 can

8 Western Australia - 2,030,627 + 30,814 aus

9 South Australia - 1,545,939 + 7,275 aus

10 Manitoba - 1,174,645 +9,683 can

11 Saskatchewan - 995,280 +837 can

12 Nova Scotia - 937,538 +318 can

13 New Brunswick - 751,257 +516 can

14 Newfoundland & Labrador - 516,986 -1,823 can

15 Tasmania - 485,898 + 2,949 aus

16 Australian Capital Territory - 324,325 + 713 aus

17 Northern Terrytory 197,603 - 549 aus

18 Prince Edward Island - 137,734 +114 can

19 Northwest Territories - 42,944 +315 can

20 Yukon Territory - 31,227 +300 can

21 Nunavut - 29,683 +432


Ordered by net increase

1 Ontario - 12,449,502 +137,081 can

2 Queensland - 4,039,272 + 99,586 aus

3 Victoria - 5,064,365 + 58,168 aus

4 Quebec - 7,568,640 +51,690 can

5 New South Wales - 6,819,565 +51,633 aus

6 British Columbia - 4,219,968 +46,372 can

7 Alberta - 3,223,415 +44,349 can

8 Western Australia - 2,030,627 + 30,814 aus

9 Manitoba - 1,174,645 +9,683 can

10 South Australia - 1,545,939 + 7,275 aus

11 Tasmania - 485,898 + 2,949 aus

12 Saskatchewan - 995,280 +837 can

13 Australian Capital Territory - 324,325 + 713 aus

14 New Brunswick - 751,257 +516 can

15 Nunavut - 29,683 +432

16 Nova Scotia - 937,538 +318 can

17 Northwest Territories - 42,944 +315 can

18 Yukon Territory - 31,227 +300 can

19 Prince Edward Island - 137,734 +114 can

20 Northern Terrytory 197,603 - 549 aus

21 Newfoundland & Labrador - 516,986 -1,823 can

The Australian figures must be a prediction for next year, because Victoria, Queensland and WA all haven't crossed into the next million mark yet.

VIC & WA have (last year), QLD is very soon.

Probably because Australia and Canada is pretty similiar to each other, being like British Founded and similiar democratic stances except for Canada not being in the war on Terrorism and Both countries are picked on by the US even though we both help their arses in different things.

You say Canada's immigration was about 220k. I think Australia's was around 120K and will be increased to about 140K next year. Our birth rate last year was apparently the highest in 16 years.

I think Queensland is growing so fast because it offers a great lifestyle(Brisbane, Gold Coast, Sunshine Coast) not to mention North Queensland. Beautiful weather all year round, beautiful beaches and a less hectic lifestyle than the southern cities.

I think Queensland is growing so fast because it offers a great lifestyle(Brisbane, Gold Coast, Sunshine Coast) not to mention North Queensland. Beautiful weather all year round, beautiful beaches and a less hectic lifestyle than the southern cities.

Basically - yes the lifestyle is better. Also there is less unemployment, cheaper housing (than Sydney anyway), an envied outdoor lifestyle, great food, great weather - I could go on LOL.

Its the place to be;)

jt :runaway:

I would disagree with that. It is all a matter of taste.

Sure it has some things going for it, but i would never move further north than i am now, and that is on the Mid North Coast NSW. I would only go REALLY north... ie.. northern hemisphere :P

For the record, I also prefer the hectic city lifestyle but I think the more relaxed lifestyle is a big selling point for a lot of people.

For the record, I also prefer the hectic city lifestyle but I think the more relaxed lifestyle is a big selling point for a lot of people.
Pftt - Sydney's not hectic, try Tokyo.
Sydney is just a big country town in comparison.
jt

lol, then brisbane is a large camp site using ur logic

Does North Queensland have any large cities and why doesn't the northen territorry have more people, it's not like it artic like ours?

lol, then brisbane is a large camp site using ur logic
Compared to Tokyo it is.
jt

Does North Queensland have any large cities and why doesn't the northen territorry have more people, it's not like it artic like ours?

Cairns and Townsville are the biggest cities of North Queensland. They both have somewhere around 150,000 population.

Northern Territory doesn't have many people because it's one big desert so in that sense it is a bit like the arctic.

Cairns is more 136 000 and Townsville is around 156 000 expected to probably overpass the 160k mark this year. And Townsville is the Biggest City in Northern Australia.

Northern Territory doesn't have many people because it's one big desert so in that sense it is a bit like the arctic.

Its more the same reason as why people in Canada wouldn't live in the arctic as to here. Because its Harsh, Hot and you can die if you aren't living in some town or not prepared out there, You can get lost out there too, but yes the climate is very opposite.

But thats why theres only Three Cities in the Outback areas.
Mt Isa, Alice Springs and Broken Hill and all of the cities are somewhere on the lines of 20 000-30 000. Both Mt Isa and Broken Hill being Mining Cities. There are other Towns out there but they range to something like couple of Hundred to about 7k.

Don't forget that it's not only harsh in northern Australia, but also that the infrastructure never got developed as well as they should have early on. However, that would've been due to the great distances and hot climate.

The railway from Adelaide to Darwin, if I remember well enough, was proposed way back in the late 19th Century. But it was only completed a couple of years ago. Had they completed that railroad, Darwin could have become much bigger than it is today.

For the record, I also prefer the hectic city lifestyle but I think the more relaxed lifestyle is a big selling point for a lot of people.

Thats pretty much the same with me. Every major city i have been too in OZ felt too slow for me. But again relaxation is good and the busy lifestyle can be too much for some ppl.

Had they completed that railroad, Darwin could have become much bigger than it is today.

Don't forget that Darwin also got bombed during WW2 and was flattened by Cyclone Tracy.

Compared to Tokyo it is.
jt

yea, i know, but Tokyo is, after all, the biggest city in the world ;)

Its more the same reason as why people in Canada wouldn't live in the arctic as to here. Because its Harsh, Hot and you can die if you aren't living in some town or not prepared out there, You can get lost out there too, but yes the climate is very opposite.

But thats why theres only Three Cities in the Outback areas.
Mt Isa, Alice Springs and Broken Hill and all of the cities are somewhere on the lines of 20 000-30 000. Both Mt Isa and Broken Hill being Mining Cities. There are other Towns out there but they range to something like couple of Hundred to about 7k.

Don't forget Kalgoorlie as well. And Coober Pedy is about 5000 but is the awesomest town on Earth. It's like a wild west town.

Don't forget that Darwin also got bombed during WW2 and was flattened by Cyclone Tracy.

Poor Darwin...it could have been the other great tropical metropolis but God really has a hate boner on for that town. Maybe because of the evolution thing.

Don't forget Kalgoorlie as well. And Coober Pedy is about 5000 but is the awesomest town on Earth. It's like a wild west town.

I didn't specificly point out Towns, Only Mt Isa, Alice Springs and Broken Hill as they're the biggest cities of the Desert regions. But then I added the thing about a few towns out there ranging from 5000-7000 ppl, but I forgot to mention all the Townships that range from 15-3k.

I thought Kalgoorlie was in the 25-30,000 range.

I'm not sure, but from what I've read, I think its that Kalgoorlie is about 10 000 and Coolgardie-boulder is about 7 000 or so.

Kal-Boul is about 29,000.

Its more the same reason as why people in Canada wouldn't live in the arctic as to here. Because its Harsh, Hot and you can die if you aren't living in some town or not prepared out there, You can get lost out there too, but yes the climate is very opposite.

But thats why theres only Three Cities in the Outback areas.
Mt Isa, Alice Springs and Broken Hill and all of the cities are somewhere on the lines of 20 000-30 000. Both Mt Isa and Broken Hill being Mining Cities. There are other Towns out there but they range to something like couple of Hundred to about 7k.

i was refering to a why it never developed a major costal city like the other states, not about the interor

Gertzy get a map!

Coolgardie is a small town 40km west of Kalgoorlie and only has a population of a few thousand.

Kalgoorlie - Boulder (twin cities within 2km of each other) has a population of 30000, making it Australia's largest remote outback city. How do I know, .....I live there!

By the way, Broken Hill has a population of 20,440
Mt Isa has a population of 20,663
Alice Springs population of 26,958
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/1020492cfcd63696ca2568a1002477b5/73590dcedade3856ca256fcc0075ad7d!OpenDocument
Map of Kalgoorlie-Boulder (http://www.arta.com.au/wamaps/kalgoorlie/)

Kingaroy:
http://img207.exs.cx/img207/766/kingaroykingaroyst3pv.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

Mmmm metro Mildura is around 50k - would that make it the biggest "desert/outback" city?

Its more the same reason as why people in Canada wouldn't live in the arctic as to here. Because its Harsh, Hot and you can die if you aren't living in some town or not prepared out there, You can get lost out there too, but yes the climate is very opposite.

But thats why theres only Three Cities in the Outback areas.
Mt Isa, Alice Springs and Broken Hill and all of the cities are somewhere on the lines of 20 000-30 000. Both Mt Isa and Broken Hill being Mining Cities. There are other Towns out there but they range to something like couple of Hundred to about 7k.


As mentioned, don't forget Kalgoorlie-Boulder. It is over 30k and is outback.

Mmmm metro Mildura is around 50k - would that make it the biggest "desert/outback" city?

Not when you condsider the size of the area that is used to define Mildura, provided by the ABS. Looks like any area of 50 x 50km. I would imagine that the Mildura urban area represents only a fraction of that, with the remainder comprising citrus farms / orchards etc.Mildura Rural City (http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/abs@.nsf/66f306f503e529a5ca25697e0017661f/53ed48e56a6bb4b7ca256ad4007f6819/$FILE/Map%202%20from%20VIC_ASGC.pdf) .

What I ment was Largest urban centre (representing the built up metro area)in the outback. Kalgoorlie wins that claim hands down, as the entire population of 30000 lives within the urban metro area. There are no outlying farming communities to speak of surrounding Kalgoorlie. (The next closest town is Kambalda, pop 5000) In that respect it is a truly isolated outback community, similar in isolation to Alice Springs (although I agree that when it comes to isolation, you can't beat the Alice )

aUSTRALIA only takes about 80K TO 120K immigration a year. Canada takes about 350 000 and the US about 800 000. Figures from a university about a year ago i remember.

^
Yes but you can't compare ours to the US on pure numbers. They have 15 times the population to begin with. Canada on the other hand is a valid comparison. Australia, over the past few years has been much closer to 120K than 80K though and will increase that over the next few years.

^ True. I wasnt making comparison. US has much more land suitable for human living than oz, but yes i think canada is a fair comparison. They still take a lot more immigrants than oz though.

By the way, Broken Hill has a population of 20,440
Mt Isa has a population of 20,663
Alice Springs population of 26,958

Well I did not know that fucking Coolgardie was like some 40 odd k out of Kalgoorlie, and that Kalgoorlie-Boulder combined is 30 000 people, and By the way Arsehole, If you didn't read all the other Quotes or my Post I said that these cities , in the Quote which were Mount Isa, Alice Springs and Broken Hill were in the lines of 20-30 000. So I already knew their Population areas.

aUSTRALIA only takes about 80K TO 120K immigration a year. Canada takes about 350 000 and the US about 800 000. Figures from a university about a year ago i remember.

I think that 350k immigration for Canada is not quite right. That's more like how much they grow including natural increase.

aUSTRALIA only takes about 80K TO 120K immigration a year. Canada takes about 350 000 and the US about 800 000. Figures from a university about a year ago i remember.

That is not correct, at least as regards Australia. Aust now has 140,000 non asylum immigration a year + about 15,000 refugees.

From memory, America takes closer to a million while canada is 220,000.

Gertzy........
Hate to be rude but you need to go back to school.
Canada was originally founded by the French, the English really didn't arrive for a hundred years later.
Even til 1950 french Quebec was the most populas province. Quebec was taken over by the English in the late 1700's by a war.
Quebec has civil law, rest of Canada common.
Canada got a lot more immigrants from Europe early on as opposed to Australia which was still basically Anglo til after the war.
Canada is officially a bilingual country. The nations largest relious denomination is Catholic.{although nobody goes}
The separist movement in Quebec is VERY strong and recently getting stronger. In this current parliament the Quebec sparist party sent more separists to Ottawa than anyohter party from Quebec.
Canada is a more politically and socially liberal country as having this background, consenus has always had to be the order of the day to keep the country together.
Canada sends 80% of our exports to the US and they send 25% of theirs to us.
Quebec is very pacifist and so is much of the rest of Canada. We are a very non-0religious country in terms of attendance and our birth-rate amongst the lowest on the planet. We are decidedly anti-American in our foreighn and domestic poilcy, much more so than Australia.
Our climates have shaped our country's lifestlyes and beleifs. There is no such thing in Canada as the frontiersman due to our climates. Cold climates meant all Canadians had to live somewhat communally or would litterally die if they did not have neighbours. This has helped forge our more Nordic outlooks and lifestyles. Although we are part of the common-wealth and we have those similarities our values and beleifs tend to be more Nordic than Britsih.
Canada waas also essentially founded as a trading station........namely beaver. Canada was settled by French Canadians for its beaver pelts and went to France/Europe. This is why the world's first department store and corporation were founded in Canada.......the Hudson Bay company. It is still our largest retailer.
We have always had to deal with "Manifest Destiny" of our neighbours which you have not, the American idea that they should own the continent. Of course that matters nothing today but meant a lot previous to 1900. This is why Canada was the first country to have its own Parliament whitih the commonwealth. To help the idea that Canada was not just part of Britain.
Did you know that the reason the Canadian Royal Mounted Police was created for just that reason. There was such a large threat in the last part of the 1900s that the US would anex western Canada that we created them. Sending our small forces and British ones there would have been seen as the excuse the US needed to attack. Therefore the RCMP was created..........they sent a new "policeforce". It reaffirmed our territory without pissing off the Yanks.
It is true that we hold similar values in some ways but not as much as you think. I know that Australia has its own unique culture and I know that you are complety different from the states but if you would compare JUST the two as which is more socially and politically similar to the US it would be Australia.
Please don't take that in anyway that you are like the Yanks just that we are more so different.

^
I'm confused.....is your post in response to...

Probably because Australia and Canada is pretty similiar to each other, being like British Founded and similiar democratic stances except for Canada not being in the war on Terrorism and Both countries are picked on by the US even though we both help their arses in different things.

He doesn't seem to have said anything blatantly incorrect or inflammatory.... and for you to say he should go back to school is incredibly rude: could you write up a similar history of Australia? I doubt it....

If you are looking to distance Oz from Canada you havn't convinced me...

Back to Canada’s immigration number - the country only grew by 290,000 over the last year so if it does have an immigration rate of 350,000 then it is losing a lot of people.

I didn't mean to be insulting and if it came by like that then I'm sorry.
But much of a countries are extremly different. Frankly I think Canada has verl little similar to Australia in most ways.
We both have great nations, free and prosperous and 90% of the planet would give their first born to live in either but comparing the two is like comparing apples to oranges, you can love both but doesn't make them the same.

Here are my top 5 reasons -

1. Still in the commonwealth, thus have a shared past.
2. English as primary language, but quite muliticultural with large immigartion. Quebec is a difference
3. Ecconomically strong, crossing many fields from agriculture to engineering, business to biotech.
4. Relatively liberal is society views.
5. Good health care, welfare and education, with low cost to users.

If you want to convince me find another country or two that is more alike to. And don't just say the US, provide justification.

About the only major difference I can see is that while the US is the large powerful country in the region rather than Canada, Austrlia is easily the largest in Oceania.

I tend to agree that Australia's politics is more in sync with the Americans than with Canadians. And the gap's just going to get bigger. Believe it or not, I feel that Canada is more closely aligned with New Zealand than with Australia.

New Zealand and Australia are so similar they my's will become a single country! So if you seem to think Canada is more aligned with New Zealand. Then you basiclly saying Canada is aligned with Australia.

New Zealand and Australia are so similar they my's will become a single country! So if you seem to think Canada is more aligned with New Zealand. Then you basiclly saying Canada is aligned with Australia.

Nope. When NZ & OZ becomes one country, Canada & the US will become one. Thus, Canada & NZ are still similiar, & Oz takes on its role as the US of Oceania. Of course, I don't want this scenario to play out that way, but it could happen, especially after NAFTA.

Canada & NZ has a lot of paralells ...

1. Except for land mass, anything that links Australia & Canada together can also be applied to NZ & Canada
2. Both have big brothers(OZ & US) watching them
3. Both have big brothers as their largest trading partner
4. Both are socially more liberal and less militaristic than their big brothers
5. Climate wise, Canada & NZ are closer aligned
6. BC is an exact replica of NZ

^^^^^^^^^^What nonsence.
Frankly considering we are both large nations , relativly sparcly populated and members of the commonwealth, I'm surprised how little we have in common.
Both great countries but very different socially, politically, and yes, economically. 80% of all our exports go the one country, the US [unfortunatly}.
Canada also has a larger manufacturing base, namly cars.
Canada is the world's fifth largest car maker due to the autopact with the US. One in every 6 vehicles sold in the US was manufactured in Canada.
Ontario produces more cars than Michigan.
As far as I know, and correct me if I'm wrong but Australia only produces for the domestic market. {not sure if it produces for NZ}.
Also our histories and colonisation are COMPLETLY different. Our climates have also helped shape our socities as well.

I must say, as a side note, that I am very surprised the way things in Australia are going. You seem to be following the US in foreign policy and even its domestic policy like same-sex marriage. Somewhat disturbing.

^ssiguy2, who are you addressing?

Canada also has a larger manufacturing base, namly cars.
Canada is the world's fifth largest car maker due to the autopact with the US. One in every 6 vehicles sold in the US was manufactured in Canada.
Ontario produces more cars than Michigan.
As far as I know, and correct me if I'm wrong but Australia only produces for the domestic market. {not sure if it produces for NZ}. .

Australia produces a lot of cars for middle eastern markets as well as domestic.

Gertzy........
Hate to be rude but you need to go back to school.
Canada was originally founded by the French, the English really didn't arrive for a hundred years later.
Even til 1950 french Quebec was the most populas province. Quebec was taken over by the English in the late 1700's by a war.

SSIGUY, I'm already in School, I am 15. In High School.

Australia produces a lot of cars for middle eastern markets as well as domestic.

And we also produce for New Zealand too, and some cars are also sent to Canada, Mainly Toyota.

And we also produce for New Zealand too, and some cars are also sent to Canada, Mainly Toyota.

Export to Canada? Canada already produces its own Toyota cars, and ships off its excess to the US. It would be absolutely absurd to export cars to Canada, since shipping alone would cost a bundle. Canada's main car imports are either from Japan, the US, and Europe. Sorry, but I doubt Australian cars will ever make it to North American shores, let alone Canadian soil.

Middle-East is definitely a huge market for Australia though.

Export to Canada? Canada already produces its own Toyota cars, and ships off its excess to the US. It would be absolutely absurd to export cars to Canada, since shipping alone would cost a bundle. Canada's main car imports are either from Japan, the US, and Europe. Sorry, but I doubt Australian cars will ever make it to North American shores, let alone Canadian soil.


I can't see why we'd be exporting to Canada either.
I know we export a few to the US though. Slightly higher end models.

As far as I know, and correct me if I'm wrong but Australia only produces for the domestic market. {not sure if it produces for NZ}.


Very wrong. The Pontiac GTO is a rebadged Holden Monaro made in Australia. Holden also exports large quantities of Commodores to the Middle East and South America. Toyota exports Camry's worldwide. Mitsubisha exports Magna's also. There are 4 manufacturers of automobiles in Australia with a domestic market of 980k cars sold last year.

Australian politics closer to American than Canadian?

ah no.

We may have a Liberal-Conservative government in power, but our PM and his government is far 'wetter' than any American would be - and in any case, every state & territory government is ALP - and last time I looked, that was further left than any party in government in the US and Canada.

I must say, as a side note, that I am very surprised the way things in Australia are going. You seem to be following the US in foreign policy and even its domestic policy like same-sex marriage. Somewhat disturbing.

One thing to note is that Australia still doesn't totally back US policy, especially in Asia. It has been said that if China and the US did go to war, Australia would be unlikely to be invovled (even with the ANZUS treaty). The American governement didn't like, considering the treaty as an "you're either for us, or against us' kind of thing but the Australia has still stuck to its guns to date. The federal govenment seems to agree with Iraq (against the views of their constituent it seems), but Australias two biggest tradding partners are Japan and China - and that seems to be shaping our policy. Australia has not done everthing it has been urged to by the American admin: declined America's request to urge the Europeans to maintain their arms embargo against China.

On another facet, religion and its affects on society at larger are very different in the US that it is in Australia.

Australian politics closer to American than Canadian?

ah no.

We may have a Liberal-Conservative government in power, but our PM and his government is far 'wetter' than any American would be - and in any case, every state & territory government is ALP - and last time I looked, that was further left than any party in government in the US and Canada.

Not really. For one, the ALP is more to the right than the Provincial Liberal parties. Also, in no way is the ALP similar to the the socialist ideologies of the NDP in Saskatchewan and Manitoba. For one, Australia relies on a two-tier health system, an idea that even the most right wing of Canadian governing parties would fear to bring up. NDP & Liberals & BQ will defend the 100% public health system to the end of time, and the Conservatives would be too worried about the popular vote to ever drop this bomb in the public arena. As I have always said, Australia's centrist politics is closely aligned with America's Democratic Party ... To Canadians, the Democratic Party would actually be considered to be more right-wing than Canadian Conservatives ...

Just some food for thought. :)

^^^Very true
Even the democrats would be a right wing party.
The Conservatives are so worried about a public backlash about gay right that they are totally commited to total equality partnership..everything but marriage. It means nothing because that's already the case across the country. 7 of the ten provinces have gay marriage representing 86% of the population.
A party that doesn't represent total equality in this regard is truly considered lunatic fringe. I under Australia is not near that level.
Religion has never played a role in Canadian politics unlike the US....we see it and we don't like it.
In the US, whether Dem or Rep you must state you have stronge christian values or your at an end politically. Canada is the exact opposite, stating you are religious is political suicide.
You may have the Labour Party but Aus is still considerable right of Canada on both foreign and domestic policy.
Much of the reason Canada is so liberal and becoming even more so is that the US is going even more right. Canadians don't like the American values and society and tend to do the 180 to distance ourselves from their influence. The more conservative they get the more liberal we get.
I don't know if you get a lot of the specialty news channels in Aus but you wouldn't beleive how they refer to "sovietcanukistane" a "the big red mennace", and "the socialist hoards to the north". Some churches actually pray for Canada's deliverence as we have strayed from gods word and as a nation we have lost our way.

As the old joke goes , God decided to make a huge country in the north, beautiful, abundant, friendly, bountiful. So the first ever Candian said thank you god for creating such a wonderful land, you truly are a kind god.............then god kinda chuckled to himself and said, ya, but what til you meet the neighbours.

I had always held Canadians in a high regard but you guys are quickly changing my mind, you clearly have no idea about Australia and are sounding more and more like your ignorant and arrogant neighbours....Ooooops, sorry about that, didnt really mean it!!
But seriously, where the hell are you getting your info? Of course were different politically and economically, we cant even walk across a border and you guys can walk next door to the biggest powerhouse in the world. While you seem to find the US annoying to say the least, the benefit that Canada has had because of your geographical location is massive.

I think socially we are very similar countries and I get this idea from the many Canadians I have known in my 30 years on the planet. The only social comment made on here was to do with Same-Sex Marraige. No, its not legal here yet, but I hardly find it disturbing in any way, and yes I am gay. It does not stop us from having a family, all aspects of government recognise our relationships as at least Defacto, and if you need a piece of paper to prove to anyone that you love your partner then that doesnt seem to be the govts problem.

Its the attitude of the people and the way they approach life that strikes me as the biggest similarity between the two countries (and that IMO they are two of the most beautiful countries in the world). NZ is the only other country that I can think of that comes close to being similar in this way. This is a positive thing for both countries and probably why people from both countries can go anywhere in the world without having to worry about being negatively judged just because of their nationality.

I had always held Canadians in a high regard but you guys are quickly changing my mind, you clearly have no idea about Australia and are sounding more and more like your ignorant and arrogant neighbours....Ooooops, sorry about that, didnt really mean it!!
But seriously, where the hell are you getting your info? Of course were different politically and economically, we cant even walk across a border and you guys can walk next door to the biggest powerhouse in the world. While you seem to find the US annoying to say the least, the benefit that Canada has had because of your geographical location is massive.

Australians tend to have a more positive impression of the United States than Canada does. I guess this has to do with the fact that Australia is quite a distance away, and doesn't have to see (& live with) the US' dirty habits, lol. ;)


I think socially we are very similar countries and I get this idea from the many Canadians I have known in my 30 years on the planet. The only social comment made on here was to do with Same-Sex Marraige. No, its not legal here yet, but I hardly find it disturbing in any way, and yes I am gay. It does not stop us from having a family, all aspects of government recognise our relationships as at least Defacto, and if you need a piece of paper to prove to anyone that you love your partner then that doesnt seem to be the govts problem.

If you compare the platforms of Democrat Americans and Centrists Australians, you will see that they are closer aligned together than with say Canada's Liberals(Centrists). There are some similarities between Canadians & Australians socially, but in the end, US influence is greater than Canadian influence, so your society will more likely reflect those of the US(Democratic blue). It's not in anyways "bad", it's just different.

In the end, socially, I would tend to link Canadians together with New Zealanders, Aussies with Democratic Americans.


Its the attitude of the people and the way they approach life that strikes me as the biggest similarity between the two countries (and that IMO they are two of the most beautiful countries in the world).

Last time I was there, Australia seemed to have a mix of the West Coast lifestyle (without the Mountains) mixed with Texas' confidence and drive.

whoops...I'll try that again in a minute

Australians tend to have a more positive impression of the United States than Canada does. I guess this has to do with the fact that Australia is quite a distance away, and doesn't have to see (& live with) the US' dirty habits, lol. ;)


Amen. I like the Americans just fine, but I like the 10,000 kms of ocean in between them and us even more.

In the end, socially, I would tend to link Canadians together with New Zealanders, Aussies with Democratic Americans.

I agree that Canada is more closely aligned with NZ, but that doesn' mean australia must be linked with the US - I still believe that Australian has more in common with Canada than the US.

I found it interesting that you brought up that Aus has a two-tiered health system.....You do know that New Zealand also has a two-tiered system?... No other country has a system like Canda's....

I found it interesting that you brought up that Aus has a two-tiered health system.....You do know that New Zealand also has a two-tiered system?... No other country has a system like Canda's....

That comparison was exclusively for Oz vs. Canada. :)

I agree that Canada is more closely aligned with NZ, but that doesn' mean australia must be linked with the US - I still believe that Australian has more in common with Canada than the US.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I would tend to say that the closest semblance of the Australian lifestyle is the US's West Coast. :)

Quite suprising to find you guys distressed about me linking you guys with the US (Democrats). :D

What I have said is that I am surprised how little we share condifering our size etc.....I NEVER said we don't have things in common.
We are fortunate to live in one of the world's great nations..........now that is something we have in common.
I understand your analogy between NZ/Aus & Can/USA but there is a huge difference.
We are already a significant nation being part of the G7.........but we are just cabbage-patch compared to the US. It is the worlds only superpower. The relationship is unlike anything on the planet.
I appreciate what you are saying but its not just that we are up against a country 9x the size of us but the fact it is the USA. With Bush that also means, my way or the highway and unfortunatly he has the power, and isn't afraid to use it, that this planet will be run his way.

Very wrong. The Pontiac GTO is a rebadged Holden Monaro made in Australia. Holden also exports large quantities of Commodores to the Middle East and South America. Toyota exports Camry's worldwide. Mitsubisha exports Magna's also. There are 4 manufacturers of automobiles in Australia with a domestic market of 980k cars sold last year.

Very True, Through a deal between Pontiac and Holden, The so called Pontiac GTO will always be pretty much imported from Australia, as Monaros might I add, and from there on, Pontiac then Re-badges it and puts a new fender on as well I think. his has cause the damn yanks to say that they made the "Pontiac GTO" first and brand us copy-cats when mean while, Holden makes them first and ships them to America.

Oh and the President of Brazil happens to proudly own and also be chaffured in a Commodore.

Those Ontario population growth numbers are amazing ! I guess all of that growth is in Toronto ????????? Must be over 100,000 people/ yr which would have to be up there with Vegas as the fast growing in north america ???????
The best Melb and Syd have EVER done is about 60,000 / yr in recent yrs I think.

Those Ontario population growth numbers are amazing ! I guess all of that growth is in Toronto ????????? Must be over 100,000 people/ yr which would have to be up there with Vegas as the fast growing in north america ???????
The best Melb and Syd have EVER done is about 60,000 / yr in recent yrs I think.

QLD's growth is amazing too at 80k/yr, & it only has a population under 4 million.

Interesting comparison of Canada & NZ:

O Canada! We stand on guard for thee

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?ObjectID=3521966

Diana Wichtel
COMMENT

Will the persecution never end? The other morning, while innocently driving my daughter to school, I was forced, as always, to abandon Morning Report - well, Holmes if I'm being honest - for her favourite radio station.

The breakfast-show crew were conducting a ring-in to establish the world's three most hideous holiday destinations. And there was Canada, place of my birth, second only to Iraq.

At least some of my compatriots weren't taking this lying down. "Um, I don't think I could fit a maple tree there," quavered one of the crew, responding to a faxed, anatomically problematic suggestion from an enraged expat.

I've long since got used to the fact that my native land is a running joke, and not just on South Park. Blame Canada? Why not? Everyone else does.

Still, after curling made it into the Winter Olympics, even I began to see the funny side. This is the nation that gave the world Pamela Anderson and depressive folk singers from Leonard Cohen to Joni Mitchell. Further sapping the will to live are such punishing Canadians as Celine Dion and Alanis Morissette. One of our most famous sons, Jim Carrey, achieved stardom by talking out of his bum.

But, after so long being the Ken Barlow of nations and against spectacular odds, Canada is having the last laugh. The country is boring no more, thanks to some changes that are, depending on your point of view, liberal and enlightened or sending the nation to hell in a handcart.

Nandor will be beside himself to hear that while marijuana won't be legal in Canada, the Government proposes decriminalising. Possession of small amounts would be punishable by the equivalent of a parking ticket but with increased penalties for growers and dealers. The federal health department is already supplying Government-grown green to patients who have medical authorisation.

Then there's the same sex-marriage thing. Courts in Ontario and British Columbia ruled against a ban on gay marriages earlier this year. Cue front-page pictures of the happy groom and ... groom. The Government has expressed a willingness to enact new legislation to legalise gay marriage across the country, though that's still a way off.

Then there was the war. Like New Zealand, Canada declined to become part of the Coalition of the Willing.

The US, though some states have quite liberal laws of their own, is officially appalled by most of the above, which is all part of the fun. George Bush has some new laws of his own in mind. "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman, and I think we ought to codify that one way or another," he said in July.

And despite the lack of much perceptible progress in the Americans' hardline war on drugs, US drug enforcement officials are predicting dire outcomes from any liberalisation of Canadian laws.

The Canadians remain unperturbed in their new-found independence and maturity, though they're still occasionally struggling with the maturity part. As one columnist pointed out loftily: "You're not the boss of us, George."

The interest in all of this for us is obvious. The Labour Government is proceeding cautiously down a similar track when it comes to social issues. Here's a chance to learn from the Canadian experience. There have always been strong similarities between our situations.

We, too, have suffered from a reputation for being friendly, mild-mannered and just a little dull. We, too, know the pain of trying to establish an identity in the shadow of a more confident, brasher big brother who keeps beating us at everything. If we get mistaken for Aussies overseas, Canadians have had to put up with being seen as Americans in parkas.

Yet similarities can be deceptive. Canadian pollster and social scientist Michael Adams, in his book Fire and Ice: The United States, Canada and the Myth of Converging Values, describes two countries that are, in many important ways, becoming less and less alike.

Adams sees Canada as an initially conservative country that has ended up producing "an autonomous, inner-directed, flexible, tolerant, socially liberal, and spiritually eclectic" people whereas the initially liberal US has produced a people who are "materialistic, outward-directed, intolerant, socially conservative, and deferential to traditional authority".

Generalisations, certainly, but when you think about how New Zealand and Australia have been responding lately to big-ticket issues such as the war in Iraq and immigration, the parallels are striking. Bags we be the Canadians. That would make Australians "materialistic", "intolerant" and so on. Works for me.

As both Canadians and New Zealanders have been reminded lately, going your own way isn't easy. The Canadian jokes haven't dried up. Even the Canadians are making them, branding their homeland "Hippie Nation" and "Woodstock North", but with a certain pride, not to mention surprise, at their own audacity.

American right-wing commentator Pat Buchanan has taken to calling his country's northern neighbour "Soviet Canuckistan", after which "Helengrad" sounds almost affectionate. But at least he's paying attention.

No doubt Canada will get more stick from the US as it continues to grow up and assert itself. Just as we will from Australia. Even the Waltzing Matilda debate is another chance for them to have a go. "The Kiwis are probably just puzzled as to why you'd put a jumbuck in your tucker bag when, with a raised eyebrow and some sweet talk, you could coax it into your sleeping bag," wrote one wag in the Sydney Daily Telegraph. Ha bloody ha.

Never mind, if we can develop some of Canada's new-found confidence in itself (winning the World Cup wouldn't hurt) we may yet get the last laugh.

naughty australia for being so socially conservative, egalitarian & secular, NAUGHTY!

Yes, that article is a bit confused. AUSTRALIANS LOVE TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY. or something. someone's mixing their stereotypes, I think!

Interesting debate, but on so many levels, Australia/NZ/Canada are all very similar. They have their differences of course, but if you put 1000 people in a room representing all of the world's nations, I reckon it would only take about 10 mins before the Aussie, Kiwis and Canadians were enjoying a beer together. A Fosters of course...

^ Nope it would be a Molsons, lol.

"Even til 1950 french Quebec was the most populas province. "


No it wasn't...Ontario has always had a larger population right from confederation ( 1867 ).





KGB

It could be any beer, and the KGB are coming to get me nooooooooooo!!!

This is absurd to look at Canada as a single nation. No, sorry, Canada is not some socialist hippie paridise that is more left wing than New Zealand for god sakes. Canada is more divided politically than you might believe. Western Canada, especally Alberta is more Conservative, with low taxes, and a much better economy. Did you know that Alberta's GDP per capita is more than California?

We do not look at ourselves like 'nordic' nations, we look at ourselves as Canadians, and as much as the left in Canada would like to deny the fact that we are very much like the Americans at the most basic level. We talk like americans, walk like americans, drive american cars, and watch american movies, and work for companies that sell products to americans. We are so similar we have to deny it... (and dont give me the 'canada is more liberal', we just happen to have a liberal in power at the moment, but that can change very quickly)

P.S. Medicare is dead, and has been for over 10 years.

I tend to agree that Australia's politics is more in sync with the Americans than with Canadians. And the gap's just going to get bigger. Believe it or not, I feel that Canada is more closely aligned with New Zealand than with Australia.

Australia's foreign affairs policies are neo-realist in terms of it's agenda. Canadians are more neo-liberalist.

Neo-liberalism:
Instituationalisation. Believing institutions such as UN, ASEAN, WTO, etc are the way to gain security and maintain political harmony. Hence believes in mediation as a sorting dispute before engaging war. They also see it as a struggle between feminism and masculinism...advocacy vs aggression. Hence allows greater participation by allowing 'sovereignty of the people' to have more say.

Neo-realism:
Believes in alliance system such as NATO as a technique for deterrance. A good example is the 'coalition of the willing'. Much more radical and have to be vigulant in policymaking. The heart of the policy is 'collective security'. Democratisation as a way of maintain coherance. It is rare to find an example where democratic nation wages war on another democratic state excluding Pakistan and India. Practice state sovereignty and sees that the gov't must use it's rights in their perspective in the 'nation's interest'.

That's the crust of international relations studies. :D

Canada's current government is centre-left, while Australia's is definitely centre-right. Canada just approved same-sex marriage. I can't see that happening while Howard's prime minister!

Australia's foreign affairs policies are neo-realist in terms of it's agenda. Canadians are more neo-liberalist.

Neo-liberalism:
Instituationalisation. Believing institutions such as UN, ASEAN, WTO, etc are the way to gain security and maintain political harmony. Hence believes in mediation as a sorting dispute before engaging war. They also see it as a struggle between feminism and masculinism...advocacy vs aggression. Hence allows greater participation by allowing 'sovereignty of the people' to have more say.

That definitely sounds like the Canadian Government.

No wonder Australia's military expenditure is higher than Canada. ;)

^
Yes but you can't compare ours to the US on pure numbers. They have 15 times the population to begin with. Canada on the other hand is a valid comparison. Australia, over the past few years has been much closer to 120K than 80K though and will increase that over the next few years.


The immigrant population in Spain grew in 660.000 persons in the last year, and is not a big country,the total population is now of 43.975.400

Yeah but a lot of those immigrants are just "passing" through? Is Spain like a gateway for many to go onto other Euro countries? It is insane to take that many immigrants into a modest population of just over 40mill. Australia takes about 150k legal immigrants a year and it would be very difficult for services, infrastructure, support mechanism's etc etc to cope with a proportionately similar immigrant (Say about 310k/yr) level to what Spain is apparently taking.

Canada's current government is centre-left, while Australia's is definitely centre-right. Canada just approved same-sex marriage. I can't see that happening while Howard's prime minister!
john howard's just an idiot, where screwed now that liberal have control of the senate.

It may be that the status quo is the same in the Canada, Australia, and the US. Whenever there is a general election, the inner-city areas usually vote for more liberal policy-makers, while further out in the suburbs, the conservatives maintain their dominance. One you make it out into the rural areas, there are the reactionaries and the arch-conservatives throwing up hideous abominations like One Nation and the National Front. Is this to do with education levels, greater multiculturalism in the cities, urban affluence?

Admittedly, in Melbourne and Sydney, the wealthy inner-city areas still vote conservative, but are also very tolerant of their gay communities and are active on social and environmental issues. It seems the same in the US where the North-East Coast and the West Coast vote more progressively, and the numerous inland and Southern states vote redneck. How about Canada?

If only votes were proportionate to your level of education - one vote if you finish high school, two if you finish undergraduate tertiary, and three if you study post-graduate. The policies of all three countries might be very different.

Now Australia has to deal with the Family First Party, a dressed-up collection of bible-bashing fundamentalists, feeding from the incomes of the brainwashed, and appealing to the most base and terrified instincts of the least informed and aware.

Yeah but a lot of those immigrants are just "passing" through? Is Spain like a gateway for many to go onto other Euro countries? It is insane to take that many immigrants into a modest population of just over 40mill. Australia takes about 150k legal immigrants a year and it would be very difficult for services, infrastructure, support mechanism's etc etc to cope with a proportionately similar immigrant (Say about 310k/yr) level to what Spain is apparently taking.


Not,Spain is not any bridge, is the principal objective of many immigrants for diverse motives...

This one is the information of last years

http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/3795/inmi2005parte139dy.jpg
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/8595/inmi2005parte233ga.jpg

Immigrants' increase, In 6 years 3 million more of immigrants, spain receives a lot of inmigrants from latinamerican, europe and morocco


1999-2000:+ 174 926
2000-2001:+ 446 778
2001-2002:+ 607 289
2002-2003:+ 686 222
2003-2004:+ 370 158
2004-2005:+ 657 221

An update with spain :D

Spain - 43,975,400 + 777.691

Canada - 32,078,819 + 290,184

Australia - 20,507,264 + 249,282


Ordered by population

1 Ontario - 12,449,502 +137,081 can

2 Andalucía - 7,829,200

3 Quebec - 7,568,640 +51,690 can

4 Cataluña - 6,984,200

5 New South Wales - 6,819,565 +51,633 aus

6 Comunidad de Madrid - 5,921,000

7 Victoria - 5,064,365 + 58,168 aus

8 Comunidad Valenciana 4,672,200

9 British Columbia - 4,219,968 +46,372 can

10 Queensland - 4,039,272 + 99,586 aus

11 Alberta - 3,223,415 +44,349 can

12 Galicia 2,760,200

13 Castilla y León 2,501,500

14 - País Vasco 2,103,000

15 Western Australia - 2,030,627 + 30,814 aus

16 Islas Canarias - 1,962,000

17 Castilla La Mancha - 1,888,500

19 South Australia - 1,545,939 + 7,275 aus

20 Región de Murcia - 1,334,000

21 Aragón - 1,267,000

22 Manitoba - 1,174,645 +9,683 can

23 Extremadua - 1,080,800

24 Asturias - 1.074.000

25 Saskatchewan - 995,280 +837 can

26 Islas Baleares - 980,000

27 Nova Scotia - 937,538 +318 can

28 New Brunswick - 751,257 +516 can

29 Navarra - 592,500

30 Cantabria - 561,000

31 Newfoundland & Labrador - 516,986 -1,823 can

32 Tasmania - 485,898 + 2,949 aus

33 Australian Capital Territory - 324,325 + 713 aus

34 La rioja - 300,700

35 Northern Terrytory 197,603 - 549 aus

36 Prince Edward Island - 137,734 +114 can

37 Ceuta - 74,800

38 Melilla - 65,300

39 Northwest Territories - 42,944 +315 can

40 Yukon Territory - 31,227 +300 can

41 Nunavut - 29,683 +432

Is this to do with education levels, greater multiculturalism in the cities, urban affluence?

Yes.

Admittedly, in Melbourne and Sydney, the wealthy inner-city areas still vote conservative, but are also very tolerant of their gay communities and are active on social and environmental issues. It seems the same in the US where the North-East Coast and the West Coast vote more progressively, and the numerous inland and Southern states vote redneck. How about Canada?

Toronto was a special case in that all the ridings except 1 went to the Liberals. The lone riding went to NDP (socialist), Conservatives had zero. Conservatives made a couple of breakthroughs in the suburbs. All the affluent ridings went Liberal.

MAPS
Blue = Conservatives
Red = Liberals
Orange = NDP Socialists

Toronto (Downtown-Uptown ridings)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/33/Ct04.PNG

Toronto (rest of city proper):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/86/St04.PNG

Suburban municipalities(Brampton, Mississauga and Oakville):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a4/Bm04.PNG

Suburban municipalities (Southern Durham & York):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1d/Sd04.PNG

Niagara Falls - Hamilton Region(Golden Horseshoe):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c3/Hb04.PNG

PEI, NorthWest Territories, Nunavat and Yukon Territory all went Liberal.

PEI
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cb/Pe04.PNG

NWT, Nunavat, Yukon
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/86/Nc04.PNG

Calgary's the only large city in Canada that has solid Conservative ridings.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ed/Ca04.PNG

Alberta's the Conservative province:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/31/Ra04.PNG

Quebec is also another special case in that Zero ridings went to the Conservatives. Quebec has its own separatist party (Parti Quebecois)... Quebec is the key factor that keeps Canada more Liberal than both the US and Australia.

Now Australia has to deal with the Family First Party, a dressed-up collection of bible-bashing fundamentalists, feeding from the incomes of the brainwashed, and appealing to the most base and terrified instincts of the least informed and aware.

There's no federal alternative, but something in Canada that might come close to the Family First Party is the provincial Alberta Alliance Party. It has one MLA in the Alberta provincial legislature.

^
The family first party is yet to get a member in the house of representatives, although it does have one member in the senate (purely on preferences). It was their first federal campaign, and the only affect they had was in providing preferences for the Liberal-National coaltion, but who knows what will happen in the future.

On average Australians are somewhat cynical of such religious parties as shown by the relative failure of the Christian Democrat Party - which presents itself as "Christian" while FFP tries presents itself as "secular" (perhaps a joke?). I'm sure it wasn't helped when the comment "lesbians should be burnt at the stake" was broadcast nationtionally (they claimed that the member had been disciplined for the statments) and the egging of some greens party supporters (denyed of course).

It may be that the status quo is the same in the Canada, Australia, and the US. Whenever there is a general election, the inner-city areas usually vote for more liberal policy-makers, while further out in the suburbs, the conservatives maintain their dominance. One you make it out into the rural areas, there are the reactionaries and the arch-conservatives throwing up hideous abominations like One Nation and the National Front. Is this to do with education levels, greater multiculturalism in the cities, urban affluence?

Admittedly, in Melbourne and Sydney, the wealthy inner-city areas still vote conservative, but are also very tolerant of their gay communities and are active on social and environmental issues. It seems the same in the US where the North-East Coast and the West Coast vote more progressively, and the numerous inland and Southern states vote redneck. How about Canada?

If only votes were proportionate to your level of education - one vote if you finish high school, two if you finish undergraduate tertiary, and three if you study post-graduate. The policies of all three countries might be very different.

Now Australia has to deal with the Family First Party, a dressed-up collection of bible-bashing fundamentalists, feeding from the incomes of the brainwashed, and appealing to the most base and terrified instincts of the least informed and aware.

Wow that's some theory you have there... I wonder if you have ever been to some suburbs in Sydney. Judging from your post i betting- no way in hell. What does location have to do with education?? Seems very Elitist way of thinking, a major form of conservatism .

On average Australians are somewhat cynical of such religious parties as shown by the relative failure of the Christian Democrat Party - which presents itself as "Christian" while FFP tries presents itself as "secular" (perhaps a joke?). I'm sure it wasn't helped when the comment "lesbians should be burnt at the stake" was broadcast nationtionally (they claimed that the member had been disciplined for the statments) and the egging of some greens party supporters (denyed of course).

If that was ever said in Canada, they would be charged for hate crimes. :runaway:

Alberta Alliance considers itself an alternative to the Alberta Provincial Conservative Party (ruling party)... a bunch of right wingers banning together to protest the existing provincial government for being elitist. They're more concerned about the preservation of "family" life than religion.

^
the comment was made because one of major candiates (for the Liberal party) was a lesbian. It was up to her to complain and because of the election she didn't - but loads of other people did.

If nothing else they have some very unusual polices - 'harm reduction' of drugs instead of total bans, a disagreement with the war on Iraq and support Indigenous Australians and immigrants that goes beyond the norm for a conservative party.

Despite their protest of being secular, except for their supporters, no one actually believes it. But also they don't seem to bring up religion at all.

Wow that's some theory you have there... I wonder if you have ever been to some suburbs in Sydney. Judging from your post i betting- no way in hell. What does location have to do with education?? Seems very Elitist way of thinking, a major form of conservatism .

Location has a lot to do with education. Families that live in Toorak and Vaucluse can generally afford to send their children to exclusive private schools where unfortunately, children get far greater attention from teachers, are taught in smaller classes and receive a more concentrated form of education. They are also quite often, sheltered from some of the social problems endemic in lower socio-economic areas of the country. Have you heard of the 'old boy' network? It is alive and well in Victoria, and I'm sure in NSW as well, and it keeps those kids in Sydney's outer-suburbs you mention, from ever running major companies or holding senior positions in government. And yes, it is extremely elitist. I wish the outer suburbs and rural Australia had the same kind of funding for their schools as that of schools in Melbourne's inner-East. There are real problems emerging as wealth in Australia becomes polarised.

Please don't confuse the national status-quo regarding education with my political opinions, or my sense of what is just and fair. I am certainly not an elitist, and in fact think private schooling should be abolished altogether. The saddest thing is that the least informed are also the most susceptible to scare mongering, and in the last few years, many frightened people have voted for a government that does not have their best interests at heart, way out there, a hundred miles away from Kings College or Toorak Village.

How come there are so many conservatives in Calgary/Alberta?

I'd love to live in Catalunya for a while!

Location has a lot to do with education. Families that live in Toorak and Vaucluse can generally afford to send their children to exclusive private schools where unfortunately, children get far greater attention from teachers, are taught in smaller classes and receive a more concentrated form of education. They are also quite often, sheltered from some of the social problems endemic in lower socio-economic areas of the country. Have you heard of the 'old boy' network? It is alive and well in Victoria, and I'm sure in NSW as well, and it keeps those kids in Sydney's outer-suburbs you mention, from ever running major companies or holding senior positions in government. And yes, it is extremely elitist. I wish the outer suburbs and rural Australia had the same kind of funding for their schools as that of schools in Melbourne's inner-East. There are real problems emerging as wealth in Australia becomes polarised.

Please don't confuse the national status-quo regarding education with my political opinions, or my sense of what is just and fair. I am certainly not an elitist, and in fact think private schooling should be abolished altogether. The saddest thing is that the least informed are also the most susceptible to scare mongering, and in the last few years, many frightened people have voted for a government that does not have their best interests at heart, way out there, a hundred miles away from Kings College or Toorak Village.

Like i said, you really haven't been to the outer suburbs of Sydney. There is a suburb near where i live (i live in Castle Hill) called Glenhaven (where Delta Goodrem is from) where there are mansions and many of the Ceo's live. It seems like the latest trend actually, to build an estate. In fact i remember a friend in West Pennant Hills living next door to the director of Macdonalds in Australia or something. Now i'm not saying that what you say is totally incorrect, there are some facets of truth in what you say (if you do/don't believe in it). It's just what the media likes to project (sterotypes are great for them). I really can't speak for Melb, but i can say that in Sydney, if you have the brains you can get anywhere no matter where you live.

How come there are so many conservatives in Calgary/Alberta?

Albertans are usually more comfortable with Conservative policies (fiscal & social) & many were staunch supporters of the former Canadian Alliance Reform Party. The Reform movement springed up from the rural consituencies of Alberta in protest of Ottawa (Western alienation), and that is still its core base of support today.

In 2003 , the "Unite the Right" movement occured to merge the Reform Party (Western Canada party) with the Progessive Conservatives (more of a Eastern - Central Canada party) into the newly minted Canadian Conservative Party. The merge occured to end the Liberal dynasty (in power since 1993), restore Conservatism in Canada & gain the right to govern.

It is interesting to note though, that many policies of Canada's Conservative Party is in sync with John Howard's Liberals. Some of the Canadian Conservative policies are even a little more left-wing than John Howard's government, since any party who wants to govern has to appease the progessive constituents of Quebec.

How come there are so many conservatives in Calgary/Alberta?

Short answer would be money. Due to it's oil and other natural resources, Alberta is shockingly rich compared with the rest of Canada or indeed most of the U.S. They run huge surpluses while the rest of the provinces (even Ontario) run deficits. And it's no revelation that wealth tends to make people more conservative in their outlook.

Also Alberta is sort of like the Texas of the North with their cattle ranching and oil fields. I'm not saying those two things equal a political shift to the right, but the similaritis are there.

And as RT said, Alberta has been the centre of right wing Canadian politics for quite some time, helped along by the continuing prescence of Ralf Klien as the premier, a man with big ideas for his province, think of him as a sort of more conservative Canuck Jeff Kennet.

And just as a side note, I found the skyscrapers in Calgary rather dulll......

What's weird about John Howard's party is their name, "Liberal Party" when they are actually the conservatives.

Sorry, but I doubt Australian cars will ever make it to North American shores, let alone Canadian soil.



I don't know if we exported it to Canada but it definitely got to the US, It wasn't exactly Australia's proudest auto-manufacturing moment but I feel it would be remiss of us to overlook the Ford Capri - now that was an export story.

Jeff Kennett wasn't conservative, he was neo-liberal, and even now the left is getting the better of him with his involvement with Beyond Blue etc.

Whenever there is a general election, the inner-city areas usually vote for more liberal policy-makers, while further out in the suburbs, the conservatives maintain their dominance. One you make it out into the rural areas, there are the reactionaries and the arch-conservatives throwing up hideous abominations like One Nation and the National Front. Is this to do with education levels, greater multiculturalism in the cities, urban affluence?


Oh come on, levels of education would not necessarily ensure people vote decidedly more left. There are just as many uneducated and extreme views and parties reflected in the far left. The extremes at either end of the spectrum always seem slightly extraneous to the masses.

Less educated redneck voters have just as much right as anyone to make their voices heard. I find it rather elitist anyone could suggest a right to vote based on a level of educational attainment, it would be like saying everyone with a degree has a level of intelligence superior to those with many years of practical and learned experience.

Many people vote on what they believe is fashionable - intelligence does not even come into the equation sometimes. An educated vote may be a good vote but it does not ensure there would be much change to the voting status-quo anyway. What annoys me is when the "educated" inner-city types vote green to appease their own environmental conscience.

Using terms like "abomination" to describe a party is less than productive, some may think the left-wing parties like the Greens a possible "abomination".

Tayser - What's beyond blue? Never heard of it!

Depression Initiative.

http://www.beyondblue.org.au/

Less educated redneck voters have just as much right as anyone to make their voices heard. I find it rather elitist anyone could suggest a right to vote based on a level of educational attainment, it would be like saying everyone with a degree has a level of intelligence superior to those with many years of practical and learned experience.

Right on.

I find left wing, right wing crap very wish washy. There are realists and liberalists in Australia but i do think it depends on their level of ignorance. In my lectures (International Relations: Continuity & Change) there are diverse range of perspective despite having been taught by a liberalist lecturer.

I do find it frustrating when people still have this picture that most asylum seekers are terrorist or that War in Iraq is justifiable.

Pftt - Sydney's not hectic, try Tokyo.
Sydney is just a big country town in comparison.
jt
JAY!...... :weird: :ohno: :pet:

I do find it frustrating when people still have this picture that most asylum seekers are terrorist or that War in Iraq is justifiable.

I find it frustrating when people assume the war in Iraq isn't justifiable, just because they don't believe the most commonly touted 'reasons' used to justify it.

For every sucker in the world that believes what the goverment tells them, there's another sucker who believes what the tree hugging hippies tell them.

I prefer to make up my own mind, for my own reasons, and just because there are reasons against something, that I happen to agree with; doesn't mean that I won't agree with the action for other reasons.

But you're right, I don't think any terrorist has shown up on a leaky boat. Most likely in first class on a plane wearing a suit, with all the right documents.

Miliux & associates.

I agree that voting shouldnt be based on an intellect level or anything, but i can see the arguement behind it, and hence i think that it shouldnt be compulsory.

Can you (as a more informed person) offer me insight into why they still retain it as a compulsory thing??

Mandatory voting isnt a perfect system, but the alternative is to have you're government formed on the basis of a majority of a minority. Would you prefer 15% of the population deciding how the country is run and who runs it? Such a small electorate is so much more sensitive to lobby groups and single interest parties. All you have to do is look at the US system which is held hostage by so many pressure groups, ranging from agricultural lobbies to jewish groups.
With everyone voting you have the best chance of actually getting a government that represents the largest proportion of the population and their interests.

Can you (as a more informed person) offer me insight into why they still retain it as a compulsory thing??

As a citizen of any country, you have to participate in politics actively to use your right of speech and press. If you do not vote, then you have no say when the government policies will be make you more disadvantage. By actively persuing your right to vote, you're part of the 'citizenship', hence physically projecting your voice without being feared or violated.

You can only participate in politics if you know the history. This is why year 9 to 10 history lessons are important because that way you know the past actions of previous governments. In my School of International Relations and Politics, we strongly believe that history repeats itself because it is bounded by theories and judgements.

By excercising that right of secret balloting, not only does it effect the current generations but the future generations. Instances when you or your hereditory generations try to find work, or be entitled to welfare payments.

'Sovereignty of the people' at work.

I find it frustrating when people assume the war in Iraq isn't justifiable, just because they don't believe the most commonly touted 'reasons' used to justify it.

I'll make this short as i don't wanna go diving into a rabbit hole.

It's in the matter of principle that under UN Charter no state have the right to invade another sovereign state unless UN Security Council has passed a resolution. Under the uni-polar movement in which we live in, it is dangerous for America to set this example in history and their reasons for invasion. Don't try to look in just the current politics. What i'm saying that the good future conventions of policymaking has been demised because of their realist practiced.

Resorting to war without mediation is a dangerous play no matter how well you want to twist that truth. You only have to look at the two world wars and how it escalated.

I'm a liberalist thinker and i do believe that global institutions should be well utilised in order to curve any military engagement.

The UN has shown itself to be impotent at intervening even when it has a mandate (Rawanda, Serbia, Iraq, Cambodia...it may have the desire but it doesnt have the will, coherance, capability or ability to intervene under its own authority)....this really affects its credibility later on in the game, as we are seeing now.

Can you (as a more informed person) offer me insight into why they still retain it as a compulsory thing??

Most people will take a greater interest in politics if the have to vote. It also helps prevent extremist views from inciting a minority to vote while the silent majority stay at home.

The idea of the UN is great, the reality is that it's fairly impotent.

Forget WMDs, forget terrorists. Saddam invaded Kuwait, Saddam was still in power in Iraq when the US invaded. IMO the war was a decade late, think of how the Iraqi people suffered due to sanctions in the mean time.

The UN has shown itself to be impotent at intervening even when it has a mandate (Rawanda, Serbia, Iraq, Cambodia...it may have the desire but it doesnt have the will, coherance, capability or ability to intervene under its own authority)....this really affects its credibility later on in the game, as we are seeing now.

I agree that the UN is an incompetant inefficient institution. It's in the matter of the states itself to participate vigerously instead of playing their own game.

The whole compulsory voting issue is a biggie, It has benefits and drawbacks. My wife, before she met me, used to add a box to the ballot paper and vote for Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck! My youngest brother, who should know better, gives his preference to whatever fly-by-night party has the catchiest title! They do this because they see voting as a chore, and their proabaly also cyncial about their vote having the power to change anything!

I laugh long and hard when I see lines of unionists shouting and rallying in the cold melbourne morning - waking up to the fact that the Libs have Reps + Senate Majorities and therefore have absolute power over their lives. I contrast those images with all the lumberjacks who rallied around Howard in Launceston and think - you voted for him fools, now he's gonna take your entitlements and your union power. His IR legislation wont hurt me - I work for a multinational ASX Top 15, I've never had nor needed union representation, and yet I voted for the ones that would've protected their entitlements - idiots!

There's an old saying that people get the government they deserve. That's probably a little unfair in a compulsory voting regime - but ultimately I'm happy with the compulsory system because if nothing else the startling result of the 2004 election will teach a lot of people who never cared before a big lesson about government and politics and then maybe next time they won't be so quick to vote for Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck.

End of Rant! :D

I agree that the UN is an incompetant inefficient institution. It's in the matter of the states itself to participate vigerously instead of playing their own game.


The UN's ineffectiveness is mostly a result of the Security Council and the veto votes that USA, among a few others, demanded when it was set up.

Many people seem to forget that most of the money spent on administration in the UN finds it's way into the US ecomony. I wonder how loud New York would squeal if the UN decided to move to another country?

The entire operational budget of the UN (excluding funds and programmes) is less than what paris spends on its department of sanitation in a year....its pretty insignificant.

Isn't most of the departments at Geneva?

^^ Nah, the largest UN base by far is NY

The entire operational budget of the UN (excluding funds and programmes) is less than what paris spends on its department of sanitation in a year....its pretty insignificant.

Wowsim you seem to have some knowlege of the UN maybe you could answer these questions.

Is there some way of finding out the source of food aid etc that is distributed for the UN and it's agencies? I imaging US suppliers would have a significant stake in that market.

Also how is UN admin and programme banking done? Is it through a single Bank or various and multinational banks. That would be a nice little earner for the banks and other finance industry players.

I'm not an expert, but i am finishing an International Studies degree with an International Relations major.... As far as a know the various agencies, funds and programs that provide humanitarian aid are fairly independent from the main body of the UN (The general assembly, security council, secretariat, economic and social council) They award contracts for aid based on a tender process similar to governmental tenders AFAIK.

Not sure regarding banking, although as the IMF is a UN agency i assume it does most of the banking....