[pitt]

I was just checking Canada GDP and United Kingdom GDP and to my surprise I see that Canada does not even make top 10 richest countries in the world, while the UK is number 6 on the list.

I always had the idea that you had way more opportunities to make money in Canada than to make money in the UK.

Does having a higher GDP translates into more opportunities for local citizens?

I also see that there are more British citizens immigrating to Canada to work than Canadian citizens are immigrating to the UK for work. If a higher GDP means more industries, more jobs, more financial opportunities, why are more British citizens immigrating to Canada to work when the UK is richer than Canada?

The oil boom in Canada shows how easy is to make money in Canada for qualified or non qualified people. The friends I know in Canada are financially better off (they don't even work in the oil industry there) than my friends in the UK.

If your objective was to have more money, would you relocate to Canada or to the UK?

I am just trying to understand this, thanks.

[Deluge]

The U.K does not have the 6th highest GDP per capita in the world, not by a mile. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co...per_capita

Anyone from the U.K whose traveled a lot will tell you the standard of living there is not as high as Northern Europe, Switzerland, Australia or Canada. Thousands of 20 something Brit's emigrate every year, they usually go on working holiday visas for 2 years then apply for skilled migration after. Even amongst the ones who go choose to go home, many have told me they only reason they did was because of their family is back home, and I've yet to meet one whose told me the quality of life in the U.K or Ireland is better than Australia. Many couples and families immigrate too, although they tend to be higher income earners and almost all from London and surrounding counties.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_di...by_country (The population in Spain is mainly retirees).

[pitt]

Forgive me if I am missing something, but if you look at the richest economies in the world, the UK is number 6 http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/rich...d-in-2014/

I was focusing on this GDP (purchasing power parity) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cou..._%28PPP%29 but you are right, I probably should focus on GDP per capita.

But I always had the feeling that a richer economy meant more financial opportunities for the citizens of that particular country.

[Deluge]

(01-25-2015 06:25 AM)pitt Wrote:  

Forgive me if I am missing something, but if you look at the richest economies in the world, the UK is number 6 http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/rich...d-in-2014/

I was focusing on this GDP (purchasing power parity) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cou..._%28PPP%29 but you are right, I probably should focus on GDP per capita.

But I always had the feeling that a richer economy meant more financial opportunities for the citizens of that particular country.

GDP overall is a useless measure of how wealthy the population is. India no. 10? Russia no. 9? Come on. You need to take into account population size, quality of services and infrastructure etc. In terms of Western countries people in Scandinavia, Switzerland and Australia are the wealthiest in the world. (America appears to be similarly wealthy but inequality there is much much higher, which makes the average citizen look better off then they actually are).

[Moma]

GDP doesn't mean shyt. I would never recommend anyone move to the UK over Canada for improved standard of living. It's just some economic padding bullshyt for the brochures.

[pitt]

(01-25-2015 06:31 AM)Deluge Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 06:25 AM)pitt Wrote:  

Forgive me if I am missing something, but if you look at the richest economies in the world, the UK is number 6 http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/rich...d-in-2014/

I was focusing on this GDP (purchasing power parity) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cou..._%28PPP%29 but you are right, I probably should focus on GDP per capita.

But I always had the feeling that a richer economy meant more financial opportunities for the citizens of that particular country.

GDP overall is a useless measure of how wealthy the population is. India no. 10? Russia no. 9? Come on. You need to take into account population size, quality of services and infrastructure etc. In terms of Western countries people in Scandinavia, Switzerland and Australia are the wealthiest in the world. (America appears to be similarly wealthy but inequality there is much much higher, which makes the average citizen look better off then they actually are).

Yes you are mate, I am definitely not disputing that. I forgot my economic classes for a second

[N°6]

(01-25-2015 06:25 AM)pitt Wrote:  

But I always had the feeling that a richer economy meant more financial opportunities for the citizens of that particular country.

Not necessarily and certainly not in a country without a sizeable agricultural or manufacturing base. Only 1% of UK land is productive and the nation that pioneered the Industrial Revolution has given all this power to the Far East.

The UK economy is highly dependent on non-productive financial services and property. Because of this, successive governments will seek to ensure that the property prices of some of the poorest quality, worst damp-infested dwellings in Western Europe will keep rising until Kingdom Come. This is decreasing what little social mobility that existed in the UK for huge sections of the population as their wages cannot keep up with the rising property prices.

I often wonder how the UK economy has survived. It is like a zombie economy which has no productive vitality to it yet it keeps stumbling along.

[Deluge]

About a year ago I brought a hottie from a small town in Staffordshire (yes there are still some hot girls from the U.K, just less than other places) home to my parents place, a two storey 3 bedroom house in a very typical area, house prices and demographics right in line with the metropolitan average. This was her first time seeing the real Australia where everyone actually lives, the suburban areas of the capital cities. When she saw my parents house she was acting like we were millionaire's and made a joke about where keep our private helicopter. She actually didn't believe me when I told her we weren't rich, she thought I was being humble.

That's when I realized why so many Briton's leave the U.K, and it's not just because of the weather. Unless you're balling in London it doesn't really make any sense to stay.

[N°6]

^Deluge, I have never been to Austrialia but I always suspected that if I did, I would stay.

I have visited other British-founded countries and it is shocking how the standard of living is so much higher. In fact, it is shocking. I think the source of the problem is extremely high land prices in the UK as well as historical social immobility that is maintained by usury, property for only a few and world class, private education for a few.

Even pop-culture icons in sport, film and music are over-represented by the private school system.

[Que enspastic]

Assuming Canada is similar to Australia, definitely Canada over the UK when it comes to living standards.

Living standards in UK are low.

I moved to the UK and was shocked by how poor the standard of living is for most people. Salaries are really low. Houses are small.

Graduate salaries in Australia pay around 30k GBP but in the UK that is seen as a salary that takes years of working to achieve. There are people in the North of the UK who don't even earn the equivalent of an Australian grad salary after decades of working.

There is a guy called Bob in Oz who came up with what he calls a 'hard yakka' measurement scale which measures what you could afford to buy after 1 hour of paid work.

Extrapolating from his measurement system:

In Melbourne, I could work 1 hour at Coles Supermarket and get paid $23 on a regular night or $31 on a Sunday.

That amount of money for 1 hour's work would:
- Buy me all my fruit and veg for a week at Queen Victoria Market as well as steaks and sausages.
- Pay for a meal at a nice restaurant on Lygon St with a bottle of wine.
- Pay for x 2 gourmet burgers at a place like Grill'd.
- Pay for a movie ticket and a snack at any cinema
- Pay my monthly rent after around 25 hours at basic pay.

In London, a person would work at Tesco supermarket, get paid 7GBP an hour and that would buy very little. This amount of money for 1 hour's work would:
- Buy sausages for 3.5GBP, x 6 apples for 1.75GBP and one or two cheap items like broccoli / bananas. No steaks. Only enough food for a day or two.
- Not pay for a meal anywhere unless it was fast food like McDonalds.
- Not pay for a single gourmet burger anywhere which costs around 9-10GBP.
- Not pay for a movie ticket anywhere.
- Pay monthly rent after around 75 hours at basic pay.

In fact, x 2 short trips on the tube would cost a London Tesco worker 4.60GBP which would be 65% of an hour's work. In Melbourne, discounting the fact most people can safely ride bikes around and that public transport is free in the CBD, they could get unlimited travel for a day for $7.52 which is 33% of an hour's work.

There's a huge underclass in the UK who are in struggle town.

However, the reason why you would move to the UK from Australia would be because:
- Finance, accounting and law pays more
- Fashion and retail companies are more established and global
- Universities for post-grad work are more prestigious (Oxbridge, LSE, Imperial, UCL)
- Flights to Europe are 30-60GBP using London as a base

[Deluge]

The elite private-schools dominate pop-culture, top universities, football teams and the like here too, it's not all utopia. But I think the U.K does have a large urban White underclass compared to other Anglo countries, and a very high % of people living in public housing. Social mobility in the U.K is still much higher than in America though at least. Median house prices in the U.K were actually cheaper than Australia's ($750k+ in Greater Sydney) up until the dollar fell recently, although you get a lot more here for what you pay.

[Que enspastic]

There's a place in Melbourne called Toorak where there are massive mansions with tennis courts and swimming pools everywhere. The median house price in this inner city suburb, ranked no 1 in Melbourne for exclusivity, is $3m AUD or $1.6mGBP.

In London at least one third of the suburbs cost more than Toorak. Paying Toorak prices in London buys you a small terraced house in a middle class area with low crime rates but that's it.

[SteveMcMahon]

(01-25-2015 06:00 AM)Deluge Wrote:  

The U.K does not have the 6th highest GDP per capita in the world, not by a mile. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co...per_capita

Anyone from the U.K whose traveled a lot will tell you the standard of living there is not as high as Northern Europe, Switzerland, Australia or Canada. Thousands of 20 something Brit's emigrate every year, they usually go on working holiday visas for 2 years then apply for skilled migration after. Even amongst the ones who go choose to go home, many have told me they only reason they did was because of their family is back home, and I've yet to meet one whose told me the quality of life in the U.K or Ireland is better than Australia. Many couples and families immigrate too, although they tend to be higher income earners and almost all from London and surrounding counties.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_di...by_country (The population in Spain is mainly retirees).

Hmmm. That list looks a bit dodgy.

Norway is a big oil exporter, but is your average Norge significantly better off than your average Brit? Seems unlikely based on what I've seen of Norway. Especially right now, with the oil price having fallen into the crapper.

And of course, it depends how you slice the numbers. Here's another chart (the OECD one) that says the UK is above Norway for earnings:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c...erage_wage

Another thing that's dodgy about that list is the position of Ireland. Ireland is by most measures more economically distressed than the UK. Higher unemployment, lower wages (but cheaper property), more brutal public sector cuts. I work with a few Irish chaps who moved to England but can't think of anybody I know moving the other way since the Celtic Tiger days of 10 years ago.

So, lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Back to the OP's question: I'd go for Canada.

Big open spaces, cheaper property (which is probably the most expensive thing you'll buy in your life), lower overall tax. And if you start a business, you have no EU to regulate you out of existence, and you have the biggest and richest market in the world just over the southern border.

But as Dick Jones said in RoboCop, "good business is where you find it."



If you have the ability and drive to succeed, you can do well for yourself in pretty much any country on earth.

I've worked for more than one self-made millionaire who left school (or the army) with a few qualifications, started a business in their spare room or garage, and ended up with a country estate, a bunch of exotic sports cars, and an exotic, younger, foreign girlfriend before they were forty.

I also know lots of people who have university degrees coming out of their orifices and who are deep in debt and making shit money. The lesson there is that about 90% of university degrees are a net drain on your life prospects.

If you want to get seriously rich, don't work for someone else all your life. Learn some skills then find a niche that you can start your own business in. Be a people person. Be the sort of positive, optimistic sort of man who other people are drawn to. Personality counts for more in business than any other single attribute. Why? Because people buy from people. People promote people. People are inspired to do their best by other people.

On the other hand, you can still do well for yourself by being a cog in a corporate machine. This requires the Jesse Pinkman strategy: make yourself indispensable.



I'm rarely the smartest man in the room in my line of work (tech sales). We have engineers who have IQ's even bigger than my dick measurements: strange, but true. But those guys don't know how to ask for money. They don't know how to network. They tend to think of selling - in all senses, including selling to customers and selling the idea of their value to their employers - is beneath them. That it's a shabby trick, somehow, as if other people should just psychically intuit their contributions to the business.



Being smart is great, but lots of smart guys die in poverty. Mozart was hounded by creditors into an early grave. I'd rather be Pitbull.


Gets more pussy than Mozart and probably not gonna die at 35

So it's the human factor that counts for most in your success. Being confident, fun to be around, able to find out what people need and then give it to them... all that counts for more than where you happen to live or how book-smart you are.

[Deluge]

(01-25-2015 07:35 AM)Que enspastic Wrote:  

There's a place in Melbourne called Toorak where there are massive mansions with tennis courts and swimming pools everywhere. The median house price in this inner city suburb, ranked no 1 in Melbourne for exclusivity, is $3m AUD or $1.6mGBP.

In London at least one third of the suburbs cost more than Toorak. Paying Toorak prices in London buys you a small terraced house in a middle class area with low crime rates but that's it.

Rents per square meter are actually higher in places like Fitzroy and Albert Park now, and most people in Toorak don't actually live in detached houses that cost $3m+ but apartments and townhouses. Anyway the U.K's house price to income ratio is lower than Australia's, the U.K outside London and the commuter belt drags it down.

[Pinocchio]

all the money in the uk is london. london is effectively a country within a country.

[Pinocchio]

(01-25-2015 06:56 AM)N°6 Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 06:25 AM)pitt Wrote:  

But I always had the feeling that a richer economy meant more financial opportunities for the citizens of that particular country.

Not necessarily and certainly not in a country without a sizeable agricultural or manufacturing base. Only 1% of UK land is productive and the nation that pioneered the Industrial Revolution has given all this power to the Far East.

The UK economy is highly dependent on non-productive financial services and property. Because of this, successive governments will seek to ensure that the property prices of some of the poorest quality, worst damp-infested dwellings in Western Europe will keep rising until Kingdom Come. This is decreasing what little social mobility that existed in the UK for huge sections of the population as their wages cannot keep up with the rising property prices.

I often wonder how the UK economy has survived. It is like a zombie economy which has no productive vitality to it yet it keeps stumbling along.

financial markets, silicon roundabout and its not stumbling along

[Que enspastic]

Ask any English person to name the 2nd city after London and they will probably say Manchester or Birmingham.

No joke, median salaries for Manchester are probably under 25k GBP. That is, a British person in their 30-40s is likely to earn 5k GBP less than a 21-22yo Australian in their first job.

The catch-22 is that in order to escape London's insane living costs you need to move out of London but in order to get a job that actually pays well you need to move to London. The South-East commuter belt (the Home Counties) is the compromise many make. The default strategy for most is to build the career in London, buy a piece of property and cash out when they want to escape, trading up for something bigger in the rest of England or making a global move.

[JJ Roberts]

(01-25-2015 07:17 AM)Que enspastic Wrote:  

- Not pay for a single gourmet burger anywhere which costs around 9-10GBP.

My local gourmet burger place (called Byron) in London sells burgers for less than 7 pounds. They are amazingly good.

(01-25-2015 07:17 AM)Que enspastic Wrote:  

- Not pay for a movie ticket anywhere.

I went to see Birdman at the Barbican centre recently. It was 6 pounds.

[richler]

I have lived in both countries. Canada is a better bet for most people, given its New World openness and relative lack of entrenched systems. The mass of people have more options there.

London, however, is a cash register on a scale that dwarfs anything in Canada. For the guys who truly wish to make a fortune in the fields where blowout successes remain possible, London is better.

[bojangles]

If you want to make a fortune - London.

Seeing as you asked where you'd make more money, London is the answer.

If you asked about better quality of life, I'd be unable to truthfully answer your question. Canada is a feminist shithole moreso than the UK for example but its spacious and has other benefits as many have mentioned above. For me London is 2 hours away from the places where i can bang the hottest women on the planet and it's not as heavily feminist as Canada. Plus some of them hotties live in London too

[LouEvilSlugger]

(01-25-2015 07:35 AM)SteveMcMahon Wrote:  

I'm rarely the smartest man in the room in my line of work (tech sales). We have engineers who have IQ's even bigger than my dick measurements: strange, but true. But those guys don't know how to ask for money. They don't know how to network. They tend to think of selling - in all senses, including selling to customers and selling the idea of their value to their employers - is beneath them. That it's a shabby trick, somehow, as if other people should just psychically intuit their contributions to the business.

Business acumen and sales can be learned very easily in a few months, just like virgins can learn game and get results within days. If you look at resume books of the top business schools, the majority of students have technical backgrounds as scientists or engineers, yet they on go on to industries, eg investment banking, consulting, private equity, where networking and relationship skills are critical.

Can you teach a sales guy to be an engineer? Now this is sightly more difficult.

That said, Canada is a fucking joke and I live and study here. I don't see why anyone would stay in Canada unless it's to study or work on an oil patch. The UK is only sightly better if you're working in finance or fashion in London.

[Moma]

Lou, what part of Canada do you live in?

[kosko]

London has more opportunities for money then the whole some of Canada combined. To put it bluntly, there is not much money in Canada. Canada will give you a good life, with a slower pace, and many options for stability, but because of that the opportunities to light a rocket up to the sky in success or wealth are limited.

When I sit down and think how I can make it rich here in Canada not a lot of ideas pop into my head. In America I could eventually whore myself out and be a contractor and make good money off the largess of USA Government, or you can go into the self-made route where money exists to chase any idea that you can flip into revenue stream. While, in the UK I could leverage being in a gateway between Europe and Africa and make International deals happen more easily. Its not impossible in Canada but the volume of activity just does not exist here. The people lack productive output and our creative capital has been waning more and more as the years go on. Canada used to be a nation of people who cut down trees and invented things. Blue Collar workers and White coat nerds but over time those jobs have been vanishing and being replaced with Sr. paper pushers in Government, Nurse, or you being a Pharmacist or Bank Branch Manager. Nothing wrong with those, but those positions are capped in potential, they offer good pay but that's all that your getting.

I am far from casting shade on Canada, it has a lot of good things going for it, but there are many limits to how big you can grow your pie here without very specific or finite targets towards certain skills and nieches to exploit. Sometimes though you just want a comfortable place to rest your head each day with low drama and bullshit. Canada can offer you that and depending on what other things you value in your life it can offer a lot of other things. If you like the outdoors and open space being in a city such as Calgary or Vancouver would beat out anything that would be a equivalent in the UK.

But the OP in regards to cross pollination of our people are Visa laws are not equal. The motherland still likes to cockblock its old colony and its very hard for Canadians to get good work Visas and come over to the UK. I suspect many Canadians who are landed there are high level workers or have family ties to get them in. Even just to travel they are no nice to Canadians and boot us out very quickly.

Still related to travel the UK puts you more central and cheaply to escape places. In Canada air travel is fucking expensive. Every place is 'far' from here, the only cheap flights from Toronto are to: Montreal, Chicago, Detroit, Boston, NYC. Contrast that to the UK where I could be in Croatia for the same price as a flight to NYC here in Toronto.

[LouEvilSlugger]

(01-25-2015 11:20 AM)Moma Wrote:  

Lou, what part of Canada do you live in?

Montreal.

[Foolsgo1d]

People on here are comparing the London and outer areas to places in the world which have no right to be compared too.

It also makes out that the UK is an utter shithole....Right.

I don't recall ice storms, hurricanes, tornados and floods the size of your entire county engulfing this country. I also don't recall losing power or utilities as a result for days and weeks on end unless there was industrial action.

Lets not forget the serious crime figures are restricted to the inner city slums and the occasional rare occurrence elsewhere. We have no towns or cities here that could equal a drastic downturn in economic ability like the USA. Australia etc.

Lets compare shall we?

Canada: Home to Toronto. Enough said.

It is also home to a massive oil industry which is poisoning its beautiful countryside, rivers and forests. Do I also need to point out the amount of snow and ice there? Most of that country is inhabited more by wildlife than humans.

If I wanted French sophistication, snobbery and nice wine/beer and good weather I would go to the south of France.

If I wanted to earn a few years salary, see as few women as possible and get a trade under my belt then Canada would be my choice.

If you're a smart bastard with money go to London. London is the Number one place to be as a young-middle aged guy who is single, can game and can earn money. Don't moan about the cost because if you do you're not the type who knows how to ball.

People earning money in London know how to hide their wealth. Its a basic requirement there and if you don't know how to then you will be chewed up.

London, mainly the City is the reason the UK is what it is. Without London I doubt the UK would have weathered the economic storm as well as it did.

For an average person your best bet is Manchester. Average salaries do not kick up a notch unless you're in a position that uses professional expertise or where you manage a lot of people.

We also have the freedom of movement in the EU. Unfortunately this gives employers the choice to pick and choose amongst a lot of people and the graduate pool is huge.

Tell me what countries demand 2 years+ experience from entry level graduate positions for a profession at basic salary in the 19-23k range?

The UK does have its problems but comparing it to other countries is laughable.