Work in Silicon Valley and Spooked About Trump? Canada Wants You(bloomberg.com)
bloomberg.com
Work in Silicon Valley and Spooked About Trump? Canada Wants You
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-01/work-in-silicon-valley-and-spooked-about-trump-canada-wants-you
12 comments
What exactly do they propose is the incentive for founding a startup in Canada instead of just doing it in the US? It can't be Waterloo because those grads don't want to stay here, as things stand (brain drain effect). It can't be the weather, or taxes. It definitely isn't the investors, Canadian investors are notoriously conservative when it comes to new ventures (unless your business is to dig a new hole in the ground and pull out rocks). It isn't the cost of living, the average price of a home in Toronto is $1M. The only support for startups is a decades old tax credit program called SRED which requires you to domicile your company as a Canadian owned private corporation (e.g., no Delaware corporations) and it is notorious for being beuraucratic and it clearly favours larger established companies over true startups. The government has failed miserably at incentivizing startups. This latest pitch seems to be based on nothing more than dusting off the old canard of Canada being more "multi-cultural" than the US, and using Donald Trump to attract startup entrepreneurs? This coming from the institutions that gave us Stephen Harper and Rob Ford? These gimmicks are more of an indication that they're not serious abot incentivizing startups, they are just trying to score political points at home.
My uncle is an engineer in Toronto, and often speaks positively of the startup scene in parts of Canada. I know Waterloo loses quite a few grads to the Bay Area and other major U.S. cities, but haven't some companies actually relocated to be closer to the scene there? I am thinking Pivotal Labs and Google off the top of my head.
I am genuinely curious on your take, since you seem to have direct knowledge. I have seen many people say things in the same vein, but also hear positive things from people in Canada and outsiders as well.
I am genuinely curious on your take, since you seem to have direct knowledge. I have seen many people say things in the same vein, but also hear positive things from people in Canada and outsiders as well.
SRED is impossible to get, and has been for several years. We make novel manufacturing plant floor technology that is sold inside and outside of Canada and seen as unique IP. Getting SRED is harder than building the technology, so we just gave up. I would gladly trade places with an American running away from Trump, to escape Liberal^2 here in Ontario. Google "Ontario Sunshine List" if you want to see our California-esque problems with government misinvestment.
SRED is annoying, bureaucratic, slow, comes with painful audits that can delay payments over a year, breaking your company if you're relying on it, requires all your engineers to keep detailed log books, et cetera.
But I've been in a few different startups in Canada, and they've all successfully received very significant SRED payments. Having the government pay a huge chunk of your engineering payroll has been a key part of the success of some of these companies.
But I've been in a few different startups in Canada, and they've all successfully received very significant SRED payments. Having the government pay a huge chunk of your engineering payroll has been a key part of the success of some of these companies.
[deleted]
I can speak a bit for western canada; Vancouver has seen many of the larger/top companies open offices: Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, etc. so plenty of jobs to be had there. I live in Calgary and have seen many peers move to Vancouver for better job prospects.
Re: SRED credits - I've been a part of the application process twice. Documentation can be a bit cumbersome, but not much more than 5 minutes summarizing the weeks work in a spreadsheet (for each employee), and tracking their hours spent on related tasks. Add in source control and the numerous artifacts that software devs come up with, means low amount of effort for high payout. And by high payout, I'm talking 1-2 devs salary in a 10 dev shop. We also hired a consulting company that specialized in SRED applications which saved us a ton of overhead. Cost 10-20% of payout, but was worth not having to deal with the application and/or any audits had they occurred.
Re: SRED credits - I've been a part of the application process twice. Documentation can be a bit cumbersome, but not much more than 5 minutes summarizing the weeks work in a spreadsheet (for each employee), and tracking their hours spent on related tasks. Add in source control and the numerous artifacts that software devs come up with, means low amount of effort for high payout. And by high payout, I'm talking 1-2 devs salary in a 10 dev shop. We also hired a consulting company that specialized in SRED applications which saved us a ton of overhead. Cost 10-20% of payout, but was worth not having to deal with the application and/or any audits had they occurred.
>I live in Calgary and have seen many peers move to Vancouver for better job prospects.
Where do they live? Even a crack house in Vancouver costs $1M. Vancouver has probably some of the most expensive real estate in the entire world now.
Where do they live? Even a crack house in Vancouver costs $1M. Vancouver has probably some of the most expensive real estate in the entire world now.
One friend is in a townhouse in North Vancouver. Rented for a while, then bought. Real-estate is stupid silly there. I've also heard talk of people moving to Victoria as an alternative.
Québec actually gives a lot of tax breaks for tech businesses. There's a pretty lively startup scene in Mtl, perhaps for this reason:
http://builtinmtl.com/
> not serious abot
True Canadian confirmed.
http://builtinmtl.com/
> not serious abot
True Canadian confirmed.
And if you do need to leave at some point, good luck because you're going to have a huge cap gains tax bill for your startup equity!
There's an $800,000 lifetime capital gains exemption for 'qualified small business corporations'. To qualify, basically you have to be Canadian-controlled for 2 years.
[deleted]
There are none.
Moving to Canada from the USA lowers your quality of life by 50%.
Moving to Canada from the USA lowers your quality of life by 50%.
What are the reasons that lead you to believe that?
I have lived in both the US and Canada, I prefer Canada.
I have lived in both the US and Canada, I prefer Canada.
I can imagine reasons a few right away that he would think that:
* housing cost is generally higher in Canada, except maybe if you're comparing to the Bay Area in which case it's a wash
* cars cost a LOT more in Canada (as does everything else)
* tech salaries are a lot lower in Canada
* taxes are generally higher in Canada (plus the huge VAT for sales)
* housing cost is generally higher in Canada, except maybe if you're comparing to the Bay Area in which case it's a wash
* cars cost a LOT more in Canada (as does everything else)
* tech salaries are a lot lower in Canada
* taxes are generally higher in Canada (plus the huge VAT for sales)
And you save a shitload of money on healthcare and university. Not to mention, money != quality of life.
While I'm not going to argue Canada is the best place ever or that we don't have some issues, the quality of life is still pretty damn good. Certainly not 50% lower than the US or Silicon Valley...
While I'm not going to argue Canada is the best place ever or that we don't have some issues, the quality of life is still pretty damn good. Certainly not 50% lower than the US or Silicon Valley...
Healthcare isn't that expensive here. Think of your premium as an extra tax: how does the lower taxes in the US plus the health insurance premium compare to what you'd pay in Canada? Now add in the significantly lower salaries.
Remember, we're comparing lifestyles of tech professionals here, not average people or poor people. For people who can't afford decent health insurance, Canada definitely seems to have a much better system. But a tech professional should not have much trouble paying health insurance premiums.
Remember, we're comparing lifestyles of tech professionals here, not average people or poor people. For people who can't afford decent health insurance, Canada definitely seems to have a much better system. But a tech professional should not have much trouble paying health insurance premiums.
What do you save on healthcare and university?
University is like $3000/year here. I heard it's almost the same in the US if you go to a regular University.
Healthcare is irrelevant is you're insured. And if you want access to care or a specialist in a reasonable delay, you have to got the private route, which means you actually pay twice. Considering that 50% of our taxes go to healthcare, I'm paying almost 25% of my income on healthcare here in Canada.
University is like $3000/year here. I heard it's almost the same in the US if you go to a regular University.
Healthcare is irrelevant is you're insured. And if you want access to care or a specialist in a reasonable delay, you have to got the private route, which means you actually pay twice. Considering that 50% of our taxes go to healthcare, I'm paying almost 25% of my income on healthcare here in Canada.
I'm not sure what a "regular university" is. That might be the cost of a relatively cheap community college - i.e. the lowest-end choice in many areas.
My uneducated guess is it's about 5-10 times that at private U.S colleges.
My uneducated guess is it's about 5-10 times that at private U.S colleges.
Comparing the price of private U.S. Colleges to public Canadian Colleges is a mistake.
Please explain yourself. If you are conflating QoL with salary then sure but I've heard stories of Canadians moving from Ontario to the Bay Area and their opinions on the move are mixed.
I don't know if I'd say the quality of life is 50% lower, but some of the reasons I prefer the US: (1) higher salary, (2) lower taxes [though this depends where in the US you move to], (3) you tend to work at HQ [better projects] rather than some satellite office, (4) more access to the latest tech [Amazon/Netflix is pretty bad in Canada], (5) more entrepreneurial/driven people [again depends where you move], (6) generally lower COL.
I know people will bring up healthcare, but I would argue if you have a high-paying job in the US, you never really worry about going bankrupt due to healthcare and you get access to some of the top physicians/hospitals.
Now don't get me wrong, Canada has a lot going for it. I think Canadian cities tend to be run better and this shows up as being safer and cleaner. Canadians also tend to be nicer and because they are 100% committed to the rat race, they tend to be less high strung and competitive.
Overall, I had to move from Canada since there weren't any jobs in my home town. I could have move to Toronto (3 hr flight) or I could have moved to the Bay area (3 hr flight). I'm the same distance from family, so why not go for the bigger opportunity?
Final disclaimer: this is my own opinion. Obviously some people will look at the US and go "yuck". Live where you want to live. It's all good.
I know people will bring up healthcare, but I would argue if you have a high-paying job in the US, you never really worry about going bankrupt due to healthcare and you get access to some of the top physicians/hospitals.
Now don't get me wrong, Canada has a lot going for it. I think Canadian cities tend to be run better and this shows up as being safer and cleaner. Canadians also tend to be nicer and because they are 100% committed to the rat race, they tend to be less high strung and competitive.
Overall, I had to move from Canada since there weren't any jobs in my home town. I could have move to Toronto (3 hr flight) or I could have moved to the Bay area (3 hr flight). I'm the same distance from family, so why not go for the bigger opportunity?
Final disclaimer: this is my own opinion. Obviously some people will look at the US and go "yuck". Live where you want to live. It's all good.
Thank you for adding your perspective. What's bothered the Canadians I have talked to who have made the move is not so much stuff like money, taxes etc. It is more general culture shock e.g. witnessing the amount of income inequality present in American cities / overt racial barriers ... etc.
Canada is a lot more egalitarian.
But from what you've said it seems like making the move to US is a good idea if you want more money and more opportunities. Hopefully I will be able to make the move soon. I am pretty ignorant of how the visa stuff works though and assuming I don't make it to the big tech companies I don't know how I'd be able to walk a middling startup through it. It seems like it would generally be easier for these startups to hire Americans.
If you have a blog where you've shared your experiences on the move I'd be very interested in reading it because this is a subject that's been in my head for a while.
Canada is a lot more egalitarian.
But from what you've said it seems like making the move to US is a good idea if you want more money and more opportunities. Hopefully I will be able to make the move soon. I am pretty ignorant of how the visa stuff works though and assuming I don't make it to the big tech companies I don't know how I'd be able to walk a middling startup through it. It seems like it would generally be easier for these startups to hire Americans.
If you have a blog where you've shared your experiences on the move I'd be very interested in reading it because this is a subject that's been in my head for a while.
Canada is a lot more egalitarian.
I think a lot of that depends on your personal experiences. There aren't really "ghettos" in Canada like the US, but there are very poor areas, just like US cities. They just tend to look a little less rundown since I think city gov'ts in Canada tend to work better.
Like I said in my original post, it all depends on what's important to you and that can change over time. If you've decided the rat race isn't for you, then Canada is a great place to live. Stability, good social services, etc are in abundance in Canada. To each his own.
As for my immigration story, I never really put it down in writing. Even though you're Canadian, it can be a real slog. You have to stand in line just like every other immigrant, although you do get some benefits (like TN visa) that other countries don't. But when it comes to a green card and citizenship, it really isn't any different that other countries.
If you want to read up on it, just google, there is a ton of information out there. If I were you, I'd give it a go using a TN visa. As long as you have a degree in certain fields, all you need is an offer letter from the company. You can get the visa at the border.
I think a lot of that depends on your personal experiences. There aren't really "ghettos" in Canada like the US, but there are very poor areas, just like US cities. They just tend to look a little less rundown since I think city gov'ts in Canada tend to work better.
Like I said in my original post, it all depends on what's important to you and that can change over time. If you've decided the rat race isn't for you, then Canada is a great place to live. Stability, good social services, etc are in abundance in Canada. To each his own.
As for my immigration story, I never really put it down in writing. Even though you're Canadian, it can be a real slog. You have to stand in line just like every other immigrant, although you do get some benefits (like TN visa) that other countries don't. But when it comes to a green card and citizenship, it really isn't any different that other countries.
If you want to read up on it, just google, there is a ton of information out there. If I were you, I'd give it a go using a TN visa. As long as you have a degree in certain fields, all you need is an offer letter from the company. You can get the visa at the border.
(7) Cost of living [everything is much cheaper in the US]
I agree to every single of your points.
I agree to every single of your points.
I love the idea of relocating to Canada. But every time I've looked into it, companies seemed to only pay entry level wages for experienced positions (80K-100K CAD which is 60-75K USD), while having high coastal-type housing costs (500K - 1M CAD, which is 400k to 760k USD)
Sure, greatly reduced health care cost. But even accounting for that, it still seemed like a big financial setback.
Unless I'm missing something, it seems like if you could afford a home in Toronto, you might as well sell it and buy a house in NYC or SF or Boston. Your cost of living would be about the same, but your income would jump roughly 2x or higher.
EDIT : For example, Sortable is the Canadian company in the article. Their "3+ year experience" Software Engineer position on their website maxes out at 100K CAD, a salary 25% lower than Amazon's Seattle interns make (~100K USD).
Sure, greatly reduced health care cost. But even accounting for that, it still seemed like a big financial setback.
Unless I'm missing something, it seems like if you could afford a home in Toronto, you might as well sell it and buy a house in NYC or SF or Boston. Your cost of living would be about the same, but your income would jump roughly 2x or higher.
EDIT : For example, Sortable is the Canadian company in the article. Their "3+ year experience" Software Engineer position on their website maxes out at 100K CAD, a salary 25% lower than Amazon's Seattle interns make (~100K USD).
Downtown Toronto is probably the most expensive place for housing. The salaries are about comparable elsewhere in Canada, with much cheaper housing options elsewhere in the GTA, or in Mtl or Vancouver.
I wouldn't say I'm making bank in Mtl, but my salary is comfortable and gives me slack. Most people I know start buying homes here in their mid-30s.
I wouldn't say I'm making bank in Mtl, but my salary is comfortable and gives me slack. Most people I know start buying homes here in their mid-30s.
No, we don't want people who, at the first sign of trouble, pack their bags and leave. If you don't like Trump, stay there and fight for your home.
The problem is that this is far, far from the first sight of trouble in the US. I'll spare the detailed history lesson, but Trump would not be the first right-wing, reactionary President in the US, and there are plenty of other reasons to leave. Many in the US feel helpless to affect politics for a variety of reasons. Trump may be, for some, more of the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.
Oh please, every country has problems, the US is just in the limelight because they own like 90% of the world's media. Canada just kicked out a right-wing government that held power for almost 10 years. The people who would leave for greener pastures would come to Canada, find that it's not so green, and head for the next "fad".
Do you want highly-productive knowledge workers in your country to boost its tech economy or not?
If not, then fine, we'll find another country that wants to greatly improve their tech sector. You don't want anything like the economic juggernaut that is Silicon Valley in your country? That's your choice, but seems pretty shortsighted to me. Most countries actually want to import people who grow their economy a lot and contribute a ton in taxes without draining their social-welfare systems.
If not, then fine, we'll find another country that wants to greatly improve their tech sector. You don't want anything like the economic juggernaut that is Silicon Valley in your country? That's your choice, but seems pretty shortsighted to me. Most countries actually want to import people who grow their economy a lot and contribute a ton in taxes without draining their social-welfare systems.
Wow, get off your high horse. 50% of Canada's population hold a degree and more, we are quite knowledgeable, thank you very much. If this is the kind of elitism we would get if the Silicon Valley-ites were to return, then you can fuck right off.
Ok then, where's your Silicon Valley? Where are your world-leading tech companies? Do you have anything at all you can point to as world-leading, like we do with Google, Amazon, Intel, etc.?
Hey, if you're happy being a backwater full of degreed people who don't actually produce anything that anyone's ever heard of, that's fine. If you enjoy having Silicon Valley-level housing prices but no Silicon Valley-level jobs or economy, that's fine too.
Hey, if you're happy being a backwater full of degreed people who don't actually produce anything that anyone's ever heard of, that's fine. If you enjoy having Silicon Valley-level housing prices but no Silicon Valley-level jobs or economy, that's fine too.
> who don't actually produce anything that anyone's ever heard of
You know I could make the same argument that I don't spent any money on these "world leading tech companies" their value to me is effectively zero.
Is zero value somehow supposed to impress me?
Is zero value somehow supposed to impress me?
This is rather stupid. How exactly did you write this post without using an Intel or AMD CPU? (Both American companies) Do you never use any search engines? (Google and Bing(MS) are American, as is DDG, which just reuses results from one of those two.) You don't have an iPhone (this is quite possible, as Samsung/LG/HTC/etc. are not American)? And how are you getting by without using American-made software from Microsoft or some variant of Linux (which is largely contributed to by both Red Hat, an American company) and various other American contributors on the Debian side? Even if you don't spend any actual money directly on some of these things, you're certainly deriving value from them.
It's rather unfortunate that the same companies you talk about are keeping their money in tax havens, they hire foreign born workers and most of the manufacturing they do happens in China or Asia. In the end a non college educated American loses to this high skilled labor and cannot afford to live in Silicon Valley which has a broken real estate system, people commute from far distances and BART is in end-of-life stage.
You're absolutely right about all that. I never said it was perfect here, and in fact things are definitely getting worse in many ways.
However, we're comparing present-day US to present-day Canada, and I'm not seeing any advantages to living in Canada, except for living around friendlier people. Economically, there don't appear to be any advantages at all to professional tech workers, only big disadvantages.
If you think Silicon Valley has a broken real estate system, have you checked out the real estate situation in Vancouver? Personally, I'd love to live in Vancouver, but there's no way I'm going to get a job there that pays enough for me to buy a house that costs several million dollars (CAD), given that even crack houses there cost $1M.
At least here in the US, there's still a lot of cities besides SV where there's a lot of tech jobs, the pay is really high for them, and the housing costs are bearable.
However, we're comparing present-day US to present-day Canada, and I'm not seeing any advantages to living in Canada, except for living around friendlier people. Economically, there don't appear to be any advantages at all to professional tech workers, only big disadvantages.
If you think Silicon Valley has a broken real estate system, have you checked out the real estate situation in Vancouver? Personally, I'd love to live in Vancouver, but there's no way I'm going to get a job there that pays enough for me to buy a house that costs several million dollars (CAD), given that even crack houses there cost $1M.
At least here in the US, there's still a lot of cities besides SV where there's a lot of tech jobs, the pay is really high for them, and the housing costs are bearable.
Right but Silicon Valley is still the best place to live and own instead of moving somewhere else, I know there's reverse immigration (Book: The rent is too damn high or something), but are there good schools, good neighborhoods? I am kind of spooked by just looking at this Election Campaign which has revealed the dirty underbelly of this country to me. I would still consider long term stability where I know the society is accepting, and I think down the line the economics can be improved if you think about it, because there are good cities, well educated people, but lack of enterprises and small business/startups to employ these people. I saw 500 startups just open a 30Bn fund for Canada and see small but solid indicators that things are changing.
Finally! http://qz.com/656320/dear-prime-minister-trudeau-a-modest-pr...
Great point. It's easy to say "Canada looks better than the US", when you don't know what it's like to live in Canada. It has it's own unique problems.
That's an interesting stance on immigration.
Hah, I was denied access to Canada for a 3 day business trip to meet with a client.
So we applied for a visa, and that was denied because there's no category for software developer or designer or PM in NAFTA. And even if there was, I would have required an engineering or graphic design degree to be eligible... without doing a costly analysis to make sure no one else in Canada could do my job.
Agreed with above comment about this being a gimmick.
So we applied for a visa, and that was denied because there's no category for software developer or designer or PM in NAFTA. And even if there was, I would have required an engineering or graphic design degree to be eligible... without doing a costly analysis to make sure no one else in Canada could do my job.
Agreed with above comment about this being a gimmick.
Business trip, NAFTA? I guess you're Mexican? I don't think you need a visa otherwise. Trudeau said he would work on lifting the visa requirements for Mexicans. So, perhaps this problem will resolve itself soon.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-proposes-lift...
In the meantime, you probably can get an ordinary tourist visa? I don't think you really need to go through the NAFTA categories or get a Labour Market Opinion for a 3-day business trip, do you?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-proposes-lift...
In the meantime, you probably can get an ordinary tourist visa? I don't think you really need to go through the NAFTA categories or get a Labour Market Opinion for a 3-day business trip, do you?
US citizen. There on business (client meetings), denied access for visitor visa. Applied for work visa, denied because didn't fit NAFTA categories.
I should have said I was there for pleasure, but I was trying to be ya know, honest. Now my passport is flagged for 7 years, so I better have a rock solid vacation plans if I want to try to enter on a tourist visa.
I should have said I was there for pleasure, but I was trying to be ya know, honest. Now my passport is flagged for 7 years, so I better have a rock solid vacation plans if I want to try to enter on a tourist visa.
US citizens do not need a visa to travel to Canada for business visits. According to [1], client meetings are specifically allowed. You cannot do 'hands-on labour' though, so it can be a fine line that you must have crossed.
As a Canadian, I once travelled to the US to assist a client with integration for a week. I got pulled into secondary questioning. He asked one question about what I was doing in the States, and then spent a few more minutes grilling me about what exactly the first level agent had asked me, how I had answered, et cetera. I could tell he was preparing to ream out the first level agent for wasting his time...
1: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/visit/business-who.asp
As a Canadian, I once travelled to the US to assist a client with integration for a week. I got pulled into secondary questioning. He asked one question about what I was doing in the States, and then spent a few more minutes grilling me about what exactly the first level agent had asked me, how I had answered, et cetera. I could tell he was preparing to ream out the first level agent for wasting his time...
1: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/visit/business-who.asp
Yeah, I don't know what was going on there. You don't need a visa for short business stays or for visiting if you're from the US. You must have worded something in a way that they thought you needed a temporary work visa, which is what the LMO would have been for. This is weird.
I would love to help pump up the GDP at a new country. What I'm looking for: Efficiently run government, low corruption, policies that encourage education and health, and progressive expanded rights and freedoms. I'm in. But, based on what I know about Canada, I don't think it's it.
Canada is the closest thing you will get to those goals without being trapped in a boring isolated Nordic European country.
A "boring" Nordic country sounds good to me... but how hard is it for Americans to move there and get software jobs there?
You mean Europe's Canada?
How about France and Germany?
French here, France is the complete opposite of an efficient government. The bureaucracy is massive and everywhere. It's quite outside of the scope of this topic but the short answer is don't create a company there.
I'm French as well (expat, though). What you say is true, but it strikes me as a lesser evil than the ones that are plaguing USA: little social protection and high cost of education among others.
Also expat on my case (London). Yes indeed I agree. My problem with the French system is more the bureaucracy than anything else. I'm from the countryside in a post-industrial area so it makes it even worse than in cities. I have a brother who has a shop and honestly, it's impossible to manage the paperwork nowadays, I don't want to put any anecdotes here because people won't beleive me and I will probably be downvoted.
I think around ~70% of the shops in the area are close to bankruptcy and the system is crashing really hard currently. If it stays like this, everyone will be relying on some sort of black market to purchase goods in less than 10 years. While I guess main cities are still okay, things are not really working anymore in remote areas.
I think around ~70% of the shops in the area are close to bankruptcy and the system is crashing really hard currently. If it stays like this, everyone will be relying on some sort of black market to purchase goods in less than 10 years. While I guess main cities are still okay, things are not really working anymore in remote areas.
Take a look at the Netherlands. It fits the OP's criteria, is not isolated, and Amsterdam, for instance, is at the opposite extreme from boring.
Could you expand on your reasoning for this conclusion a bit? What knowledge of Canada does not fit to these requirements? Which countries would in your opinion be a better fit?
progressive expanded rights and freedoms
If that includes freedom of speech, you may want to rethink Canada. Say something politically incorrect and expect to be pulled in front of the on Human Rights Commission to explain yourself and potentially be fined.
In terms of corruption, try googling "Sponsorship Scandal".
If that includes freedom of speech, you may want to rethink Canada. Say something politically incorrect and expect to be pulled in front of the on Human Rights Commission to explain yourself and potentially be fined.
In terms of corruption, try googling "Sponsorship Scandal".
Sounds like you want a Scandinavian country
IDK about the rest but Sweden has definitely not encouraged good education in a while.
Also, if you are fleeing from Trump's anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim rhetoric (as the Bloomberg article suggests), some of those places (e.g. Denmark) might not really be the best place to go.
As an immigrant in Denmark, I can confirm. After a while here, Trump sounds like a clown with centrist political views on immigration.
Take a look at New Zealand.
The insanity about this is HE'S NOT EVEN THE NOMINEE YET.
Considering how pissed the establishment Republicans are that he might be the nominee, they're all betting on an open convention followed by some combination of a Walker, Cruz, Rubio, Ryan ticket.
I can't believe how people have lost their minds and he most likely won't get the amount of delegates required to get the nomination outright before the convention in June. Clearly whatever he's doing, he's struck a HUGE nerve somewhere, because there is a fuck ton of panic in the streets and it's still very, very, very early in the process.
Considering how pissed the establishment Republicans are that he might be the nominee, they're all betting on an open convention followed by some combination of a Walker, Cruz, Rubio, Ryan ticket.
I can't believe how people have lost their minds and he most likely won't get the amount of delegates required to get the nomination outright before the convention in June. Clearly whatever he's doing, he's struck a HUGE nerve somewhere, because there is a fuck ton of panic in the streets and it's still very, very, very early in the process.
Candidates like Trump often serve the useful purpose of making candidates that would otherwise seem extreme look moderate. I'm almost surprised there isn't some sort of loud-mouthed, extreme liberal anti-Trump candidate on the Democratic side to make some of their other candidates look more moderate by comparison.
Taking extreme positions doesn't win elections unfortunately. Trump has a few of his own extreme opinions and I feel relatively confident he's going to lose pretty bad to Hillary because of it. Hillary is the master of no extremes.
"Hillary is the master of no extremes."
That really depends on where you're coming from, politically. Compared to some places in the world, the most "liberal" and "socialist" Democrat (no, not Hillary) is already a right wing extremist. For starters: She's a hawk. She and her husband deliberately came in to office to push the already right-leaning Democratic party further to the right. She's for enlarging the already massive surveillance state. These are not moderate positions to a lot of people. Maybe moderate compared to Trump.
Regarding whether a moderate or an extremist is more likely to win, there's little evidence that Presidential elections get decided on political positions. Sadly, personality and style are far more significant.
That really depends on where you're coming from, politically. Compared to some places in the world, the most "liberal" and "socialist" Democrat (no, not Hillary) is already a right wing extremist. For starters: She's a hawk. She and her husband deliberately came in to office to push the already right-leaning Democratic party further to the right. She's for enlarging the already massive surveillance state. These are not moderate positions to a lot of people. Maybe moderate compared to Trump.
Regarding whether a moderate or an extremist is more likely to win, there's little evidence that Presidential elections get decided on political positions. Sadly, personality and style are far more significant.
I disagree about her being moderate compared to Trump. I fully intend to vote for Trump if it comes down to a race between Trump and her, because in my view, Trump is far more moderate than Hillary. As you said, Hillary is a war hawk, and I believe she'll start another war in the middle east. Trump, by contrast (despite all his crazy rhetoric about building a wall etc.), has preached non-intervention for the most part, not starting unnecessary wars, and really pissed off the Republican establishment by calling Bush's Iraq war "stupid". I don't believe he'll start a needless war. He might do a bunch of other things, but to me that's a big enough factor that I'll vote for him over Hillary. Add in the plain fact that she's sold out to Goldman Sachs and the private prison industry and Trump really looks quite reasonable by comparison.
Of course, my preferred choice is Bernie, but with how plainly and obviously corrupt the DNC is, I don't have a lot of hope of him getting the Dem nomination and running in the general election. Maybe things will go totally haywire and both Bernie and Trump will get pissed and run as independents after the establishment railroads them both, and then we'll have a 4-way race.
Of course, my preferred choice is Bernie, but with how plainly and obviously corrupt the DNC is, I don't have a lot of hope of him getting the Dem nomination and running in the general election. Maybe things will go totally haywire and both Bernie and Trump will get pissed and run as independents after the establishment railroads them both, and then we'll have a 4-way race.
The only perspective that really matters is the average American voter. The average American voter, in some parts of the country, would possibly disagree with Hillary's gun control stance, but she's not really vocal about that and nothing else comes to mind that either side of the aisle would really care about. Of course there's the minority who care about things like privacy, TTP, campaign finance, etc. Most that's a pretty small niche and I doubt most Americans are even aware those issues exist.
If you removed gun control views Hillary could run just fine as a Republican. She's in favor of climate change policies too, which establishment Republicans disagree with, but I don't see many average joe Republicans giving a shit about it.
If you removed gun control views Hillary could run just fine as a Republican. She's in favor of climate change policies too, which establishment Republicans disagree with, but I don't see many average joe Republicans giving a shit about it.
Hilary has her own set of issues, including an ongoing FBI investigation.
You are right though, she really has no extreme stances. This is mainly due to the fact she tailors her views and policies to what's popular at the time.
You are right though, she really has no extreme stances. This is mainly due to the fact she tailors her views and policies to what's popular at the time.
> Hillary is the master of no extremes.
except for consistently lying...
except for consistently lying...
Are there any successful politicians that don't consistently lie?
I would say no but she's pretty bold and consistent
No kidding. Not too long ago Ted Cruz was a xenophobic, extreme-right religious nut. Now the media is playing him up to be some sort of moderate (he's still a religious nut).
By contrast, Trump is a moderate masquerading as a conservative caricature.
The worst part is that it looks like you guys will be stuck with an 'establishment' president who'll simply continue the status quo of funnelling money to the rich and waging wars in 3rd world countries (Hillary).
By contrast, Trump is a moderate masquerading as a conservative caricature.
The worst part is that it looks like you guys will be stuck with an 'establishment' president who'll simply continue the status quo of funnelling money to the rich and waging wars in 3rd world countries (Hillary).
It's interesting that angry exclusionary interests have not had more traction among liberals. For example, there's nothing like Fox News to attract and organize such dissatisfied folk on the liberal side. (MSNBC has tiny viewership by contrast to Fox, and no democrat leaders have insisted on interviewing ONLY at MSNBC, unlike Fox. The same goes for talk radio.)
Historically, extremists on the liberal side have focused more on policy than personality, like Sanders, Ralph Nader, Dennis Kucinich, and to a lesser extent, Jesse Jackson. These guys aren't populists. They promote the interests of folk who are below average economically and civilly, raising their prospects upward toward the mean, rather than promoting the economic or moral interests of those already in the mainstream.
IMHO, that difference is less likely to attract megalomaniacs, like Trump.
Historically, extremists on the liberal side have focused more on policy than personality, like Sanders, Ralph Nader, Dennis Kucinich, and to a lesser extent, Jesse Jackson. These guys aren't populists. They promote the interests of folk who are below average economically and civilly, raising their prospects upward toward the mean, rather than promoting the economic or moral interests of those already in the mainstream.
IMHO, that difference is less likely to attract megalomaniacs, like Trump.
Once you've witness a few elections, you start to see this stuff repeat over and over again.
"Oh my god! Candidate X won New Hampshire, what an upset! Who knows what will happen!!!"
[5 months later...]
"As expected, the candidate everyone thought would win the nomination did."
It's a bit of a farce. I swear the nomination process was created solely to see newspapers.
"Oh my god! Candidate X won New Hampshire, what an upset! Who knows what will happen!!!"
[5 months later...]
"As expected, the candidate everyone thought would win the nomination did."
It's a bit of a farce. I swear the nomination process was created solely to see newspapers.
I saw the Sortable ad in my Facebook feed. Good for a few laughs. Presidents come and go, but the opportunities in the US have been consistently better than Canada for decades now in tech.
Canadians come to the US for a better standard of living, comparatively more affordable housing (yes, even in the Bay Area!), a diverse and booming job market with interesting opportunities and a less conservative startup culture. None of that seems to be changing anytime soon.
Canadians come to the US for a better standard of living, comparatively more affordable housing (yes, even in the Bay Area!), a diverse and booming job market with interesting opportunities and a less conservative startup culture. None of that seems to be changing anytime soon.
Absurd. Even if for some odd reason you buy into the unproven idea that things would be bad for what you do with Trump as President, moving to a new country when someone might only be in office for 4 years is ridiculous and shows that you act on emotions, not rational and logic.
I'm sure someone said that back in 2000 just before Bush got elected. Bush's reign has had a huge effect on the American economy and culture, lasting far longer than just 4 years.
Wonder what visa they want us on.
(I'm Canadian, but still)
[deleted]
I'd love to create a statup in a bureaucratic, third-world country. Canada sounds perfect!
(preparing for modbomb oblivion)
(preparing for modbomb oblivion)