Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just think I would find the relative lack of social and cultural diversity in Australia a bit numbing particularly because going anywhere else requires a 12 hour flight and at least $2k in your pocket.
Migrants actually make up a significantly higher proportion of the population base in Aus than they do in Canada. Walk thought the streets of downtown Sydney or Melbourne, and you'll bump into folk from most parts of the globe. Even in the 1800s a sizeable proportion of the population in the then boom towns of the north were from places like China and Japan.
I'm not talking modern cultural inflow but rather the historic foundations of the country and regions.
In Australia, basically everyone came from the UK while in Canada that is not at all the case.
In Canada the British influx was everywhere but there were large Chinese and Japanese communities on the West Coast which was founded by the Spanish. Ukrainians, Russians, Germans and Dutch on the Prairies and Canada still has the largest Ukranian population outside Ukraine. Manitoba has the largest Icelandic population outside Iceland.
Only was mostly British and French but also a lot of Italians and ex-slaves. Quebec was obviously mostly French. Atlantic Canada was "discovered" by the Vikings and then the Basques, French, Portuguese, and English and Celts of Cape Breton. Canada eventually came under UK rule but was founded by many different nations well before the English arrived and have left their mark with towns with different architecture, histories, and cultures.
^ When I said "Only" I meant in Ontario it was mostly British and French but a lot of ex-slaves with the Underground Railroad and Uncle Tom's cabin. A little place named Buxton Ontario still has about 300 people almost everyone of them descendents of escaped slaves.
I'm not talking modern cultural inflow but rather the historic foundations of the country and regions.
In Australia, basically everyone came from the UK while in Canada that is not at all the case.
Movement of free settlers to Aus commenced in around 1830; within two decades a sizeable proportion were from countries other than the UK or Ireland, chiefly continental Europe and Asia, and with others from places like the US. The draw was the gold rushes of the mid 1800s. Today you can find old Chinese joss houses even in backwater Tasmania, while the legacy of 1800s migration from Germany and Italian speaking Swiss in pretty evident in place like central Victoria, SA and Qld. Even the Gaelic speaking Irish Catholics who made up a fairly large portion of the British Isles influx were quiet distinct from the English and Scots who migrated at that time.
Movement of free settlers to Aus commenced in around 1830; within two decades a sizeable proportion were from countries other than the UK or Ireland, chiefly continental Europe and Asia, and with others from places like the US. The draw was the gold rushes of the mid 1800s. Today you can find old Chinese joss houses even in backwater Tasmania, while the legacy of 1800s migration from Germany and Italian speaking Swiss in pretty evident in place like central Victoria, SA and Qld. Even the Gaelic speaking Irish Catholics who made up a fairly large portion of the British Isles influx were quiet distinct from the English and Scots who migrated at that time.
I don't think we are going to be able to declare a winner on which country is more diverse.
Certainly in the early on the settlement of both Anglo-Canada and Australia was very British (if you include Irish as British). A rather large part of Canada was also French-settled.
There were smidgens of Asian immigration in both countries a hundred years ago or more. Australia's has been mentioned already. Canada also had Japanese people in BC by the late 1800s, and even some people from India. And of course Chinese labourers were largely the ones who built Canada's transcontinental railway in the late 1800s.
I would say that large-scale non-British immigration was a bigger phenomenon in Canada in the early part of the 20th century. Many parts of the Prairies were originally settled by Ukrainians, Russians, Finns, Germans, etc. during this time. You had immigration from Europe (non-British) in Australia at that time as well but nothing on the scale of the ethnic block settlements in Western Canada.
Also, immigration from the UK has tailed off considerably in Canada during the contemporary era. Whereas levels have remained fairly high in Australia.
In Australia most immigrants today do not come from the UK but the number of UK immigrants in total numbers and relative to population is still quite a bit higher than in Canada. British immigration to Australia today sort of resembles British immigration to Canada in the 50s and 60s.
Also Canada (well, Quebec) is getting a high number of immigrants from France these days. This phenomenon is similar to that of the UK-to-Oz migration.
And of course, both Canada and Australia are getting very large numbers of non-European immigrants these days, something which is changing the face of both countries.
What about access to water/food in extreme regions of Australia?
Believe it or not an igloo's internal temperature can be 16 degrees c on the inside just by body heat alone - even though outside temps can be -45 degrees c
As I said before, the only limiting factor in populating the most extreme regions of Australia is lack of water...however there are large untapped water reservoirs very deep in the ground in a lot of places.
Get the water and you can build a city without any problem....a lot of free energy (solar), you do not have impediment to transportation like in extreme cold weather and less health issues....just make sure your skin is well protected if there is too much exposure to the sunshine.
Water makes farming possible (agriculture and livestock).
Life in the 30-40 degree C range (especially with low humidity) is way more pleasant and easier than life at -30 C.......
As I said before, the only limiting factor in populating the most extreme regions of Australia is lack of water...however there are large untapped water reservoirs very deep in the ground in a lot of places.
Get the water and you can build a city without any problem....a lot of free energy (solar), you do not have impediment to transportation like in extreme cold weather and less health issues....just make sure your skin is well protected if there is too much exposure to the sunshine.
Water makes farming possible (agriculture and livestock).
Life in the 30-40 degree C range (especially with low humidity) is way more pleasant and easier than life at -30 C.......
This is true in the era of modern technology. Historically, temperate and continental climate areas like southern Canada, even though they have relatively harsh winters, were often seen as more desirable places to settle as they had abundant water supply and fertile land for agriculture during the summer months. In the absence of air conditioning and other modern technological advances, it's much easier to make shelter out of trees (that grow in abundance in this type of climate), make a fire to keep warm, kill animals to use their fur for warm clothing, and stockpile food for the winter, than it was to try and survive in a barren desert or even an arid, hot climate with a only little bit of vegetation.
If you look at the history of the U.S. for example the settlement and development of places like the desert southwest and southern Florida only really took off with air conditioning and other technological progresses.
Thinking a bit about the things you can do (outdoors especially) in Canada vs. Australia, and I don't think there is anything you can do in a given year in Australia that you can't do in Canada during the same year during a fairly long period of time.
You wanna go to the beach? Swim in your pool? Go sailing? Boating? Surfing? Sunbathing? Snorkeling? Scuba diving? Cycling?
You can do all of that every single year for several months at a time in Canada.
If anything the colder season in Canada increases the number of things you can do in a given year. Contrary to popular belief, some outdoor winter sports are possible in Australia, but only in a very small part of the country. And some years the winter sports conditions are downright crappy if winter happens to be milder than average.
Granted, you can't do certain specific activities *all year* in Canada. So if for example you want to be a beach-goer for the 12 months of the year, then Australia is the better place. Although even in Australia year-round beach weather isn't a given in most parts of the country anyway.
This is true in the era of modern technology. Historically, temperate and continental climate areas like southern Canada, even though they have relatively harsh winters, were often seen as more desirable places to settle as they had abundant water supply and fertile land for agriculture during the summer months. In the absence of air conditioning and other modern technological advances, it's much easier to make shelter out of trees (that grow in abundance in this type of climate), make a fire to keep warm, kill animals to use their fur for warm clothing, and stockpile food for the winter, than it was to try and survive in a barren desert or even an arid, hot climate with a only little bit of vegetation.
If you look at the history of the U.S. for example the settlement and development of places like the desert southwest and southern Florida only really took off with air conditioning and other technological progresses.
Modern technology has made more palatable to live in both extreme landscape (Canada or Australia) obviously Australia, as much as Canada, had plenty of desirable places to settle with nice weather and fertile land.
Native population have found a way to live in very hostile environment in both countries before the advent of the white man technology.
Quote:
Thinking a bit about the things you can do (outdoors especially) in Canada vs. Australia, and I don't think there is anything you can do in a given year in Australia that you can't do in Canada during the same year during a fairly long period of time.
You wanna go to the beach? Swim in your pool? Go sailing? Boating? Surfing? Sunbathing? Snorkeling? Scuba diving? Cycling?
I do not have personal experience about eastern Canada, but the ocean waters of BC are pretty much unswimmable year round.
Surfing is possible only in few spots on the western coast of Vancouver island (for example Tofino), wrapped in a quality wetsuit.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
