|
Re: Serious about going back
Originally Posted by jjanj
(Post 9296560)
Hi,
I have lived in both Australia and Canada and I have found (again totally my own opinion) that it is a totally different type of expat that goes to Canada and stays than one that goes and stays in Oz, not better or worse but certainly different. Because of this, I also think that for some, unhappiness in Canada is definitely dis positional and not situational and that for some, no length of time will make them happy here. J Personally also i dont hold with people who seem to live their lives through their children and judge their own quality of life on those of the kids. To say we would stay even if we were unhappy because our children are happy is madness!!! |
Re: Serious about going back
Originally Posted by cheeky_monkey
(Post 9298111)
I have wondered the same...and i think the same... that the kind of people who emigrate to Canada are generally not the same kind of people that go to Australia. I find that i probably fall into the Australia category of person (that doesnt mean i ever wanted to live there) just the type of person i am.
Personally also i dont hold with people who seem to live their lives through their children and judge their own quality of life on those of the kids. To say we would stay even if we were unhappy because our children are happy is madness!!! |
Re: Serious about going back
Originally Posted by jjanj
(Post 9297170)
I don't think that you understood my post, read it again slowly. That's my last word on the matter.
Good luck OP J In my opinion someone who comes onto expats and honestly expresses their true feelings especially when many are afraid to for whatever reason, deserves a big pat on the back and the respect of those expats yet to experience hardships. |
Re: Serious about going back
Originally Posted by JonboyE
(Post 9298416)
And yet anyone who honestly expresses their true feelings, but happens to disagree with you, is a member of a clique who is towing the party line.
- 1000 for "towing the party line". ;) |
Re: Serious about going back
Originally Posted by Atlantic Xpat
(Post 9298460)
- 1000 for "towing the party line". ;)
|
Re: Serious about going back
Originally Posted by Atlantic Xpat
(Post 9298460)
+1 for spelling "clique" correctly. If you can't spell it, you can't join it.;)
- 1000 for "towing the party line". ;) As for me, I shall henceforth fly in the face of convention and heel the party line instead. |
Re: Serious about going back
Originally Posted by JonboyE
(Post 9296756)
Yes, apart from this ...
A very good post ruined by a silly comment. Unless, that is, the moderators forgot to send me the memo on the party line. I stand by my initial advice that people should wait more than 6 months, preferably at least a year before jumping ship. |
Re: Serious about going back
Originally Posted by Oakvillian
(Post 9298664)
:) ah, but the party line is very heavy. That's how people justify buying the big 4x4 truck, so they have enough towing capacity.
As for me, I shall henceforth fly in the face of convention and heel the party line instead. |
Re: Serious about going back
Originally Posted by Atlantic Xpat
(Post 9298460)
+1 for spelling "clique" correctly. If you can't spell it, you can't join it.;)
- 1000 for "towing the party line". ;) J |
Re: Serious about going back
|
Re: Serious about going back
"Tow the line" is a recent bastardization popularized by lazy journalists. I can't find a reference older than the mid-1980s. It appears in august publications such as the Cambridge dictionary because it is in regular common usage. That doesn't make it any more excusable for those of JonboyE's or AX's standing. ;) |
Re: Serious about going back
Originally Posted by Oakvillian
(Post 9299058)
as you'll no doubt know, the job of a dictionary is to reflect the current usage of idiom, without necessarily commenting on its etymology or "correctness" (I use the term loosely). The original expression was undoubtedly "toe the line." Precise etymology - probably from boxing - is unclear, but it appears to have been widely used in various forms from the second quarter of the 19th century (OED, Webster, Chambers all have citations from the 1820s and 1830s).
"Tow the line" is a recent bastardization popularized by lazy journalists. I can't find a reference older than the mid-1980s. It appears in august publications such as the Cambridge dictionary because it is in regular common usage. That doesn't make it any more excusable for those of JonboyE's or AX's standing. ;) |
Re: Serious about going back
Originally Posted by Atlantic Xpat
(Post 9298758)
Well I never. You learn something new everyday.
J |
Re: Serious about going back
I assumed that the derivation was something like a boat being towed. That is, it has no freedom to chose its own direction and had to follow the boat that was towing it.
As observed, one learns. However, I still prefer my derivation to the real one. |
Re: Serious about going back
Originally Posted by cheeky_monkey
(Post 9298111)
I have wondered the same...and i think the same... that the kind of people who emigrate to Canada are generally not the same kind of people that go to Australia. I find that i probably fall into the Australia category of person (that doesnt mean i ever wanted to live there) just the type of person i am.
Personally also i dont hold with people who seem to live their lives through their children and judge their own quality of life on those of the kids. To say we would stay even if we were unhappy because our children are happy is madness!!! |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 12:30 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.