adrball

Hey all

Looking forward to having a good read of the forums and finding some helpful hints for a successful move to somewhere in Latin America.

My head has been a little spooked up over the last year trying to think of something to give me a little challenge, fresh surroundings and friends. I've thought of many reasons why emigration wouldn't work but I'm going to shed my anxiety and just do it!!!!

I'm 36, married with two young kids. I love the Spanish language (learning it now), the latin american attitude to life, and really love experiencing new cultures.

I'm a bit nervous of making the big leap, and would welcome any practical help and to hear both positive and negative stories about people who have moved to Santiago or Lima.

That's it for now!!

//ADRIAN

Poppy girl

I am sure Dakota44 will be along in a bit to set you straight

dakota44

I live in Lima, Peru at the moment. I have also spent time in Chile, Santiago and La Serena. There are some significant differences, but Peru gets my vote.

Some good info on these websites about immigration and living in Peru. Be happy to share some actual experiences and suggestions if you want. With a family, it gets a bit difficult.

http://www.expatperu.com/

also www.livinginperu.com

Peru is less expensive than Santiago. Chile is certainly more economically advanced in terms of business. Santiago is in the mountains and is a nice enough city. Lima is beside the ocean and is beautiful. Chile, as you saw from the news, gets a shitload of earthquakes. They happen in Peru too but Chile gets the bulk of them. So many things to consider.

adrball

Let me take some time to look at the website and digest the information. I'll probably end up with long list of questions as I get further into this process, but if you'd be able to answer just a few i would be very grateful.

Chile's mountain/sea scape sounds and looks amazing. Stable economy and politics are important too. But my experience is that the less well discussed places have more of a inspiring side to them. And Peru may be that.

I'll check in again soon.

//ADRIAN

dfjordan

I sent quite a long post yesterday expalining about Santiago where I have lived for the last 11 years, but I don´t see it posted anywhere?

dfjordan

OK, don´t worry, I´ve found it on the earlier thread. I didn´t know a secodn one had been opened.

dfjordan

I think you are exaggerating somewhat saying that Chile " gets a shitload of earthquakes". They do happen now and again, and even when strong like the last one, very few houses or buildings are damaged. The ones you saw in the news are those that weren´t built according to the regulations here or they are very old and made of adobe- something which isn´t used now. I know of nobody in Santiago who suffered even the slightest damage in the last quake. I also want to say that the air pollution in Santiago is a myth that´s been going on for years. Yes, in some months in winter there is pollution but no more than in many other cities of the world and certainly not something you would need to worry about if you live to the normal standards of people coming from a first world country. Try walking down Oxford Street and compare that to downtown Santiago and tell me which is worse!

dakota44

I spent enough time in Chile to know about the earthquakes. Experienced a few of them. Yes, the new buildings, if built to code, are better. Funny, though, I would have thought the airport would have been built to code, and yet part of it collapsed. And of course the apartment buildings, including a 15 story one that was recently built, that collapsed in Concepcion. Don't downplay the quake situation. And there were many buildings damaged in Santiago, or were you out of town at the time.
Air pollution is not a myth. So stop fibbing about it. You ruin your creditability. The guy has young kids.

http://c.hileno.com/2008/05/chile-ai...-santiago.html
Patricio Pérez, the author of the above mentioned carbon monoxide study, was recently quoted in an article about smog in Santiago:
It's as if we were swimming at a beach not suitable to bathe in. Santiago's air, during four or five months (each year), is not suitable to breathe, and the government throws these lifesavers when there are people who are 'drowning', so that they don't 'die'".
It's true. The government only takes action after children and the elderly are forced into hospitals.

For all her motherly daycare initiatives, Chile's President Michelle Bachelet didn't once mention smog in her state of the union address Wednesday.

Last week was particularly bad. The Icelandic grad student who told me about the smog map writes:
I hadn´t noticed the smog too much (well of course I could see it) but it first started affecting me last week, when I started having sore eyes and coughing like crazy. It´s nasty shit.

This is from last year.
SANTIAGO — Soon it will be that time of year again. Children and the elderly will be wearing surgical masks on the streets. Hospitals will overflow with babies gasping for air. Schools will suspend sports activities.
And everyone will blame everyone else for one of the capital’s longtime ailments: the dark cloud of smog that hovers over its 6 million inhabitants.
Santiago is one of the most polluted cities in Latin America. Trapped in a valley surrounded by the Andes on the east and a coastal mountain range on the west, the capital suffers a thermal inversion during the winter that keeps pollutants from dispersing. Only the winter rains bring relief.
In addition to geography, population growth, poorly regulated transportation systems and manufacturing, and the use of polluting energy sources such as coal and lumber have made smog a life-threatening issue.
When pollution reaches critical levels, public health centers are overwhelmed. A study, commissioned by the government National Environment Commission (Conama) and released in July, found that every year, almost 20,000 people suffer pollution-related health problems in the capital. The report estimates air pollution will cause 720 deaths in Santiago next year. http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/c...ironment-chile


There is pollution in Lima too, the degree of which depends on what district you are in. It's minimal where I am. I agree, all cities have it. But in Lima, being on the coast, the ocean breezes prevent same kind of inversion that afflicts Santiago.

adrball

That's pretty bad if the schools are preventing the kids playing out in it. I'll have to look for some stats and get another opinion from my London based Chilean friend. I don't mind having to put up with the occasional bout of smog, but if there are long periods where it disrupts daily life then I start to have some doubts.

I don't mind conflicting opinions, in fact I welcome them so I can make up my own mind. Keep them coming :-) And typical Chilean food can be no more bland than my mothers cooking ;-)

Thx again all.

dfjordan

To Dakota

To answer your comments about the recent quake; yes I was in Santiago, but fortunately being here I had access to a variety of news sources, which apparently you didn´t. The airport building did not suffer any structural damage. The false ceilings fell down and can be put up as easily as they fell down. The buildings that were damaged were the very old ones or in some cases, had not been built according to the legal requirements. In the sector where I live there are still some houses made of adobe. Some of them had severe damage but what do you expect if you build your house out of mud? The building that the news reports all loved to show that fell down in Concepcion was obviously not built according to the law and action is being taken to hopefully charge the constructors with criminal negligence. Did you see a foto that showed the one next door?- no damage. It´s like the houses that get blown away in the hurricanes in the US, just because people wont spend what they should do on constructing them. How many houses were destroyed the last time a hurricane hit Bermuda for example?.
With regard to the report of some " expert" on pollution here, he shows his obvious ignorance of the facts by mentioning that during 4 to 5 months a year the air is unbreathable. If that were the case, people wouldn´t be living here. Also, as we all know, smog occurs in the winter months of which there are 3, as the other months, the air movement allows the pollution to move out of the valley. It´s like anywhere, if you live in the wrong part of town, you will suffer from pollution, rapes, bad roads etc but I assume that people using this website are fortunate enough not to have to live like that. I lived in Houston for 10 years and even in the good part of town I got used to seeing the dark yellow sky out of my office window for most of the year, but myself and 4 million or so others, didn´t get up and leave. I have nothing to gain by defending Santiago, there a lot of things I don´t like about the place I just believe that commenst should be made based on facts and not "experts" surveys or news reports

My advice to ardball would be for him to visit both places and chose based on his priorities as you can´t get away from the fact that Lima and Santiago are like chalk and cheese .

dakota44

I'm happy that you had no problems in the quake. I am well aware of the construction codes in Chile, and I am also well aware that you can never be certain that the building was in fact built to those codes. No different than in Peru, which also has strong codes for construction as regards earthquakes. More important, in Santiago, the hospitals suffered extensive damage. Many roadways and bridges collapsed. You assume that you will be safely sequestered in your apartment in a quake. What if you happen to be in a restaurant, or a theater, or a bar, or thousands of other places that were built before the code? What if you are in your car on an elevated roadway? One assumes that the bridges and elevated roadways were built to earthquake code too. Don't be so foolish as to diminish the risk of living in a quake zone. I live with the same concern here in Lima, but thee is no question that Chile is more prone to quakes than Lima. And I never heard of an airport being shutdown for three days because "some ceiling tiles fell".

Smog. Pollution. Again you make a ludicrous statement in the face of the facts. People would not live there if it were that bad? Of course they would, if they have to for work and survival. The same as people live in tornado alley, in hurricane country, on flood planes. The same as they do in pollution ravaged cities around the world. Fact of necessity.

You said that "experts" should be ignored. I'll listen to environmental experts long before I'll listen to someone that the pollution just doesn't bother. I have many friends in Santiago, and all say the same thing about it. Many say they would move if they could, but work requires that they remain there. And it isn't good. I've been there when the taste of it was so strong in your mouth that it was disgusting.

I agree that the O.P should visit both and decide for himself. But I do suggest he visit Santiago in the winter. I don;t say any of this to dis Santiago, because I do like the place. I have fond memories of it. I just prefer Lima for many reasons. In Chile, if I was planning to live there, it would in La Serena.

adrball

It's good advice to visit in Winter...I'll make sure I do that. Work permitting.

Chile has been my initial favourite because of it's pretty sound legal and political systems, and having a relatively stable and progressive economy. That said, if I can get a transfer through my employer, it's most likely going to be in Santiago that any of the other areas such as La Serena. But pollution is a concern...much more so that the quakes.

On the subject of quakes. How does insurance work in both countries. Does quake damage typically get excluded from cover (on the basis of act of god) or is there some sort of building certification that allows code-standard property to be covered? I'd definately rent first but ultimately would prefer to buy.

Dakota: Could you give me your top 3 reasons why you prefer Lima?

//ADRIAN

dfjordan

Earthquake insurance is not only readily available in Chile but if you take out a mortgage you will be obliged to take it out anyway. You wont be able to get a building cert; such a thing doesn´t exist, but you can be pretty sure that if the house you think of buying wasn´t affected by the latest quake, then it will have been built according to specs. You really need to be in the country to see how things work, etc and get the feel of the place. Most foreigners live in the area close to the mountains which is basically smog free and where you would be able to find very well constructed houses/apartments, that wouldn´t give you any cause for concern. Value for money is far far betetr than in the UK. Like most places, if you buy cheap, you will get crap. I agree that you should visit in winter, and if you like it at that time of the year you will obviously love it during the rest of the year. Personally I like many things about Lima but to me, climate is very important and for that reason I don´t live on the coast as I like to see the sun first thing in the morning whereas for most of the time at the coast it tends to be cloudy until about noon then the sun comes out. Also it depends on whether you like a humid climate or not.
I would also suggest that if you have kids you think about the quality of secondary education from an international point of view. The main universities in Chile are highly respected internationally, which is important if you want to do say a post grad outside which most do. If you want, you can send your kids to what they call " British schools" which really means they try to follow the education system of Britain from the 1950s, with better discipline, " fair play" the obligatory use of uniforms etc. The one my son went to for example teaches all subjects up to age 12, 70% English 30% Spanish then from 12 on they swop it around. The aim being to have the kids fluent in English before senior school. They also offer the UK GCSE and the IB if you want it .

dfjordan

Once again Dakota, I suggest you get your facts right before commenting on a place where you do not in fact live. If you read my post I did not say that "some ceiling tiles fell off" That´s a distortion. Read what I said. If you think of a terminal the size of Santiago, I think you would agree that to try and restore ceilings in less than 3 days would be impossible for anyone. You also give an unclear description of the damage to hospitals. You say " the hospitals suffered extensive damage" This would imply that all hospitals, and there are very many, suffered extensive damage which was not the case. None of the type of hospitals that you or I would go to, ie the private ones, suffered any damage worth talking about. Similarly the only part of the road system that was seriously damaged was one section of a flyover. The rest of the city roads worked as usual. You should remember that building standards aren´t and obviously can´t ,require buildings to suffer no damage at all. They are designed to ensure that they don´t fall down; that´s very different. I´m surprised that you give such erroneous comments on the place as you say you have many friends here. Your friends who would like to get out but can´t because of their jobs obviously value cash more than they do their environment, so should have no reason to gripe. The same goes for those in hurricane prone zones as well. None of the people I met in Houston lived there becasue they thought it was a nice place to live. They all were there for the cash so accepted the pollution as part of life, just as the commuters to London etc do. Nobody forces them to live there.
I see that you suggest living in La Serena. Yes, it´s a nice place for a vacation, but what about if you want to work for a decent size company, or want to send your kids to a good university etc. I think it would only be fair to also mention how small the place is, and as such can´t be expected to offer any kind of sophisticated life style. There are many nice places to live in Chile but if you have to work then there really is only one place that´s worth thinking about and that´s Santiago and in my opinion it´s very easy to avoid the pitfalls you mention just by living in the east part, and working in the east part where more and more companies are relocating to all the time. There is never any need to go to the west or south or center for that matter where the pollution and bad houses /hospitals/roads etc are. You wont find a decent school anywhere except in the east nor a decent hospital and so on. Why worry about the pollution in an area you never go to? That´s my problem with the experts, who generalise everything because it suits them. You should never take statistics as gospel, no matter who produces them, as generally they are produced according to the preferred outcome. They are based on generalities and should be used as a guide not a rule.

dakota44

Let's just say that you might be making too little of the earthquakes and the smog, and I might be making too much of them. So perhaps there is a middle ground somewhere that the O.P. will find.

I did say that I like Santiago, but truth is I prefer Lima. You are right about the humidity here though. Heavy in the summer and in the winter the sun is rare.

As for La Serena, I said that I would live there and wasn't suggesting that he should, but then I don't need a job, so not a problem for me. Pretty much whether it is Peru or Chile the job situation pretty much dictates either Santiago or Lima. I do think it is unfair to criticize someone for not being willing to leave the smog and go live where they cannot earn a living. It's called being between a rock and a hard place.