Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
#31
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,656
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
Now the other option is in Canada I will be earning $11 per hour and my partner hasn't got a job yet so lets say he was on minimum wage which is $7.15 per hour, he may earn more but don't know yet.
I will have roughly between $70,000-$80,000 after I have sold my flat but if were not to take this in to consideration and live on our salaries alone would we be able to survive in NS. I know this is very general but I'm hoping that some of you will have a rough idea.
I know I will not be earning mega bucks but the main difference for me would be I would be living in a house and not a flat, so if I could survive the same or better than I am right now then that would be fine with me. Did that make sense?
What do people think?
I will have roughly between $70,000-$80,000 after I have sold my flat but if were not to take this in to consideration and live on our salaries alone would we be able to survive in NS. I know this is very general but I'm hoping that some of you will have a rough idea.
I know I will not be earning mega bucks but the main difference for me would be I would be living in a house and not a flat, so if I could survive the same or better than I am right now then that would be fine with me. Did that make sense?
What do people think?
#32
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,656
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
I think this is the key point really. Even if you are getting by financially the key problem is that you are having to live in a 1-bed apartment. What if you wanted children?
I hear lots of people in Canada saying that things are no cheaper than in the UK and they don't have any more disposable income but in 90% of cases they are now living in houses that are huge comparred to what they had before they moved. Kids have their own rooms, a "rec room" lots of garden to play in etc. If they had bought something equivalent in terms of house size and amount of land in the UK their outgoings would have been 5,000 pounds/month (assumes huge mortgage and ridiculous council tax bill)
I hear lots of people in Canada saying that things are no cheaper than in the UK and they don't have any more disposable income but in 90% of cases they are now living in houses that are huge comparred to what they had before they moved. Kids have their own rooms, a "rec room" lots of garden to play in etc. If they had bought something equivalent in terms of house size and amount of land in the UK their outgoings would have been 5,000 pounds/month (assumes huge mortgage and ridiculous council tax bill)
#33
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
I think this is the key point really. Even if you are getting by financially the key problem is that you are having to live in a 1-bed apartment. What if you wanted children?
I hear lots of people in Canada saying that things are no cheaper than in the UK and they don't have any more disposable income but in 90% of cases they are now living in houses that are huge comparred to what they had before they moved. Kids have their own rooms, a "rec room" lots of garden to play in etc. If they had bought something equivalent in terms of house size and amount of land in the UK their outgoings would have been 5,000 pounds/month (assumes huge mortgage and ridiculous council tax bill)
I hear lots of people in Canada saying that things are no cheaper than in the UK and they don't have any more disposable income but in 90% of cases they are now living in houses that are huge comparred to what they had before they moved. Kids have their own rooms, a "rec room" lots of garden to play in etc. If they had bought something equivalent in terms of house size and amount of land in the UK their outgoings would have been 5,000 pounds/month (assumes huge mortgage and ridiculous council tax bill)
Regarding life in canada on a combined income of $19/hr.... its hard to say. I expect it would be pretty rough. We were surprised by how much it costs to keep and maintain a house, $150 min a month for heating oil, $120 for electricity, $200 taxes, thats excluding occasional one off maintenance issues, replacing inefficient windows, new A/C and furnace, the prospect of replacing the roof in the coming years, replacing the deck and siding, that sort of thing
Obviously a new house avoids or postpones some of those issues, and will be more efficient, but then it costs more to buy, and then taxes are higher... I would put in for lots of overtime and train hubby for a more lucrative job. BUt if you live within your means now, then for my money you will do the same thing in Canada, the real question thats so hard to answer is how far will those means take you here...
Last edited by iaink; Aug 24th 2007 at 5:34 pm.
#34
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,656
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
Fair point, my first (and hopefully last) home is about the same size and has a far larger yard then my brothers £1m+ house in Woking. His is much nicer, with more bathrooms, but I can afford mine, and we have room to expand if necessary, although no desire to do so.
Regarding life in canada on a combined income of $19/hr.... its hard to say. I expect it would be pretty rough. We were surprised by how much it costs to keep and maintain a house, $150 min a month for heating oil, $120 for electricity, $200 taxes, thats excluding occasional one off maintenance issues, replacing inefficient windows, new A/C and furnace, the prospect of replacing the roof in the coming years, replacing the deck and siding, that sort of thing
Obviously a new house avoids or postpones some of those issues, and will be more efficient, but then it costs more to buy, and then taxes are higher... I would put in for lots of overtime and train hubby for a more lucrative job.
Regarding life in canada on a combined income of $19/hr.... its hard to say. I expect it would be pretty rough. We were surprised by how much it costs to keep and maintain a house, $150 min a month for heating oil, $120 for electricity, $200 taxes, thats excluding occasional one off maintenance issues, replacing inefficient windows, new A/C and furnace, the prospect of replacing the roof in the coming years, replacing the deck and siding, that sort of thing
Obviously a new house avoids or postpones some of those issues, and will be more efficient, but then it costs more to buy, and then taxes are higher... I would put in for lots of overtime and train hubby for a more lucrative job.
I suppose that what I thought, still very confusing though.
#35
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
POST #1
On the kinds of wages you're talking about, you and your partner will be able to survive in Canada, but that's about it. Okay, you'll probably be able to afford something bigger than the one-bedroom flat in which you're living now. To that extent, a move to Canada probably would represent an improvement over your current circumstances.
But you still would not have what I would call "the good life." For example, I cannot see you being able to afford trips back to the UK to visit your families.
If you are still paying off your trip to Canada and if you are broke after your recent three-day trip out of town, moving to Canada is going to stretch you to your limits. But it could be done. (Dbd33 says he and his then-wife arrived in Canada with a suitcase each and a pair of skis.) It would take a lot of perseverance and determination to pull it off, though.
I feel that what you should do, both now and after you get to Canada, is find ways of improving your earnings. You and your partner could study part-time and improve your qualifications so that your hourly earnings could increase. Alternatively, you could do some sort of money earning activity on the side. You could get part-time jobs or you could start a small business. Initially you might consider running the business as a part-time venture. Then, if the business was sufficiently successful and if its revenue grew large enough, you'd earn enough money from it that you could give up one or both of your "day jobs" in order to give your full attention to the business.
There are tax advantages to being an entrepreneur. The tax advantages only kick in when your business is actually making money, however. There really are no tax advantages when your business is making no profits or running at a loss.
At the moment you are in a situation in which you have to work for money. The ideal, I think, is to be in a situation in which your money is working for you.
How does money work for you? Well, if you have enough spare money that you can invest some of it, you can earn interest or dividends or rental income from your capital investments. Then you're in a situation in which your capital earns money for you even when you're sleeping.
More in next post ...........
Originally Posted by or4ngecrush
Now the other option is in Canada I will be earning $11 per hour and my partner hasn't got a job yet so lets say he was on minimum wage which is $7.15 per hour, he may earn more but don't know yet.
I will have roughly between $70,000-$80,000 after I have sold my flat but if were not to take this in to consideration and live on our salaries alone would we be able to survive in NS. I know this is very general but I'm hoping that some of you will have a rough idea.
I know I will not be earning mega bucks but the main difference for me would be I would be living in a house and not a flat, so if I could survive the same or better than I am right now then that would be fine with me. Did that make sense?
What do people think?
I will have roughly between $70,000-$80,000 after I have sold my flat but if were not to take this in to consideration and live on our salaries alone would we be able to survive in NS. I know this is very general but I'm hoping that some of you will have a rough idea.
I know I will not be earning mega bucks but the main difference for me would be I would be living in a house and not a flat, so if I could survive the same or better than I am right now then that would be fine with me. Did that make sense?
What do people think?
But you still would not have what I would call "the good life." For example, I cannot see you being able to afford trips back to the UK to visit your families.
If you are still paying off your trip to Canada and if you are broke after your recent three-day trip out of town, moving to Canada is going to stretch you to your limits. But it could be done. (Dbd33 says he and his then-wife arrived in Canada with a suitcase each and a pair of skis.) It would take a lot of perseverance and determination to pull it off, though.
I feel that what you should do, both now and after you get to Canada, is find ways of improving your earnings. You and your partner could study part-time and improve your qualifications so that your hourly earnings could increase. Alternatively, you could do some sort of money earning activity on the side. You could get part-time jobs or you could start a small business. Initially you might consider running the business as a part-time venture. Then, if the business was sufficiently successful and if its revenue grew large enough, you'd earn enough money from it that you could give up one or both of your "day jobs" in order to give your full attention to the business.
There are tax advantages to being an entrepreneur. The tax advantages only kick in when your business is actually making money, however. There really are no tax advantages when your business is making no profits or running at a loss.
At the moment you are in a situation in which you have to work for money. The ideal, I think, is to be in a situation in which your money is working for you.
How does money work for you? Well, if you have enough spare money that you can invest some of it, you can earn interest or dividends or rental income from your capital investments. Then you're in a situation in which your capital earns money for you even when you're sleeping.
More in next post ...........
#36
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
POST #2
Around the beginning of this year I did an online course that I found really helpful. It was called Science of Getting Rich for Practical Geniuses. The woman who has designed the course is Rebecca Fine.
She bases the course on a book called The Science of Getting Rich by Wallace D. Wattles. The book was written in 1910, so the copyright on it has expired. That's why Fine (and other online marketers) are able to offer visitors to their websites free electronic copies of Wattles' book. In fact you can go to the website right now and download it for free if you wish. If you do download it, I recommend that you go straight to the last, brief chapter, as it efficiently summarizes the book.
Fine has an interesting way of marketing her course. She asks the student to pay what he/she thinks the course will be worth to him/her and how much he/she can afford. Fine says some students have chosen to pay her hundreds of dollars, while other students have paid as little as $10.
Each lesson addresses a topic covered in Wattles' book. Fine has a very clear and user-friendly style of writing. She makes it easy for ordinary, everyday people to understand the principles of wealth and money. In addition to that, she helps to make Wattles' principles relevant to the 21st century reader.
At the end of every lesson there is a questionnaire for the student to complete. The purpose of these questionnaires is for the student to gain an awareness of his/her attitudes towards money and the attitudes that he/she acquired from the family and the circumstances in which he/she grew up. As the student progresses through the questionnaires, he/she becomes more creative and is better able to "think outside the box."
More ...........
Around the beginning of this year I did an online course that I found really helpful. It was called Science of Getting Rich for Practical Geniuses. The woman who has designed the course is Rebecca Fine.
She bases the course on a book called The Science of Getting Rich by Wallace D. Wattles. The book was written in 1910, so the copyright on it has expired. That's why Fine (and other online marketers) are able to offer visitors to their websites free electronic copies of Wattles' book. In fact you can go to the website right now and download it for free if you wish. If you do download it, I recommend that you go straight to the last, brief chapter, as it efficiently summarizes the book.
Fine has an interesting way of marketing her course. She asks the student to pay what he/she thinks the course will be worth to him/her and how much he/she can afford. Fine says some students have chosen to pay her hundreds of dollars, while other students have paid as little as $10.
Each lesson addresses a topic covered in Wattles' book. Fine has a very clear and user-friendly style of writing. She makes it easy for ordinary, everyday people to understand the principles of wealth and money. In addition to that, she helps to make Wattles' principles relevant to the 21st century reader.
At the end of every lesson there is a questionnaire for the student to complete. The purpose of these questionnaires is for the student to gain an awareness of his/her attitudes towards money and the attitudes that he/she acquired from the family and the circumstances in which he/she grew up. As the student progresses through the questionnaires, he/she becomes more creative and is better able to "think outside the box."
More ...........
#37
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
POST #3
When it comes to money, there is the technical knowledge about how to handle it. But, even more important than technical knowledge is attitude. There are a person's beliefs about what he/she deserves . There is a person's perception of money as a good thing or a bad thing. There is a basic pessimism or optimism about one's opportunities.
In my reading on this topic I came across a quote by a rich guy (I forget who). He said that, while he had been broke many times in his life, he had never been poor. He said that, whenever he had been down and out, he always had assumed that it was a temporary condition and that he would get out of it. He said that what distinguished him from poor people was their assumption that their condition was permanent.
This distinction between being broke versus being poor ties in with the concepts of "learned optimism" and "learned pessimism" that a psychologist called Martin Seligman identified.
Seligman did a series of experiments on dogs. He administered electric shocks to dogs in their cages. As long as the dogs had a way of escaping the electric shocks, they would go to a tremendous amount of effort to do so. But, if all of their avenues for escaping the shocks were cut off, they would just lie down, whimper, endure the shocks, and not even try to escape. Then later, if a means of escaping the shocks was re-introduced into a dog's environment, the dog would not avail itself of the opportunity to escape the shocks. It would still just lie there and whimper. In Seligman's terminology, the dog had been trained to be pessimistic and, even when there was cause for optimism, the dog was unable to recognize it.
When it comes to money, there is the technical knowledge about how to handle it. But, even more important than technical knowledge is attitude. There are a person's beliefs about what he/she deserves . There is a person's perception of money as a good thing or a bad thing. There is a basic pessimism or optimism about one's opportunities.
In my reading on this topic I came across a quote by a rich guy (I forget who). He said that, while he had been broke many times in his life, he had never been poor. He said that, whenever he had been down and out, he always had assumed that it was a temporary condition and that he would get out of it. He said that what distinguished him from poor people was their assumption that their condition was permanent.
This distinction between being broke versus being poor ties in with the concepts of "learned optimism" and "learned pessimism" that a psychologist called Martin Seligman identified.
Seligman did a series of experiments on dogs. He administered electric shocks to dogs in their cages. As long as the dogs had a way of escaping the electric shocks, they would go to a tremendous amount of effort to do so. But, if all of their avenues for escaping the shocks were cut off, they would just lie down, whimper, endure the shocks, and not even try to escape. Then later, if a means of escaping the shocks was re-introduced into a dog's environment, the dog would not avail itself of the opportunity to escape the shocks. It would still just lie there and whimper. In Seligman's terminology, the dog had been trained to be pessimistic and, even when there was cause for optimism, the dog was unable to recognize it.
#38
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
POST #4
Steve Pavlina writes a blog about personal development. I find his writing inspirational. In one of his blog entries, he addressed the matter of learned pessimism in humans. He said that people who feel depressed and defeated often are "all or nothing" thinkers. They often feel they have only a couple of choices open to them. For example, a woman might think, "I can either endure the beatings by my abusive husband, or I can commit suicide." She doesn't recognize any options other than those two.
As Pavlina says, in the vast majority of cases there are many options. He says that when one is facing a problem, one can do an exercise to help one to think "outside the box." One might ask oneself, "How would an old person view this situation?" Then one can move on to other questions. How would a small child view this situation? How would a person from another country view this situation? How would a millionaire view this situation? How would a super-intelligent person view this situation? How would a person of the opposite sex view this situation? How would a Buddhist monk view this situation? How would a soldier view this situation? Try to identify as many people as possible who are different from oneself and imagine how they might look at the situation.
More ...........
Steve Pavlina writes a blog about personal development. I find his writing inspirational. In one of his blog entries, he addressed the matter of learned pessimism in humans. He said that people who feel depressed and defeated often are "all or nothing" thinkers. They often feel they have only a couple of choices open to them. For example, a woman might think, "I can either endure the beatings by my abusive husband, or I can commit suicide." She doesn't recognize any options other than those two.
As Pavlina says, in the vast majority of cases there are many options. He says that when one is facing a problem, one can do an exercise to help one to think "outside the box." One might ask oneself, "How would an old person view this situation?" Then one can move on to other questions. How would a small child view this situation? How would a person from another country view this situation? How would a millionaire view this situation? How would a super-intelligent person view this situation? How would a person of the opposite sex view this situation? How would a Buddhist monk view this situation? How would a soldier view this situation? Try to identify as many people as possible who are different from oneself and imagine how they might look at the situation.
More ...........
#39
Account Closed
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 494
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
POST #3
When it comes to money, there is the technical knowledge about how to handle it. But, even more important than technical knowledge is attitude. There are a person's beliefs about what he/she deserves . There is a person's perception of money as a good thing or a bad thing. There is a basic pessimism or optimism about one's opportunities.
In my reading on this topic I came across a quote by a rich guy (I forget who). He said that, while he had been broke many times in his life, he had never been poor. He said that, whenever he had been down and out, he always had assumed that it was a temporary condition and that he would get out of it. He said that what distinguished him from poor people was their assumption that their condition was permanent.
This distinction between being broke versus being poor ties in with the concepts of "learned optimism" and "learned pessimism" that a psychologist called Martin Seligman identified.
Seligman did a series of experiments on dogs. He administered electric shocks to dogs in their cages. As long as the dogs had a way of escaping the electric shocks, they would go to a tremendous amount of effort to do so. But, if all of their avenues for escaping the shocks were cut off, they would just lie down, whimper, endure the shocks, and not even try to escape. Then later, if a means of escaping the shocks was re-introduced into a dog's environment, the dog would not avail itself of the opportunity to escape the shocks. It would still just lie there and whimper. In Seligman's terminology, the dog had been trained to be pessimistic and, even when there was cause for optimism, the dog was unable to recognize it.
When it comes to money, there is the technical knowledge about how to handle it. But, even more important than technical knowledge is attitude. There are a person's beliefs about what he/she deserves . There is a person's perception of money as a good thing or a bad thing. There is a basic pessimism or optimism about one's opportunities.
In my reading on this topic I came across a quote by a rich guy (I forget who). He said that, while he had been broke many times in his life, he had never been poor. He said that, whenever he had been down and out, he always had assumed that it was a temporary condition and that he would get out of it. He said that what distinguished him from poor people was their assumption that their condition was permanent.
This distinction between being broke versus being poor ties in with the concepts of "learned optimism" and "learned pessimism" that a psychologist called Martin Seligman identified.
Seligman did a series of experiments on dogs. He administered electric shocks to dogs in their cages. As long as the dogs had a way of escaping the electric shocks, they would go to a tremendous amount of effort to do so. But, if all of their avenues for escaping the shocks were cut off, they would just lie down, whimper, endure the shocks, and not even try to escape. Then later, if a means of escaping the shocks was re-introduced into a dog's environment, the dog would not avail itself of the opportunity to escape the shocks. It would still just lie there and whimper. In Seligman's terminology, the dog had been trained to be pessimistic and, even when there was cause for optimism, the dog was unable to recognize it.
Have you read this book, Judy?
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=x...print&ct=title
#40
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
POST #5
I'm bringing up this issue of choices because I get the impression that your attitude towards your situation comes down to two choices : Do I stay in the UK, or do I emigrate to Canada? That may not be a fair assessment on my part. I see only what you post on this forum. I don't see you in your entirety. You may have considered many more angles than I am aware of. But, just in case you are thinking too much inside the box, I'd like to suggest that the issue of staying in the UK versus moving to Canada is only one dimension. Yes, maybe it would be a good idea to move to Canada. But I very much doubt that moving to Canada, on its own, is going to give you a comfortable lifestyle. I think it may be worthwhile to relocate to Canada AND implement additional measures that will improve your life. Don't think in terms of either/or. Think in terms of both/and.
Doing the exercises in Rebecca Fine’s course really opened my eyes about my attitudes towards money. I came to see how unfounded and illogical some of my ideas about money were.
Another exercise that Pavlina suggests on his blog is to take a look at the six people with whom one spends most of one’s time. Are those people anything like the person one would like to become? Are they leading the sort of life one would like to lead oneself? If the people with whom one hangs out most of the time are very different from the person one would like to become, Pavlina suggests that one seek out people who are closer to one’s ideal.
For example, many of the people with whom I work eat rather unhealthily. They bring doughnuts to the office to share with everyone, and stuff like that. A while back I started attending lunch hour fitness classes in a very affordable City of Calgary facility. These fitness classes have me rubbing shoulders with people who have a different attitude towards life than the doughnut-guzzling crowd (over and above the fact that the exercise I’m doing is physically healthy in and of itself).
Another thing I am going to do is join a Toastmasters International group that meets one night a week near where I live. Other people have told me that belonging to Toastmasters has helped them tremendously to improve their public speaking and general communication skills. As far as I understand, all of the people who belong to Toastmasters are volunteers. The cost of joining is negligible. If it isn’t totally free, it’s a very nominal sum – just the cost of renting a room in an inexpensive local community centre or something like that.
As is the case with my fitness classes, I see the Toastmasters meetings as having at least a couple of different benefits. They will help me to improve my verbal communication skills, and I welcome that opportunity. But, more importantly, they will help me to surround myself with other people who are working on improving themselves and who are not just sitting around and watching television (or participating on Internet forums – which is another habit I want to wean myself of). The only reason that I haven’t already joined Toastmasters is that, at the time that I decided to join, the group was taking its annual July-August break. It’ll start up again at the beginning of September, and I’ll be at the very first meeting of the 2007 – 2008 season.
More ...........
I'm bringing up this issue of choices because I get the impression that your attitude towards your situation comes down to two choices : Do I stay in the UK, or do I emigrate to Canada? That may not be a fair assessment on my part. I see only what you post on this forum. I don't see you in your entirety. You may have considered many more angles than I am aware of. But, just in case you are thinking too much inside the box, I'd like to suggest that the issue of staying in the UK versus moving to Canada is only one dimension. Yes, maybe it would be a good idea to move to Canada. But I very much doubt that moving to Canada, on its own, is going to give you a comfortable lifestyle. I think it may be worthwhile to relocate to Canada AND implement additional measures that will improve your life. Don't think in terms of either/or. Think in terms of both/and.
Doing the exercises in Rebecca Fine’s course really opened my eyes about my attitudes towards money. I came to see how unfounded and illogical some of my ideas about money were.
Another exercise that Pavlina suggests on his blog is to take a look at the six people with whom one spends most of one’s time. Are those people anything like the person one would like to become? Are they leading the sort of life one would like to lead oneself? If the people with whom one hangs out most of the time are very different from the person one would like to become, Pavlina suggests that one seek out people who are closer to one’s ideal.
For example, many of the people with whom I work eat rather unhealthily. They bring doughnuts to the office to share with everyone, and stuff like that. A while back I started attending lunch hour fitness classes in a very affordable City of Calgary facility. These fitness classes have me rubbing shoulders with people who have a different attitude towards life than the doughnut-guzzling crowd (over and above the fact that the exercise I’m doing is physically healthy in and of itself).
Another thing I am going to do is join a Toastmasters International group that meets one night a week near where I live. Other people have told me that belonging to Toastmasters has helped them tremendously to improve their public speaking and general communication skills. As far as I understand, all of the people who belong to Toastmasters are volunteers. The cost of joining is negligible. If it isn’t totally free, it’s a very nominal sum – just the cost of renting a room in an inexpensive local community centre or something like that.
As is the case with my fitness classes, I see the Toastmasters meetings as having at least a couple of different benefits. They will help me to improve my verbal communication skills, and I welcome that opportunity. But, more importantly, they will help me to surround myself with other people who are working on improving themselves and who are not just sitting around and watching television (or participating on Internet forums – which is another habit I want to wean myself of). The only reason that I haven’t already joined Toastmasters is that, at the time that I decided to join, the group was taking its annual July-August break. It’ll start up again at the beginning of September, and I’ll be at the very first meeting of the 2007 – 2008 season.
More ...........
#41
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
POST #6
One thing I can say about you, or4ngecrush, is that you have pleasantly surprised me. You have made more progress than I thought you would be able to make when I first “met” you on the forum. When you initially introduced yourself, I wouldn’t have guessed that you would be able to get a job offer in Canada while you still were living in the UK and that that job offer would be a step towards PNP.
So, if that’s where your perseverance has got you so far, I would say the prospects are excellent that you will not stop there, and that you will go much further than that.
What I would like to suggest is that you think beyond survival and focus instead on a life of fulfillment and prosperity (if that’s what you want). Of course you cannot ignore survival issues. Before you can be well off, you first have to achieve financial stability. Then you can build on that base and go to the next step. But, based on the progress you have made so far, I am betting that you will go a lot further.
I’m sorry if you feel this series of posts has been intrusive and overly personal. I thought of sharing my observations in a private message. But then it occurred to me that the discussion may be relevant to other posters as well. I have seen quite a few people on this forum who seem to be obsessed with the UK versus Canada issue while paying insufficient attention to other aspects of their lives.
Besides that, it also has been a way for me to “think aloud” about my own goals.
THE END
One thing I can say about you, or4ngecrush, is that you have pleasantly surprised me. You have made more progress than I thought you would be able to make when I first “met” you on the forum. When you initially introduced yourself, I wouldn’t have guessed that you would be able to get a job offer in Canada while you still were living in the UK and that that job offer would be a step towards PNP.
So, if that’s where your perseverance has got you so far, I would say the prospects are excellent that you will not stop there, and that you will go much further than that.
What I would like to suggest is that you think beyond survival and focus instead on a life of fulfillment and prosperity (if that’s what you want). Of course you cannot ignore survival issues. Before you can be well off, you first have to achieve financial stability. Then you can build on that base and go to the next step. But, based on the progress you have made so far, I am betting that you will go a lot further.
I’m sorry if you feel this series of posts has been intrusive and overly personal. I thought of sharing my observations in a private message. But then it occurred to me that the discussion may be relevant to other posters as well. I have seen quite a few people on this forum who seem to be obsessed with the UK versus Canada issue while paying insufficient attention to other aspects of their lives.
Besides that, it also has been a way for me to “think aloud” about my own goals.
THE END
#42
Immigration Consultant
Joined: Jun 2007
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,144
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
Oh, Judy - here you go again with your advice - she didn't say she was destitute, she's just trying to decide between staying in the UK and a move to Canada! These strategies you're talking about could apply equally in either country and fall under the heading of self-improvement not moving to Canada.
#43
Account Closed
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 494
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
Well, I have enjoyed that series of posts.
The one thing I am going to say is that it would be a shame if you completely left the virtual world as you provide a great deal of practical help to people in a sane, clear and accessible manner.
The one thing I am going to say is that it would be a shame if you completely left the virtual world as you provide a great deal of practical help to people in a sane, clear and accessible manner.
#44
Account Closed
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 494
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
Oh, Judy - here you go again with your advice - she didn't say she was destitute, she's just trying to decide between staying in the UK and a move to Canada! These strategies you're talking about could apply equally in either country and fall under the heading of self-improvement not moving to Canada.
Particularly as the process now is lengthy and you can change an awful lot whilst waiting!
#45
Re: Could you survive on ?????? in the U.K.
Originally Posted by Beebop
Yeuch, I knew of Seligman's work on the psychology of hapiness but even so, poor wee doggies.