If you could live anywhere with all current restrictions removed, where would you live?

If I knew the language and had the money and mental health, I would want to live in Jerusalem. I love Israel, mainly for spiritual reasons, but I also love the "romance" of the "old world." Jerusalem is a modern city too and the largest in Israel. I also love the big city though Jerusalem is just under a million in population. The Tel Aviv Metropolitan Area has a larger population.

Jeanette Isabelle

That's a tough one! I haven't been everywhere but a few of the places I really loved include Coeur D'Alene, Idaho; Mizzoula, MT and Bozeman, MT; and Spokane, WA. All are in beautiful country near forests and/or mountains and all of them have gun laws that are to my liking (I'm a big shooter and firearms enthusiast).

Somewhere not too hot ! I hate the heat but don't mind cold within reason.
Warm clothing can be worn if cold, there is a limit as to what can be removed if too hot.
Heating appliances are generally cheaper, simpler, and more reliable than air conditioning.

Somewhere not too crowded, but also not too remote.

Democratic and law abiding.

Preferably where land is cheap enough that one could buy enough to grow food and firewood, and where edible game is available.

Not liable to earthquakes, landslides, forest fires, flooding or other natural disasters.
Not too vulnerable to man made disasters such as dam failure, chemical leak, large accidental explosions,or nuclear accident.

Not too near obvious military or terrorist targets.

Where firearms may be lawfully obtained and used.

That suggests either certain northern parts of the USA, southern parts of Canada, Norway, and perhaps Scotland (shotguns are easily obtained legally, other guns effectively prohibited)

New Zealand.

Spent a month there and loved it -- subtropical beaches, magnificent glaciated mountains and volcanoes -- my favorites.


.

I'd love to find a place that has strong protection of firearms rights, low earthquake and flood risk, no extremes of heat or cold, reasonable access to different types of terrain, and close to good medical care. One of the best areas I've seen for my list is Central Arizona. Coeur D'Alene has been on my list although I haven't been there yet.

But every place has it's STOBOR....

I believe I have the gist of what you're saying; I could not find STOBOR in the online dictionaries.

Jeanette Isabelle

ROBOTS spelled backward -- it's a Heinlein thing.

Putting emphasis on your "current restrictions removed" statement, I'd consider the Pacific Northwest. There are reasons I wouldn't necessarily move there now, because of restrictions - the building up of left coast firearms laws and attitudes specifically. I'd consider Hawaii too, given that their current onerous restrictions would be removed as well. But taking in account the current restrictions of places here in the US, I'd probably pick Alaska, Wyoming or Montana.

Chaos, your choices would be mine as well. I have been there and I loved it.

My mental health should not be an issue for my situation. They have the doctors and the medications I need there too.



Taking things a step further, such as laws, is an interesting thought. Even then I would pick Israel.

Jeanette Isabelle

I would probably consider moving to northern Perthshire, somewhere around the Loch of the Lowes or Dunkeld, although the county of Angus next to Perthshire does have some nice Glens. The North of the Kingdom of Fife around Falkland and Newburgh is a little too quiet though.

Having traveled far and wide, I have found the ideal place for me. Alaska meets my criteria for individual freedoms, lack of poisonous/dangerous vermin, abundant resources, favorable weather, and minimal population. Anchorage was a bit crowded for me, but where I am now is about as good as it gets. Sure, the state govt has it's personally undesirable slants, but fortunately they don't affect me significantly yet. Time will tell, as it did in Washington.

I could go for Queensland AU, except for the snakes and spiders, and the 45%+ income tax rate. The area around Reno NV would be good, except for the proximity to California and the overflow of their influence in the area. Walla Walla was pretty nice, but again, the political philosophy of the area is wanting, and they too have snakes and spiders I've had run-ins with.

Europe, Asia, and Africa are far too inhospitable, both politically and naturally, for my tastes. Europe feels sort of used up and gentrified. Asia is just too crowded and overgrown, and Africa is just plain hostile. Parts of South America would work I suppose, but I have no real experience to contemplate.

I am happy with where I am for the moment. I don't need any panacea remedies or qualifiers to enjoy life here, so until the big one hits, this is as good as it gets in my humble opinion. I could make a list, and even started one on this thread. But not so sure it is a good idea to advertise what I don't want to share.

I agree completely with Big Ben on Africa and Europe!

I think Alaska would be awesome if we're talking the parts off of the Ring of Fire and out of the tsunami zone. But I have not yet had a chance to visit the state.

Best to build traps for them, just in case.

Hmm, I can't really think of all that many inhospitable places in Europe. And Asia being crowded... Heck, Mongolia and Siberia would be just about perfect for anyone trying to get away from civilization. But anyway, to each his own.

As cliche as it may sound, Provence may be closer to the ideal place than anywhere else I've been so far. Or Portugal, the countryside is fantastic. Beautiful nature, pretty relaxed and easygoing (in a good way) all around. Maybe not the ultimate choice for a gun nut. Then again, not the kind of place where you'd need a gun for anything other than personal amusement.

My mind freezes at the "current restrictions removed" clause.

What does that mean?

No earthquakes, floods, volcanos, diseases, tornadoes, nosy neighbors, intrusive governments, predatory animals, venomous pests?

Realistically, it is very unlikely that there is an"ideal" place to live,with no negative features...

I, too, am a fan of central Arizona. living for about three years in Globe, a small community which is rather insular and provincial - still, good folks. But weather extremes and EQ possibilities exist there. Where precisely in central AZ do you not have these conditions - Prescott?

Mars. A well funded, long term NASA settlement on Mars

I listed the restrictions preventing me from living in my ideal place to live, finances and the language barrier. I would need to read, write and speak Hebrew.

Jeanette Isabelle

I know the negatives of the nation I wish to live in. Still, if I had the money and knew the language that is where I want to live.

Jeanette Isabelle

Your desired changes are quite modest and potentially achievable.

I was thinking something like - I'd love to live in San Diego as I remember it when I was a kid there 55 years ago.

You might like your chosen city better if you could somehow impose peace on the squabbling that goes on in that city.

Think big? Or small? How much superpower are we granted for this question?

I think hikermor hits it on the head- no place is perfect and ideal. There are always tradeoffs.

OK. I'll have to admit complete geographical ignorance here. I have no idea where you are talking about. I guess I better brush up on my geography so I'm not so stupid. The only thing I can say is those names don't sound like they're in Mexico ... but that's about all I can glean from it.

Let me rephrase the question. What's preventing you from living in your ideal location?

I'm able to learn a new language. All I need is to take a class. What about finances? I'm not living in poverty but with my current finances, I can't afford to live in Israel.

Jeanette Isabelle

Work.

I'm in a pretty good place already, all things considered.

Otherwise- risk aversion, lack of imagination, tolerance for sub-optimal conditions (such as work), and 35 years of accumulated stuff in the house have their effects.
I'd revisit the question after a house fire I think....

The utter lack of an ideal location.

That sounds like a snarky answer, but I mean it seriously. I'm not sure, all things taken together, that there really IS a better location than where I am now. Some things here I dislike, other things I like. You dream of other places being better, but are they?

In my opinion, the single greatest "ruiner" of a fantastic location is government control in action. Doesn't matter which party. And we have zero control of how that's playing out, despite the mantra "get out and vote!" (which I do every time). This is ruining many places I otherwise might consider moving to. Are there any places left without a government, or only a very minimal one?

I don't believe such a place exists. If it's taken this direction the question becomes what kind of government do you want?

Jeanette Isabelle

I'd be happiest with one that spent only money it actually had in hand, where Election Day is also Tax Day, where only one kind of tax was permitted to be collected (property taxes, I think, as sales taxes tend to gum up the machinery of commerce and income taxes has the government involve itself in how I earn money), where religion was not the basis of law, where bureaucrats could not make law, and where the government's function was to do the things that only government can do effectively (defense, police, courts).

Since that place exists solely in my mind I would settle for one that was just like the United States but actually followed the written Constitution.

I'll go for that. I also want one that doesn't waste taxpayers' money.

Jeanette Isabelle

Colorado was cool. The two things I didn't care for when I lived there was the weather (two tornadoes and numerous thunderstorms at most inopportune times), and the politics. They have their own state run "bureau of investigation", and they confused me with someone else with a criminal record. When I tried to purchase a firearm, they denied me, and said I would have to prove in court I was not the criminal, and the judge would have to agree to it. Needless to say, I did not stick around to wait for them to come a calling with the swat team. Also, I was uncomfortable with the 4/20 celebration happening out on the state's capital lawn.

Yeah, and the traffic in Denver was not much fun either.

But the fishing was pretty cool, and the food was tasty.

I have lived in southern California for some time, and it has its negatives and its pluses. Realistically, what you do is adapt, minimizing the negatives and taking full advantage of the positives.

We have earthquakes, but we don't have tornadoes or hurricanes;thunderstorms are rare.

The area is over crowded, but the population is ethically and culturally diverse. We get many cultural events that don't play elsewhere. Freeways can be jammed, so you learn about off-peak travel.

Weather is generally mild (which can actually be boring!) I have a daily choice of beach, ocean, mountain environments within thirty minutes of my house. Desert and high mountain country are an easy drive. Lots of national parks and other preserves, which can be crowded (Yosemite!), but I know of secluded places, not to be named, where solitude can be found - pristine beaches where I have never encountered another soul....

What works is a change of place. For several years, I have worked seasonally in South Dakota, which is SoCal turned inside out. SoCal-every other person drives a Prius. SoDak-get a pickup truck or leave! I eagerly await my annual SoDak fix!

People is each environment generally respond rationally to their situation, which gives me hope for the human race.

"Ethically" or "ethnically"? Or is this one of those humor things?

OOps! Missed that one completely! However, upon further review, I think both words fit - my original intent was "ethnically"

LOL I saw that too but didn't see a need to correct -- ethically diverse seems fitting and appropriate.