Re: Seems I'm Right--Ozzies ARE happy People!
Lake . . . .
You're thinking and guessing again mate

And hazardous versions of such are particularly err, umm, hazardous
My comments on your comments below . . .
Just to hazard a wild assed guess, I would think that lower population density is a major contributor to the happiness of a population. Australia, about the size of the continental USA has 22.6 million people and the USA has well over 300 million. Do the math, people have more SPACE to live in Australia and New Zealand. Lower population density produces less congestion, less traffic, less pollutiion, etc.
You ain't been to today's Sydney with it's traffic jams

I was warned in the context of getting the 6-7 miles to the airport from downtown to plan well in advance for traffic snarls.
In the old days, it was merely "congested" at times.
Also . . . it would be interesting to know the truth of who they surveyed in Oz . . . I'll bet the preponderance of those surveyed were city types . . . . you any idea of the mileage involved in surveying the "cockies"? as we call them . . . . the farmers, or folks who live in "the country? It's mega mileage mate. The bulk of the Oz population live in the cities on the coast line.
Look at my sig line below . . . I tell the Yanks that that is the Ozzie attitude to life. In actuality, that is pretty correct. I grew up with it, but never quite noticed it till I traveled. Actually, living in the UK
tended to demonstrate it

sorry Paul and Terril
Living in the good ol' USofA confirmed it
It's the people and their attitude, mate. The environment merely facilitates it in the context that it doesn't bring them down, though it's also true the environment affords good recreation . . . . but err, um . . . don't the Yanks boast that?
This was a survey of people and their attitudes . . . not the why of the attitude
lkwdblds said:
I know there is a reverse side to the coin and that would be lower randomity. In some densely populated countries people are still happy. The Netherlands and Swizerland are good examples. Probably the best example is Japan with 125 million people in an area smaller than California. Japan seems to work because the people have a strong national purpose. They believe they are exceptional people with a destiny and so they are.
Lower randomity?!? You've got to be joking mate! You ever surfed the Sydney surfs? Ozzies CREATE max randomity for FUN!
Who bloody else but a bunch of ballzie Ozzies pulled off the Senate and the earlier Melbourne inquiries?
Ozzies love and create ACTION! Though it is true the other side of that coin is that they sure a shit know how to relax and be lazy!

But, hey . . . that's a talent!! Ever heard of people who can't relax?
lkwdblds said:
Again, just guessing, Australia has a lot going for it. There is low population density but still plenty of randomity. There is plenty of room to roam but also several large metropolitan centers offering all the glitz and high tech which this world has to offer. Not only that but their country is full of natural beauty, interesting animals and things that are not found in other parts of the world. I've never been there but would really like to experience it. Just the thought of a USA sized country with only 22.6 million inhabitants conjures up ideas of how much fun it would be to cavort, play around and explore in such a vast playground.
Well mate, some parts of Oz . . . the empty parts you refer to, are about as inviting and enjoyable and Death Valley, USA.
Stick with where the fun is . . . . I mean, look at that outrageous Opera House . . . . who else but the Ozzies would have gone for it and made such a statement . . . and pulled it off?
As I say . . . note my sig below
Rog