Talk:Retiring abroad/Table

Pakistan

Why Pakistan is removed from this list? --Saqib (talk) 20:23, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I took out the twenty countries that rated lowest on the Global Peace Index. They rank Pakistan #157 of 162; only Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan and Somalia are below it. Pashley (talk) 00:44, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Weird. Even though Pakistan is listed as very (in-fact very very) dangerous country on GPI, but fortunately still some people do consider of retiring in Pakistan and Pakistan is home to 40 million immigrants (rank 14th in the world). On the other hand, I don't see GPI very reliable and accurate, because certain countries not included in the index, and domestic violence, violence against women and child abuse was never included in their index. But anyway! --Saqib (talk) 10:39, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I can imagine a lot of retirees with Pakistani roots in the United Kingdom would consider retiring in Pakistan. Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:50, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Actually they do. After all, more than 60 million Pakistanis are living abroad. On the other hand, I believe GPI data is mostly concentrate on the security situation in a country. if we see things practically, as compare to Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia and both Sudan countries where whole of the country areas is affected by conflicts, in Pakistan, only the western part of the country is affected and rest of area is relatively safe. --Saqib (talk) 11:16, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I restored Pakistan and added various others. Pashley (talk) 14:53, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Btw, any comments here? --Saqib (talk) 15:02, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Other columns?

It would be possible to add columns for other things. Quite a few places — much of the Islamic world, parts of India, ... — ban or restrict alcohol, which would be a problem for some retirees. Firearms restrictions might be a problem for others. There are probably other things I haven't thought of.

I do not think extra columns are necessary, but it seems worth asking. Certainly I would not object if someone thinks an extra column would be useful and wants to volunteer for the work. Pashley (talk) 16:38, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Vfd discussion

Right now, this table doesn't seem to be very useful – it's out-of-date by eight years and tables like these are out-of-scope on a travel guide. If someone would like to see such statistics, they can go to the encyclopedia, but this rather unusual encyclopedic page can't stand the way it is. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

• Delete. We should avoid legal and medical information which cannot be clearly verified. Travel topics should also have a minimum of ephemeral information that is likely to change over the years; if they are to be kept anywhere, it should be in the destination article. /Yvwv (talk) 11:35, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
• I'm not unbiased since I created it. I'd say keep, though I'll not be hugely upset if the decision is to delete. I think it is useful to have this summary, at least for people seeking the right place to retire, because it lets you compare destinations. Some folk might discover destinations they had not considered; e.g. Bangladesh is dirt cheap & has legal prostitution.

Yes, most of the info here can be found in the encyclopedia, but it is spread out over many country articles and others like w:Prostitution by country, w:Legality of cannabis by country and w:Criminalization of homosexuality. Some, like the costs for retirement visas, is not likely to be in the encyclopedia; you'd need to check with each country's immigration department. Pashley (talk) 04:23, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

• Comment Few countries change character in a few years, so not having been updated in eight years does not make it useless (although updating would be nice, especially as there may be ongoing trends relevant at least for those who are going to still be in the country a decade from now). I also think, like Pashley, that a summary here can be useful despite the individual data being available in Wikipedia and in UN statistics (or whatever). I don't particularly like having prostitution and drugs being singled out as important factors, and other tweaks could be made, but such issues should be discussed elsewhere. –LPfi (talk) 07:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
• Comment I don't think legality of prostitution and cannabis should be in this table. This isn't a sex tourism guide. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:11, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

I agree with this. But I'd support deletion; let Wikipedia keep these stats and otherwise, keep the info in country guides. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:33, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

I know people who have chosen retirement destinations partly based on availability of high-grade weed and/or tolerant attitudes to homosexuality. Pashley (talk) 23:08, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Undoubtedly. People have different priorities, but not just retired people. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:30, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

---

Outcome: There seems to be consensus to delete, but I prefer someone else to do the deletion as I'm not comfortable deleting a page that I nominated. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:58, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Anyone? I'll have to do it myself if no-one does it within 2 days. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:02, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I'll take care of it, but I don't understand why you ask other people to do a job that you have the power and apparent time to do yourself. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:46, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

• Outcome: In fact, there is no consensus to delete after 14+7 days. There are but 3 votes to delete, 1 to keep and 1 comment about how to edit the table, so this table will be kept per no consensus to delete, without prejudice to further discussion about how to edit it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:53, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek: As it's often bad practice for the nominator to delete the page themselves. Some wikis don't allow it, often because the nominator may make a biased judgment towards deleting it. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:17, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Drugs and sex

Is there a consensus to remove drug and sex tourism laws from this table? I support doing so. Pinging participants in the VfD discussion: User:SHB2000, User:Rubbish computer, User:Yvwv, User:Pashley. My observation is that these laws are of interest to some people, but not particularly to retired people, as opposed to people of any other age, but also that this guide doesn't cater to sex tourism or really to drugs tourism, although we do have at least one travel topic article about a drug that covers the Andes, where the coca leaf is not only legal but sacred and traditionally grown. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:57, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I also support doing so. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 12:09, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Ditto. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:15, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

The only reason I see to remove them is that they are hard to maintain. The table columns can go, but I feel strongly that we should retain the links to WP either here or in the main article, perhaps both. Pashley (talk) 01:11, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

To WP coverage of laws on sex work and drugs? I don't see why. Anyone else? Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:07, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

As I wrote above "I know people who have chosen retirement destinations partly based on availability of high-grade weed and/or tolerant attitudes to homosexuality". Certainly a sensible retiree should avoid places with particularly nasty laws. Arguably we should just link to our articles on LGBT travel and Cannabis, but we don't have one on prostitution. I'd say we should, but that's a minority position.

I don't think anyone I know has chosen a destination based even partly on prostitution laws, but then I've never lived anywhere that it was legal. Certainly a few lads I know have tried the local rent-a-wench services in various places. Pashley (talk) 04:46, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Those table columns are now gone. Pashley (talk) 04:49, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. No hard feelings, I hope. Now, all that's needed is to keep the other stats updated, which I'd trust you to do. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:54, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Apologies for bringing this up, but why does this even bear mentioning?

Some retirees should check the legal status of activities they might engage in. The Wikivoyage articles on LGBT travel and Cannabis and Wikipedia on prostitution laws are starting points for some issues. However for anything that is a serious concern you should do your own more detailed research.

I almost get the sense from this that retirees are a bunch of stoned dirty old men, but I don't think that's a fair characterization or that it's any fairer than making such generalizations about any other age group. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:18, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

GDP and expensiveness

The paragraph on GDP says that the 30 most expensive countries have been removed. If that's true, why is it told in the GDP explanation? Or is it the 30 top GDP per capita countries that are removed? Those tend to go hand in hand, but are not at all equivalent. Taxation, income distribution, climate etc. affect expensiveness. –LPfi (talk) 19:15, 17 October 2023 (UTC)