This is an interesting list but I would caution that it appears to be written for a European audience. For Americans, I don't think it takes into account current political climates, and general safety of westerners. Oman and the Philippines are beautiful places to go, truly wonderful, but they can also be very dangerous for Americans.

I'm an American living in the Philippines. The dangerous areas are dangerous for all foreigners. Kidnappings are a method for making money. The kidnappers don't care what nationality you are, they're only interested in what funds they could get from snagging you.

There are lots of other areas which aren't considered dangerous, but places in which you could still run across rebel groups. They are the same smiling locals you'll find anywhere else, just with guns and a cause. Flip them some coin for the revolution, maybe buy a bottle of Tanduay and you'll be fine.

Or dangerous for people in general. The list seems to favor cost of living over all else. Personally, I would some other factor as the overriding one, perhaps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index

If you're an American concerned about Trump I'm not sure Duterte is a great alternative in the Philippines.

I have lived almost all of my childhood in Muscat, Oman. I went to visit Oman some years back which was very nostalgic. I still felt very welcomed there, met shopkeepers & my neighbors who instantly recognized the grow up me.

PS: I am not an American nor European.

I fail to see how Oman and especially the capital Muscat is dangerous. This is the one country where I've felt safest, and its safety is the reason for it being a very popular destination for wild camping.

> they can also be very dangerous for Americans

Evidence?

In Philippines and Columbia, kidnapping for ransom is still a thing in certain areas, particularly of "rich" westerners.

Yeah, seriously. Oman? It's like Middle East-Lite.

I would always suggest checking with your country's foreign travel advisories before planning a trip. It doesn't mean you shouldn't go, but you should at least be educated beforehand. For the record, both the warnings from the UK and the US seem equally concerning.

From the UK government on Oman [1]

>Attacks in Oman are likely. Attacks could be indiscriminate, including in places frequented by expatriates and foreign travellers.

>Terrorists continue to issue statements threatening to carry out attacks in the Gulf region. These include references to attacks on western interests, including residential compounds, military, oil, transport and aviation interests as well as crowded places, including restaurants, hotels, beaches, shopping centres and mosques. You should maintain a high level of security awareness, particularly in public places.

From the US government on Oman [2]

>Potential for Terrorist Activity: To date, there have been no terrorist attacks against U.S. citizens in Oman. Regionally, terrorists continue to target U.S. interests in the Middle East and North Africa. Please review the Worldwide Caution before traveling.

>Safety Precautions:

>Avoid public demonstrations and large gatherings.

>Monitor local media broadcasts and consular messages.

>Vary travel routes and times when possible.

>Report security concerns to Omani police and the U.S. Embassy.

From the UK government on the Philippines [3]

>There is a high threat from terrorism throughout the country. Terrorist groups continue to plan attacks and have the capacity and the intent to carry out attacks at anytime and anywhere in the country. Attacks could be indiscriminate, including in places visited by foreigners like airports, shopping malls, public transport and places of worship.

From the US government on the Philippines [4]

>U.S. citizens contemplating travel to the Philippines should carefully consider the risks to their safety and security while there, including the risk of terrorism. Separatist and terrorist groups continue to carry out attacks and kidnappings in the areas of the Sulu Archipelago, the southern Sulu Sea, and the region of Mindanao. Kidnap-for-ransom gangs have targeted foreigners in the Philippines, including Philippine-Americans. For further information, see the Travel Warning for the Philippines.

[1] - https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/oman/terrorism

[2] - https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/country/oman.h...

[3] - https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/philippines/terrori...

[4] - https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/country/philip...

In any of those countries you're more than a hundred times more likely to get run over by a car, accidentally ingest something poisonous, trip over your own feet and break your neck, or die from a myriad of other causes before you'll die because of terrorist attack.

Warning against terrorist attacks without also providing a list of poisonous things, explaining cultural differences in driving behavior or reminding you to wear practical footwear that won't make you trip over your own feet seems incredibly misguided to me.

It isn't about the ultimate odds, it is about the change in odds. I'm no more likely to slip and break my next in Oman than I am in my backyard. Driving is certainly one thing than can be more dangerous abroad, but if you click through the links I provided you will see it mentioned. Those sites are resources on much more than terrorism.

The reason I only copied highlights from the terrorism sections is because the original comment was regarding the targeting of Americans due to current political climates. I don't think the indigenous poisonous flora and fauna are targeting Americans for their politics.

Can someone TLDR this for those of who live in the UK where such BBC content is blocked?

  - Uganda
  - Costa Rica
  - Colombia
  - Oman
  - The Philippines
  

and they cite [Expat Insider survey](https://www.internations.org/expat-insider/)

It's a list of nice places to live like Costa Rica, but with no specific information about visas or if you'll actually be able to move there

...Why is the BBC blocked in the UK, of all places?

In this instance because BBC worldwide is the for profit arm, they show adverts, something the BBC cannot do within the UK. The content is usually still available elsewhere on the BBC but I find it odd that it does not redirect.

My understanding (I don't live in the UK) is that the BBC is wholly or partially government funded. As such there are certain things the BBC cannot do within the UK, because it would unfairly compete with other UK media companies which don't have similar government funding.

(But I could be completely wrong, if so... please correct me :)

The way it's generally considered to be: they are actually funded directly by a license fee which British people are legally required to pay if they watch any live TV (including live online streams such as iPlayer, but not including non-live VODs).

Technically... the BBC collects the license fees, gives all the money to the Government and then receives money back from the Government. But it's a complicated setup, separate to normal taxes/budgets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licensing_in_the_Un...

edit: Actually, I then read the wikipedia article that I linked, since last year you now do need a license to watch BBC iPlayer VODs.

I'd be very interested to hear how they implement it, because it's fairly resistant to VPN trickery too.

Possibly leveraging the same technology they use for Blocking BBC iPlayer via VPN's.

People I know abroad say that works quite well.

"tv licence fee doesnt cover it"

like what the actual fuck...?

This is the for profit arm, basically resells BBC content internationally, with the website they show adverts, the BBC is not allowed to show adverts in the UK.

Uganda may not be a great fit for a lot of people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Uganda

My wife is from Colombia and I love it there. We definitely plan on living part of the year there and part of the year in the US when we retire. I will mention outside of the Mountainous cities, it is very warm and humid. The cities at say 1828m (6,000ft) and above are absolutely perfect climates year round. Bonus: You can get in shape very, very quickly in the mountains.

Is altitude a problem? Like, do you find yourself out of breath very easily?

Colorado Springs is about the same altitude (~6000ft), Denver is only a little lower. By and large you don't notice unless you do something that makes you breathe hard, in which case it'll take you a while to catch your breath for the first few weeks.

Honestly the biggest annoyance about living at altitude is baking recipes require adjustment pretty much all the time, you can't just use a bread recipe designed for sea level and expect it to work right.

A British friend of mine lives in Colorado. He loves everything about the place, except for one thing: he can't get a decent cup of tea there for love nor money. (Because water boils at too low a temperature.)

I just drink green or white tea mostly, which you steep at a lower temperature anyway.

But yeah, water boils at 201F where I live, so I know this pain.

Now I'm wondering about pressure-cooking tea...

I think the problem you'd have is that good tea is a function of both time and temperature - you'd end up ruining the tea because of the time it takes to get the vessel to pressure.

Unless you had some way of keeping the tea isolated until the vessel got to pressure...

My experience says that 6000 feet will be noticeable, but you'll be able to, say, climb a flight of stairs and be a bit more winded than usual. As another example, the Paradise visitor's center at Mount Rainier sits at (IIRC) 7K feet. Plenty of fat people waddle out of their cars and make it across the parking lot just fine. They don't generally go very far up the mountain, but they make it. And the residents of Denver, CO seem to survive at 5200 feet.

To me, "noticing altitude" starts at about 10K feet. For reference, life-long endurance athlete who still stays in pretty good shape in his middle-age.

I tried to sprint to make a connecting flight in Denver (after waiting on the tarmac for 30 minutes to get a gate, grumble). What a mistake. I never had a chance.

Sad part was it took me a few minutes to remember why I was suddenly an invalid.

As always, YMMV. I can run a marathon in under 3:00, and making an airport connection in Denver probably wouldn't phase me much (I've run in Denver, but not to make a flight). OTOH, I distinctly remember going up Pike's Peak at >14K feet, and found the walk across the parking lot to be challenging. I can't imagine what climbing a >20K foot peak must be like given that humbling experience.

I get my ass kicked in Bogota every summer @ 9k feet. I live at 2.5k and run 24 to 30 miles a week almost 40yo, and it hits me HARD there...

I live in Colorado. You get used to the altitude in a few weeks.

Altitude, yes. Lack of humidity, nope. My body shrivels up in Denver.

That was really hard for me at Estes Park, higher in the mountains near Denver. Growing up in Indiana, humidity tolerance is practically baked into my genome.

I was in Bogota earlier this month. We flew in from sea level, and felt some degree of crappy for a few days (and a bit scared that we were suffering mosquito-borne ailments from our previous adventure before we realized the altitude).

We eventually settled in, but 8000 ft up is for real.

Yep, I get sick almost every summer. It is 9K+ where we stay. I absolutely love the weather there, however the traffic is insane. Also, where my sister in law lives there is a really cool park where people work out, walk, and show off their dogs. I have never seen so many exoitc breeds of dogs. Also, Also, Andres carne de res!

Andres was crazy fun and delicious, and the tasting menu at Leo was one of the best five meals of my life.

What are your favorite towns or cities to live long-term there?

Manizales

There are very good reasons people DON'T live in those countries though. Most have to do with things westerners take for granted, like stable electricity, not needing to bribe cops, and being able to easily purchase goods when you need to.

YMMV as always. Places aren't easy to move to unless they are trying to create a place that is hard to move to.

As someone living in one of those countries, I got to ask, have you actually visited one of them? Sure if you go to a rural place then a solid electric grid may be an issue, but not at all in mid to large cities.

Remember kids, all Westerners are never migrants, immigrants, or God forbid, refugees. They're just expats.

Visiting Colombia recently, Bogota felt like an absolutely brilliant place to work remotely from. Housing and dining are ridiculously cheap (and high quality), but one can easily collaborate with the US (it's on the eastern time zone, and flying in for meetings isn't particularly far away).

have heard recently alarmingly high crime rate in Costa Rica for Foreigners, I would stay out of Costa Rica

Two of my coworkers experienced armed home invasions while on holiday in Costa Rica (5 years apart, within the last 10 years). One of them had the same people come back the following evening.

It's a small sample size but it's a hell of an anecdote!

It would be nice to have a guide to developed world countries with easy paths to permanent residence and/or citizenship.