The continent has most of the world's most poisonous snakes, not only on land but in the ocean. It has the world's largest crocodiles, and one can be devoured by one in or near the ocean or a river, and then out in the surf great white sharks abound. And I haven't even mentioned box jellyfish, blue ring octopi, stone fish, or the red backed and funnel spiders.
If ever a land was saying "Go away, people," it's Australia.
Add to all this that Sydney, strangely, is one of the most expensive cities on Earth and that you're so far from the United States (where everyone wants to go) and why would anyone live there, much less WANT to live there?
So, why are there people in Australia? What explains it?
Yes, and of course I'm being tongue in cheek. I'm sure there are many reasons to risk the many ways to die there.
Oh, I know - I just like to rag on my favorite Brit-ess.
Because the Brits kicked us out callin us criminals. America aint worth livin in cause the beer is shit. Well the Uk kicked us out once before so no point tryin again. Asia aint worth goin don't like the taste of cat or dog. Africa pretty much the same as oz just more disease. So we might get shanked by a platypus or roll around in the lake with crocs or maybe get a hug from a friendly irukandji (worlds most venomous jelly fish) get torn up by tazzy devils and so on but hey it could be worse, we could have, hmmm????? well it could be worse some how
CAUTION DO NOT LEAVE BABIES NEAR DINGOES THEY MAY GET EATEN or worse raised by them to join the evil dingo/dropbear association of world domination, true story happened to a mate of mine
By the way I love livin in oz and I personally have only had to catch maybe a dozen snakes so it aint that bad. My cats used to love catchin king browns, man they was the days.
The beer situation is much improved. True, the mass-marketed giants Budweiser and Miller make beer fit to wash dishes in, but all over the country so-called "microbeweries" are making world-class beers and, more commonly, ales. One thing people from the British sphere of influence might criticize, though, is that we drink our ales cold, just like our beer. There are many people like me who haven't had a "Bud" or Miller two decades or more.
Out of curiosity, which do you prefer, a lager or a pilsner?
Well, a pilsner is a lager. It's a lager in the pilsner style as exemplified by Pilsner Urquell (German for "the true source, Pilsn").
I actually prefer ales because they generally are more bitter, but a good bitter lager is almost as good. Jever Pils, for example.
Imagine you prefering the bitter side.
(Running for cover)
I've always felt Bud to be a bit too sweet.
I haven't had it in so long I couldn't even describe it anymore. For 30 years I lived in Portland, OR, which is something of a microbrew capital and between their regular brews and their seasonal offerings, I was never tempted to go any cheaper than Henry Weinhards, which for a locally-made beer aimed at the mass market, was pretty darned tasty.
You're probably a purist, but I got rather accustomed to Tecate, with a pinch of salt and a squeeze of lime.
I think I am. It took me forever to take to fruit-flavored beers, even though I saw Germans drinking lemonade- and raspberry-flavored Weissbeer when I was there three decades ago. Now I love the stuff as an occasional change of pace.
I'm not brand loyal much when it comes to beer. I'll usually try something new, following my instincts on the one hand or my curiosity on the other.
I do currently have a "thing" for Budweiser's "Lime-A-Rita," which is a fairly close approximation of a Margarita and is based on a relatively flavorless (no hops) alcoholic malt beverage. However, I don't think of it as a beer, which it really isn't anyway.