i was wondering what is best to play as black if your opponent opens up with something like the english or something non standard.

theres no hard and fast answer to that as there is alot of room for transpositions to take place.

but i like hard and fast answers! i am an impatient youth!

is there a "safe" move to make against the english, the bird, or other unorthodox openings, or would it be safest to just go into a nimzo-indian?

You can't go into an Nimzo without your opponent co-operating by playing d4, c4, and Nc3 in his first three moves.

the KID you can play against almost anything.

A lot depends on what sort of transpositions you want. For example, I meet 1.c4 with e6, and usually get a transposition into my beloved Tarrasch defense. Of course, you can't completely avoid a Reti (d4 isn't compelled) so I have to know what I'm doing then.

Some defenses are easier to transpose into than others.

king's indian defense? hm. yeah ive been told its a pretty sound all-purpose defense for black

Whoever told you that was out of their minds.

The advantage of the KID is that you can play it against pretty much anything but 1.e4.

The downside is that it's one of the most theoretically complex openings, and, quite frankly, if you're the level of player who's asking the sort of question at the top of this thread, you shouldn't be trying to play stuff that complex yet.

Inexperienced players who play the KID get blown off the board, even by other inexperienced players.

This is something that I think a lot of people don't understand. A lot of counterattacking or hypermodern openings are perfectly sound, but they defy basic opening principles. While it's proven that you can survive - or, even get an advantage - despite that, when neither player really understands the position the player with the move obvious advantages - a space advantage, greater development, a potential kingside attack - wins a huge percentage of the time.

The problem for Black in openings other than 1.e4 and 1.d4 (at least 1.c4 or 1.Nf3 or 1.g3) is that they ar HIGHLY transpositional.

A player with little experienced can be easily tricked into a line that he is unfamiliar with (or that is just plain bad), despite te "slow innocent looking" set up by White

A lot of the times White is happy to transpose into some 1.d4 or 1.e4 lines having avoided some annoying defenses of Black

Just as an example, White might be happy to play vs a Sicilian defense after 1.Nf3 c5; 2.e4

Or he might be happy to play vs an Indian defense or QGD but avoid the Slav after opening 1.c4 (and play something other than 2.d4 if black plays 1.... c6)

Or he might like to avoid the Benko Gambit or the Budapest, or the Chigorin or the dutch or whatever you like. Even the NimzoIndian can be avoided.
Anyways I think you get the point.

Of course if White is making such a choice, he is ready for some concessions, e.g. playing vs Black's .... c5 or .... e5 setups. Some people like it (I do), but in my opinion it's not better nor worse than most other openings stemming from (Semi)Open games or Queen's pawn openings.

From the practical viewpoints, one plus for Black is to choose a setup that almost forces white to transpose in a 1.d4/1.e4 scheme: in this case, if you have the right 1.d4/1.e4 defense as Black, you'll be able to play it even vs 1.c4 or 1.Nf3

I like to offer a Tarrasch (as Ronaldinho suggested), starting 1.c4 e6 and a later ....d5, as White's attempts to steer into a Reti are not really bound to yield advantages; vs 1.Nf3 one shall also have a decent knowledge of how to defend vs the King's Indian Attack.

Someone else might like the King's Indian, although if white refrains from d4, he'll have to choose between the ... c5 and ...e5 schemes, where white's restrained center change significantly the strategic course of the game, so it's not going to be a "real" KID (and - compared to the Tarrasch case - where the failure to play d4 is bound to leave white without advantages, here against the KID setup, White can indeed play for an advantage nonetheless).

In my opinion, there are two kinds of openings:

1.) e4
2.) Non-e4

My main task in the opening is to play with and defend against the former. Non-e4 is mainly 1. d4. I'll setup a system I like depending on my mood against various stuff (1. d4, 1. c4, 1. Nf3, 1. Nc3, 1. d3, 1. e3, 1. g3, 1. b3 etc).
A Classical Dutch: f5;Nf6;e6;Be7;0-0
A Queen's Indian: Nf6;e6;b6;Bb7
All-purpose defense: Nf6;e6;d5;c5;Nc6 (not necessarily in that move order)

Thus making 1. e4 and 1. d4 the only opening moves 'that matter'. Against the others, you can just setup your system and be perfectly fine.

It can be, but it's very dangerous to think that this is automatic.
For example, the "Dutch setup" and the "Queen's indian setups" can have COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FLAVOUR if white does not play d4 soner or later

The Classical Dutch can be met with the Botvinnik system (e4 and c4). I will never dream of saying that this refutes the Dutch: I am only arguing that if one only prepares for the regulat Dutch, he'll be in troubles in many "pure english" lines, because the fact that white (temporarily) refrains from d2-d4 changes dramatically the strategy

The same applies for a Queen's indian (or hedgehog) scheme, that can be countered by white in a Reti fashion (say a double fianchetto followed by e4/c4, or by a cebntral pawn scheme such as c4,d3,e3,f4 and possibly a Kside pawn storm- this is QUITE different from usual Queen's Indian lines where Black has clearer targets and more chances to exchange off pieces), or KIA fashion; or, even white can go for the Flohr-Mikenas attack with some move orders.

And if white really wants, he can open 1.g3, when the Queen's indian or Hedgehog schemes are really tougher to achieve.

Nothing of all this should be really scary, but it only points out that Black must know his independent stuff vs non e4/non d4 schemes

And indeed, that is what is most appealing for me to play the Engkish: a lot of players believe it is possible to get away without a specific preparation vs 1.c4/Nf3 or g3.

Well, you can get away without specificly preparing for non-e4 & non-d4, at least I can. It's true that, in a number of cases, white transposes into a d4 system, but I don't specificly aim for that. You're absolutely right stating that many times, white doesn't go for any of that and refuses to transpose staying in unique lines.
Say white goes for an English opening.
1. c4 f5
But doesn't want to transpose here.
2. Nc3 Nf6
Or here. (I've occasionally tried e5 here, but anyway)
3. g3 e6
At this point, I would recommend the Fianchetto system in the Dutch defense via 4. d4 which is strong. White doesn't want to.
4. Bg2 Be7
If I recall the Botvinnik system requires e4 and Ne2. I've had this played against me.
5. e4 fxe4
The e4 plan is somewhat blunted in Dutch territory I'd say.
6. Nxe4 0-0 7. Ne2
[Hardly perfect play]
Where are we at? Well, there is no d4 (not yet, maybe not ever). Looks a little like the Fianchetto variation and Staunton gambit. I know how to play against this. There's a tactical issue here that I wouldn't like to see as white, which is Nxe4 followed by d5.

In the proper d4 line of the system, there are subsystems and variations that are often (not always) similar to the unique lines of non-d4 openings.