I blame the Russian Judge. The Economist magazine bumped Vancouver from the top spot for the first time in about a decade. They came under crticism here because they used closures of a highway on Vancouver Island as a reason for the downgrade. Those of you who know the local geography will understand how odd that is.
But I am most upset that Toronto is only one spot away now.
Quote
Vancouver has finally slipped from the top of The Economist's global livability survey after nearly a decade.
Our glittering city, wedged as it is between the mountains and the water, was finally undone by traffic congestion. The British magazine's business-research division has downgraded Vancouver to No. 3 out of the 140 cities ranked annually for quality of life.
Melbourne, Australia, and Vienna, Austria, are now ranked one and two in the 2011 Livability Ranking by the Economist Intelligence Unit. Melbourne edged out Vancouver by only two tenths of a percentage point.
"Vancouver has seen increased [traffic] congestion in the surrounding area," said Economist analyst Jon Copestake. Ongoing upgrades to Highway One and the resulting delays for commercial traffic and commuters were a factor in the lower ranking, he said.
The report specifically cites lengthy closures on Vancouver Island's Malahat highway as a reason for a 0.7-per-cent decline in Vancouver's overall livability rating, a reference that inspired widespread derision from commentators and locals on the Web and social media, particularly Twitter.
Copestake explains the seemingly dramatic effect of the Malahat highway closure thus: "When we compile the scores, we look at the area around a city as well as the city itself for assessing indicators. For example, congestion on the M25 is an indicator of problems in London's transport infrastructure. So we used the Malahat highway as an example of this for Vancouver."
Copestake quickly came to understand that Vancouver's long run at the top of the EIU rankings has become a part of the city's collective self-image.
"I didn't realize the importance of the ranking until I had angry Vancouverites contacting me by email today [Tuesday]," laughed Copestake. "People need to understand that the rankings are very tight at the top and that Vancouver scores almost perfectly in every category."
The riots that followed the Stanley Cup Final loss by the Vancouver Canucks to the Boston Bruins came too late to be reflected in this year's rankings, but Copestake opined that the period of unrest was so brief and out of character that it might not even affect next year's ranking.
Overall, there was only a difference of 0.2 percentage points between Melbourne (97.5) and Vancouver (97.3). The top three cities earned identical scores for stability, health care and education.
Vancouver scored much higher than Melbourne and Vienna for culture and environment, due in part to the legacy of hosting the 2010 Winter Olympic Games, Copestake said.
"The Olympic Games were a strong force for Vancouver getting to the top and staying there," he said. "It was certainly a factor last year when we discussed Vancouver being No. 1."
The only place Vancouver stumbled was in its grade for infrastructure, with a score of 92.9 in the face of a perfect score of 100 by Melbourne and Vienna.
Canadian and Australian cities dominate the top ten, with Toronto and Calgary in the 4th and 5th spots, followed by Sydney, Perth and Adelaide in 6th, 8th and 9th respectively. Harare, Zimbabwe, is the worst-ranked city in the survey.
The Economist Intelligence Unit's livability rating is a tool that companies use to assign hardship allowances to employees working in those areas. The hardship allowance recommended for Vancouver is zero.
Here are the world's 10 most livable cities, according to the EIU:
1. Melbourne, Australia
2. Vienna, Austria
3. Vancouver, Canada
4. Toronto, Canada
5. Calgary, Canada
6. Sydney, Australia
7. Helsinki, Finland
8. Perth, Australia
9. Adelaide, Australia
10. Auckland, New Zealand
Wait, what?
There's no way in hell that Tronto is more livable than Calgary.
"Surrounding area?" :lol:
Oh, and: :yeah:
Quote from: Barrister on August 31, 2011, 04:42:57 PM
Wait, what?
There's no way in hell that Tronto is more livable than Calgary.
I'm actually surprised that Calgary made it so far up. :P
And USA....ha ha. Not one city.
Quote from: Josephus on August 31, 2011, 05:39:59 PM
And USA....ha ha. Not one city.
We put a man on the moon and won the Cold War. You made it onto a list.
I guess I'm supposed to be hurt and rage against the list.
Toronto? :bleeding:
I would however like to visit cities 1-3, 6, and 8-10.
Quote from: Ed Anger on August 31, 2011, 06:11:46 PM
I guess I'm supposed to be hurt and rage against the list.
It's a British magazine, so you're supposed to say "HEY WE SAVED UR ASSES IN DUBYA DUBYA TWO YEW SISSIES"
Quote from: Caliga on August 31, 2011, 06:12:34 PM
I would however like to visit cities .... and 8-10.
I would too, but only if they all push their countries closer so I don't have to be on a plane for 16 hours.
:hmm: I wonder why those particular Australian cities are listed. I'd rather go to Cairns or Brisbane than some of the other ones that made the top 10.
Vancouver? I guess if you like being accosted by drug addicts it's alright, or enjoy having your car burned by rioters.
When ethnic Alberta finally goes to war against Canada, we'll bombard Vancouver like it was Warsaw.
Quote from: Neil on August 31, 2011, 06:17:59 PM
Vancouver? I guess if you like being accosted by drug addicts it's alright, or enjoy having your car burned by rioters.
Personally, I like not freezing my balls off, and maybe The Economist's guys feel the same way. Although I really can't see myself ever moving to Canada, if I absolutely had to for some reason, Vancouver is the only place I'd go.
Quote from: Caliga on August 31, 2011, 06:19:59 PM
Personally, I like not freezing my balls off, and maybe The Economist's guys feel the same way.[/quote]
Toronto is #1. :contract:
I'd move to Canada if I needed too. I'd buy a house in Ontario, and according to Holmes on Homes, every house in the province has apparently been fixed by the swarm of crooked contractors there or inspected by Mr. Magoo.
Plus according to that Canuck immigration site, I'm a shoo-in.
Quote from: Caliga on August 31, 2011, 06:19:59 PM
Quote from: Neil on August 31, 2011, 06:17:59 PM
Vancouver? I guess if you like being accosted by drug addicts it's alright, or enjoy having your car burned by rioters.
Personally, I like not freezing my balls off, and maybe The Economist's guys feel the same way. Although I really can't see myself ever moving to Canada, if I absolutely had to for some reason, Vancouver is the only place I'd go.
The cold is our virtue. It keeps out dangerous invertebrates and many undesirables.
Quote from: Caliga on August 31, 2011, 06:17:55 PM
:hmm: I wonder why those particular Australian cities are listed. I'd rather go to Cairns or Brisbane than some of the other ones that made the top 10.
I think they've all got beaches, while Brisbane's inland-ish (for Australia). I think Cairns is tiny compared to any of the other cities mentioned. The beaches would sway me - though I don't personally get the attraction of Australia at all. But I would quite like to spend some time in New Zealand and, on topic, Canada.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on August 31, 2011, 06:10:23 PM
Quote from: Josephus on August 31, 2011, 05:39:59 PM
And USA....ha ha. Not one city.
We put a man on the moon and won the Cold War. You made it onto a list.
Dude...those are so last century.
Quote from: Caliga on August 31, 2011, 06:17:55 PM
:hmm: I wonder why those particular Australian cities are listed. I'd rather go to Cairns or Brisbane than some of the other ones that made the top 10.
Note sure if you got the point...but they're not top 10 cities
to visit.
My comment was an aside, but anyway it seems to me that if a city is nice to visit, it's probably also nice to live in.
Quote from: Caliga on August 31, 2011, 06:59:54 PM
My comment was an aside, but anyway it seems to me that if a city is nice to visit, it's probably also nice to live in.
Probably the case most of the time. I can think of a bunch of exceptions to that off the top of my head though. Especially among big cities.
Yes, there are exceptions of course. Exception #1: Boston. :bleeding:
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on August 31, 2011, 07:09:27 PM
Probably the case most of the time. I can think of a bunch of exceptions to that off the top of my head though. Especially among big cities.
I can think of a bunch of middle sized cities that fit that bill.
Quote from: Caliga on August 31, 2011, 06:59:54 PM
My comment was an aside, but anyway it seems to me that if a city is nice to visit, it's probably also nice to live in.
I'm not sure. I think most big cities are nice to live in for the experience but not forever. Even for great cities like New York or London.
Quote from: Ed Anger on August 31, 2011, 06:14:02 PM
Quote from: Caliga on August 31, 2011, 06:12:34 PM
I would however like to visit cities .... and 8-10.
I would too, but only if they all push their countries closer so I don't have to be on a plane for 16 hours.
http://www.satirewire.com/news/jan02/australia.shtml (http://www.satirewire.com/news/jan02/australia.shtml)
I think several of the cities on the list fit that description. Nice to visit in July, wouldn't want to live there in January.
There is an obvious bias about these lists. The author desires lots of space, plenty of opportunities for outdoor activities, heavy government support for health and education, low pollution etc.
No mention on crime. HK and, say, the Japanese major cities are much safer places than the Canadian cities. And what about jobs? Vancouver is a nice place to live in, I have to say, but only if you have a stable, decent job. It isn't such a good place if you are unemployed and your chance to getting a decent job isn't that great. What about taxes? Good health care and education aren't free. The price is high taxes. What if I desire low taxes and don't mind paying for health care and education myself?
Quote from: Monoriu on August 31, 2011, 09:08:17 PM
No mention on crime. HK and, say, the Japanese major cities are much safer places than the Canadian cities.
Not so in HK, as most of the population are thieves.
QuoteAnd what about jobs? Vancouver is a nice place to live in, I have to say, but only if you have a stable, decent job. It isn't such a good place if you are unemployed and your chance to getting a decent job isn't that great.
It's much better if you're a Canadian native, especially if you're white. The problem is that if you're from the Third World, you're pretty much only good for labour, no matter what your qualifications in your native land. We don't place much stock in non-first world education.
QuoteWhat about taxes? Good health care and education aren't free. The price is high taxes. What if I desire low taxes and don't mind paying for health care and education myself?
Then you're dangerous and antisocial, and so aren't welcome in Canada.
Quote from: Monoriu on August 31, 2011, 09:08:17 PM
There is an obvious bias about these lists. The author desires lots of space, plenty of opportunities for outdoor activities, heavy government support for health and education, low pollution etc.
No mention on crime. HK and, say, the Japanese major cities are much safer places than the Canadian cities. And what about jobs? Vancouver is a nice place to live in, I have to say, but only if you have a stable, decent job. It isn't such a good place if you are unemployed and your chance to getting a decent job isn't that great. What about taxes? Good health care and education aren't free. The price is high taxes. What if I desire low taxes and don't mind paying for health care and education myself?
Wait - you think your chance of getting a decent job is better in Hong Kong than it is in Canada?
:lol:
Now we're talking in general - not for you specifically Mono. :contract:
I'm rather unimpressed with their list.
Quote from: Caliga on August 31, 2011, 07:10:37 PM
Yes, there are exceptions of course. Exception #1: Boston. :bleeding:
Heh my best friend growing up is a convert to the Bostonian faith. And like any convert he is a super fanatic. Not too much unlike you and Kentuckianism.
Quote from: Barrister on August 31, 2011, 10:36:28 PM
Wait - you think your chance of getting a decent job is better in Hong Kong than it is in Canada?
:lol:
Now we're talking in general - not for you specifically Mono. :contract:
We've been through this many times before, so I won't elaborate. But I honestly believe that it is easier (both in general and for me specifically) to find a decent job in HK than in Canada. I'm not the only one who is saying this. This is the consensus of the Chinese immigrant community in Canada.
Yeah, but they're Chinese. We bring them to be wageslaves, not to get real jobs.
Helsinki? Really? :yeahright:
You`d die of bordom.
Or suicide.
:smug:
Quote from: Monoriu on August 31, 2011, 09:08:17 PM
There is an obvious bias about these lists. The author desires lots of space, plenty of opportunities for outdoor activities, heavy government support for health and education, low pollution etc.
No mention on crime. HK and, say, the Japanese major cities are much safer places than the Canadian cities. And what about jobs? Vancouver is a nice place to live in, I have to say, but only if you have a stable, decent job. It isn't such a good place if you are unemployed and your chance to getting a decent job isn't that great. What about taxes? Good health care and education aren't free. The price is high taxes. What if I desire low taxes and don't mind paying for health care and education myself?
I agree, there is a heavy bias against high pollution. Some people love to live in smog. You fucking Chinese creep.
Quote from: Monoriu on August 31, 2011, 09:08:17 PM
There is an obvious bias about these lists.
Yes. It's tailored to big companies posting high earning employees/execs to these places.
And it makes a lot of difference if you live in Vienna's posh 1st or 19th districts, or in the mid to lower class 20th, 15th or inner 16th. I'm guessing the best place in Hong Kong is nicer than the worst place in Vienna, but that's not what the survey looks at - if I understand correctly they look at what places are most pleasant if you have a big pocketbook.
Quote from: Monoriu on August 31, 2011, 09:08:17 PM
There is an obvious bias about these lists. The author desires lots of space, plenty of opportunities for outdoor activities, heavy government support for health and education, low pollution etc.
The EIU are doing this based on their hardship list of whether companies what extra companies would have to pay for people to move. Crime will have been part of it, but chances are so will density, pollution, political stability and the rest while employment opportunities won't.
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 01, 2011, 04:46:08 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on August 31, 2011, 09:08:17 PM
There is an obvious bias about these lists. The author desires lots of space, plenty of opportunities for outdoor activities, heavy government support for health and education, low pollution etc.
The EIU are doing this based on their hardship list of whether companies what extra companies would have to pay for people to move. Crime will have been part of it, but chances are so will density, pollution, political stability and the rest while employment opportunities won't.
In that case I just don't think the survey is useful at all. If the business is in Shanghai then you have to send people to Shanghai. Simple as that. I've been to Shanghai and Beijing many times and I see expats everywhere, despite the pollution, density and internet censorship.
Quote from: Monoriu on September 01, 2011, 05:54:06 AMIn that case I just don't think the survey is useful at all. If the business is in Shanghai then you have to send people to Shanghai. Simple as that. I've been to Shanghai and Beijing many times and I see expats everywhere, despite the pollution, density and internet censorship.
Many of them willl get a percentage of the salary bonus ('hardship allowance') for moving to Shanghai or (more likely) Beijing. The company I used to work for competed with EIU on this, they did theirs based on a city-city basis though so would include things like language and cultural difference. While I don't think it was common for expats to get an allowance for moving to Shanghai or Hong Kong it was reasonably common for second tier Chinese cities and (I think) Beijing.
You'll find plenty of expats in Almaty. It doesn't mean it's a nice place to live.
Yes, I think the use (if any) of the survey is along the lines of "....and, if we open the office in Melbourne we won't have to twist too many arms to get our people to go there". So, it is particularly nice for Vienna to get such a high spot as it is so near so many other cities.........might be good for business as firms open their European or Central European offices there.
Is climate not taken into account?
Quote from: Iormlund on September 01, 2011, 07:47:02 AM
Is climate not taken into account?
I would imagine it is, which is why with the exception of #4 and #8, the climate in all those places is fairly pleasant.
The hilarious part, of course, is that Vancouver got downgraded for something that happened on the island. :lol:
Anyway, the true weakness of this list is that it does not appear to take into account housing costs. Most people can't afford to live in these livable cities ...
Toronto and Perth? :huh: What sets those two apart from the others in your mind?
Quote from: Monoriu on August 31, 2011, 10:54:26 PM
Quote from: Barrister on August 31, 2011, 10:36:28 PM
Wait - you think your chance of getting a decent job is better in Hong Kong than it is in Canada?
:lol:
Now we're talking in general - not for you specifically Mono. :contract:
We've been through this many times before, so I won't elaborate. But I honestly believe that it is easier (both in general and for me specifically) to find a decent job in HK than in Canada. I'm not the only one who is saying this. This is the consensus of the Chinese immigrant community in Canada.
Do you have a decent job in Hong Kong? Here civil service employees are treated little better then the chairs they sit in.
My God those are some crap cities.
The Economist seems to equate mind-numbing boredom with livability
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 01, 2011, 09:41:26 AM
The Economist seems to equate mind-numbing boredom with livability
Can't be. There's not a single Swiss city in their Top 10. :swiss:
Quote from: The Larch on September 01, 2011, 09:58:32 AM
Can't be. There's not a single Swiss city in their Top 10. :swiss:
:lol:
Quote from: Habsburg on August 31, 2011, 10:41:41 PM
I'm rather unimpressed with their list.
I would put Seattle above both Calgary and Toronto - probably even above Vancouver.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 01, 2011, 08:48:25 AM
Toronto and Perth? :huh: What sets those two apart from the others in your mind?
Perth is good if you hate other cities and demand to be so far away from them, you can pretend you are a living in an earthling colony on a far away planet.
Quote from: Malthus on September 01, 2011, 08:45:55 AM
The hilarious part, of course, is that Vancouver got downgraded for something that happened on the island. :lol:
Anyway, the true weakness of this list is that it does not appear to take into account housing costs. Most people can't afford to live in these livable cities ...
5.5 million live in the Greater Toronto Area. that's a huge chunk of people. Now, they don't all live in your neighbourhood, granted... ;)
Quote from: Malthus on September 01, 2011, 08:45:55 AM
Anyway, the true weakness of this list is that it does not appear to take into account housing costs. Most people can't afford to live in these livable cities ...
Again, not an issue for employees receiving a hardship allowance. Generally accommodation costs will be taken care of by the company.
never really was #1 anything. People here often call Vancouver No-Fun City... so I always blanched at that "Most livable city" crap. It's not unlivable for most, but no moreso than anywhere else I've lived.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 01, 2011, 08:48:25 AM
Toronto and Perth? :huh: What sets those two apart from the others in your mind?
Toronto is unbearable hot in the summer, and unbearably cold in the winter. Perth is a desert.
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 01, 2011, 10:02:17 AM
Quote from: Habsburg on August 31, 2011, 10:41:41 PM
I'm rather unimpressed with their list.
I would put Seattle above both Calgary and Toronto - probably even above Vancouver.
Thanks, Seattle an Vancouver are pretty much on par IMHO.
Stockholm >>> Helsinki (and I like Helsinki)
Munich or Berlin >>> Wien
Calgary?!? :wacko:
I guess they didn't take culture and the arts into account. Or with Australia, the cost of visiting elsewhere (and culture and the arts.)
Quote from: Habsburg on September 01, 2011, 04:02:56 PM
I guess they didn't take culture and the arts into account. Or with Australia, the cost of visiting elsewhere (and culture and the arts.)
I think they gave culture and the arts exactly what they are due.
Quote from: Neil on September 01, 2011, 04:26:40 PM
Quote from: Habsburg on September 01, 2011, 04:02:56 PM
I guess they didn't take culture and the arts into account. Or with Australia, the cost of visiting elsewhere (and culture and the arts.)
I think they gave culture and the arts exactly what they are due.
That is one of many explanations why Edmonton will never appear on the list.
Quote from: Malthus on September 01, 2011, 08:45:55 AM
Anyway, the true weakness of this list is that it does not appear to take into account housing costs. Most people can't afford to live in these livable cities ...
Vancouver at least has cheap housing as far as I am concerned.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 01, 2011, 09:00:24 AM
Do you have a decent job in Hong Kong? Here civil service employees are treated little better then the chairs they sit in.
Decent job = long-term + office job
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 01, 2011, 04:37:55 PM
Quote from: Neil on September 01, 2011, 04:26:40 PM
Quote from: Habsburg on September 01, 2011, 04:02:56 PM
I guess they didn't take culture and the arts into account. Or with Australia, the cost of visiting elsewhere (and culture and the arts.)
I think they gave culture and the arts exactly what they are due.
That is one of many explanations why Edmonton will never appear on the list.
Edmonton will never appear on the list because of the terrible road construction situation, which is in large part caused by an inept mayor and council and a foolish and short-sighted city planner. The only way that Edmonton would make the list is if I were to put the city under my administration.
Quote from: Monoriu on September 01, 2011, 07:19:47 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 01, 2011, 09:00:24 AM
Do you have a decent job in Hong Kong? Here civil service employees are treated little better then the chairs they sit in.
Decent job = long-term + office job
Lots of people have long-term office jobs in Vancouver. At least as long-term as they can be in the modern economy.
Quote from: Neil on September 01, 2011, 07:32:39 PM
Lots of people have long-term office jobs in Vancouver. At least as long-term as they can be in the modern economy.
The ratio of office job openings and people seeking them just doesn't work out.
Quote from: Monoriu on September 01, 2011, 08:31:04 PM
Quote from: Neil on September 01, 2011, 07:32:39 PM
Lots of people have long-term office jobs in Vancouver. At least as long-term as they can be in the modern economy.
The ratio of office job openings and people seeking them just doesn't work out.
Some people who are seeking them aren't suited to office jobs.
Quote from: Neil on September 01, 2011, 08:38:05 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on September 01, 2011, 08:31:04 PM
Quote from: Neil on September 01, 2011, 07:32:39 PM
Lots of people have long-term office jobs in Vancouver. At least as long-term as they can be in the modern economy.
The ratio of office job openings and people seeking them just doesn't work out.
Some people who are seeking them aren't suited to office jobs.
Sadly that's their opinion of me.
Quote from: Habsburg on September 01, 2011, 04:02:56 PM
I guess they didn't take culture
When I hear the word culture, I reach for my Browning.
Quote from: Monoriu on September 01, 2011, 08:46:22 PM
Quote from: Neil on September 01, 2011, 08:38:05 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on September 01, 2011, 08:31:04 PM
Quote from: Neil on September 01, 2011, 07:32:39 PM
Lots of people have long-term office jobs in Vancouver. At least as long-term as they can be in the modern economy.
The ratio of office job openings and people seeking them just doesn't work out.
Some people who are seeking them aren't suited to office jobs.
Sadly that's their opinion of me.
Indeed. You're Chinese.
Quote from: Caliga on September 01, 2011, 08:55:37 PM
Quote from: Habsburg on September 01, 2011, 04:02:56 PM
I guess they didn't take culture
When I hear the word culture, I reach for my Browning.
I suppose you should move to Texas, or at least the parts Valmy tries to avoid.
Quote from: Caliga on September 01, 2011, 08:55:37 PM
Quote from: Habsburg on September 01, 2011, 04:02:56 PM
I guess they didn't take culture
When I hear the word culture, I reach for my Browning.
Whatever you say Chairman Mao.
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 02, 2011, 10:55:55 AM
Quote from: Caliga on September 01, 2011, 08:55:37 PM
Quote from: Habsburg on September 01, 2011, 04:02:56 PM
I guess they didn't take culture
When I hear the word culture, I reach for my Browning.
I suppose you should move to Texas, or at least the parts Valmy tries to avoid.
I hear Lubbock is lovely this time of year.
Quote from: Ed Anger on September 02, 2011, 11:13:16 AM
I hear Lubbock is lovely this time of year.
And famous for its lack of culture of any kind.