http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/08/daily-chart-19
Kind of disheartening not to see a single US city break the top ten. I really haven't been to any of the top ten except for Vancouver ( a long time ago). Some of the rankings are a little surprising to me, even though I can't see the whole report, I think there are some cities I'd rank above those listed. I think I'd put something like Munich in the top ten, as well as maybe Boston.
So what do you guys think? Would you change any of the cities listed?
I would not include Moscow, Beijing, or DC. They should have Plano, Boston, Edinburgh, and lots of cites in CO on the list. Too many of the cities on the list have crime and pollution problems.
Where are Geneva & Zurich ? These cities are so pleasant to live in, I will easily put them ahead of Calgary, Paris at least, maybe more but I don't know the others cities too well.
That list is a bit odd. When I think of "livable" I think of things to do, affordability, weather, and good places to work I suppose. DC and NYC are the only two on the list from America and Canada gets 3 in the top 10? Give me a break...
Very subtle, edited.
@TheSquale: Yeah, they may be on there though (just not shown on the abbreviated list). I agree, they should be on there too.
Does everyone generally agree with the massive number of Australian cities in the ranking?
I've never been to Australia. It's on my list though.
Yea it doesn't make sense. Australia's economy remains very sensitive to the demand for commodities from developing countries. That said I've been told that young people can work "dangerous" jobs in the mine or what not as a seasonal thing, return to the cities and then live the good life for 3 months. Essentially no problem getting those kind of jobs either. I can't see this as a good lifestyle once starting a family though and consumer goods such as food, beer, clothing and cars tend to be more expensive in Australia.
List is retarded and inconsistent with usual lists. Vienna but no Zurich/Geneva? Beijing? Lol...
You guys do realize that the entire list is not sequential? They jump to major city rankings, e.g. 10) Auckland 16) Paris =18) Tokyo etc, etc.
But the rating methodology is this: 25%: Stability -petty crime -violent crime -terror threat -military threat -civil unrest threat
20%: Healthcare -available private hc -quality private hc -available public hc -quality public hc -general hc indicators
25%: Culture & Environment -too many to list
10%: Education
20%: Infrastructure
Sorry, the last few were too tedious to list their sub categories.
Oh.
GTFO of here with your "basic intelligence"
I'm ranking cities and reading charts based on my gut, man. My gut doesn't lie.
It ain't livable if you can't do [insert dream job] there.
If you throw affordability/cost of living into the equation, that should take DC and NYC right off the list. As far as the US is concerned, you should have Austin, DFW, Charlotte, Houston, Tampa/St Pete, Denver/Boulder and maybe Atlanta (they still have the traffic problem). You may argue that the lack of a significant subway in any of these cities gets them dinged a bit, but that's just the way most of America is. DC gets no points for their subway as it's a joke.
I am probably missing a few, but those are places I have varying degrees of familiarity with. What's cost of living like in the Seattle/Tacoma area like? If it is not bad, I would probably throw that in as well.
Moscow and Beijing are also rediculous. Both are very expensive and have bad polution.
You must be joking? Austin, DFW, Charlotte, Houston, Tampa or Denver in best places in the world to live? Heat in most of those places is year round unbearable IMO.
Seattle is the only one that you mentioned that I'd consider could place up the list. It is pretty cool place, but the weather can be a bummer.
I personally like Denver too, but don't think it could place well on that list.
It is the Economist, so can't say I'm surprised with zero US cities placing in the top 10. At the same time, the article implies real issues with Culture, Healthcare and Stability in this country. Can't say I wholeheartedly disagree.
Nice, number 5. I know I'm biased but I can completely agree with at least my own cities ranking. Buttloads of jobs (including all things finance), beautiful weather, mountains right there, relatively little crime (I live in one of the worst neighborhoods and still have no hesitations walking home from the bar by myself at 3am), booming economy even if it is 100% reliant on oil, free healthcare, what more can a guy want?
I wouldn't have ranked Vancouver so high though. It's a beautiful city yeah, but has huuuge community/culture issues and obscene real estate prices considering half the downtown condos sit empty (thanks asian investors)
Personally I've thought that healthcare as a metric is almost always misused if measured by accesses rather than by quality of care. It inherently favors countries with socialist tendencies and in my opinion skews the data.
Well put, falconpunch19. The fact that many countries outside the U.S. have socialized medicine igonores the fact that these services are not, in fact, "free." Folks on this site should be able to figure out what happens with a service when prices do not effectively control demand. That demand causes a massive dilution of quality. When people complain how expensive health insurance is in the U.S., they fail to analyze the fact that you get get a really nice plan for less than the cost of your smartphone bill.
Sao Paulo, are you kidding me? I had a friend on vacation in Brazil who got seriosuly ill. Did he go to the doctor's office or the emergency room? F$&ck no!! He hopped a flight back to the U.S ASAP and got treatment here, from a real doctor and medical staff. He was in chronic pain and discomfort throughout the entire flight, not to mention the added worry of whether or not his condition could seriously worsen during the transit.
It is a 'world of hurt' if you do not have medical insurance here. That is why I support the President's idea of levying a penalty on those that do not have health insurance. (Full disclosure: I did not vote for Obama either time and greatly oppose additional government involvement in Healthcare.) Most states require you to buy auto insurance in order to operate a motor vehicle on public roads. The reason for this is to make sure you can cover the possible liability for damages to someone else's auto or person following an accident. Same thing with health care. When are the rights of those who are responsible enough to maintain insurance coverage for themselves and their families infringed on by those who do not purchase coverage.
If anything, cities outside the U.S. should be operating at a discount due to the differences in quality of health care.
@falconpunch19
I'm gonna assume cost of healthcare is a big factor in this metric, in which case, US cities deserve to be ranked lower. Compared with locations like Tokyo, Vienna or Sao Paulo, the cost for the medical services received in this country are crazy. For those without medical insurance here, it is a world of hurt...
The report takes into account both availability and quality.
Also, some countries with socialized health care provide some of the best in the world, e.g.: Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Thailand, Canada, and Australia(?).
Furthermore, health care in US isn't all its cracked up to be. Have had first hand experiences where doctors screwed me over big time due to negligence and arrogance on their part.
And, I believe that you have the right to deny medical treatment from a hospital, so why should you be required to be insured?
Hah, I was told I had lymphoma once
...I didn't
"DC gets no points for their subway as it's a joke."
How exactly is DC's subway a joke? DC isn't as congested as NYC so it doesn't need to stop every 20 feet. The subway hits all the major areas in the city and is expanding with additional lines. In addition to this, its much cleaner and safer than the NYC subway.
Have you ever lived in DC? The Metro has been under construction forever, the trains come far less often than the Subway and the best part? They breakdown... frequently.
In two years of living there, I was stuck at least 14 times for a period of 15 mins or longer... almost always in a tunnel, but at times even on the outside portion of the Red Line.
Even worse yet is the amount of times that escalators were out on the Red and Orange (lines I took the most). In case people don't realize, these stops are far underground. It's not like 5 stairs here and when it's fucking 95 degrees and humid as shit and you are in a full suit, carrying your bag trying to make it to a client meeting for which you are already late for thanks to the delay... you have to run up 100 stairs.
No doubt it is cleaner, but there are still plenty of homeless bums, trash, etc.
Plus, do you realize it costs $5.70 each way to go 8 stops during rush hour?
This list is absolutely misguided. I'm not sure The Economist knows what livability is.
I've lived in D.C. most of my life. I guess we have different perceptions. The wait times can be bad, but I never sat there for more than 20 mins ever. If you have then you just have bad luck. The escalators are down alot of times, I'll admit this. $5.70 each way, your being ripped off. I bought a smartpass when I interned there and it cost me about $7 both ways. Also you mention red line, this is by far the worst line and is plagued with disaster. Even the metro people know this. You can't compare one line to all the other lines.
1) IIRC, the Red Line is the busiest line. How is that not relevant? It's a key piece.
2) $5.70 each way is definitely a rip-off. That is the SmartPass rate, which gets jacked up when you have to travel to/from MontCo to downtown during rush hour (opening to 9:30am, 3-7pm).
http://www.wmata.com/fares/metrorail.cfm
Bad luck is when something happens a few times. This is a chronic problem with WMATA. And if you think taking a bus is any better, the app doesn't work.(there are literally ghost buses and the timing system is inaccurate as fuck). At least the bus fares were more reasonable (think it was $2/per?).
I lived in Chicago for a significant amount of time and NYC for a brief stint and both transit systems, including the tracking and reliability are far superior to WMATA... not that it surprises me.
Why do you think traffic is so bad in D.C.? Who wants to pay $10+ for a crowded, unreliable transit system?
Minima aspernatur unde voluptas tempore possimus nisi. Possimus et nesciunt saepe iusto adipisci quae aliquam. Maxime officia laboriosam officia accusamus recusandae fugiat qui. Facilis id dicta perferendis minima.
Velit et et ea neque et minima dolorum. Recusandae corporis minima et natus magnam harum. Odit accusantium iste suscipit sint. Enim voluptas aut maiores quaerat voluptas nostrum.
Necessitatibus quod voluptas voluptas dolorem porro fugit commodi. Maxime a fugiat harum sed harum reiciendis. Molestias aut commodi assumenda qui. Culpa sit et voluptas velit consectetur. Ipsam voluptate voluptatem tempore autem quidem. Suscipit expedita architecto facilis a nemo ut harum. Sit maiores cumque facilis.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Et voluptas a vero ut praesentium vel dolorem. Dolor eum animi repellendus non. Dolorem repudiandae itaque explicabo.
Illo molestiae aut saepe non cum non aut rerum. Ut doloribus at dolorem quaerat aut. Dolore maiores autem est culpa maxime at.