Vancouver "Worlds Most Liveable City" According to Study!

[Hed Kandi]

* Mods sorry if wrong forum please move if needed...


We're all familiar with Mercer and the Economist Intelligence Unit rankings, where Vancouver placed 4th and 1st respectively for 2008, well I just came across another study that once again places Van first among world cities in terms of livability.

http://www.mastercard.com/us/company...eport_2008.pdf


Rankings
1. Vancouver
2. Dusseldorf
3. San Francisco
4. Frankfurt
5. Vienna
6. Munich
7. Zurich
8. Tokyo
9. Copenhagen
10. Paris

[excel]

Thanks for the link.

Nice to see were in first on the livability scale.
However, overall we dropped from 28th last year to 37th this year.

[raggedy13]

^True but look at the cities above us and those below us. We're in good company really, especially considering our size. Just above us is Washington D.C., the capital of the most powerful country in the world, and just below us is Barcelona, the second most important city in Spain. They are both metros of over 5 million in an area comparable to the Lower Mainland which has about 2.5 million. It is amazing we could be so high in comparison.

We also beat out some very impressive cities such as Melbourne, Dubai, Rome, Moscow, Beijing, Sao Paulo, Rio, etc. I'm pleasantly surprised. Meanwhile, I don't think there is a single city above us in the rankings that doesn't deserve to be.

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by raggedy13

^True but look at the cities above us and those below us. We're in good company really, especially considering our size. Just above us is Washington D.C., the capital of the most powerful country in the world, and just below us is Barcelona, the second most important city in Spain. They are both metros of over 5 million in an area comparable to the Lower Mainland which has about 2.5 million. It is amazing we could be so high in comparison.

hmm, I dont think im following what youre saying. What does the level of population have to do with quality of life? so cities of 5 million people should be assumed to be more livable than cities half that size?

[city-dweller]

I think its remarkable that we remain very high in livability standards as we continue to grow. #1 in the 1990s isn't as impressive as one of best for x-number of years. Also with rankings, keep in mind that sometimes we don't actually slip in livability, other citiess are just improving.

[nickinacan]

Originally Posted by city-dweller

I think its remarkable that we remain very high in livability standards as we continue to grow. #1 in the 1990s isn't as impressive as one of best for x-number of years. Also with rankings, keep in mind that sometimes we don't actually slip in livability, other citiess are just improving.

That is true. And it is very impressive. Unfortunately, Vancouver falls flat on its face when it comes to anything in regards to being an economic centre. Does it have to do with the relatively high commercial taxes? Does it have to do with the Pacific Time Zone? Or is it Vancouver's reliance as a resource centre and tourist city? What is the reason behind the lack of large commercial head offices shunning Vancouver?

As for the tax portion, check out this site to see what I mean:
http://www.fairtaxcoalition.com/other_cities.htm

[twoNeurons]

Sometimes I think it's just popular to upvote Vancouver. I'm sure there are far more livable cities in the world, depending on who you are.

[Spork]

Originally Posted by nickinacan

That is true. And it is very impressive. Unfortunately, Vancouver falls flat on its face when it comes to anything in regards to being an economic centre. Does it have to do with the relatively high commercial taxes? Does it have to do with the Pacific Time Zone? Or is it Vancouver's reliance as a resource centre and tourist city? What is the reason behind the lack of large commercial head offices shunning Vancouver?

As for the tax portion, check out this site to see what I mean:
http://www.fairtaxcoalition.com/other_cities.htm

Expensive labour and lack of certain talents. With such a high cost of living, companies are much better off locating elsewhere. Why locate in Vancouver when you can locate somewhere that is closer to your competitor's and supplier's head offices such as Toronto? Further, people here seem to lack a sense of drive, from what I've seen both in school and in the professional workplace, whereas people out east have more ambition and seem to work harder.

[Distill3d]

you know, i'm proud of topping this list, but do we ever get sick of being #1 all the time?

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

hmm, I dont think im following what youre saying. What does the level of population have to do with quality of life? so cities of 5 million people should be assumed to be more livable than cities half that size?

With a higher population, you tend to get more problems that affect the livability of a city.

[vansky]

Originally Posted by Spork

Expensive labour and lack of certain talents. With such a high cost of living, companies are much better off locating elsewhere. Why locate in Vancouver when you can locate somewhere that is closer to your competitor's and supplier's head offices such as Toronto? Further, people here seem to lack a sense of drive, from what I've seen both in school and in the professional workplace, whereas people out east have more ambition and seem to work harder.

this place is pretty good, just the population of brains and talent dont compete with toronto. let's face it, the top guys are likely more ambitious than others, then toronto would be a better choice since its a bigger city.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by nickinacan

What is the reason behind the lack of large commercial head offices shunning Vancouver?

Calgary seems to get a lot of head offices. Alberta has the lowest corporate income taxes in Canada. Look at their rate compared to the U.S even.

Is this a good thing though? Does it go too far? This limits the province's spending power. Alberta can subsidize themselves because of the oil industry, BC can't.

Their provincial personal income tax rate is also a flat 10%, meaning no matter how much money you make or how little, it never goes up or down. I could also see this as being a selling point for moving there and setting up offices.

[s211]

Originally Posted by dreambrother808

Alberta can subsidize themselves because of the oil industry, BC can't.

Bullshirt. BC could, but it doesn't have the cojones to permit off-shore drilling.

[nickinacan]

Originally Posted by s211

Bullshirt. BC could, but it doesn't have the cojones to permit off-shore drilling.

Well they are afraid that Greenpeace would slander them... but then again, they already do, so who cares!

It is very true that Calgary has a huge amount of corporate offices, and oddly enough, Calgary's rise was about the same time as Vancouver's demise. Taxes probably do have something major to do with it. A 15% tax is pretty steep, especially when the local competition is so much lower, especially Surrey at 9%. Anyone have an idea what Calgary's is at?

[raggedy13]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

hmm, I dont think im following what youre saying. What does the level of population have to do with quality of life? so cities of 5 million people should be assumed to be more livable than cities half that size?

Sorry, I'm referring to the overall ranking at the end of the report. I should've clarified that. Livability is just 1 of 7 different aspects they measured. The others are Legal & Political Framework, Economic Stability, Ease of Doing Business, Financial Flow, Business Center, Knowledge Creation & Information Flow, and then Livability.

I was referring to excel's point about how our ranking dropped from last year and just trying to take an optimistic view by pointing out how despite our drop Vancouver is still level with and ahead of many cities I would've considered to rank much better than Vancouver. And I thought the fact that Vancouver's ranking is competitive with cities twice its size reflects well on Vancouver.

[vansky]

if you have money, get a boat and go live in vancouver. this is obviuosly the city to live if you are rich. most livable for the rich.

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by s211

Bullshirt. BC could, but it doesn't have the cojones to permit off-shore drilling.

BC has a huge oil and gas industry in NE BC

some of the biggest natural gas in the world

but that whole region would rather be part of Alberta anyway - they are completely ignored by the BC government and lower mainland

[EdinVan]

Originally Posted by Spork

Further, people here seem to lack a sense of drive, from what I've seen both in school and in the professional workplace, whereas people out east have more ambition and seem to work harder.

Totally agreed. But to what do you attribute this? Is it the Lotusland effect? Does the setting distract people from academic and professional pursuits? This issue continues to vex me.

[EdinVan]

[QUOTE=vansky;3977922]this is obviuosly the city to live if you are rich. /QUOTE]

Is that true? I don't have the information in front of me, but does Vancouver tend to attract the richest people? I don't think it's the case...

[crazyjoeda]

Originally Posted by tintinium

Sometimes I think it's just popular to upvote Vancouver. I'm sure there are far more livable cities in the world, depending on who you are.

I'm not sure if thats logical. I think that Geneva and Zurich are seen as more glamourous jet-set cities, so I would argue it would be more popular to upvote them. Not that Geneva or Zurich are that great; I have been to both and they would be great places to live, Geneva especially is beautiful. Vancouver is a larger city than Geneva and I think there is more to do here, and obviously Vancouver is beautiful also, so I agree Vancouver deserves to be at the top.