What cities have a high quality of life?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I'm nitpicking but it bugs me that Montreal is frequently described in such a manner. Montreal isn't a particularly old city, nor does it have much (admittedly subjective) gorgeous architecture. It's the incessant Francization (?) of Montreal/Quebec, turning it into some fiction of baguettes and chateaus.

Montreal was much smaller than, say, Cleveland or Buffalo. Is Cleveland frequently referenced as some historical gem? Montreal, outside the core, looks very typically Canadian, with lots of postwar commieblocks and the like. It doesn't have anything like a French feel, or even a Philly feel, for that matter. It's very North American, just with a differing dominant language. The really nice areas look like Brookline, not Versailles.

Montreal definitely isn't Paris but it doesn't look like your typical Canadian city either - if such a thing even exists. And it certainly doesn't have "lots of commieblocks".

Here is what it looks like a 15-minute drive or hour walk from the oldest part of town in the heart of the city:

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5255...8192?entry=ttu

If it's to be compared to any American city, one might call it a much much better preserved St. Louis. And even then...

(It's really got its own look and feel.)

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Toronto doesn't have high rents. Unless things changed recently, all the big Canadian cities have cheaper rents than the big American cities.

Canada has a housing ownership crisis, not a rental crisis, mostly due to bank/govt. manipulations and immigrant cultural affinity for ownership.

5-10 years ago you might have been correct, but rents have soared (often by double-digit year-over-year percentage points) across the country with very little vacancy, thanks to our insane level of population growth coupled with the unaffordable RE market. There's absolutely a rental crisis - it's one of the biggest domestic issues at the moment.

Average rent for a 1-bedroom apartment in Toronto is over $2,500/month, with a 1.4% vacancy rate. Still lower than say, NY or SF - but incomes are also much lower and there are fewer affordable alternatives.

Originally Posted by Crawford

I'm nitpicking but it bugs me that Montreal is frequently described in such a manner. Montreal isn't a particularly old city, nor does it have much (admittedly subjective) gorgeous architecture. It's the incessant Francization (?) of Montreal/Quebec, turning it into some fiction of baguettes and chateaus.

Montreal was much smaller than, say, Cleveland or Buffalo. Is Cleveland frequently referenced as some historical gem? Montreal, outside the core, looks very typically Canadian, with lots of postwar commieblocks and the like. It doesn't have anything like a French feel, or even a Philly feel, for that matter. It's very North American, just with a differing dominant language. The really nice areas look like Brookline, not Versailles.

I also think Montreal's "historicness" or foreignness is sometimes overstated, but minimizing it as being little more than a French-speaking Cleveland or something is an overcorrection too far in the other direction.

It's still a first-wave, 17th century North American city that's contemporaneous with the likes of New York, Boston, and Philly after all. That it was slightly smaller than Cleveland in 1940* or whatever has no bearing on either the quality of its traditional urban form, nor the extent to which it was preserved - let alone how it may have been improved upon or expanded since. I mean, Cleveland doesn't look like this:


https://stock.adobe.com/it/images/pa...city/383177676


Judging cities as some sort of zero-sum exercise based strictly on their population in 1940 is a weird take in 2024.

*On closer inspection, that's probably not even true - while historic data is questionable, it looks like (metropolitan) Cleveland was at no point larger than (metropolitan) Montreal, nor was Buffalo.

[citywatch]

Originally Posted by AviationGuy

Are we talking about quality of life for most residents, or just the affluent?

Almost any city is appealing or attractive if ppl are wealthy enough. For some cities listed, 'quality of life' does not come immediately to mind.

this person owns a large, deluxe penthouse in manhattan...

• Video Link

But her so called quality of life....around 1:06....takes on a different angle.

• Video Link

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by citywatch

Almost any city is appealing or attractive if ppl are wealthy enough. For some cities listed, 'quality of life' does not come immediately to mind.

this person owns a large, deluxe penthouse in manhattan...

• Video Link

But her so called quality of life....around 1:06....takes on a different angle.

• Video Link

Spent $13 Million USD ($17.6M for Canucks) for the ultimate NYC Central Park dream, but is happiest in a "luxury" double wide beside the Pacific coast of California that cost her 16x less money.

[pdxtex]

Originally Posted by AviationGuy

Are we talking about quality of life for most residents, or just the affluent?

The least amount of potholes. Most grocery stores per capita.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by pdxtex

The least amount of potholes.

Chicago is officially out!!

(not that it was the ever in)


Freeze-thaw is the mortal enemy of pavement everywhere.

[Nouvellecosse]

I'll go with Medellin, Milan, Melbourne, Montreal, and Munich.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I'll go with Medellin, Milan, Melbourne, Montreal, and Munich.

What about Madrid, Malaga, Malmo, Moncton and Minsk?

[JManc]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

What about Madrid, Malaga, Malmo, Moncton and Minsk?

Or Mexico City, Manchester, Milpitas, Moscow and Moose Jaw.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by JManc

Or Mexico City, Manchester, Milpitas, Moscow and Moose Jaw.

And for good measure, Mogadishu, Maputo, (Port) Moresby, Magadan and Modesto.

[chris08876]

Tokyo IMO.

Its a superior city. The whole region is.

Superior transportation, high-tech, clean, a population that cares, a government that allows affordable housing to be built in mass over the decades (Take note U.S. cities), amazing food, diversity, and did I mention clean?

Superior city. Very low crime too, very low.

Bullet trains to speed around the regions nodes, and vending machines. Seems like the hallmarks of a high quality of life. The Japanese also live very long on average so for the sake of high quality of life, I'd say so!

Japan in general. That is a civilization. Its a shame that they are seeing a population drop because if the world was modeled more like Japan, man... the potential for this planet.

[ilcapo]

When speaking of capitals and "big" cities in Europe, the first that comes to my mind is nord-ish cities such as Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Dublin, Stockholm, Oslo, Helsinki.

Also Zurich, Milano, Lyon and Munich a bit further south.

But honestly i think there needs to be an element of warmer climate and proximity to water to be really high quality of life.

The above cities are great in many aspects but i bet a large number of their population would love to live in a warmer climate during the winter peak. Especially when it comes to Stockholm, Oslo and Helsinki.

When excluding capitals-only id say that cities like Bilbao, Barcelona, Nice and perhaps Lisboa seems like the best. (I have only visited Barcelona and Nice out of these).
I'd like to add an italian city to the list, but most of its prosperous cities are inland.

Marseille is excluded because of Crime Rates. Same with Naples where i think its also too warm and chaotic.
Bordeux seems like an ideal place for most aspects, but its missing immediate proximity to the sea. Same goes for Rome (which is also too warm summer-time).

[dktshb]

Of places I have been

Amsterdam
Sydney
London
Vancouver
Maybe Barcelona and New York

Small Towns
Aspen
Boulder

If it weren't for the homelessness plaguing the west coast I would put
San Francisco, Seattle Santa Monica and Portland on the list.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by dktshb

If it weren't for the homelessness plaguing the west coast I would put
San Francisco, Seattle Santa Monica and Portland on the list.

Yes, the homeless problem is one of the few things about San Francisco that significantly affects its grade from me. The city seems to otherwise be very well run from the perspective of fostering a thriving urban environment, and can rival a few European capitals in that regard.

[Innsertnamehere]

Calgary would probably give you the best quality of life in Canada, provided you can stand the weather.

Housing is affordable, incomes are high, infrastructure is basically impeccable with excellent road and transit systems, strong community services, and little in the way of poverty. Strong access to nature being an hour drive from the Rocky Mountains, a great airport with a large amount of connections for a city it's size, a dense downtown which isn't full of parking lots, the list goes on.

The urban life isn't anything majorly exciting, but that's to be expected for a city of 1.5 million. It still has a decent share of night life and restaurants, if not anything mind blowing.

The only reason it's not absolutely exploding in population (IMO) is that it's cold. Summer lasts all of 3 months and snow is common from September to May.

If you are established or have money, Toronto and Vancouver are great as well, if not as good as Calgary. The infrastructure lacks more in the two cities but both also provide great access to nature, bustling cities, etc. - They are just expensive as hell.

[Crawford]

MTA is state-operated. NYC has no direct role in MTA.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by Crawford

MTA is state-operated. NYC has no direct role in MTA.

Who cares. It's also a system where it costs an exhorbitant amount of money to execute on the most basic services. Last I read the barriers they want to "pilot" at 42nd street on the subway are going to cost something north of $100MM. For 1 subway station? GTFOOH. No wonder why we don't have anything nice.

[badrunner]

Is there a city that offers high quality of life for working class/poor? Most American cities would be disqualified. Maybe Rome, Athens, Istanbul? Casablanca? Marrakesh?

[mousquet]

I wouldn't describe Paris as an easy city to live in in our day and age.

It is expensive, like real estate is some kind of scam all over the metro area.
Of course, there's a lot of pretty things and neighborhoods, but there's also a lot of crime, drug dealing and gang violence that comes along.

And it's always in suburbs gone too far to the left that difficulties occur. When struggling people are all over the same places, it goes wrong.

I noticed something over here. There's a sign that doesn't lie. When you have a little synagogue in your neighborhood, it means it's safe and healthy.
Wherever the Jews can live in safety, everybody's safe. I'm a Catholic and I have Christian faith, so I don't particularly fancy the Jewish or Muslim religions.
But I'm glad to have a synagogue next door anyway, because it means we're ok where I live.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by mousquet

I noticed something over here. There's a sign that doesn't lie. When you have a little synagogue in your neighborhood, it means it's safe and healthy.
Wherever the Jews can live in safety, everybody's safe. I'm a Catholic and I have Christian faith, so I don't particularly fancy the Jewish or Muslim religions.
But I'm glad to have a synagogue next door anyway, because it means we're ok where I live.

You sounded just like White South Africans back in my stay there in 2008... I was too young and always asking about safety in different neighbourhoods and cities and they were very direct: if you don't see White people, it's not safe. I heard that quite often.

You live there and know better, but I find hard to believe crime is an issue in most of Paris except where Jewish live. I've been in Paris three times and I felt safe most of the time.

Originally Posted by chris08876

Tokyo IMO.

Its a superior city. The whole region is.

Superior transportation, high-tech, clean, a population that cares, a government that allows affordable housing to be built in mass over the decades (Take note U.S. cities), amazing food, diversity, and did I mention clean?

Superior city. Very low crime too, very low.

Bullet trains to speed around the regions nodes, and vending machines. Seems like the hallmarks of a high quality of life. The Japanese also live very long on average so for the sake of high quality of life, I'd say so!

Japan in general. That is a civilization. Its a shame that they are seeing a population drop because if the world was modeled more like Japan, man... the potential for this planet.

I'm completely fascinated by Tokyo as well for all those reasons you mentioned. It's the queen of all metropolises.

I didn't put it on my list though as it's too foreign and I guess after a time I would get tired of living there.