Best to live in the midst of the current chaos
 

Alright my friends.., considering the economic crisis what is in your opinion the best city to live considering the following.
The capacity of the city to stay alive economically despite the current and bloomy future
The capacity of growth despite the negative macroeconomic scenario
Taxes and redtape ( obviously the less the better)
jobs
And of course it has to have things to do...bars, clubs, restaurants , parks etc

lets divide by regions
my pick
North America:( no particular order)
Dallas
Miami
Salt Lake City
Toronto

South America
São Paulo
Florianopolis
Santiago

Europe
Amsterdam
Frankfurt
Stockholm
London

Asia
Seoul
Shenzhen
Singapore
KL

Oceania
Melbourne
Sydney


these are all cities i have visited.

Can you afford to live in all those cities now? Would money be no option?

turks and caos?

In the bloomy future, seems to me like it would a prime spot.

yes, especially when you factor in the capacity of the city to stay alive

When it comes to the capacity of staying alive, I'm hopping in my time machine and heading straight to 1970s Brooklyn.

https://meetinmontauk.files.wordpres...ight_fever.jpg

:previous:
Whether you're a brother or whether you're a mother you're stayin' alive, stayin' alive.

Why Miami? Isn't it North American city that would be most susceptible to climate change?

I'd probably go with someplace like Seattle or Vancouver. Major metropolitan areas with plenty of cultural amenities. Great parks and access to open space. Mild climates, so even with rising temperatures it won't be too bad. Lots of precipitation so less susceptible to drought. And close to freshwater sources. And if there was some geopolitical conflict it's pretty easy to go off the grid and live off the land.

Portland, Oregon. Despite our reputation for spicy urban hijinx, Portland has the sixth highest credit rating in the country, our unemployment rate is under 4 percent and I read we presently had the second fastest job growth last quarter. We have what I'd call economic herd immunity. People make fun of us for being so white but 800k left voting Karens sometimes has its advantages, if its just the blue pill you are after. Id probably say Minneapolis, Des Moines, SLC and Boise have similar situations.

I thought the situation was about the best place to ride out the economic downturn... which is a pretty weird premise. If you need to relocate because of the economy then presumably it's because you lost your job? So the answer is go to the place where you can find work. And most likely that place is going to be where you already live.

That said... Miami is not a place that I imagine will weather an economic downturn better than other places.

I interpreted the question to take into account all possible chaos.

I'd stay put in Pittsburgh and stop flirting with the other cities I'm flirting with. She's never been an economic superstar, just slow and steady with a diverse economy and a nice health/tech/university layer to boot. Also, pretty protected against the worst of climate change effects...has plenty of fresh water, etc.

Portland also has massive vulnerability to poisonous air via forest fires. It faces a possible future where the air is toxic for months, every year. It's probably one of the more vulnerable metros to climate change.

Plus Antifa burned down the city, or so I hear. ;)

If there is any encumbrance in the future, I think it would be water related. Portland gets its water from snow melt and some seasons they barely get any snow. Fires are no joke but at least thats seasonal. School is back in session so teenage antifa freedom fighters are back in containment. Downtown is actually looking pretty lively.

The rent and cost of living hikes makes many of the premier cities unviable, even if they are best-placed to weather the storm. Average rent in London is now is about $600 a week, for shitty accom and likely far out. An average 30 applicants per room, and multiple times that for anything with the whiff of a better deal. I've found an amazing deal but a box room in the quietest, most boring part of the city (it doesn't even have pubs) and I have to share with an OAP landlord who has mental health issues, is a hoarder, very unhygienic and talks to himself.

A pint is now $8, a 'cheap eat' is $20 for a main. Commuting will cost $2000 as the cheapest option (annual pass for zones 1-3, which you'd need to be rich to live in anyway), $2,500 for one zone further (and there are 9 zones). Without a travelcard an upfront single journey within the same zone is $7, even for one stop, which technically makes it the world's most expensive form of transport mile-for-mile.

A box of cereal is now $5-7, spam is the cheapest meat and that's $5 a tin.

I imagine it a similar story for all large cities.

The interior west is really dry, and the coast is very developed (and extremely pricy). Ideal locations to live off the land IMO would be Southern Quebec and Northern New England. Decent growing season already (and only getting better), decently sunny summers but still plenty of rain too. And tons of freshwater.

Vancouver, Sydney or Melbourne would be my apocalypse cities of choice to live in.

If those are US dollar amounts, that's actually a bit below NYC for everything except public transit. A pint in NYC will typically cost about $9 most places except dive bars. A box of cereal was in the $5-7 range even pre-pandemic, but I haven't paid close attention to the prices for it as inflation kicked into high gear. Prices for fresh meat, fish, and poultry has exploded, but I don't think the increase has been as bad for dry goods. Public transit in NYC has been substantially cheaper than London for as long as I can remember, though. The cost per ride in NYC is still $2.75, and that will get you to virtually any point in the city. But the MTA has scaled back a bit on things like bonus rides for the bus and subway, and will soon completely phase out the flat fee monthly MetroCards.