• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

23 Cities With Highest Living Quality (No USA City To Be Found)

Thrilla said:
why would you assume that?.... why do you believe only white people are rational?
Click to expand...
im saying i believe your using the word "rational" as a codeword for white, thanks for confirming that you were
 
dimensionallava said:
im saying i believe your using the word "rational" as a codeword for white, thanks for confirming that you were
Click to expand...

the assumption came from YOUR brain... literally none of my words would lead a rational person to believe I was delineating based on race... or even addressing race in any shape form or fashion.

don't blame me for what your own brain gives birth to....it's yours and yours alone.

additionally, please learn the definition of "confirm" and how it's applicable... thanks
 
Geoist said:
23. Montreal, Canada
22. Perth, Australia
21. Brussels, Belgium
20.Stockholm, Sweden
19. Luxembourg
18. Hamburg, Germany
17. Ottawa, Canada
16. Melbourne, Australia
15. Toronto, Canada
14. Bern, Switzerland
13. Berlin, Germany
12. Wellington, New Zealand
11. Amsterdam, Netherlands
10. Sydney, Australia
09. Copenhagen, Denmark
08. Geneva, Switzerland
07. Frankfurt, Germany
06. Dusseldorf, Germany
05. Vancouver, Canada
04. Munich, Germany
03. Auckland, New Zealand
02. Zurich, Switzerland
01. Vienna, Austria

Mercer 2016 Quality of Living worldwide city rankings - Business Insider


How is it the "best country in the world!!!" doesn't even have a city in the top ten?! Would love to see this as a GOP debate question (my money is on every one of them blaming Obama)
Click to expand...

because socialism.

/thread
 
Thrilla said:
wow, I didn't know every single rural area was like you believe them to be, imagine my surprise..... I mean, I live in the boonies and it's absolutely nothing like you say it is... but i guess I'm wrong and the bigoted know-it-all "progressive" is correct:roll:
Click to expand...

FYI, I grew up in the boonies, and where I was, it's PRECISELY as I just said. Heck, the school I graduated from was in the next county over, and even then my graduating class was only 42 kids.

To be sure, there's a lot of rural areas that are very nice...but you'll find very few rural areas that have easy access to the best universities, short commutes to high-paying jobs, and emergency services close at hand. Would you agree that blue states are generally more urban, and red states are generally more rural? Of course you would. Now bear in mind that generally speaking, blue states have lower homicide rates, lower divorce rates, lower teenage pregnancy rates, higher rates of educational achievement, and higher rates of health insurance coverage...and longer life expectancies, to boot. Yes, there are some exceptions to the rule, but generally speaking, all the above is fact.

I have seen it from both sides...and I know which side has it better. And it's not just in America, either. Generally speaking, wherever you go, cities are the economic hearts of the nation.
 
Geoist said:
Here, in Illinois, uneducated folks often blame teachers for the problems with the pension crisis. But teachers paid 9% of their salary into the pension program. It was the politicians who borrowed into that program and never paid it back who are to blame. I'd imagine the case is similar with other pension programs in other states.
Click to expand...

Seems harsh. I believe that for many people who don't have a pension, any pension would draw a little attention and perhaps resentment. I was fortunate to have a pension based on years worked times 1.5% times average salary for last 5 years, discounted by age at which one started to draw the pension. So, 30 years times 0.015 times, say $60K time 0.4 if started at 58 or times 1 if started at 65. So a max of $27K/yr or so. I suspect that teachers get more. Now that 9% (assuming that is not including normal SS taxes) might yield a $275K in 25 years or $600K in 40 years but that would not make much in an annuity. Maybe $25K if 40 years. But I suspect teachers do much better. The average in Illinois is reported to be $48K at age 58 after 25 years. That is a nice pension. It would help if there was more transparency and the people knew what the pension and health benefit costs are. And it would help if teachers followed the policy of federal employees and the military and did not allow partisan political activity, as members of a teachers union. That seems so obviously wrong and open for corruption.
 
dimensionallava said:
The joke is.... thats its stupid to say that democrats are to blame for a cities problems, when every single major american cty is run largely by democrats, if there was a city that was mostly run by conservative republican right wingers and it was the best city in the world, than you might have a point, but there isn't a city like that anywhere.... so all your really doing is pointing out that republicans just promote anti-social policies.
Click to expand...

There are no social programs listed in their criteria although you can bet their cost of living and taxes are outrageous.
 
Geoist said:
23. Montreal, Canada
22. Perth, Australia
21. Brussels, Belgium
20.Stockholm, Sweden
19. Luxembourg
18. Hamburg, Germany
17. Ottawa, Canada
16. Melbourne, Australia
15. Toronto, Canada
14. Bern, Switzerland
13. Berlin, Germany
12. Wellington, New Zealand
11. Amsterdam, Netherlands
10. Sydney, Australia
09. Copenhagen, Denmark
08. Geneva, Switzerland
07. Frankfurt, Germany
06. Dusseldorf, Germany
05. Vancouver, Canada
04. Munich, Germany
03. Auckland, New Zealand
02. Zurich, Switzerland
01. Vienna, Austria

Mercer 2016 Quality of Living worldwide city rankings - Business Insider


How is it the "best country in the world!!!" doesn't even have a city in the top ten?! Would love to see this as a GOP debate question (my money is on every one of them blaming Obama)
Click to expand...

Meh. Nobody can afford to live in those places. It appears to be based mainly on the magnitude of government services. Screw it.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
FYI, I grew up in the boonies, and where I was, it's PRECISELY as I just said. Heck, the school I graduated from was in the next county over, and even then my graduating class was only 42 kids.

To be sure, there's a lot of rural areas that are very nice...but you'll find very few rural areas that have easy access to the best universities, short commutes to high-paying jobs, and emergency services close at hand. Would you agree that blue states are generally more urban, and red states are generally more rural? Of course you would. Now bear in mind that generally speaking, blue states have lower homicide rates, lower divorce rates, lower teenage pregnancy rates, higher rates of educational achievement, and higher rates of health insurance coverage...and longer life expectancies, to boot. Yes, there are some exceptions to the rule, but generally speaking, all the above is fact.

I have seen it from both sides...and I know which side has it better. And it's not just in America, either. Generally speaking, wherever you go, cities are the economic hearts of the nation.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this. The States that generally vote (D) are controlled by large population zones such as NY, Chicago, Filthadelphia, LA, DC(Metro), but those States have very large rural areas too.

As for your "facts", I have no doubt whatsoever that you are using some crazy progressive analysis considering that Chicago, Detroit, LA, Filthadelphia and NYC are the most dangerous cities in the country and those cities are most assuredly not in (R) States,
 
truthatallcost said:
None of the countries you named have a population of 320,000,000, like the US does. Standard of living decreases with over populated countries, just look at the only 2 countries with more people than the US; China and India. And 4th is Indonesia.
The US has quite a high standard of living compared to countries with similar population size.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with anything Amsterdam is on there, and it is one of the most densely populated countries in the world.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
FYI, I grew up in the boonies, and where I was, it's PRECISELY as I just said. Heck, the school I graduated from was in the next county over, and even then my graduating class was only 42 kids.

To be sure, there's a lot of rural areas that are very nice...but you'll find very few rural areas that have easy access to the best universities, short commutes to high-paying jobs, and emergency services close at hand.
Click to expand...

Isn't that why they call it rural areas? If they weren't rural, had all the amenities you speak of, they would be suburbian or urbian. No?
 
WCH said:
Well, you can't have one without the other.
Click to expand...

For you maybe but not for most people. Mercer is aimed at expats who are usually very well educated, very highly skilled, and usually make a lot of money. Living in places like the ones listed would change much. They are also probably from cities like New York and San Francisco, also with ridiculous cost of living.
 
truthatallcost said:
Then what's your opinion as to why the US doesn't make the list?
Click to expand...

I think you were close when you were talking about populations. Only, the problem isn't the USA being overpopulated, but the USA being too big geographically. Huge countries contain numerous cultures, ideologies, spiritual beliefs, etc. The USA is no different. Every country on that list is much smaller than the United States. When we think of German or French culture we think of specific food, clothing, etc. What do we think of with US culture? Cowboy hats? How often do you see cowboy hats in Massachusetts? :2razz: Of course, differences go beyond mundane things like hats. National politics get extremely hostile because we have extreme differences in opinion on how to run a country that rules over such diverse groups.

Most Americans do not want to admit it, but if we want to see Americans compete with other 1st world nations this country needs to be broken up. The Cascadia Movement is one that shares that sentiment.
 
Rentoc said:
I disagree with this. The States that generally vote (D) are controlled by large population zones such as NY, Chicago, Filthadelphia, LA, DC(Metro), but those States have very large rural areas too.

As for your "facts", I have no doubt whatsoever that you are using some crazy progressive analysis considering that Chicago, Detroit, LA, Filthadelphia and NYC are the most dangerous cities in the country and those cities are most assuredly not in (R) States,
Click to expand...

Yes, and California has very large rural areas, too...but California, like New York and Illinois, have a significant majority of their populations in urban areas, whereas Louisiana does not.

Oh, and if you'll check the actual numbers, NYC is one of the SAFEST cities in America. But then, by your post above, it's apparent that actually checking your personal beliefs against the facts at hand is not real high on your priority list. NYC has about the same number of homicides each year as the entire STATE of Louisiana...but NYC also has nearly twice as many people as the state of Louisiana...which means that the homicide rate in NYC is just over half that of mostly-rural Louisiana.

That, and if you'll check, here's the violent crime RATE by county...and it's easy to see that NO, the oh-so-urban northeast is not the most dangerous region - instead, it's the gun-friendly, oh-so-conservative Deep South (and the rural counties of California).

YLUA0wz.jpg

As you can see, a heck of a lot of those counties are RURAL counties. This doesn't mean that the cities are all very safe places, because the INNER cities tend to have the highest violent crime rates. However, when one looks at the cities as a whole, including the surrounding metropolitan and suburban areas which tend to be among the safest in the nation, this brings the crime rate for the county and state way down.

So if you're going to keep claiming how much more dangerous cities are, you've got some 'splainin to do since - as you can see above - outside the inner cities, the most dangerous places in America are in the very red areas of the rural Deep South and rural California.
 
Geoist said:
23. Montreal, Canada
22. Perth, Australia
21. Brussels, Belgium
20.Stockholm, Sweden
19. Luxembourg
18. Hamburg, Germany
17. Ottawa, Canada
16. Melbourne, Australia
15. Toronto, Canada
14. Bern, Switzerland
13. Berlin, Germany
12. Wellington, New Zealand
11. Amsterdam, Netherlands
10. Sydney, Australia
09. Copenhagen, Denmark
08. Geneva, Switzerland
07. Frankfurt, Germany
06. Dusseldorf, Germany
05. Vancouver, Canada
04. Munich, Germany
03. Auckland, New Zealand
02. Zurich, Switzerland
01. Vienna, Austria

Mercer 2016 Quality of Living worldwide city rankings - Business Insider


How is it the "best country in the world!!!" doesn't even have a city in the top ten?! Would love to see this as a GOP debate question (my money is on every one of them blaming Obama)
Click to expand...

Cities are for working and living in mass number - if that's your thing. There's nothing that would compel me to move back to one . . . or one that's even more populated and cluttered than the one I used to live in.

In the US, people who want to live nicely live AWAY from the city.

Thus most likely it's a cultural thing. Instead, we have suburbs that people live in (or commuter towns that are 10 - 30 miles outside the city, like where I live).

You're wondering why we don't have one in that list (for which - the reasons for including and excluding are vague presented) and I'm wondering why anyone would want to live in one no matter how pretty it is (because that seems to be a qualifier - all those pictures might just be jaded and give the illusion that they're all pretty)
 
Glen Contrarian said:
FYI, I grew up in the boonies, and where I was, it's PRECISELY as I just said. Heck, the school I graduated from was in the next county over, and even then my graduating class was only 42 kids.
Click to expand...
OK?

To be sure, there's a lot of rural areas that are very nice...but you'll find very few rural areas that have easy access to the best universities, short commutes to high-paying jobs, and emergency services close at hand. Would you agree that blue states are generally more urban, and red states are generally more rural? Of course you would. Now bear in mind that generally speaking, blue states have lower homicide rates, lower divorce rates, lower teenage pregnancy rates, higher rates of educational achievement, and higher rates of health insurance coverage...and longer life expectancies, to boot. Yes, there are some exceptions to the rule, but generally speaking, all the above is fact.
Click to expand...



I have seen it from both sides...and I know which side has it better. And it's not just in America, either. Generally speaking, wherever you go, cities are the economic hearts of the nation.[/QUOTE]
No, the above is bull****.
every state in the union has urban and rural areas.... all of them... red and blue.
now, I really hate getting into this immature blue state v red state bull**** Progressives dwell on... but let me set a few things straight for you.
our homicide rates begin and end in "blue" cities... period...end of story..... your blue cities are the very heart of crime and other assorted societal problem like homelessness, gentrification, and corruption.
i'm not one to blame that on modern liberals..... but as you are here playing your stupid ****ing games,so i'll join you for a few rounds.

the "blue world" you worship is not all unicorn and puppy dogs... and the "red" world you shame is not all despair and devil spawn... the quicker you understand that , the better off you will be.
there is alot of good and alot of bad in our world, that's the way life works....but only very very stupid people try to pin all the bad on their political opposition, while tryign to take all the credit for all the good

I've also seen it from both sides... and yes, cities are economic hearts, no doubt about it... but don't you run around and **** on rural areas... those are the areas and the people that feed your bigoted uppity ass.
those are the areas the city dwellers run to when they want to escape their rat race.... and those rural folks are the ones who welcome you and your bigotry to that quaint little cafe when you're out there escaping.

so the very least you can do, as a human being and American, is have a little ****ing respect for your fellow citizens by not ****ting on them according to your irrational bigotry ...
I know that incredibly hard for bigoted "progressives" to do, but man the **** up and give it a good try anyways.
 
Geoist said:
National politics get extremely hostile because we have extreme differences in opinion on how to run a country that rules over such diverse groups.

Most Americans do not want to admit it, but if we want to see Americans compete with other 1st world nations this country needs to be broken up. The Cascadia Movement is one that shares that sentiment.
Click to expand...

I doubt the possibility of breaking the US into several smaller countries without some kind of national crisis or even revolution. The federal government collects taxes from all 50 States which bankrolls their bloated and frivolous spending. No way they will allow that to change. Government is way too big to allow that.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Yes, and California has very large rural areas, too...but California, like New York and Illinois, have a significant majority of their populations in urban areas, whereas Louisiana does not.

Oh, and if you'll check the actual numbers, NYC is one of the SAFEST cities in America. But then, by your post above, it's apparent that actually checking your personal beliefs against the facts at hand is not real high on your priority list. NYC has about the same number of homicides each year as the entire STATE of Louisiana...but NYC also has nearly twice as many people as the state of Louisiana...which means that the homicide rate in NYC is just over half that of mostly-rural Louisiana.

That, and if you'll check, here's the violent crime RATE by county...and it's easy to see that NO, the oh-so-urban northeast is not the most dangerous region - instead, it's the gun-friendly, oh-so-conservative Deep South (and the rural counties of California).

View attachment 67197666

As you can see, a heck of a lot of those counties are RURAL counties. This doesn't mean that the cities are all very safe places, because the INNER cities tend to have the highest violent crime rates. However, when one looks at the cities as a whole, including the surrounding metropolitan and suburban areas which tend to be among the safest in the nation, this brings the crime rate for the county and state way down.

So if you're going to keep claiming how much more dangerous cities are, you've got some 'splainin to do since - as you can see above - outside the inner cities, the most dangerous places in America are in the very red areas of the rural Deep South and rural California.
Click to expand...

The large populations skew the stats and you know it. I didn't mention CA, but I also didn't mention Cleveland and Cincy. Look at the counties surrounding the population zones. NJ is burdened by NYC, Gary by Chicago, areas around KC and St Louis. Look at fyour map and tell me why Alaska has so much red?
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Cities are for working and living in mass number - if that's your thing. There's nothing that would compel me to move back to one . . . or one that's even more populated and cluttered than the one I used to live in.

In the US, people who want to live nicely live AWAY from the city.

Thus most likely it's a cultural thing. Instead, we have suburbs that people live in (or commuter towns that are 10 - 30 miles outside the city, like where I live).

You're wondering why we don't have one in that list (for which - the reasons for including and excluding are vague presented) and I'm wondering why anyone would want to live in one no matter how pretty it is (because that seems to be a qualifier - all those pictures might just be jaded and give the illusion that they're all pretty)
Click to expand...

That does not explain the existence of the Canadian cities on the list, we have a similar suburb culture to the US except that it is slowly being reversed, the same goes for Europe.

Have you ever been to cities like Amsterdam or Vienna? they are the most beautiful places I have ever been. The canals and architecture in Amsterdam are beautiful and Vienna is essentially one gigantic monument to the power and wealth of the Habsburgs, everything is built to give a feeling of grandness. To each their own.
 
Thrilla said:
our homicide rates begin and end in "blue" cities... period...end of story..... your blue cities are the very heart of crime and other assorted societal problem like homelessness, gentrification, and corruption.
Click to expand...

Thrilla said:
only very very stupid people try to pin all the bad on their political opposition, while tryign to take all the credit for all the good
Click to expand...

Thrilla said:
so the very least you can do, as a human being and American, is have a little ****ing respect for your fellow citizens by not ****ting on them according to your irrational bigotry ...
I know that incredibly hard for bigoted "progressives" to do, but man the **** up and give it a good try anyways.
Click to expand...

:lol: This post may have broken some kind of record for irony.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Cities are for working and living in mass number - if that's your thing. There's nothing that would compel me to move back to one . . . or one that's even more populated and cluttered than the one I used to live in.

In the US, people who want to live nicely live AWAY from the city.

Thus most likely it's a cultural thing. Instead, we have suburbs that people live in (or commuter towns that are 10 - 30 miles outside the city, like where I live).

You're wondering why we don't have one in that list (for which - the reasons for including and excluding are vague presented) and I'm wondering why anyone would want to live in one no matter how pretty it is (because that seems to be a qualifier - all those pictures might just be jaded and give the illusion that they're all pretty)
Click to expand...

That's the thing - the 'burbs are the safest parts. The inner cities are generally the worst, followed by the boonies. And it's not a red-state or a blue-state thing, but a human thing that is seen in pretty much every nation...although the ease of access to firearms has a direct effect on the violent crime rate.
 
Thrilla said:
No, the above is bull****.
every state in the union has urban and rural areas.... all of them... red and blue.
now, I really hate getting into this immature blue state v red state bull**** Progressives dwell on... but let me set a few things straight for you.
our homicide rates begin and end in "blue" cities... period...end of story..... your blue cities are the very heart of crime and other assorted societal problem like homelessness, gentrification, and corruption.
i'm not one to blame that on modern liberals..... but as you are here playing your stupid ****ing games,so i'll join you for a few rounds.

the "blue world" you worship is not all unicorn and puppy dogs... and the "red" world you shame is not all despair and devil spawn... the quicker you understand that , the better off you will be.
there is alot of good and alot of bad in our world, that's the way life works....but only very very stupid people try to pin all the bad on their political opposition, while tryign to take all the credit for all the good

I've also seen it from both sides... and yes, cities are economic hearts, no doubt about it... but don't you run around and **** on rural areas... those are the areas and the people that feed your bigoted uppity ass.
those are the areas the city dwellers run to when they want to escape their rat race.... and those rural folks are the ones who welcome you and your bigotry to that quaint little cafe when you're out there escaping.

so the very least you can do, as a human being and American, is have a little ****ing respect for your fellow citizens by not ****ting on them according to your irrational bigotry ...
I know that incredibly hard for bigoted "progressives" to do, but man the **** up and give it a good try anyways.
Click to expand...

"homicide rates begin and end in "blue" cities"???? Then take a look at the violent-crime-by-county map I posted in #64 and explain why it is that across the nation, MOST of the counties that have the highest violent crime rates are RURAL counties, and seem to be especially concentrated across the very-conservative, second-amendment-loving South.

Have fun trying to tap-dance your way around that one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom