How would you rate the quality of life in your city? [Archive]

SYDNEY

January 18th, 2011, 12:09 AM

Auckland: 9/10

Pros
* Comfortable and predictable weather - very mild winter
* Fantastic setting with volcanoes, islands, a variety of beaches, lots of water
* A huge variety of parks, tropical forests and vineyards
* A city of villages, each very unique
* Lots of space and not over crowded
* An ever improving public transport system that is clean and safe
* A good mix of contemporary and heritage buildings
* A large variety of shops that offer International labels at affordable prices
* Low crime rates, especially violent crime
* Well maintained, clean and very little bureaucracy
* Multicultural (186 Nationalities call Auckland home)
* A city transforming itself, aiming to become the World's most livable
* Lots of free festivals and events
* A thriving cultural scene that is growing rapidly
* Great restaurants and cafes
* Fantastic inner city suburbs
* Very low levels of pollution
* Friendly and helpful people
* Gay friendly
* Great nightlife
* Very walkable city with incredible vistas
* Some of the best schools in NZ

Cons
* Boring architecture - not experimental enough
* No train service between the airport and the CBD
* Property is expensive
* Too much sprawl - would prefer if the city densifies - North to South = 140 kilometres

SYDNEY

January 18th, 2011, 12:13 AM

Gang problems in New Zealand? That sounds unreal for me.

This is a cultural thing between Maori (tribal) and Pacific Islanders. Don't associate NZ gangs with the likes of American gangs in say Los Angeles, they are not near as bad as that, it is more like a bike gang etc. Gang members are a minority of New Zealand criminals. A New Zealand Ministry of Justice study showed that in 1991 just under 80% of prison inmates had no gang history, and just over 90% had no current gang membership.

Svartmetall

January 18th, 2011, 12:39 AM

This is a cultural thing between Maori (tribal) and Pacific Islanders. Don't associate NZ gangs with the likes of American gangs in say Los Angeles, they are not near as bad as that, it is more like a bike gang etc. Gang members are a minority of New Zealand criminals. A New Zealand Ministry of Justice study showed that in 1991 just under 80% of prison inmates had no gang history, and just over 90% had no current gang membership.

Not quite true these days. (http://www.corrections.govt.nz/research/census-of-prison-inmates-and-home-detainees/census-of-prison-inmates-and-home-detainees-2003/6-gang-membership/6-2.html) The mongrel mob and black power aren't exactly biker gangs and do have a large presence in the poorer parts of the community. But still, they aren't as omnipresent as the American gangs I agree. :)

SYDNEY

January 18th, 2011, 12:55 AM

Not quite true these days. (http://www.corrections.govt.nz/research/census-of-prison-inmates-and-home-detainees/census-of-prison-inmates-and-home-detainees-2003/6-gang-membership/6-2.html) The mongrel mob and black power aren't exactly biker gangs and do have a large presence in the poorer parts of the community. But still, they aren't as omnipresent as the American gangs I agree. :)

Are you able to tell how much of that is domestic violence ? once again a cultural thing - in general Maori and PI's don't share the same view about women as we do :) It is not like they go around shooting everybody that they don't agree with or don't like :) NZ gangs are very mild compared to the other gangs that exist out there.

If NZ gangs had to encounter the gangsters on the Cape Flats in South Africa they would run as fast as their legs could carry them :lol: I have also been told that the bike gangs in Australia are pretty rough.

davidhenocq

January 18th, 2011, 02:58 PM

I have lived in 5 different cities so I'm gonna rate them all :)

Nice, France - 6.5/10

+Mild and sunny climate
+Beautiful natural setting
+Proximity to a large number of natural landscapes (mountains, beaches)
+Great vibe in summer

-Boring and dead in winter
-Poor public transport
-Dirty in some places
-Not so safe

Paris, France - 7/10

+Wonderful architecture and history
+Excellent cultural life
+Good nightlife

-Extremely expensive
-Gloomy winters
-Boring topography; landlocked
-Ugly and dangerous suburbs
-Dirty transportation system

Lille, France - 5/10

+Beautiful city centre
+Pedestrian friendly
+Lively
+Friendly people

-Horrible climate, cool and gloomy
-Lack of green spaces
-Landlocked

Hong Kong - 8/10

+Extremely energetic feeling
+Modern and convenient, ever-improving
+World-class transportation system
+Excellent shopping
+Good nightlife
+Safe
+Warm weather
+Stunning skyline and topography
+Culture mix (Chinese/Western)
+A lot of green spaces and islands
+Central position in Asia-Pacific, allowing for easy travels

-Too cloudy
-Extremely polluted
-Extremely dense, can feel oppressive
-Some rude people
-English is not very well spoken

Singapore - 6.5/10

+Very warm weather
+Extremely clean
+Extremely safe
+Abundant equatorial vegetation
+Mix of cultures (Chinese, Indian, Malay, Western)

-Too dense
-Too strict
-Very expensive rents

aaabbbccc

January 19th, 2011, 12:49 PM

There is this myth that all suburbs of Paris are dangerous that is not true , there are some very nice suburbs of Paris , especially the western suburbs

BetaMaxx11

January 20th, 2011, 08:26 PM

Sudbury, Ontario
7/10

Pros:
Natural Scenery
Many Shopping Options

Cons:
Crappy Roads
No new business downtown
ugly
even more ugly in the winter

poshbakerloo

January 20th, 2011, 09:34 PM

East Cheshire (Golden Triangle) England
10/10

Pros:
Natural Scenery
20mins on the train to Manchester - Jobs/ good shopping/ night life
1hr 40mins on the train to London - Everything
Nice houses
Pretty villages
Space for big gardens

Cons:
If you don't drive or live near to the railway station, your screwed.
If you don't like snobs and brash common but very rich chavs, your screwed.

ajaaronjoe

January 20th, 2011, 11:10 PM

:lol:

The capital of the world is either NYC or Washington D.C.
Europe on the other hand is ruled by Brussels, Berlin and Paris...
I guess London is nothing else than the capital of a midsize island named UK.

:lol: London already beats NYC in many aspects such as education, world's best universities, cities with most visited museums, world's busiest airports, most visited city, better public transport, over 2000 years of history, ranked 1st in Global Financial Centre Index, ranked 1st again in World's Most Economically Powerful Cities, and then another 1st position in Worldwide Centres of Commerce Index, full of world's most recognizable football clubs, most expensive stadium, busiest entertainment venue, over 300 languages are spoken in London, only one city on earth to officially host the modern Olympic for three times, safer than New York and of course cleaner than the entire NYC. London new year celebrations killed nye celebration of ny, do i need to say more? trust me i could go on like this all day, but bye for now :cheers:

Xy_9bx6U8_0?rel=0

Xusein

January 21st, 2011, 02:11 AM

What's with the city vs city?

goschio

January 21st, 2011, 07:00 AM

I wish city vs city would become legal again. Frankfurt would beat the crap out of Atlanta.

Dimethyltryptamine

January 21st, 2011, 07:03 AM

:lol: London already beats NYC in many aspects such as education, world's best universities, cities with most visited museums, world's busiest airports, most visited city, better public transport, over 2000 years of history, ranked 1st in Global Financial Centre Index, ranked 1st again in World's Most Economically Powerful Cities, and then another 1st position in Worldwide Centres of Commerce Index, full of world's most recognizable football clubs, most expensive stadium, busiest entertainment venue, over 300 languages are spoken in London, only one city on earth to officially host the modern Olympic for three times, safer than New York and of course cleaner than the entire NYC. London new year celebrations killed nye celebration of ny, do i need to say more? trust me i could go on like this all day, but bye for now :cheers:

you know where i'd rather live sweet heart? NYC.

desertpunk

January 21st, 2011, 07:42 AM

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2600/4174936532_22b0b8dfbd_d.jpg
see_albuquerque

Albuquerque: 7.5/10

+ Excellent climate
+ Afforadble and convenient
+ Beautiful natural setting with incredible mountains
+ Well run city
+ Great local food and culture
+ Easygoing, friendly people

- Commercial backwater lacking world class institutions and ammenities
- Stagnant economy over the last 18 months
- Few tall buildings :(
- Lack of water resources
- Geographically isolated from major cities

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4024/4620786614_f3eda049bc_m_d.jpg
ap0013

El Paso: 7/10

+ Warm, sunny climate
+ Amazingly affordable
+ Shares border with Mexican twin city (CD Juarez) with awesome food and culture
+ 5th strongest economy in the US
+ 2nd safest major city in the US
+ Easygoing and very tolerant people and customs

- Isolated geographically
- Overlooked by major national and global firms
- Very lacking in water resources
- Spanish speaking is virtually mandatory which hinders adjustments for some
- On the low end of the scale in terms of wages and salaries

LtBk

January 21st, 2011, 08:39 AM

I wish city vs city would become legal again. Frankfurt would beat the crap out of Atlanta.

I agree.

Norf_London_boi

January 21st, 2011, 03:07 PM

I would give London 6.5/10

Pros
Hugely diverse population - truly multicultural but paradoxically still very English
Young - everyone seems under 30!
Great nightlife and relatively cheap beer in pubs (compared to continental Europe)
Gay friendly and tolerant
World's most extensive public transport - NOBODY drives anywhere
Good cheap food in supermarkets
Small shops everywhere selling beer and wine
Beautiful Green parks
Excellent food (sorry, the stereotype that you eat badly in England is totally outdated)
Beautiful old (if run down) victorian housing stock
Free galleries and museums
Such diversity between districts - each neighbourhood has its own unique atmosphere
Despite economic crisis, still relatively prosperous city where it is easy to find a job (compared to the rest of UK and other parts of Europe)
Good wages (for some professions)
Boris bikes! (Virtually free cycle hire scheme)
Relaxed informal attitude (OK to go boozing with your work colleagues on Friday lunchtime - you wouldn't get that in New York!)
Socially mixed - council housing for the poor alongside multimillion pound townhouses, as well as wealthy professionals buying traditionally 'poor' areas
Amazing open air markets (Borough, Camden, Columbia Road...)
Easy and cheap flights to loads of destinations across Europe
Maybe not the capital of world - but probably the capital of Europe!

OK so now cons
Huge and can be anonymous unless you know people
Rediculously expensive rent and housing costs
Old, decaying, expensive & inefficient public transport system
High crime rate
Overcrowded and overpopulated - you sometimes can't move on the pavement!
Chains are taking over everywhere - Tesco, Costa Coffee and Starbucks dominate
Loads of pubs still shut at 11 despite the new licencing law - we can't expect to compete with NYC until we sort this out
Not really a 24hr city unless you're in a dirty club
HUGE disparities between rich and poor
Depressing grey skies for weeks and weeks on end
City government in thrall to Financial Services
Ugly glass skyscrapers going up everywhere when we should be protecting our heritage- why do we have to copy Dubai?
Bad wages relative to cost of living
Terrible driving makes cycling dangerous
Huge shortage of housing
Poorly constructed and/or old and run-down housing
Inefficient and sclerotic public services

Dr_Cosmo

January 21st, 2011, 07:43 PM

:lol: London already beats NYC

NYC is simply the major city of the worlds most powerful country.
London is the major city of a midsize island.

In Europe/ the EU I would rank Berlin and Paris as more important,
simply because the UK has no role in European affairs.

ajaaronjoe

January 21st, 2011, 08:26 PM

In Europe/ the EU I would rank Berlin and Paris as more important,
simply because the UK has no role in European affairs.

I am fed up of your corrupt EU, please stop that joke. let the UK remain as an English speaking country like New Zealand, Australia, and Canada, do not expect them to rule all over the European affairs when they don't want to associate with the Europeans :rofl: :hilarious :puke:

Ricbit

January 21st, 2011, 09:26 PM

(625k)

São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brasil... I was just thinking in giving it a 6 or 7/10, but I realized that if so many people that live in those cities I consider great, what they would think about my city?

Too many things to solve, but quite good if comparing to rest of Brazil... Urbanism sucks, but the city is not that bad to live... Nightlife so so, leisure ok, parks ok, culture spaces sucks... Proximity to SP, that's good... Poverty is going down quickly, well I think we're going in the right way... It's not also that violent comparing to Brazil, but not safe, for sure. Traffic is good. Last but not least, I don't like its architeture, but I'm doing well here. If I had the opportunity, I would leave here :yes: But I quite like it too.

Well... Levels

3rd world: 7.0
1st world: 3.5

mcolley

January 21st, 2011, 10:12 PM

I have difficulty rating cities, but here are the pros and cons of the three major cities I've lived in.

ATLANTA
Pros:
Attractive city, lots of trees
Some interesting architecture
Some interesting historic sites
Mostly friendly people
Affordable

Cons:
WAY too much sprawl
Public transportation needs a lot of improvement
Car dominated, bad traffic

HOUSTON
Pros:
More vibrant economy than most American cities
Affordable
Winter weather is great

Cons:
Too much sprawl
Ugly freeways and strip malls
Car dominated, not much public transportation
Rediculously hot summers
Can get boring

RIO DE JANEIRO
Pros:
Fantastic natural setting
Excellent night life
Lots to do, never boring
Wonderful friendly people

Cons:
Crime
Extremely high inequality
Ugly city aside from the beaches
All forms of transportation need improvement
Too much graffiti, dirty, polluted

Dr_Cosmo

January 21st, 2011, 11:13 PM

Because the British people never class themselves as European, and the Great Britain/the United Kingdom doesn't want to be part of EU, which is a devil state designed and ruled by greedy Germany and French for their own benefits. Thanks god we are still using our most stable currency £ and we never hang their ugly EU flags in our streets. But, if your a yank please keep trying to get your own Empire like UK controlled and dominated 1/3 of the world, largest and greatest empire in human history. Besides, stop killing the innocent people, if you want to invade other countries do it on your own. :bash: BTW i forget to say UK is the most militarily powerful nation in EU and has the biggest military budget in the entire Europe and ranked 3rd in the world just after the US and China. Do you know that the United States was founded by the 13th British colonials and the name New York was named and given by the British :)

You seem to live in the past like many Englanders. The British Empire has ceased 50 years ago.

Cities are bound to countries. NYC, DC and L.A are great and powerful because the USA is great and powerful.

Berlin and Paris are powerful because these cities are running the European Union.

London has, according to my information, no influence in Europe, it has only the UK.

intensivecarebear

January 22nd, 2011, 12:52 AM

ok I'll do Cairo, Egypt

Pros:
-Incredibly safe city, especially if you're a dude
-truly 24 hour city, cafes are great and stay open late
-if you're a foreigner the cost of living is very cheap
-beautiful Islamic and Coptic landmarks
-lots of history
-in spite of its problems, people are generally friendly
-the city feels 'real' and isn't disneyfied at all
-great weather in the winter and in general in the evenings (in summer)
-amazing metro system...very clean too

Cons:
That said....
-incredibly polluted and dirty
-lots of poverty and misery
-police corruption and abuse....lack of basic human rights
-not many people who are accepting of differences i.e (religious, cultural, etc.)
-horribly hot in the summer
-backwards mentalities
-huge wealth disparity
-no edgy or interesting nightlife for a city its size due to conservative culture
-very very difficult to meet and have fun with the opposite sex
-lots of cheaters and thieves (due to poverty naturally)
-can be lonely and anonymous
-can be intimidating if you're a blonde or white-looking female

ajaaronjoe

January 22nd, 2011, 09:39 AM

You seem to live in the past like many Englanders.
Its called pride

Rank Country Score
1 United States 90.62
2 United Kingdom 65.04
3 Russia 63.03
4 France 62.00
5 Germany 61.93
6 China 59.10
7 Japan 57.84
8 Canada 57.09
9 South Korea 53.20
10 India 50.43

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_National_Power
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_power

NYC, DC and L.A are great and powerful because the USA is great and powerful.
It depends on how you measure, US has almost $14 trillion debt, the worst healthcare system among developed nations, US even owes $511.8 billion to UK. http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/mfh.txt i like LA because of it's in a sunny sate and has wonderful weather.

Berlin and Paris are powerful because these cities are running the European Union.
Get your facts right, EU laws are made by Brussels. EU is designed by Germany and France for their own profits. You can ask to the people in UK, nobody wants the UK to be part of EU and fortunately they are still keeping their own currency.

London has, according to my information, no influence in Europe, it has only the UK.
Obviously not, as i told you before. UK doesn't want to be part of EU, so why do you expect them to influence the entire Europe?(you mean including Russia) Germany and France are the largest trading partners unlike the UK it's largest trading partner is the US, and it's biggest export partner is also US. As far as i am concerned UK is a completely different country compared to other countries in Europe. Please leave the UK alone and let it remain in English speaking world (not european) :cheers:

Isek

January 22nd, 2011, 10:24 AM

Dr_Cosmo

January 22nd, 2011, 01:19 PM

As far as i am concerned UK is a completely different country compared to other countries in Europe.

Different ? It is a European country with European history and European ethnicities. It has chosen not to influence Europe politically or economically, thats why London is far less important for Washington or Beijing. The first address is Berlin than Paris and a bit Brussels. The Brussels people usually get in line with Germany and France because they are most respected and connected in the EU.

ajaaronjoe

January 22nd, 2011, 01:35 PM

London is far less important for Washington or Beijing
You have changed the subject, we are not talking about the Chinks (future superpower) or DC (capital of falling superpower).

The Brussels people usually get in line with Germany and France because they are most respected and connected in the EU.
Its good to see German & France getting along so well. We all know what its like when they don't :|

niterider

January 22nd, 2011, 03:24 PM

It depends on how you measure, US has almost $14 trillion debt, the worst healthcare system among developed nations, US even owes $511.8 billion to UK. http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/mfh.txt i like LA because of it's in a sunny sate and has wonderful weather.

'Worst' eh...hardly. If by worst you mean universal access - agreed, but the quality in the US is vastly superior to anything you get in England. They simply took the path that it is up to the individual to take responsibility of their own live and choose the insurance they consider most approprite...remember you get taxed far less there.
I've used the NHS in the UK - If im sick I need to book a few days in advance to see an doctor...I'll get seen for maybe 10mins max. Doctors have been incompetent and downright wrong. Many hospitals are just - dirty - and people have no privacy in crap shared rooms. Treatments are basic and take longer.

It Get your facts right, EU laws are made by Brussels. EU is designed by Germany and France for their own profits. You can ask to the people in UK, nobody wants the UK to be part of EU and fortunately they are still keeping their own currency.
True. It might be geographically close to Europe, and indeed willingly cooperate on certain issues, but culturally it is sees itself closer to those in places like Australia and Canada and to a lesser extent the USA

R@ptor

January 22nd, 2011, 05:46 PM

Here's my rating for the 4 cities I've lived in so far (Heidelberg, Taipei, Amsterdam, Shanghai)

HEIDELBERG, Germany: 7.0 / 10.0

Pros
- Nice historic old town
- Nice scenery
- Good public transportation system for a city of its size

Cons
- Much too small for my taste (145k)
- High rents
- Lack of large scale events
- Next major airport is 85km away

TAIPEI, Taiwan: 9.0 / 10.0

Pros
- Some of the friendliest people I’ve encountered anywhere on this planet
- Very affordable
- Spectacular landscapes and national parks are just a short 15 minute ride outside the city
- Great public transportation system
- Extremely safe

Cons
- Frequent earthquakes
- Humidity in the summer is almost unbearable

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands: 8.5 / 10.0

Pros
- Fantastic old town with quaint canals
- Very cosmopolitan
- Highly-educated, multi-lingual population
- Good public transportation system
- Strong economy
- Better nightlife than some cities 5 times the size

Cons
- Extremely expensive (rents, eating out)
- Some unsafe districts
- Very high petty crime rate (I gave up owning a bicycle after having 3 stolen within my first couple of weeks there)
- Too cold in the summer and too much rain throughout the year

SHANGHAI, China: 5.5 / 10.0

Pros
- One of the largest cities in the world
- Great subway system
- A skyscraper paradise
- Still very affordable
- Great selection of restaurants & shops

Cons
- Very rude public behaviour (No queuing, spitting, noisy people, no consideration for the well-being of others)
- Horrible traffic & horrible driving skills
- High income inequality
- Noisy & Polluted
- Widespread corruption
- Oppressive society with internet censorship and no freedom of speech
- Humidity in the summer is almost unbearable

ajaaronjoe

January 22nd, 2011, 08:38 PM

True. It might be geographically close to Europe, and indeed willingly cooperate on certain issues, but culturally it is sees itself closer to those in places like Australia and Canada and to a lesser extent the USA
Exactly, you got the point. Id rather see the UK working together with it's cousins Australia, Canada, New Zealand and (United States) rather than EU. I even wish the location of UK was closer to Australia or Canada than in Europe :lol: Commonwealth Nations Rule :horse:

Dr_Cosmo

January 22nd, 2011, 09:09 PM

I even wish the location of UK was closer to Australia or Canada than in Europe

There are 3 superpowers today on the globe, the US, the EU and China (in the future).

The UK does not have influence in any of these entities, thats why London has long ago ceased to be important.

Actually you are the best proof. A Londoner who rather wants to deal with geopolitical midgets like Canada or Australia has stopped his desire to rule with the big boys... I knew it .

ajaaronjoe

January 22nd, 2011, 10:23 PM

There are 3 superpowers today on the globe, the US, the EU and China (in the future).
do you think i don't know that?:|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_superpowers

The UK does not have influence in any of these entities, thats why London has long ago ceased to be important.
Why would i want the UK to be part of EU or to influence its power among European countries? Let me tell you something if you don't know, UK has the 2nd biggest GDP PPP in EU after Germany, UK has the biggest military budget in the entire Europe, which is way bigger than germany or france or russia whatever you say, UK is one of nuclear weapons states out of 2 in EU, Royal Navy (Blue Water Navy) and Royal Air Force are the biggest and most powerful in EU(2nd in NATO after the united states). UK is arguably the most influential nation in Europe. i could go on like this all day but i think its is more than enough. ok

Actually you are the best proof. A Londoner who rather wants to deal with geopolitical midgets like Canada or Australia has stopped his desire to rule with the big boys... I knew it .
All i want is to withdraw the UK from the corrupt EU, thats in a bad shape. I am fed up of seeing useless laws made by brussels and bailing some Europe's third world countries out every single day. PS London aint a joke, its the world's largest Financial centre, economically most powerful city on earth and the richest city in the whole Europe nufff said :hilarious:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_centre

desertpunk

January 22nd, 2011, 10:24 PM

You have changed the subject, we are not talking about the Chinks (future superpower) or DC (capital of falling superpower).

Its good to see German & France getting along so well. We all know what its like when they don't :|

:ohno:

Anything else while you're still here?

ajaaronjoe

January 22nd, 2011, 10:32 PM

@Dr Cosmo,,,PS i aint being cocky or arrogant, i am just trying to prove that your facts are bullocks, the way you look on UK is like UK is some sorta third world nation, no military or political power or anything like that. your just funny when you cant see that UK is militarily the msot powerful nation in European Union. By the way, my favourite countries in the world are Australia, Canada, Spain and Florida (not country but its a state in US).

wjfox

January 22nd, 2011, 10:41 PM

"Chinks" is a highly racist and completely unacceptable word on this forum (or anywhere, for that matter). You're brigged.

DanielFigFoz

January 22nd, 2011, 11:18 PM

You can ask to the people in UK, nobody wants the UK to be part of EU and fortunately they are still keeping their own currency.

I do.

'

True. It might be geographically close to Europe, and indeed willingly cooperate on certain issues, but culturally it is sees itself closer to those in places like Australia and Canada and to a lesser extent the USA

It's true that most people in the UK see the UK as being culturally non-European and more like Australia, Canada, or the US, but that doesn't make it true.

niterider

January 22nd, 2011, 11:48 PM

I do.

It's true that most people in the UK see the UK as being culturally non-European and more like Australia, Canada, or the US, but that doesn't make it true.

Yes but the vast majority don't. The thing is, outside of the 'capital' London ...which couldn't be farther from representative of British culture or society if it tried, most people are deeply suspicious of the EU and Europe in general. Fine to holiday there or trade, but nothing more.
As for culture, it does partly make it true - culture is essentially how people think and live their lives and here, rightly or wrongly, most people just do not see themselves as European and furthermore resent being 'told' they are.

groentje

January 23rd, 2011, 12:51 AM

Brussels: 7 to 8
PRO
Affordable housing
Trams!
Lots of historical buildings
Lots of cafés with a great choice of beer
Many parks
CONTRA
Political nonsense that exists on the national level, exists in Brussels, too.
Public transport could do better
Too many cars
Some beautiful buildings were neglected and/or torn down to be replaced by something hideous.
some city parts are rundown and less safe, although no no-go areas exist.

IrishMan2010

January 23rd, 2011, 01:04 AM

DUBLIN:

Pros:
Phoenix park
Nice Georgian architecture
Amazing nightlife
Mild weather
History

Cons:
Public transport is not up to standard (rely too much on cars and buses)
Urban sprawl
Filthy dirty in some places
Serious drug problem
Traffic

Dr_Cosmo

January 23rd, 2011, 01:17 AM

It's true that most people in the UK see the UK as being culturally non-European and more like Australia, Canada, or the US, but that doesn't make it true.

Correct. The Brits are fantasizing. Obviously the UK has taken over the last 1000 years the same cultural path as the rest of Western Europe. Britain is neither Arabia nor China nor India. It is very much France, Germany, Scandinavia (seen from a global perspective).

While the Brits are driving on the wrong side, the irrational believe of a supposedly non-European heritage still holds I guess.:crazy: Another basic psychological problem for them is probably the island situation. Britain just has no neighbours, all of Europe does and feels geographically connected.

When I see how Britain blocks everything in the EU I seriously ask myself why Europe does not kick them out, the UK seems to be a kind of pain in the ass, politically spoken.

kix111

January 23rd, 2011, 02:50 AM

If you have $$$ Shanghai is definitely one of the best city in the world for city life.

Conor

January 23rd, 2011, 10:11 PM

Because the British people never class themselves as European,

That is wrong. Have you asked every person from the UK whether they don't class themselves as European, or hate the EU? I know I strongly consider myself European and I'm from the UK, as would all of my family and friends. Visit the USA or Australia, and after a few weeks you will soon realise they are nowhere near as similar as the UK as you thought. What do we share? A common language? That's about it. Different mindset, attitude, culture... even different sports and humour. These are the same close Americans that struggled for independence from the UK and pushed us into recent wars to maintain a 'special relationship' btw

and the Great Britain/the United Kingdom doesn't want to be part of EU, which is a devil state designed and ruled by greedy Germany and French for their own benefits.

I'm not sure you know what you're talking about. The EU has turned Europe around for the better. We are far closer, with invisible borders and freedom to travel and live anywhere else in the EU. Eastern Europe has been turned around and in a few decades will most likely have caught up wit the West. We are protected by many new rights at home or in the work-place. The UK can leave the EU whenever it likes if we all hate it so much. I don't see any serious mass-movements to do just that right now.

Thanks god we are still using our most stable currency £ and we never hang their ugly EU flags in our streets.

The fact the Euro is used in Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Poland, among the worlds strongest economies, it should find no problem picking itself up again. Anyone lucky enough to be in Europe, let alone Western Europe should be hanging flags and celebrating the fact. It is the safest, wealthiest, cleanest, respected and one of the most powerful and the most visited little corner this earth. Why would you want to pretend you are not part of that.

But, if your a yank please keep trying to get your own Empire like UK controlled and dominated 1/3 of the world, largest and greatest empire in human history.

Lets celebrate repression, discrimination, concentration camps, invasion, provocation, pointless wars and snobbery! Go British Empire!

Besides, stop killing the innocent people, if you want to invade other countries do it on your own. BTW i forget to say UK is the most militarily powerful nation in EU and has the biggest military budget in the entire Europe and ranked 3rd in the world just after the US and China.

You tell the USA to go off and fight their own wars/stop killing innocent civilians then brag about the UK's military capabilities?.. Have no British troops ever killed innocent civilians? Of course they have. And that's not the best part... They've done it on their own soil! (See Bloody Sunday) There's no denying that the UK has one of the worlds most capable and well equipt armies or that there are amazing brave British military heros, but come on.

the name New York was named and given by the British

Actually, the Settlement was initially called New Amsterdam and was founded by the Dutch. The British got traded the land and named it New York, after the Duke of York. So what anyway? New York has no significance to your argument.

UK is arguably the most influential nation in Europe.

Pity most of Europe hats us then. And is it any wonder why...

Please leave the UK alone and let it remain in English speaking world (not european)

lol. So Canada and the USA aren't North American. NZ and Oz aren't Australasian. India isn't Asian? They all inhabit this unknown English speaking continent together. Please remember that the USA, Canada, NZ and Australia were all built in a joint European effort. There are hundreds of millions populating those countries without British decent.

btw on a final note, you are coming across as extremely arrogant and ignorant. ;)

To keep on topic:

Belfast...

PROS
Very interesting history
Lively and great dining/night-life
Fantastic old and modern architecture and very varied
Becoming more and more multi-cultural
Fantastic retail
Has a bigger city feel than Dublin even though by population it isn't
One of Europe's most up and coming city break destinations
Relative peace restored
I'm getting to witness the cities renaissance
Still some exciting projects U/C or planned
Overambitious/punch above our weight
Great, friendly, sociable people

CONS
Still large areas of the city run by terrorists
Frequent bomb scares
Some areas not safe for tourists, forgien workers or people from the wrong religion
Underlying working class sectarianism/racism
Bad reputation throughout the world
Chavs lol
Stupid planning department and can be badly run
Recession has affected lots of projects

The Cake On BBQ

January 23rd, 2011, 11:56 PM

Izmir, Turkey
8.5/10

Pros.

-Turquoise, clean and wide beaches, endless forests, mountains and fields nearby. Impressive topography and landscape. Perfect climate. (Well, except July and August which might be quite uncomfortably hot)
-Liberal and cosmopolitan
-Efficient, cheap, clean and safe public transportation.
-The fact that I can go out at 3 am and have a dinner anywhere in the city and there will be still lots of people in the streets.
-Very decentralized.
-Very walkable.
-Very affordable in every term you can think of. (Housing, food, social activities, utilities etc)
-Very shopping-friendly; lots of shopping streets with wide sidewalks, as well as lots of pedestrianized neighbourhoods, lots of malls, outlets etc.
-Lots of archeological areas and historical towns nearby and in the city.
-Not a Paris, Berlin or Istanbul but you'll see lots of interesting architecture. Although unlike those cities, you will have to discover it.
-Very vibrant.
-You'll always discover some place, restaurant, shop, building you haven't heard of/seen before.
-Insanely delicious food and you don't have to pay a fortune to access it.

Cons.

-Lack of museums, art galleries and sport facilities. But current municipality and companies are really putting so much effort on this issue and actually catching up.
-Current Turkish goverment doing everything to stop investments in Izmir. (But despite that Izmir is doing quite better than rest of the Turkish cities. )
-Cold and -sometimes- rude people. But it's a consequence of every big city in the world I guess.
-We have no historical core because whole city was burned down in a fire in 1922 and then hit by a damaging earthquake in 1948. We have a few historical buildings/streets survived scattered around the city. Only some old suburbs survived that fire.
-Some areas might not be so safe for a tourist.
-And (just like Belfast lulz), chavs (Or Apaches as we call them here in Turkey, but most of them are -except being totally unaesthetic- harmless)

kerouac1848

January 24th, 2011, 12:12 AM

Visit the USA or Australia, and after a few weeks you will soon realise they are nowhere near as similar as the UK as you thought.

I'd say Australia is pretty similar to the UK, not least because people of Anglo-Celtic stock are in the clear majority, which has been reinforced by millions of Brits locating there over the past 15 years or so. I'd say Ireland, OZ, NZ and the Netherlands are the closest countries socially and culturally to the UK, probably followed by a second group composing of Canada, Germany, France and the rest of North Western Europe.

I've lived and worked in the US (and another EU State), it's vastly different on many important fundamentals - such as the role of class in Britain and religion in the US for example - which then get borne out in broader debates on specific issues (e.g. health care, abortion, taxation, etc). Politically and economically, British people are slightly centre-left (accept and advocate for a significant role of the State in major affairs and industry) and socially slightly centre-right, with the exception of religion which is a dead issue here (unless it is to attack Islam, which is a Europe wide thing anyway).

This isn't to mention lifestyle differences, tastes in sports, TV shows and music, and so on.

Svartmetall

January 24th, 2011, 02:01 PM

I'd say Australia is pretty similar to the UK, not least because people of Anglo-Celtic stock are in the clear majority, which has been reinforced by millions of Brits locating there over the past 15 years or so. I'd say Ireland, OZ, NZ and the Netherlands are the closest countries socially and culturally to the UK, probably followed by a second group composing of Canada, Germany, France and the rest of North Western Europe.

I've lived and worked in the US (and another EU State), it's vastly different on many important fundamentals - such as the role of class in Britain and religion in the US for example - which then get borne out in broader debates on specific issues (e.g. health care, abortion, taxation, etc). Politically and economically, British people are slightly centre-left (accept and advocate for a significant role of the State in major affairs and industry) and socially slightly centre-right, with the exception of religion which is a dead issue here (unless it is to attack Islam, which is a Europe wide thing anyway).

This isn't to mention lifestyle differences, tastes in sports, TV shows and music, and so on.

I'm British and I live in New Zealand. Culturally, NZ and Australia have far more in commmon with the USA than Britain these days. Sure, some of the same sports are played here, but NZ and Australia are heavily Americanised.

Norf_London_boi

January 24th, 2011, 02:38 PM

You seem to live in the past like many Englanders. The British Empire has ceased 50 years ago.

Cities are bound to countries. NYC, DC and L.A are great and powerful because the USA is great and powerful.

Berlin and Paris are powerful because these cities are running the European Union.

London has, according to my information, no influence in Europe, it has only the UK.

I will sat that in my opinion aaronjoe's ranting and raging comments are obviously mindlessly gleamed from an addiction to a certain type of bigoted reactionary newspapers that unfortunately seem to dominate here.

Cancel your Daily Mail subscription and read a proper paper mate. You'll find that in reality the EU is not an evil conspiracy designed to take over the UK and make us all speak French and eat straight bananas, but a benign group of nations working together for a common good and making sure (and largely succeeding) we never go to war with each other again.

Personally I am a proud European as well as an Englishman and know many people who are too!

Let's celebrate what the EU has given this country - free movement of workers throughout the continent, huge common market to replace our collapsed and defunct empire, huge amounts of development aid and support for our poorer regions (Wales, Northern Ireland, Cornwall..) to name but a few.

Norf_London_boi

January 24th, 2011, 02:49 PM

True. It might be geographically close to Europe, and indeed willingly cooperate on certain issues, but culturally it is sees itself closer to those in places like Australia and Canada and to a lesser extent the USA

Absolute rubbish - you've obviously never really spoken to that many English people about this.

I would agree that Australians and New Zealanders are the most similar culturally to us because they are largely descended from 20th century British migrants.

But Americans? I think most Brits would agree we have more in common with fellow Northern Europeans such as the Dutch and possibly even the French and Germans than we do Americans.

Yanks may share our language but they have a totally different culture to British people due to 300 years of political seperation, an immigrant history far more influenced by other nations (Germany, Ireland, Mexico) than England and a strong sense of individualism and religion that is totally lacking in the modern UK, and indeed most of Europe.

Witness the fact that despite the shared language, Brits and Americans largely watch different TV, listen to different music, eat different food, and have totally different humour to each other. Most British people in America find it a very foreign place indeed and usually find it easier to settle in countries like France or Spain, which, despite the language barrier, share a similiar 'European' outlook.

kerouac1848

January 24th, 2011, 05:53 PM

I'm British and I live in New Zealand. Culturally, NZ and Australia have far more in commmon with the USA than Britain these days. Sure, some of the same sports are played here, but NZ and Australia are heavily Americanised.

Fair enough, although my sister lived in Oz until last August for over 3 years and thought there were many similarities (whereas I, to my surprise, found very little when living in the US), although the huge numbers of Brits and Irish (who she appeared to mostly hang around and live with) may have been a factor.

I have a friend in NZ but have never asked him about this. May well do so.

Btw, when you say Americanised do you include societal attitudes, general political positions, etc? Or do you just mean individual lifestyles?

It's all relative I guess. The only country, IMO, which is really similar on many levels to a large degree is probably Ireland.

TheCanadianEuro

January 24th, 2011, 11:59 PM

:shifty:LONDON }{ CANADA The Forest City

Pros-

Well-treed (Double the national capita)
Somewhat insulated from ecomony
Low crime and sparse gang activity
"When you ask for a light someones gonna send it"
Good bike path network
Rebounding downtown, economically and to the eye
Plenty of parks
London is a GREEN city

Cons-

Lack of nightlife
Overall lack of life
Unattractive low-rise concrete towers
Poor transit / Infrastructure
Poor city council
Retains and continues post war suburbansim in all its strip mall glory
Expensive flight fares
You might break your back from shovelling all that snow.

Good luck! :goodbye:

Hia-leah JDM

January 25th, 2011, 03:45 AM

Witness the fact that despite the shared language, Brits and Americans largely watch different TV, listen to different music, eat different food, and have totally different humour to each other.

I agree with your post to a certain extent. The differences are clear, but not as stark as you might be implying. I'd probably argue the similarities are more clear. The US is so large that certain regions might share the same humor or cynicism as the UK, others share the frontier attitude you see a lot in Australia, and entire regions are indistinguishable from Canada.
As for TV, music and food. I've got to say the statement "Brits and Americans largely watch different TV, listen to different music, eat different food" is completely untrue.

Skyrazer

January 25th, 2011, 03:47 AM

For those talking down London:

Corporations, banks and financial institutions arguably have more influence on the world than political bodies and London is probably the most prominent hub for which these institutions reside (along with NYC). For this reason, London is undoubtedly one of the most powerful and influential cities in the world, to deny this is being ignorant.

Quall

January 25th, 2011, 05:46 AM

Sudbury

6/10

- close to Toronto, US, cottage country
- fairly safe
- lots of recreation (lakes, boardwalk, parks, etc.)

- miserable climate (short summers; long, cold winters)
- ugly
- polluted
- conservative
- awful roads
- shitty drivers
- blue-collar
- extremely sprawly, car dependent
- horrible transit
- wigger kids
- rednecks
- religious
- retarded city council
- lots of unemployed, homeless
- little business downtown
- aging population

-.-

brazilteen

January 25th, 2011, 06:13 AM

Sorocaba-Brazil

7/10

Pros:
Beatiful parks
Good public education(comparing to other Brazilian public schools)
Many bike ways
Very good restaurants and bars
Almost every place is safe
Good urbanism on the new sections
nice streets of shopping

Cons:
Full buses
ugly buildings on downtown
Bad traffic
polluted river
floods on summer
gangs that paint the houses walls

Sorocaba pictures
http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn58/joseneto2008/2-3.jpg

http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn58/joseneto2008/100_3075.jpg

http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn58/joseneto2008/6-3.jpg

Jonesy55

January 25th, 2011, 09:58 AM

You can ask to the people in UK, nobody wants the UK to be part of EU and fortunately they are still keeping their own currency.

Obviously not, as i told you before. UK doesn't want to be part of EU.

As far as i am concerned UK is a completely different country compared to other countries in Europe. Please leave the UK alone

Please don't claim to speak for all of us. And no other country is forcing the uk to be in the EU against our will, we can elect a ukip/bnp government if we want to, but we don't.

Svartmetall

January 25th, 2011, 10:11 AM

Fair enough, although my sister lived in Oz until last August for over 3 years and thought there were many similarities (whereas I, to my surprise, found very little when living in the US), although the huge numbers of Brits and Irish (who she appeared to mostly hang around and live with) may have been a factor.

I have a friend in NZ but have never asked him about this. May well do so.

Btw, when you say Americanised do you include societal attitudes, general political positions, etc? Or do you just mean individual lifestyles?

It's all relative I guess. The only country, IMO, which is really similar on many levels to a large degree is probably Ireland.

OZ/NZ are Americanised across the spectrum - societal attitudes, political positions (they often spout some surprisingly tea party-esque rhetoric especially in QLD) and definitely individual lifestyles where people live very much in individual, detached houses and get around by car. Aus and NZ are far more suburban and sprawled than Britain.

LondonFox

January 25th, 2011, 12:35 PM

kerouac1848

January 25th, 2011, 12:49 PM

OZ/NZ are Americanised across the spectrum - societal attitudes, political positions (they often spout some surprisingly tea party-esque rhetoric especially in QLD) and definitely individual lifestyles where people live very much in individual, detached houses and get around by car. Aus and NZ are far more suburban and sprawled than Britain.

Interesting. Also unsurprising if I think about it.

As for TV, music and food. I've got to say the statement "Brits and Americans largely watch different TV, listen to different music, eat different food" is completely untrue.

No, I think the statement is true depending upon which angle you take (I'm thinking of comparing local versions).

Everyone across the globe watches American TV and listens to American music, so on that scope it doesn't really matter. However, native British TV is very different to US TV in terms of the type shows produced. Look at British soaps, sitcoms, drama, comedies etc, they're totally different. You'd never get a Desperate Housewives, Dallas, Lost, etc produce in the UK, for example. Similarly, local British music with its strong emphasis on dance music and complete lack of modern folk sounds. The indie/alternative produce in Britain sounds different, despite the being the same genre.

As for food, well, the US technically has regional produce I guess if you just want to talk about native dishes, but I've always found typical American cuisine (if there is such a thing) to be closest to Central Europe personally (warm potato salads, smoked meats, pickled veg, sauerkraut, goulash, etc). I'm only basing this on people's houses I've eaten at, mostly in the Mid-West.

Piltup Man

January 25th, 2011, 02:16 PM

As for food, well, the US technically has regional produce I guess if you just want to talk about native dishes, but I've always found typical American cuisine (if there is such a thing) to be closest to Central Europe personally (warm potato salads, smoked meats, pickled veg, sauerkraut, goulash, etc). I'm only basing this on people's houses I've eaten at, mostly in the Mid-West.

That would make sense, as German ancestry is the largest descendent group in the US.

Norf_London_boi

January 25th, 2011, 02:36 PM

Interesting. Also unsurprising if I think about it.

No, I think the statement is true depending upon which angle you take (I'm thinking of comparing local versions).

Everyone across the globe watches American TV and listens to American music, so on that scope it doesn't really matter. However, native British TV is very different to US TV in terms of the type shows produced. Look at British soaps, sitcoms, drama, comedies etc, they're totally different. You'd never get a Desperate Housewives, Dallas, Lost, etc produce in the UK, for example. Similarly, local British music with its strong emphasis on dance music and complete lack of modern folk sounds. The indie/alternative produce in Britain sounds different, despite the being the same genre.

Exactly. I would say subjectively that the amount of American imports we watch in England has actually gone down in recent years; the most popular shows on British TV are locally produced comedy, drama and soaps that people can relate to. While people enjoy Family Guy, the Simpsons, Glee etc a lot of the gags are very America-centric and totally lost on a British audience. And I think the biggest argument to this point is that every British show that goes transatlantic has to be remade and "translated" into an American setting before anyone will watch it. Will the Aussies ever demand their own version of the Office? I think not.

[/QUOTE] As for food, well, the US technically has regional produce I guess if you just want to talk about native dishes, but I've always found typical American cuisine (if there is such a thing) to be closest to Central Europe personally (warm potato salads, smoked meats, pickled veg, sauerkraut, goulash, etc). I'm only basing this on people's houses I've eaten at, mostly in the Mid-West [/QUOTE]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the modern British and modern American eating habits are different. In the US, there is little in the way of an indigenous 'cuisine', moreover an adoptation and assimilation of various immigrants' cuisines (German, Italian, Mexican). Portions are huge and the food system is highly mechanised and processed-driven.

England has its own indigenous cuisine, which, while poor by French or Italian standards, nevertheless has a history going back hundreds of years and dozens of 'typical' dishes found nowhere else. While we are great consumers of foreign food - Indian, and to a lesser extent Italian and Chinese cuisine - indigenous English cooking is being rediscovered and revitalised with foreign techniques. We share with the United States a love of junk food and processed meals, but the suppy chain is more fragmented and based on local producers and there's generally more awareness over eating healthily and the importance of cooking from scratch. I feel this is very similar to the food situation in Australia, and other northern European countries.

Letniczka

January 25th, 2011, 05:47 PM

Hamburg
Population 1.8 million
Area 755 sq km

+
Some topics ...
Water, water everywhere! Rivers, many channels, big and fantastic lakes in the city.
2600 bridges.
3000 ha of 120 parks, and 4400 ha of forests.
89 p.c. of Hamburgers can reach next park within 300 m.
Excellent air and water quality.
Interesting and fantastic preserved architecture, as well modern as 100+ years old. Great churches.
Great public transportation - 172 metro stations. One station / 10,000 inhabitants.
Great city ferry lines - all included if you buy a day ticket for metro.
Very fast car traffic: from border to border, through downtown, I need one hour during peak hours, and 30 minutes at night despite over 1 million cars.
Six different freeways lead to Hamburg.
1700 km lanes for bikes.
Airport only 8 km from downtown.
30 sq m average flat for each Hamburger.
Only less than 10 p.c. Hamburg's population live in housing estates.
No skyscrapers (only two buildings, 100 m resp. 110).
Modern sports/music venues.
A lot of hi level sports events - soccer, ice hockey, handball, etc.
Many music events, as well classic as pop.
60 museums, 60 theaters, 150 music clubs.
On average up to 180 events a day.
Shopping paradise - from Karstadt to Armani ;) Great shopping streets and many nice malls in the downtown.
More than 2500 restaurants. International cuisine from almost every corner of the World - from French to Chinese (about 200 chinese restaurants).
Only 80 km to the Baltic (beach!), and 150 km to the Northern Sea.
Great neighbour cities - Lübeck (60 km, 30 minutes by car or train, UNESCO's World Heritage Site) and Bremen.

-
An El Dorado for criminals and terrorists (the 9/11 guys lived in Hamburg).
Organized international crime made almost 500 million euros profit for 2010.
Huge migrant settlements with high crime rate. Less than 20% Germans (born as Germ.) there, in some schools much less than 10%.
Downtown free night life (entertainment area in St.Pauli district, about 3 km away).
Locations of music halls and music theaters spreaded over the whole city.

Result: 9/10

-------------

Shanghai
Population 19.2 million
Area 6340 sq km

Sorry my Shanghai friends, but at most 1/10
(the 1 stands for a few really great people I met in your city)

woutero

January 25th, 2011, 06:42 PM

To add an on-topic response:

Amsterdam, The Netherlands: 9/10

Pros:
+ Bikes, everybody rides them
+ Beautiful city with diverse architecture (old and new)
+ Easiest big city in the world to get around in (especially by bike)
+ A feeling of freedom
+ Lots of water
+ Extremely high density of services (shops, bars, restaurants, etc.)
+ Diverse population (many nationalities)
+ Green
+ Easy access to countryside (by bike)
+ Easy access to other cities (rail, road, air)
+ Good work-play balance: work hard, play hard
+ Good and ever-changing night life
+ Rich cultural life
+ Creative
+ Spend a lazy sunday afternoon boating around on the canals and you understand
+ Developing eating culture

Cons:
- Local culture is rather 'hard/harsh'
- Too many yuppies (like me)
- Too many expats
- Too many tourists (especially the ones that come for the clichés)
- Screwed up housing market
- Not enough good living options for middle class families
- Main stream shopping sucks: too busy and lousy service. The cool shops are too dispersed.
- Unreliable climate. Summers can be wonderful. Or crappy.

kerouac1848

January 25th, 2011, 11:43 PM

Ok, this thread has been hijacked and gone quite a bit off-topic (and I am partly to blame) so this is going to be my last post on the matter (unless I get asked a specific question!)

That would make sense, as German ancestry is the largest descendent group in the US.

Right, although geographic distribution of ethnic groups wasn't/isn't even. In all honestly, I was based right near the Ohio River, so spent most time around Northern Kentucky and Southern Indiana and Ohio, where German immigration was pretty strong.

Exactly. I would say subjectively that the amount of American imports we watch in England has actually gone down in recent years; the most popular shows on British TV are locally produced comedy, drama and soaps that people can relate to. While people enjoy Family Guy, the Simpsons, Glee etc a lot of the gags are very America-centric and totally lost on a British audience. And I think the biggest argument to this point is that every British show that goes transatlantic has to be remade and "translated" into an American setting before anyone will watch it. Will the Aussies ever demand their own version of the Office? I think not.

The influence of American television has probably gone down since I was a kid in the 1990s, but still is high I think. I couldn't believe how much British TV the Dutch and Belgians watch (I was in the Netherlands until recently) Latin American television is probably the most american I have seen (no surprise).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the modern British and modern American eating habits are different. In the US, there is little in the way of an indigenous 'cuisine', moreover an adoptation and assimilation of various immigrants' cuisines (German, Italian, Mexican). Portions are huge and the food system is highly mechanised and processed-driven.

England has its own indigenous cuisine, which, while poor by French or Italian standards, nevertheless has a history going back hundreds of years and dozens of 'typical' dishes found nowhere else. While we are great consumers of foreign food - Indian, and to a lesser extent Italian and Chinese cuisine - indigenous English cooking is being rediscovered and revitalised with foreign techniques. We share with the United States a love of junk food and processed meals, but the suppy chain is more fragmented and based on local producers and there's generally more awareness over eating healthily and the importance of cooking from scratch. I feel this is very similar to the food situation in Australia, and other northern European countries.

Yeah, but don't forget a couple of things. One, the introduction of produce from the New World which we now consider 'local' - e.g. potatoes in the UK, tomatoes in italy, etc. Second, the influence of the former colonies. Tea is the most obvious example, but biscuits and many dishes are adaptions from India and elsewhere. Go back to, say, 1300AD and you'll likely see a very different British diet.

Tbh, industrialization of agriculture isn't an American issue per se and I don't think Brits eat more organic food really. Farmers markets and the like exist there too and don't forget a far wider range of produce can be grown locally and organically due to the variety of micro-climates and vegetation. You can't grow banana's nautrally in the UK, for example. It's just as much a class and educational thing in the US as anywhere (and even regional). Most Brits eat crap too.

frashp2

January 26th, 2011, 11:06 AM

I agree with your post to a certain extent. The differences are clear, but not as stark as you might be implying. I'd probably argue the similarities are more clear. The US is so large that certain regions might share the same humor or cynicism as the UK, others share the frontier attitude you see a lot in Australia, and entire regions are indistinguishable from Canada.
As for TV, music and food. I've got to say the statement "Brits and Americans largely watch different TV, listen to different music, eat different food" is completely untrue.

The quality of food stuffs in England is not that bad but some British foods are fattening.

I am only 175cm high (not 156cm :) ) and hospitalised being a heart disease so not good at having those heavy stuffs.

Rather it feels nice to smoke the cigarettes.

Jonesy55

January 26th, 2011, 11:57 AM

local British music with its strong emphasis on dance music and complete lack of modern folk sounds.

There is actually quite a strong and dynamic modern british folk, folk-rock scene. It's niche rather than mainstream but there are several popular summer folk music festivals and many year-round touring venues for these bands.

DrDre

January 26th, 2011, 10:57 PM

Deanb

January 26th, 2011, 11:13 PM

DrDre

January 26th, 2011, 11:25 PM

what are you trying to prove?
London's got a shitty climate and it, along with NYC share the 1st place globally... it would NEVER beat NYC...

First of all i just wanna say that the purpose of this post is not to bash NYC which i love a lot, this is just a reply to above person who doesn't know something.

World's Most Economically Powerful Cities

1. London
2. Hong Kong
3. New York City
4. Tokyo
5. Chicago
6. Seoul
7. Paris
8. Los Angeles
9. Shanghai
10.Toronto

London win, New York lose.

Global Financial Centres Index

1. London
2. New York City
3. Hong Kong
4. Singapore
5. Tokyo
6. Shanghai
7. Chicago
8. Zurich
9. Geneva
10. Sydney

London win, New York lose

Worldwide Centres of Commerce Index

1. London
2. New York City
3. Tokyo
4. Singapore
5. Chicago
6. Hong Kong
7. Paris
8. Frankfurt
9. Seoul
10. Amsterdam

London win, New York lose again

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_centre survey is made by Forbes American company. http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/15/economic-growth-gdp-biz-cx_jz_0715powercities.html

Best universities ranking list in both cities -

UCL London's Global University - 4th world wide
Columbia University, NYC - 11th world wide

London beats NYC again not only in financial, also in education.
http://www.usnews.com/education/worlds-best-universities/articles/2010/09/21/worlds-best-universities-top-400-
survey made by USNEWS American

World's most visited cities

London ranked 2nd in the world
New York ranked 6th in the world

London win, New York has been beaten
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism#Most_visited_cities_by_international_tourist_arrivals survey made by UNWTO World Tourism Barometer (World Tourism Organization)

Deanb

January 26th, 2011, 11:35 PM

well I personally enjoyed new york a whole lot more than I did London... but that's a personal thing

DrDre

January 26th, 2011, 11:43 PM

well I personally enjoyed new york a whole lot more than I did London... but that's a personal thing

I know how you feel, but London actually beats New York in many aspects. I visited NYC in 2007 December, i actually loved it and was very impressed especially in Manhattan, Mid Town areas and Central park. May be thats because of a lot of tall skyscrapers that make you feel like your in a big city. BTW London has world's top 3 most visited museums out of top 5, New York has one, which is also great, but i haven't visited yet. I didn't like the New York subway though which i thought dirtier and messier :sorry: Rockefeller Centre ice rink is my love LOL

soup or man

January 27th, 2011, 12:07 AM

Los Angeles

Pros:
+ Remerging downtown
+ Renewed interest in mass transit (subway, light rail)
+ One of the best food cities on the planet
+ Very safe (2010 saw LA's murder rate the lowest since 1967)
+ One of the most diverse cities on the planet
+ Thriving art scene
+ The Clippers getting more press than the Lakers
+ Nice weather (going to the beach in January)
+ Renewed interest in bikes

Cons:

- Traffic
- Horrible road conditions (after December's record rains, huge potholes are EVERYWHERE)
- Expensive housing options
- Stalled development in downtown (Grand Ave, Park Fifth)
- Could use a good cleaning up
- The constant threat of 'The Big One' hitting at any time
- Lack of bike lanes
- Movie shoots shutting down streets

Deanb

January 27th, 2011, 12:08 AM

not one big city is free of dirt and rubbish... ive seen tons of cigarettes and other rubbish in London streets & parks too...

a major / important city should never be judged by how clean it is.

niterider

January 27th, 2011, 12:12 AM

NYC subways pale in comparison to the London Underground. Not a dig at NYC, just a fact. NYC has the amazing high rise architecture and many others pros, but the relentless car/pedestrian balance became tiring whenever I was there - not talking about banning cars but sometimes it's nice to have a narrow street with more space given over to pedestrians, public spaces etc...it's lacking in there. In terms of livability though, particularly outside Manhattan, its way above London in terms of road infrastructure and housing

DrDre

January 27th, 2011, 12:16 AM

not one big city is free of dirt and rubbish... ive seen tons of cigarettes and other rubbish in London streets & parks too...

a major / important city should never be judged by how clean it is.

your quite right i am not saying that overall London is cleaner than New york (although in reality it is cleaner), all i wanted to say was that london underground is more efficient, convenient, frequent and comfortable may be because its seats are not hard plastic like you get in ny subway. ive never rated the city by their tidiness, london has many things that defo beats new york, and vice versa new york has loads of things that beats london. they are both worlds capitals :) thats why they have the same world status Alpha++ World City http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_city#GaWC_studies
( ps i don't drive in london cos i hate its narrow streets, i prefer to drive in LA :) and i dont think you need to drive on your own in london cos it's public transport is pretty massive and it can get you almost everywhere)

gabrielbabb

January 27th, 2011, 01:42 AM

Well my city has a lot of things to share it is thee first or the second city with the most museums in the world. It has also great green areas and a forest in the middle of the city. Not just the central part of the city can be visited, but also south, as Coyoacán, the center, Paseo de la Reforma, Six Flags, Chapultepec Forest & castle & auditorium & museums, the pyramids, etc. It is one of the less dangerous cities in Mexico, and is now vey clean compared to the 80's, due to the use of "today you can't drive" system and the inclusion of new lines of public non pollutant transport. Gay marriages has been aproved since 2009. We are in the top 5 longest metros in the world with almost 300 kms covered in 12 lines, which is very clean compared to some "first world countries" and we have the only system of metro with recognizable pictures for every single station. We have 3 important football clubs Pumas, Cruz Azul and Club America, and we have hosted once the Olympic Games. Our National Autonomous University has invented and researched about many unknown things and is in the top 100 best universities in thee world, with a campus o aboutf 10 sq km. It has improved a lot in many aspects, it is cleaner every day with a better quality of life. But still there is a high percentage of poor population who need to get out from the hole, politics don't help that much for being ignorants sometimes, and it is difficult to find a job in such a competitive city even with the best currriculums. So I would give Mexico city a 7/10, because it is both a cosmopolitan, and traditional city, with everything you need even in poor zones, but I dislike those people living in poor areas.

Norf_London_boi

January 27th, 2011, 01:59 PM

Norf_London_boi

January 27th, 2011, 02:05 PM

not one big city is free of dirt and rubbish... ive seen tons of cigarettes and other rubbish in London streets & parks too...

Would totally disagree with you on that one Deanb - have you ever been to either Dubai or Toronto!?

In fact, we were so amazed with how squeeky clean Toronto was we tried to play spot the rubbish/grafitti/pot hole - very hard!

I also found Hong Kong pretty immaculate too. And people say Singapore and Swiss cities such as Zurich are spotless..

a major / important city should never be judged by how clean it is.

Would agree with you on that one - some of my favourite cities (Bangkok, Naples) are pretty filthy. I personally found Toronto too sanitised and clean - i prefered more down-at-heel Montreal.

Dr_Cosmo

January 27th, 2011, 02:38 PM

Thats why they have the same world status Alpha++ World City http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_city#GaWC_studies

Be reminded, that most of the so called world rankings originate in London or the UK.

It is a well known fact, that these lists frequently tend to overestimate the positions of England based cities. It has to be seen as advertisement, propaganda.

Like the UK based media, who always talks up the English football team before the World Cup. In reality of course England has won nothing the last 40 years.

DrDre

January 27th, 2011, 03:52 PM

There you go buddy American one http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/15/economic-growth-gdp-biz-cx_jz_0715powercities.html

Dr_Cosmo

January 27th, 2011, 04:01 PM

There you go buddy American one http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/15/economic-growth-gdp-biz-cx_jz_0715powercities.html

Its rather the exception from the rule.

BTW, its a ranking concerning only economic power. Cultural influence or political influence is not measured.

I find it funny, that so many Londoners here are obviously frightened and concerned about the fragile status.

Anyway, realistically seen, London is a city, the only major city, of the 6th largest economy in the world. Nobody would seriously believe that this situation can claim a powerful status, apart of British people of course.

DrDre

January 27th, 2011, 04:18 PM

Well, i am not British. London once was the capital of the largest empire in human history that owned and used to control 1/3 of the globe. Greenwich mean time was invented in London Greenwich which divided the world into two parts such as eastern world and western world, anyway lets get back to the topic, Your the one whos funny, you don't know what your talkin' bout. for example, India has the 4th largest GDP PPP its capital city is New Delhi and do you think this New Delhi is superior and has higher status compared to a global city like Singapore? cos its GDP is ranked only 39th? what are you talking bout? funny bloke

frashp2

January 28th, 2011, 04:41 PM

Tbh, industrialization of agriculture isn't an American issue per se and I don't think Brits eat more organic food really. Farmers markets and the like exist there too and don't forget a far wider range of produce can be grown locally and organically due to the variety of micro-climates and vegetation. You can't grow banana's nautrally in the UK, for example. It's just as much a class and educational thing in the US as anywhere (and even regional). Most Brits eat crap too.

The English food stuffs are not bad.

not one big city is free of dirt and rubbish... ive seen tons of cigarettes and other rubbish in London streets & parks too...

a major / important city should never be judged by how clean it is.

Do you not want to smoke in Piccadilly Circus seeing a lot of people pass by?

Would agree with you on that one - some of my favourite cities (Bangkok, Naples) are pretty filthy.

Bangkok and Naples are the beautiful places to visit.

nonotz

January 29th, 2011, 08:25 AM

the topic of this thread is "How would you rate the quality of life in your city?"

its certainly a personal view..
nothing to do with those number

WooWoo

February 11th, 2011, 06:47 PM

Getting on topic of this thread

Manchester, Great Britain

5 Pros
Great night life
Clean city center
Greet green spaces
Beautiful landscape
Really diverse, you can do anything there really!

5 Cons
Youth crime (on the decrease but still not good)
Too much rain :( one of the wettest cities in the UK
Cold in the winter
Not enough highrises :D
Some of the suburbs are pretty rough

Rating: 7/10

what are you trying to prove?
London's got a shitty climate and it, along with NYC share the 1st place globally... it would NEVER beat NYC...

One thing i did want to pick up on however is the climate remark. London is drier than NYC and quite a lot of places in Europe and indeed the world. Its more or less as dry as places like Sydney and Jerusalem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London#Climate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyc#Climate

Sorry for going off track, just cant help myself when someone is wrong :lol:

diablo234

February 11th, 2011, 09:51 PM

Houston:

Pros:

It's relatively diverse and thanks to the energy industry you have highly educated immigrants from all over move here. Houston also has the most consulate offices outside of New York City.

Relatively laid back compared with other cities

Art Scene

Restaurant scene (pretty much any ethnic cuisine can be found here)

Central location within the US along with proximity to most of Latin America

Renewed interest in reviving downtown

Expanding it's mass transit system

Relatively affordable compared with other US cities along with many of the same amenities.

Cons:
Weather (during the winter it is nice but in the summer it's just too hot outside).

No mountains nearby and downtown is located away from any significant body of water even though Galveston Bay and the Gulf of Mexico are not too far away. That being said the tropical vegitation makes up for it though.

Still too car orientated

The backward state government tends to hinder any progress to making cities more livable (other cities such as Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio are also affected by this despite their forward thinking leadership.)

Air pollution is still pretty bad.

Those tacky billboards alongside the freeways (although there is an ongoing effort to remove them).

Hia-leah JDM

February 12th, 2011, 02:39 AM

ORLANDO

Pros -

Real young population
Wonderful Downtown
Lots of activity in reviving the urban core
Diverse population
Theme Parks
Weather
great airport
relatively affordable
Decent dining options

Cons -

Mega sprawl
Traffic
nonexistent public transportation
Theme Parks (yup)
Not the best public education
No real distinction
Not on the coast
Tiny Downtown (but great)

MIAMI

Pros -

Booming urban core
Real diverse population
Beaches
Weather
Exciting art scene
Great location for travel/business to Latin America and Europe
abundant entertainment and world class events
Excellent nightlife
Shopping
The Miami Heat
Great dining

Cons -

Traffic and drivers
Limited mass transit
Suburbia/Car oriented
Location to travel from car
Flat topography
Faulty public education
Corruption at state and local level
Not enough green space
Can be real expensive

I'm still figuring out Jacksonville.

Zach759

February 12th, 2011, 03:22 AM

Kansas city

pros
+great restaurants and shopping centers
+friendly people
+everything is NOT in a central location
+transportation

cons
-litter
-it's next to Kansas
-public transportation

8/10

poshbakerloo

February 12th, 2011, 03:50 PM

One thing i did want to pick up on however is the climate remark. London is drier than NYC and quite a lot of places in Europe and indeed the world. Its more or less as dry as places like Sydney and Jerusalem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London#Climate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyc#Climate

Sorry for going off track, just cant help myself when someone is wrong :lol:

That is so true. London is a lot drier than what people think. Even English people put it in the 'Its in England so its going to rain' bracket.

22.976 inches of rain isn't much at all. In the summer this shows as the grass in the parks starts to go a bit brown in places

"London is a relatively dry city with regular but generally light precipitation throughout the year, with an average of 583.6 millimetres (22.98 in) every year. This is lower than many cities such as New York, Paris, Sydney and around the same as Jerusalem and San Francisco." from wikipedia

poshbakerloo

February 12th, 2011, 04:06 PM

what are you trying to prove?
London's got a shitty climate and it, along with NYC share the 1st place globally... it would NEVER beat NYC...

London vs NYC is such a pointless debate!

They are BOTH the worlds most famous cities and get a huge amount of tourists each year! I personally put them BOTH at number 1!

They are both VERY different and not comparable at all.

Its like comparing Los Angeles and Nanjing!

pesto

February 12th, 2011, 06:52 PM

Love London and NY as well. But London does have a "dampness" problem. It isn't so much that it is raining measurable amounts, the problem is that it is quite often foggy to the point of drizzle or very light rain.

SF has the same problem: not much rain actually precipitating but frequent fog and drizzle.

Conversely, most of Hawaii gets much more measurable rain than London. Clear and warm 95 percent of the time and pouring buckets from time to time.

SO143

February 12th, 2011, 08:26 PM

I love both The Big Apple and The Big Smoke :D Two greatest cities

GZT

February 13th, 2011, 01:08 AM

Ghent (Belgium)

+ A historical centre that is one of the most beautiful in entire Europe.
+ Small, yet not too small (200.000 inh.)
+ Beautiful city with diverse architecture (old and new) and the centre was just renovated this year
+ Increasing facilities for bikes
+ Efficient and not too expensive public transport
+ Close to Brussels, Antwerp, Paris & London
+ Many young people going to uni & college
+ Totally safe
+ People drive calm and chill

Cons:
- Weather
- Could be a bit bigger
- Still needs more facilities for bikes
- Moroccans & some immigrant hoods
- Roma gypsys flooding the city

8.5/10

Skyland

February 13th, 2011, 03:44 PM

Vienna (1.7 M people) was ranked highest in Quality of Living by the Mercer Study 2010 http://www.mercer.com/articles/quality-of-living-survey-report-2010

Anyway here are my Pros:
- Very beautiful city, lots of historic architecture, very urban downtown
- Culture (Lots of theaters, opera, museums - modern/historic, art galleries...)
- Excellent restaurants
- One of the best public transportation systems in the world
- Good nightlife - particularly in summer along Donaukanal
- Open to skyscrapers (new 220 m building U/C) and modern architecture
- Lots of construction going on e.g. 3 new train stations
- relatively cheap rents (compared to London, Munich or Paris)
- Good flight connections, airport only 20 min from downtown by cheap train
- Awesome weather in summer: Dry and hot
- Lakes in the city for swimming in the summer, Forests within the city for hiking
- 1h to the Alps for skiing and hiking/climbing, 4 h by car to Adriatic sea (Slovenia, Croatia)
- 3 countries can be reached within an hour by car (Slovakia - 45 min to Bratislava, Czech Rep - 1.5 h to Brno, Hungary - 2 h to Budapest)
- International significance (UN, OSCE, OPEC HQ in Vienna)

...and Cons:
- Grey and cold winters
- In some districts: too many unfriendly retirees, some people xenophobic
- Some houses outside downtown really need to be renovated, at least some paint
- Foreign population mainly from East and South-Eastern Europe (mainly F-Yugos, Turkey) as well as Germany, not many immigrants from countries outside Europe
- Located far from the other main cities in W-Europe (Paris, Amsterdam, London, Madrid)
- Shops close at 7PM during the week and at 6 PM Saturdays (though there are some exceptions)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4015/4476566151_9d1626407b_b.jpg

Eduardo L. Ramirez

February 13th, 2011, 10:51 PM

Its called pride

Rank Country Score
1 United States 90.62
2 United Kingdom 65.04
3 Russia 63.03
4 France 62.00
5 Germany 61.93
6 China 59.10
7 Japan 57.84
8 Canada 57.09
9 South Korea 53.20
10 India 50.43

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_National_Power
:cheers:

I really like England but honestly, I think this "Ajaaronjoe" individual has made that wikipedia entry itself or something like this. I had a look at the source shown at wikipedia and it has the UK not even in the range of a second place -nowhere!

http://www.fgu.edu.tw/~academic/up1/malayconference1/paperscollection.files/conferefncepapers/chang.pdf

SO143

February 13th, 2011, 11:08 PM

dj4life

February 14th, 2011, 01:19 PM

Wikipedia survey is a joke they even put Ethiopia above Singapore, Sweden, Israel, New Zealand and Norway etc :nuts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_Index_of_National_Capability
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_powers

Yeah, what is Northern Europe? Just a few neutral, mostly silent, calm countries, lol. :D Seriously, if i was able to changet the ranking, i'd put these naitions to the top, since it is a power of mentality that rules there. :)

Norf_London_boi

February 14th, 2011, 03:12 PM

That is so true. London is a lot drier than what people think. Even English people put it in the 'Its in England so its going to rain' bracket.

22.976 inches of rain isn't much at all. In the summer this shows as the grass in the parks starts to go a bit brown in places

"London is a relatively dry city with regular but generally light precipitation throughout the year, with an average of 583.6 millimetres (22.98 in) every year. This is lower than many cities such as New York, Paris, Sydney and around the same as Jerusalem and San Francisco." from wikipedia

The problem with the climate in London is not so much the rain, rather the fact that the default weather is grey skies from horizon to horizon. In most other parts of the world, grey skies = it's going to rain soon, so most foreign visitors interpret the London climate as really rainy because of the greyness.

In fact you can go weeks and weeks without a single drop of rain, but you can also go for weeks without seeing the sun either - particularly at this time of year :ohno:

the spliff fairy

February 14th, 2011, 09:09 PM

yep London it hardly rains, and neither is it constant drizzle or fog, which is in fact very rare (the old romantic, foggy streets of fame was actually smog from the Victorian times through to the 1950s, when the Clean Air Act cleaned up all the industry from the city - after 12,000 people died in one such 'pea-souper' in 1952).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/02/Nelson%27s_Column_during_the_Great_Smog_of_1952.jpg/220px-Nelson%27s_Column_during_the_Great_Smog_of_1952.jpg http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38552000/jpg/_38552701_smog300women.jpg

So the smog is gone, and it's the driest part of the country with about half the rainfall of NYC, and on a par with Tel Aviv, Melbourne etc - but, it being overcast is it's default weather from autumn through to spring. If one should slate London, it's not on the nonexistant rain, drizzle or fog, but the nonexistant sun most of the year.

WooWoo

February 14th, 2011, 09:54 PM

The problem with the climate in London is not so much the rain, rather the fact that the default weather is grey skies from horizon to horizon. In most other parts of the world, grey skies = it's going to rain soon, so most foreign visitors interpret the London climate as really rainy because of the greyness.

In fact you can go weeks and weeks without a single drop of rain, but you can also go for weeks without seeing the sun either - particularly at this time of year :ohno:

I dont get that. May June July and August get over 180 sunshine hours, just bordering 200 hours. Its not always cloudy and dull in London. You go in Autumn and winter then yeah, its going to be cloudy, but thats because of the fact that constant low pressures from the west bringing in rain hit the penines and the moores, so they take out all of the rain, leaving cloudy and dull skies. You go there in Spring and Summer though and its rather sunny tbh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London#Climate

mvictory

February 15th, 2011, 04:34 AM

Melbourne

Pros:
- Generaly nice Climate
- Food culture second to none
- lots of good coffee
- Culture (lots of live music, art, theater)
- Safe environment
- Beautiful city (architecture, Gardens, etc...)
- Close proximity to beautiful nature and activities (Mornington Peninsula, Surf Coast, Wilsons Prom, Phillip Island, The Alps, Grampions, Dandenongs, Yarra Valley, etc.. are all just a short drive away)
- Sport (great facilities and events)
- Lots of great beaches

Cons:
- Cost (one of the most expensive places in the world to live in terms of housing, food, drink, etc..)
- Public Transport (the tram system would be amazing if there were no cars on the road, unfortunately this is not the case)
- like anywhere in Australia it is a long way from the rest of the world

In conclusion I would not live anywhere else

weava

February 15th, 2011, 05:47 AM

Kansas city

pros
+great restaurants and shopping centers
+friendly people
+everything is NOT in a central location
+transportation

cons
-litter
-it's next to Kansas
-public transportation

8/10

Kansas City for me :6/10

Pros
-the plaza, crossroads, power and light, westport, and brookside districts
-food(known for BBQ)
-light traffic
-a NFL and MLB city (plus nascar and MLS)
-lots of concerts/shows/etc (sprint center is a top 10 venue)
-architecture of city hall, municipal arena,new Kaufman hall, etc.

Cons
-no light rail
-gang/drug problems
-massive amounts of abandoned structures(1000s)
-No NBA or NHL
-bi-state politics and cultural divides
-massive amount of sprawl
-the suburban architecture
-the city smells terrible(combined sewer/sanitary lines)
-small market baseball

Norf_London_boi

February 15th, 2011, 02:46 PM

I dont get that. May June July and August get over 180 sunshine hours, just bordering 200 hours. Its not always cloudy and dull in London. You go in Autumn and winter then yeah, its going to be cloudy, but thats because of the fact that constant low pressures from the west bringing in rain hit the penines and the moores, so they take out all of the rain, leaving cloudy and dull skies. You go there in Spring and Summer though and its rather sunny tbh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London#Climate

Sure it's all subjective. London IS sunnier, dryer and warmer than Manchester, which is one of the wetter parts of the UK. But compared to most other parts of the world - particularly countries where most of our tourists come from (USA, France, Italy, Spain) - it is grey. Hence the stereotype.

We may be as dry as Tel Aviv but I bet there it pours with rain once a month then the rest of the time the sun shines.

VECTROTALENZIS

February 15th, 2011, 03:51 PM

Stockholm, EU

Pros

-Clean air
-Many green areas
-Nice geography near the water
-Lively inner-city
-Good public transport inclusive the metro
-Warm and sunny summers

Cons

-Hard to find any housing
-Cost (one of the most expensive places in the world to live in terms of housing, food, drink, etc..)
-Ice cold and gray winters
-Nimby-ism
-Far away from the rest of the world

atmada

February 15th, 2011, 05:55 PM

^^ is there any example of the nimbyism there? toll road or airport maybe?

poshbakerloo

February 15th, 2011, 08:23 PM

^^ is there any example of the nimbyism there? toll road or airport maybe?

Whats nimbyism?

groentje

February 16th, 2011, 01:49 AM

NIMBY, short for Not In My Back Yard, nimbyism is when a group opposes something they would love elsewhere when it's in their own town.

LtBk

February 16th, 2011, 04:13 AM

Stockholm has bad nimbyism from what I read.

dj4life

February 16th, 2011, 02:26 PM

^^ is there any example of the nimbyism there? toll road or airport maybe?

Many people are against tall buildings. That is common in Stockholm, whole Sweden, Scandinavia and Northern Europe. :)

Norf_London_boi

February 16th, 2011, 03:06 PM

-Far away from the rest of the world

Really? You can fly to London, Paris, Berlin, Rome etc for €50 on a low cost airline in a couple of hours.

It's hardly Perth!

Svartmetall

February 16th, 2011, 03:16 PM

Really? You can fly to London, Paris, Berlin, Rome etc for €50 on a low cost airline in a couple of hours.

It's hardly Perth!

Agreed. I live in one of the worlds most isolated countries and it costs a bucketload to get anywhere! ;)

Also, I agree about the NIMBYism in Stockholm too from what I have read - there is a big problem getting tall buildings approved there, though that is nothing compared to Auckland. Even two story houses on a subdivided plot of land get protested here as it is "too dense". Just up the road from me, a set of three story townhouses were rejected because it would "ruin the character of the area". :lol:

dj4life

February 16th, 2011, 05:43 PM

Agreed. I live in one of the worlds most isolated countries and it costs a bucketload to get anywhere! ;)
Also, I agree about the NIMBYism in Stockholm too from what I have read - there is a big problem getting tall buildings approved there, though that is nothing compared to Auckland. Even two story houses on a subdivided plot of land get protested here as it is "too dense". Just up the road from me, a set of three story townhouses were rejected because it would "ruin the character of the area". :lol:

Heh, i always thought that Scandinavia and New Zealand had many common things. :) By the way, is Australia more different from New Zealand? :)

LtBk

February 16th, 2011, 09:50 PM

From what I seen in Swedish section, they still manage to have lot of construction despite the NIMBYism.

Svartmetall

February 17th, 2011, 01:10 AM

Heh, i always thought that Scandinavia and New Zealand had many common things. :) By the way, is Australia more different from New Zealand? :)

NZ has more in common with America than Scandinavia certainly politically and culture-wise. The layout of the cities is also much more American than Scandinavian. Sure, NZ has a lot of open space and beautiful scenery outside of the cities just like Scandinavia, and has low levels of corruption in the government, but I think the similarities stop there.

Australia and NZ are like peas in a pod to be honest. I often refer to Australia as being a bigger, hotter version of here and in many ways this is true. Australians are more loud and brash and generally more right-leaning in their politics (especially in regards to immigration). The relationship between Australia and NZ is very much like the USA and Canada with Australia as the US and NZ as Canada.

Hope that answers your questions!

VECTROTALENZIS

February 17th, 2011, 09:52 AM

Really? You can fly to London, Paris, Berlin, Rome etc for €50 on a low cost airline in a couple of hours.

It's hardly Perth!

What I mean is Asia and North America...

Skyrazer

February 17th, 2011, 11:36 AM

What I mean is Asia and North America...

Well then you should have said "far away from Asia and North America" (which I fail to see as a negative anyway). These 2 continents hardly makeup "the rest of the world".

Jonesy55

February 17th, 2011, 07:08 PM

Whilst it would be nice to be within a 30 minute drive of everywhere on earth I don't think that's physically possible, but Stockholm seems to have a decent range of places to visit within a 3 hour short flight radius.

frashp2

February 18th, 2011, 06:24 AM

It must be of course walkable. :)

aaabbbccc

February 18th, 2011, 12:53 PM

Marrakech Morocco
PRO
Beautiful culture / Arts / History
an amazing historical medina over 1000 years old
great shopping both traditional shopping and ultra modern shopping
beautiful historical french areas such as gueliz
Lovely parks and a lot of green space
gorgeous Atlas mountains
open minded city
a great urban vibe
Huge international community
Walking friendly city
Amazing nightlife ( top 20 in the world )
very clean
CON
the last 2 decades American style Suburban sprawl ( very much like Las Vegas )
too Hot in the summer temps can reach over 125 F at times
too many tourists
Crime is some areas is becoming an issue
traffic is horrible at times
Housing is way too expensive ( median cost of a home is 250,000 dollars )

dj4life

February 18th, 2011, 02:18 PM

NZ has more in common with America than Scandinavia certainly politically and culture-wise. The layout of the cities is also much more American than Scandinavian. Sure, NZ has a lot of open space and beautiful scenery outside of the cities just like Scandinavia, and has low levels of corruption in the government, but I think the similarities stop there.

Australia and NZ are like peas in a pod to be honest. I often refer to Australia as being a bigger, hotter version of here and in many ways this is true. Australians are more loud and brash and generally more right-leaning in their politics (especially in regards to immigration). The relationship between Australia and NZ is very much like the USA and Canada with Australia as the US and NZ as Canada.

Hope that answers your questions!

Yes, mostly. Actually, what i meant was nature, low level of corruption and mentallity (somehow i find it quite similar to the one scandinavians tend to have). Thank you for an answer. :)

gino lo spazzino

February 20th, 2011, 02:55 AM

Milan, Italy

PRO
Low crime rate
Interesting historic Sites
Beautiful Old Town
Many museums and cultural centers
Fashion and style
Many shops, department stores and shopping malls
Laborious city
Improved public transport
The view of the Alps with blue sky
Clean City
Efficient recycling system
Many development projects in the city

CON
Pollution
Traffic
Street furniture
Vandalism
A few bicycle lanes
A few parking spaces available

http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/9449/5oukurgeniusloci.jpg (http://img511.imageshack.us/i/5oukurgeniusloci.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

_00_deathscar

February 20th, 2011, 03:10 AM

PRO

Safe city
Clean city (generally)
Wide choice in terms of activities
Wide choice in terms of food
Wide choice in terms of pricing
Pedestrian friendly city
Great (and cheap) public transport
Lots of nature (in the surrounding areas) - minutes away from the main city
Vibrant city and nightlife
Efficient and good service industry
Technology integrated

CONS

High cost of housing
Small housing space
Pollution
Summer weather

I would rate it an 80-85/100.

Isek

February 20th, 2011, 07:46 PM

Milan, Italy

PRO
Low crime rate
Clean City

CON
Vandalism
Pollution
Traffic
Street furniture

:nuts: Is it now clean or drity??

Imo Milan is quite dirty. Especially comparing it with its neighboring cities in the north like Zurich or Munich.

gino lo spazzino

February 20th, 2011, 10:06 PM

:nuts: Is it now clean or drity??

Imo Milan is quite dirty. Especially comparing it with its neighboring cities in the north like Zurich or Munich.

^^ Quiet, that level of cleanliness we are cleaner than Paris or London :devil:

SO143

February 20th, 2011, 10:29 PM

Yeah with 1,315,000 people compared to 7.55 million

gino lo spazzino

February 20th, 2011, 10:41 PM

^^ With 7.55 million of population you understand the Greater London, When I talk about Milan, I also understand the area of the Greater Milan, that it is also comes to be 7.40 million of population.

I know that the idea that in Italy there is a city cleaner than other European cities make you disgust. :evil:

SO143

February 20th, 2011, 10:52 PM

Metro London has 14 million, Paris has 11 million, Metro Milan is 7.4 million which is the same as London city (32 boroughs) population, neither urban nor metro

SO143

February 20th, 2011, 10:58 PM

[QUOTE=gino lo spazzino;73002601

I know that the idea that in Italy there is a city cleaner than other European cities make you disgust. :evil:[/QUOTE]

No No No, this is absolutely incorrect. I do not have any intention at all to offend any city on earth. What i am trying to say is that how could you compare cities like Beijing and Munich? or New York to Geneva? They are not comparable in terms of population. So i think you should not blame New York for being a dirtier city compared to Milan or Singapore. for example

gino lo spazzino

February 20th, 2011, 11:06 PM

No No No, this is absolutely incorrect. I do not have any intention at all to offend any city on earth. What i am trying to say is that how could you compare cities like Beijing and Munich? or New York to Geneva? They are not comparable in terms of population. So i think you should not blame New York for being a dirtier city compared to Milan or Singapore. for example

^^ You're absolutely right about everything, in fact I had compared Milan to London because, in terms of population, more or less, are similar, it is obvious that Milan do not compare with Tokyo or New York, which are twice or three times the population of Milan and London.

Metro London has 14 million, Paris has 11 million, Metro Milan is 7.4 million which is the same as London city (32 boroughs) population, neither urban nor metro

If we count the entire region of Milan, we come to 10-11 million

End OT :)

SO143

February 20th, 2011, 11:31 PM

If we count the entire region of Milan, we come to 10-11 million

This is how analysts count, and how do you count?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_in_Europe_by_population

gino lo spazzino

February 21st, 2011, 12:50 AM

http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_in_Italy
^^ Here we come already 8,047,125 of population in Milan

You can also enter part of Piedmont, which runs between Torino and Brescia in Metropolitan area of Milan.

In this area, some Italian analysts have speculated that if we all unite under a single metropolitan area (that of Milan's main), you would have a population of 11 million inhabitants.

Obviously we are talking about a utopia for Italy to have one area that incorporates transport, infrastructure and more as happens in Paris, London or the German Ruhr.

London is one area, L'ille de France is the metropolitan area of Paris, infact, the transport in London and Paris are efficient and have a transport fare integration in the region (metropolitan area) that Milan is a utopia

P.S Bit of information: the City of Paris (not the metro area) is smaller than the City of Milan and the City of London (not the metro area) is smaller than Rome.

So the comparison can be done with Milan.

Required

February 22nd, 2011, 02:55 AM

Suburbanist

February 22nd, 2011, 03:15 PM

Pros
-Lots of open space
-Few traffic jams
-Not a tourist hot-spot
-Very nice new development area (Reeshof)
-Agile and international-friendly City Hall services
-Awesome ice-cream shop, best in the country
-Many institutions of higher education, including mine

Cons
-Expensive parking downtown + too many pedestrianized streets
-Lack of some stores other major Dutch cities have like MediaMarkt, Bijenkorf, C&A and even some basic fast food restaurants like Burger King.
-Most interesting nightlife die on weekends (university city)
-Incomplete motorway connections, we only have 2, whilst many cities of similar size have 3, 4 or 5
-

Jonesy55

February 22nd, 2011, 03:47 PM

Manchester, England:

3/10

Pros:

+ History
+ Beautiful old victorian buildings
+ Many live music venues

Cons:

+ Above average precipitation. Manchester is nicknamed the rainy city.
+ Pedestrian unfriendly. Narrow streets ruled over by cars
+ High crime
+ No parks. We had something approximating a park, but then the council concreted it over because homeless people were makin it their den.
+ Too few independent retailers and too many corporate chains, eg. Starbucks, McDonalds, Topsop
+ Too many offensively bland new builds

Oooh I think that's a bit harsh..

Manchester does have plenty of parks though it could do with more near the centre.

Heaton park for example is a massive park, massive!

VECTROTALENZIS

February 22nd, 2011, 06:21 PM

Required

February 23rd, 2011, 02:01 AM

... ...

Svartmetall

February 23rd, 2011, 03:05 AM

Cons
-Expensive parking downtown + too many pedestrianized streets
-Lack of some stores other major Dutch cities have like MediaMarkt, Bijenkorf, C&A and even some basic fast food restaurants like Burger King.
-Most interesting nightlife die on weekends (university city)
-Incomplete motorway connections, we only have 2, whilst many cities of similar size have 3, 4 or 5
-

First time I have seen someone wanting more chains in their stores and less pedestrianised streets! That's just... Crazy!

Required

February 23rd, 2011, 03:09 AM

.... ....

VECTROTALENZIS

February 23rd, 2011, 02:13 PM

First time I have seen someone wanting more chains in their stores and less pedestrianised streets! That's just... Crazy!

I rather go and eat in McDonalds and Burger King than a local restaurant...because it's usually cheaper and you know what you get.

Alexpilsen

February 23rd, 2011, 02:54 PM

Pros:

History
Colonial Architecture
Economic Growth
Low unemployment
Natural Beauties

Cons:

Violence very high
Poor educational system
Very high income inequality
Public Transport Quality is Low
Dirty streets

Svartmetall

February 23rd, 2011, 03:15 PM

I rather go and eat in McDonalds and Burger King than a local restaurant...because it's usually cheaper and you know what you get.

But that leads to a very boring life! If one takes the chance one might end up with something far better than one expects. There is a reason that the top restaurants in the world aren't chain restaurants. When I was in Hong Kong, for example, McDonnalds was way, way more expensive than the food in Mong Kok and tasted awful by comparison.

You've got to take chances in your life or you'll never enjoy it. Often I find that you'll get a much more satisfying meal from a restaurant (even if you pay a little more) than if you simply go to a fast food chain. A local example for you - Östermalms Saluhall offers some very nice lunchtime food for a reasonable price. Much more tasty, much healthier and far mre interesting! I also found some fantastic restaurants in Stockholm while I was there too. I found some interesting things such as Lao Wai (http://laowai.se/) which, despite the rather amusing name, was an interesting restaurant despite my exposure to Chinese food in China, this was definitely tasty and very healthy.

Jonesy55

February 23rd, 2011, 03:39 PM

I rather go and eat in McDonalds and Burger King than a local restaurant...because it's usually cheaper and you know what you get.

That makes me want to cry :(

wc eend

February 23rd, 2011, 04:29 PM

Brussels, Belgium

Pro:

- Architectural beauty and diversity
- Diversity of population
- Cosmopolitan
- parks and forests
- lots of cool, still ungentrified areas
- great connections with London, Paris, Germany and Holland
- café/restaurant life

Con:

- Urban Belgian-style sprawl
- Car-congested, bicylcle/pedestrian unfriendly
- political mess

SO143

February 23rd, 2011, 07:26 PM

Pros
Arguably world's best skylines
The city that never sleeps 24 hour city
A lot of green places, mini parks everywhere
Great music concerts, food, diversity, fashion and entertainment
Taxi everywhere, good subway that covers almost all the the entire city
Good education, world class colleges, lots of places to explore, fantastic museums

Cons
Expensive and dirty
Lots of people on the street and sometime can't move
It takes long time to commute from one place to another
Very cold weather in the winter, rainy and snowing at the same time
Very inequality between rich and poor, state schools are not that good

old school

February 23rd, 2011, 08:05 PM

SO143

February 23rd, 2011, 08:17 PM

What's the city???
:nuts::nuts::nuts:

Guess :D

VECTROTALENZIS

February 23rd, 2011, 08:57 PM

Guess :D

The Big Apple? :|

Pfeuffer

February 23rd, 2011, 09:03 PM

yep ! but it is not dirty ! it`s not an rotten apple !

ov_79

February 24th, 2011, 11:10 AM

Brno, Czech rep.

8 Pros
+ well and tasty renovated historical centre
+ hilly surroundings with well-managed tourist infrastructure
+ dense electric-based Public transport system (trams, trolley-buses)
+ large percentage of student population making the city more lively
+ Vienna, Prague, Budapest and Krakow all within 350 km
+ sufficient highway bypass system
+ relatively clean air
+ relatively safe with low crime stats

8 Cons
- little amount of good music clubs, large stages in particular
- few open-air cultural events to attract people reaching the centre on weekends
- few city cycle lines (almost lack off)
- few cultivated green areas
- too many (though not extensive) brownfields
- too dense commie block areas from late 80s
- terrible main railway station
- poor sport infrastructure, lack of representative universal arena in particular

SO143

February 24th, 2011, 03:28 PM

yep ! but it is not dirty ! it`s not an rotten apple !

:lol: it ain't rotten, its the greatest Apple

studiowacho

February 24th, 2011, 04:55 PM

WooWoo

February 24th, 2011, 05:06 PM

Manchester, England:

3/10

Pros:

+ History
+ Beautiful old victorian buildings
+ Many live music venues

Cons:

+ Above average precipitation. Manchester is nicknamed the rainy city.
+ Pedestrian unfriendly. Narrow streets ruled over by cars
+ High crime
+ No parks. We had something approximating a park, but then the council concreted it over because homeless people were makin it their den.
+ Too few independent retailers and too many corporate chains, eg. Starbucks, McDonalds, Topsop
+ Too many offensively bland new builds

No Parks? We have the biggest park in Europe in Manchester, Heaton Park, and where I live there are many playground's, parks and green spaces

Too many bland new builds? If Manchester wants to maintain its status as a Global City, more "glass boxes" shopping centers and skyscrapers are going to have to be built in order to keep the city's economy booming

dj4life

February 24th, 2011, 06:06 PM

I completely agree it's a joke!!

That data is a good sign of what unreliable source truelly wikipedia is.

VECTROTALENZIS

February 24th, 2011, 10:34 PM

That data is a good sign of what unreliable source truelly wikipedia is.

Actually the data there is from another source, it's not somebody that has made up all these...

Required

February 25th, 2011, 12:11 AM

edit

old school

February 25th, 2011, 12:15 AM

Guess :D

I do not have a clue...
Wait, is it that dreary UK city, London???

Skyrazer

February 25th, 2011, 12:49 AM

^^
Pretty obvious it's NYC.

"City that never sleeps" was the giveaway...

SO143

February 25th, 2011, 01:42 AM

^^
Pretty obvious it's NYC.

"City that never sleeps" was the giveaway...

+1 :yes:

kix111

February 25th, 2011, 03:09 AM

The city never sleeps better slip you a Ambien :D

_00_deathscar

February 25th, 2011, 07:29 AM

Let me do one for Mumbai

Pros
When you love it, you really love it
Lots of entertainment options
Some truly stunning architecture (mostly old)
Some great cityscapes, skylines and areas
There IS varied public transport (unlike in some cities)
Fantastic Indian food and a decent mix of other types (but not necessarily great)
Great history/culture

Cons
When you hate it, you really hate it
Dirty - the city, the streets, the public transport - water unsafe for drinking, unhygienic
Crowded
Polluted
Expensive for accommodation
Inefficient services

Overall I'd give Mumbai a 5/10 - it's basically a place that divides like no other.

Jonesy55

February 25th, 2011, 08:13 AM

Heaton Park is brilliant, but that doesn't change the fact there's no large park in the city centre. Regarding glass boxes, your attitude seems to be that they're a neccessary evil. I think they're an architectural blight. They make cities unrecognisable from one another. Manchester is turning into an imitation of Liverpool and every other city in the country. Same malls, same shops, same cafes, same office blocks. Worst of all it's all glass and highly unengaging. Architects and planners are the most important sociologists in a city. Architecture can endow people with a sense of place and community. Glass boxes are the anesthatis of that.

To be fair you didn't specify the city centre re parks, if you had I would have agreed with you, there are a few small ones like this below but more would be good. The residential areas outside the centre have many parks though including 240 hectare Heaton Park.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a20/jonesy55/dscf1006.jpg

As for glass boxes I see your point but its a criticism that could be levelled at pretty much any major city in the world from Guangzhou to Buenos Airies to Auckland to Luanda to Paris to Riyadh to Moscow to Mumbai glass and steel is what they are using for many major commercial buildings. Some are better than others though and they don't dominate the architectural landscape of Manchester.

WooWoo

February 25th, 2011, 08:06 PM

Suburbanist

February 26th, 2011, 11:42 AM

First time I have seen someone wanting more chains in their stores and less pedestrianised streets! That's just... Crazy!

Chain stores and restaurants don't necessarily need to be a mutually exclusive category as opposed to local ones. Sure, if I want a high-end "dining experience", I'll go to one of the few good restaurants here in Tilburg, but sometimes I just want something predictable, fast and cheap. Is that wrong?

I don't have plenty of money to make every errand out of home into a € 60 "dinning experience". Moreover, as for the cheap(er) local restaurants, that I also patronize, their menus will be 80% the same, but the quality could vary a lot. And they might be - depending on what you order - unhealthy too.

Likewise, department chain stores makes shopping for regular stuff easier. I can check whether they have an item online. Their inventory will me more-or-less predictable. It is also quite uncommon to have big local independent stores, meaning they have less options to offer (or, put another way, you have to shop in different places instead of finding many items at the same store). But of course it's not a mutually exclusive choice.

The bottom line is: for most of the time, people are looking for convenience, predictability and availability - and lower prices -, hence the overall success of chain stores for clothes, food, office supplies, hardware etc. And, for instance, I miss not having a MediaMarkt in my city, meaning I have to either shop at 5 or 6 different stores and try to hit what I want there or (what usually happens) I just go to the nearest city and shop there.

Netherlands lacks big shopping malls, we don't have many. They could help local stores as they can pack together in the same place, no need to walk long distances or keep moving your car while you shop.

Regarding glass boxes, your attitude seems to be that they're a neccessary evil. I think they're an architectural blight. They make cities unrecognisable from one another. Manchester is turning into an imitation of Liverpool and every other city in the country. Same malls, same shops, same cafes, same office blocks. Worst of all it's all glass and highly unengaging. Architects and planners are the most important sociologists in a city. Architecture can endow people with a sense of place and community. Glass boxes are the anesthatis of that.

I guess you are overreacting. Since architecture freed itself from mere functionalist paradigms (the ones that resulted in most vernacular architecture styles around Europe), it became more global. English styles were exported to US (or the former colonies over there) and Australia. High-rises are more-or-less similar as they cost a hell of money and so.

It is not the duty of architects, and it should never be, to "engage" people and promote social engineering. They should build cool buildings, without consideration for the surroundings beyond what HE or SHE thinks is appropriate and the client is willing to pay for (some architects like to work considering the surroundings, other prefer to draw their masterpieces as stand-alone buildings that do not rely on what is on either side).

This whole "sense of community" and "livable neighborhoods" chit-chat is overrated and overstated. A true star architect will want to put on the markets buildings that will be a beacon, that will obliterate everything else but the building itself. Sure, not all architects are stars, and not all developments are meant to "win" over any other competing lesser buildings (I'm not talking in terms of height, in case someone thinks that way), but still the priorities of an architect should be the building itself, people who are actually going to live, shop or use it (not the those bypassing it), suitability for the expected function and, in a lower scale, then things like fit with the surroundings, whether it is "inviting" or not etc.

Creating a "sense of community" in the streets is not a responsibility of any architect. Individual households, shoppers or users are way more important as individuals than as a group of people called "community".

Back to the "every city is looking the same", that is in part the result of lack of courage to allow radical transformation of certain areas that would give them 21st Century-worth landmarks. In most European cities, the landmarks are still 19th Century churches. If you want to make cities look different, allow some of them to completely reconstruct (from scratch) some key areas using only avant-grade (for 2010) techniques and so. Imagine a whole neighborhood with Zaha Hadid buildings, one build over former 19th Century Victorian row houses that are plenty in many English cities...

Finally, in regard of the "standardization of High Street", it is inescapable. Commercial stores exist only to serve patrons. If people in Manchester want to buy the same shoes, clothes, perfumes, books as people in Leeds, Plymouth, Edinburgh and Birmingham, chances are they will buy them as similar stores. What makes Tesco competitive in one medium-city size is likely to make it competitive in other similar medium-size city.

I do agree there are some problems emerging for excessive market power that need to be addressed, but making streets "blend" is certainly not one of them.

Required

February 26th, 2011, 01:55 PM

edit

Required

February 26th, 2011, 01:58 PM

edit

Jonesy55

February 26th, 2011, 02:32 PM

That's not a park though, that's a garden. Most of it is on show in that picture.

Manchester may share glass boxes with the rest of the world, but it has fewer laurels to rest on. If theres to be more identikit shopping malls, there needs to be more unique cultural attractions. I would be lying if I said Manchester was Barcelona. If mancunians were more frank and critical about the city, instead of blindly praising it, things could vastly improve

Park, garden, whatever its green space in the city centre and I agree there should be more of it.

I don't wish to blindly praise anything, but just being negative isn't realistic either.

What do you suggest instead anyway if glass is to be abandoned, faux-victoriana?

Required

February 26th, 2011, 03:50 PM

I guess you are overreacting. Since architecture freed itself from mere functionalist paradigms (the ones that resulted in most vernacular architecture styles around Europe), it became more global. English styles were exported to US (or the former colonies over there) and Australia. High-rises are more-or-less similar as they cost a hell of money and so.

It is not the duty of architects, and it should never be, to "engage" people and promote social engineering. They should build cool buildings, without consideration for the surroundings beyond what HE or SHE thinks is appropriate and the client is willing to pay for (some architects like to work considering the surroundings, other prefer to draw their masterpieces as stand-alone buildings that do not rely on what is on either side).

This whole "sense of community" and "livable neighborhoods" chit-chat is overrated and overstated. A true star architect will want to put on the markets buildings that will be a beacon, that will obliterate everything else but the building itself. Sure, not all architects are stars, and not all developments are meant to "win" over any other competing lesser buildings (I'm not talking in terms of height, in case someone thinks that way), but still the priorities of an architect should be the building itself, people who are actually going to live, shop or use it (not the those bypassing it), suitability for the expected function and, in a lower scale, then things like fit with the surroundings, whether it is "inviting" or not etc.

Creating a "sense of community" in the streets is not a responsibility of any architect. Individual households, shoppers or users are way more important as individuals than as a group of people called "community".

Back to the "every city is looking the same", that is in part the result of lack of courage to allow radical transformation of certain areas that would give them 21st Century-worth landmarks. In most European cities, the landmarks are still 19th Century churches. If you want to make cities look different, allow some of them to completely reconstruct (from scratch) some key areas using only avant-grade (for 2010) techniques and so. Imagine a whole neighborhood with Zaha Hadid buildings, one build over former 19th Century Victorian row houses that are plenty in many English cities...

Finally, in regard of the "standardization of High Street", it is inescapable. Commercial stores exist only to serve patrons. If people in Manchester want to buy the same shoes, clothes, perfumes, books as people in Leeds, Plymouth, Edinburgh and Birmingham, chances are they will buy them as similar stores. What makes Tesco competitive in one medium-city size is likely to make it competitive in other similar medium-size city.

I do agree there are some problems emerging for excessive market power that need to be addressed, but making streets "blend" is certainly not one of them.

Completely disagree.

Buildings really do 'make' a place - and therefore influence (however subtly) some aspects of how people think and feel, both about themselves and the communities in which they live.

Building endless offices, retail space and car parks is not doing anything to the area but taking away it's heritage.

groentje

February 26th, 2011, 05:42 PM

I have to disagree with suburbanist, too. It's a view worthy of the modernist times of the sixties and seventies. Exciting times for urbanists for sure, but almost never for the cities in which these transformations took place. In Brussels e.g., it's still felt as a trauma how the entire north district was buldozered because they wanted their CBD to resemble the American highrise CBD's. Nieuwstraat/rue Neuve, once the shopping street of Brussels and even Belgium, has lost a lot of it's attractivity since no other shops than the big chains are located there. Even the big Palace of Justice, already morde than 100 years old, is still seen as an intruder in the Marolles. Just because it's too big and too much showing of in this originally popular neighbourhood.

kerouac1848

February 28th, 2011, 03:24 PM

No Parks? We have the biggest park in Europe in Manchester, Heaton Park, and where I live there are many playground's, parks and green spaces

It isn't even the biggest urban park in Britain, nevermind Europe. Both London and Birmingham have parks considerably larger (Richmond, Sutton, Bushey).

up5

March 3rd, 2011, 02:05 PM

Not Breathtaking to see the urbanised areas. :)

Metro007

May 8th, 2011, 10:28 PM

I would rate it like this:

http://www.mercer.com/press-releases/quality-of-living-report-2010

That means 2nd in the world... ;-)

Skyrazer

May 9th, 2011, 04:13 AM

Simon91

May 9th, 2011, 08:45 AM

Singapore - 6/10

Pros:

-Good environment, very green, clean air
-Great food
-Decent entertainment and shopping options, especially lately more good bands have been regularly performing here and local independent arts are strongly growing
-Diverse population, some people are very nice and open (and good looking :D)
-Nice, warm weather most of the time
-Plenty of parks and some actual rainforests are preserved
-Fantastic architecture around, both modern and historical

Cons:

-Rampant overcrowding - transportation is just not sufficient anymore.
-Very poor land accessibility overseas (our 'countryside') - just 2 land crossings with permanently jammed causeway into Johor and a third-world-standard railway, this may improve soon though.
-Skyrocketing property costs - doubled over the past 5-8 years.
-Monster poor-rich divide - between billionaires and the elderly picking cans from rubbish bins in our glorious parks.
-Civic behavior is terrible - many folks, both locals and foreigners spit, litter, sneeze without covering their mouths on the MRT, jumps the queues, push their way into carriages, don't signal when driving.
-Legalized political dictatorship complete with censorship, stiffed media, govt ignoring public feedback, criminalization of homosexuality, some institutionalized racism.
-Extremely stressful education system, 20% of 10-11 year olds think of suicide.
-Major, yet latent social tensions over flooding of immigrants over the past 6-7 years.

As a whole, a pretty wearing out city to live in.

lakegz

May 9th, 2011, 10:07 AM

Nanning, China
The Good-
No snow or other extreme weather.
Pretty good greenery within the city.
Very cheap cost of living.

The Bad-
Depressing winter. 5-10 degrees usually which isn't that bad. However, this year there were about 3 days of sunshine in the three winter months. Very gloomy. I felt colder in the Nanning winter than I did in my two NY winters.
Unpredictable and chaotic drivers. No sidewalk is safe from marauding motorcyclists or e-bike riders.
Crap everywhere- Can't find much of anything with decent quality. Rip-off clothes, electronics... all beer is like piss water (makes American light beer taste like any stout). No music venues or bars that play live music. Extremely monotonous and gaudy nightclubs.
Always searching in vein for some sort of 'culture' to enjoy in my spare time.
HUGE ONE- People hocking up loogies and spitting left and right. I've been here 8 months and it still really gets to me and grosses me out. I've never seen so many people have to cough up so much phlegm in my life.

Metro007

May 9th, 2011, 01:37 PM

The Mercer list is always crap IMO. Sydney the most livable Aus city and Honolulu the most livable in the US?

WTF do they base this on? Do they think higher cost of living = more livable or some crap?

I don't think so. They use a lot of indicators. The higher cost of living are only one side. You should compare with the salary and with the resulting buying power. A lot of cities with high prices also have a very high level of salaries.. but that's just one indicator beetween hundreds.

Whatever: i found myself SFO one of the most enjoyable cities i have seen. And people i know said the same about Boston. So i don't think it would be completely wrong that theses both cities are second and third in the US. From my point of view the point we can discuss about is: they only compared the most important cities in the world. There would surely exist other smaller cities who are more enjoyable....

musiccity

May 10th, 2011, 05:34 AM

Nashville, TN USA

6.5/10

Pros

-Lots of culture...especially music! :)
-People are friendly
-Nice setting with green hills and Cumberland River
-Easy to move around on car...traffic isnt a big problem
-Diverse
-Very cheap cost of living
-Very welcoming to newcomers
-Good business climate
-Good food! :drool:

Cons
-Horrific public schools
-Corruption (not in the news but its obvious)
-Large income gap (if people in European & Australian cities are complaning about this, then Nashville must be real bad)
-High crime rate (Same statement above)
-Hidden but shocking poverty (homeless shanties underneath overpassies and along the river)
-Not a very good shopping scene

yin_yang

May 13th, 2011, 03:04 AM

Toronto is amazing, So rich. I haven't worked consistently for years and still somehow have enough money to live a luxurious lifestyle. I rate quality of life here 10/10.

hadrett32

May 13th, 2011, 02:28 PM

Toronto is amazing, So rich. I haven't worked consistently for years and still somehow have enough money to live a luxurious lifestyle. I rate quality of life here 10/10.

exactly :) 10/10

nicdel

May 14th, 2011, 12:15 PM

Berlin: 8.5/10

Pro:

-vibrant atmosphere
-diversity regarding architecture, people, nightlife, sights etc.
-quite multicultural
-amazing nightlife
-very historic place (WW2, Cold-War, the Berlin Wall etc.)
-decent public transportation
-due to its size (second largest city proper in the EU after London), it has so many different areas and districts
-for being a large city, it has a lot of trees, parks, lakes
-artsy
-touristy (in some parts too much)
-plenty of shopping malls and shopping streets
-Germany's only 'real' Global City

Contra:

-bad public schools
-located in a dull region (Brandenburg), not much to do outside of the city
-significant problems with Immigrants (Muslims specifically) and crime in some parts of the city (for German conditions; crime is not comparable to U.S. cities)
- isn't an economical hotspot

aaabbbccc

May 15th, 2011, 11:48 AM

Toronto is amazing, So rich. I haven't worked consistently for years and still somehow have enough money to live a luxurious lifestyle. I rate quality of life here 10/10.

Got to agree with you there I love it there great town one of the very few big cities in the world that you can actually rate it very well , the only downside about Toronto is the prices it is expensive but other than that it is an amazing city :)

hadrett32

May 15th, 2011, 03:06 PM

Got to agree with you there I love it there great town one of the very few big cities in the world that you can actually rate it very well , the only downside about Toronto is the prices it is expensive but other than that it is an amazing city :)

I agree once again. :okay:

Peregrin Tuk

May 23rd, 2011, 06:58 AM

Mordor:
1.3/10

pro:
-safety ,the great eye cares about us
-smith's are funny
-inmigrants die , and they are sentenciated to listen "friday"
- Everybody must know Physics , especially angmar's king

cons:

-Smell like crap
-House are small, but the great eye will put a project in the senate

Aztecgoddess

May 23rd, 2011, 06:41 PM

^^^^
Since when and why do you live in mordor? Boy, lately you seem a bit taller :sly:

Wapper

May 23rd, 2011, 11:14 PM

Antwerp, Belgium 8.5/10

Pros:
- Great historic centre, great architecture
- Lots of culture: museums, churches, concerts...
- One of the most multicultural cities of Europe
- Nice shops
- Bike/ pedestrian friendly
- cosy
- great bars, food, beer
- great nightlife
- beautiful, large port
- rather safe, only a few bad neighbourhoods (but not really dangerous)
- in the heart of Europe, near all the nices places of interest in Belgium, Northern France and Paris, Holland and Amsterdam, Germany, London...

Cons:
- Lots of rain
- Poor public transport, lots of traffic jams
- a little too small for me
- Lots of problems with migrant people
- Too many ugly buildings
- Far away from any real nature and quiet places
- Small citizen action groups block large building and infrastructure projects

Vienna, Austria

10/10 (No definitive judgement, because I have only been there for half a year so far)

Pros
- An incredible amount of stunning architecture
- Lots of culture
- Very green
- Unbelievably safe and clean, almost no vandalism
- One of the best public transport systems in the world (so I've heard, and I do believe it)
- Good food, great restaurants and bars
- great weather
- Not overcrowded, not too small
- Near the alps and other beautiful places, not far from the Czech republic (prague), Slovakia (Bratislava), Croatia, Hungary (Budapest), Germany, Italy...
- Bike/pedestrian friendly

Cons:
- not a lot of different shops, shops seem to be more often closed than open

wc eend

May 24th, 2011, 05:39 PM

I would say that for me Vienna, where I used to live, just misses a bit of funky grittiness. That would make it perfect.

arquitekto

June 5th, 2011, 08:49 AM

Here in the Makati (Metro Manila), Philippines: 7/10 (just okay for me)

Living in a metropolis is quite a challenge for me because of "chaotic traffic" when i go home (or to school) with or without a car.. Anyway, here are some pics of the Metro: :)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3149/5779534918_9ce66e0652.jpg
^^ Makati Skyline at night
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/51509306.jpg
^^ Ortigas Centre, the Metro's secondary financial district

Pros
-Majority of the people here understand & can speak English well
-Well urbanized city
(WiFi zones, some WiFi buses offered, mass rapid transport(MRT), a high-speed rail is u/c & will be completed by 2013 that will link Metro Manila & north-central provinces , paved roadways/highways, impressive city skylines with good clustering)

-Very cheap cost of living
(cheapest condominium unit costs around $18,000+/- & a decent 2-storey residential house in a gated community around $28,000+/-
-Food, transport & education are also cheap
(Many Koreans, Chinese, Americans & Iranians study here)
-Gadgets are cheap and a number of services also.

-Good weather
(it doesn't snow, around 23 to 32degrees centigrade average daily temperature from April to September while 18 to 28 degrees from October to March with extremities at 14 to 34degrees )
-Nightlife & Entertainment are so vibrant
(a number of the largest shopping malls in the world are also found here in our metro area, like SM Mall of Asia)
-Restaurants, Cafés, Theme Parks & Shopping districts are very accessible

-Affordable for the Upper & Middle Class
-Rich in Culture & History
-People are hospitable & friendly

-Sort of multi-cultural & very westernized lifestyle
(Chinese and Koreans are very noticeable in different areas, and also Caucasians in shopping districts plus Chinatowns, Korean Plazas & Little India)
-Bangkok-ish, Jakarta-ish & Kuala Lumpur-ish city atmosphere

Cons
-Rush-Hour TRAFFIC!
(maybe because it's a mega city..conditions are the same with Shanghai, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, Bangkok)
-Temperature tends to get warmer, sometimes it reaches 37degrees centigrade + the humidity

-Car is so expensive. Majority of the middle-class families doesn't even have one..
(Some of the cheapest are the Suzuki Alto that costs around $8,600+/- & Hyundai Getz at $11,100+/-)
-Electricity is more expensive than of neighboring countries
-Petrol is cheaper than American & European cities but more expensive than other Asian cities

-Low minimum wages +/-PhP400 pesos or +/-$9 a day
(maybe because of cheaper cost of living, but it's hard to survive with this for others) although the wage is subject for an increase)
-Unemployment rate stands 6 to 7%
-A big challenge of survival for the lower class families (& settlers from provinces)

(This city sucks for the poor & jobless people) -lol that's normal for any city.

:)

WasabiHoney

June 5th, 2011, 09:28 PM

I will talk about two cities where I have lived: Lausanne, Switzerland and Thessaloniki, Greece (I currently reside in a small town, so it probably doesn't count)

Lausanne

1-Natural environment
+ very nice setting on Lake Geneva, with stunning views of the Alps
+ close to ski resorts, frequent rail connections to everywhere (including Cointrin airport)
+ lots of greenery and nature (you can even spot foxes running around), a number of beautiful parks and fountains, little air pollution
- but surprisingly dirty for a country famed for cleanliness
+ spring and summer are generally nice
- though very humid. Sometimes it can rain for several days at a time
- autumn and winter weather is terrible: cold, gloomy and often windy

http://i55.tinypic.com/a9wu0z.jpg

2-Built environment
+ a number of nice buildings in the old town and the central areas
- sometimes badly integrated into newer surroundings (Place de l'Europe is a screaming mess)
- not many impressive buildings overall. Dull architecture in most areas (surprising thing for a country which hasn't been through a war for the last 150 years)
+ very good quality of housing, no cockroaches even in old houses :banana:
- however finding an apartment can be extremely hard, especially if you're a student
+ relatively cheap heating and electricity. Hot water is always available
- but overpriced rents

3-Transportation
+ generally little traffic
- however chronic traffic jams occur on certain roads because of inadequate design
+ largely sufficient parking capacity
+ well-developed transportation system which generally runs on time, biking facilities in many spots, but:
- most buses, trains and metro stations are old, dirty and depressing
- very rude public behaviour in trains and buses (brats shouting, resting their feet on seats, littering and playing loud music :bleep:)
- some bus lines are plagued by chronic delays
- and mostly, ridiculously high fares!

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3452/3291680358_334c349c5b.jpg

4-Services
+ excellent healthcare infrastructure
- but it generally takes a lot of time to book a medical appointment
+ respectful and efficient public service staff
- still, it can take anywhere from 2 weeks to 6 months to obtain a residence permit (and just wait to hear this: YOU get to pay if your permit isn't issued on time! :weird:)
+ high wages, wasn't hit hard by economic crisis. It's still relatively easy to find a job
- unless of course you are a non EU national! >(
+ many world-class educational establishments: IMD, EPFL, HEC...
- overpriced services and insurance costs

5-People
+ generally very polite
- but very cold, and seem to care too much about money
- overall, an all-work-and-no-fun society where it's hard to make or keep friends, much loneliness

6-Food scene
- food is generally bland and flavor enhancers are often used in cheaper restaurants
+ despite the impressive choice of tasty cheeses and dairy products (mice paradise!)
+ a large variety of foods in supermarkets
- although it could be greater for some items (meat, fish, prepared foods...)
+ all items are discounted 25% or 50% close to expiry date
+ decent international cuisine scene (mainly Italian and Spanish), many ethnic shops
- but eating out is very expensive and most establishments close early

http://chrisnsue.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/lausanne-dusk-1.jpg

7-City life
+ still a safe and walkable town
- although beggars, juvenile delinquency and (to some extent) burglary are on the rise
+ quiet town which still retains a rural feel in some areas
- but is extremely dull (even TV there is very boring!)
- streets empty after 6 or 7 p.m., shops close at 6 p.m. during weekdays and 5 on weekends, meager nightlife
+ but at least you can come back from your night out without stinking of cigarette, since smoking is prohibited in closed places
+ developed sports infrastructure and frequent sports events during spring and summer
- which however lead to some roads closing to all traffic and public transportation (extremely annoying!)
+ a lot of museums and galleries for a town this size
+ many cultural events, most notably the Festival de la Cité, the Balélec Music Festival, the Jazz Festival in nearby Montreux...
- very few shopping options, unexplainable monopoly in retail trade (only two supermarkets chains, present everywhere). Malls are not easily reachable by public transport
- nothing, I mean nothing, is free, and you get fined for every imaginable thing!

Overall: an attractive, but stiff and dull place. I give it 6/10, despite the country being famed for its high quality of living.

WasabiHoney

June 5th, 2011, 09:52 PM

And now Thessaloniki

1-Natural environment
+ a nice setting on Thermaikos Gulf, facing Mount Olympus
+ just an hour away from Chalkidiki's pine forests and crystal-clear waters
- but far from most archaeological sites and islands (and ferry connections have been cut down lately)
+ many streets and avenues are tree-lined
- despite the small number of parks
+ streets are generally cleaner than what you might expect, but:
- high levels of air pollution because of traffic
- many neighborhoods are plagued by stray dogs, which constitute a serious nuisance and can be dangerous
+ sunny weather most of the year, cold generally doesn't last for long, weather in spring is just perfect
- but summer is unbearably hot and humid

http://www4.lubavitch.com/files.html/8602301/image|gif/Thessaloniki_Olympus.gif?scale_max=597

2-Built environment
- extremely densely built city, looks like a sea of concrete when viewed from above
+ the city core is a delightful mix of old and new
- many stunning old buildings are still in need of repair however
+ a number of ancient churches and other monuments around town as well
+ sidewalks on the main arteries are specially designed for the visually impaired
- except for the newly-built areas, housing quality is mediocre (many buildings are run down beyond renovation, and cockroaches rule everywhere!)
+- rents had been skyrocketing until 2008, but have collapsed ever since
- heating and electricity are quite expensive, and many older apartments don't have central heating

3-Transportation
- intense traffic, city center suffers from chronic congestion (exacerbated lately by the metro works)
- frequent demonstrations (against every imaginable reason) add to the traffic problems
- parking capacity is too small, double rows of parked cars are an extremely common sight
+ comprehensive network of buses, to be complemented by Europe's most modern metro network (under construction)
+ newer, cleaner buses and electronic timetables have been introduced
+ fares are still quite cheap
- heavy traffic often creates big delays on some lines

http://www.kinkaa.com/imgw/Hotel_Kinissi_Palace_Thessaloniki__Greece-+17256b6003fa3811d3f6f126586cccf6.jpg

4-Services
+ public healthcare is available to anybody with a basic insurance
- but long waiting lines, mediocre care quality and corruption (you can't expect to get operated fast, even for a serious health problem, without bribing the doctor) are making private insurance increasingly popular
- extremely rude, lazy and inefficient public service staff, and rampaging bureaucracy. Getting your work done in one time is nearly impossible. Residence permits can take over a year to be issued.
- high unemployment, wages are generally not that great despite the stiff competition on the job market. Many sectors have been hit by the recent financial crisis
- political corruption negatively affects all sectors
- higher education in critical condition: lack of organization, outdated subjects and infrastructure, frequent strikes, corruption...

5-People
+ warm, lively and generally expressive, but:
- very noisy (at any hour), widespread lawlessness
- extremely rude and arrogant. Plenty of bitches out there
- usually superficial. An alarming lack of professionalism in most fields
- extremely trashy culture and mentality, no sophistication
- annoying obsession with alleged Ancient Greek and "Macedonian" heritage, and with football!
+ still, making friends is relatively easy. Loneliness is generally not an issue
+ a young, student-oriented city (more than 60.000 students)
- conservative mentality is still prevalent, with the Church maintaining a strong social influence
+ but people are becoming increasingly tolerant
+ cool, relaxed way of life. A city where you work to live and not the other way round

6-Food scene
+ food is generally tasty and typical local products of great quality are widely available (extra virgin olive oil, traditional cheeses, dozens of olive types...)
- but people are very fond of trashy foods and most eateries are following this trend, making it increasingly hard to eat out healthily
+ supermarkets feature some great food items not found even in Switzerland (such as 100% pomegranate juice)
+ lots of restaurants and eateries, most with Greek cuisine, some with a more creative twist
- international cuisine is still not widely represented. Few shops selling ethnic foods

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4114/4812615663_24a57d5a1f.jpg

7-City life
+ still a very safe city for its size. The town center is delightfully walkable at any hour
- however, burglary has skyrocketed during the last 10 years
+ extremely vibrant and lively. You can go out at 3 a.m. any day and still see open food stalls, bars and people on the streets
- but can be noisy and nerve racking
+ regular shops and supermarkets close late (9 p.m. during weekdays, 8 p.m. on Saturday). Many shops and kiosks stay open 24h, selling everything from drinks to chocolates to magazines
+ few chains. Most cafes, restaurants... are still individually owned
+ exciting nightlife, although much of it is oriented towards Greek music. Entry to most establishments is not expensive (or even free), and face-control is technically illegal
- but smoking is still a huge problem. Cigarette haze lingers everywhere
+ TV is generally very entertaining (lots of movies, humorous programs...)
- but is also choke-full of trash, making people even dumber
- few sport facilities, apart from football stadiums (the national sport!)
+ a number of interesting museums (archaeological, Byzantine, modern art...), some of which were created or refurbished for the Cultural Capital of Europe status in 1997
+ a number of cultural events, most notably Demetria, the Thessaloniki International Film Festival, the Thessaloniki Book Fair...
+ the vibrant Thessaloniki International Fair, held every September
+ the center is a shopping mecca, hundreds of shops everywhere with every imaginable brand or artifact. You don't even need to go to one of the numerous malls
+ the old central market: picturesque and very cheap, a must!

Overall: a fun and vibrant city with a lot of charm, despite its rude people and decaying public sector. I give it 7/10.