Vancouver still most liveable city in world: Survey

[NetMapel]

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

Vancouver's suburbs are also arguably among the worst in the country...say what you will about Toronto but I'd rather live anywhere in the GTA over Surrey, Langley, Maple Ridge, etc...Vancouver may have a high quality of life but it drops off very quickly the further you get from Boundary Road.

Burnaby, Richmond, South Surrey, New Westminster, White Rock and Coquitlam says hello ?

[invisibleairwaves]

Originally Posted by NetMapel

Burnaby, Richmond, South Surrey, New Westminster, White Rock and Coquitlam says hello ?

Certainly tolerable, but really nothing special as far as quality-of-life goes. Well, except for White Rock, but it's an anomaly.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Why all the Calgary-bashing in the first place? It's got more head offices and a more dynamic economy than Vancouver, even if it doesn't have the ocean, the mountains, etc etc etc.

Couldn't agree more. A positive, dynamic, sunny environment with the Rocky Mountains and Banff to boot. My fave city in Canada after Metro Vancouver.

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

Vancouver's suburbs are also arguably among the worst in the country...say what you will about Toronto but I'd rather live anywhere in the GTA over Surrey, Langley, Maple Ridge, etc...Vancouver may have a high quality of life but it drops off very quickly the further you get from Boundary Road.

Gotta disagree with ya there. I have lived in Vancouver and am in the city all of the time. Wouldn't want to live there anymore - too hectic and busy.

I have been fortunate enough to live on the beach/on the bluff overlooking the ocean in both Tsawwassen and White Rock and I wouldn't want to live anywhere else in Metro Vancouver. It's a very enjoyable and laid-back lifestyle - almost akin to heaven on earth. Also twice the sunshine and 1/3 the rainfall of Vancouver proper.

[agrant]

White Rock would be the worst choice for me since it is so far from Vancouver. At least Richmond, Burnaby, and New West are connected by rapid transit.

[NetMapel]

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

Certainly tolerable, but really nothing special as far as quality-of-life goes. Well, except for White Rock, but it's an anomaly.

Well, can't be worse than Richmond Hill, Etobicoke, Brampton, York and Ajex

[Wooster]

Originally Posted by Wentworth

It's a sign of the times that someone can duck and cover from Calgary bashing comments by saying that they are from Toronto.

No, just commenting on the seemingly relentless need for all the vancouverites I know (particularly those that have moved there) to bash other cities to make them feel better about themselves. Wasn't specific to Calgary, although it is often the target of derision. Drives me fucking crazy.

[giallo]

^It's the BC curse.
I don't know what happens, but whenever people move to BC from Calgary/Winnipeg/Toronto or any other part of Canada they change in to this relocated snob that can't say enough bad things about their hometown. It makes us 'natural' BCers look terrible by association.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by nova9

as well, i find vancouver like some other big cities where you are kinda fine if you were born here. A lot of the people that find it okay and 'affordable' grew up here and their parents and even themselves may have had property early on in life. And speaking for myself, I live apart but I certainly had parental help to get me started with property.

My parents helped me and my brother as well. Back in 1998 the house next door went up for sale. So my parents decided to buy it, but me, my brother and his girl friend would have to buy a portion as well. I only took 13% at the time. My brother and his girlfriend moved in. So even though I had a mortgage. I was still living at home. Then my brother and now his wife were expecting so they moved to a bigger home in Maple Ridge. I moved in and bought out there portion.

I feel a lot of people have gotten help from the parents who already owned a home. More people have decided to stay at home. It may not be what it was years ago when the kids would leave at a young age. Now a lot of kids just stay home and pay a modest rental fee.

[vansky]

Originally Posted by giallo

^It's the BC curse.
I don't know what happens, but whenever people move to BC from Calgary/Winnipeg/Toronto or any other part of Canada they change in to this relocated snob that can't say enough bad things about their hometown. It makes us 'natural' BCers look terrible by association.

some of these places have friendlier ppl, lower cost of living, and affordable housing, but movers believe that van is the bertter place...which is true, is it not

[delboy]

given all teh bloody rain here, I for one am surprised we make any lists! spring has been the pits so far. it seems half the year is crap weather wise.

[vanman]

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

Certainly tolerable, but really nothing special as far as quality-of-life goes. Well, except for White Rock, but it's an anomaly.

So what you're saying Mississauga, Okotoks, or Laval are better???

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Wooster

No, just commenting on the seemingly relentless need for all the vancouverites I know (particularly those that have moved there) to bash other cities to make them feel better about themselves. Wasn't specific to Calgary, although it is often the target of derision. Drives me fucking crazy.

That's a bit of an ironic statement, since you came in from the Calgary forum to bash the "typically douchy, condescending Vancouverite".

[Wooster]

I just came to read the thread. I had no intention of saying what I did, until I saw a post that stoked my annoyance of people from Vancouver putting down my city and others, something that's all too common. I love Vancouver, it's one of my favourite cities on earth - but as giallo said it's particularly a lot of people that move to Vancouver seem to have such an insecurity that they must attach their identity to Vancouver (as a great city) and belittle others (often their hometowns). It's like someone switching jobs to a more prestigious company, but feeling the need to brag to their former colleagues at how awesome they have it now, and mocking how shitty your situation is.

[GeeCee]

Anyone who chooses to live in one city over another very likely prefers it over their old city.. I haven't been to any other Canadian provinces other than BC, but I know that Vancouver is pretty great.

I only dislike Calgary because of the Flames and Toronto because of its denizens attitudes with regards to there being a Canada outside of the GTA.

That being said, I don't think this thread is going anywhere good.

[vansky]

the "personality" of this city, outside of its infra., is one of problematic nature...

only toronto has worser attitude than vancouver, ( but i haven't been to montreal) ...

in terms of friendliness, calgary scores highest on my list, winnipeg, banff, kowl...are all fine

but in terms of design, buses...expensive houses, probably not calgary or winnipeg,


definetly not "surrey"...~~~

[GeeCee]

better safe than surrey

[trofirhen]

I think the concept and definition of "LIVEABILITY" would do much much better if it were broken down into empirical, measurable criteria, and not just on pretty views, etc etc.

There are a number of solid criteria on which to base liveability.

Using these as a baseline, the results would be far more objective.

[SpongeG]

I think the difference with Vancouver suburbs is they have their own appeals that fit a west coast lifestyle - from my experience living in ontario the toronto suburbs were all the same boring bland can't tell them apart

vancouver - like mountains? than choose north van, west van, coquitlam, port moody, maple ridge etc. like flat choose surrey or langley or richmond etc,

you don't have to leave your suburb to get a lake, a hiking trail, a beach etc.

[PaperTiger]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I think the concept and definition of "LIVEABILITY" would do much much better if it were broken down into empirical, measurable criteria, and not just on pretty views, etc etc.

There are a number of solid criteria on which to base liveability.

Using these as a baseline, the results would be far more objective.

From the intro page:
In the annual survey by the Economist Intelligence Unit, Vancouver scored 98% on a combination of stability, health care, culture and environment, education, and infrastructure -- a score unchanged from last year

The whole point of the survey is to aggregate all of these empirical data and relate them to a subjective, experiential thing they called “livability." I'm not sure how they could be more objective than that.

[vanman]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I think the concept and definition of "LIVEABILITY" would do much much better if it were broken down into empirical, measurable criteria, and not just on pretty views, etc etc.

There are a number of solid criteria on which to base liveability.

Using these as a baseline, the results would be far more objective.

Read what the criteria was again:

In the annual survey by the Economist Intelligence Unit, Vancouver scored 98% on a combination of stability, health care, culture and environment, education, and infrastructure -- a score unchanged from last year. The city has also topped the index since at least 2007.

I'm as sick of these surveys as the next guy, but I'm also more sick of people who think Vancouver always ranks well because of its "pretty views".

For f**ks sakes, our drinking water is almost limitless, fed by snow capped mountains and filtered by pristine forests!

We live in one of the most tolerant, integrated, and multicultural societies in North America!

We have the fittest population on the continent with one of the highest lifespans and lowest rates of cancer in the world!

We're an ever growing economy in one of the safest and most stable nations on earth!

Our universities and and art institutions are internationally acclaimed!

We have a stable and clean supply of energy that is some of the cheapest on the continent!

Our port is one of the largest and most diverse on the continent!

I could easily go on but I'll leave it at that. I'm in no way trying to say that Vancouver is the "best place on earth" because I don't believe such a place exists. What I will say is that Vancouver has a lot more going for it than most people, even locals, realize.