<p>I was in B&N this morning, sipping a latte and perusing a recent issue of Monocle. This issue’s focus was their annual list of the world’s 25 most livable cities. Only two of them were in North America Vancouver and Portland, Oregon. The top three on the list were all Scandinavian cities: Helsinki (1), Zurich (2), and Copenhagen (3). Others ranking highly on the list were, Tokyo, Barcelona and Melbourne. Among the criteria for livability were factors such as a rich cultural climate, a low crime rate, usable green space, quality of food and universally available medical care, business friendly conditions, abundant public transportation and efficient operation of city services, tolerance (defined as a willingness to embrace gay marriage, or civil unions—as if it alone could be called the sole defining condition), and bold implementation of urban planning and design. </p>
<p>This highly subjective list got me thinking. What really does “livability” mean to most people? What makes a city a desirable place to live? Where’s the best place you’ve ever lived, and why does it rate that designation?</p>
<p>I used to live in Seattle, which was at the top of these lists when they first started coming out. It was, and is, a fabulous city. Beautiful, exciting, on the forefront of music, technology and art. It was a great place to live when I was in my 20s. I even liked the rain.</p>
<p>Now that I’m older, and the ailments and the medical bills pile up, that criteria “universally available medical care” seems alot more important that it did when I was young. To anyone who needs more medical attention than their insurance will pay for, or to anyone who doesn’t have insurance at all, that’s a biggie and it eliminates every American city. IMO no city deserves the title “most livable” if all of its people don’t have access to decent health care.</p>
<p>Zurich? Haha great if you like spending tons of money on everything. Religious toleration? Please. Progressive on gender? Women couldn’t vote in Switzerland federal elections until 1971.</p>
<p>I think the article was written by a multi billionare, who does not need to worry about make a living. There is a big difference between livability and living.</p>
<p>So if you can treat a 100SF bill like a 20US bill, all the top 3 cities are very livable.</p>
<p>A good deal of our extended family lives in and near Copenhagen. I’m going to give a big thumbs up. Danish people are also always listed at or near the top of the happiest or most contented people lists. I can attest to that as well. Far less angst going on there. When our kids are successfully launched we’d gladly take an assignment there.</p>
<p>I live in Toronto and find its ‘livability’ to be topnotch. We have lived in a few other cities for periods of time through the years but ultimately made the decision to return to Toronto for good. It’s a beautiful and clean city that has something for everyone: cultural amenities to rival NYC, professional sports, excellent universities, good mass transit, the largest variety of restaurants we’ve ever seen, great parks and public pools. Situated right on Lake Ontario, sailing is a popular pasttime and there are hundreds of lakes within a couple of hours of the city where many people have summer cottages. Universal healthcare and excellent public school systems are foundations of Canadian society. Gay marriage has been legal here for years and, amazingly, the sky hasn’t fallen. The crime rate is very low. All of these things were factors in our decision.</p>
<p>Having spent a decent amount of time in Barcelona, I agree it deserves to be on the list. Terrific city. As for culture, it has Greek and Roman ruins, and a fantastic museum for Juan Miro and his friends. Ancient to modern, and all wonderful.</p>
<p>NYC - is there anyplace else? Actually, my husband thinks Tokyo is the most “civilized,” I think it’s the most uptight. Clearly, this is more subjective than even college rankings!</p>
<p>I have lived in a number of areas ( all in the US) and find Nashville area extremely livable. We have top medical care, a stronger economy than most places, great entertainment industry and options, professional sports, easy airport access and travel and a decent climate. On- and a major university which adds a lot.</p>
<p>I lived in one of the least livable (by the criterion described) cities in the world (Jakarta) for 13 years and loved it. All factors were mitigated by a great community of friends and a great school for our kids. Plus, quick flights to great getaways. It would be a terrible place to retire or live, in general, if you have a need to feel in control- or expect things to work!</p>
<p>Now I live in an incredibly livable place by the criterion (except on the tolerance front as defined above). People flock here for the affordable, high quality medical care, it is incredibly safe, a foodie paradise, lots of great museums and music, incredible urban planning, public transportation and great green spaces and recreation facilities. It is not cheap to live an expat life, but there are ways to economize. Unemployment at about 2%. Stable government. Relatively easy to get household help and non stop to New York (after 18 1/2 hours on a plane). But, not the same community life and shared sense of purpose. It is fine for now, fine for retirement life… however. We will probably split our time between Singapore and someplace rural-ish in the U.S. once we can afford it! My husband loves Tokyo, but Singapore is much easier… in fact.</p>
<p>Any city that has so many hours of darkness all winter would not make it to my list of ‘livability’. Who wants to live in the dark? I need sunshine. That would eliminate all those Scandinavian cities for me. </p>
<p>Portland and Vancouver - rains too much. </p>
<p>People vote with their feet. Retired people move for sunshine, low taxes, access to medical care, low cost of living, outdoor activities all year round. </p>
<p>The magazine’s editors might think that Helsinki is livable, but do you ever hear of anyone retiring to Helsinki?</p>
<p>OTOH, I wouldn’t want to retire anywhere near Florida…the heat would kill me. The culture doesn’t appeal to me at all, nor does the landscape. Different strokes.</p>
<p>For families with no children, I’d vote San Francisco or Manhattan (in the US) with San Francisco getting the nod due to better year-round weather.</p>
<p>I can’t think of anything livable about Manhattan except that you don’t need a car. Cost of living rules it out of livability without going beyond that.</p>
<p>I’ve made several trips to Vancouver and with the exception of days when the Canucks play in the Stanley Cup finals…it is eminently livable. Great transportation, restaurants, culture and plenty of nature right out your door.</p>
<p>Speaking of nature right out your door…I spotted a black bear above my back yard this weekend. Does that count as a plus or minus on the livable scale? Conceivably I could be chased by a mountain lion in the morning and if I succeed in escaping still hear the LA Phil that evening. (I live in the foothills of the San Gabriels, just a 20 minute metro rail trip to downtown Los Angeles. Our little town of 10,000 has one of the lowest crime rate in the country) LA will never make this list (too big to be perfect) , but for me…I love where I live</p>