ozzieeagle

The down side of this is a suprising one especially as it's something that wasn't part of my nature before, unless age has made me more critical as I've grown older. That's seeing the obvious flaws in other places I've visited.

How can you look forwards to moving somewhere else ?

Bit of a conundurum for my retirement that one.

OzTennis

Before congratulating the 'mother country' it might be opportune to keep in mind how the 'new world' was used and seen:

As a dumping ground for the overcrowded jails and hulks and for political prisoners such as the Irish who objected to foreign occupation of their country.

As a place for the upper classes to make fortunes on plantations growing products not suited to Blighty's climate. In so doing they used slave labour compulsorily moved from other colonies, particularly Africa.

To provide minerals and raw materials for the first industrialised country.

Whither the native populations of many of the colonies of the New World - aboriginals, eskimos, 'red' indians etc?

To provide extra soldiers to fight wars.

And so on and so forth, you get my drift.

Victorian times in Britain seemed fantastic too from say what Dickens wrote about them! Please sir, I want some more (food) said Oliver. The slums of London etc have still not been properly addressed even to this day.

Blue touch paper lit.

OzTennis

Just Google:

"The Global liveability survey ranks 140 cities on over 30 qualitative and quantitative factors across five broad categories: stability; healthcare, culture and environment, education and infrastructure.

Each of the 30 factors in each city is rated as acceptable, tolerable, uncomfortable, undesirable or intolerable.

The categories are compiled and weighted to provide an overall rating of 1–100, where 1 is considered intolerable and 100 is considered ideal.

The liveability ranking considers that any city with a rating of 80 or more will have few, if any, challenges to living standards. Any city with a score of less than 50 will see most aspects of living severely restricted."

Amazulu

Shit happens - a means to an end

The 'Dominions' and the USA, the places where the colonists wiped out the indigenous populations - these are the countries with the highest living standards, GDP, HDI etc. These are the nations that have surpassed the UK

Coincidence? I think not

Sure, some bad shit was done along the way but the ends justified the means

BTW This is historical fact. Whether you, I or anyone else agrees or disagrees is immaterial. This is what happened and today we live a good life because it did

big_matt

I got that bit, was interested in a bit more detail about how the numbers were derived. Was it just a team of people ranking factors as tolerable etc, or was it more fact/statistics based?

OzTennis

EIU has a team which gathers information year round (I know someone who worked there) and produce a total score based on their 30 criteria for each of 140 cities and they update this at regular intervals. I'm not sure what criteria they used to get the tolerable etc but the quantitified criteria by definition is facts based; not sure how the qualitative data is derived; of course more difficult for that be facts based but Economists do try to put a number to subjective things where possible.

OzTennis

That's a frighteningly right wing view of events. Move over Genghis Khan it seems. Easy for you to dismiss anything? Why did you do it Mr Hitler? - 'shit happens, means to an end'.

Speaking for Australia; what happened pre 1901 was partly down to 'colonists' but largely down to Blighty. Transportation up until 1868/9 for example. Britain lost the America option for dumping in 1783 (lost a war) so turned attention to Australia.

Amazulu

It is an unashamedly right-wing viewpoint but why the need to mention Hitler? There is no comparison

By colonists I mean UK colonists - and those that followed

My last sentence - it happened this way and we gain the benefit today

Sharing wasn't an option

Pollyana

Had to laugh at the CourierMail - brisbane's main newsrag

Recently declared Queensland Great and renowned Brisbane identity Stefan Ackerie, labelled those responsible for the survey "uneducated", saying their priorities were wrong.

"I think when God made the world, he made Australia last, he made Queensland very last and he made Brisbane for himself," he said. " Brisbane has everything. It has weather, beautiful people, facilities like no other city in Australia so it (the survey) is just uneducated.

I thought this guy must be someone really influential, but when I put his name into Google it seems he is a local hairdresser No offence to hairdressers amongst us, but was he really the best identity they could find to defend Brisbane? Did the others all agree with the survey?!!!

OzTennis

I mentioned Hitler because the 'shit happens, means justifies the end' viewpoint is what gives rise to such things happening if we aren't careful.

You probably would have fitted in well in post 1948, pre 1990 South Africa with your unashamed views. Shit happens - separate people into 4 different groups and have separate development. Use 3 groups so 1 group has about the highest living standards in the world? Means justifies the end?

Imperialism, fascism, nazism, apartheidism and most of all the other isms - nasty!

chris955

These surveys appeal to those who live in the chosen cities, others who dont or have no interest in living there rightly dismiss them as pointless. I lived in Melbourne years ago, it was OK but I have no desire to live there again anymore than I want to live in London or New York or Vancouver.
Queenslanders are even more insecure than other Australians which is quite an acheivement.

BadgeIsBack

But you are also a Queenslander? Why is it that people who dont like living somewhere always have to point out the insecurities of those who do like living in that place?

Surely much of your life was insecure, if you have very little to say about your past?

I don't care much for aspects of Queensland, no thanks to this forum, but I can understand the appeal.

bcworld

This is very true. If Australia is jingoistic, Qld takes it to a whole new level!

One common theme of these types of surveys is that Brisbane trails Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide and Perth...always. I'm sure Cando must have a conniption every time he sees one! And yet I'm sure there are signs on the way into Brisbane declaring it Australia's 'most liveable city'!?

To be honest though...I'm not quite sure why Brisbane is division 2, based on my experiences I'd certainly pick it over Adelaide.

Zen10

If you read The Fatal Shore, Robert Hughes makes the case that notwithstanding the very, very early days, the aborigines were treated with a good deal more respect by the British than by the post-federation Australians.

alipally

We, none of us, we're there. We only have the white mans written words and the verbal stories passed through the generations of the indigenous people of Australia. You must take both sides and make up your own minds regarding the early days, because, unavoidably, both accounts will have some bias.....