ABCDiamond

Mercer’s 2009 Worldwide Quality of Living Survey

The survey covers 215 cities and cities are compared to New York as the base city, with an index score of 100.

Australian and New Zealand cities continue to dominate worldwide quality of living standards

All Australian and New Zealand cities ranked higher than New York.

• Sydney ranked 10th place (scoring 106.3 points);
• Melbourne ranked 18th (scoring 104.8 points);
• Perth ranked 21st place (scoring 104.3);
• Adelaide ranked 30th (scoring 103 points);
• Brisbane ranked 34th (scoring 102.4 points);
• London ranked 38th (scoring 101.6 points)

http://www.mercer.com.au/referenceco...ontent=1345230

It is not all bad news for Brisbane, with perfect scores for housing and near perfect scores in the socio-cultural, environment, recreation and economic categories.


A recent NRMA Insurance survey found that nearly half of the people who had relocated to Brisbane within the past 10 years were lured by the more relaxed lifestyle.

Three-quarters of them said their expectations had been met, and while the traffic was worse than 10 years ago 78 per cent of newcomers said it was now easier to buy a decent cup of coffee.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...5-3102,00.html

bcworld

Don't forget to read the comments.......some crackers!

Common themes which I think many can relate to:

-poor public transport, car is king
-rude, aggressive (not at all 'laid back') drivers
-poor expensive, restaurants
-blaaaaaaaaand!

kar-kier

Glasgow isn't even in the top 50 (surprize surprize), think I made the right move!

bcworld

Clearly the availability of deep fried pizzas and temazepam wasn't included in the survey!

Amazulu

As is typical with these surveys, it is aimed at 'multinational' executives and therefore irrelevant to most people.

It's a crock of shit - apart from Perth being better than Brisbane.

jad n rich

Auckland is the best place in asia paciific, they havent been there on dole day or a saturday night then Sorry I though auckland was a dump, must be me.

Isnt this the survey that placed Iceland NO 1 just before it sunk into financial oblivion and Vancouver, pretty enought but has one hell of a drug/gang/poverty problem, however its for multi national executives not those living there on $8 an hour

Amazulu

Agree about Auckland. 1.5m people living with an infrastructure designed for 750k. It's a dump.

Tooterelli

What a crock! Only an Ozzie newspaper would come up with these headlines.

Weebie

Adelaide may be higher than New York doesn't mean its better lol!!

ABCDiamond

Too many people blame Australia a tad to fast....... The headlines came from the Mercer Press Release, NOT from the newspaper itself.

Find out who Mercer is here: http://www.mercer.com/

bcworld

Yes......mercer.com.au does headline as above.

Meanwhile Mercer.com states 'European cities dominate 2009 worldwide quality of living rankings', and with 13 cities in the top 20, that seems a bit more accurate.

ABCDiamond

So you agree that it wasn't "Only an Ozzie newspaper" then

It was an international company with websites around the world.

bcworld

Yes - but Tooterelli didn't 'blame Australia' either!

ABCDiamond

I agree, but I think you missed these ones, amongst many .........

• I grew up in Brisbane and still love it.
• Brisbane is a great city to live in
• If we were so unlivable why are so many people moving here?
• Brisane would be a lot liveable if we could ping those whining,flatulent and arrogent Southerners whom no sooner get here want daylight savings

stm1971

It's interesting to note that there is less than 5 points between all the Australian cities and London. Hardly enough to really say whether one is better than the other.

If you read the whole article London scores higher than all the Australian cities for city infrastructure which includes the following criteria: electricity, water availability, telephone, mail, public transport, traffic congestion and airport.

Swings and roundabouts really and as another poster said totally irrelevant to most people.