Best places to live
Nov 6th 2006, 6:24 pm
#1
Now on Vancouver Island
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 6,935
Best places to live
Came across an April 2006 article on the Canadian Business website that is entitled Canada’s best places to live.
They used 2001 census data and some other sources of information to compare communities with populations over 10,000.
They used the following criteria to rank places:
Weather. Top three places were Victoria, British Columbia, Powell River, BC, and Cobourg, Ontario
Walkability. The places in which the highest proportion of people walk to work. They used this as an indicator of several other factors, such as personal safety, easy access to amenities, etc. The number one town was Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. Apparently one quarter of Yellowknife’s residents walk to work. Numbers two and three were Magog, Quebec and Dolbeau-Mistassini, Quebec.
Growth rate. They considered the ideal growth rate to be 15% between the 1996 and 2001 censuses. Towns were marked down the further their growth rate was from that figure, and that was true whether their growth rate was far lower or far higher. The winners were three Alberta communities : Calgary, Red Deer and Wood Buffalo (the census area into which Edmonton falls).
Income. This was a less than ideal measure, because they lacked the data with which to weigh it against cost of living. Nominal winners were Yellowknife, NWT, Wood Buffalo (i.e., Edmonton), Alberta and Kitimat, BC.
Low unemployment rate. All three winners were located in Saskatchewan. They were Estevan, Lloydminster, and Swift Current. Although Saskatchewan does not create the most jobs in Canada, it also has relatively few people chasing what jobs there are. So the unemployment rate is the lowest in Canada.
Economic diversity. They did not mean absolute economic diversity but rather economic diversity relative to town size. The most economically diverse places, relative to their population sizes, were Brantford, Ontario, Drummondville, Quebec, and Moncton, New Brunswick.
Affordability of housing. The cheapest communities were Timmins, Ontario, Yorkton, Saskatchewan, and Terrace, British Columbia.
Special attractions (university, oceanfront, lakefront, proximity to a national or provincial park, etc.)
So, once all of those factors were combined, the top ten towns / cities turned out to be:
(1) Leamington, Ontario. This is a town of 30,000 to the south of Windsor. It has relatively mild weather, low unemployment, and high incomes. Its only weakness is that few people walk to work
(2) Guelph, Ontario. It is a university town whose one weakness is expensive housing.
(3) Lloydminster, which straddles the Saskatchewan / Alberta border. Its weakness is its frigid winter weather.
(4) Grande Prairie, Alberta. Has a good economy, but house prices are high, few people walk to work, and winter weather is frigid.
(5) Kitchener / Waterloo / Cambridge metropolitan area in Ontario. Weaknesses are expensive housing and the small number of people who walk to work.
(6) Cobourg, Ontario. The only weakness is relatively expensive real estate.
(7) Hamilton, Ontario. High tech industries are moving in and offering diversity from the steel industry. Proximity to Lake Ontario moderates the weather.
(8) Red Deer, Alberta. The main detractor is the high price of housing.
(9) Calgary, Alberta. Performs well on several indicators, but high house prices and the domination of one industry (oil) detracted from the score.
(10) Halifax, Nova Scotia. Scored well in most areas, but was marked down for expensive housing and wet weather.
I was interested to discover that British Columbia, which I love to visit, and to which I have considered relocating, is not represented in the overall top ten list.
I also was surprised that there was not a single Quebec town or city in the overall top ten list.
The absence of BC and Quebec from the top ten list reinforces my intuitive feeling that studies of this kind can go only so far in measuring the quality of life in a given place. Some of it comes down to a subjective perception that is difficult to capture on paper.
Another surprise for me was that Saskatchewan had the highest employment rate / lowest unemployment rate in Canada. There are a heck of a lot of people in Alberta who come from Saskatchewan. I wonder if the rate of “emigration” from Saskatchewan influences the province’s apparent unemployment figures. But still, the statistics are what they are.
I was taken aback that Yellowknife got the highest score for the number of people who walk to work. That’s amazing to me.
The Canadian Business study does not appear to have considered various towns’ vulnerabilities to disasters (floods, hurricanes, wildfires, earthquakes, etc.). I am doing some research on that. If time permits, I’ll start another thread that looks at all of this from that gloomier point of view.
Anyway, I hope this information may serve as a starting point for people who are researching places to live.
Remember that, beyond this crude beginning, you need to consider what sort of place you want (city versus rural area, etc.) and whether or not your qualifications and experience point you in a certain direction (e.g., oil industry skills are of most use in Alberta, and so on).
They used 2001 census data and some other sources of information to compare communities with populations over 10,000.
They used the following criteria to rank places:
Weather. Top three places were Victoria, British Columbia, Powell River, BC, and Cobourg, Ontario
Walkability. The places in which the highest proportion of people walk to work. They used this as an indicator of several other factors, such as personal safety, easy access to amenities, etc. The number one town was Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. Apparently one quarter of Yellowknife’s residents walk to work. Numbers two and three were Magog, Quebec and Dolbeau-Mistassini, Quebec.
Growth rate. They considered the ideal growth rate to be 15% between the 1996 and 2001 censuses. Towns were marked down the further their growth rate was from that figure, and that was true whether their growth rate was far lower or far higher. The winners were three Alberta communities : Calgary, Red Deer and Wood Buffalo (the census area into which Edmonton falls).
Income. This was a less than ideal measure, because they lacked the data with which to weigh it against cost of living. Nominal winners were Yellowknife, NWT, Wood Buffalo (i.e., Edmonton), Alberta and Kitimat, BC.
Low unemployment rate. All three winners were located in Saskatchewan. They were Estevan, Lloydminster, and Swift Current. Although Saskatchewan does not create the most jobs in Canada, it also has relatively few people chasing what jobs there are. So the unemployment rate is the lowest in Canada.
Economic diversity. They did not mean absolute economic diversity but rather economic diversity relative to town size. The most economically diverse places, relative to their population sizes, were Brantford, Ontario, Drummondville, Quebec, and Moncton, New Brunswick.
Affordability of housing. The cheapest communities were Timmins, Ontario, Yorkton, Saskatchewan, and Terrace, British Columbia.
Special attractions (university, oceanfront, lakefront, proximity to a national or provincial park, etc.)
So, once all of those factors were combined, the top ten towns / cities turned out to be:
(1) Leamington, Ontario. This is a town of 30,000 to the south of Windsor. It has relatively mild weather, low unemployment, and high incomes. Its only weakness is that few people walk to work
(2) Guelph, Ontario. It is a university town whose one weakness is expensive housing.
(3) Lloydminster, which straddles the Saskatchewan / Alberta border. Its weakness is its frigid winter weather.
(4) Grande Prairie, Alberta. Has a good economy, but house prices are high, few people walk to work, and winter weather is frigid.
(5) Kitchener / Waterloo / Cambridge metropolitan area in Ontario. Weaknesses are expensive housing and the small number of people who walk to work.
(6) Cobourg, Ontario. The only weakness is relatively expensive real estate.
(7) Hamilton, Ontario. High tech industries are moving in and offering diversity from the steel industry. Proximity to Lake Ontario moderates the weather.
(8) Red Deer, Alberta. The main detractor is the high price of housing.
(9) Calgary, Alberta. Performs well on several indicators, but high house prices and the domination of one industry (oil) detracted from the score.
(10) Halifax, Nova Scotia. Scored well in most areas, but was marked down for expensive housing and wet weather.
I was interested to discover that British Columbia, which I love to visit, and to which I have considered relocating, is not represented in the overall top ten list.
I also was surprised that there was not a single Quebec town or city in the overall top ten list.
The absence of BC and Quebec from the top ten list reinforces my intuitive feeling that studies of this kind can go only so far in measuring the quality of life in a given place. Some of it comes down to a subjective perception that is difficult to capture on paper.
Another surprise for me was that Saskatchewan had the highest employment rate / lowest unemployment rate in Canada. There are a heck of a lot of people in Alberta who come from Saskatchewan. I wonder if the rate of “emigration” from Saskatchewan influences the province’s apparent unemployment figures. But still, the statistics are what they are.
I was taken aback that Yellowknife got the highest score for the number of people who walk to work. That’s amazing to me.
The Canadian Business study does not appear to have considered various towns’ vulnerabilities to disasters (floods, hurricanes, wildfires, earthquakes, etc.). I am doing some research on that. If time permits, I’ll start another thread that looks at all of this from that gloomier point of view.
Anyway, I hope this information may serve as a starting point for people who are researching places to live.
Remember that, beyond this crude beginning, you need to consider what sort of place you want (city versus rural area, etc.) and whether or not your qualifications and experience point you in a certain direction (e.g., oil industry skills are of most use in Alberta, and so on).
Nov 6th 2006, 6:29 pm
#2
Moderαtor Emeritus
Joined: Sep 2003
Location: Upstate South Carolina
Posts: 30,768
Nov 6th 2006, 6:37 pm
#3
Now on Vancouver Island
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 6,935
Re: Best places to live
Originally Posted by iaink
Leamington. Excellent...especially if you are a migrant mexican worker!
Nov 6th 2006, 7:55 pm
#4
Dismember
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 0
Re: Best places to live
Originally Posted by Judy in Calgary
(10) Halifax, Nova Scotia. Scored well in most areas, but was marked down for expensive housing and wet weather.
And we're open on Sundays too...
Nov 6th 2006, 9:13 pm
#5
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Dec 2005
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 1,214
Re: Best places to live
I bet Quebec cities fall foul on Growth rate, Income and Unemployment. We also have (let's face it...) political instability here. Or at least, perceived political instability. Although i'm sure an equivalent francophone survey would use different criteria that would place Quebec city near the top 
Originally Posted by Judy in Calgary
I also was surprised that there was not a single Quebec town or city in the overall top ten list.
The absence of BC and Quebec from the top ten list reinforces my intuitive feeling that studies of this kind can go only so far in measuring the quality of life in a given place. Some of it comes down to a subjective perception that is difficult to capture on paper.
The absence of BC and Quebec from the top ten list reinforces my intuitive feeling that studies of this kind can go only so far in measuring the quality of life in a given place. Some of it comes down to a subjective perception that is difficult to capture on paper.
Nov 6th 2006, 9:36 pm
#6
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 15,883
Re: Best places to live
I really have to question what yardstick they are using for the weather portion. Powell River as one of the top three???? 
If perhaps you take only temperature into account Powell River is right up there but add in the precipitation (amount and precipitation days) and it drops considerably.
I think you'll find that Wood Buffalo is the census area in which Fort McMurray falls not Edmonton. Edmonton is listed as a separate entity just as Calgary and other major centers are.
Most likely reasons more people walk to work in Yellowknife is they can't get their cars started in the winter or they can't afford to operate one up there anyway.
Cheers
Steve
If perhaps you take only temperature into account Powell River is right up there but add in the precipitation (amount and precipitation days) and it drops considerably.I think you'll find that Wood Buffalo is the census area in which Fort McMurray falls not Edmonton. Edmonton is listed as a separate entity just as Calgary and other major centers are.
Most likely reasons more people walk to work in Yellowknife is they can't get their cars started in the winter or they can't afford to operate one up there anyway.
Cheers
Steve
Last edited by Hangman; Nov 6th 2006 at 9:59 pm.
Nov 6th 2006, 9:37 pm
#7
smokes, let's go
Joined: Apr 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 184
Re: Best places to live
Funny, the first thing I measure when I visit a town is how many pubs it has... Halifax would be #1 on my list in that case! 
Nov 6th 2006, 10:22 pm
#8
Now on Vancouver Island
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 6,935
Re: Best places to live
Originally Posted by Hangman
I think you'll find that Wood Buffalo is the census area in which Fort McMurray falls not Edmonton. Edmonton is listed as a separate entity just as Calgary and other major centers are.
Nov 6th 2006, 10:56 pm
#9
Now on Vancouver Island
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 6,935
Re: Best places to live
Further to the previous information about various parts of Canada, here is Atlas of Canada's webpage on natural hazards.
Some risks are concentrated in specific geographical areas. For example, the risk of experiencing an earthquake are much higher in coastal British Columbia than they are elsewhere in Canada.
Some risks are widespread. Floods, for example, occur right across Canada. The irony of floods is that they happen even in very dry areas. Just ask anyone who lives in a desert.
One can mitigate some of these risks when one buys a house. For example, one can avoid buying a house that has been built in a floodplain. If one lives in an area that is prone to earthquakes, it is better to buy a house that is built on rock rather than one that has been built on a reclaimed river delta that will turn to jelly during an earthquake.
In looking at the maps supplied in this section of the Atlas of Canada's website, the one map that I think is particularly inadequate in conveying the level of risk is the one that depicts wildfires. In fact large swaths of the inhabited parts of BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba are vulnerable to wildfires. The western part of Ontario also is moderately vulnerable. The risk of wildfires is being exacerbated by climate change.
Here is a map, from a different section of the website, which shows Forest Fire Severity Levels from 1980 to 1989. I believe it gives one a better sense of the areas that are vulnerable. It is even more sobering to look at the map that shows the direction in which we are headed, the one that depicts estimated Forest Fire Severity Levels from 2050 to 2059.
Speaking of climate change, here is another map that shows the sensitivity of Canada's coastlines to rises in sea levels. Rising sea levels apparently will have varied effects -- from low through moderate to high -- in the coastal areas of Atlantic Canada. If you want to see how a given area will be affected, you need to zoom in on the relevant part of the map. Apparently BC's coast will experience low to moderate effects.
Here is Natural Resources Canada's web site about other potential impacts of climate change.
Edited to add this.
I think the UK is very vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, even more so than Canada I believe. So, even on that basis alone, I think it makes sense to move from the UK to Canada. But I also believe it makes sense to try to analyse Canadian destinations both in terms of what they are like now and in terms of how they are likely to be in future. That is no small feat.
Some risks are concentrated in specific geographical areas. For example, the risk of experiencing an earthquake are much higher in coastal British Columbia than they are elsewhere in Canada.
Some risks are widespread. Floods, for example, occur right across Canada. The irony of floods is that they happen even in very dry areas. Just ask anyone who lives in a desert.
One can mitigate some of these risks when one buys a house. For example, one can avoid buying a house that has been built in a floodplain. If one lives in an area that is prone to earthquakes, it is better to buy a house that is built on rock rather than one that has been built on a reclaimed river delta that will turn to jelly during an earthquake.
In looking at the maps supplied in this section of the Atlas of Canada's website, the one map that I think is particularly inadequate in conveying the level of risk is the one that depicts wildfires. In fact large swaths of the inhabited parts of BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba are vulnerable to wildfires. The western part of Ontario also is moderately vulnerable. The risk of wildfires is being exacerbated by climate change.
Here is a map, from a different section of the website, which shows Forest Fire Severity Levels from 1980 to 1989. I believe it gives one a better sense of the areas that are vulnerable. It is even more sobering to look at the map that shows the direction in which we are headed, the one that depicts estimated Forest Fire Severity Levels from 2050 to 2059.
Speaking of climate change, here is another map that shows the sensitivity of Canada's coastlines to rises in sea levels. Rising sea levels apparently will have varied effects -- from low through moderate to high -- in the coastal areas of Atlantic Canada. If you want to see how a given area will be affected, you need to zoom in on the relevant part of the map. Apparently BC's coast will experience low to moderate effects.
Here is Natural Resources Canada's web site about other potential impacts of climate change.
Edited to add this.
I think the UK is very vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, even more so than Canada I believe. So, even on that basis alone, I think it makes sense to move from the UK to Canada. But I also believe it makes sense to try to analyse Canadian destinations both in terms of what they are like now and in terms of how they are likely to be in future. That is no small feat.
Last edited by Judy in Calgary; Nov 6th 2006 at 11:03 pm. Reason: Add comment about UK
Nov 7th 2006, 3:56 am
#10
mañana is my busiest day
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Cabo San Lucas, Mexico
Posts: 2,636
Re: Best places to live
Originally Posted by Judy in Calgary
Came across an April 2006 article on the Canadian Business website that is entitled Canada’s best places to live.
They used 2001 census data and some other sources of information to compare communities with populations over 10,000.
They used the following criteria to rank places:
Weather. Top three places were Victoria, British Columbia, Powell River, BC, and Cobourg, Ontario
Walkability. The places in which the highest proportion of people walk to work. They used this as an indicator of several other factors, such as personal safety, easy access to amenities, etc. The number one town was Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. Apparently one quarter of Yellowknife’s residents walk to work. Numbers two and three were Magog, Quebec and Dolbeau-Mistassini, Quebec.
Growth rate. They considered the ideal growth rate to be 15% between the 1996 and 2001 censuses. Towns were marked down the further their growth rate was from that figure, and that was true whether their growth rate was far lower or far higher. The winners were three Alberta communities : Calgary, Red Deer and Wood Buffalo (the census area into which Edmonton falls).
Income. This was a less than ideal measure, because they lacked the data with which to weigh it against cost of living. Nominal winners were Yellowknife, NWT, Wood Buffalo (i.e., Edmonton), Alberta and Kitimat, BC.
Low unemployment rate. All three winners were located in Saskatchewan. They were Estevan, Lloydminster, and Swift Current. Although Saskatchewan does not create the most jobs in Canada, it also has relatively few people chasing what jobs there are. So the unemployment rate is the lowest in Canada.
Economic diversity. They did not mean absolute economic diversity but rather economic diversity relative to town size. The most economically diverse places, relative to their population sizes, were Brantford, Ontario, Drummondville, Quebec, and Moncton, New Brunswick.
Affordability of housing. The cheapest communities were Timmins, Ontario, Yorkton, Saskatchewan, and Terrace, British Columbia.
Special attractions (university, oceanfront, lakefront, proximity to a national or provincial park, etc.)
So, once all of those factors were combined, the top ten towns / cities turned out to be:
(1) Leamington, Ontario. This is a town of 30,000 to the south of Windsor. It has relatively mild weather, low unemployment, and high incomes. Its only weakness is that few people walk to work
(2) Guelph, Ontario. It is a university town whose one weakness is expensive housing.
(3) Lloydminster, which straddles the Saskatchewan / Alberta border. Its weakness is its frigid winter weather.
(4) Grande Prairie, Alberta. Has a good economy, but house prices are high, few people walk to work, and winter weather is frigid.
(5) Kitchener / Waterloo / Cambridge metropolitan area in Ontario. Weaknesses are expensive housing and the small number of people who walk to work.
(6) Cobourg, Ontario. The only weakness is relatively expensive real estate.
(7) Hamilton, Ontario. High tech industries are moving in and offering diversity from the steel industry. Proximity to Lake Ontario moderates the weather.
(8) Red Deer, Alberta. The main detractor is the high price of housing.
(9) Calgary, Alberta. Performs well on several indicators, but high house prices and the domination of one industry (oil) detracted from the score.
(10) Halifax, Nova Scotia. Scored well in most areas, but was marked down for expensive housing and wet weather.
I was interested to discover that British Columbia, which I love to visit, and to which I have considered relocating, is not represented in the overall top ten list.
I also was surprised that there was not a single Quebec town or city in the overall top ten list.
The absence of BC and Quebec from the top ten list reinforces my intuitive feeling that studies of this kind can go only so far in measuring the quality of life in a given place. Some of it comes down to a subjective perception that is difficult to capture on paper.
Another surprise for me was that Saskatchewan had the highest employment rate / lowest unemployment rate in Canada. There are a heck of a lot of people in Alberta who come from Saskatchewan. I wonder if the rate of “emigration” from Saskatchewan influences the province’s apparent unemployment figures. But still, the statistics are what they are.
I was taken aback that Yellowknife got the highest score for the number of people who walk to work. That’s amazing to me.
The Canadian Business study does not appear to have considered various towns’ vulnerabilities to disasters (floods, hurricanes, wildfires, earthquakes, etc.). I am doing some research on that. If time permits, I’ll start another thread that looks at all of this from that gloomier point of view.
Anyway, I hope this information may serve as a starting point for people who are researching places to live.
Remember that, beyond this crude beginning, you need to consider what sort of place you want (city versus rural area, etc.) and whether or not your qualifications and experience point you in a certain direction (e.g., oil industry skills are of most use in Alberta, and so on).
They used 2001 census data and some other sources of information to compare communities with populations over 10,000.
They used the following criteria to rank places:
Weather. Top three places were Victoria, British Columbia, Powell River, BC, and Cobourg, Ontario
Walkability. The places in which the highest proportion of people walk to work. They used this as an indicator of several other factors, such as personal safety, easy access to amenities, etc. The number one town was Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. Apparently one quarter of Yellowknife’s residents walk to work. Numbers two and three were Magog, Quebec and Dolbeau-Mistassini, Quebec.
Growth rate. They considered the ideal growth rate to be 15% between the 1996 and 2001 censuses. Towns were marked down the further their growth rate was from that figure, and that was true whether their growth rate was far lower or far higher. The winners were three Alberta communities : Calgary, Red Deer and Wood Buffalo (the census area into which Edmonton falls).
Income. This was a less than ideal measure, because they lacked the data with which to weigh it against cost of living. Nominal winners were Yellowknife, NWT, Wood Buffalo (i.e., Edmonton), Alberta and Kitimat, BC.
Low unemployment rate. All three winners were located in Saskatchewan. They were Estevan, Lloydminster, and Swift Current. Although Saskatchewan does not create the most jobs in Canada, it also has relatively few people chasing what jobs there are. So the unemployment rate is the lowest in Canada.
Economic diversity. They did not mean absolute economic diversity but rather economic diversity relative to town size. The most economically diverse places, relative to their population sizes, were Brantford, Ontario, Drummondville, Quebec, and Moncton, New Brunswick.
Affordability of housing. The cheapest communities were Timmins, Ontario, Yorkton, Saskatchewan, and Terrace, British Columbia.
Special attractions (university, oceanfront, lakefront, proximity to a national or provincial park, etc.)
So, once all of those factors were combined, the top ten towns / cities turned out to be:
(1) Leamington, Ontario. This is a town of 30,000 to the south of Windsor. It has relatively mild weather, low unemployment, and high incomes. Its only weakness is that few people walk to work
(2) Guelph, Ontario. It is a university town whose one weakness is expensive housing.
(3) Lloydminster, which straddles the Saskatchewan / Alberta border. Its weakness is its frigid winter weather.
(4) Grande Prairie, Alberta. Has a good economy, but house prices are high, few people walk to work, and winter weather is frigid.
(5) Kitchener / Waterloo / Cambridge metropolitan area in Ontario. Weaknesses are expensive housing and the small number of people who walk to work.
(6) Cobourg, Ontario. The only weakness is relatively expensive real estate.
(7) Hamilton, Ontario. High tech industries are moving in and offering diversity from the steel industry. Proximity to Lake Ontario moderates the weather.
(8) Red Deer, Alberta. The main detractor is the high price of housing.
(9) Calgary, Alberta. Performs well on several indicators, but high house prices and the domination of one industry (oil) detracted from the score.
(10) Halifax, Nova Scotia. Scored well in most areas, but was marked down for expensive housing and wet weather.
I was interested to discover that British Columbia, which I love to visit, and to which I have considered relocating, is not represented in the overall top ten list.
I also was surprised that there was not a single Quebec town or city in the overall top ten list.
The absence of BC and Quebec from the top ten list reinforces my intuitive feeling that studies of this kind can go only so far in measuring the quality of life in a given place. Some of it comes down to a subjective perception that is difficult to capture on paper.
Another surprise for me was that Saskatchewan had the highest employment rate / lowest unemployment rate in Canada. There are a heck of a lot of people in Alberta who come from Saskatchewan. I wonder if the rate of “emigration” from Saskatchewan influences the province’s apparent unemployment figures. But still, the statistics are what they are.
I was taken aback that Yellowknife got the highest score for the number of people who walk to work. That’s amazing to me.
The Canadian Business study does not appear to have considered various towns’ vulnerabilities to disasters (floods, hurricanes, wildfires, earthquakes, etc.). I am doing some research on that. If time permits, I’ll start another thread that looks at all of this from that gloomier point of view.
Anyway, I hope this information may serve as a starting point for people who are researching places to live.
Remember that, beyond this crude beginning, you need to consider what sort of place you want (city versus rural area, etc.) and whether or not your qualifications and experience point you in a certain direction (e.g., oil industry skills are of most use in Alberta, and so on).
Edmonton definately isn't included within the Wood Buffalo census area. Fort McMurray is part of Wood Buffalo. Someone has confused Edmonton with Fort McMurray!
Saying that the Kitchener area should be marked down due to its expensive housing is also incorrect.... its housing prices are below the Canadian average, while average incomes there are well above the Canadian average.
Last edited by oceanMDX; Nov 7th 2006 at 4:03 am.
Nov 7th 2006, 4:50 am
#11
mañana is my busiest day
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Cabo San Lucas, Mexico
Posts: 2,636
Re: Best places to live
Regarding average housing prices across Canada:
http://www.remax-oa.com/MarketReport...k-PR-Oct06.pdf
http://www.remax-oa.com/MarketReport...k-PR-Oct06.pdf
Nov 7th 2006, 6:06 am
#12
Now on Vancouver Island
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 6,935
Re: Best places to live
Originally Posted by oceanMDX
Edmonton definately isn't included within the Wood Buffalo census area. Fort McMurray is part of Wood Buffalo. Someone has confused Edmonton with Fort McMurray!
Nov 7th 2006, 6:07 am
#13
Now on Vancouver Island
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 6,935
Re: Best places to live
Originally Posted by oceanMDX
Regarding average housing prices across Canada:
http://www.remax-oa.com/MarketReport...k-PR-Oct06.pdf
http://www.remax-oa.com/MarketReport...k-PR-Oct06.pdf
Nov 7th 2006, 3:33 pm
#14
mañana is my busiest day
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Cabo San Lucas, Mexico
Posts: 2,636
Re: Best places to live
Originally Posted by Judy in Calgary
Quite so. But someone may not have read the thread thoroughly enough to realise that Steve (Hangman) already had caught that error.
Nov 7th 2006, 3:55 pm
#15
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Dec 2005
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 1,214
Re: Best places to live
Originally Posted by Judy in Calgary
Edited to add this.
I think the UK is very vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, even more so than Canada I believe. So, even on that basis alone, I think it makes sense to move from the UK to Canada. But I also believe it makes sense to try to analyse Canadian destinations both in terms of what they are like now and in terms of how they are likely to be in future. That is no small feat.
I think the UK is very vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, even more so than Canada I believe. So, even on that basis alone, I think it makes sense to move from the UK to Canada. But I also believe it makes sense to try to analyse Canadian destinations both in terms of what they are like now and in terms of how they are likely to be in future. That is no small feat.