Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Global/Worldwide Cost of Living Rankings 2005/2006

First, here is the link. Check it out for more interesting info

http://www.finfacts.com/costofliving.htm

2005
Rank City
1 Tokyo, Japan
2 Osaka, Japan
3 London, United Kingdom
4 Moscow, Russia
5 Seoul, South Korea
6 Geneva, Switzerland
7 Zurich, Switzerland
8 Copenhagen, Denmark
9 Hong Kong, Hong Kong
10 Oslo, Norway
11 Milan, Italy
12 Paris, France
13 New York City, United States
13 Dublin, Ireland
15 St. Petersburg, Russia
16 Vienna, Austria
17 Rome, Italy
18 Stockholm, Sweden
19 Beijing, China
20 Sydney, Australia
20 Helsinki, Finland
22 Douala, Cameroon
22 Istanbul, Turkey
24 Amsterdam, Netherlands
24 Budapest, Hungary
26 Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire
27 Warsaw, Poland
28 Prague, Czech Republic
29 Taipei, Taiwan
30 Shanghai, China
31 Bratislava, Slovak Republic
32 Düsseldorf, Germany
33 Luxembourg, Luxembourg
34 Singapore, Singapore
34 Frankfurt, Germany
36 Dakar, Senegal
37 Munich, Germany
38 Berlin, Germany
39 Tel Aviv, Israel
40 Glasgow, United Kingdom
41 Athens, Greece
41 Brussels, Belgium
43 Barcelona, Spain
44 Los Angeles, United States
45 White Plains, United States
46 Madrid, Spain
47 Birmingham, United Kingdom
48 Zagreb, Croatia
49 Hamburg, Germany
50 Hanoi, Vietnam
50 San Francisco, United States
52 Chicago, United States
52 Beirut, Lebanon
54 Riga, Latvia
54 Kiev, Ukraine
56 Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam
57 Miami, United States
58 Algiers, Algeria
59 Casablanca, Morocco
60 Tallin, Estonia
61 Lyon, France
61 Honolulu, United States
63 Shenzhen, China
64 Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
65 Guangzhou, China
66 Lisbon, Portugal
67 Amman, Jordan
68 Melbourne, Australia
69 Auckland, New Zealand
70 Houston, United States
71 Jakarta, Indonesia
72 Kuwait City, Kuwait
73 Dubai, United Arab Emirates
74 San Juan, Puerto Rico
75 Almaty, Kazakhstan
76 Wellington, New Zealand
76 Ljubljana, Slovenia
78 Washington, D.C., United States
79 Boston, United States
80 Morristown, United States
81 Sofia, Bulgaria
82 Toronto, Canada
83 Atlanta, United States
84 Brisbane, Australia
85 Leipzig, Germany
86 Manama, Bahrain
87 Vancouver, Canada
88 Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
89 Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
89 Adelaide, Australia
91 Vilnius, Lithuania
91 Accra, Ghana
93 Perth, Australia
94 Denver, United States
95 Mexico City, Mexico
96 Lagos, Nigeria
97 Cairo, Egypt
98 Calgary, Canada
99 Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
100 Limassol, Cyprus
101 Detroit, United States
102 St. Louis, United States
103 Seattle, United States
103 Bucharest, Romania
105 Kingston, Jamaica
105 Mumbai, India
107 Montreal, Canada
108 Guatemala City, Guatemala
109 Cleveland, United States
110 New Delhi, India
111 Pittsburgh, United States
112 Portland (Ore.), United States
113 Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei
114 Panama City, Panama
115 Monterrey, Mexico
116 Johannesburg, South Africa
117 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
118 Lima, Peru
119 Nairobi, Kenya
119 Winston-Salem, United States
119 São Paulo, Brazil
122 Ottawa, Canada
123 Lusaka, Zambia
124 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
125 Bangkok, Thailand
126 Tunis, Tunisia
127 Dacca (Dhaka), Bangladesh
128 Santiago, Chile
129 Tehran, Iran
130 Blantyre, Malawi
131 Tianjin, China
132 Colombo, Sri Lanka
133 Bogotá, Colombia
134 Harare, Zimbabwe
135 San José, Costa Rica
136 Karachi, Pakistan
137 Quito, Ecuador
138 Chennai (Madras), India
138 Caracas, Venezuela
140 Montevideo, Uruguay
141 Bangalore, India
142 Buenos Aires, Argentina
143 Manila, Philippines
144 Asunción, Paraguay


http://www.finfacts.com/costofliving3.htm>

which city has most modern skyscraper in the world

which one?>

HIGH-PROFILE LATIN AMERICAN NATIONS

In terms of "image" (how it's generally perceived), which country in Latin America has the highest profile (and why)? Which is best known globally and what is it's "claim to fame" if you will, or if you prefer, what single (or multiple) aspect(s) places it on the word stage; what it's known for. What's your top 10 (or less)?

Unlisted from the poll due to limited space (15 max.): Dominican Republic, Haiti, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Puerto Rico,* and Uruguay.

*Pre-emptive notice: Please spare me the Puerto rico-is-part-of-the-U. S.-not-Latin America routine. It's gotten old...

My Top 10
1-Mexico (common border with to U. S. biggest factor)
2-Argentina (Buenos Aires, Evita)
3-Brazil (colossus of the south)
4-Cuba (Fidel Castro)
5-Peru (top tourist destination in S. A.)
6-Costa Rica (top tourist destination in C. A.)
7-Colombia
8-Venezuela (petrolium)
9-Guatemala
10-Panama (Canal)>

Is Scandinavia Wealthy? NYT article/propaganda?

NY Times
April 17, 2005
PERSPECTIVE


We're Rich, You're Not. End of Story.
By BRUCE BAWER

OSLO — THE received wisdom about economic life in the Nordic countries is easily summed up: people here are incomparably affluent, with all their needs met by an efficient welfare state. They believe it themselves. Yet the reality - as this Oslo-dwelling American can attest, and as some recent studies confirm - is not quite what it appears.

Even as the Scandinavian establishment peddles this dubious line, it serves up a picture of the United States as a nation divided, inequitably, among robber barons and wage slaves, not to mention armies of the homeless and unemployed. It does this to keep people believing that their social welfare system, financed by lofty income taxes, provides far more in the way of economic protections and amenities than the American system. Protections, yes -but some Norwegians might question the part about amenities.

In Oslo, library collections are woefully outdated, and public swimming pools are in desperate need of maintenance. News reports describe serious shortages of police officers and school supplies. When my mother-in-law went to an emergency room recently, the hospital was out of cough medicine. Drug addicts crowd downtown Oslo streets, as The Los Angeles Times recently reported, but applicants for methadone programs are put on a months-long waiting list.

In Norway, the standard line is that there must be some mistake, that such things simply should not happen in "the world's richest country." Why do Norwegians have such a wealthy self-image? Partly because, compared with their grandparents (who lived before the discovery of North Sea oil), they are rich. Few, however, question whether it really is the world's richest country.

After I moved here six years ago, I quickly noticed that Norwegians live more frugally than Americans do. They hang on to old appliances and furniture that we would throw out. And they drive around in wrecks. In 2003, when my partner and I took his teenage brother to New York - his first trip outside of Europe - he stared boggle-eyed at the cars in the Newark Airport parking lot, as mesmerized as Robin Williams in a New York grocery store in "Moscow on the Hudson."

One image in particular sticks in my mind. In a Norwegian language class, my teacher illustrated the meaning of the word matpakke - "packed lunch" - by reaching into her backpack and pulling out a hero sandwich wrapped in wax paper. It was her lunch. She held it up for all to see.

Yes, teachers are underpaid everywhere. But in Norway the matpakke is ubiquitous, from classroom to boardroom. In New York, an office worker might pop out at lunchtime to a deli; in Paris, she might enjoy quiche and a glass of wine at a brasserie. In Norway, she will sit at her desk with a sandwich from home.

It is not simply a matter of tradition, or a preference for a basic, nonmaterialistic life. Dining out is just too pricey in a country where teachers, for example, make about $50,000 a year before taxes. Even the humblest of meals - a large pizza delivered from Oslo's most popular pizza joint - will run from $34 to $48, including delivery fee and a 25 percent value added tax.

Not that groceries are cheap, either. Every weekend, armies of Norwegians drive to Sweden to stock up at supermarkets that are a bargain only by Norwegian standards. And this isn't a great solution, either, since gasoline (in this oil-exporting nation) costs more than $6 a gallon.

All this was illuminated last year in a study by a Swedish research organization, Timbro, which compared the gross domestic products of the 15 European Union members (before the 2004 expansion) with those of the 50 American states and the District of Columbia. (Norway, not being a member of the union, was not included.)

After adjusting the figures for the different purchasing powers of the dollar and euro, the only European country whose economic output per person was greater than the United States average was the tiny tax haven of Luxembourg, which ranked third, just behind Delaware and slightly ahead of Connecticut.

The next European country on the list was Ireland, down at 41st place out of 66; Sweden was 14th from the bottom (after Alabama), followed by Oklahoma, and then Britain, France, Finland, Germany and Italy. The bottom three spots on the list went to Spain, Portugal and Greece.

Alternatively, the study found, if the E.U. was treated as a single American state, it would rank fifth from the bottom, topping only Arkansas, Montana, West Virginia and Mississippi. In short, while Scandinavians are constantly told how much better they have it than Americans, Timbro's statistics suggest otherwise. So did a paper by a Swedish economics writer, Johan Norberg.

Contrasting "the American dream" with "the European daydream," Mr. Norberg described the difference: "Economic growth in the last 25 years has been 3 percent per annum in the U.S., compared to 2.2 percent in the E.U. That means that the American economy has almost doubled, whereas the E.U. economy has grown by slightly more than half. The purchasing power in the U.S. is $36,100 per capita, and in the E.U. $26,000 - and the gap is constantly widening."

The one detail in Timbro's study that didn't feel right to me was the placement of Scandinavian countries near the top of the list and Spain near the bottom. My own sense of things is that Spaniards live far better than Scandinavians. In Norwegian pubs, for example, anyone rich or insane enough to order, say, a gin and tonic is charged about $15 for a few teaspoons of gin at the bottom of a glass of tonic; in Spain, the drinks are dirt-cheap and the bartender will pour the gin up to the rim unless you say "stop."

In late March, another study, this one from KPMG, the international accounting and consulting firm, cast light on this paradox. It indicated that when disposable income was adjusted for cost of living, Scandinavians were the poorest people in Western Europe. Danes had the lowest adjusted income, Norwegians the second lowest, Swedes the third. Spain and Portugal, with two of Europe's least regulated economies, led the list.

Most recently, the Danish Ministry of Finance released a study comparing the income available for private consumption in 30 countries. Norway did somewhat better here than in the KPMG study, lagging behind most of Western Europe but at least beating out Ireland and Portugal.

The thrust, however, was to confirm Timbro's and Mr. Norberg's picture of American and European wealth. While the private-consumption figure for the United States was $32,900 per person, the countries of Western Europe (again excepting Luxembourg, at $29,450) ranged between $13,850 and $23,500, with Norway at $18,350.

Meanwhile, the references to Norway as "the world's richest country" keep on coming. An April 2 article in Dagsavisen, a major Oslo daily, asked: How is it that "in the world's richest country we're tearing down social services that were built up when Norway was much poorer?"

Obviously, this is one misconception that won't be put to rest by a measly think-tank study or two.>

what do you think of cities on the planet mars ?!

Can it be realistic that there are cities on the planet mars in 2200 ?! waht ure thinkin ....?>

What do you think of Shenzhen?

what kind of city will it become?>

Developing Economies: Which one will be a developed economy first??

mm>

Chicago as a case study: aren't cities better off without "comparisons"

Are our cities far better off when we drop the comparisons between them and allow each to operate on its own?

I ask this as a Chicagoan because Chicago often becomes the poster child city for making comparisons.

We get a lot of the "smaller version" of New York arguments or the that Chicago and LA are in some absurd battle for some sort of non-existent "second slot" in the US, each city's attributes and negatives contributing to its relative rise or decline.

I myself totally dismiss the concept that Chicago is a "mini-New York" on any level; Chicago's personality is unique and cannot be compared to any city. Likewise, Chicago and LA are great cities, doing far more battle here than they do in "the real world". Both are unique and niether depends on the other to detmine its greatness.

As a Chicagoan and one who has been invovled with so many out-of-town visitors (an well as knowing locals well) get the following impression of my city: the people who live in it love it, the people in the metro region are proud to be part of it (and will identify themselves as "Chicagoans"), out of towners are enchanted by it, and those who haven't been to Chicago look at it as a place they like to go.

Every one of the perceptions I listed above is strenghtened by eliminating comparisons to other cities and seeing Chicago as Chicago.

In that sense, I would be curious to know how people on the board see Chicago as a city when they see it as Chicago.....and avoid comparing to New York, LA, or any other great city. Basically, how does Chicago come out when it stands on its own two feet when the obvious achievements of New York, LA or elsewhere are left out of the conversation???????>

Most expensive cities for offices

Occupancy costs per person, which includes rent, taxes, management fees, continues to hit new highs around the world. Here is a list of the top 15 most expensive cities and markets in them. It consists of large office spaces in prime office markets.

2005 Rank--City, market------------Occupancy cost per person
1) London West End----------------$19,330
2)Paris-----------------------------$15,520
3)London City----------------------$15,280
4)Washington, D.C.-----------------$14,250
5)Frankfurt-------------------------$13,640
6)Tokyo Central--------------------$13,400
7)Dublin----------------------------$12,740
8)New York Midtown----------------$12,200
9)Munich---------------------------$12,010
10)Stockholm-----------------------$10,780
11)Amsterdam----------------------$9,740
12)Edinburgh-----------------------$9,680
13)Toronto-------------------------$9,670
14)Hong Kong (tied)----------------$9,320
14)Seoul (tied)---------------------$9,320

The source of this list was DTZ Research and it was printed in USA Today on Tuesday, May 31.

Since the costs are listed in US Dollars I would assume that exchange rates played a sizable role in determining the results.>

Is Tokyo the greatest city on earth?

I've just realised that Tokyo is the greatest city on earth.>

San Diego, the next Vancouver?

With all the urban infill and specifically condo highrise construction going on in San Diego, do you think it will be the West Coast's next Vancouver?>

Barcelona: art nouveau details (1)

in this first part we will see the top of some modernist buildings in bcn...as you can see, there's a huge diversity in the shapes...hope you like them (there's no uniformity like in other european cities)











































































































































>