I was just in Vancouver, and it blew my socks off. Granted I got some lovely weather, but what a beautiful city, great food, and brilliant access to outdoors. Got me thinking, if money and family are not constraints, but you still need access to some things like good internet and a decent international airport, where would you live? Maybe 2 cities in one year, winter vs summer.
I was thinking Tokyo and New York, but now maybe Vancouver.
Vancouver is amazing, NY would be very low on my list, it’s just grimy and needs an infrastructure rebuild, better to visit. They way I compare it is NYC has a layer of just dirt on everything like the city needs a top to bottom pressure wash whereas SF has more poop and litter related dirt and LA is smog. Alongside Vancouver for me is Boston, Toronto (I like cold, it’s a theme). Further south the new growth cities I think are attractive (Nashville, Austin). As a biased PA native, I find Philly punches above its weight for lifestyle and it’s a fact that Pittsburgh has seen explosive tech driven growth stemming out of CMU. Outside North America for me would be pre-2019 Hong Kong, Tokyo, Barcelona, Paris, Berlin/Munich and Zurich.
100% agree on the NYC part. Spent there a week in early October and felt sorry for the poor souls who live there. Definitely not a city where I’d like to live. In the US, I’d probably pick Boston or Charlotte, NC. Outside US, Amsterdam, Paris, Stockholm or Barcelona. Barcelona is overrun by tourists so I’d probably start hating it after a while.
For me, the availability of a nice house with a decent sized barn on a few acres of land within 30 minutes of the city for about half the price of my current house.
Eh. If “money is not a constraint”, you’d probably want to go to some of the places that are in fact most expensive, i.e. San Francisco Bay Area or similar. The problem with these places is that costs are out of control and can ruin most people. However, if you are extremely wealthy, who cares if you have to pay $20 million for your house?
There’s also the question of what “cost” means. If no cost constraint means you do not have to work and therefore, you can live anywhere, even far from job centers. I’d live in Hawaii if I could get the same job there. Even further - maybe you can take helicopters everywhere or something…
NY yes, San Francisco no. Who’s kidding? It’s very nice there. The problem is that houses are like $5 million. The other common downside is maybe that traffic in the peninsula is pretty bad. However, if you go live in Belvedere or something, that’s not an issue. Politics there sucks also, but if you’re a like minded person, that’s a positive.
If the taxes weren’t so bad, I could see nyc as an awesome place to live. As long as you have lots of money, you can just walk around and blow it on all sorts of good food, things, and experiences.
NYC is probably great if you have borderline unlimited money. If you have a $50 million penthouse, you are (literally) above all the problems faced by everyone else. When you are a billionaire, who knows what special amenities are normal to you that you can’t live without - 3 Michelin star food everyday, buying $10 million art, brunch with Tom Cruise, dating Taylor Swift, etc.
Unfortunately, that’s not the world where most people live.
In my opinion this sort of question is only worth debating in terms of your higher end restaurants. Mid range restaurants are extremely comparable between virtually any city. That being said, I think Denver is about a 7.9 out of ten, which is noticably behind the food I’ve had in NYC, Sarasota, or even L.A. I don’t care how many times I had to tell tables when I was a bus boy at the Ocean-Prime here on Larimer that our fish is just as fresh as anywhere else you can get it, but, you just can’t beat fish that is caught from more coastal regions (especially the northern east coast) and then delivered within hours to restaurants. So, even though that sea-bass you just paid $60 for at Capital Grille may taste “great”, it’s just not as good as the restaurants that were started by world renown chef’s that have their hubs in other cities.
Admittedly, Denver does fail the bigger cities on food. However, we do have a Quality Italian here now. So, that’s pretty dank. I love italian. But we do have some pretty sweet hole in the wall mexican spots.
I think city vs city, cuisine can be good but NYC has more variety. I watched a video that said queens has people from over 150 countries, 130 languages. Tons of different types of food.
Probably with even being rich in NYC is even if you manage to elevate above the problems you’re still living in a grimy and gridlocked city with aging infrastructure. All you’ve done is isolate, not really a selling point.
@OP - you mentioned possibly living in Vancouver, Tokyo, or NYC. You do know that these cities are in three different countries, right? Have you considered how you’re going to change your country of residence? And how you’re going to “look” in a different country and culture?
EG - I’m a fat, white, country boy with a hick accent and cow shit on my boots. I wear short sleeved button-down shirts and drive an F-150. I like watching NFL and drinking Coors Lite. Exactly what do you think all my Tokyo cohorts will think of me when I walk into the Tokyo version of Dorsia?