Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Mcjibblies t1_jad76hd wrote

600 homicides was not part of the scoring

Sorry…. San Fran has a notoriously crap housing situation. Boston… maybe. London post Brexit?!? Wow, they will spit on us and tell us it’s raining at this point!

−6

ColdJay64 OP t1_jad7m8u wrote

If it was, the only city that would've been omitted is Chicago. Certainly didn't take long for a negative comment though.

The point in sharing this is to show where we stack up against other cities globally, and to remind people that there is a lot of good about living here.

6

Mcjibblies t1_jad7wnt wrote

“Top world wide Neo-lib rankings!”

−8

ColdJay64 OP t1_jad8ssw wrote

I don't think you are familiar with Schroders. Here is some more granular information on how they compiled the index, it's pretty interesting: https://www.schroders.com/en/schrodersglobalcities/blog/global-cities-index/

6

flamehead2k1 t1_jadbtmq wrote

Do you have a link to the full 900 cities?

It does seem like there is bias toward certain nations and regions given the top 30.

They are also an asset manager so not surprising the top cities for asset management are on the list

3

ColdJay64 OP t1_jadcaqi wrote

I can’t find the full 900, I’m not sure it’s available.

1

flamehead2k1 t1_jaddh02 wrote

Yea, without that it is hard to really evaluate this list.

This is a list made for asset managers to evaluate investments.

I'd be really curious how they evaluate places like Sao Paulo or Buenos Aires in terms of environmental impact. Sure, they may feel the pain of climate change more than Chicago or Philadelphia but they aren't contributing to the problem nearly as much as Chicago or Philadelphia.

This is a good list for what it was made for but I don't think it should be taken beyond that.

2

ColdJay64 OP t1_jadfvdw wrote

What aspects of their criteria would rank favorably only from an asset management perspective to the point that they aren’t relevant on a real-world level?

3

flamehead2k1 t1_jadgytm wrote

It matters a lot. The places that are easy to invest in and extract profit aren't necessarily the best for actual living. Particularly in the regulatory environment category.

It is a really complex discussion I don't have time to explain in detail but kinda interesting you said "i don't think you're familiar with Schroders" and then subsequently say you know nothing about asset management.

3

ColdJay64 OP t1_jadj22p wrote

You must’ve missed the “neo-libs” comment that I was responding to…. simply by knowing of the company I knew that was a foolish take. Thanks for the feedback though bud.

1

flamehead2k1 t1_jadjbg7 wrote

That comment doesn't change what the intended audience for this list orv why using this list for other purposes is misleading.

Thanks for your feedback

4

ColdJay64 OP t1_jadjyks wrote

“Schroders’ Global Cities Index seeks to rank global cities across four key criteria: Economic, Environmental, Innovation and Transport. It also aims to identify the cities which combine economic dynamism with world-class universities, forward-thinking environmental policies and excellent transport infrastructure.”

Sharing that our city ranks well among global cities in these areas is misleading? It wasn’t intended to be.

0

flamehead2k1 t1_jadkqwc wrote

>Sharing that our city ranks well among global cities in these areas is misleading? It wasn’t intended to be.

Well in these areas from a global investor perspective is different than from a resident perspective.

Also, global asset management is probably peak neoliberalism. I say that as a neoliberal working in that industry.

>Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers" and reducing, especially through privatization and austerity, state influence in the economy.

3