hm... interesting quiz but I see the methodology as flawed. Taking a survey, even of as big a sample as 200,000 people, you're going to end up with drastically different results depending on where exactly your sample population is from. For instance, if they had included many of the 500 million or so people in Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan and Bangladesh I'm sure that Mecca and some other cities around the Arabian peninsula would show up on the list. If they interviewed many of the 1.7 billion people in India then Dubai would be higher along with Abu Dhabi and Mumbai and probably some cities in Texas where they have family. If they asked more people in Latin America there would be more southern American cities on here (though Miami and LA show up anyway). If you asked people who know what they're talking about then there would have been at least one city from Thailand on here.
Curious, I followed the link to the article, and another link to the report, and confirmed what I suspected: the polling sample is not very representative. For example they polled 16,220 people in Germany, in a country with a population of 80 million. Meanwhile they only polled 150 people in Pakistan. And 0 in Bangladesh.
kalbahamut, I see your comments on all kinds of quizzes and you are usually judgemental like this. Do you feel better about yourself when you find flaws in the quizzes that you didn't create? Is it some sort of competition for you? People play these for a bit of fun and to challenge themselves. You should know that English is not my first language so if you find some grammar problem with this post, go ahead and point it out for everyone if it makes you feel better about yourself.
cappa1: I don't see it as a complaint about the quiz. More of a start for discussion about where the data in the quiz comes from. It's not wrong per se to make a quiz based on flawed data, there are a lot of those quizzes. I just think it's good to be aware that some matters of opinion are just that, not solid fact.
Malbaby, not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but, yes, they do. Bangladesh is one of the biggest suppliers of cheap labor in the world. They get a little bit of competition from India, China, Mexico, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Indonesia, Yemen, the Philippines, etc... but certainly there is a much bigger Bengali diaspora than a German one.
2. provide feedback for the quiz maker to show that I took and appreciated the quiz. As a prolific quiz author myself, this is important to me.
3. offer constructive criticism. Something else I appreciate as a quiz author.
Reasons I NEVER comment:
1. to brag or make myself feel good, smart, etc.
2. to complain about the quiz, except in very rare instances and those are usually user-created quizzes that suffer from bias or something along those lines. I don't recall ever seeing a front-page quiz like that.
3. to take away from anybody's fun.
4. because I imagine I am competing against anyone here for any reason
I will occasionally comment to correct grammar, but that is exceedingly rare, as well.
Yeah, of course, which makes it nothing more than a test of perception, an opinion popularity contest subject to the weaknesses in methodology (problems with sample size and selection; lack of any objective or measurable metrics) that I already mentioned.
Suggest some people nominated cities that are appealing to live in for cultural/geographic/quality of life reasons, while others nominated cities that provide exciting career/earnings possibilities. The top ten or so cities in the list have both covered
Exactly. Look at Sydney for example. Great tourist destination, no doubt, but the cost of living over there is so high, you might as well work somewhere else.
Proximity may play a role as well. I guessed Dublin because I thought people from the UK would want to be able to go back and forth frequently if they worked abroad. Other cities like Paris or Amsterdam probably make as much sense from that criterion but you also need to consider the language barrier (which is greater in a lot of British people's minds than in reality; most people would much rather live in a country that has English as it's primary language). The Canadian cities are probably here for similar reasons. I think it is also interesting to consider the possibility that most people in the survey probably wouldn't consider working abroad, and were wanting to choose the least worst option. This would probably result in a different list to where people actually go to work abroad.
I've seen other lists with superior methodology where Thailand is in the top ten countries of the world, and often ranked number ONE in the world, in terms of: cultural experience, quality of life for expats, work/life balance, healthcare, and places where your dollar will stretch the farthest. Bangkok has some of the best hospitals in the world. Poverty is a problem for people who are born in Thailand and have little opportunity to advance themselves, not for people who immigrate to Thailand with the wealth, education, and opportunity (such as being able to move to a different country) being born somewhere else already has afforded them. Thailand has undergone several coups, but the country always remains remarkably stable though all of them. I credit Buddhism for this. Crime in Thailand is also not significant.
All of that being said and I haven't even mentioned the perfect climate, amazing food, great nightlife and infrastructure, beautiful friendly women, live-and-let-live culture, cheap international airfares, friendly people, first-rate shopping/dining/entertainment venues, the most incredible beaches in the world, or the fact that the Thai economy is booming and business/investment opportunities abound.
So, I maintain, for those who know what they're talking about...
No African cities at all and the only South American city is Santiago, but no Buenos Aires or Rio de Janeiro? I think there must be additional flaws to the methodology of this survey other than the ones mentioned by kalbahamut above.
Well most of Rio is very neglected. Do some research into Maré, in Rio's North Zone and you will find that the local gov't built an opaque wall so that the tourists on the highway couldn't see the Favela on the other side. driving down the road, the wall becomes transparent only so that the travelers can see the new school they built, then the wall changes back to normal. before the 2016 Olympics, Rio officials rerouted several bus routes around these Favelas so the people on the outside couldn't see how much of the city is in poverty; other houses in the Manguinhos neighborhood. Bottom line is that the city only wants you to see certain stuff like Ipanema of Copacabana, and (like the DPRK,) they don't want you to see the rest of the city. Just read the following article because I could go on and on.
And Argentina is constantly on the verge of economic collapse, so maybe people don't want to live in there. Furthermore, I've heard that there's awful smog in Buenos Aires.
This chart is completely nonsense, with no scientific basis. For example, the only Italian city on the list is Rome, which is far from being as cosmopolitan and economically relevant as Milan!
As someone who has worked abroad in Santiago, I can credit its inclusion. It is an excellent city with relatively good cost of living, a vibrant culture, and close to plenty of incredible natural wonders. I'd happily return to do it all again.
Even if this is simply based on opinions and not on any data like rental prizes and living expenses etc.: If they asked me I'd still consider those things in my head. I wouldn't just name 5 cities I like that just popped up in my head. Obviously nobody knows those things about every single place in the world but I definitely wouldn't have expected some of the ones on the list.
I think the average person 1. isn't that analytical and 2. doesn't know very much about the world. They're going to answer with the first few cities that pop into their head because they have a feeling that they are nice places based on word of mouth or some TV show that they saw once, or a place that they took a holiday to once and enjoyed, or maybe because they have a friend or family member that already lives there.
Then they get their check and Canada helps themselves to 55% in taxes *^%#@&$!..and people here (in the states) complain about high tax. I love Canada but I wouldn’t work there again
I know, I thought the same thing. New York city isn't very pleasant and is very expensive. Sydney is in the middle of nowhere close to nothing in a country full of lethal animals and insects. Vienna? I always found Budapest a far nicer and more vibrant city also far cheaper than Vienna. Miami? Really? Just like Rio, get outside the main business district you have the local ghettos and of course the drug trade going on. I disagree with a lot of the city choices here.
There's plenty of interesting stuff near Sydney and the lethality of the animals is hugely overestimated by people who have never been there. yes, they have lots of snakes and spiders and stuff, but they don't bother you anymore than if you live in California.
I've never been to Australia before but I am sure that the average person commenting on how dangerous or venomous the fauna of the country is sounds every bit as ridiculous to urban Australians as foreigners talking about the crime or murder rate of the United States sounds to an American.
Clearly you know nothing about Australia if you think the entire country is just deserts filled with dangerous animals. Australia's cities are considered some of the best in the world.
It's the biggest most famous city in California. Also gets portrayed glamorously a lot in American TV shows and Hollywood movies. Lots of foreigners would like to move there. Plus, it's still objectively a nice place to live - sunny and warm all year round which is the reason Hollywood is there, good for shooting movies. Cosmopolitan, too. and Miami is the same way. If you can deal with the traffic.
But I bet a big part of the reason both LA and Miami show up on the list is that if they polled anyone in South or Central America it's very likely that they have a friend or family member residing in one or both cities.
I think it was better in the past. I lived around LA some years ago and when I went back to visit recently I was shocked at how bad it's become. Almost everyone I knew there has moved out.
But I guess foreigners do have a glamorous perception of it. When I was teaching in Asia I was constantly getting asked if I knew people like Arnold Schwarzenegger and J.Lo.
1. start interesting conversations.
2. provide feedback for the quiz maker to show that I took and appreciated the quiz. As a prolific quiz author myself, this is important to me.
3. offer constructive criticism. Something else I appreciate as a quiz author.
Reasons I NEVER comment:
1. to brag or make myself feel good, smart, etc.
2. to complain about the quiz, except in very rare instances and those are usually user-created quizzes that suffer from bias or something along those lines. I don't recall ever seeing a front-page quiz like that.
3. to take away from anybody's fun.
4. because I imagine I am competing against anyone here for any reason
I will occasionally comment to correct grammar, but that is exceedingly rare, as well.
So, I maintain, for those who know what they're talking about...
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/15/sports/olympics/rio-favelas-brazil-poor-price-too-high.html
But I bet a big part of the reason both LA and Miami show up on the list is that if they polled anyone in South or Central America it's very likely that they have a friend or family member residing in one or both cities.
But I guess foreigners do have a glamorous perception of it. When I was teaching in Asia I was constantly getting asked if I knew people like Arnold Schwarzenegger and J.Lo.