Where is the best place to live?

Where we live determines a lot about our life.

So today I'm going to share a resource that can help you decide where might be a good place to live.

It started with an article ranking Brisbane suburbs from 1 to 260.

That ranking was based on a set of 17 factors. Here are some of them.

But all 17 may not be relevant for you. And some might matter more than others.

So they developed a tool where you can rank the 5 factors most important to you and it will give you a personalised list of Brisbane suburbs that would be the best for you - based on those factors. There are also Sydney and Melbourne versions.

On the results page, there's also a map that colour-codes each suburb by star rating, for each factor. For instance here's the map for public transport. Five-star suburbs are in blue.

When you click on a suburb, you get the name and the star rating of that suburb - for whichever factor you select.

I find this to be so enlightening. I choose not to own a car. Some people find this shocking, tell me it's not possible, and complain that public transport is terrible. That surprises me, but when it turns out they live in a 2-star suburb (for public transport) it kind of makes sense.

So when we are choosing our next place to live, we can choose the kind of area we like. It can provide the kind of lifestyle we want - and we could save a lot of commuting time and money by selecting an area that has the things we need. You could reduce the number of cars you need to own and maintain.

PS. If walkability is something you're interested in, you may also like to check out walkscore.com - where you can get a walkability score for your suburb, street and even street number.

Comments

My mug shot

This is every mug I own. How many did I buy? Zero. They seem to just appear. I don't even drink tea or coffee. In winter I have might have a hot chocolate or cocoa. So 9 mugs seems like a lot. How does this happen? I reckon most mugs are gifts. There are two reasons for this. 1. It's a safe bet. People need to drink. It's kind of like buying your dad socks for father's day. But the difference is that socks wear out and need replacing. Cups don't. One of these mugs i received as a kid in the 90s. It still works fine. Now it has 8 friends. 2. It's often for what's on the mug. It might be a greeting card-style message, or a sports team logo, or something humorous. It's a good thing that something functional can also provide an inspiring message or pleasant memory as you use it. But the problem comes when we have too much. If I use the cup my sister gave me at Christmas, then I'm not using the 'awesome brother' one she already gave m...

Adam ruins work

The TV show Adam Ruins Everything took a look at the workplace - and the 40 hour work week. It confirms my thoughts that the 40-hour work week (or at least it's relevance today) is a figment of our imagination. Very enlightening. Watch it now . The first 7 minutes are the most relevant. There were some astonishing stats coming out of it. For example, we spend only 45% of the work week doing our actual job (not including meetings etc). That's about 18 hours per week. Interestingly, that's what experts predicted. With rises in productivity, the 1950s brought talk of a 4-day work week. By 2030 they reckoned we might work just 15 hours per week. But instead we work longer hours. That results in more mistakes and safety mishaps. It also reduces brain function. We might think that it's being productive but Adam points to countries that have as much prosperity as America while working much shorter hours. A classic case of 'less is more'. PS. for the basis of ...

Investing Less, Earning More

Could investing $13,000 be better than investing $70,000? In this case, the answer seems to be yes. In Making Money Made Simple , Noel Whittaker compares two hypothetical investors: Person 1: Invests $ 1,000 a year from age 18-30. Person 2: Invests $ 2,000 a year from age 30-65. You might think that person 2 would be better off, but here's how it goes (in chart form): Person 1 stops investing at 30, but their investment keeps growing. At that point, person 1's yearly growth is more than person 2's yearly contribution. That's why person 2 never catches up. Person 1 ends up about $ 150,000 ahead, despite investing about one-fifth of what the person 2 invested. What if growth isn't so good? These calculations assume 10% growth. What if it isn't that high? Fair point. I've run the numbers at lower rates of growth. At 9%, person 1 is still better off. At 8% it's close, and person 2 comes out slightly ahead. But that's not really the poin...

But wait... there's less!

Search This Blog