'Melbourne tops Sydney: work survey'

[kangaroo]

Hello everyone

At the risk of (inadvertently) stepping on a few NSW toes, I thought I'd share this link to an article in today's The Age:

Australians would prefer to work in Brisbane, on the Gold Coast or in Melbourne rather than in Sydney if they had the choice, a new survey shows.

Sydney, despite the glamour of the harbour, its bridge and the Opera House, has a reputation for being too fast-paced, impersonal,

cut-throat and expensive, a survey by recruitment firm Talent2 shows.

The survey of 1,327 respondents, and based on the quality of life attainable in Australian cities, found 29 per cent would prefer to work in Brisbane or on the Gold Coast, 26.2 per cent liked the look of Melbourne, while only 18.2 per cent backed Sydney.

The rest of the article can be found here: Melbourne tops Sydney: work survey

[choog]

Yep, Sydney would be way down on the list for me, dont like the place.

[Guest Bronwyn]

Did anyone else read the survey? At the bottom it says 'Canberra didn't get a mention'.

Seems like even the journalist forgot to mention Adelaide.....

[no longer interested]

Hello everyone

At the risk of (inadvertently) stepping on a few NSW toes, I thought I'd share this link to an article in today's The Age:

The rest of the article can be found here: Melbourne tops Sydney: work survey

Yup not surprised at all!! GO MELBIN !!!!

[matman]

The key is not to take this article out of context. There are many reasons why people love Sydney and why Sydney is a fantastic place to immigrate to.

However, this statement most probably sums up why we left Sydney and moved to melbourne.

"Sydney, despite the glamour of the harbour, its bridge and the Opera House, has a reputation for being too fast-paced, impersonal, cut-throat and expensive, a survey by recruitment firm Talent2 shows"

Rgds

Matman

[Springbok]

Hmmm, The Age is of course a Melbourne-based newspaper....

But funny how Sydney never tries to prove itself better than the rest.... it simply is.

The combination of the harbour, the bridge, the Opera House, the beaches, etc., etc. are simply without equal.

But I do agree - if you don't like your life too fast-paced, cut-throat and expensive, Sydney may not be the place for you.

(Although I personally find life to be very relaxed here)

Just for some balance, the annual Anholt City Brands Index, which ranks the world’s most desirable cities according to the city’s people, lifestyle, affordability, transport and its economic presence on the world stage, rated Sydney the best city in the world for the 2nd year in a row, while Melbourne came in sixth. 10,000 people in 20 countries have taken part in the survey. The purpose of the CBI is simply to record people's perceptions of cities and countries, whether they are correct or not.

Also have a look at The Sydney Paradox

[Biker]

Maybe this will help:

http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html

http://www.citymayors.com/environment/eiu_bestcities.html

According to this:

In 2007, demographer Bernard Salt predicted that if current trends continue, Melbourne will again become the most populous city in Australia by 2028.[44]

See all on www.wikipedia.org

Edited March 22, 2008 by Biker

[kangaroo]

According to this:

In 2007, demographer Bernard Salt predicted that if current trends continue, Melbourne will again become the most populous city in Australia by 2028.[44]

See all on www.wikipedia.org

Also have a a look at this article: Victoria unlocks vast tracts for housing - 4 March 2008.

It mentions that:

Mr Brumby [Premier John Brumby], who believes Melbourne will overtake Sydney as Australia's biggest city by 2028, will unveil his plans hours before the Reserve Bank is expected to raise interest rates again and a day after Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced the Federal Government would double the national rental affordability scheme.

...With Melbourne now growing at nearly 1500 people a week, the population is expected to top 6.2 million in 2020, a decade earlier than previous estimates based on the 2001 census.

This move will put further pressure on the Government's 2030 strategy for Melbourne's urban growth by increasing housing density in the outer suburbs more quickly than previously planned.

The Treasury analysis shows Melbourne's population increased by about 270,000 — one-third above forecasts — between 2001 and 2006. There were more new households — 86,613 — in Melbourne than in any other Australian city in the five years between censuses.

...The city outgrew Sydney in the 1850s because of the gold rush and was known internationally as "Marvellous Melbourne" in the 1880s, but was overtaken by Sydney early in the 20th century.

Many commentators expected the 2000 Olympics to mark the final "victory" of Sydney over Melbourne, with some demographers predicting the Brisbane-

Gold Coast corridor would soon push Melbourne back to third place.

But a poll earlier this week revealed that one in five Sydneysiders were considering leaving the city. Among the main reasons were the high cost of living, traffic congestion and overcrowding.

...In the 1980s and early '90s Victoria was losing families to other states. Now it is consistently recording net gains in interstate and overseas migration.

I for one certainly hope that Melbourne does not become a 'second Sydney'. It's not that I don't like Sydney - I do - it's just that I prefer visiting Sydney rather than living there for personal reasons.

As it's mentioned in the article, the Victorian government's challenge is to manage the expected growth without failing to maintain Melbourne's liveability (and character).

Hmmm, The Age is of course a Melbourne-based newspaper....

The point is that the article, while appearing in The Age, reflects the results of an independent survey done by recruitment firm Talent2.

Edited March 23, 2008 by kangaroo

[Springbok]

Mercer's annual quality of living index is probably not taken too seriously by many people - the Melburnians and Brisbanites are quite upset about their "disappointing" results. And if Auckland and Wellington are such nice cities, then why are so many Kiwis coming to Australia? But I think the major point of the Mercer survey is that Australian cities rank relatively high compared to their global peers in terms of quality of living. South Africa's best, which is probably Cape Town, is not even among the top 50:

Kiwis hammer Aussies in global rankings

"AUCKLAND is a better city to live in than any in Australia, and even windy Wellington tops Melbourne, Perth and Brisbane. The latest rankings of quality of living in the world's major cities entrenches Australia's capitals among the top 35, with Sydney in 10th place, Melbourne in 17th, Perth 21st, Adelaide 29th and Brisbane 34th. But Auckland comes 5th and Wellington 12th in the latest rankings by consulting firm Mercer, which measure the political, social, economic and environmental climate along with levels of education, health and safety, transport and public services."

While I'm sure there will be plenty of disagreement about the rankings, I guess it's each to his own. No city can be all things to all people. What South Africans moving to Australia should take away from this though, is that regardless of which city you choose, you will have a great life over here.

More details here.

[HansaPlease]

As you say Springbok, one person's idea of al liveable city isn't neccesarily the same as another and it depends on what angle you're looking at it from.

Why is everybody leaving Wellington and Auckland if they're so liveable? Because they can't find decent work! Liveable, maybe, but liveable doesn't pay the bills.

I'm yet to find the perfect city.

Edited June 11, 2008 by HansaPlease