Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Toronto named best place to live.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 140
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's certainly impacted housing availability and costs. Look at the problems of those displaced by the 650 Parliament St. fire, many of whom have nowhere to move to but shelters. And there was an arti

Sun tans and big noses? Huh? In any case, the problem with immigration in cities/urban regions like Toronto and Vancouver is simply numbers. Canada now accepts roughly 320K immigrants a year (and grow

There’s a lot more to Hamilton than the steel works.  It actually has a nice geography with the escarpment, bay, many waterfalls, and Royal Botanical Gardens.  I used to judge that city based on its i

Sometimes that's the tradeoff, but you're doing ok there too.

My 'commute' is a walk, a bit less than that.

.

We really don't mind the drive. It's beautifull country and quite often we'll take alternate routes just because. When you get off the main roads you'll see some fantastic places. One of my favourites is a log home with rolling hills around it and a large pond on the property, all the buildings are log style as well. Just a really nice place to live.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's beautifull country and quite often we'll take alternate routes just because.

Lucky to have.

When you get off the main roads you'll see some fantastic places.

Sure will.

But we both know , in many many places (off the lakes) you'll see abject poverty the likes of which you will not ever see in the city.

Ramshackle homes with very little support structure, Muskoka siding (aka Tyvek-yellowed from age),windows covered w anything but glass, crap and cars junked up on front lawns with a beater in the driveway .Its the hidden (only because tourists stick to the lakes for the most part) part of Muskoka, Parry Sound Georgian Bay and the Kawartha's.

Thats of course not to say the city is free from it, but the rules of home ownership in the city do not allow for any of that. The truly poor are mainly in apt bldgs so one does not see it the same.

And we get all the homeless since the sity has the infrastructure to handle it, whereas local towns up north cant afford them and the homeless now a better gig awaits if they can get out.

Edited by Guyser2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that it depends on the individual. When we were younger, we spent about 40 years in Toronto. We had our health and had enough income to take advantage of the Leaf games (and other events in the Gardens), the Art and Ceramics galleries, Ontario Place, excellent opportunities for food and drink from all over the world, pro baseball and football games at the Lakeshore and CNE, the latest live theater, a large choice of movie theaters and the CNE et al.

Once we retired, Toronto became too busy for us, we sold and moved to a slower and quieter part of Southern Ontario. Our children and their families still live there and are at an age where they can appreciate and take advantage all of the special attractions that the big city offers.

After one of the few times we visit Toronto I would feel a sense of relaxation and peace the farther I drove on the 401 out of that city.

I guess it depends what you are looking for in your life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...

I am thinking of moving to Southern Ontario eventually to warm up my weary bones so this thread is of personal interest. Many of my friends live in Toronto and love it there. I find it too fast, too crowded and with way too much traffic and concrete. The subway is inadequate, the parks are nothing to write home about and Harbourfront is horribly overbuilt. The thought of living in one of the 'suburban' tower blocks farther out is deeply depressing - Paris with les banlieues and none of the sights. The price of real estate is crazy too which also puts me off relatively benign places like Burlington as well. I am thinking Ottawa might be a better place to live in - more hills, more history, more geezer friendly, lower prices. Am I correct?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It all depends what u want and are u retiring or will u be working? If u are working then the big city is the place but if u are retiring and want to stretch your $, why not consider smaller city or even a town, that cost of living is lower than the big city and if u don't mind travelling to work, u can do that too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It all depends what u want and are u retiring or will u be working? If u are working then the big city is the place but if u are retiring and want to stretch your $, why not consider smaller city or even a town, that cost of living is lower than the big city and if u don't mind travelling to work, u can do that too.

I'll second that. Look at the North Shore of Lake Erie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll second that. Look at the North Shore of Lake Erie.

I looked up a few links and it is intriguing although I would probably prefer bigger places - ideally, indoor tennis would be close by. I am considering options along the Windsor/Ottawa axis. Ontario tends to flat or, at best, bumpy. Scenically, the Eastern Townships are more my kind of place but French would be a problem. BC would be even better in that mountainy regard but it is too remote from family and friends.

I have relatives in Detroit which might make the southern end of that shore a good place to be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks very much for that suggestion, Big Guy. I looked up a few links and it is intriguing although I would probably prefer bigger places - ideally, indoor tennis would be close by. I am considering options along the Windsor/Ottawa axis. Ontario tends to flat or, at best, bumpy. Scenically, the Eastern Townships are more my kind of place but French would be a problem. BC would be even better in that mountainy regard but it is too remote from family and friends. I have relatives in Detroit which might make the southern end of that shore a good place to be.

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Link to post
Share on other sites

It all depends what u want and are u retiring or will u be working? If u are working then the big city is the place but if u are retiring and want to stretch your $, why not consider smaller city or even a town, that cost of living is lower than the big city and if u don't mind travelling to work, u can do that too.

I won't be working regularly, if at all, so I don't need to be near a large city but I'm not a real outdoorsman either. Somewhere abutting on a national park with bike trails and decent restaurants would be perfect. That's what attracted me to Ottawa - seeing all the wild stuff across the river and the bike trails and hills too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My current ranking is as follows:

1. Ottawa.

2. Burlington or somewhere else near Toronto.

3. Windsor.

4. Kingston.

I intend to spend a month or two in each place and see what they are like. It none of them suit, I will stay in Atlantic Canada and winter in the Southern US or Portugal/Spain.

All suggestions welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

I would think Vancouver would take the prize, although Toronto has the Jays!

I spent many many years in Ontario. Couldn't stand the summer humidity, nor the cold winters. I live on the west coast now, would never go back east. The climate here is perfect, the views are outstanding and plenty to do outdoors and indoors. If you can survive condo living, it's the perfect place in Canada (and we have the Canucks!)

Edited by WestCoastRunner
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Ottawa was quite lovely. If it wasn't for the climate, it would have been my favorite place, I think, due to the combination of natural and man-made beauty in the area. The summer humidity is just gross. And in winter the precipitation is often wet, and the temperature continuously oscillates above and below zero, so that all the snow turns to ice and the city becomes a big skating rink, and it becomes necessary to cover everything with salt, so that everything becomes a big mess of salty slush.

I also lived in Vancouver for a while, and hated it. There are some lovely things to see, but the climate and traffic are huge turn-offs. We were there during the winter months, and I think I could count on my fingers the number of times we had sunshine. It was always overcast and usually drizzling. I hated it. And the traffic, ugh, just insane. I assume that the people who create these "quality of life" studies that Vancouver always wins are people who haven't had to get to work there.

This probably sounds like a huge homer statement, but I preferred the climate in Edmonton to both Ottawa and Vancouver, despite the amount of ribbing and bad press Edmonton gets. Edmonton's summers are lovely, with the added bonus of long daylight hours. Of course, once winter hits and the cold hits, things turn for the worse, but my personal preference is that I much prefer -10 and sunny to +2 and drizzling, or -2 and covered in salt and slush. It's easy to keep warm when it's cold. It's harder to stay dry when it's wet. And it's near impossible to avoid getting slushed in Ottawa.

Of course, I no longer live in any of those places. Here in Kim City, summers are dry and hot, winters are mild, we have lovely snow in the hills for winter activities, and the only climate worry we have is the constant worry of forest fires burning the place to the ground during summer.

-k

Link to post
Share on other sites

I lived in Vancouver for 12 years (born in Ontario) and eventually left for two reasons: rain, clouds. The year I left, there were a reported 189 days of rain PLUS the cloudy days. I was a little depressed from a back injury that year and the gloom just put me over the edge so I moved back to Ontario. I will admit that the previous 11 years were glorious. When that sun shines in Van, well, there's not much like it elsewhere in Canada. It almost redeems the gloom.

I have set up home from coast to coast and nowhere did I experience burning eyes from rainfall as I did in Toronto. I spent two years there and apart from the first few months of excitement for all the things to do, the city and its people eventually wore me down. I could complain of the elements that drove me away, not least of which was population density, but most points have already been covered here. There is a little issue of a bloated sense of entitlement that being moneyed brings that became obvious quickly but I guess when you live there for long enough you might start to accept it as the norm. I'm not a very good consumer though, so perhaps Toronto and I simply don't see eye to eye for that reason.

I'm now in a small city about an hour from TO. It's estimated that by 2050 this city will be attached to Toronto by suburbia. I will have moved by then. You can have it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I lived in Victoria for a few years as well. Undoubtedly, one of the best places I have lived in Canada. I ended up moving back to the mainland because it was just too much effort getting back and forth to the mainland to visit family both financially and time. Victoria has much less rain then Vancouver and plenty more sunshine but far less to do as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

I can't afford to live anywhere God dam it.

Me personally I like Kingston believe it not.

Victoria is beautiful but too friggin expensive and I hate tsunamis and earthquakes.

Put me on a dam lake in the Kawarthas, Eastern Townships.

I like Ottawa but hate the winters. Its worse on the bones then Montreal ands its damper otherwise I like Ottawa and Montreal my home town but the winters rule them out.

I love Quebec City but its too damn cold in the winter and a tad boring..

Saskatoon has good weather but is boring. St. John's is beautiful but the friggin rain and time zone is nutso.

So I go with Kingston. Its a perfect size and has everything including good distance to Ottawa, Montreal, T.O., New York up state, thousand islands. Nuff to do.

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if you want to live your life in fear for the next 200 years then sure. Suck it up.

All in all, I think Victoria is a better place to be in an earthquake than Vancouver. It's rockier (Richmond will be a swamp, the tunnel will be a death trap) and the west coast will shelter it from most tsunamis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All in all, I think Victoria is a better place to be in an earthquake than Vancouver. It's rockier (Richmond will be a swamp, the tunnel will be a death trap) and the west coast will shelter it from most tsunamis.

Something to be said for that. Luckily I don't live in Richmond but dam near close!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...