> these lists of "most liveable cities". I think the problem is that the idea of habitability is not always clearly defined in facile compilations of locations

> these lists of "most liveable cities". I think the problem is that the idea of habitability is not always clearly defined in facile compilations of locations. And the compromises and sunken-cost calculations are not always clear. Any good community, big or small, is healthy. Clean air, water, good food, waste management; sensible urban planning and shelter cost; access to nature, infrastructure, and health services; intellectual and cultural prospects such as libraries, bookstores, museums, music, galleries. A "city" as a market/marketplace is rarely very healthy. Some people might choose to trade health for money and prestige. These are personal choices, but do not scale well over time to a large population.