5 ms·

> “for their safety” of course. Where do you suggest is a safer place to live?

mdp2021 3y ago
Check the Economist Intelligence Unit at https://safecities.economist.com/safe-cities-2021-whitepaper/ https://safecities.economist.com/safe-cities-2021-whitepaper... Personal security («crime, violence, terrorist threats, natural disasters and economic vulnerabilities»), 2021: > 1 Copenhagen; 2 Amsterdam; 3 Frankfurt; 4 Stockholm; 5 Brussels; 6 Paris; 7 Wellington; 8 Toronto; 9 Lisbon; 10 Madrid; 11 Sydney; 12 Barcelona; 13 Singapore; 14 London; 15 Zurich; 16 Tokyo; 17 Osaka; 18 Melbourne; 19 Taipei; 20 Santiago Other lists will be available. This one list is odd, because Singapore ranks in the top five for other measures related to security, but is ranked in the second of four quadrants for personal security, "second" to cities with presumably very different policies.
- delta_p_delta_x 3y ago
  I'm sorry, but that list is very inaccurate (even if it is by The Economist—what are they smoking?). Singapore, below Paris? Below Barcelona, and below Frankfurt? Within two hours of setting foot in Paris, I nearly got my passport and 1400+€ stolen. I've lived 26 years in Singapore, and I have seen nothing of the sort. I left my phone in a hawker centre, and it was still there when I came to retrieve it, several hours later.
  - mdp2021 3y ago
    Yes I also found it quite odd. Those list make me wish data were expressed outside aggregates, in forms that quantitatively specify proper odds, and qualitatively display reasons that justify data. It is again like being shown dumb aggregates. Check the post from Gmerc nearby - the notes about London about apparent unorderly behaviour and similar amount of monitoring -, and London being ranked near Singapore. Of Barcelona, somebody on these pages (as I remember) posted about criminals cutting tyres of cars at semaphores to rob the driver. Others swear it is one of the safest places in the world. Official USA (as I remember) indications for travellers talk about a hive of scammers and petty thieves. This makes one wish for proper stats indicating rates of events, and reasoned data.
  - gmerc 3y ago
    Reminder: Just before the Pandemic, the US got the #1 ranking on pandemic preparedness while most of Asia including Singapore got trashed. Rankings are for profit endeavors that sell people metrics they can use to justify their policies or actions. Like best employer. The economist specifically has an almost comical beef with Singapore that draws derision in Asia year after year. Colonial Butthurt. Frankfurt over Singapore. Lol
- throw4837244 3y ago
  I've been to most of these cities and it surprises me the Asian ones aren't higher up. I absolutely felt safer in Singapore and Tokyo than Toronto. I'm also surprised Shanghai, Beijing, and Shenzhen aren't on the top 10.
  - JimDabell 3y ago
    If you read the report, that chart seems to combine inputs (effort expended) and outputs (results observed), and when you look at just the results, Singapore is top and several Asian cities are similar. The report says: > As with other pillars, personal security inputs and outputs have a high level of statistical correlation. Within this context, some individual cases differ markedly. On personal security outputs, Singapore scores an average of 97.3, markedly ahead of second place Copenhagen (92.7) and well over the index average (67.2). At the same time, it finishes in 40th place on inputs (51.7), falling below the average (57.3). Although the most extreme case, several other Asian cities, notably Tokyo, Osaka, Seoul and Taipei, have much lower input than output scores.
- JimDabell 3y ago
  Speaking as a Brit living in Singapore, the idea that Singapore and London are even in the same ballpark when it comes to personal safety is absolutely insane. The two cities aren’t even remotely similar. I took a look at the report you mentioned and I think the chart might be misleading you. Yes, the chart does give those rankings. But look at the prose: > As with other pillars, personal security inputs and outputs have a high level of statistical correlation. Within this context, some individual cases differ markedly. On personal security outputs, Singapore scores an average of 97.3, markedly ahead of second place Copenhagen (92.7) and well over the index average (67.2). At the same time, it finishes in 40th place on inputs (51.7), falling below the average (57.3). Although the most extreme case, several other Asian cities, notably Tokyo, Osaka, Seoul and Taipei, have much lower input than output scores. What’s all this about inputs and outputs? Well inputs are the effort a city puts into promoting personal security, and outputs are how good the personal security actually is. Here are the inputs for personal security: - Use of data-driven techniques for crime - Gun regulation and enforcement - a) Threat of terrorism - b) Threat of military conflict - c) Threat of civil unrest - a) Police personnel per capita - b) Prosecution personnel per capita - c) Professional judges or magistrate personnel per capita - Expenditure on social security - a) Laws on domestic violence - b) Laws on sexual harassment And here are the outputs for personal security: - a) Prevalence of petty crime - b) Prevalence of violent crime - Organised crime - Severity of terrorist attacks - Deaths from substance use disorders - Level of corruption - Enforceability of contracts - a) Income inequality levels - b) Share of population in vulnerable employment - a) Female homicide rates - b) Prevalence of domestic violence In short, the report you are citing is saying that not only is Singapore by far the safest city, but in fact it’s the safest despite putting comparatively little effort into it. This is what other commenters here mean when they complain that a lot of the criticism of Singapore here is from afar without experiencing or understanding the place. Anybody who has spent time in both London and Singapore would think that calling them similar in terms of personal safety is crazy.
  - mdp2021 3y ago
    Thank you very much Jim for your attention and time, spent to understand what was "wrong" in that report. Those graphs are one the most misleading thing I have ever encountered. It is also paradoxical that effort is factored in the final ranking: if some place has good output in spite of low investment, it means that it has "natural" good output (e.g. "inhabitants of X need little policing because they already incline towards honesty"), which means it should - if anything - be ranked higher!!!

mdp2021 3y ago

Check the Economist Intelligence Unit at https://safecities.economist.com/safe-cities-2021-whitepaper/ https://safecities.economist.com/safe-cities-2021-whitepaper... Personal security («crime, violence, terrorist threats, natural disasters and economic vulnerabilities»), 2021: > 1 Copenhagen; 2 Amsterdam; 3 Frankfurt; 4 Stockholm; 5 Brussels; 6 Paris; 7 Wellington; 8 Toronto; 9 Lisbon; 10 Madrid; 11 Sydney; 12 Barcelona; 13 Singapore; 14 London; 15 Zurich; 16 Tokyo; 17 Osaka; 18 Melbourne; 19 Taipei; 20 Santiago Other lists will be available. This one list is odd, because Singapore ranks in the top five for other measures related to security, but is ranked in the second of four quadrants for personal security, "second" to cities with presumably very different policies.

delta_p_delta_x 3y ago
I'm sorry, but that list is very inaccurate (even if it is by The Economist—what are they smoking?). Singapore, below Paris? Below Barcelona, and below Frankfurt? Within two hours of setting foot in Paris, I nearly got my passport and 1400+€ stolen. I've lived 26 years in Singapore, and I have seen nothing of the sort. I left my phone in a hawker centre, and it was still there when I came to retrieve it, several hours later.
- mdp2021 3y ago
  Yes I also found it quite odd. Those list make me wish data were expressed outside aggregates, in forms that quantitatively specify proper odds, and qualitatively display reasons that justify data. It is again like being shown dumb aggregates. Check the post from Gmerc nearby - the notes about London about apparent unorderly behaviour and similar amount of monitoring -, and London being ranked near Singapore. Of Barcelona, somebody on these pages (as I remember) posted about criminals cutting tyres of cars at semaphores to rob the driver. Others swear it is one of the safest places in the world. Official USA (as I remember) indications for travellers talk about a hive of scammers and petty thieves. This makes one wish for proper stats indicating rates of events, and reasoned data.
- gmerc 3y ago
  Reminder: Just before the Pandemic, the US got the #1 ranking on pandemic preparedness while most of Asia including Singapore got trashed. Rankings are for profit endeavors that sell people metrics they can use to justify their policies or actions. Like best employer. The economist specifically has an almost comical beef with Singapore that draws derision in Asia year after year. Colonial Butthurt. Frankfurt over Singapore. Lol
throw4837244 3y ago
I've been to most of these cities and it surprises me the Asian ones aren't higher up. I absolutely felt safer in Singapore and Tokyo than Toronto. I'm also surprised Shanghai, Beijing, and Shenzhen aren't on the top 10.
- JimDabell 3y ago
  If you read the report, that chart seems to combine inputs (effort expended) and outputs (results observed), and when you look at just the results, Singapore is top and several Asian cities are similar. The report says: > As with other pillars, personal security inputs and outputs have a high level of statistical correlation. Within this context, some individual cases differ markedly. On personal security outputs, Singapore scores an average of 97.3, markedly ahead of second place Copenhagen (92.7) and well over the index average (67.2). At the same time, it finishes in 40th place on inputs (51.7), falling below the average (57.3). Although the most extreme case, several other Asian cities, notably Tokyo, Osaka, Seoul and Taipei, have much lower input than output scores.
JimDabell 3y ago
Speaking as a Brit living in Singapore, the idea that Singapore and London are even in the same ballpark when it comes to personal safety is absolutely insane. The two cities aren’t even remotely similar. I took a look at the report you mentioned and I think the chart might be misleading you. Yes, the chart does give those rankings. But look at the prose: > As with other pillars, personal security inputs and outputs have a high level of statistical correlation. Within this context, some individual cases differ markedly. On personal security outputs, Singapore scores an average of 97.3, markedly ahead of second place Copenhagen (92.7) and well over the index average (67.2). At the same time, it finishes in 40th place on inputs (51.7), falling below the average (57.3). Although the most extreme case, several other Asian cities, notably Tokyo, Osaka, Seoul and Taipei, have much lower input than output scores. What’s all this about inputs and outputs? Well inputs are the effort a city puts into promoting personal security, and outputs are how good the personal security actually is. Here are the inputs for personal security: - Use of data-driven techniques for crime - Gun regulation and enforcement - a) Threat of terrorism - b) Threat of military conflict - c) Threat of civil unrest - a) Police personnel per capita - b) Prosecution personnel per capita - c) Professional judges or magistrate personnel per capita - Expenditure on social security - a) Laws on domestic violence - b) Laws on sexual harassment And here are the outputs for personal security: - a) Prevalence of petty crime - b) Prevalence of violent crime - Organised crime - Severity of terrorist attacks - Deaths from substance use disorders - Level of corruption - Enforceability of contracts - a) Income inequality levels - b) Share of population in vulnerable employment - a) Female homicide rates - b) Prevalence of domestic violence In short, the report you are citing is saying that not only is Singapore by far the safest city, but in fact it’s the safest despite putting comparatively little effort into it. This is what other commenters here mean when they complain that a lot of the criticism of Singapore here is from afar without experiencing or understanding the place. Anybody who has spent time in both London and Singapore would think that calling them similar in terms of personal safety is crazy.
- mdp2021 3y ago
  Thank you very much Jim for your attention and time, spent to understand what was "wrong" in that report. Those graphs are one the most misleading thing I have ever encountered. It is also paradoxical that effort is factored in the final ranking: if some place has good output in spite of low investment, it means that it has "natural" good output (e.g. "inhabitants of X need little policing because they already incline towards honesty"), which means it should - if anything - be ranked higher!!!