New York City landed near the very bottom of U.S. News & World Report's list of the "Best Places To Live," falling behind Cleveland, Ohio; Allentown, Pennsylvania; and, um, Albany, New York. So why is the greatest city in America ranked 96 out of 100 in this "study," which factored in data from the U.S. Census Bureau, the Department of Labor, and, of course, the FBI? Besides the obvious Chartbeat appeal of trolling the loudmouth residents of the nation's media capital, U.S. News & World Report has decided that NYC has bad "value."
The report's Value Index, calculated using U.S. Census data, "measures how comfortably the average resident of each metro area can afford to live within his or her means." NYC scored a very low 1.1 out of 10 on the report's Value Index. NYC did, however, score high ranks on several of the other indexes, including quality of life, job market, and "Desirability." Check out our 8.4 in Desirability! Go cry in your pillow, hideous 98th-ranked Stockton, California.
Peruse the whole bullshit report here, if you have nothing better to do (which must mean you don't live in New York). And if you really think you'd be happier getting more value in Rochester, then by all means, peruse the whole bullshit report from the spacious, high-value confines of your comfortable split-level townhouse in the charming Rochester suburb of Pittsford.
There is no disputing the facts: all the money you waste on rent in NYC could get you a much larger domicile in a place like stimulating Winston-Salem, North Carolina. But why stop there? You'll get even more value in Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine, or any city in Ukraine for that matter. Of course, to get the most value, you need only invest in a comfy subterranean studio apartment anywhere in hip downtown Hades. Quiet and cozy!
[Editor's note: An earlier version of this article sarcastically referred to Pittsford, NY as "charming." After receiving objections from one longtime Pittsford resident, and investigating the suburb further, we hereby withdraw the sarcasm.]
