Amsterdam Ranked Best and Worst in Global Survey of Cities

(Washington, DC)– April 1, 2015 — According to the most recent survey of the US Association of Newspapers and World Reporting, the Town of Amsterdam is ranked one of the country’s best places to live while the City of Amsterdam ranks as one of the worst.
The survey of over 1200 global cities, large and small, considered a range of factor in its rankings including: educational opportunities, economic opportunities, and quality of life issues.
The Town of Amsterdam ranked topmost in quality of life issues given its abundance of shopping opportunities (Target, Staples), its willingness to turn greenspace into a casino, its contribution to suburban sprawl, and its pristine roads and parking lots.
The City of Amsterdam scored at the bottom in almost every measured category of the random sample of global cities. Surprisngly, survey respondents chose war zones such as Tikrit, Iraq as offering better quality of life and economic opportunity than the city. Crucially, Tikrit’s infrastructure, even after sustained mortar strikes, scored higher than Amsterdam with more drivable roads, fewer potholes and less blighted housing.
The full survey will be released on April 1, 2015 at www.surveyofplacesintheusaidesperatelywishedilivedin.com

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. wildthane says:

    I just left the review of my departmental budget. It amounts to a whopping .002% of the total budget. I was questioned over a 2% salary increase for my secretary, Carol, and the cost of a $17K update to our website.
    I pointed out that combing through the fine hairs of each department perpetuates the MYTH that these departments are driving the increase in the budget. For the most part, they are not. The departments do not spend extravagantly. There is no “fat.” The department heads religiously adhere to the 2% cap in their requests, with the exception of Transportation (will hit the General Fund for $155K) and, this year, Golf ($90K.)
    The shortfall in Transportation was pointed out to this group last year before they were even sworn in. They point to a reduction in costs last year as a success, ignoring the fact that the hit to our taxpayers is still over $100,000 and my driving a car worth $890 to the grocery store after work is a problem.
    The other drivers that inflate this budget include $450,000 in pension costs and $450,000 for health insurance cost. Our state aid has been flat for the eight years I’ve been here. We cannot control these variables.
    So, costs are escalating at an alarming rate and we are forced to look for new revenues because our backs are against the wall. This council needs to stop the showboating, pretending that they addressing the meta-factors that affect this budget by looking at micro-expenditures in each line. We will never get to where we need to be unless they courageously make the decision to PROTECT TAXPAYERS INSTEAD OF SPECIAL INTERESTS. The only organization we represent is the City of Amsterdam.

    • Luis says:

      Mayor,
      I congratulate you on the extremely small increase over last years departmental budget of only .002%. BTW, Carol is worth more than any of the select few that received extra special raises.
      Back to the budget, its better to measure an office operating budgets overall impact to the general budget or any of its associated fees/taxes by looking back years, when looking for fat. I quote you above “I pointed out that combing through the fine hairs of each department perpetuates the MYTH that these departments are driving the increase in the budget.”
      Now how about you give us a better understanding of your budget and whether it maybe contributing to an increasing budget. No not (1) year but what was the increase from two years ago? And from three years ago? And …yes 4,5,6 and 7 years?
      What is the increase now from the last year Mayoral budget under the last Mayor?
      That Is a better indicator of wheather your budget is only a .002 increase to the taxpayer’s!
      No, I don’t want to hear what is associated with the increases other than standard percentage based increases. That’s another question. Just the numbers. This is how you truly find if a budget is contributing to an increasing operating budget.
      I’m certain it’s not .002%. And please don’t tell me to go look for them.

  2. wildthane says:

    I just left the review of my departmental budget. It amounts to a whopping .002% of the total budget. I was questioned over a 2% salary increase for my secretary, Carol, and the cost of a $17K update to our website.
    I pointed out that combing through the fine hairs of each department perpetuates the MYTH that these departments are driving the increase in the budget. For the most part, they are not. The departments do not spend extravagantly. There is no “fat.” The department heads religiously adhere to the 2% cap in their requests, with the exception of Transportation (will hit the General Fund for $155K) and, this year, Golf ($90K.)
    The shortfall in Transportation was pointed out to this group last year before they were even sworn in. They point to a reduction in costs last year as a success, ignoring the fact that the hit to our taxpayers is still over $100,000 and my driving a car worth $890 to the grocery store after work is a problem.
    The other drivers that inflate this budget include $450,000 in pension costs and $450,000 for health insurance cost. Our state aid has been flat for the eight years I’ve been here. We cannot control these variables.
    So, costs are escalating at an alarming rate and we are forced to look for new revenues because our backs are against the wall. This council needs to stop the showboating, pretending that they addressing the meta-factors that affect this budget by looking at micro-expenditures in each line. We will never get to where we need to be unless they courageously make the decision to PROTECT TAXPAYERS INSTEAD OF SPECIAL INTERESTS. The only organization we represent is the City of Amsterdam.

    • Luis says:

      Mayor,
      I congratulate you on the extremely small increase over last years departmental budget of only .002%. BTW, Carol is worth more than any of the select few that received extra special raises.
      Back to the budget, its better to measure an office operating budgets overall impact to the general budget or any of its associated fees/taxes by looking back years, when looking for fat. I quote you above “I pointed out that combing through the fine hairs of each department perpetuates the MYTH that these departments are driving the increase in the budget.”
      Now how about you give us a better understanding of your budget and whether it maybe contributing to an increasing budget. No not (1) year but what was the increase from two years ago? And from three years ago? And …yes 4,5,6 and 7 years?
      What is the increase now from the last year Mayoral budget under the last Mayor?
      That Is a better indicator of wheather your budget is only a .002 increase to the taxpayer’s!
      No, I don’t want to hear what is associated with the increases other than standard percentage based increases. That’s another question. Just the numbers. This is how you truly find if a budget is contributing to an increasing operating budget.
      I’m certain it’s not .002%. And please don’t tell me to go look for them.

Leave a Reply