Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Where's the best place to live in the UK if you're young?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-46815257

In this article, you can check to see if the area you live in is classed as a good area to live if you are under 26 years old. This was assessed on a number of different variables, including average rent prices, access to mental health support, and unemployment levels. Melton in Leicestershire is currently ranks bottom in places to live, with cities and areas around them tending to be higher up in the list.

What's your area like to live in as a young person?

What do you think is important to have as a young person living the UK?

Let us know your thoughts below!

Reply 1

Good bloke

This is a ridiculous classification. Inner city Tower Hamlets, pretty well hell on earth, gets a score of seven - with an average rent of over £800, high unemployment, no open spaces or wild land - all on the basis, it seems, that there are lots of disadvantaged young people there, nightclubs and good buses.

Meanwhile, low-crime and affluent Surrey Heath, low unemployment, half the rent to pay, loads of open space and next door to buzzing Guildford is rated four. I know where I would rather live at any age.

Reply 2

Picnic1

Ironically, those places that are classed as worst will probably have some of the richest or stablest families in the country. That's why they don't need lots of mental health care, that's why they don't need low rent prices and that's why they don't need high employment rates. So if you're a 26 year old from a rich family, you're probably doing OK, relatively speaking. Even if you've got depression, you've generally got a better class of depression. It's the very intelligent people from poor or average areas that are the ones to really worry about. They have the intelligence to know how second rate their life experience is compared to their abilities and inclinations.

(edited 5 years ago)

Reply 3

jameswhughes

Original post by Good bloke

Hartlepool and Blackpool also both score better than Surrey Heath mainly because of their 4G coverage. Who drew up these metrics? :lolwut:

Reply 4

Picnic1

Original post by jameswhughes

Hartlepool and Blackpool also both score better than Surrey Heath mainly because of their 4G coverage. Who drew up these metrics? :lolwut:

It's the BBC- their left wing bias has an interest in suggesting that places with significant amounts of economic deprivation are actually good places to be in if you're young with low standards of what keeps you happy. Because that makes BBC Baby Boomers feel less guilty whilst stopping the great unwashed from wanting to move next to middle aged Alan Yentob (who, ironically, looks unwashed) in his swanky London pad. A typical BBC false platitude from someone whose idea of a palatable place to live in the north is pretty much restricted to York or a luxury flat in a city, would be something like "Oh you wouldn't want to be surrounded by all of these Hampstead and Eton types like I am. Oh I love the north"

(edited 5 years ago)

Reply 5

sr90

Volunteer Team

Big fan of Islington coming out top in a study where one of the key variables is affordable house prices. Or Richmond being given 0 for wild land when it's got a huge park that people from all over the country come to visit.