> none of U.S. cities rank in the top 100 most livable places (Mercer Cities Ranking)
Unless I am mistaken, this link shows 8 US cities in the top 50. Are you referring to something else?
http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html http://bwnt.businessweek.com/interactive_reports/livable_cit...
> crime, largest per capita prison population in the world
Honest question, is this totally a bad thing? Does punishing criminals under a certain standard imply something poor? Or am I fuzzy on the statement?
> infrastructure - roads, bridges, buildings etc. (don't get me started; it's almost third world country level)
Whoa! Have you ever been to the US? This is a very bold statement to make. (note: I've been all around the world in my days)
> average lasting quality of housing (drywall, cheap wood framing, bad carpentry on windows and doors etc.)
Hmm, I've never seen this in my travels around the States. Quality depends on many factors. I've lived in newly built to 40+ year old homes and I've never had the problems you've mentioned. I've never heard of anyone I've personally known with those problems, either (not that they don't exist, of course).
> no functioning Euro-style city cores, urban sprawl, stuffed highways with commuters
Some areas could use some help, but I've successfully navigated around San Diego, Seattle, Washington DC, NYC, and other metros without a personal vehicle, and have relatives who do so all the time. Does this not fit the description? On a side note, my personal city is 400,000 people over 115 sq miles (county: 900,000 people over 832 sq miles) - it's a different way of life and trying to force a metro-city transportation system into this area is bound for failure (though I will agree that there is room for improvement).
The US isn't perfect. But not that imperfect, either.