At long last people seem to be waking up the terrible inequities in the UK and the completely Londoncentric policies that have left swathes of the country with relatively little money, prospects etc. The London based 'elite' are only interested in their own backyard and couldn't give a shit about the rest of the country except as a place to collect rainwater and visit in the hols.
Decent jobs drain into the south east, exacerbating the north/south divide. More money is spent on infrastructure projects in London than anywhere else. They've finally come out and admitted that even HS2 will benefit London more than anywhere else.
Sturgeon is on the rampage in Scotland again and apparently Wales has seen its first ever mass independence march. I'm sure the various Northern English provinces would also be in on the act if they could find a flag to rally around.
So, will the decline get halted... Will someone manage to convince the northern hordes that actually Europe isn't the cause of their poverty, it's actually London. And will they manage to get the message across in time to do anything to stop the approaching catastrophe?
London didn't make Britain great, Britain made London Great. But they seem to be quite happy to cut the rest of us loose and look after nothing except themselves.
I’ve often said that if/when we leave the EU this will only get worsen.
Westminster thinking when it comes to infrastructure investment is usually about ‘efficiency’ if you invest £ in London and the South East you’ll get the quickest return because that’s where the economy is strongest, but it’s self fulfilling- invest more, economy grows, makes more sense to invest more.
That’s the thinking that says that Heathrow is the busiest airport in the UK, we must have a 3rd runway to increase its capacity, makes sense I suppose, but why not invest in regional airports? I can assure anyone in Westminster that no one who doesn’t live in the SE wants to drive for 4 hours to catch a 2 hour flight!
The EU has always been more focused on investment in struggling areas, they helped transform Cardiff 20 years ago, Swansea is well on its way and Newport and the Valleys are seeing reversal of decline that started 50 years ago.
I’ve been shouted down by leavers time and again, we pay more into the EU than we get out (forgetting the economic benefits of being a member for a moment) and once we’re out we can invest more in Wales, The North of England and Scotland, well I’ll believe when I see it because it’s never, ever happened before.
Well on the other hand compared to London it's quiet and cheap up here.
Agreed, but as the majority of people live there, they ain't gonna vote to help other areas. Until everyone stops being greedy and thinking only of themselves it will never happen. Politicians aren't overly bothered about the north or west as combined there still isn't enough people to beat the volume in south East (I vaguely recall that but can't think where so may be a total made up fact).
Agreed, but as the majority of people live there
It’s the most densely populated part of the UK, but less than a 3rd of the population of the UK live in London and the SE of England.
That is still a sizeable chunk for an 'area', however, I knew I'd have something wrong so I'll go back to reading political threads instead of joining in as clearly I'm not up to speed and likely to spout more inaccuracies.
(not having a go, I suspected I'd be wrong on something and happy to be corrected)
It's easy to blame London but that isn't the Issue. London is one of the top 3 major cities in the world so it is right we protect that status as it is of great benefit to us. The problem with the areas outside of London is the utter short sightedness, lack of ambition of the local councils and governments. They're so hung up on the old heavy industries and mass production manufacturing industries of the past and have not prepared their regions or people for the developing world and economies and as a result they have populations of people with the wrong skills for the modern world. It will take some time to reverse I fear and also I fear some generations are now lost generations because they're either too old or unwilling to re-train and adapt.
The sooner people get out of the victim mentally that is a major infection of the British phycology and stop blaming everyone and everything else the better.
+1 Wobbliscott
The North needs to find a way to encourage firms to move set up shop up North. It's not just subsidies from central government that will encourage that, it's that do the right people want to live up North - our economy is slowly going higher tech, can you really convince a lot of top graduates to stay up North? How are private firms going to cope with being stuck out in the wilderness so to speak and not have the advantage of having suppliers close by, why would they accept increased logistical costs etc etc etc?
There are loads of reasons the North isn't doing well, central government policies are partly responsible but a lot of it is outside of central government control and market based.
If my company announced it was moving it's manufacturing and R&D site up North, half the company would quit or move to the Swiss or Singapore sites. Let's say my firm moved to Sheffield, even if half the site quit, they'd still end up employing non-locals for most of the roles - so the reality would be that a bunch of Southern English, Europeans and Indians would move in and drive up house prices. I'm sure Northerners would love that.
OP - the North you describe is not the North I live in (edge of West/North Yorkshire). I think there could be more inequality within the SouthEast than there is between the SE and the rest of the counrty - at least if you take quality of life/affordability as part of the yardstick. And what is the LOL movement? It hasn't taken hold around me.
What's the LOL movement?
What’s the LOL movement?
I've just had to google it myself. It's something to do with League of Legends. Probably.
I’ve just had to google it myself. It’s something to do with League of Legends. Probably.
Well it seems very popular not sure if people in London have all the elite gear though.
No, it's more about the UK State being run for the benefit of the elite.
It means 'Laugh Out Loud". Usually used when anyone says government spending is designed to benefit the whole of the country...
it’s more about the UK State being run for the benefit of the elite.
When did that start then?
When did that start then?
Especially considering London contributes more in tax than it recieves. The rest of the surplus going to all those other hard done to regions.
No, it’s more about the UK State being run for the benefit of the elite.
The problem with statements like that is when challenged very few people can give examples.
"You know, them"
At which point them becomes whoever they want them to be, yuppies, hipsters, Etonians, BAME and positive discrimination, or all all sort of unsavoury 'ists and 'isms.
Or the population of Reading gets blamed because that's where crossrail finishes, so we're the elite and Basingstoke isn't.
I doubt someone in Slough really considers themselves the elite compared to Harrogate or Hebden Bridge.
But yes we really didn't need crossrail, if you can't get to canary warf from Berkshire, then dont live in Berkshire.
raybanwomble
Member
Especially considering London contributes more in tax than it recieves.
Well now. The tax figures include everything that's <declared> in London, not where the revenue is actually generated. So an undefined amount of that revenue is only accrued in London because that's where a head office is. I could be wrong but I don't think there's any numbers available for tax revenue actually generated and paid in London, rather than just paid.
With regards tax spend Vs income even the ONS say it's not simple (and therefore if it's being simplified it's being used to "prove" a point.)
Take for example:
A commuter does their tax raised go to where they live or work? Because most of their tax use is where they live.
Or a national company does it's VAT return get attributed to where is was raised or to where the books are submitted?
Defence and other large projects can be spread across the whole population yet only benefit small areas (crossrail, hs2, Heathrow 3rd runway).
Decent jobs drain into the south east
What exactly do you mean by a decent job, do you mean being a miserable member of the Daily London City pissing contest worried that Giles and Miles might disapprove of his new shirt or that the canteen on the Battersea site is better than the one at Woodsmith Mine.
Decent job, define please.
What exactly do you mean by a decent job, do you mean being a miserable member of the Daily London City pissing contest worried that Giles and Miles might disapprove of his new shirt or that the canteen on the Battersea site is better than the one at Woodsmith Mine.
Decent job, define please.
Got a chip on your shoulder?
Ive o my ever worked in TV and engineering so here's a couple rod examples.
Almost the entire uk process engineering design industry is within the west london and the Leatherhead/Camberley/Baingstoke/ Reading area. Jacobs has a Manchester office and there's Aberdeen but the rest of the uk is site based. Process engineering is the second highest paid graduate job after being a doctor so objectively a decent job quantitatively and it's engineering design so hard to argue it's not qualitatively as well. So that area pretty much sucks up all the uk graduates.
I now work in TV which is getting better than it was, but its still basically a case of move to London if you want to get on the career ladder. Again, well paid, creative and/or technical roles, a decent job.
Now there are obviously decent jobs outside the SE. And jobs elsewhere that aren't available in the SE. But are you really going to belligerently argue that there isn't a problem with brain drain in the Uk and that it's not down to better prospects for a tonight people in the SE?
Got a chip on your shoulder?
No thought I made that obvious
Got a chip on your shoulder?
Now there are obviously decent jobs outside the SE. And jobs elsewhere that aren’t available in the SE. But are you really going to belligerently argue that there isn’t a problem with brain drain in the Uk and that it’s not down to better prospects for a tonight people in the SE?
Depends on your interpretation of decent, yours is obviously different from mine, my interpretation of work involves the whole thing outside of work ie the support mechanism that allows you to go to work, the quality of your life outside of the work, if London and the SE is your thing then fill your boots, I am more than happy with my lot here in the North West, quite happy to work in smoke during the week but the site of Man Picc concourse on a Friday afternoon is a sight to behold.
yours is obviously different from mine, my interpretation of work involves the whole thing outside of work ie the support mechanism that allows you to go to work, the quality of your life outside of the work, if London and the SE is your thing then fill your boots, I am more than happy with my lot here in the North West, quite happy to work in smoke during the week but the site of Man Picc concourse on a Friday afternoon is a sight to behold.
You think no one south of Watford Gap has a life outside of work?
No denying that the high earnings and house prices cancel each other out. But you're going to have to articulate why you think either there isn't a brain drain to the SE (because there is) or explain why there is a brain drain problem despite there being no difference (or a negative one) in your opinion.
Local government outside London doesn't have the same powers nor the same spending ability as London does. Also not helped by crap like the deregulation of buses etc.
As long as spending is decided in London, that's where the power, the influence resides and the money is spent.
As for crossrail, crossrail 2, HS2 all massive investment in London
Which they need, because I have yet to see a city in the UK other than London that resembles Japan in terms of how crowded the public transport is.
Without London and the southern Oxford, Didcot, Reading and Cambridge science and technology belt this country would shit itself and resemble Greece overnight.
Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.
Big centralised mega cities with proper networked infrastructure are good, they will in the long run be better for the environment.
What’s the LOL movement?
Lord of Light. The North Remembers, or something.
Which they need, because I have yet to see a city in the UK other than London that resembles Japan in terms of how crowded the public transport is.
It is self defeating though. Unless London is a bit shit then there's no incentive for graduates* to stay in the North.
The trouble is a few billion spent upgrading the m4 pays for itself very quickly. A couple of billion on the transpennine railway might take a lot longer. But at some point the balance has to tip the other way or the north gets abandoned.
*Or people in general, just that it's probably the biggest single demographic that migrates.
The trouble is a few billion spent upgrading the m4 pays for itself very quickly. A couple of billion on the transpennine railway might take a lot longer. But at some point the balance has to tip the other way or the north gets abandoned.
But unless you can find a way to convince more companies to locate up North, what is the point of building more rail capacity? As I said earlier, the reaction at my company if it were to relocate north would be "I quit" from most workers and yet even then most of those employed at the new site would be non-northeners. No doubt strengthening the UKIP vote. The people in these jobs like biotech, process engineering, finance.... don't want to live in ex mining or steel towns surrounded by depressed people who bang on about Thatcher.
Raybanwomble, intent on offending as many people as possible since 2018 (since getting banned and coming back under a new pseudo).
The people in these jobs like biotech, process engineering, finance…. don’t want to live in ex mining or steel towns surrounded by depressed people who bang on about Thatcher.
That is outrageous Tom.
What’s the LOL movement?
Something to do with cats I think.
I spent most of my life in London and the SE, now I'm in a former mining town in Lancs. There's inequality in both regions for sure, but the rich have it better down south and the poor have it much worse up here.
There's basically almost full employment down south IME, long-term unemployment is a serious problem in some of the regions and brings a range of other social issues.
The problem with the areas outside of London is the utter short sightedness, lack of ambition of the local councils and governments. They’re so hung up on the old heavy industries and mass production manufacturing industries of the past
Textbook Tory bollocks.
don’t want to live in ex mining or steel towns surrounded by depressed people who bang on about Thatcher.
You've shown your lack of life experience here pal, get off the internet and get around a bit more.
You’ve shown your lack of life experience here pal, get off the internet and get around a bit more.
Families up north, I know what it's like.
No denying that the high earnings and house prices cancel each other out. But you’re going to have to articulate why you think either there isn’t a brain drain to the SE (because there is) or explain why there is a brain drain problem despite there being no difference (or a negative one) in your opinion.
I`m bewildered as to why you think I am in denial about the brain drain ? where have I mentioned anything of the sort ?
I couldnt give 2 hoots about this brain drain, I only gave my opinion on what I think constitutes a decent job, hence my initial question.
Right. The OP has grossly oversimplified the situation. There are so many layers and so many points of view. 'The London Elite' clearly do care about those less fortunate since they tend to vote left rather than right, for a start.
The reasons why London dominates the economy are historical, having originally been geographical. And it's a common phenomenon - most countries have a large city that dominates the economy (Sweden, France, Ireland etc) and the ones that don't (Germany, Spain) are modern federations of states, each of which had its own dominating city. The fact it keeps happening suggests that there is some fundamental driver at work.
That driver is the fact that it's easier to do business with people who are nearby. This means that businesses located near to other businesses they need (both customers and parntners) can prosper more. They have a bigger market and a business advantage. So if you want to start a new business, you go where the partners and the markets are. With businesses flourishing, people come to the big cities to get work, which in turn boosts the economy further.
The only reason for big cities to have developed in the North, Midlands and South Wales is that there were natural resources that couldn't move. Now those resources aren't so important, not only do they not have an economic advantage, they have a disadvantage because they are further from the strongest economic hot spot. Therefore, if you want those places to grow, you need massive investment.
So the question is, should a government massively invest in a place that may create a lower return on that investment? I mean, let's say 10bn invested in London generates 20bn of growth, because of the aforementioned snowball effect. If you invest 2.5bn in four other places, you might only get 3bn of growth in each one, thereby only getting 12bn of growth. This is the economic argument.
The social argument says that people who have a home in a place deserve opportunities in that place. Ok, fine. But can you create two Londons? Can a country support two? Or three or four? London is only London because it's THE biggest place, not simply A big place. But do you want Manchester or Birmingham to be like London? Most of the anti-London posters on here criticise it heavily, so do you really want your home town to end up like it?
In my industry, IT - there is a massive difference between what goes on in London and in say Birmingham. Most of the high powered stuff happens in London, most of the startups for new exciting job opportunities are in London. Because it is London.
Now before I get flamed, I'm a leftie and if I were in charge I'd massively increase investment everywhere, and create a nationwide development plan which plays to each city's strengths. I'm just trying to explain the economics of it - lack of investment outside London is not a conspiracy by London Elite who don't care about anywhere else. That's just sour grapes and clinging to the idea doesn't help anyone. Look for the truth behind phenomena rather than finding a random idea that fits your emotional state.
But unless you can find a way to convince more companies to locate up North, what is the point of building more rail capacity?
It's the other way round. Companies might locate because there is more rail capacity. Or, more likely, companies will start up in Birmingham because it's now close to London. Cities are not separated by distance, they are separated by time. For all the reasons I just mentioned, if you bring Birmingham closer to London, they will both benefit. Markets will be closer, partner businesses will be closer, people will be closer.
It’s the other way round. Companies might locate because there is more rail capacity. Or, more likely, companies will start up in Birmingham because it’s now close to London. Cities are not separated by distance, they are separated by time. For all the reasons I just mentioned, if you bring Birmingham closer to London, they will both benefit. Markets will be closer, partner businesses will be closer, people will be closer.
Well yes, but they were talking about the transpennine - local transport for local people.
Not HS2 - which is for the elite.
Apparently.
Also - good previous post.
I much prefer living in my former mining and steel town (in the Midlands, so nearly North) where people still bang on about Thatcher than living in the south east.
Jobs pay less, but things cost less. People are generally friendlier and have more time and care for each other. The post Thatcher victim mentality and BNP world view is being replaced as another generation comes through with a broader and more enlightened outlook
Mind you, some London based asshat is about to drive HS2 right through the middle of it - and particularly our fantastic bridleway network - so people from Leeds can go and meet him 10 minutes quicker.
I've worked in Cardiff, Bristol, Birmingham, London, and numerous other locations. Usually, the smaller the place the more mundane the job and the less dynamic the workforce. Not always, but usually.
This is probably related (maybe causally) to the often described pattern of moving to London when you're young and moving away when you get older, settle down and have a family.
the smaller the place the more mundane the job
I'd have said the opposite. Lots of mundane office jobs in London. None in forestry, guiding, path building etc. 🙂
Edukator
Raybanwomble, intent on offending as many people as possible since 2018 (since getting banned and coming back under a new pseudo).
Thank god you posted that, for a while there I was thinking he was semi serious.
LOL
Life outside London.
So the question is, should a government massively invest in a place that may create a lower return on that investment? I mean, let’s say 10bn invested in London generates 20bn of growth, because of the aforementioned snowball effect. If you invest 2.5bn in four other places, you might only get 3bn of growth in each one, thereby only getting 12bn of growth. This is the economic argument.
Yes of course it should invest elsewhere. Precisely because of that snowball effect. But in reverse. I can't believe people genuinely believe it's fair and right that a monumentally huge proportion of investment should go to one place only.
And don't get me started about the banking crisis wherec the London based banks were bailed out with everyone's money whilst various northern and Welsh industries were left to rot.
And don't give me that crap about those industries being loss making/ failing etc. It would be hard to top the failure of the banking system, and yet they got bailed.
I’d have said the opposite. Lots of mundane office jobs in London. None in forestry, guiding, path building etc.
Forestry seems fairly mundane tbh. Plant trees, cut down trees, sell timber, repeat 🙂
I was obviously talking about my own experience as mentioned in the preceding sentence. I think a lot of people share that opinion. Also many people who share your view, that they would rather work out in the countryside. I can see both points of view, having been tempted either way. But I personally need the stimulation of a challenging involving techie job and there are very few of those out in the sticks.
Yes of course it should invest elsewhere. Precisely because of that snowball effect. But in reverse. I can’t believe people genuinely believe it’s fair and right that a monumentally huge proportion of investment should go to one place only.
Just to make it clear I'm not arguing either way - just raising the issues.
There are two ways to think about it. You could say that investment should be spread out according to population, or you could argue that investment should go to the places where it would have most effect. Where businesses need it.
Why should we break up one very big snowball to create many smaller snowballs that are collectively less effective? *note this is an academic question not a personal viewpoint.
