8 ms·

I live in Northern England, and this disparity has long been a source of irritation to me. In the 19th century there was a reasonable balance between north and

I live in Northern England, and this disparity has long been a source of irritation to me. In the 19th century there was a reasonable balance between north and south, mainly due to the wool and cotton industries in the North. At some point in the last century that parity ended and moving to London to pursue ones interest was the only way to further ones career. This created a virtuous circle as far as London is concerned and a brain drain for the rest of the country. The BBC's Evan Davies touches on some of these points in his TV programme 'Mind the Gap'. If you want to work at a decent tech company and work with like minded folk in an inspiring environment, London is really the only answer. The friends and family I have in London who have a similar education / skills / upbringing to me generally earn more and work for better companies but their quality of life is nowhere near as good as mine with respect to general living. The main trade off is the paucity of like minded friends who live near me. The price of property in this country is absurd and I find it very difficult to see how the situation has not been gamed by the land owning moneyed / political elite over the last 20 years or so. From personal experience there was a 4 fold increase in property prices between 1997 and 2005. There was not a corresponding increase in wages. Who does this benefit? I'll end with a joke: http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/northerner-terrorised-london-by-saying-hello-20151001102473 http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/northerner-terror...

pjc50 11y ago
Moved from Cambridge (which is starting to have London house prices) to Edinburgh and it's worked out very well: affordable, less crowded, more friendly, enough of a tech cluster, lots of culture. In re wages, I know at least one person in London whose house earns more in tax-free annual value appreciation than their salary.
- sjclemmy 11y ago
  Edinburgh is a lovely city. Ticks a lot of boxes as you mention.
- jeeva 11y ago
  As someone in Cambridge bemoaning the housing market, and having loved Edinburgh when visiting a few times, this is... interesting. Thanks! Oh, wait: <redacted> I used to work with you.
branchless 11y ago
Up North is better. London is a circle-jerk. http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/london-property-market-boosted-by-people-pretending-grim-places-are-great-2013053070398 http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/london-property-m... As ever the mash nails it. > Property prices in the capital are rocketing as people behave like a structurally unsound ex-council flat in a post-industrial wasteland is a spectacular place to live.
porker 11y ago
Exactly my experience (apart from living up north, which I'm considering). So far I've gotten round it by living an hour and a bit out of London, and going in every so often to meet likeminded people and enjoy the capital, knowing that the cost of travelling there / eating out / staying is _far_ less than I'd pay if I lived there.
simonh 11y ago
We're doing it to ourselves. We have an effectively fixed stock of housing, but everyone wants to live in a better house. So we're continuously bidding against each other, driving up the cost of houses trying to move up the ladder. Government subsidies intended to make cheaper houses more affordable, to help people get on to the property ladder, just mean that new entrants into the housing market can afford to bid even more against each other for those houses than they would otherwise. That just drives the cost of low-end housing up even more.
- dazc 11y ago
  Plus, volume house builders have in interest in maintaining the status quo. I think what's needed is for builders to switch from a 'build to sell' to a 'build to rent' business model but this needs long term finance to more readily available and, of course, a willingness to embrace new ideas. I'm not optimistic though.
- sjclemmy 11y ago
  It's the fixed stock of housing thing that bugs me. There is no shortage of space in this country. There are ineffective planning laws and most of the land is owned by offshore trust funds controlled by the wealthy few. /rant.
api 11y ago
The same thing is happening in the USA. It definitely feels like you must be in one of around 5-10 cities or you don't exist. If you don't go to one of them for at least part of your career, you go nowhere and command half or less the pay. The rest of America is "flyover country" where people supposedly live but nothing happens. This effect has always existed to some extent, but the "alpha cities" phenomenon is definitely something I've watched intensify as I've grown up. I've asked older people about this and they've agreed: in the past 15-ish years the prestige value of where you live has exploded in relevance. Here are some examples from the tech field: - The first true "PC" by most accounts, the Altair, came from Albuquerque, New Mexico. - The Compucolor II was the first "color" PC by many accounts and came from Atlanta, Georgia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compucolor_II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compucolor_II - The IBM PC was designed in Boca Raton, Florida. - The BBS phenomenon was largely decentralized, with major BBS efforts all of the world. - The Commodore 64, the biggest selling PC in the early-mid 80s, was from West Chester, Pennsylvania. Can you imagine that today? Now almost everything happens in SF, a notable but much smaller number of things happen in NYC, Boston, and LA/OC, and nothing happens anywhere else (or so it seems). I'm not sure exactly why this is. It could be a side-effect of increasing wealth disparity: the alpha cities are where the rich live, and the rich are increasingly richer than everyone else. Another factor could be the Internet. The net was supposed to decentralized, but as we've seen in other areas this has not always been the case. The net has been a powerful centralizing force.

pjc50 11y ago

Moved from Cambridge (which is starting to have London house prices) to Edinburgh and it's worked out very well: affordable, less crowded, more friendly, enough of a tech cluster, lots of culture. In re wages, I know at least one person in London whose house earns more in tax-free annual value appreciation than their salary.

sjclemmy 11y ago
Edinburgh is a lovely city. Ticks a lot of boxes as you mention.
jeeva 11y ago
As someone in Cambridge bemoaning the housing market, and having loved Edinburgh when visiting a few times, this is... interesting. Thanks! Oh, wait: <redacted> I used to work with you.

branchless 11y ago

Up North is better. London is a circle-jerk. http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/london-property-market-boosted-by-people-pretending-grim-places-are-great-2013053070398 http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/london-property-m... As ever the mash nails it. > Property prices in the capital are rocketing as people behave like a structurally unsound ex-council flat in a post-industrial wasteland is a spectacular place to live.

porker 11y ago

Exactly my experience (apart from living up north, which I'm considering). So far I've gotten round it by living an hour and a bit out of London, and going in every so often to meet likeminded people and enjoy the capital, knowing that the cost of travelling there / eating out / staying is _far_ less than I'd pay if I lived there.

simonh 11y ago

We're doing it to ourselves. We have an effectively fixed stock of housing, but everyone wants to live in a better house. So we're continuously bidding against each other, driving up the cost of houses trying to move up the ladder. Government subsidies intended to make cheaper houses more affordable, to help people get on to the property ladder, just mean that new entrants into the housing market can afford to bid even more against each other for those houses than they would otherwise. That just drives the cost of low-end housing up even more.

dazc 11y ago
Plus, volume house builders have in interest in maintaining the status quo. I think what's needed is for builders to switch from a 'build to sell' to a 'build to rent' business model but this needs long term finance to more readily available and, of course, a willingness to embrace new ideas. I'm not optimistic though.
sjclemmy 11y ago
It's the fixed stock of housing thing that bugs me. There is no shortage of space in this country. There are ineffective planning laws and most of the land is owned by offshore trust funds controlled by the wealthy few. /rant.

api 11y ago

The same thing is happening in the USA. It definitely feels like you must be in one of around 5-10 cities or you don't exist. If you don't go to one of them for at least part of your career, you go nowhere and command half or less the pay. The rest of America is "flyover country" where people supposedly live but nothing happens. This effect has always existed to some extent, but the "alpha cities" phenomenon is definitely something I've watched intensify as I've grown up. I've asked older people about this and they've agreed: in the past 15-ish years the prestige value of where you live has exploded in relevance. Here are some examples from the tech field: - The first true "PC" by most accounts, the Altair, came from Albuquerque, New Mexico. - The Compucolor II was the first "color" PC by many accounts and came from Atlanta, Georgia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compucolor_II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compucolor_II - The IBM PC was designed in Boca Raton, Florida. - The BBS phenomenon was largely decentralized, with major BBS efforts all of the world. - The Commodore 64, the biggest selling PC in the early-mid 80s, was from West Chester, Pennsylvania. Can you imagine that today? Now almost everything happens in SF, a notable but much smaller number of things happen in NYC, Boston, and LA/OC, and nothing happens anywhere else (or so it seems). I'm not sure exactly why this is. It could be a side-effect of increasing wealth disparity: the alpha cities are where the rich live, and the rich are increasingly richer than everyone else. Another factor could be the Internet. The net was supposed to decentralized, but as we've seen in other areas this has not always been the case. The net has been a powerful centralizing force.