4 ms·

In my opinion, mostly formed from personal experience in the UK the biggest issue is the extreme cultural and political centralization around South-East England

In my opinion, mostly formed from personal experience in the UK the biggest issue is the extreme cultural and political centralization around South-East England. The gulf between London and the rest of the country, particularly the North of England is immense. There is incredible potential wasted in large parts of the UK. The tone of the article itself reflects that culture, one particular government or set of policies cannot be responsible for malaise that is so generalized. I think the UK needs much more devolution of power, autonomy and less financial and political dependence between its regions.

bsder 4y ago
> There is incredible potential wasted in large parts of the UK. Except that those parts are the ones who benefited most from being in the EU and are also the parts that overwhelmingly voted for Brexit.
- scaramanga 4y ago
  All corners of the media fed them decades of lies about how it was the EU that was holding them back, and not the british ruling class.
  - iqkznnft 4y ago
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- rayiner 4y ago
  How are they benefitting from cheap labor and goods coming over from Eastern Europe? That sounds like something London benefits from.
  - ben_w 4y ago
    IIRC, the poorer parts of the UK are where the car factories are, and they used to export a lot — might still do, but the investment in that sector is down due to Brexit, and that's because the cheap imports included parts for manufacturing cars. As for labor, again IIRC, the (fruit?) farms are labor intensive and locals aren't interested, at least not at the wages that the farms can afford given what they get paid by the supermarkets, who can't meaningfully pay more without raising prices, which they can't do without hurting more people: even before I left, I was seeing "donate food to the food bank" baskets at the doors to supermarkets in well-off areas like Cambridge.
  - mmarq 4y ago
    Because cheap labour from the EU, an area of the world generally richer than the UK minus London, was mostly a marginal phenomenon that didn’t have an impact on the lives of the British workers. EU citizens earn more than the locals and are generally younger and better educated, so they finance public services without actually using them as much as the locals. The entire UK depends on fiscal transfers from London, which is the only part of the country that is fully developed. So what benefits London, benefits the job center material complaining about foreigners in the barbaricum (which is the UK minus London).
    - rayiner 4y ago
      > So what benefits London, benefits the job center material complaining about foreigners in the barbaricum (which is the UK minus London) Gee, I wonder why those folks don’t believe Londoners who say they have their best interests at heart.
      - mmarq 4y ago
        Because the flow of fiscal transfers never stopped. Turn London in an independent state that keeps all its tax income and see how long it takes to Brexit England to realise where the benefits have been coming from.
        rayiner 4y ago
        Or the hinterland could pull a Hunger Games: https://thehungergames.fandom.com/wiki/The_Capitol https://thehungergames.fandom.com/wiki/The_Capitol. God knows London of all places would have it coming.
        bsder 4y ago
        At which point everything collapses--not just London. And what does the rest of the British isles have that the EU or US can't get elsewhere, better? And you would be relying on "modern norms" to protect you against someone invading the isles, exterminating everybody and taking over. This is something people don't seem to get--anarchy sounds nice to lots of people. However, everything doesn't just keep going--everything suddenly stops. Maybe what emerges on the other side on anarchy is better for "the people" (history suggests that the probabilities are against it), but there's a lot of bloodshed and starvation in the meantime. You may get your pound of flesh but will you be alive to appreciate that fact?
- FastMonkey 4y ago
  It's a bizarre situation, they'd actually probably be better off voting to leave the UK and rejoining the EU.
irrational 4y ago
I think you are on to something. The USA has a cultural capital in LA/Hollywood, a financial capital in NYC, a political capital in Washington D.C., and technology capitals in the Bay Area and Seattle. The UK has all of those too, but they are all located in one city instead of spread out across the country.
- flowerbeater 4y ago
  There's also an academic capital, New England (Boston), with Harvard, MIT, Yale, Brown, and two dozen top liberal arts colleges.
  - seibelj 4y ago
    Boston (Cambridge) is also the global top biotech and life sciences center.
  - eatonphil 4y ago
    Just to clarify, Yale and Brown aren't in Boston and 4/8 Ivies aren't in New England. And Ivies aren't even all the top schools. Top schools really are spread out quite well in the US compared to some countries. Which agrees with the general point that the US isn't super centralized.
  - barry-cotter 4y ago
    Why did you put Brown with Harvard and MIT? Alumnus? Yale isn’t in the same state as MIT and Harvard.
  - vineyardmike 4y ago
    The Ivy's are all in the north east, which I think is your point, but not in Boston nor NewEngland.
- wutbrodo 4y ago
  And on top of that, even the secondary industry hubs in the US (eg tech in NY or biotech in the Bay) are massive and productive enough to dwarf European industry "capitals". The geographic diversification of the US really is an enormous asset for the economy.
fennecfoxen 4y ago
You’re restating the case for “leveling up”.
- ben_w 4y ago
  IMO, the only thing wrong with "leveling up" is that the government itself, and not just the rest of us, is putting the policy in air-quotes.
mrcartmeneses 4y ago
The problem isn’t power centred on London it’s political power centred on the Home Counties. So we end up with far-right financialsm dressed up as economic policy.

bsder 4y ago

> There is incredible potential wasted in large parts of the UK. Except that those parts are the ones who benefited most from being in the EU and are also the parts that overwhelmingly voted for Brexit.

scaramanga 4y ago
All corners of the media fed them decades of lies about how it was the EU that was holding them back, and not the british ruling class.
- iqkznnft 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
rayiner 4y ago
How are they benefitting from cheap labor and goods coming over from Eastern Europe? That sounds like something London benefits from.
- ben_w 4y ago
  IIRC, the poorer parts of the UK are where the car factories are, and they used to export a lot — might still do, but the investment in that sector is down due to Brexit, and that's because the cheap imports included parts for manufacturing cars. As for labor, again IIRC, the (fruit?) farms are labor intensive and locals aren't interested, at least not at the wages that the farms can afford given what they get paid by the supermarkets, who can't meaningfully pay more without raising prices, which they can't do without hurting more people: even before I left, I was seeing "donate food to the food bank" baskets at the doors to supermarkets in well-off areas like Cambridge.
- mmarq 4y ago
  Because cheap labour from the EU, an area of the world generally richer than the UK minus London, was mostly a marginal phenomenon that didn’t have an impact on the lives of the British workers. EU citizens earn more than the locals and are generally younger and better educated, so they finance public services without actually using them as much as the locals. The entire UK depends on fiscal transfers from London, which is the only part of the country that is fully developed. So what benefits London, benefits the job center material complaining about foreigners in the barbaricum (which is the UK minus London).
  - rayiner 4y ago
    > So what benefits London, benefits the job center material complaining about foreigners in the barbaricum (which is the UK minus London) Gee, I wonder why those folks don’t believe Londoners who say they have their best interests at heart.
    - mmarq 4y ago
      Because the flow of fiscal transfers never stopped. Turn London in an independent state that keeps all its tax income and see how long it takes to Brexit England to realise where the benefits have been coming from.
      - rayiner 4y ago
        Or the hinterland could pull a Hunger Games: https://thehungergames.fandom.com/wiki/The_Capitol https://thehungergames.fandom.com/wiki/The_Capitol. God knows London of all places would have it coming.
        bsder 4y ago
        At which point everything collapses--not just London. And what does the rest of the British isles have that the EU or US can't get elsewhere, better? And you would be relying on "modern norms" to protect you against someone invading the isles, exterminating everybody and taking over. This is something people don't seem to get--anarchy sounds nice to lots of people. However, everything doesn't just keep going--everything suddenly stops. Maybe what emerges on the other side on anarchy is better for "the people" (history suggests that the probabilities are against it), but there's a lot of bloodshed and starvation in the meantime. You may get your pound of flesh but will you be alive to appreciate that fact?
FastMonkey 4y ago
It's a bizarre situation, they'd actually probably be better off voting to leave the UK and rejoining the EU.

irrational 4y ago

I think you are on to something. The USA has a cultural capital in LA/Hollywood, a financial capital in NYC, a political capital in Washington D.C., and technology capitals in the Bay Area and Seattle. The UK has all of those too, but they are all located in one city instead of spread out across the country.

flowerbeater 4y ago
There's also an academic capital, New England (Boston), with Harvard, MIT, Yale, Brown, and two dozen top liberal arts colleges.
- seibelj 4y ago
  Boston (Cambridge) is also the global top biotech and life sciences center.
- eatonphil 4y ago
  Just to clarify, Yale and Brown aren't in Boston and 4/8 Ivies aren't in New England. And Ivies aren't even all the top schools. Top schools really are spread out quite well in the US compared to some countries. Which agrees with the general point that the US isn't super centralized.
- barry-cotter 4y ago
  Why did you put Brown with Harvard and MIT? Alumnus? Yale isn’t in the same state as MIT and Harvard.
- vineyardmike 4y ago
  The Ivy's are all in the north east, which I think is your point, but not in Boston nor NewEngland.
wutbrodo 4y ago
And on top of that, even the secondary industry hubs in the US (eg tech in NY or biotech in the Bay) are massive and productive enough to dwarf European industry "capitals". The geographic diversification of the US really is an enormous asset for the economy.

fennecfoxen 4y ago

You’re restating the case for “leveling up”.

ben_w 4y ago
IMO, the only thing wrong with "leveling up" is that the government itself, and not just the rest of us, is putting the policy in air-quotes.

mrcartmeneses 4y ago

The problem isn’t power centred on London it’s political power centred on the Home Counties. So we end up with far-right financialsm dressed up as economic policy.