4 ms·

The OP starts with a very wrong comparison; essentially comparing the London area with the American average. A proper comparison will be to compare it against t

by csomar 2y ago

The OP starts with a very wrong comparison; essentially comparing the London area with the American average. A proper comparison will be to compare it against the Washington or NYC metropolitan area. The numbers will be different. Then the article presents no arguments on how the UK can achieve such a feat other than having a bit better public transport. Public transport does certainly help and it’ll increase GDP; but I highly doubt it’s the determinant in creating the richest country per capita in the world. As for “can”, any country theoretically can become super-rich. Singapore did. Whether it will or not is another matter. The UK had particular circumstances in the 1700-1900. It does not have the same circumstances today. Lots of countries are also racing toward this goal. The UK is certainly better positioned than most countries in the world but not the best positioned out there.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> Public transport does certainly help and it’ll increase GDP; but I highly doubt it’s the determinant in creating the richest country per capita in the world The UK is geographically blessed. That hasn’t been an advantage recently, because the EU seemed to be working, but Alexander Hamilton’s arguments against loose political unions seem prescient as ever amidst Europe’s present rightwing lurch [1]. If Britain can get its infrastructure in line and press its inherent energy-cost advantage relative to Europe, it could reasonably supplant Asia based on proximity, capital market depth and “friendshoring” advantage in many high-value supply chain elements. The problem is Britain has American-style public services and European bureaucracy; that prevents it from being the Singapore it reasonably aspires to be. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._7 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._7
- KingOfCoders 2y ago
  The image thrown around in UK media about Singapore has nothing to do with Singapore
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > image thrown around in UK media about Singapore has nothing to do with Singapore Because the U.K.’s role wouldn’t be identical to Singapore. The analogy is fine. Singapore exists between China, Southeast Asia and the world; Britain between America, Europe and the world. Singapore has a logistical advantage in its proximity to the Straits; Britain a financial advantage in the City of London.
  - tim333 2y ago
    I was thinking when the brexit folk were saying London could become Singapore on the Thames that not many of the brexit voters would be very keen on the reality of that. I like Singapore but it has a very high percentage of immigrants, a high emphasis on education and about 90% of it's housing is built by the government, all things that seem not quite in line with most brexit voters wishes. Although I could be wrong?
- maxglute 2y ago
  What "high-value supply chain elements" were you thinking? Singapore as 1/12th the population of UK, it's easier for them to specialize in finance and a few high value manufacturing sectors and be wealthy per capita. An island of 67m people is going to have a hard time competing against europe with ~400m in half the size of US that can be networked together by rail/truck. I don't think EU is going to let UK challenge port of rotterdam and eat away at continental bloc logistic advantages. I also don't think US is going to throw many opportunities at UK when they need to keep east asian partners fed, after what US wants to reshore in NA for herself. IMO not much high-value scraps left.
jasfi 2y ago
The problem I see is a mindset that doesn't value creators/makers. Why is public transport seen as the problem? Who can't make the next great thing because they can't get from A to B? With remote work that shouldn't even feature on a top 10 list. If you look at the US, there are always complaints about the public transport being way behind the UK/Europe. But they value creators/makers. Why not look to the US, which is the leading economic country? If not, then which other leading economy should the UK emulate? Certainly not China.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > there are always complaints about the public transport being way behind the UK/Europe. But they value creators/makers Those creators cluster around urban centres with good transport. You can’t remote found a battery plant. I doubt Britain’s salvation is in public transport alone. But remote work doesn’t obviate the need for human infrastructure. (At the very least, it hasn’t been demonstrated at scale.)
  - jasfi 2y ago
    Better infrastructure is always a good thing, but I don't see it as a limiting factor. A battery plant is an example of where you need decent infrastructure, that's all. Software is eating the world, that's the industry I'm thinking of.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > Software is eating the world, that's the industry I'm thinking of Sure. Yet we aren’t seeing a wave of remote-only upstarts pressing their cost and recruiting advantage. (We are seeing massive agglomeration effects in the Bay Area.) Remember that “software is eating the world” is a quip by a then-financier, no longer coder [1]. [1] https://a16z.com/why-software-is-eating-the-world/ https://a16z.com/why-software-is-eating-the-world/
- csomar 2y ago
  It's just an advantage. It's not a make or break condition. The US could do better with public transport and will do much worse if the circumstances (easy access to capital and talent) changes.

by csomar 2y ago

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> Public transport does certainly help and it’ll increase GDP; but I highly doubt it’s the determinant in creating the richest country per capita in the world The UK is geographically blessed. That hasn’t been an advantage recently, because the EU seemed to be working, but Alexander Hamilton’s arguments against loose political unions seem prescient as ever amidst Europe’s present rightwing lurch [1]. If Britain can get its infrastructure in line and press its inherent energy-cost advantage relative to Europe, it could reasonably supplant Asia based on proximity, capital market depth and “friendshoring” advantage in many high-value supply chain elements. The problem is Britain has American-style public services and European bureaucracy; that prevents it from being the Singapore it reasonably aspires to be. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._7 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._7

KingOfCoders 2y ago
The image thrown around in UK media about Singapore has nothing to do with Singapore
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > image thrown around in UK media about Singapore has nothing to do with Singapore Because the U.K.’s role wouldn’t be identical to Singapore. The analogy is fine. Singapore exists between China, Southeast Asia and the world; Britain between America, Europe and the world. Singapore has a logistical advantage in its proximity to the Straits; Britain a financial advantage in the City of London.
- tim333 2y ago
  I was thinking when the brexit folk were saying London could become Singapore on the Thames that not many of the brexit voters would be very keen on the reality of that. I like Singapore but it has a very high percentage of immigrants, a high emphasis on education and about 90% of it's housing is built by the government, all things that seem not quite in line with most brexit voters wishes. Although I could be wrong?
maxglute 2y ago
What "high-value supply chain elements" were you thinking? Singapore as 1/12th the population of UK, it's easier for them to specialize in finance and a few high value manufacturing sectors and be wealthy per capita. An island of 67m people is going to have a hard time competing against europe with ~400m in half the size of US that can be networked together by rail/truck. I don't think EU is going to let UK challenge port of rotterdam and eat away at continental bloc logistic advantages. I also don't think US is going to throw many opportunities at UK when they need to keep east asian partners fed, after what US wants to reshore in NA for herself. IMO not much high-value scraps left.

jasfi 2y ago

The problem I see is a mindset that doesn't value creators/makers. Why is public transport seen as the problem? Who can't make the next great thing because they can't get from A to B? With remote work that shouldn't even feature on a top 10 list. If you look at the US, there are always complaints about the public transport being way behind the UK/Europe. But they value creators/makers. Why not look to the US, which is the leading economic country? If not, then which other leading economy should the UK emulate? Certainly not China.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> there are always complaints about the public transport being way behind the UK/Europe. But they value creators/makers Those creators cluster around urban centres with good transport. You can’t remote found a battery plant. I doubt Britain’s salvation is in public transport alone. But remote work doesn’t obviate the need for human infrastructure. (At the very least, it hasn’t been demonstrated at scale.)
- jasfi 2y ago
  Better infrastructure is always a good thing, but I don't see it as a limiting factor. A battery plant is an example of where you need decent infrastructure, that's all. Software is eating the world, that's the industry I'm thinking of.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Software is eating the world, that's the industry I'm thinking of Sure. Yet we aren’t seeing a wave of remote-only upstarts pressing their cost and recruiting advantage. (We are seeing massive agglomeration effects in the Bay Area.) Remember that “software is eating the world” is a quip by a then-financier, no longer coder [1]. [1] https://a16z.com/why-software-is-eating-the-world/ https://a16z.com/why-software-is-eating-the-world/
csomar 2y ago
It's just an advantage. It's not a make or break condition. The US could do better with public transport and will do much worse if the circumstances (easy access to capital and talent) changes.