4 ms·

Without arguing about the "right or wrong" of the whole thesis as it applies to Britain, as an American I thought this paragraph definitely held a good warning

Without arguing about the "right or wrong" of the whole thesis as it applies to Britain, as an American I thought this paragraph definitely held a good warning for the US: > Because only the best paid people can afford to move to the most prosperous cities, there is no longer general migration across the economic spectrum, as there was in the nineteenth century when it was the poorest people who were most likely to move to find better work. Today, this has created a situation where only the most gifted and educated people can afford to move to richer cities and stay there. Their less well-off peers are quite literally “left behind”, and compete with one another over a narrow pool of jobs, driving the wages down even further, making those places feel even more deprived. Most cities in the US have gotten insanely expensive, primarily due to housing costs. As someone who lives in Austin TX, I've seen it first hand with people in non-tech jobs just concluding that they can have at least an easier quality of life if they move to someplace cheaper. But Austin also should serve as a glimmer of hope, because since the peak of pandemic-house-price insanity of about early/mid 2022, house prices (and especially rents) have dropped considerably, bucking the national norm. The primary reason is that Austin and surrounding areas built a shit ton of housing (especially multi-family) starting right around 2020, with a lot of that coming online just in the past couple years. I think it's rare and usually a mistake when one tries to tie so many societal ills to a single cause, but in this case I believe doing everything possible to build a crap load of new housing in desirable areas is the #1 thing to do to fix so many of today's societal problem. Not a "cure-all", and I'm also not saying it's politically easy, but I think it would give the biggest bang-for-the-buck given that so much of are problems today are due to people becoming disillusioned that they can ever really afford a stable, comfortable, "opportunity-providing" residence. I've often said myself I feel lucky to have gotten on the "property train" early in my career, as without the increased equity value in my home I wouldn't be able to afford to buy here now.

TMWNN 2y ago
In England, "the north" is seen as poor and "the south" is seen as rich, and the north is indeed much poorer than the south. In 1964, the Oxford Union debated "When going North, wogs begin at Barnet" <http://books.google.com/books?id=fGI3Bgy54OcC&lpg=PA15&pg=PA15#v=onepage&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=fGI3Bgy54OcC&lpg=PA15&pg=PA...>; while humorous, of course, it was based on a real perception in "the south" of "the north". In this video of northern Brexit voters <https://vimeo.com/172932182 https://vimeo.com/172932182>, people talk about "the south" as if it were a foreign country that they could never move to, with wealth their region could never hope to achieve. This is very different from in the US, where New Yorkers might similarly call anything west of the Hudson River <http://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/steinberg-newyorker.jpg http://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/...> "rural" or "the West", but, generally speaking, wouldn't make the distinction based on a perceived wealth gap. No New Yorker would claim that Dallas or Atlanta or Phoenix or Pittsburgh or Boise is "poor", nor would the residents of those cities concede that NYC is wealthier (as opposed to larger or more glamorous or more exciting). I've made this point elsewhere. Quoting myself <http://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1eymi7/number_of_cities_larger_than_the_capital1425x761oc/ca579as?context=3 http://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1eymi7/number_of_cit...>: --- Consider the US's 10 largest metro areas <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_metropolitan_areas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_metropoli...>: In order, NYC (~7% of the total US population), LA (~5%), Chicago (3%), DC, San Francisco Bay area, Boston, Philly, Dallas, Miami, and Houston. They comprise one third of the country's population and the list is overall a very balanced one: * 3 in the Northeast, 1 in the mid-Atlantic, 1 in the Southeast, 1 in the Midwest, 2 in TX, 2 on the West Coast * 5 in the Sunbelt, 5 not * 5 on the East Coast, 5 not * 5 on the East Coast, 2 on the West Coast, 3 in between Etc., etc. Now, consider this map of the UK <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom#Demographics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom#Demographics> and this list of the largest UK urban areas <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_areas_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_areas_in_the_Uni...>. Note how, other than London, only one (Southampton/Portsmouth) of the top ten is below the Severn Wash line. Greater London is gigantic, relatively speaking, compared to its US counterparts--13% of the entire country's population (!)--and has no national peers the way LA and Chicago are real rivals to NYC. This causes a huge imbalance, wherein London 1) sucks up most of the capital and human energy that would otherwise supply cities south of the Severn Wash, and 2) sucks up much of the capital and human energy that would otherwise supply the country north of the Severn Wash. No region of the United States is grossly wealthier or poorer than others to the extent that the Severn Wash in the UK divides the poor north with the wealthy south. ---- The previous Conservative government mentioned forming a "Northern Powerhouse" <http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/elections2015/election2015/12865823.Labour_would_damage_Northern_Powerhouse_vision__warns_Chancellor/ http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/elections2015/ele...> to help relieve the above imbalance. Devolution can't be only at the home-nation level, though, because England is so much larger than the other three combined. If England wants Scotland to stay in the union, it will have to break itself up for unity's sake. Regional devolution will hopefully give the new states/provinces a chance to compete with Greater London on a more equal footing and, as in other federations around the world, come up with innovative, local-specific solutions to their own issues.
tharmas 2y ago
But who is going to build houses where house prices are declining? The private market certainly wont. And the stigma attached to public housing (especially those horrible slums of tower blocks) is still too fresh the nation's memory. Unfortunately, housing was only ever affordable when the govt built it. It had knock on effects into the private sector too making privately built homes affordable. But I just dont see people and politicians voting for this.
- AnimalMuppet 2y ago
  > But who is going to build houses where house prices are declining? The private market certainly wont. Of course the private market will, if it still can make a buck. Can it buy land, buy materials, employ builders, sell a completed house, and come out ahead? If yes, then houses will be built by the private market. They may wish they got last year's price for the new house, but if they make money with this year's price, they will still build.

TMWNN 2y ago

In England, "the north" is seen as poor and "the south" is seen as rich, and the north is indeed much poorer than the south. In 1964, the Oxford Union debated "When going North, wogs begin at Barnet" <http://books.google.com/books?id=fGI3Bgy54OcC&lpg=PA15&pg=PA15#v=onepage&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=fGI3Bgy54OcC&lpg=PA15&pg=PA...>; while humorous, of course, it was based on a real perception in "the south" of "the north". In this video of northern Brexit voters <https://vimeo.com/172932182 https://vimeo.com/172932182>, people talk about "the south" as if it were a foreign country that they could never move to, with wealth their region could never hope to achieve. This is very different from in the US, where New Yorkers might similarly call anything west of the Hudson River <http://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/steinberg-newyorker.jpg http://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/...> "rural" or "the West", but, generally speaking, wouldn't make the distinction based on a perceived wealth gap. No New Yorker would claim that Dallas or Atlanta or Phoenix or Pittsburgh or Boise is "poor", nor would the residents of those cities concede that NYC is wealthier (as opposed to larger or more glamorous or more exciting). I've made this point elsewhere. Quoting myself <http://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1eymi7/number_of_cities_larger_than_the_capital1425x761oc/ca579as?context=3 http://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1eymi7/number_of_cit...>: --- Consider the US's 10 largest metro areas <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_metropolitan_areas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_metropoli...>: In order, NYC (~7% of the total US population), LA (~5%), Chicago (3%), DC, San Francisco Bay area, Boston, Philly, Dallas, Miami, and Houston. They comprise one third of the country's population and the list is overall a very balanced one: * 3 in the Northeast, 1 in the mid-Atlantic, 1 in the Southeast, 1 in the Midwest, 2 in TX, 2 on the West Coast * 5 in the Sunbelt, 5 not * 5 on the East Coast, 5 not * 5 on the East Coast, 2 on the West Coast, 3 in between Etc., etc. Now, consider this map of the UK <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom#Demographics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom#Demographics> and this list of the largest UK urban areas <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_areas_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_areas_in_the_Uni...>. Note how, other than London, only one (Southampton/Portsmouth) of the top ten is below the Severn Wash line. Greater London is gigantic, relatively speaking, compared to its US counterparts--13% of the entire country's population (!)--and has no national peers the way LA and Chicago are real rivals to NYC. This causes a huge imbalance, wherein London 1) sucks up most of the capital and human energy that would otherwise supply cities south of the Severn Wash, and 2) sucks up much of the capital and human energy that would otherwise supply the country north of the Severn Wash. No region of the United States is grossly wealthier or poorer than others to the extent that the Severn Wash in the UK divides the poor north with the wealthy south. ---- The previous Conservative government mentioned forming a "Northern Powerhouse" <http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/elections2015/election2015/12865823.Labour_would_damage_Northern_Powerhouse_vision__warns_Chancellor/ http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/elections2015/ele...> to help relieve the above imbalance. Devolution can't be only at the home-nation level, though, because England is so much larger than the other three combined. If England wants Scotland to stay in the union, it will have to break itself up for unity's sake. Regional devolution will hopefully give the new states/provinces a chance to compete with Greater London on a more equal footing and, as in other federations around the world, come up with innovative, local-specific solutions to their own issues.

tharmas 2y ago

But who is going to build houses where house prices are declining? The private market certainly wont. And the stigma attached to public housing (especially those horrible slums of tower blocks) is still too fresh the nation's memory. Unfortunately, housing was only ever affordable when the govt built it. It had knock on effects into the private sector too making privately built homes affordable. But I just dont see people and politicians voting for this.

AnimalMuppet 2y ago
> But who is going to build houses where house prices are declining? The private market certainly wont. Of course the private market will, if it still can make a buck. Can it buy land, buy materials, employ builders, sell a completed house, and come out ahead? If yes, then houses will be built by the private market. They may wish they got last year's price for the new house, but if they make money with this year's price, they will still build.