[Zanu Bob]

http://www.telegraph...es.html?image=1

'1 Hull claimants per job 79.64
2 Stoke 73.22
3 Sunderland 53.66
4 Southend 44.06
5 The Wirrall 40.94'



Anyone know why Hull's so bad?

[Grrrr I'm a tiger]

 Zanu Bob, on 21 February 2012 - 01:51 PM, said:

http://www.telegraph...es.html?image=1

'1 Hull claimants per job 79.64
2 Stoke 73.22
3 Sunderland 53.66
4 Southend 44.06
5 The Wirrall 40.94'



Anyone know why Hull's so bad?

The geography is such that all the poor people live in Hull and all the rich people who work there live in surrounding countryside , villages and towns like Beverly.

So whilst bad, I would say the statistical area/geography is important and can be self reinforcing.


EDIT to add:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverley

Quote

Beverley is a market town, civil parish and the county town of the East Riding of Yorkshire, England, located between the River Hull and the Westwood. The town is noted for Beverley Minster and architecturally-significant religious buildings along New Walk and other areas, as well as the Beverley Racecourse and the market place; the town itself is around 1,300 years old. It is also home to the oldest grammar school in the country, Beverley Grammar School.


...


For 22 years, Beverley was the administrative centre of the local government district of the Borough of Beverley, and is now the County Town of the East Riding. It is located 8 miles (13 km) north-west of Hull, 10 miles (16 km) east of Market Weighton and 12 miles (19 km) west of Hornsea. According to the 2001 United Kingdom Census the total population of the urban area of Beverley was 29,110 - of whom 17,549 live within the historic parish boundaries.^[2] As well as its racecourse and markets, Beverley is known in the modern day for hosting various music festivals throughout the year, and also food festivals. In 2007 Beverley was named as the best place to live in the United Kingdom in an "Affordable Affluence" study by the Royal Bank of Scotland.^[3]

This post has been edited by !EURO!: 21 February 2012 - 02:04 PM

[The Generation Game]

 Zanu Bob, on 21 February 2012 - 01:51 PM, said:

http://www.telegraph...es.html?image=1

'1 Hull claimants per job 79.64
2 Stoke 73.22
3 Sunderland 53.66
4 Southend 44.06
5 The Wirrall 40.94'



Anyone know why Hull's so bad?

Because there aren't any new jobs?

[The Generation Game]

 !EURO!, on 21 February 2012 - 02:00 PM, said:

The geography is such that all the poor people live in Hull and all the rich people who work there live in surrounding countryside , villages and towns like Beverly.

So whilst bad, I would say the statistical area/geography is important and can be self reinforcing.

Certainly the boundaries of the city are very close, omitting many of the more affluent suburbs. This skews the figures for quality of life stats which is why it is always near the bottom of such lists along with other cities where the boundary are similarly drawn, such as Nottingham.

[Tonkers]

Is this the top five places we are sending skint Southerners?

[Pent Up]

Yet according to the Halifax, Rochford (pretty much part of Southend) is one of only two places to experience a price rise since 07. The local paper even had a piece on it. Couldnt bring myself to read it though.

[Unsafe As Houses]

 !EURO!, on 21 February 2012 - 02:00 PM, said:

The geography is such that all the poor people live in Hull and all the rich people who work there live in surrounding countryside , villages and towns like Beverly.

So whilst bad, I would say the statistical area/geography is important and can be self reinforcing.


EDIT to add:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverley

Part of the problem with Stoke is that it has no recognised centre. It's comprised of six small towns : Hanley, Burslem, Fenton that are a few miles apart. There is no recognised city centre for a business to locate to and/or invest in. Other problems are it's long-standing reuputaiton as a bit of a dump and that it spawned Robbie Williams .

[PopGun]

 !EURO!, on 21 February 2012 - 02:00 PM, said:

The geography is such that all the poor people live in Hull and all the rich people who work there live in surrounding countryside , villages and towns like Beverly.

So whilst bad, I would say the statistical area/geography is important and can be self reinforcing.


EDIT to add:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverley

Yep

Where as most Cities have afluent areas to pick them up, Hull's belongs to a different county council.

There's some really pretty (and bl00dy expensive) villages around the area, such as Burstwick, Welton, South Cave & North Ferriby.

Goole is another typically down trodden port town with a very bad press and high unemployment. Coincidently Goole is also surrounded by expensive and attractive semi rural areas, with Howden on it’s door step (another top 15 places to live in year 200x).

This post has been edited by PopGun: 21 February 2012 - 02:34 PM

[ader]

Hull was a terrible dump of a place when I lived there in the 90s. It's worse now. Nice people though (for the most part). It still astounds me that prices in east riding/humberside villages are still more expensive than Milton Keynes area though. All the public sector "workers" I guess.

This post has been edited by ader: 21 February 2012 - 02:35 PM

[Bob Loblaw]

 Unsafe As Houses, on 21 February 2012 - 02:31 PM, said:

Part of the problem with Stoke is that it has no recognised centre. It's comprised of six small towns : Hanley, Burslem, Fenton that are a few miles apart. There is no recognised city centre for a business to locate to and/or invest in. Other problems are it's long-standing reuputaiton as a bit of a dump and that it spawned Robbie Williams .

Fenton?

Jesus Christ.

[PopGun]

 ader, on 21 February 2012 - 02:33 PM, said:

Hull was a terrible dump of a place when I lived there in the 90s. It's worse now. Nice people though (for the most part).

It's vastly improved but still quite bad, especially when you compare it to say York or Newcastle.

However there's much much worse places to live imo.

[cheeznbreed]

Why is 'the Wirral' in this list?

Is Southend a city either?

The subbies at the Telegraph are not doing themselves any favours today.

[Pent Up]

 cheeznbreed, on 21 February 2012 - 02:46 PM, said:

Why is 'the Wirral' in this list?

Is Southend a city either?

The subbies at the Telegraph are not doing themselves any favours today.

Southend is currently competing for city status so officially it's still a town.

[Peter Hun]

 !EURO!, on 21 February 2012 - 02:00 PM, said:

The geography is such that all the poor people live in Hull and all the rich people who work there live in surrounding countryside , villages and towns like Beverly.

So whilst bad, I would say the statistical area/geography is important and can be self reinforcing.


EDIT to add:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverley

There is ****** all jobs in Beverley, nice place as it is.

[Grrrr I'm a tiger]

 Peter Hun, on 21 February 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

There is ****** all jobs in Beverley, nice place as it is.

Well I understand perfectly how you form that view. But remember, every town has shops, handymen, estate agents, radio etc and of course, people don't all work locally (they may commute the enormous distance of 8 miles to Hull for instance!). Probably a fair amount retired too. You could also argue that they aren't very well paid either...but that wasn't your point.

According to this Guardian article, the % of population claiming unemployment benefits in Beverley is 3.4% versus 4.4% for London.


http://www.guardian....stics-economics