Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
zugzwang

The Economist Urges Govt To Let The North Die

Recommended Posts

Finish what Thatchy started, why don't you? Let's all move to London and become financial terrorists.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10373105/Ministers-urged-to-forget-about-saving-failing-cities-and-towns-such-as-Hull-Hartlepool-and-Burnley.html

Ministers urged to forget about saving 'failing' cities and towns such as Hull, Hartlepool and Burnley

Ministers have been urged to abandon "failing" cities and towns across the north of England such as Hull, Hartlepool and Burnley and concentrate instead on helping the locals to get jobs elsewhere.

The Economist magazine said that despite years of Government money and "heroic" efforts the towns were decaying and it was time for a change in policy.

The globally-respected publication, in an editorial entitled 'City Sicker', said the fate of the once confident places was "sad".

But it urged ministers to forget about using tax breaks or spending money to encourage people to go the cities and towns as it diverted them from areas where "they would be more successful".

The Economist cited the example of the Cotswolds, once an industrial engine and now so pretty because "centuries ago, huge numbers of people fled them".

In a withering verdict, the magazine said: "Despite dollops of public money and years of heroic effort, a string of towns and smallish cities in Britain's former industrial heartlands are quietly decaying.

"Middlesbrough, Burnley, Hartlepool, Hull and many others were in trouble even before the financial crisis.

It added: "That so many well intentioned people are trying so hard to save them suggests how much affection they claim.

"But these kindly efforts are misguided, Governments should not try to rescue failing towns. Instead they should support the people who live in them.

"That means helping them to commute or move to places where there are jobs - and giving them the skills to get those jobs."

The Economist argued more money should go in schools in the "urban ghost towns" and the transport network should be upgraded so it's possible to run more regional services to each of them.

The controversial article comes as Hull bids to be voted the 2017 City of Culture. The city is down to the last four in a race even locals thought they would never win.

And Burnley two months ago was voted the most enterprising area of the UK for its "pioneering" culture and economic prospects.

Despite these successes, experts claim the north-south divide is growing with house prices in southern England now more than £100,000 more expensive than those in the north.

The Economist argued that unemployment rates in the "failing" cities and towns were double the national averge and the high streets are dominated with betting shops and payday lenders. Wolverhampton, it said, was among the worst have "condemned parts of its town centre for a shopping mall that never came".

It said that in Wolverhampton 22 per cent of the people have no qualifications - and the overall performance of schools in Hull and Hartlepool is "appalling".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of these towns will decline with or without central government support. Once the smarter youngsters start moving away as a matter of course there's not much future left.

Time for them to declare independence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny, I thought we were an information economy now. All these towns need is fast fibre optic broadband. That way they can repeat the success of the South and double their house prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the Greek style collapse comes the true picture will be opposite of what is portrayed.

The distortions in the South East Potemkin economy are orders of magnitude greater than in the north. The smack-down will be brutal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People have always moved to where the work was, South Wales is the perfect example, before the coalfields were in mass production in Victorian times they were pretty desolate places, only farmers lived there.

Once coal was discovered people from all over Britain and Ireland moved to the valleys to work in the mines, oh shock horror this means a lot of people who live in the Welsh valleys are not (pure) ethnically Welsh (something that is lost on the people responsible for making kids there learn Welsh!).

When the mines closed the obvious thing for the younger people would have been to move to where the jobs were (tbh that did happen before the mines closed plenty of people moved from Wales to work in factories in the West Midlands and places like the Vauxhall factory in Luton).

Luton used to have a strong Welsh community including its own church, and the Welshie twang could be heard in the now (sadly) disappeared local accent.

Blame Thatcher for wrecking British Industry, blame Brown for wrecking the economy, things may never be the same again

Edited by Hectors House

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How long will London last with no food and no water.

Give it a month.

Let London die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How long will London last with no food and no water.

Give it a month.

Let London die.

Yeah, you cockney feckers, and don't come whinging to us Northerners when your wild eyed Somalian neigbours have ate your Japanese Akita while you were digging a well in the basement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and the reason is, I'll give you a clue - it begins with G, wastes lots of money, takes money from people by force so opportunity and incentive to work is non-existant. I wish the economist would urge the people to let the big G die lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same could be said for the entire west really.

Only reason the north died is because govt mandating our employers to pay £10.00 an hour plus for staff while allowing slave shops abroad to pay their workers peanuts and peddle their wares here with no equalizing tariff.

Im all for competition, but it should at least be on a level playing field. However, I guess Perot was saying this 20 years ago, people didnt go for it. Voters would rather have cheap shit than a job and pay for it by mortgaging their childrens future's away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the Greek style collapse comes the true picture will be opposite of what is portrayed.

The distortions in the South East Potemkin economy are orders of magnitude greater than in the north. The smack-down will be brutal.

The North Koreans will be sittin' pretty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only reason the north died is because govt mandating our employers to pay £10.00 an hour plus for staff

The minimum wage was introduced on 1 April 1999. Mass unemployment in the former industrial areas predates NMW by two decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly with having no skills up North they would all make excellent economists down South.

I've just fixed the problem.

Derivatives traders (some with experience at Northern Rock), estate agents..................plenty of opportunities for folk with no qualifications.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the government left them alone they would be booming within two years. Within ten they would be probably wealthier than London. That's the experience of people not shackled by the incredible level of taxes we are forced to pay in this country, anyway. Places like Hong Kong and Singapore, that used to be poverty stricken, are now beacons of prosperity.

But I guess by leaving them alone the economist mean the state should still demand income tax, nation insurance, employer national insurance, business rates, council tax, vat, fuel tax, petrol tax, television license and goodness knows what else. All the money to be spent in London on pensions and salaries for overpaid civil servants. On top of that everyone must comply with books full of nonsensical, contradictory regulations made up by fat politicians in London and Brussels. Then they can blame the population for their poverty and call them scroungers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of these towns will decline with or without central government support. Once the smarter youngsters start moving away as a matter of course there's not much future left.

If truth be told, London is in terminal decline also...billions in bail outs and deficit records prove the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be better to let the 3 main political parties die and replace them with a representative, transparent and honest political system. The sooner the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does not say let the north die, it is actually positive about centres such as Manchester and Newcastle

Please please get it right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the discussion is helpful talking in terms of locations as it brings up many emotional feelings.

What we should be thinking about is 'what has gone from these places and why'.

Then they could try and re-run the numbers too and look at total government support - whether that be thru' capital spending, monetary policy, currency policy, trade policy or whatever and they could perhaps really work out what has 'gone wrong' and whether it is worth redressing.

But I suppose if you exist in 'the London Bubble' itself, you all celebrate in your mutual wonderfulness and fail to ask oneself the right, critical questions about the world.

Better to condemn the victims for their sloathfulness and stupidity.

Yes, when the majority of the people see the wealth created by transferred to London, they dont question it, they just assume its all productivity, not theft by some vast ponzi scheme we all have no choice but to be part of.

I guess London is not alone, Singapore and HK also spring to mind. But a whole country of 66mn cannot be run on this model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   224 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.