The economic consequences of Brexit (Vol 2)

[anonymous-user]

Yes, but they are mostly rubbish at typing.

[Eddie Strohacker]

andymadmak said:

Does a good English teacher also instruct on spelling and grammar?

You would think so. However, BV has made a pretty simple & empathetic point that London acts as a vortex for culture & finance to the detriment of the wider country. It wasn't that hard to understand if even a grade A doofus like me grasped the nettle. Yet it's met by a chorus of You're just a part of the Metropolitan elite type scorn, even after repeated clarifications & reiterating the point.

It's profoundly dispiriting to encounter these types who infest these pages day after day standing on the transmit button, forgetting one can receive too, but of course that requires a little introspection & cogitation which I suspect lies at the heart of the matter.

Edited by Eddie Strohacker on Tuesday 26th September 14:11

[anonymous-user]

Breadvan72 said:

PS: I cannot help but notice that you do not know how to use an apostrophe. That is not the snide comment, that you may take it to be. I am cutting you some slack for being poorly educated, which is most likely not your fault. A good English teacher instructs pupils on apostrophes, but also on comprehension.

Edited by Breadvan72 on Tuesday 26th September 13:57

I do OK for someone whose main focus in life is engineering. I'm sure if we communicated using the stronger aspects of my ability and education I could point out your weakness also. But thanks for the pointer, we can all improve ourselves.

[confused_buyer]

Breadvan72 said:

Many parts of the UK, including places in and very close to London, are in a state. I have mentioned Edmonton (in London) and Portsmouth (near London) as two places that are pretty grim. The Medway towns aren't great either. There will always be grot spots, but there are too many of them. In many (not all) chunks of the country, if you are not lucky enough to live in or close to a big centre you have severely reduced chances to participate in rewarding economic activity and in other things that make life fun. I mention again Glasgow - go around that great city and tell me that most of its citizens are leading lives of material and cultural riches. That is despite Glasgow having great concert halls, galleries, universities, restaurants and so on. I stress again that there are huge areas of economic and cultural blight in London as well, but the topic here is the skewing effect that London has on economy, politics, and culture.

It is a lot better than it used to be though. Think back 25-35 years ago and all the Provincial cities were in a state. There has been massive redevelopment in many of them and several which were basically pretty much "no go" areas for many are now tourist destinations. Just compare Liverpool with 15 years ago - it is barely recognisable as the same place.

[superlightr]

Breadvan72 said:

Yes, but they are mostly rubbish at typing.

agggghhhhhh ! I blame Britexit. phew back on topic.......

[confused_buyer]

Breadvan72 said:

I get out of London all the time. Anyone who is denying that London is not having an unbalancing effect on UK economy and culture is, I suggest, ignoring reality. I have nowhere suggested that everywhere but London is a desert, but the point is that the great provincial cities (and they are great), although revived since the era of de-industrialisation, are not back to where they were in the C19 and C20, and London's unbalancing powers seem set to keep the other cities slightly off the pace.

Hasn't that always been the case though? Go back to C19 and early C20 and the power and the money lay in the North in the Northern cities you mention. London was a piss poor backwater by comparison apart from some very small bits mainly concerned with Government and some Finance.

It has just switched around a bit. One day it may well change again. There will always be imbalances and areas doing better then others I'm afraid and I think, if anything, the trend is positive for the non-London regional centres rather than negative at the moment.

[Digga]

Eddie Strohacker said:

I doubt that. Rather they love the idea of London, just as Mancs hate Liverpoollove Manchester & so on. That's run of the mill tribalism & no more.

Fixed that for you.

[anonymous-user]

confused_buyer said:

It is a lot better than it used to be though. Think back 25-35 years ago and all the Provincial cities were in a state. There has been massive redevelopment in many of them and several which were basically pretty much "no go" areas for many are now tourist destinations. Just compare Liverpool with 15 years ago - it is barely recognisable as the same place.

I agree with that - they are all better than they were in the 80s and 90s, but they have not regained some of their former glories and I wonder if they ever will.

[anonymous-user]

Taking the subject back to Brexit (remember that?), someone above made the ludicrous assertion that some people (I think that I am supposed to be one of them) "hate the idea of England". Note the use of the word England (the UK in UKIP is arguably misplaced). Brexit is a sort of of Kulturkampf (I did that on purpose), and it seems that for some leavers (maybe not the ones here) there is a suggestion that some "idea of England" has been lost and should be regained. What is this "idea of England"? Is it that silly John Major speech rather feebly invoking the socialist and internationalist but also very English George Orwell? Old maids and warm beer and all that?

Some of the things that I regard as very English might, with some irony, appear on the hate list for those in the "get behind the patriotic project" axis. Civil liberties, judicial independence, international involvement, media that challenge governments, tolerance, and so on. To make it clear, I am not talking about (most of) you lot, but about the Daily Mail "enemies of the people" lot to whom Farage appeals. The Brexit-Trump parallel comes back here - as Trump invokes an idea of America that seems inimical to people who know how America happened and know what it used to stand for.

[confused_buyer]

Breadvan72 said:

I agree with that - they are all better than they were in the 80s and 90s, but they have not regained some of their former glories and I wonder if they ever will.

The problem is most (all) of the industries and reasons many cities popped up in the first place where they are, are gone and not likely to come back. Therefore, whilst they will and are doing OK the days of them being fabulously wealthy international cities are impossible to re-vitalise. London was lucky in that one of it's main industries (finance) is still thriving.

When they built Shanghai they copied Liverpool's Three Graces as they reckoned it was the epitomised wealth, success and style. Now everyone seems to want to be Shanghai (including Liverpool if you've seen the hideous plans they're proposing for some of the waterfront).

Let's not be too negative though - many of the UK's provincial cities are really great places again and well worth visiting as well.

[confused_buyer]

Breadvan72 said:

Some of the things that I regard as very English might, with some irony, appear on the hate list for those in the "get behind the patriotic project" axis. Civil liberties, judicial independence, international involvement, media that challenge governments, tolerance, and so on. .

We are very lucky in this country in that we take those things for granted. We probably shouldn't, but we do. This - in part - I think explains our odd relationship with Europe in that in many countries these things are not taken for granted. If you're Spanish or Portuguese then a knock in the night from the Guardia Civil is still a living memory. If you are from Poland your democracy is very young and you might still not trust the Police and we all know what happened in Germany.

We have always viewed the EU as a handy means to an end trading block - for others in other countries is about guaranteeing their very freedom against their own home grown institutions. We are never going to view it the same way.

[anonymous-user]

That is a good point.

[John145]

Breadvan72 said:

Taking the subject back to Brexit (remember that?), someone above made the ludicrous assertion that some people (I think that I am supposed to be one of them) "hate the idea of England". Note the use of the word England (the UK in UKIP is arguably misplaced). Brexit is a sort of of Kulturkampf (I did that on purpose), and it seems that for some leavers (maybe not the ones here) there is a suggestion that some "idea of England" has been lost and should be regained. What is this "idea of England"? Is it that silly John Major speech rather feebly invoking the socialist and internationalist but also very English George Orwell? Old maids and warm beer and all that?

Some of the things that I regard as very English might, with some irony, appear on the hate list for those in the "get behind the patriotic project" axis. Civil liberties, judicial independence, international involvement, media that challenge governments, tolerance, and so on. To make it clear, I am not talking about (most of) you lot, but about the Daily Mail "enemies of the people" lot to whom Farage appeals. The Brexit-Trump parallel comes back here - as Trump invokes an idea of America that seems inimical to people who know how America happened and know what it used to stand for.

I'd add to that Common Law, patience, queuing, willingness to do what is right, a healthy distrust of government, a certain acceptance of class, charity, an appreciation for the concept of ownership of land and property.

Your first paragraph highlights your own innate prejudice.

The more I travel the more I love England (and for the past 3 years I've been abroad more than home!).

[anonymous-user]

What is the innate prejudice indicated by my first para? If you are suggesting that I am not keen on little Englandism, then you are right, especially because little Englandism rejects the things that make England fab. England always was (and Britain always was) better when being big rather than being little. I am concerned that Brexit might diminish Britain rather than making it bigger.

[John145]

It leaves a sour taste in the mouth reading it.

[Murph7355]

Breadvan72 said:

What is the innate prejudice indicated by my first para? If you are suggesting that I am not keen on little Englandism, then you are right, especially because little Englandism rejects the things that make England fab. England always was (and Britain always was) better when being big rather than being little. I am concerned that Brexit might diminish Britain rather than making it bigger.

You do not have to (almost, time will tell) inextricably tie yourself to others to make you "big". "Bigness" doesn't come from size, it comes from your intent and actions.

When the country become great - as a result of those things you note and John added to - we weren't "big" in terms of being glued to the EU.

The chronically stupid bells and whistles that have been attached to the EU are things that I do not believe were driven by our underlying beliefs and ways and more by the ulterior motives of other member states. These things aren't making us "bigger", and us leaving those things behind won't make us "smaller" either.

What we are trying to do through the negotiation process, IMO, is retain/nurture the "big" bits and leave the rest to the others who want them. Sadly because of entrenched positions, some will never see that.

[anonymous-user]

Occasionally Brexit World becomes delightfully Lewis Carroll. We are told that Britain became great because of, amongst things, queuing, and a bit of old deference, and the law of private property (So long as the property doesn't belong to the King of Benin, obvs. Tough st, dusky dudes, you shoulda got some Martini action rifles and Maxim guns. Now we have all your cool stuff. Property rights forever! ). This recalls the old UKIP manifesto that promised to make the Circle Line a Circle and to make cab drivers wear a uniform. By the way, nowadays it's always a massive punch up and Devil take the hindmost at London bus stops, and, no, that is not because of the foreigners.

I do not suggest that hooking up with others is always what is needed to be big, but the post Imperial UK has realistically to accept its limitations, and being internationalist and open and inclusive can go with bigness. There are some Brexiteers (maybe not many here, but some) who actually want smallness -
and they do not wish for openness and inclusion. Others (maybe many here) hope that bigness etc will come from leaving the EU. Make Britain great again might be the slogan for go it alone, or go it with all the (thus far imaginary) mega bigly big trade deals that Mr Davis promised would be getting on for half way done or would even be passed half way done by now. Some of you (I think more realistically) may accept that going it alone will mean being smaller, but say that is OK, because democracy. I think that Britain may be losing something difficult to measure in terms of its profile and presence in the World.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/28/opinion/dunkirk...

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 26th September 17:55

[anonymous-user]

John145 said:

It leaves a sour taste in the mouth reading it.

That probably relates to some innate prejudice of yours, but I can't say for sure.

[anonymous-user]

Breadvan72 said:

I think that Britain may be losing something difficult to measure in terms of its profile and presence in the World.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/28/opinion/dunkirk...

I guess you used that New York Times piece as a reference to the world view of the UK.

This is who wrote it. Jenni Russell (@jennirsl), a journalist and broadcaster, is a columnist for The Times of London.

So the view of a staunch remainer in London, not the view from New York.

[anonymous-user]

No, I was well aware of who wrote the piece, because I can, er, read. I don't care which paper the piece was published in (save perhaps to note that it's in a credible international paper, not the Mustard Pickle Fancier's Gazette or MX 5 Rims Weekly*). It strikes me as a well argued piece, that is all.



* I intend no dissage to either of those fine organs.