'Leveling up' a bad thing?
Discussion
In the news recently i have seen lots about 'leveling up'. I'm just putting it out there, but i think this isn't all bread and roses.
Surely leveling up will at least in the short term, increase the cost of living for those in 'lesser' areas? Therefore reducing quality of life and increasing the wealth gap. I would be interested in hearing thoughts and opinions on this
Surely leveling up will at least in the short term, increase the cost of living for those in 'lesser' areas? Therefore reducing quality of life and increasing the wealth gap. I would be interested in hearing thoughts and opinions on this
sociopath said:
Why would increasing investment and opportunity in the less affluent areas mean an increased cost of living?
Because it increases spending power among the less well off, which increases demand for stuff, which increases prices, so you end up back where you started in relative terms... and I say this as someone who is fairly close to the bottom of the financial food chain and would love my income to be "levelled-up", but I say it also as a realist.It depends how you measure poverty. Or how much importance you place on different measures of poverty.
So long as someone has nothing then anyone getting anything more will widen the spread of wealth. Unfortunately some people are quite determined to have nothing one way or another and I don’t think throwing money at them will ever make that problem go away.
I would rather look at the mobility of the rungs above where people are stuck in dead end low paying jobs, low quality rented accommodation and often in areas blighted by crime and sub standard schools.
Unfortunately these things are not nearly as newsworthy as food banks and single mothers who can't afford electricity so they don't get the attention.
So long as someone has nothing then anyone getting anything more will widen the spread of wealth. Unfortunately some people are quite determined to have nothing one way or another and I don’t think throwing money at them will ever make that problem go away.
I would rather look at the mobility of the rungs above where people are stuck in dead end low paying jobs, low quality rented accommodation and often in areas blighted by crime and sub standard schools.
Unfortunately these things are not nearly as newsworthy as food banks and single mothers who can't afford electricity so they don't get the attention.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: Rather than listen to what they say they'll do look at what they actually do.
This.Levelling up requires several hundred billion. Not chicken feed. There should be a National Infrastructure bank setup, make it govt backed but borrow money to invest in UK plc. 500billion should do for starts.
Maybe the immediate benefits for working class people in a place like Darlington won't be obvious but in the long run the fact that part of the Treasury will be based there will create opportunities for local people that weren't there previously. They'll spend their money locally which will create opportunities for others.
Taking a bit of the heat out of London will be good for them too.
Taking a bit of the heat out of London will be good for them too.
The benefit of levelling opportunity is obvious, so it makes one wonder why the gap is wider now than when I was a youth.
Levelling up income is a financially difficult target to hit. Decreasing the gap between the super-rich and the very rich is a pointless exercise. The gap between the very rich and the rest of us is wider now than ever, and those in authority over us are pulled from those who enjoy the benefits of such high income.
The gap will be maintained at a level where the peasants - that's upper middle class down - are not causing problems because of it.
Levelling up income is a financially difficult target to hit. Decreasing the gap between the super-rich and the very rich is a pointless exercise. The gap between the very rich and the rest of us is wider now than ever, and those in authority over us are pulled from those who enjoy the benefits of such high income.
The gap will be maintained at a level where the peasants - that's upper middle class down - are not causing problems because of it.
PeteinSQ said:
Maybe the immediate benefits for working class people in a place like Darlington won't be obvious but in the long run the fact that part of the Treasury will be based there will create opportunities for local people that weren't there previously. They'll spend their money locally which will create opportunities for others.
Taking a bit of the heat out of London will be good for them too.
Moving bits of govt out of London is pretty much symbolic only. Most of the govt machinery isn't in London already.Taking a bit of the heat out of London will be good for them too.
Levelling up needs to be far more structural than that IMO. It needs big investment in non-public sector activity. Forward looking industry sectors. Better technology links. Better transport links. Etc.
I'll be more interested to see what they do with the "encouragement" of battery and other "green" tech and where they place it, pharma research and production, Fintech bolstering, automation etc etc etc. Spread these sorts of thing and more away from the South East.
stongle said:
This.
Levelling up requires several hundred billion. Not chicken feed. There should be a National Infrastructure bank setup, make it govt backed but borrow money to invest in UK plc. 500billion should do for starts.
No idea how they do it but I'm sure it's all costed in the manifesto?Levelling up requires several hundred billion. Not chicken feed. There should be a National Infrastructure bank setup, make it govt backed but borrow money to invest in UK plc. 500billion should do for starts.
Kind of my point that words are cheap.
Doing stuff costs money.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:stongle said:
This.
Levelling up requires several hundred billion. Not chicken feed. There should be a National Infrastructure bank setup, make it govt backed but borrow money to invest in UK plc. 500billion should do for starts.
No idea how they do it but I'm sure it's all costed in the manifesto?Levelling up requires several hundred billion. Not chicken feed. There should be a National Infrastructure bank setup, make it govt backed but borrow money to invest in UK plc. 500billion should do for starts.
Kind of my point that words are cheap.
Doing stuff costs money.
Projects that drive investment and boost our trade exports should be priorities.
Fundoreen said:
Fate has conspired to make the USA adopt corbyns election manifesto with Bidens 2 trillion recovery spend.
The clueless boris and team of halfwits will probably have no choice but to follow where the USA leads as per usual.
Boris has enough experience to know that you say that you’re going to do it. Without any intention of actually doing it. The clueless boris and team of halfwits will probably have no choice but to follow where the USA leads as per usual.
350 million on the side of a bus being the most obvious example.
survivalist said:
Fundoreen said:
Fate has conspired to make the USA adopt corbyns election manifesto with Bidens 2 trillion recovery spend.
The clueless boris and team of halfwits will probably have no choice but to follow where the USA leads as per usual.
Boris has enough experience to know that you say that you’re going to do it. Without any intention of actually doing it. The clueless boris and team of halfwits will probably have no choice but to follow where the USA leads as per usual.
350 million on the side of a bus being the most obvious example.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff