Why the UK's Economy is Awful

butterandjam

escaped

London eats Michelin star meals, while Britain scrapes for leftovers.

Just a quick observation here; fine dining exists in London because excellent chefs, even from the French provinces, have been drawn to London for decades to practise their Art. I'm not saying it's right, just saying that the capital is a mecca for all sorts of industries which are sustained by the folks who live there and spend money. Catch 22.

www.greatbritishchefs.com/maps/michelin-star-restaurants-map-2024

Michelin star restaurants are all over Britain.

That map actually confirms the heavy concentration in the Greater London area (easier to see if you scroll to enlarge it). Most of the rest are in tourist areas.

Thank you for that map sunami . Very interesting, but not unexpected.

I think part of the reason for there being so many Michelin * restaurants in London is due to rich visitors from all over the world. You only have to look at the number if 5* star hotels in the capital, which inevitably drives the capital's fine dining industry. I would guess it's no way just Londoners dining out, though I've no idea what the percentages are.

Of course, that spend coming from outside is very important to any town or city as a whole, because more spend goes into the local economy, more jobs are created and more local suppliers are supported. For other places to be as successfull as London, they would need a plethora of other attractions to visit too.

Interestingly, although I know we're not meant to talk about personal lifestyles here, I've just returned, (and can't sleep), from a Breton coastal town that has 31 Michelin * restaurants - again a town that attracts many many wealthy tourists from all over the world.

TBH, I took the sentence about London eating Michelin starred meals while Britain scrapes for leftovers as being a metaphor rather than a literal description.

I feel that taking it literally misses the point of the video.

PS I've found time to watch the OP vid now. The intro was a bit misleading making comparisons with American states, so my mistake in thinking the film was American was not surprising!

MaizieD

TBH, I took the sentence about London eating Michelin starred meals while Britain scrapes for leftovers as being a metaphor rather than a literal description.

I feel that taking it literally misses the point of the video.

Of course, but the video obviously expressed a complex issue with enough powerful imagery here to make people sit up and think.

I didn't post the map escaped. I just pointed out that if you look closely, it does confirm that the highest concentration of Michelin starred restaurants is in the Greater London area.

I agree with you Maizie. It's metaphorical. It's all about averages and it is a fact that wealth is concentrated in London and the south east, as evidenced by a higher percentage of millionaires/billionaires and higher average personal wealth and incomes. They rub shoulders with poverty. London itself has pockets of deprivation.

The concentration of highly paid jobs and high property prices has a serious effect on opportunity because it limits opportunities for people from low priced property areas to move.

Does this not all go back to the feudal system? I don't think it will ever change now, well not as long as we have a King of Queen!

* or

escaped

Does this not all go back to the feudal system? I don't think it will ever change now, well not as long as we have a King of Queen!

Not really. If you look at the 19th century when the Industrial Revolution was in full swing, you'll see that there were many wealthy hotspots particularly in the north west. Liverpool and Manchester had the same kind of inequality which London has now.

On the other hand, highly desirable areas like the South Hams in Devon were generally poor. Properties in Salcombe which are now selling for £1 million+ were hovels in the 19th century.

Distribution of wealth, either by area or by demographic group, is not static and is controlled by all sorts of factors including government intervention and political will.

The causes of homelessness have nothing to do with Michelin Stared Restaurants of course that’s just a red herring.
High rates of drug abuse, mental illness and relationship breakdown are the main causes, plus of course migrants from overseas and rural parts concentrate homelessness in the cities.

It really isn’t a London problem it’s a national emergency affecting everyone, there is drug abuse in every town and villiage, condoned everywhere.

butterandjam

*The United Kingdom is a shell of its former self. What once was a prosperous country has become a mostly vestigial nation with a single thriving city.*

Manchester, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Birmingham. Leeds, Bristol are all thriving cities.

* London sits and eats Michelin star food, while the rest of the UK eats scraps in the alleyways like stray cats*

That's another pathetically obvious outright lie and smear. By an American.

butterandjam the Michelin Star food and scraps like cats is both ironic and metaphorical not an actual description.

Thank you to Petra and Maizie for the Spiders Web video www.youtube.com/watch?v=np_ylvc8Zj8 it is long but brings a lot, which I felt I had already come across over the years, together.

The problem is that doing anything about it seems so difficult. However, 'difficult' still has to be dealt with at some point, and just making the information available to more people is one small step in the right direction.

escaped

Does this not all go back to the feudal system? I don't think it will ever change now, well not as long as we have a King of Queen!

Yes. But do we really want to go back to that as a reality?

I'm not sure royalty has any real affect on it. It always tended to be the machinations of courtiers, trying to rise to the top, that seemed to be the greatest cause of the peasants poverty.

MaizieD

TBH, I took the sentence about London eating Michelin starred meals while Britain scrapes for leftovers as being a metaphor rather than a literal description.

I feel that taking it literally misses the point of the video.

I woke up wondering whether it isn't actually a metaphor, but a simile, because it uses the word "like" and metaphors do not? But nevermind.

As I read things, a fair number of posters have expressed some resentment towards London almost in a geographic, place-based context. Yet London can't help its location and the benefits that this location has brought over the centuries. Salcombe in South Devon could never compete in a million years, and most rural places wouldn't stand a chance. But that is no-one's fault.
What I'm trying to say, and probably of little relevance, is that the sentiment of hostility often expressed about London, although a fair one, is always about an area or town being worse off or falling behind which often implies geographically. London can't help its terrestrial location. Is this why people understandably get so hung up comparing property values elsewhere with those in the capital, as this is often seen as a hopelessly rectifiable situation?

Fascinating how geography plays such a vital role in history for us all.

(Anyway, off now to do 6 weeks' holiday washing.)

To answer the question - Labour policies.

love0c

To answer the question - Labour policies.

Were you on another planet while the tories were in power for 14 years. I can only assume that’s a yes 🤷‍♀️
I can see no other reason for your comment. That’s not to say I’m behind Rachael Reeves policies.

Spot on escaped
London was the premier location for wealthy Romans.

Doodledog

I can't follow YouTube links as I am in company and anything with volume would be intrusive, so I am answering without having seen the video.

I do think that London steals the wealth of the country, and find it particularly galling when Londoners point out how much tax etc is paid by those living there, as (IMO) that just proves my point. You just have to look at the figures for how much investment goes into London compared to huge areas of the rest of the country. Also look at things like school achievement, unemployment and health outcomes. It's blatant and apparently unashamed.

Apart from that, there is very little geographical mobility, as house prices are so skewed to London and the SE. This has gone on for so long that whole generations are massively advantaged if they inherit. Graduates from areas outside London and the SE can struggle to find internships or to live on low salaries whilst they build careers, so again, mobility is seriously hampered, and it is not the 'best' people who get on, but those who can get a start somewhere that pays well.

'Downsizers' from London and the SE colonise whole areas where housing is still cheaper, but in so doing price out locals and make it difficult for them to 'move up' the housing ladder, as the better houses have been bought up by people selling much smaller ones elsewhere. There is no longer the chance for those with ambition to start in a smaller home then work to move up as their families grow. And don't get me started on second home owners.

Then there is the fact that groups such as the WI, U3A, local societies and so on tend to have over-representation from this who have been able to retire early because of 'downsizing', and their views on their new home towns can be jaw-droopingly patronising. Honestly, if I have listened to one person tell me how 'backward' the new town people have chosen to relocate to is in comparison to London, I have heard a hundred, and the same applies to what is left of my professional life, where the same prejudices play out in a different way.

None of it takes account of simple things like buying a council house on the Mile End Road and making a million from the sale. Or of how the fact that some people can do that, whilst others lose everything when their mother goes into care and the entire value of her house is used to pay for it means that the playing fields are not just wonky but in separate hemispheres.

Not only that, but local accents can be assumed to be inferior, and those from London and the SE as 'posher'. Seriously, more than once I have had Londoners with Eastenders-type accents tell me that they have been deferred to because they speak differently from locals. It's as though a London accent is classless and neutral, and people are assumed to be 'yokels' in their own home towns.

Added to all of that, if someone like me speaks out (as in this post) we are accused of having chips on our shoulders.

I am far from being at the bottom of the privilege pile by any sensible standards, and am very aware of that, so don't want to appropriate anyone else's situation. There will be worse things than house prices, career opportunities and so on that I haven't mentioned as it would be inappropriate to do so (obesity, benefit dependency, addiction for instance), and if anyone suggests that my rant was inspired by the 'politics of envy' I will explode. There is such a thing as politics of fairness, too.

Taxes and council tax paid by Londoners are far in excess of elsewhere simply by being higher wages and far more in numbers.
But in terms of per head govt spending, £15,371 in Northern Ireland, £14,759 and £14,842 in London. So if you want a better slice of the cake NI is the place to live, followed by Scotland.

People living in Wales are the biggest complainers about incomers, but 41% of people living in London are born outside the UK (and this does not count their children born here) and it does not take account of the 300,000 Welsh, 100,000 Scots, folks living in London or their dependents, nor the 150,000 who identify as Irish. so 10% of the London population So when folks complain about Londoners leaving and driving up prices, they need to look at the reverse.

The world is in economic crisis. We are consuming more than we need

Sometimes I wish Mrs thatcher was in power. If anyone could sort out the illegal immigration boats it would be her. Could imagine her standing on the beaches and ordering them to row back to France lolol

sazz1

Sometimes I wish Mrs thatcher was in power. If anyone could sort out the illegal immigration boats it would be her. Could imagine her standing on the beaches and ordering them to row back to France lolol

What? She has been dead 12 years- she died in the Ritz Hotel in London where she lived!

However, she was strongly pro-European and the idea of Brexit would have been anathema to her...

FranP

The world is in economic crisis. We are consuming more than we need

I think that the point of this thread is that SOME people are consuming more than they need while a significant percentage of the population (20%) is barely existing. No overconsumption of resources there.

To answer the question in the OP I'd say that

1) it isn't so much London that is appropriating the nation's wealth as it is the City of London, the financial centre which is like an independent state, where the Monarch, and therefore the British constitution, has no authority. (Just watch 'The Spider's Web')

2) It isn't just 'foreigners', it is any wealthy person. Though, indeed, Britain has been sold off to foreigners for decades.

From what I read about France, rural areas outside the major cities, particularly Paris feel similarly disadvantaged.

keepingquiet

sazz1

Sometimes I wish Mrs thatcher was in power. If anyone could sort out the illegal immigration boats it would be her. Could imagine her standing on the beaches and ordering them to row back to France lolol

What? She has been dead 12 years- she died in the Ritz Hotel in London where she lived!

However, she was strongly pro-European and the idea of Brexit would have been anathema to her...

It is Thatcher who is the cause of our problems. As I have said over and over again.

She introduced the economic strategy which Britain and a greater part of the 'Western World' has been following ever since. It is no coincidence that populism is 'winning' all over Europe and in the Americas. Neoliberal economic policy has concentrated wealth in the hands of a few and has left the rest of the populations poor and disadvantaged.

When governments of any colour follow the same economic theory, no difference between the right, the centre or the left, and people feel no improvement in their lives, whichever they vote for, then they are going to go for the simplistic populist answer...

UK is slowly going down the toilet!