Simple answer: no. The economy of SE England is largely comprised of: 1. Shuffling money around 2. Socialist-level ponzi government spending 3. A combination of property flipping and high-end property overseas sales used for tax evasion Innovation-wise, always looking for the easy wins without the hard work, unlike the US. As a Brit and former resident, happy to have emigrated and escaped the >50% (soon to be increas…
> As a Brit and former resident, happy to have emigrated and escaped the >50% (soon to be increased) tax rates. Hah. So you don't believe in the Scandi high-tax economy, or the Dutch one? Resentment of taxation is a perquisite of the rich, overwhelmingly. In fact, most people who are not rich pay reasonable rates of taxation except they pay far more percentage of their income as VAT/consumption taxes, which is of cou…
The UK can go back to being the richest country in the world
61–70 of 112 posts
Re: The UK can go back to being the richest country in the world
#62Re: The UK can go back to being the richest country in the world
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Exploiting and stealing always makes you rich Colonies have Britain an edge, but plenty of nations had colonies at the time (and have throughout history). Britain became rich because it industrialised first.
Britain has the world’s biggest empire… in part it did so because it industrialized first, but also it was able to industrialize first because of the empire. The two are deeply interlinked
The Watt Steam Engine is from 1765.
Re: The UK can go back to being the richest country in the world
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How is a political party funded by a bunch of generational rich right wingers dumping elites? It’s a new set of elites. Starmer is still connected and conversant with the present batch of elites. > None of these right wing parties would exist without rich people funding them This is true of practically every revolution outside fairy tales. (It’s why fairy tales need divine intervention and/or superpowers to be beli…
What is the new set of elites in France and Germany? How are they different from the old batch of elites? As far as I can tell, it's all the same donors and special interests. The only difference is in the rhetorical window dressing. You might as well be comparing Lidl and Aldi.
They’re in different social circles! They don’t socialise with each other. That’s the difference. Bardella is a college drop-out, for instance.
> it's all the same donors and special interests
If you aren’t looking for how subsets in that group align and reälign you’re missing the entirety of politics.
Re: The UK can go back to being the richest country in the world
#65Yes, because they had the world's biggest navy and effectively controlled the sea route to the East. That would make anyone rich.
> And unlike in Germany where these transfers have been shrinking for decades as the East of the country grows its economy, in Britain we become ever more reliant on the Greater South East and London in particular every year.
Uhh... Outside of Leipzig (and obviously Berlin), things aren't going very well in the East of Germany. And even in Leipzig things were super shitty until property fever hit in 2017. Everybody with prospects still moves West in Germany, and the East remains relatively poor as a result (and unheard, which is why the AFD has gained a foothold here).
Know what makes countries rich (besides conquest)? Long rivers big enough to pass container ships through without locks - connecting your resources and industrial bases to your markets with super cheap transport costs. The Mississippi. The Yangtze. The Rhine.
Re: The UK can go back to being the richest country in the world
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem I see is a mindset that doesn't value creators/makers. Why is public transport seen as the problem? Who can't make the next great thing because they can't get from A to B? With remote work that shouldn't even feature on a top 10 list. If you look at the US, there are always complaints about the public transport being way behind the UK/Europe. But they value creators/makers. Why not look to the US, which i…
> there are always complaints about the public transport being way behind the UK/Europe. But they value creators/makers Those creators cluster around urban centres with good transport. You can’t remote found a battery plant. I doubt Britain’s salvation is in public transport alone. But remote work doesn’t obviate the need for human infrastructure. (At the very least, it hasn’t been demonstrated at scale.)
Re: The UK can go back to being the richest country in the world
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As a Brit and former resident, happy to have emigrated and escaped the >50% (soon to be increased) tax rates. Hah. So you don't believe in the Scandi high-tax economy, or the Dutch one? Resentment of taxation is a perquisite of the rich, overwhelmingly. In fact, most people who are not rich pay reasonable rates of taxation except they pay far more percentage of their income as VAT/consumption taxes, which is of cou…
> they pay far more percentage of their income as VAT/consumption taxes, which is of course nothing like 50% I don't think that's true, unless you assume rich people either a. spend a lower percentage of their income (in which case, what's the point in having money) or b. they avoid VAT when they do spend.
The point in having money is indeed NOT to spend it. It is to build a hoard so large you can live comfortably off the dividends and investment returns, or even to save most of that again and grow your hoard even faster, creating "fuck you" levels of money and intergenerational wealth.
When people say "tax the rich" they don't mean "deprive the neurosurgeon or City banker off his biannual new Mercedes". (These people DO indeed spend a smaller share of their income than poorer folks but that's not the point) When people say "tax the rich" they mean "tax capital returns" so that the country can benefit from the wealth currently amassed and extracted by the hyper wealthy that couldn't spend all their annual portfolio gains if they bought ought all of Paris Fashion Week every year.
Re: The UK can go back to being the richest country in the world
#68The high cost of labor and the abundance of coal deposits created an incentive for automation and that led to unprecedented technological innovation.
This brought an era of prosperity and also created a power asymmetry. But that power asymmetry did not make it into the 21st century.
The Suez canal crisis was officially the end of the UK as a world superpower.
The UK has strong partnerships, is a member of many important institutions like the G7, UN security council, NATO and others, but is not a world superpower anymore.
Economically it is in decline and politically is in crisis.
Re: The UK can go back to being the richest country in the world
#69What’s missing is the social analysis here - ambitious people in the UK go to London where they can make more money, and ambitious companies that want ambitious people go to London because that’s where the staff are. London and the SE don’t just fund the rest of the country, they also drain the talent and workers from those areas.
London does not have that great economy in isolation from its regions, it has it at least in part by feeding on them.
Growing the northern economy (and really anywhere outside the London dormitory belt) is also going to require finding a way to break the low-pay, low-productivity, low-expectations trap that exists across most of the British economy. And doing that will to some extent limit London’s talent pool.
It’s not a zero sum game, but also - TAANSTAFL.
Re: The UK can go back to being the richest country in the world
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Britain has the world’s biggest empire… in part it did so because it industrialized first, but also it was able to industrialize first because of the empire. The two are deeply interlinked
The East India Company is from 1600. The Watt Steam Engine is from 1765.