Interesting perspective, but it really seems like state capitals just tend to siphon money from far away to invest nearby, and consequently, grow. Selecting a major city as your capital seems to accelerate the process, but even countries which select minor towns as their capitals have had this happen.
The US somehow avoids this, likely by putting state capitals and the national capital into smaller cities. Hence NYC, SF, Chicago, Dallas, Miami, Seattle, etc are all big urban agglomerations, but are not the points that concentrate everything important in their respective areas.
Why Northern England is poor
111–120 of 164 posts
Re: Why Northern England is poor
#112We also shifted largely into a service based economy, shutdown a lot of mines and mills (for better or for worse) which were primarily more north based. More than 2/3rds of my graduating physics class went straight into banking, as there was no relevant industry to pick them up... and as someone with several postdoctoral degrees, yet no house or meaningful assets... who could blame them for going into banking in this…
Most developed economies have shifted to services. Its a natural progression that results from higher productivity and higher wages. I think the big problem is too much reliance on on service sector.
And the focusing on a more abstract economy- produces a inability to even perceive physical products, limitations and overall reality and the world. If everything is an abstraction, then problems like climate change, running out of energy or societal instability, surely can be doctored, narrated and abstracted away. And they cant. Which is a fundamental incompetence that is pretty obvious by now.
One stuck in such a delusion, would imagine it optimal to blast furnace a mountain of money towards "elegant" formulas, unable to perceive, that those formulas at the end of the day have to produce fertilizer to feed a world of billions even when the crops fail.
Re: Why Northern England is poor
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
> More than 2/3rds of my graduating physics class went straight into banking This is why I advise people to never study physical sciences or non-software engineering. There just aren’t many jobs for it in the UK. And even fewer that pay well.
The usefulness of that depends on whether you think academic higher education is vocational ("I'm doing a chemistry degree so that I can be a chemist") or inquisitive ("I'm doing a chemistry degree because it's so heckin' interesting"). I'd tend to advise people to study stuff they find interesting. I'd wager the percentage of degree holders doing a job that's directly related to their degree is in the minority, and…
Most are becoming educated and going into significant debt to get a specific job, or salary.
Re: Why Northern England is poor
#114I think there's a fundamental gap in this analysis, which is how hyper-local many of the inequalities are. Manchester has a GDP per capita of £59,000. Tameside, the poorest area in Greater Manchester, has a GDP per capita of £19,000. Leeds has a GDP per capita of £42k; ten miles away, Bradford has a GDP per capita of £23.6k. Those disparities are really difficult to explain in terms of infrastructure or commercial in…
It's a 15 minute train ride to Manchester. 30-40 min drive/bus trip to Manchester, 1 hour train ride to Leeds and slightly longer drive.
Generally Tameside is well serviced, you got all the amenities you would expect and location wise you have very good access for commuting. Manchester, Salford, Leeds university all easily accessible. Tamesides location makes it popular as a commuter location looking for lower costs of living.
It's always been a working class place. Despite the wealth of the industrial revolution, the grand factories mostly now demolished and buildings, the majority of people where/are working class low paid workers and didn't see that money although the money built grand markets and highstreets for workers to spend the wages.
Tameside is a low socioeconomic area which is generational.
I went to an at best, average school. The importance of school wasn't really seen, or taught at home or in school. Myself, I had a mixed schooling history. Troublesome/difficult, likely influenced through parents attitudes, being bullied at times, not academically smart but not dumb, dyslexic and can remember one specific teacher publicly shaming me for not being able to spell my surname instead of trying to teach me. My social worker partner is adamant i'm on the spectrum. I feel there was a nurturing missing generally at these average, low social economic schools and my time could of been better with the right support in school. Eck I got a C GCSE in maths but learnt a bit of category theory, Haskell and functional programming myself.
Those who had a reasonable fortunate home life seem to of done just ok in their adult life from the area.
Those who were disruptive, high level of truancy, poor parenting, some are dead, some are in prison, some look like they should be dead with addiction. Their kids will likely follow down the same path they did and they've had more kids than the people who turned out alright.
Growing up in low social economic environments is hard to break out of. It starts at home with the importance of education and it's hard to start at home when your parents and parents parents never seen the importance and then the schooling isn't prepared to deal with it.
I broke out of it leaving as fast as I could, hard work when younger and some luck.
The north can be raw, probably not so much these days but "southern pansy" or "posh", "gay" is used disparagingly for people trying to better themself. I grew up not in poverty and not well off, in a area that wasn't the worst but not great. My mum see's anyone who has done well for themselfs as "posh" looking down on her and that can be a common theme with the less fortunate people I know in the area. This is a generational attitude.
The story seems common over the world. People growing up less well off struggle to get out of being less well off and it often starts at home and education and it's hard to start at home in the environment you are in and education doesn't happen due to home environment apart from the few outliers who do overcome the odds stacked against them.
It's funny reading these articles from people who haven't grew up poor, in the north, never seen a council estate, or the way of life, talking about Universities in 1066 and Northern Conquests as a reason.
Re: Why Northern England is poor
#115Re: Why Northern England is poor
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
It just makes the poor people move elsewhere, they are still around.
Specific to London but there were a lot of working class home owners who bought under the right to buy schenlme who have benefited hugely from gentrification (not just from increased home prices but from lower crime, better schools etc). Also a lot of non-market housing being rented, all those people also benefit.
Poor areas have few people with the knowledge/ resources to really leverage gentrification which is why they are living in poorer neighborhoods to begin with. So the average outcome may be a slight improvement due to the major winners, but the median outcome is likely a net loss.
Re: Why Northern England is poor
#117I think there's a fundamental gap in this analysis, which is how hyper-local many of the inequalities are. Manchester has a GDP per capita of £59,000. Tameside, the poorest area in Greater Manchester, has a GDP per capita of £19,000. Leeds has a GDP per capita of £42k; ten miles away, Bradford has a GDP per capita of £23.6k. Those disparities are really difficult to explain in terms of infrastructure or commercial in…
Thanks for reading. For my precise work on the hyper-local angle you're asking after I did this analysis of Greater Manchester when I lived there in 2018 and it holds up really well. https://www.tomforth.co.uk/inequalityingreatermanchester/ Specifically on the GDP per capita numbers you quote, it's important to know what the "capita" means here. In your numbers, the capita is of residents. So people who commute into…
Re: Why Northern England is poor
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but it does little for the overall population. Not sure about that.
It just makes the poor people move elsewhere, they are still around.
Re: Why Northern England is poor
#119I think there's a fundamental gap in this analysis, which is how hyper-local many of the inequalities are. Manchester has a GDP per capita of £59,000. Tameside, the poorest area in Greater Manchester, has a GDP per capita of £19,000. Leeds has a GDP per capita of £42k; ten miles away, Bradford has a GDP per capita of £23.6k. Those disparities are really difficult to explain in terms of infrastructure or commercial in…
I was born and bred in Tameside. It's a 15 minute train ride to Manchester. 30-40 min drive/bus trip to Manchester, 1 hour train ride to Leeds and slightly longer drive. Generally Tameside is well serviced, you got all the amenities you would expect and location wise you have very good access for commuting. Manchester, Salford, Leeds university all easily accessible. Tamesides location makes it popular as a commuter…
I grew up on a council estate and escaped that environment. I credit a headteacher that directed me to one of the better secondary schools, and a well run public library that was a safe third space between home and school. Curious what other escapees credit, and what lessons might be drawn.
Re: Why Northern England is poor
#120The very success of Northern England in the nineteenth century may have also precipitated a great deal of its subsequent failures. The rail, coal and manufacturing industries crowded out other forms of enterprise economically. The related union / capitalist disputes crowded out other political activity. Similarly the great agricultural “successes” of the Scottish Highlands in the 17th & 18th century crowded out every…
We'll have the same thing for the whole country when the time of housing investment comes to an end. Why start a business when you could just buy another house?