>>54881002 It's ok dear, I remember when Vienna used to be important... oh wait, I don't.
>>54881027 >the ECB owns Europe Interesting proposition, but completely wrong in every way. You may want to learn a little about the Eurozone before continuing this debate. For example, the Eurozone does not cover all of Europe.
>What similarly important organ does London house? The British government, the Bank of England, some of the largest banks in the world (like HSBC, Barclays), many global companies of every kind are HQd here, various world-renowned cultural institutions and think-tanks, the Commonwealth of Nations, time itself starts in London at the Prime Meridian in Maritime Greenwich
Forgive me if I can't summon up much enthusiasm about the Eurozone in all its stagnating glory, maybe when London is the capital of Europe's largest economy (which is all but inevitable to happen in the next decade or so) you'll feel differently
>>54881436 So what's your criticism of London? A "bloated" finance centre? Finance doesn't even make up the majority of London's economy. But I don't see how a globally successful financial sector isn't something to be proud of.
Also, I notice that you criticise "most capitals" for being "socialist" and at the same time you poo-poo London for its vibrant capitalist tradition and "turbo jews". Are you trying to be contradictory and stupid or does it come naturally?
>>54881673 many of those other services are reliant on profits from the City, finance makes up about 7% of Britain's total GDP, which is far larger than comparable developed nations. At the same time Britain has one of the largest deficits on its trade balance in the world, which makes tourism and exports of both goods and services expensive and uncompetitive.
Britain's economy is structurally bad, it focussed too much on one sector and even more on one geographical area (South-East England).
Great Britain, and London specifically, have a lot of things going for it, but in the end it needs to reform to make that durable.
>>54882386 >finance makes up about 7% of Britain's total GDP, which is far larger than comparable developed nations
I'm going to stop you there, because that's completely wrong. See pic related. Less memes, more facts from you, please.
You're also wrong about Britain's economy being focused too much on "one sector". The services are dominant in the UK but only a minority of that is finance. The creative industries contribute only a little less than the finance sector.
>By 2009, the sector accounted for 10% of UK GDP, the highest of all G7 economies. The second highest was Canada at 6.7%, and the lowest was Germany at 3.9%. >Output in the UK financial services sector is still 13.6% below pre-crisis levels according to the latest ONS data.
>>54882840 The Netherlands can export half as many services with a much smaller economy, so to think the British services sector is somehow uniquely strong is laugable http://www.cbs.nl/nl-NL/menu/themas/dossiers/eu/publicaties/archief/2011/2011-3341-wm.htm
Meanwhile your trade deficit widens, with your services exports not making up for it. http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35530340
>>54883374 >By 2009, the sector accounted for 10% of UK GDP, the highest of all G7 economies. >2009
The Guardian, and you, chose this year because it was a one-off, during the eye of the financial storm straight after the crash. In the years after that it dipped again to 8% or so. This is NOT especially high compared to other advanced economies. Cherrypicking does not make you clever it makes you desperate
>The Netherlands can export half as many services with a much smaller economy I never said it was the British services sector was "uniquely strong". YOU said it was "uncompetitive" and that's just not true.
I notice from your link that the UK has the largest services output in the entire EU, higher in value than France or Germany despite them having larger populations than the UK.
>Meanwhile your trade deficit widens, with your services exports not making up for it. In fact the most recent figures show the gap closing
>Today's figures also contained December's trade data, which showed the deficit narrowed by £1.3bn to £2,7bn overall in the month.
>>54885035 >it sucks up the entire wealth of the UK to maintain itself. Wrong. Approximately half the revenue raised in London is distributed to the rest of the country. London subsidises the UK to an extraordinary degree. See pic related.
>>54885136 >New York manages to be a world city on it's own merits, without the entire Eastern seaboard of the US having to support it.
Wow, you're stupid. Firstly, look at the table. It's London propping up the rest of the UK.
Secondly, do you think New York doesn't benefit from a MUCH larger domestic population (consumer pool, economies of scale) than London?
>>54885322 >Approximately half the revenue raised in London is distributed to the rest of the country. London subsidises the UK to an extraordinary degree.
Yes, because it receives insane amounts of government investment, as the government is run by The City for The City. Any and all supposedly nationwide initivies, infrastructure projects etc. are designed to ensure that London is the primary beneficiary by several orders of magnitude. For instance, HS2.
>Firstly, look at the table. It's London propping up the rest of the UK.
>>54885701 You're so fucking stupid it's amazing. So London's getting all the money the regions should get? Look at the EXPENDITURE column you idiot.
Yes, the other cities DO need more investment but blaming this on London is completely absurd.
>>54885787 Yeah ok. I knew you'd come up with some bland generalised statement like that after being proved wrong.
>>54885839 >>54885839 /int/ has a hate complex towards London. People here make up bullshit and lie about it all the time, these people deserve to be insulted because they're the ones who insult first without checking the facts
>>54885914 The entire advanced world is switching from industrial to service based models, Thatcher just did it too fast and was ahead of her time.
>>54879760 The feature of EU is it's diversity. To pick a "capital" would not make any sense other than to try and cause internal division which is therefore reasonably what you are trying to do. /thread
>>54886900 >It is literally impossible for London to be so wealthy and so developed and for the rest of the country to be so poor if it's not because London is halting the development of anywhere else in the UK.
How is London halting development of these other places? Look at the expenditure column in >>54885322. And the deficits and surpluses.
>The gap between the richest and poorest region in the UK, in terms of disposable income, is the widest in the EU
AND IT'S REDISTRIBUTED TO THE REGIONS
This is what the table I posted is telling you:
London taxpayer earns high salary, pays taxes. A large portion of those taxes then LEAVES London, goes to the Exchequer and then is spent OUTSIDE of London and the South East.
Projects you mentioned earlier like Crossrail are necessary to keep the city functioning, without them it would literally break down
>>54887339 >How is London halting development of these other places?
I've already told you, by taking insane amounts of government investment compared to the rest of the UK, and by dictating the policies of the entire nation to suit its own ends.
I say it again: It is literally IMPOSSIBLE for the rest of the country to be so poor for it to be in spite of how rich London is.
>Projects you mentioned earlier like Crossrail
I never mentioned Crossrail, I mentioned HS2.
The project supposedly designed specifically to help the North economically. The main beneficiary will be... London, to the tune £3 billion a year.
The second? Birmingham by just £1.5 billion.
Everywhere else will get a fraction of what London will get.
Scotland has to pay £8 billion towards HS2 despite the fact it will not even reach that far North and the fact that HS2 will likely DAMAGE Scotland's economy, according to the government's OWN FIGURES.
It's a vast, blunt, flavourless mediocrity. I wouldn't even care for the cost of living, if it would be worth it.
And it's not like UK can't have cities with character. Bath, Cambridge, Oxford, Bristol, are all beautiful, picturesque cities with plenty character. Even the fucking cesspool that's Manchester, at least it has character.
>>54887751 >I've already told you, by taking insane amounts of government investment compared to the rest of the UK, and by dictating the policies of the entire nation to suit its own ends.
How on Earth does this make sense to you? Let's go back to basics shall we. You are saying a LABOUR CITY is dictating the policies of the ENTIRE nation via a CONSERVATIVE majority government. What. The. Fuck.
>I never mentioned Crossrail, I mentioned HS2. HS2 is not a London project you mong. It stretches across England. Don't quote your estimates at me, ANY national high speed railway line is obviously going to pass through the capital fucking city of the United Kingdom.
>Scotland has to pay £8 billion towards HS2 Oh my goodness. Stop the fucking presses. Scotland has to pay taxes for something that doesn't directly benefit Scotland! I'm tearing up, this is a tragedy. It's almost... ALMOST as if Scotland is part of a larger country, and not independent.
Deary me. If only the UK government had the balls to hold a Scottish independence referendum to ascertain whether the Scottish people are ok with not being independent! Damn this injustice.
Thread replies: 88 Thread images: 23
Thread DB ID: 517683
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.