Jump to content

Recommended Posts

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> They've got a point though


They don't. England/Britain is no different from any other county - Its capital essentially subsidises the rest of the country (or wherever the financial centre of that respective country is)


Moving on, the ad was also littered with really basic inaccuracies. "Scotland get a national holiday for their Saint's day, so should we." Well, that's not true in any way you pillock. You'd think you'd think they'd check these things out before spouting.

They don't. England/Britain is no different from any other county - Its capital essentially subsidises the rest of the country (or wherever the financial centre of that respective country is)


Not Australia. WA and QLD mining is bankrolling the country. Canberra is unproductive (in most senses of the word) and Sydney is like high maintenance dolly bird of a girlfriend. Looks pretty, but is generally useless.

See loads of places.


In the US the bankrollers are California, Texas, New York and Florida in that order. DC is a tiny fraction of those.


Beijing offers very little, you'd need to look at the SARs of Shanghai, Hong Kong and Shenzhen.


It doesn't get away from the fact that wealth generation is usually polarised and less wealthy areas are subsidised. The subsidies are generally supported because either it's convenient or it prevents social breakdown that may impact upon prospects for further wealth generation.


Myopic types often think they can keep the wealth and drop the subsidies - then they can't understand why it's all gone wrong.

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Not all economies are based around a centralised

> financial services industry either.


So true - as well as the capital's financial sector, the whole of the UK receives substantial revenue from the Oil & Gas sector (North Sea oil and gas fields, including waters spanning both Scotland and England btw).

I think people may be getting the wrong end on this one!


In the areas that a devolved government does have oversight, then effectively UK parliament only has oversight over what's left anyway. That means in England.


In those decisions there are 533 English MPs, 40 Welsh, 59 Scottish and 19 Morther Irish.


Given the huge disparity in influence, and the fact that devolution is not the same under the same terms in each country, there's no justification for the enormouse expense of running a second UK parliament.


Since most of the proponents of this position are 'small government Tories' then they are either too confused to see this, or just being disingenuous with a hidden agenda.


If we're running scared of those 118 'foreign' MPs, with their blue faces and scary voices, then we're not really the big strong English people we think we are. A bit weedy really.


If in the other hand you're talking about complete devolution in the face of what is clearly a more globalised world where the winning countries in the resource battle are billion citizen trading blocks, then you must be daft - letting petty rivalries ruin your nation.

The Labour Government has relied on its Scottish MPs on occasions to force through legislation in the house of commons that only affects England - this at the minimum is slightly unfair given there is no reciprocity. Now imagine the situation where the Conservatives have an outright majority of seats (not just votes as happend last time round) in England but not a majority government due to Scottish and Welsh seats held by Labour. It soon becomes a mess constitutionally. The Scots and Welsh moaned throughout the 1980's of being governed by London, it doesn't seem unreasonable for similar moans to be made by the English when the reverse is the case.


In any case the number of Scottish and Welsh seats (not sure about NI but probably applies there too) is disproportionate to their respective populations. Hence a neat solution could reduce the number of seats in these countries, and hence minimise their ability to influence policy on England-only matters.

Interesting economic data on this debate (of which VoteEnglish is not worthy, but still)


'Gross Value Added per Capita' is a measurement of productivity. It's the difference of what comes out of a region economically, compared with the resources it consumes:


(this figure is the amount of value added annually in pounds per person)


1 Greater London, Eng 26 192

2 South East England 21 514

3 East of England 19 599

4 Scotland 17 789

5 South West England 17 467

6 East Midlands, England 16 982

7 West Midlands, England 16 583

8 North West England 16 234

9 Yorkshire / Humber, Eng 15 968

10 North East England 15 177

11 Northern Ireland 15 175

12 Wales 14 396


This would appear that before we think about kicking Scotland out, we'd be far better off kicking the West, the Midlands and the North out....

To be fair I think its more the fact that the scots want to leave than vice versa . . . .


I have seen similar stats on government spending per capita by region - think NI is first, but the amount spent on Scotland, Wales and the poorer parts of the UK - Cornwall, North East etc is pretty similar. However, on average Scotland gets more per capita than England. This is not a problem where there is one country and one parliament - Ie UK pre devolution. It becomes a cause of irritation to some once devolution happens.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I have to wonder who's going to benefit from the Trump tarrifs  Possibly those in tje know who dumped their shares before it happened, banked the cash,  bought shares at rock bottom  and are now waiting for stock that crashed to go up again and make a fortune. But the bigger losers will be Americans who expect industry to move their factories to America, provide jobs and revive the economy, 20 years ago that could have happened but since then most factory jobs can now be done by robots  including warehouse movements, and if a tech company is going to build a new factory they will obviously use robotics and maybe AI to do the work, which means a gluten of goods and no one with the cash to buy them.  America will go into another depression and take the rest of the world with it. Forget the issues Liz Truss and Rachel Reeves combined have caused the economy, the trump tarrifs will make them look like saints by comparison.
    • Perhaps someone who works there owns a Tesla and is keen to promote more sales. After all poor Musk needs all the support he can get right now 😢
    • Well unless you have a different user name  you weren't actually commenting on this at all - i was responding to the posters who had concerns about the wooden planters falling apart.   Do carry on though...
    • Oh never mind. I was just commenting on the horrific traffic jams, pollution and delay of emergency services due to our beloved council blocking side roads.   back to beautiful cherry trees 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...