It will never happen.Imagine £18.9b being spent on the North East.
Westminster types fund nothing that they can't see out of their office window
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It will never happen.Imagine £18.9b being spent on the North East.
There's a good thread here about why that happens:It will never happen.
Westminster types fund nothing that they can't see out of their office window
It will never happen.
Westminster types fund nothing that they can't see out of their office window
It's explained (to a certain degree) in that Twitter thread above.Nobody is asking for the tube up here obviously. But £18.9b for a new line? Nowhere outside of London gets anywhere near that for improvement, travel links and quality of life. Before anyone moans I think London is class.
Fair enough. Certainly don’t deny the facts in the Twitter thread I just can’t be arsed to read it. The difference between London and any other city in the UK is frightening mind in terms of quality of life.It's explained (to a certain degree) in that Twitter thread above.
We are an outlier in the western world with having a capital that is bigger than most of England's other cities combined. It skews all sorts of investment decisions.
Also because London and the SE has the population density to support a high frequency mass transit system. Move the Elizabeth Line to the north east and it would be mostly empty.
It’s Catch 22 though. If they put the investment in, more people would come to the region and you’d have the indigenous folk complaining about the influx of “bloody southerners” and complain how their kids couldn’t afford to get on the housing ladder as property prices soared due to demand and lack of supply.Part of the problem is that what you say is a bit chicken & egg.
The NE doesn't have the population density because it gets very little spent on it, so doesn't attract enough jobs & people move away. Start spending on other places, and things might actually change.
Part of the problem is that what you say is a bit chicken & egg.
The NE doesn't have the population density because it gets very little spent on it, so doesn't attract enough jobs & people move away. Start spending on other places, and things might actually change.
I've only skimmed through that thread and its spinoffs but found it absolutely fascinating and will set some time aside tomorrow to do it justice.There's a good thread here about why that happens:
As I posted earlier in the thread, 70% of that figure was paid for by London via levying private development.
To reach the same population as London, you would need to add together the entire populations of the following cities:
Birmingham, Glasgow, Liverpool, Bristol, Manchester, Sheffield, Leeds, Edinburgh, Leicester, Coventry, Bradford,
Cardiff, Belfast, Notttingham, Kingston upon Hull, Newcastle upon Tyne, Stoke on Trent, Southampton, Derby, Portsmouth AND Brighton.
THAT'S How big London is. It's effing HUGE. London is as big as the next 21 largest urban centres in the UK COMBINED.
It’s Catch 22 though. If they put the investment in, more people would come to the region and you’d have the indigenous folk complaining about the influx of “bloody southerners” and complain how their kids couldn’t afford to get on the housing ladder as property prices soared due to demand and lack of supply.
No mention about how London got that way, namely disproportionate investment in London and the South East over two centuries.I've only skimmed through that thread and its spinoffs but found it absolutely fascinating and will set some time aside tomorrow to do it justice.
This stopped me in my tracks though!
It’s Catch 22 though. If they put the investment in, more people would come to the region and you’d have the indigenous folk complaining about the influx of “bloody southerners” and complain how their kids couldn’t afford to get on the housing ladder as property prices soared due to demand and lack of supply.
No mention about how London got that way, namely disproportionate investment in London and the South East for two centuries.
Yet another vestige of this class war where only one side is allowed to fight.
The fact that the nearest comparable example is Thailand is hardly reassuring.It's known as the "Primate city" effect where the capital/biggest city is much larger than the second biggest and acts as the centre for finance, politics, culture, media etc.
Another example is Bangkok which is much bigger than Chiang Mai. Whereas in Germany, the US and other countries there is not one city with all of the power.
Primate city - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
As opposed to southern rentier types buying up northern housing stock to rent out ?It’s Catch 22 though. If they put the investment in, more people would come to the region and you’d have the indigenous folk complaining about the influx of “bloody southerners” and complain how their kids couldn’t afford to get on the housing ladder as property prices soared due to demand and lack of supply.
Of course not.I presume nobody is being held accountable for the multi-billion pound overspend on this project?