http://www.economist.com/node/21562938


Please read the article at the link above about Northern England and comment. 
 


Comments

Julia Souza
10/24/2012 6:59pm

There are “islands of affluence in a sea of poverty” in the north and in the south is a sea of affluence. That is how Danny Dorling of the University of Sheffield described Britain’s demography. The state’s neoliberal economic policies have increased financial inequality throughout the UK. This inequality becomes even more apparent in a regional viewpoint, with the country’s south growing much faster than the north, which is the traditional home of heavy industry. Whether this gap is rising or falling is still unknown. However, these cleavages result in the breaking of England’s social cohesion and stops citizens from thinking in a community sense. This inequality may lead to increased criminality and also result in lower educational attainment in the northern parts of England. The government’s priority should not be to boost the northern cities by constructing high buildings and commercial areas, which is David Cameron’s approach to the issue. Instead, those in power should be more worried about reviving the region. That happens through better education centers, an investment on their services and attracting more tourists to these places. The time of industrial growth now seems something outdated and from the last century.

Reply
Gabriella Goldenstein
10/25/2012 5:08am

Northern England seems to be turning into a complete different country from the south regarding its economy, society and politics. After WWI, the north’s industrial economy started to diminish and face hardships. With significantly lower employment rates and average incomes, the north remains poorer than the south. There are statistics saying that in 1965 men in the north were 16% more likely to die under the age of 75 than men in the south and by 2008 they were 20% more likely to. Danny Dorling, from the University of Sheffield suggested that the difference is that in the north there are “islands of affluence in a sea of poverty” while the south is a sea of affluence. The north needs more professional types to bring their jobs to the region. There are good and well prepared universities in the north, however the majority of graduates are still located in the south. David Cameron, the current prime minister, watches in worry as the country is divided into two separate ones.

Reply
Leonardo
10/25/2012 2:22pm

Northern Ireland has suffered a lot since World War I, as its economy has being disintegrated. With that, the southern part of UK has increased its population density, showing a failure of Harold Macmillan predictions in 1962. This actually only diminishes the Irish strength on the conflict. Even though the government spending in regards to education and health is evenly divided, the region suffers from a liberal market, which favors the private sector. This industry is concentrated in the southern part, mainly around London, which again, limit the opportunity for the northern portion to compete economically. This is clear when analyzing the unemployment rate, that has boosted up in the North, whereas in London has decreased by 0.3 points. It could also experience the beginning of a lack of political influence, as the Conservative party retracts from the region, as a result of the poor population preference for the Labour party.

Reply
Liz Costa
10/25/2012 4:08pm

North and Southern England have discrepancies on economic, social and political aspects. After WWI the northern pat of England started to go down hill in its economic aspects and up to date the north is still poorer than the south. The government however spends practically the same amount of money on all of the regions. Now the British government is trying to cut spending due to a budge deficit and that may affect the north even more. There are three reasons why the budget cuts are going to hurt the north more being: 1. The cut would reduce the funding of development agencies in the north that support the growth on this region. 2. Cuts to council budget is deeper in poorer places leaving them with little to no money to invest in the well being of the citizens. 3. The cut of the infrastructure budget will leave major projects intact, never getting out of the paper. A plan to make the discrepancy better would be to persuade some professionals to move north and take job opportunities with them to employ the citizens. In mid 19th century some northern cities began to modernize however, David Cameron just like Macmillan is watching without action the separation of both regions.

Reply
Tiago Fonseca
10/25/2012 5:02pm

This economic difference between North UK and South UK is very concerning. The nothern areas are not as developed as the southern areas, due to the presence of industries, which it boosts its economy. This gap will result in resentment from the North, since it is not being taken care of, or receiving investments like the South. This resentment can be stopped if the government starts investing on the area, such as, incentivating industries to be built, make the area more appealing for graduate students, in short make the area more economically “attractive”. If the Northern region is left untouched, then definetely there will be an increase in the gap, as one keeps get richer and richer, and the other poorer and poorer.

Reply
Marina Oliveira
10/25/2012 6:03pm

The north is economically, socially and politically separated from the south. After WWI the northern economy began to deteriorate and despite governmental attempts to stop it, they could only manage to slow it down. 1962 the Conservative PM, Harold Macmillan with his one-nation ideal tried to fight the increasing division between the north and the south, though it was conceived as a hopeless challenge. The discrepancies between sides is still a tough task for the current leaders of Britain, since the north is still poorer with lower employment opportunities and wages. The north is characterized by Danny Dorling of the university of Sheffield, for having “islands of affluence in a sea of poverty”, since it is filled with poor cities that were once industrialized and depressed towns, while the south is a sea of affluence. These differences are not a result of governmental spending since the budget is evenly spread out across the nation, though currently in the midst of a economic crisis and the budget cut the north will be more affected. It is important for the government to make incentives to shift the attention of professionals and citizens to the north so that this economic slow down won’t increase even more the discrepancies between England’s sides. It is important for the British to feel a sense of community and a tie as a single nation, so that they won't dismantle little by little.

Reply
Nilo Lisboa
10/25/2012 6:56pm

The state in which Northern England can be found in is a huge issue. How could one of the most powerful, richest nations allow this to happen? The North's economy has been damaged ever since World War I, but its state right now is not a result of a 100-year-old conflict. It is the result of negligence. Negligence is what the British government did to the North and only 50 years after the fact, it seeked to improve the nation as a whole. At that point the damage was practically irreversible, as the North had been left in its own ashes for far too long. With the immense financial crisis that the UK currently finds itself in, it proves to be a very bleak future for any further positive develpment in the North. It has much higher unemployment rates than Southern England and a much lowwer population number and density. If the David Cameron does not take some real action soon and begin helping the North, we will be looking at two incredibly different regions within the same country.

Reply



Leave a Reply