Eliminating the regulations against covering all our buildings with flammable cladding has done wonders for the nation. And just think how much wealthier we'd be still if we permitted lead in our paints, DDT on our crops, and even more raw sewage and toxic chemical run-off into our drinking water!
I think we should keep in mind that GDP per capita is an average and this could flaw the comparison. How many billionaries and millionaries the US have, and how many the UK have? Is the gap between the higher salaries and the lower ones in the UK thinner than in the US (which some could consider as being part of the "social justice"? The facts might have some impact on the comparison.
My question is: What does the UK make that the rest of the world wants to buy? I'm having trouble of thinking of what industries the UK is a global leader in.
Tom, can I ask if the premise is correct? The US GDP is heavily driven by healthcare, last I checked, it makes up about 1/5 of the US economy. Isn't it possible that the UK GDP per capita appears lower because healthcare prices are artificially suppressed? Could this explain part of the apparent discrepancy in wealth?
Seems like there's other issues here? London is denser than the San Francisco area or Berlin, so even with the constraints on new housing, the preexisting housing supply should let it be a strong economy (like in NYC).
This is a really important question that needs more attention.we would be one of the poorest states in the US and we are behind Germany, Holland,Austria, Scandinavia and other European countries.
All i can think of is housing ,infrastructure, R&D investment (which we are getting thanks Dominic cummings Arpa)
I'm certainly not a neoliberal (not anti market though) we have had low productivity, low wages.
We really need to figure out the best solutions to make this country better.
Good piece. An issue I see is that even if parties propose more housing, individual MPs still intervene in local housing proposals(see Michael Gove), as these events are key vote getters for local NIMBYs. Outside of preventing these interventions entirely, what could be done about this?
Eliminating the regulations against covering all our buildings with flammable cladding has done wonders for the nation. And just think how much wealthier we'd be still if we permitted lead in our paints, DDT on our crops, and even more raw sewage and toxic chemical run-off into our drinking water!
Full steam ahead Nigel! Britannia rule the waves!
I think we should keep in mind that GDP per capita is an average and this could flaw the comparison. How many billionaries and millionaries the US have, and how many the UK have? Is the gap between the higher salaries and the lower ones in the UK thinner than in the US (which some could consider as being part of the "social justice"? The facts might have some impact on the comparison.
My question is: What does the UK make that the rest of the world wants to buy? I'm having trouble of thinking of what industries the UK is a global leader in.
Tom, can I ask if the premise is correct? The US GDP is heavily driven by healthcare, last I checked, it makes up about 1/5 of the US economy. Isn't it possible that the UK GDP per capita appears lower because healthcare prices are artificially suppressed? Could this explain part of the apparent discrepancy in wealth?
Seems like there's other issues here? London is denser than the San Francisco area or Berlin, so even with the constraints on new housing, the preexisting housing supply should let it be a strong economy (like in NYC).
Great post!
Pls could you provide a rational measure of poor to back up the opening assertion.
This is a really important question that needs more attention.we would be one of the poorest states in the US and we are behind Germany, Holland,Austria, Scandinavia and other European countries.
All i can think of is housing ,infrastructure, R&D investment (which we are getting thanks Dominic cummings Arpa)
I'm certainly not a neoliberal (not anti market though) we have had low productivity, low wages.
We really need to figure out the best solutions to make this country better.
Good piece. An issue I see is that even if parties propose more housing, individual MPs still intervene in local housing proposals(see Michael Gove), as these events are key vote getters for local NIMBYs. Outside of preventing these interventions entirely, what could be done about this?
So how come the most productive places have the highest housing constraints? It turns your argument upside down doesn't it?