Named and Shamed! Britain's jobless ghettos...

chucky

vivatifosi wrote: »

Looks like they are including IB:

http://www.cityam.com/news-and-analysis/allister-heath/why-unemployment-remains-so-high

that makes more sense

The disparities within the UK are enormous: in Richmond upon Thames, it its just 8.1 per cent; in Kingston 8.3 per cent. London isn’t as bad as some places but the stats can be awful here too: over 20 per cent are on out of work benefits in Hackney, Tower Hamlets, Barking and Newham.

something needs to be done otherwise these places will become even worse ghettos while the 'better' areas will 'progress'

bigjl

I assume that these figures are in % terms, so basically they are skewed from the start, there are huge populations in Birmingham and Hackney, they aren't even comparing like with like, how can you compare a Town with a City then with local authority area in a geographically small area in London, they all have different population densityies and coverage areas.

Sady there is little that can be done to sort the problems of Hackney, Tower Hamlets, Barking and Newham. I have worked in these areas for the last ten years and they are getting worse every year, if not every week.

DaddyBear

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

It's almost like a top ten list of Britain's Cheapest Housing.....

Or a top ten list of places you wouldn't want to live. I grew up in one of that top 10 and have no intention of ever returning.

C_Mababejive

DaddyBear wrote: »

Or a top ten list of places you wouldn't want to live. I grew up in one of that top 10 and have no intention of ever returning.

I wonder what quality of life "the poor" have in such areas..?

amcluesent

>they experienced zero intervention from central Government <

IIRC, The Tories under Hestletine poured £M into Liverpool.

The disaster that was 'two minutes' Prescott on urban regeneration has yet to be counted, especially the highly dubious clearances of Victorian streets for chipboard 'apartments' with backhanders to all except the peeps who were swept out there homes and left without the means to buy £150K+ 'spaces'.

kabayiri

One of the theories of wealth distribution openly touted pre-credit crunch was the idea of 'trickle down economics'. The wealth power house regions, like the City of London, would generate wealth and this would find it's way out to poorer areas.

I must admit it did sound like brown cow stuff at the time, does this put the nail in it's coffin?

amcluesent

>does this put the nail in it's coffin?<

Not at all. The wealth has just 'trickled out' to where all the EE labourers, plumbers, au pairs, maids, bus drivers, etc. etc. have come from.

ILW

There are a lot of 1 miilion plus places in Hackney.

nearlynew

The working class people who live in these areas of the country were finished off long ago.

They are now being used as a scapegoat for all our ills and the so-called "middle class" are being conditioned to look down on them and encourage all sorts of "austerity measures" like benefit cuts etc as a remedy.

Before you know it, similar "austerity measures" will start to bite further up the line.

And all the while the rich just get richer.

lemonjelly

vivatifosi wrote: »

In Hackney it was 25% in 1993. Its a long term issue there due to poor skills:

Local government paper on why:
http://www.gos.gov.uk/497417/docs/189146/198595/251298/Hackney.pdf

Independent article from 1993:
http://www.gos.gov.uk/497417/docs/189146/198595/251298/Hackney.pdf

It'll be interesting to hear lj's take on what the issues are for Wolverhampton.

I feel it is a whole multitude of issues to be honest.

Firstly, a lot of the areas listed are, or are around former mining communities. This kind of suggests that some communities are still reeling from the 1980's.

Secondly, they are areas with generally poor health statistics and high % areas with many ill people.

They also appear (at first glance) to be generally densely populated areas. I can't help wonder if that is a factor?

The areas are also (imo) areas where the Local Authorities are weak, badly run and/or have significant failings.

They are also generally areas where refugees are dispersed too, along with asylum seekers. I'd suggest that this would impact a little on the figures as asylum seekers cannot work legally, and though refugees can, they generally find it difficult to get work, & also, depending on how long they've been in the country, may have restriced language skills.

That said, in wolverhampton specifically, there have been some significant regeneration projects not fulfilled. There are real problems for the town centre area, with some seriously dilapidated buildings surrounding it, and some significant numbers of empty shops. All of which adversely affects any potential investment.