London Has Peaked

padington

remorseless wrote: »

did you? I dunno, wasn't speaking back then
Mind you though, comparing 2015 with 1970 is a bit different... in the 70's, I guess a generation ago, people wouldn't have learnt English at school and the concept of a globalisation was maybe at an early stage.

If I were a youngster now in Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece, Poland, Latvia, etc, where could I go abroad where I can hit the ground running? UK, I have learned English at school compared with say Germany where conditions are better but language is a barrier.

I am not saying language alone is a factor, but it does play an important role in making a city easily accessible! You can see similar behaviour in Australia, Canada, etc

I often wonder why people stay in London for this long despite the city not being overly organised. Transport is like cattle-class, expensive, often running late. Housing is often shocking, expensive, difficult to secure. Don't feel overly welcome from the news, it's always the fault of immigrants!

Maybe they come here for the experience, using the UK as a stepping stone for something else... Also it's extremely cheap to swing by London.

Sure it's busy, it's a sign of a good party.

cells

padington wrote: »

It's not the hallowed ground of one particular area that makes London so special. It's the people that make London an amazing place.

So much talent, so much innovation, so much knowledge, so many connections, so many liberal people, so many open minded people, so many rational people and so many of them with such a good sense of humour.

thats all just propaganda

or was there no knowledge connections and rational people with a sense of humor between 1961-1991 in London?

cells

padington wrote: »

People travel to find a better life. Sometimes they move from rural poverty to shanty towns and sometime they try to storm the gates of the most fashionable generous liberal safe democracy that enjoys a wealth of emplyment opportunities.

On the whole it tends to mean that higher populations are because of some form of relative greatness which were accessible from the life they left behind.

Yes I understand that, the population draw of london is that it is an English speaking capital city with an existing pool of immigrants.

thats the truth, not some rubbish propaganda about it being paved with gold and full of first rate people

cells

Jonbvn wrote: »

IMHO this is a bit OTT? I really like "The Smoke" and what it offers. However, it is not Shangri La (for me at least).

exactly,

one other factor which helps Londons population is that there are a lot of universities in London. So if 100,000 students come to study in London annually there is a chance a good whack will try to find work there. Whereas non university towns and cities dont have that effect

cells

padington wrote: »

It's because you were more likely to find an attractive partner who was going places and more likely to find an interesting job and more likely to have a wild weekend.

i think thats mostly propaganda

attractive people exist everywhere
most of london is normal boring jobs only a fraction are "different"
wild weekends, erm not for the 24% of london that are social tenants, not for the house sharers living 6 to a flat, nor for the families going back and tending to the kids, so another fraction of a fraction

what london does have is hope and propaganda

cells

padington wrote: »

The language, literature , history, music, theatre, BBC, films, lectures, art, comedy, queens, princess, palaces, innovators, London transport, parks, visitors, special events, Global connectivity, education, science, technology, museum's, libraries, specialised communities, shopping, inward investment, iconic buildings, liberal tolerance, generosity, open competition, free festivals, the people, good jobs, occasional incredible party ...

It's true, London wouldn't be so prolific if it wasn't for those.

maybe its true for 1/100 that those are the reasons they decided to move to London

The other 99/100 is for a lot of immigrants its the only city they can name in England and or they already have family/friends there so they can benefit from their help in setting up

also its one big propaganda that feeds off itself. If everyone says London is the place to go to get work and you are unemployed (or just out of university) you go with the flow and go try your luck there. While you are there your needs and demands add jobs so a growing city adds normal jobs to meet its growing populations needs.

cells

padington wrote: »

Did we stop speaking English in the 70's ?

http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/rbi-blogs/wp-content/blogs.dir/303/files/2014/03/Lonon-population-ons.jpg

there was no mass immigration in the 70s certainly not like it is now (in fact i think the 70s was a decade of people leaving the uk rather tan coming to it)

Crashy_Time

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

If you grow up in the provinces big cities will always be alluring, and London is the biggest and shiniest. There will always be a stream of young people happy to work unglamorous jobs and endure grotty flatshares during their 20s. Some love it enough to stay, others will tire of it and move to the suburbs after a few years.

I grew up in Dorset and when I went to university I had only been to a nightclub once. This was because going out on the raz involved massively expensive taxis back from the nearest town with a club, or someone had to volunteer to drive everyone back round all the villages. Obviously I moan about the Tube like all Londoners, but as a born yokel I know that the public transport here is actually awesome. There are downsides to living in London, but for most who grew up in Yokel-on-the-Wold, there is enough to outweigh those.

London was exciting, and rammed full of young people in the late 80`s/early 90`s, didn`t stop the market "correcting" then though? This bubble is much worse, the debt monster needs to feed or it really is going to be game over.

Crashy_Time

cells wrote: »

i think thats mostly propaganda

attractive people exist everywhere
most of london is normal boring jobs only a fraction are "different"
wild weekends, erm not for the 24% of london that are social tenants, not for the house sharers living 6 to a flat, nor for the families going back and tending to the kids, so another fraction of a fraction

what london does have is hope and propaganda

And certainly not for the mentalists who bet the farm on I.O HPI Forever, no Sir, they should be looking for the Andrex puppy pretty soon IMO. I agree with you though that the notion of "London" is just VI claptrap designed to get people into the city spending and borrowing like morons, many Chinese and others seem to lap it up though?

cells

Crashy_Time wrote: »

And certainly not for the mentalists who bet the farm on I.O HPI Forever, no Sir, they should be looking for the Andrex puppy pretty soon IMO. I agree with you though that the notion of "London" is just VI claptrap designed to get people into the city spending and borrowing like morons, many Chinese and others seem to lap it up though?

Its not debateable if London population is rising rapidly that's a fact

And while its +100,000 people a year you are on the losing side of a hpc bet