Shocking Statistic on the UK

cepheus

The UK has 9 of the 10 poorest regions in Northern Europe, as well as the richest (London). This seems to exclude Norway and Eastern Europe.



Another fascinating observation about this map, is that four of the most prosperous areas today were heavily bombed during the war. Much of Hamburg and Darmstat were two of the three German cities which became self sustaining infernos, or fire storms (the other was Dresden) resulting in the loss of much of these cities, and presumably creating the potential for rebuilding from scratch. Perhaps a coincidence? The others were Vienna and Central London.

I'm not suggesting we bomb the nine poorest areas to see if it works again though!

In_For_A_Penny_2

Any idea how they define "poorest"? Bit meaningless without it.

cepheus

In_For_A_Penny wrote: »

Any idea how they define "poorest"? Bit meaningless without it.

Just follow the links through to the source then examine the source. It is linked if not directly.

chewmylegoff

In_For_A_Penny wrote: »

Any idea how they define "poorest"? Bit meaningless without it.

GDP per capita (adjusted for purchasing power).

So, a pretty meaningless measure. Also, the geographic regions they break things down by are not comparable. For instance the French figures are broken down over 22 regions, whereas the UK with more or less the same population and about half the landmass, is broken down over 38 regions.

Carl31

It is weird that a blog about poor Britain manages to find such a statistic

no one's poor up north, they still have iphones and coffee etc..

vivatifosi

It just goes to show what you can do with statistics.

Show the poorest regions in the EU and you would get a different picture. But pick the very specific and distinctly wealthy (in terms of anywhere in the world) northern Europe and you get a different figure.

Tbh I think it is the author dividing things for their own definition. After all, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia are missing from the map and they are also in northern Europe.

Similarly, the traditional geographic placement of the UK is in Western Europe.

It's like saying Victoria Beckham is poor because she has nowhere near the wealth of Roman Abramovitch.

the_flying_pig

Doesn't surprise me really. I'm sure that living standards are higher across all of that small sample of wealthy countries than in most of the uk

Thrugelmir

cepheus wrote: »

Much of Hamburg and Darmstat were two of the three German cities which became self sustaining infernos, or fire storms (the other was Dresden) resulting in the loss of much of these cities, and presumably creating the potential for rebuilding from scratch. Perhaps a coincidence?

Hamburg is Germany's second largest city and has a population 3 times that of Cornwall. So there's bound to be a wide divergence in GDP. Rather meaningless comparisons. Surprised the Greek Islands don't get a mention either.

PS. Hamburg is also Germany's largest port.

Prudent

Why does Scotland get extra money per head from the UK government when it is not listed in the poorest areas? By this map, most of the extra spends should go to areas of England.

molerat

I used Google Earth and could not find any mud huts or tented refugee camps in those areas - am I missing something ?

cepheus

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Hamburg is Germany's second largest city and has a population 3 times that of Cornwall. So there's bound to be a wide divergence in GDP.

If Cornwall why not Brittany, the Black Forest or the Swedish Lakes for the Poorest, and any other capital for the richest?

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Rather meaningless comparisons.

Not half as meaningless as your reply.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Surprised the Greek Islands don't get a mention either.

Do you know the difference between North Europe and South Europe? There is even a map to help the geographically challenged