Bit shocked

wotsthat

I don't like that funny underground smell which is uniquely London.

I know some would say it's the smell of success which can't be found in Northern Hell Holes but I'd say it's a blend of fart, BO and a little pinch of je ne sais quoi.

lisyloo

Of course, some people like all of the things that I regard as negatives

I don't disagree with your negatives but there are an equal set of negatives outside London like lack of decent public transport, isolation, lack of facilities etc.

I do find there is a real buzz and optimism in London and isolation in the countryside can be depressing for some people in some situations.

gadgetmind

lisyloo wrote: »

I don't disagree with your negatives but there are an equal set of negatives outside London like lack of decent public transport, isolation, lack of facilities etc.

Isolation? There *are* other UK cities, with PT and facilities.

I've spent a lot of time in a fair few cities around the world and prefer pretty much all of them to London overall. Of course, if I could pick and mix, I'd go for Vancouver's attitude to life, Portland's attitude to cannabis, Tokyo's transport, Chicago's music, Amsterdam's cycling, San Jose for technology, and I'm a bit torn on beer, but might go for Portland again. Food maybe Tokyo again, or perhaps Copenhagen. London maybe for museums, but New York and Amsterdam are other great options.

My own home city of Leeds has The Yorkshire Dales on our doorstep, affordable housing, great food and drink, a lively nightlife, plenty of jobs (mostly well paid), good universities, interesting parks and houses, the odd museum, and excellent transport links. It's just a shame about the people.

zagubov

Drp8713 wrote: »

I live in Dulwich and it is very nice.

I cant imagine ever owning a property here though. To buy a two bedroom flat like ours would cost from £450-600k.

When I do manage to save £50k up (which will be about 5 years) it wont be going down on a deposit here, id rather buy a whole two bedroom house, with land in the Normandy countryside as a holiday home / place to retire.

Went to a lovely art exhibition here on Saturday. Hadn't really been much to Dulwich and it is very very nice, especially when you discover how central it is.

A while ago a friend from London visited Edinburgh with me and had a good time climbing Arthur's Seat and looking down at Edinburgh city centre.

He was rather taken aback when he walked around the top and realised that Edinburgh stretched in all directions and the plateau was just part of the city centre. As far as city centre parks go, it's quite hard to beat.

Fair enough you've got to go to Glasgow to see the opera or the ballet or any big musical acts or visit one of its Apple stores but the two cities provide a lot of opportunities and distractions.

Britain's a bit over-centralise around London though; only regions or clusters of cities manage to offer any competition at all: Bristol plus Cardiff or Birmingham plus the Black Country, Liverpool and Manchester, the main cities of Yorkshire can all provide very affordable places with the population sizes to provide facilities to make life tolerable.

The fact that Britain lacks individual cities that could rival or surpass London is a flaw in the structure of the country that should have been addressed. America, Belgium, Canada, Spain, Germany, the USA, Australia, all have many "second cities" that could handle huge events like the Olympics (although ironically I'm not sure that over-centralised Greece has).

I've posted links in the past about how London-headquartered parties have deliberately suppressed the growth of rival centres such as Birmingham. Policies like this need to stop, and the sooner the better.

Sapphire

Oxford and Bath are also really lovely cities – and in fact Oxford is very expensive now. They also look pretty affluent.

Generali

zagubov wrote: »

Went to a lovely art exhibition here on Saturday. Hadn't really been much to Dulwich and it is very very nice, especially when you discover how central it is.

A while ago a friend from London visited Edinburgh with me and had a good time climbing Arthur's Seat and looking down at Edinburgh city centre.

He was rather taken aback when he walked around the top and realised that Edinburgh stretched in all directions and the plateau was just part of the city centre. As far as city centre parks go, it's quite hard to beat.

Fair enough you've got to go to Glasgow to see the opera or the ballet or any big musical acts or visit one of its Apple stores but the two cities provide a lot of opportunities and distractions.

Britain's a bit over-centralise around London though; only regions or clusters of cities manage to offer any competition at all: Bristol plus Cardiff or Birmingham plus the Black Country, Liverpool and Manchester, the main cities of Yorkshire can all provide very affordable places with the population sizes to provide facilities to make life tolerable.

The fact that Britain lacks individual cities that could rival or surpass London is a flaw in the structure of the country that should have been addressed. America, Belgium, Canada, Spain, Germany, the USA, Australia, all have many "second cities" that could handle huge events like the Olympics (although ironically I'm not sure that over-centralised Greece has).

I've posted links in the past about how London-headquartered parties have deliberately suppressed the growth of rival centres such as Birmingham. Policies like this need to stop, and the sooner the better.

London didn't really host the Olympics alone though: there were events and venues across the UK. And many places have hosted the Commonwealth Games (Edinburgh, Cardiff, Glasgow, Manchester).

TBH it's not the London is doing stuff to hold the rest of the country back it's that the rest of the country seems to have this reluctance/failure to pull their collective fingers out.

London provides a massive subsidy to the rest of the UK each and every year despite having some of the poorest boroughs in the country. All those arts venues across the UK are effectively paid for using London taxes for example, London is one of the very few places to have a vibrant enough economy to allow it to have lots of privately run venues.

Perhaps places like Edinburgh and Cardiff should take a look at what they are failing to do, despite the massive subsidies the receive that drain London of resources. Maybe the problem is the subsidies: councils and decentralised Governments over-reach themselves so private companies can't compete.

Sapphire

lisyloo wrote: »

I don't disagree with your negatives but there are an equal set of negatives outside London like lack of decent public transport, isolation, lack of facilities etc.

I do find there is a real buzz and optimism in London and isolation in the countryside can be depressing for some people in some situations.

There are things about London that I absolutely hate – especially now, when there has been so much ugly development. However, it is still a fascinating city. As long as I don't have to commute in every day and can work from home, and can stay in my lovely Richmond Park area, I can find a lot in central London that is interesting and stimulating, like the great museums, art galleries, archaeology and history, and opportunities for study. I would say shopping and some other things as well, except that I can find everything on my doorstep now: good shops, fabulous parks, the river, great cinemas, Petersham Nursery and the Palm Centre, excellent restaurants and pubs, and so on. Actually, when I lived more centrally in London, I found I always had to travel to buy certain things, which isn't the case now…

I also think London was a more interesting and attractive city ten years ago and more. It is far too crowded now, and losing much of its historic attractions through globalisation (generic shops and eating places, ugly high-rise buildings that are destroying the character of the city…).

cells

Generali wrote: »

London didn't really host the Olympics though: there were events and venues across the UK. And many places have hosted the Olympics (Edinburgh, Cardiff, Glasgow, Manchester).

TBH it's not the London is doing stuff to hold the rest of the country back it's that the rest of the country seems to have this reluctance/failure to pull their collective fingers out.

London provides a massive subsidy to the rest of the UK each and every year despite having some of the poorest boroughs in the country. All those arts venues across the UK are effectively paid for using London taxes for example, London is one of the very few places to have a vibrant enough economy to allow it to have lots of privately run venues.

Perhaps places like Edinburgh and Cardiff should take a look at what they are failing to do, despite the massive subsidies the receive that drain London of resources. Maybe the problem is the subsidies: councils and decentralised Governments over-reach themselves so private companies can't compete.

capital cities tend to export services to the rest of the country because a lot of the service industries are entrenched there for one reason or another but mostly historical. Media Arts Accounting Legal Finance Politics Tourism etc.

It is not something that is emulateable

It is even true within London, the city of London and the central zones full of offices export services to the rest of London. If Enfield in North London 10 miles away cant take on the city of London or Westminster what chance does Birmingham 100 miles away have?

Or put another way, why isn't Enfield pulling its finger out?

lisyloo

Bath is a lovely city but has awful traffic and parking problems partly inherent in being a Georgian city.
No axe to grind just pointing out that everywhere has pros and cons.

buglawton

Generali wrote: »

London didn't really host the Olympics alone though: there were events and venues across the UK. And many places have hosted the Commonwealth Games (Edinburgh, Cardiff, Glasgow, Manchester).

TBH it's not the London is doing stuff to hold the rest of the country back it's that the rest of the country seems to have this reluctance/failure to pull their collective fingers out.

London provides a massive subsidy to the rest of the UK each and every year despite having some of the poorest boroughs in the country. All those arts venues across the UK are effectively paid for using London taxes for example, London is one of the very few places to have a vibrant enough economy to allow it to have lots of privately run venues.......

Really?
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/aug/07/london-gets-24-times-as-much-infrastructure-north-east-england

That's 24 times more investment per person btw.