Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Barrister]

So according to GLAAD queer means:

An adjective used by some people, particularly younger people, whose sexual orientation is not exclusively heterosexual (e.g. queer person, queer woman). Typically, for those who identify as queer, the terms lesbian, gay, and bisexual are perceived to be too limiting and/or fraught with cultural connotations they feel do not apply to them. Once considered a pejorative term, queer has been reclaimed by some LGBTQ people to describe themselves. However, it is not a universally accepted term even within the LGBTQ community, so use caution when using it outside of describing the way someone self-identifies or in a direct quote. When Q is seen at the end of LGBT, it typically means queer. In a setting for support, particularly for youth, it may mean questioning. Ask people how they describe themselves before labeling their sexual orientation.

https://www.glaad.org/reference/terms

[The Larch]

Thanks Beeb. It's still unclear to me, but it's something. 

It's then basically some kind of "Not hetero, but not any kind of other label either". As said, too much fuzziness...

[The Larch]

Checking the link it turns out that "homosexual" is mentioned as a term to avoid due to being outdated and considered offensive and derogatory. That caught me by surprise, the more you learn...

[Barrister]

What's fascinating about that link is that for pretty much every single term there's a line which says "Ask people how they describe themselves before labeling their sexual orientation."  I mean - if you're a guy, who sleeps only with other guys, and is open about being attracted to guys - is it really wrong to call that person Gay?

[Valmy]

I don't think so

But generally why would you need to do that? Maybe it is just growing up in the much more homophobic 1990s but I guess I am used to never assuming somebody is gay because I never wanted to accidentally out somebody.

[Josquius]

Anyway. Away from the WOKE PC GONE MAD. THIS IS WHY I WONT EVER VOTE LABOUR stuff. This stood out to me this morning.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/25/north-england-would-rank-second-worst-investment-oecd-country

North of England 'would rank second worst for investment' if OECD country
Thinktank says of advanced economies, only Greece would have lower public and private investment


If the north of England were a country, it would be second bottom of a league table showing levels of investment in advanced economies, according to a report by a leading thinktank.

Only Greece has lower levels of public and private investment in a ranking of Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries compiled by researchers at IPPR North, the northern branch of the influential Institute for Public Policy Research.

The research, which aims to put the north's situation in an international context, will be revealed at Convention of the North, an annual gathering of political, civic and business leaders being held in Manchester on Wednesday.

Marcus Johns, the report's author, said the research showed the UK was standing out internationally for all the wrong reasons.

"Of all the advanced economies around the world, ours is the most regionally divided and getting worse – the north is at the sharp end of these divides and that's a barrier to prosperity. But what's even more unacceptable is that our country is divided by design. It is the result of decisions."

Researchers have calculated overall levels of public and private investment in all 38 OECD countries.

Ireland is ranked top followed by South Korea, Turkey and Estonia. The UK is a lowly 35 in the list followed by Costa Rica (36), Luxembourg (37) and the imagined country of the north of England (38). Greece, still recovering from a sovereign debt crisis and its aftermath, is bottom.

The report attempts to quantify the extent of inequalities in the UK. For example, it says productivity is about £7 lower an hour worked in the north than the rest of England. Hourly pay is £1.60 lower.

Researchers used detailed case studies of places across the world that have successfully levelled up, showing how they have done it and what lessons can be learned.

They include Leipzig, the fastest growing city in Europe; Bilbao, a regeneration triumph that began with the opening in 1998 of the Frank Gehry-designed Guggenheim; and Ibaraki in Japan where productivity per worker is 61% higher than the north of England.

Zoë Billingham, the director of IPPR North, said this international evidence showed that levelling up came from governments letting go of power and collaborating positively with places. She called on political leaders to "zoom out" and learn lessons. "Our leaders need to think big and look beyond our borders for inspiration."

Wednesday's convention will also hear a demand for levelling up to be "hardwired" into UK law to ensure regions can close gaps in living standards, whether skills, wages or life expectancy.

The call takes its inspiration from Germany, where the constitution guarantees areas have equivalent living standards and strong political leadership.

arsten Schneider, the minister for east Germany and equivalent living conditions, will address the convention by video. He said there were good reasons for putting it in the constitution. "If regions are drifting apart, it is bad for everyone, including for the growing regions," he said. "If a variety of regions flourish, the whole country will prosper."

Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester, said the German example showed what could be done.

"East Germany has seen long-term support and investment since the fall of communism – and it has worked. Cities in eastern Germany are now powering ahead of cities here in the north.

"Our own history has shown us that, too often, the north struggles to get to the top of the government's to-do list – whichever political party is in charge. That's why we need to hardwire levelling up into UK law and unlock the potential of the north to help the whole country thrive."

The convention comes a week after the government's second round of levelling up funding brought accusations of favouritism towards Conservative seats.

Michael Gove, the levelling up secretary, and his shadow, Lisa Nandy, are due to address delegates in Manchester.

And do note they're speaking of a broad version of the north that includes the favoured child of Manchester here....which says a lot for the north-north

[Sheilbh]

I love your continued claim that Manchester, Liverpool and I assume the rest of Lancashire isn't Northern

[Josquius]

I love your continued claim that Manchester, Liverpool and I assume the rest of Lancashire isn't Northern

They're borderline :p

But seriously, Manchester is quite a world apart from the rest of the north (including Liverpool, Sheffield and other such southern lands). It does get a fair bit of investment and is developing a lot. Its well on its way to being a properly balanced second city.

That even including Manchester the north pulls up as second worst in OCED.... The 'success' of Manchester masks a far deeper issue than this already not particularly nice situation.

[Sheilbh]

They're borderline :p

Via Dan Jackson who wrote The Northumbrians:

But seriously, Manchester is quite a world apart from the rest of the north (including Liverpool, Sheffield and other such southern lands). It does get a fair bit of investment and is developing a lot. Its well on its way to being a properly balanced second city.

That even including Manchester the north pulls up as second worst in OCED.... The 'success' of Manchester masks a far deeper issue than this already not particularly nice situation.

It is. Although I think part of that with Manchester, which is a slightly uncomfortable lesson for a lot of the rest of the country, isn't because it was the favoured child of Whitehall. Instead, even before Metro Mayors, Manchester's councils were able to work together, make joint appointments, joint pitches for business and there was buy in from, say, Bury or Oldham that Manchester doing better was better for them rather than the zero sum game you get in a lot of other areas' local governments.

But even Manchester has a real mixed picture between the centre and other areas even if, as a whole, they're doing better than much of the North. But obviously on the substance I agree

[Admiral Yi]

What do you think is the reason for the lack of investment in The North Squeeze?

[Tamas]

What do you think is the reason for the lack of investment in The North Squeeze?

I vote the weather.

[Josquius]

What do you think is the reason for the lack of investment in The North Squeeze?

Mountains of books have been written on the topic.

Though to try and over simplify a complex situation, it's been an active government decision to make the UK one of the most ridiculously centralised countries in the world and focus all investment around London and in businesses where London was traditionally strong (with some lovely ideological warring back in the 80s to crush other industries and local government ).
This has led to a cycle where investment naturally goes to the south east due to various "market forces" like network effects which in turn mean the CBA for further investment points there, most educated people have to move there etc...

[Admiral Yi]

it's been an active government decision to ...focus all investment around London

Do you mean public investment, private investment, or both?

[Sheilbh]

And the difference of male to female LGB+ mapped (you can see Hebden Bridge ):


Also on a personal level with people I know, not surprised by Pembrokeshire and Cornwall either. But really does seem like gay men just like (inner) cities and apparently airports


See also the difference in local authorities - not surprised to see the numbers from political and Barbican gays:

🇺🇦 Owen Winter 🇺🇦
@OwenWntr
Looking at the LAs with the biggest imbalance in ratio:

More LGB+ women: West Lancs (72% more women), Mid Devon (68%), York (66%), Adur (65%)

More LGB+ men: Westminster and City of London  (124% !), Kensington and Chelsea (108%), Lambeth (85%), Hammersmith and Fulham (57%)

[crazy canuck]

Women have made the obvious observation that women are more attractive than men