boris
Posted by: TOBYJUG on 17 December 2014
i don't live in London ,but I am saddened by the closure of so many music venues in and around the area to be converted into apartments recently.
Plenty of people (not only people in London) think that London should become independent from the rest of the UK - it is certainly wealthy enough to survive on its own, with a GDP of just under half a trillion pounds (or about 22% of the UK total) and exports of £92bn, so perhaps it's not such a daft idea.
Is that GDP gross or net of the 'minor' losses that the inevitable cyclic bursting of 'wealth bubbles' spreads so generously to the rest of the population?
An independent London sounds like an excellent idea.
The contents of the London based art galleries and museums would be distributed around Outer Britain. Art would obviously end up in Liverpool, with museum contents probably Manchester. We'd let London keep the contents of Tate Modern, it's hardly worth the effort moving it.
The royals could decamp to Oxford, renting the palace to a Russian Oligarch, with parliament relocating to Birmingham.
The Bank of England would obviously relocate to Newcastle. With London having no currency or protection from the Bank of England, financial institutions would probably follow suit.
Exports of 92 billion won't be maintained when the only thing worth exporting is jellied eels.