MAJOR CAVEAT: The source for this is the Daily Mail.

 

Parts of Britain are now poorer than Poland, Lithuania and Hungary, official figures reveal.

 

People in the Welsh Valleys and Cornwall - Britain’s two poorest areas - scrape by on less than £14,300 a year on average.

 

Because Britain is so expensive, this leaves families in these areas worse off than those vast swathes of Eastern Europe, according to an EU study.

 

In Lincolnshire and Durham, the next two poorest areas in Britain, people live on less than £16,500 a year.

 

This puts them in the same bracket as Estonians and rural Poles, once prices are taken into account.

 

Britain as a whole fares a little better, with average earnings of £23,300 - just over the EU average of £20,750. But this still leaves us out of the top 10 wealthiest countries in the EU.

 

And this figure is propped up by Europe’s runaway richest region – inner London. In the heart of the capital the average GDP per person is £71,000 a year.

 

This is 321 per cent of the average across the EU, according to Brussels’s official statistics arm Eurostat.

 

...

 

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/05/02/article-2617938-1D869EFE00000578-298_634x380.jpg

 

 

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/05/02/article-2617938-1D85574A00000578-913_634x397.jpg

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-26...-worst-off.html

Edited May 5, 201411 yr by Danny

MAJOR CAVEAT: The source for this is the Daily Mail.

 

It's because of those IMMIGRANTS

 

Nah, but seriously these really does say it all about who is getting priority if there was any other proof needed.

 

Wow, this is just another fork to pick immigrants and EU workers with!

 

Unlike other European cities, our economy pretty much runs from London, hence no real surprise why the top areas tat dominant the yearly salary are from London and the surrounding areas. Okay there are a few anomolies there, but 90% people who have money, and work in Manchester live in Cheshire.

 

I just don't really get the point of the article. In places like East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire there really is next to no real industry anywhere, so it's not surprising to see their income so low. I don't really get their fascination with these Eastern European countries, it's not like their hell-holes who all live in cardboard boxes. They have wealthy and poor areas, just like every other country in the world.

Wow, this is just another fork to pick immigrants and EU workers with!

 

Unlike other European cities, our economy pretty much runs from London, hence no real surprise why the top areas tat dominant the yearly salary are from London and the surrounding areas. Okay there are a few anomolies there, but 90% people who have money, and work in Manchester live in Cheshire.

 

I just don't really get the point of the article. In places like East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire there really is next to no real industry anywhere, so it's not surprising to see their income so low. I don't really get their fascination with these Eastern European countries, it's not like their hell-holes who all live in cardboard boxes. They have wealthy and poor areas, just like every other country in the world.

 

But isn't that the entire issue? The fact there is no major industry anywhere outside London is the whole problem, and is the fault of all the governments of the past 30 years (of both parties) who are meant to have the responsibility of creating it.

 

Eastern European countries aren't hellholes, but still 30-40 years ago it would've been unthinkable for average living standards for anyone anywhere in Britain to be comparable to those countries.

Edited May 5, 201411 yr by Danny

But isn't that the entire issue? The fact there is no major industry anywhere outside London is the whole problem, and is the fault of all the governments of the past 30 years (of both parties) who are meant to have the responsibility of creating it.

 

Eastern European countries aren't hellholes, but still 30-40 years ago it would've been unthinkable for average living standards for anyone anywhere in Britain to be comparable to those countries.

 

Yes it's a major problem, but it's not something that's going to change soon. I mean it obviously means there's a massive inflation of house prices in London wrongly. Government should be trying to promote industry set-up in some of the key bigger cities (which are mostly Northern) but the problem is far greater, and more social than the article states.

Yes it's a major problem, but it's not something that's going to change soon. I mean it obviously means there's a massive inflation of house prices in London wrongly. Government should be trying to promote industry set-up in some of the key bigger cities (which are mostly Northern) but the problem is far greater, and more social than the article states.

The problem might be quite complex but it doesn't mean that nothing can be done.

I don't really get their fascination with these Eastern European countries, it's not like their hell-holes who all live in cardboard boxes. They have wealthy and poor areas, just like every other country in the world.

Definitely agree with you! (we certainly aren't hell-holes, ha) and I've read that : "The wealthiest regions in the EU include several capital cities (measured based on GDP per person), and Prague (171%) has ended up in tenth place. (London 1st - 328%)".."all of the Czech Republic's other seven regions range from 63-72 % of the EU average."

 

I know it's a different example, but the difference is, sadly, everywhere.

The problem might be quite complex but it doesn't mean that nothing can be done.

 

The world works from London. What big financial firm or brand is going to want to build their offices in Scunthorpe - it makes no logistical or business sense! I like the Daily Mail article does also not take in to account the cost of living in the areas.

 

I saw some BBC documentary a month or so go about Birmingham, and how it was booming with industry in the 60s/70s, but the Governement at the time (Labour I think) wanted industry, mainly white collar to move elsewhere to spread the growth. Unlucky that it seems to have had the opposite effect, and generated a negative effect on Birmingham.

The world works from London. What big financial firm or brand is going to want to build their offices in Scunthorpe - it makes no logistical or business sense! I like the Daily Mail article does also not take in to account the cost of living in the areas.

 

I saw some BBC documentary a month or so go about Birmingham, and how it was booming with industry in the 60s/70s, but the Governement at the time (Labour I think) wanted industry, mainly white collar to move elsewhere to spread the growth. Unlucky that it seems to have had the opposite effect, and generated a negative effect on Birmingham.

Yes, but resigning to London being a more attractive place for business (given the higher costs there this isn't necessarily the case) will only exacerbate the problem. I agree with you but it seems as if you're using this as an excuse/justification to do nothing. More balanced growth will benefit us all the in long run.

*MAJOR STATISTICAL BORE ALERT*

 

I'm assuming that when they talk about the average income in places like Poland they're using the mean income, which is to some extent meaningless given that every developed country is going to have enough very rich people to completely distort the figures. Individual British counties don't always have the same issue, and if they're using the mean for abroad and then the median income for figures over here then that's just absurd.

 

The more telling part is, as other people have said, the huge gaps between different parts of the UK.

*MAJOR STATISTICAL BORE ALERT*

 

I'm assuming that when they talk about the average income in places like Poland they're using the mean income, which is to some extent meaningless given that every developed country is going to have enough very rich people to completely distort the figures. Individual British counties don't always have the same issue, and if they're using the mean for abroad and then the median income for figures over here then that's just absurd.

 

The more telling part is, as other people have said, the huge gaps between different parts of the UK.

For many years the difference between the mean and the median was so small that it didn't really matter which definition of "average" people used. The obscene levels of pay at the top mean that the difference between the two "averages" is now several thousand pounds. Therefore it is important to know which average is being used in any story about "average" pay.