The end of London as a financial centre?

[Moscow Mule]

Everybody who lives in London genarates GDP every time they eat. Etc. Much of this would not necessarily follow the City financial institutions down the tubes.

People live in London because that's where the big bucks are. If that goes, many people (and hence the businesses that support them) will go too.

It would be an utter catastrophe if the City of London lost it's cachet as a financial centre.

[Cyberman]

Yes ok but apart from free university and free prescriptions, what have the londoners ever really done for us?

It's about time that the Barnett formula which gives Scotland 20% per head more in public funding than the English per head, is scrapped. Cameron has already said that they will stop Scottish MPs voting on english issues, so this will be the next logical step.

[Mich the Tester]

People live in London because that's where the big bucks are. If that goes, many people (and hence the businesses that support them) will go too.

It would be an utter catastrophe if the City of London lost it's cachet as a financial centre.

if?

[expat]

It's about time that the Barnett formula which gives Scotland 20% per head more in public funding than the English per head, is scrapped. Cameron has already said that they will stop Scottish MPs voting on english issues, so this will be the next logical step.

OK, I know you're just trolling, but I'll rise to it. The Barnett formula does not "give Scotland 20% per head more in public funding than the English per head", what it does is adjust some public spending so that increases in that spending in England are followed by similar increases in Scotland (inter alia).

It is a kludge, just a back-of-the-envelope calculation, and nobody really likes it. But its purpose is not to give Scotland more, rather to follow changes in England with changes in Scotland.

And I am in favour of Scottish MPs not voting on English issues; or in England at all.

[Bagpuss]

Don't expect an on topic reply

[Cyberman]

OK, I know you're just trolling, but I'll rise to it. The Barnett formula does not "give Scotland 20% per head more in public funding than the English per head", what it does is adjust some public spending so that increases in that spending in England are followed by similar increases in Scotland (inter alia).

It is a kludge, just a back-of-the-envelope calculation, and nobody really likes it. But its purpose is not to give Scotland more, rather to follow changes in England with changes in Scotland.

And I am in favour of Scottish MPs not voting on English issues; or in England at all.

When Scotland has its own revenue through its own taxes and can only have expenditure related to that and thus gets nothing from England I will be a happy man. At the moment they are getting subsidies from us and this is not only grossly unfair but also greatly unappreciated by them.

Bring on independence !!

[EternalOptimist]

When Scotland has its own revenue through its own taxes and can only have expenditure related to that and thus gets nothing from England I will be a happy man. At the moment they are getting subsidies from us and this is not only grossly unfair but also greatly unappreciated by them.

Bring on independence !!

The French get their own revenue from their own taxes but they still manage to get subsidies from us

[expat]

Don't expect an on topic reply

Thanks for the heads-up

[Bagpuss]

And you think I didn't provoke him?

[DimPrawn]

At least it's a nice place to live, even without City jobs.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/...x183_popup.jpg