politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The places where people would most like to live mostly voted R

What a fantastic study in ignorance and prejudice.

matt said:

What a fantastic study in ignorance and prejudice.

+1

dixiedean said:

Yorkcity said:

JosiasJessop said:

Sean_F said:

Beverley_C said:

Mortimer said:

MikeSmithson said:

Morris_Dancer said:

No York. Invalid list.

I agree on that. I had two great years working at the university in York and it is perhaps the best city anywhere.

Thirded. Spend about a week a year there for work, and it seems to have everything that a city needs. Including a decent racecourse!

I have never been in York, but I have flown over it several times including thermalling a DG-505 belonging to the BGA one sunny afternoon. It is very, very flat around there (especially from 7,000 feet) and I can see why it might flood.

York is great. The Minster, the Jorvik Centre, the almost perfectly intact Medieval walls, and a maze of charming old streets.

And the National Rail Museum.

York Racecourse is good.
Shame about the football club , they are getting a new ground However they are now in the national league north.

RL team on the up though after many years of struggle.

Yes , they will share the new ground with the football club.So hopefully will help with the improvement on the pitch.

Gardenwalker said:

Let’s compare second tier cities.

Birmingham or Lyon?
Manchester or Antwerp?
Liverpool or Hamburg?
Glasgow or Barcelona?

Lyon but other than that the British city every time. Belfast and Den Haag/Eindhoven/Maastricht if you want as well.

AndyJS said:

"Europe Elects
‏ @EuropeElects
4h4 hours ago

France, BVA poll:

President Macron Approval Rating

Approve: 39% (-2)
Disapprove: 59% (+6)

Field work: 18/07/18 – 19/07/18
Sample size: 1,003"

The French never approve of their leaders.

JosiasJessop said:

Pulpstar said:

Other than Sheffield which is where I am already (For work) I'd have Stoke on the top of the list as I think we'd have a field for the horses near there (And not a tiny house). Can't see that with Cambridge, Brighton.
Edinburgh perhaps might be ok

Given that travellers are back in my village for the umpteenth time recently, and their horses are loose over the roads, I don't think you'd have a problem finding a field for your horses.

You might not like the lifestyle, though...

(Actually, you might be in luck to the north and east of Cambridge- lots of arable land. And very near Newmarket and Huntingdon if you want to try racing ...)

Maybe. I'd need a payrise to live there though

Places with poor reputations often acquire them through snobbery as much as any genuine deficiency; and most towns or cities of any size vary dramatically between different neighbourhoods anyway. One of my cousins moved to Grimsby a few years ago, and when I went up there for her wedding I thought it was really nice.

Oh, and hello everyone.

matt said:

Gardenwalker said:

Let’s compare second tier cities.

Birmingham or Lyon?
Manchester or Antwerp?
Liverpool or Hamburg?
Glasgow or Barcelona?

Lyon but other than that the British city every time. Belfast and Den Haag/Eindhoven/Maastricht if you want as well.

Lyon Manchester Hamburg and Barcelona

Acorn_Antiques said:

Places with poor reputations often acquire them through snobbery as much as any genuine deficiency; and most towns or cities of any size vary dramatically between different neighbourhoods anyway. One of my cousins moved to Grimsby a few years ago, and when I went up there for her wedding I thought it was really nice.

Oh, and hello everyone.

Grimsby needs to rethink its name, it is hardly welcoming.

Welcome to pb, Mrs O.

8/18 visited for me. Glasgow was a lot of fun.

not_on_fire said:

Gardenwalker said:

Let’s compare second tier cities.

Birmingham or Lyon?
Manchester or Antwerp?
Liverpool or Hamburg?
Glasgow or Barcelona?

Arguably one of the biggest problems with the UK is that is doesn’t have a proper 2nd city. There is no UK equivalent of Marseilles or Milan.

Have you been to Marseilles recently? Most of it is a dump. I think we just have a tendency to glamourise the foreign.

matt said:

AlastairMeeks said:

From Hell, Hull and Halifax, good Lord, deliver us.

Glasgow is great and its low polling shows how few people have visited it. Belfast is a lot of fun too.

Belfast is rated badly by people who just see it on the news. If you live, for example, going out towards Hollywood you’ll have a better quality of life, and materially better schools, than anywhere similar on the mainland for the same income.

Minus the serial killing and the baroque sex lives, The Fall gives a pretty fair impression of middle class Belfast life.

AndyJS said:

not_on_fire said:

Gardenwalker said:

Let’s compare second tier cities.

Birmingham or Lyon?
Manchester or Antwerp?
Liverpool or Hamburg?
Glasgow or Barcelona?

Arguably one of the biggest problems with the UK is that is doesn’t have a proper 2nd city. There is no UK equivalent of Marseilles or Milan.

Why do you think Britain doesn't have a "proper" second city?

If it does have one, in terms of status and wealth might it be Edinburgh rather than an English metropolis?

Roger said:

AndyJS said:

"Europe Elects
‏ @EuropeElects
4h4 hours ago

France, BVA poll:

President Macron Approval Rating

Approve: 39% (-2)
Disapprove: 59% (+6)

Field work: 18/07/18 – 19/07/18
Sample size: 1,003"

The French never approve of their leaders.

I know. 39% is quite a high rating for a French president that wasn't elected last week.

AlastairMeeks said:

Acorn_Antiques said:

Places with poor reputations often acquire them through snobbery as much as any genuine deficiency; and most towns or cities of any size vary dramatically between different neighbourhoods anyway. One of my cousins moved to Grimsby a few years ago, and when I went up there for her wedding I thought it was really nice.

Oh, and hello everyone.

Grimsby needs to rethink its name, it is hardly welcoming.

Welcome to pb, Mrs O.

Thank you!

Poor old Grim could, of course, have been a very jolly fellow, but this information is lost in the mists of time.

And at least it doesn't get censored by some of the more primitive interweb content blockers, like poor old Scunthorpe.

AlastairMeeks said:

London is so dominant that in effect it fulfils the role of both first and second city.

We could be cheeky here.

It's the major financial, commercial and political centre and is therefore the first city.

It's also an expensive dump where nobody in their right minds would live, like most countries' second city.

That works...

AlastairMeeks said:

London is so dominant that in effect it fulfils the role of both first and second city.

Manchester is in effect second city, as capital of the North. This is only a recent phenomenon, though, ie from about the mid 90s onwards.

Even within their regions, second tier British cities barely function as capitals. Do people of the West look to Bristol? The Midlands meanwhile is divided between Birmingham, Nottingham and Leicester.

Another interesting and unusual pattern in British cities: the pairing.

Most famously Liverpool/Manchester but see also Leeds/Bradford, Southampton/Portsmouth, Nottingham/Derby and maybe even Bristol/Cardiff.

Roger said:

RobD said:

Roger said:

I was talking to a guy this afternoon who told me the following story.

His 80 year old father voted Brexit because he believed it would mean the NHS would get extra money. Meanwhile his sister who lives in Spain and lives off the income from renting her property in London has been told she will now have to pay Spanish tax on this income.

As a result she can't afford to live in Spain any longer so she and her family are having to move back and her father is heartbroken.

Brexit is a dogs breakfast and Cameron should be shot

She wasn't paying any tax on her income beforehand? Unless the Spanish rates are punative compared to the UK...

Apparently you get taxed on the whole amount without the £11,000 or so tax free you get in the UK

So the delta is something like £2,000 a year?

Gardenwalker said:

Even within their regions, second tier British cities barely function as capitals. Do people of the West look to Bristol?
Another interesting and unusual pattern in British cities: the pairing...maybe even Bristol/Cardiff.

Yes and no, to answer your questions, although it depends on what you mean by 'the West.' One of the things that killed regional government was that real world regions tend to be quite small and localised and cut across official boundaries in funny ways, making them a bureaucratic nightmare.

So for example in Gloucestershire the northern Forest of Dean and the Vale of Gloucester are definitely Midlands and looks to Birmingham, the south of the forest, the Vale of Berkeley and the Cotswolds up to about Stow look to Bristol, and the rump around Winchcombe and Moreton looks to Cheltenham or Oxford.

Similarly in Devon and Cornwall I imagine Plymouth (or Exeter) is seen as a more important regional centre than Bristol.

But I don't think either Bristol or Cardiff would thank you for that pairing. Bristol and Bath would be more like it.

matt said:

What a fantastic study in ignorance and prejudice.

As a new strapline for PB I don't think that is a winner!

On second cities, I had thought places which have the major city be so dominant no other place really qualifies even to be a second city were called Primate Cities, though the wikipedia page on such is so small I presume it is not a widely accepted concept.

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

Even within their regions, second tier British cities barely function as capitals. Do people of the West look to Bristol?
Another interesting and unusual pattern in British cities: the pairing...maybe even Bristol/Cardiff.

One of the things that killed regional government was that real world regions tend to be quite small and localised and cut across official boundaries in funny ways, making them a

Quite so. Take for example the way most of the major settlements in a county like Wiltshire are around the edges (because of Salisbury Plain for instance), which means they can often look to areas outside the county more than other parts within it.

AlastairMeeks said:

Anyway, if I were choosing where Channel 4 were to have a new creative hub, out of the options listed above I’d choose Liverpool. It’s big enough not to be overwhelmed by Channel 4, poor enough that it would be worthwhile regeneration and cultured enough to have something distinctive to offer the network.

Following the same principles, I’d go with Newcastle or Glasgow. The point being that both of these are a challenge to get back to London so would over time force the channel to forge its own new identity. One’s seen with the BBC and Salford that the ease of return to London means that it’s an outpost and not a destination. Liverpool would be similar to Manchester in that respect.

Just looking at the 'Global City' wiki page, which of course has London and New York as Alpha ++ cities (real useful classification system there), Manchester and Edinburgh are the next UK cities which get in there, 6 levels below in the Beta - cities. Glasgow and Birmingham are one lower in Gamma +, Leeds in Gamma, and Belfast and Bristol in Gamma -.

Poor old Liverpool doesn't get a look in until the level below that as a High Sufficiency city (cities that have a sufficient degree of services so as not to be overtly dependent on world cities).

I am surprised to see Liverpool below some of those others, but who the hell knows.

Tykejohnno said:

AndyJS said:

"Europe Elects
‏ @EuropeElects
4h4 hours ago

France, BVA poll:

President Macron Approval Rating

Approve: 39% (-2)
Disapprove: 59% (+6)

Field work: 18/07/18 – 19/07/18
Sample size: 1,003"

So the world cup win hasn't helped,it must be bad.

More likely the riots after the win have hurt his ratings.

Gardenwalker said:

AlastairMeeks said:

London is so dominant that in effect it fulfils the role of both first and second city.

Manchester is in effect second city, as capital of the North. This is only a recent phenomenon, though, ie from about the mid 90s onwards.

Even within their regions, second tier British cities barely function as capitals. Do people of the West look to Bristol? The Midlands meanwhile is divided between Birmingham, Nottingham and Leicester.

Another interesting and unusual pattern in British cities: the pairing.

Most famously Liverpool/Manchester but see also Leeds/Bradford, Southampton/Portsmouth, Nottingham/Derby and maybe even Bristol/Cardiff.

Don't forget London /New York

kle4 said:

Just looking at the 'Global City' wiki page, which of course has London and New York as Alpha ++ cities (real useful classification system there), Manchester and Edinburgh are the next UK cities which get in there, 6 levels below in the Beta - cities. Glasgow and Birmingham are one lower in Gamma +, Leeds in Gamma, and Belfast and Bristol in Gamma -.

Poor old Liverpool doesn't get a look in until the level below that as a High Sufficiency city (cities that have a sufficient degree of services so as not to be overtly dependent on world cities).

I am surprised to see Liverpool below some of those others, but who the hell knows.

Most cities have a decent bit, and a bit that is a shithole.

I suspect that Liverpool, Glasgow and Belfast all suffer from being awkward to get to. People who want to stay in contact with family and friends. I quite like Liverpool as a City, and am not impressed with Nottingham, but would opt for the latter as easier to get away from.

Many of the most interesting cities are third or lower tier. Places I have enjoyed visiting in recent years include Graz, Ljubljana, Trieste, Pécs and Košice. None would feature in many city break guides but all had much to commend them for a short visit.

The tricky bit is getting to such places without wasting too much time. Britain is stuffed full of such places so we should take full advantage of what’s on our doorstep.

Gardenwalker said:

Let’s compare second tier cities.

Birmingham or Lyon?
Manchester or Antwerp?
Liverpool or Hamburg?
Glasgow or Barcelona?

The food is better in Lyon but the music is better in Birmingham. Culturally Birmingham is a happening place, which I don't think applies to Lyon, despite the former being regarded by everyone including the inhabitants as a dump. Lots going on in Belfast when I was there last. Subjectively more appealing to me than Dublin. I am working in Glasgow currently and loving it, despite the city having some big problems.

But I do really like Hamburg.

JonWC said:

A completely bizarre article given the very limited set of options. The places people would most like to live are easily determined by where they actually do so once they get a free choice i.e. retirement hotspots and of course they almost all voted Leave by absolutely miles.

Yes, bizarre.
It begins "Away from Brexit for moment ... "
And before long lapses into "most of the top choices all voted remain ... " etc.

Evening all

Mrs Stodge and I have just returned from 10 days cruising the Rhine from Basel to Amsterdam. Very pleasant - very hot as well.

I can only speak for the Rhineland but if I had to live along the river, I'd choose Breisach which is a delightful smaller town and less twee than Rudesheim and less like a city than Cologne or Koblenz.

Again, the Germany I saw wasn't unlike southern England - issues with high streets losing shops, plenty of housing being built. The roads have traffic and jams, the railway lines more freight than in the UK perhaps (and more lines generally).

It's all about identity - who you are, who you want to be and where you want to be in terms of where you feel comfortable. "People like people like themselves" the maxim tells us and for those supporting multiculturalism, the triumph of capitalism leads to the triumph of multiculturalism as prosperity unites like nothing else.

Otherwise, it's easier to be with people who think like you, look like you and talk like you. The 2016 Referendum was as much about the UK as the EU - who we are, who we want to be, what our place in the world should be. Although couched in terms about the EU, it was a time of national soul searching and asking the really difficult questions.

If 2008 challenged our faith in capitalism, 2016 challenged our faith in ourselves and our national and social identity.

Roger said:

I was talking to a guy this afternoon who told me the following story.

His 80 year old father voted Brexit because he believed it would mean the NHS would get extra money. Meanwhile his sister who lives in Spain and lives off the income from renting her property in London has been told she will now have to pay Spanish tax on this income.

As a result she can't afford to live in Spain any longer so she and her family are having to move back and her father is heartbroken.

Brexit is a dogs breakfast and Cameron should be shot

As someone who works, I have very little sympathy for people who live off rent.

Philip_Thompson said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sean_F said:

All of the places listed have their attractive districts.

Even Stoke? Can you show me please....Newcastle isn't in Stoke for the record.

Yeah the A52.

You can use it to get through Stoke and to Alton Towers.

The Churnet Valley (in which Alton Towers resides) can be exquisitely beautiful at times, especially a dry autumn. Yet most people just rush through. And it has a rather good steam railway.

Oh, and if you know where to find it, the JCB test track is well worth a look.

As for Stoke: it's only ever a place I rush through, since they built the A52 right through the centre. I haven't actually stopped there for yonks.

When I was a nipper (1950s) living in Wolverhampton - we use to go to where Alton Towers now is on Sunday School outings. Happy days.

ydoethur said:

Pulpstar said:

numbertwelve said:

I’m going to stick up for Leeds, which is partly because I live there, but also (having lived in a fair few places) because I genuinely do think it has a lot going for it. Friendly folk, a lot of open spaces, great shopping, a lot of very nice suburbs, places like Ilkley, Harrogate, York, the North York Moors and the Dales on your doorstep, and not too far from Northumbria and the Lakes. Decent connections to London, Newcastle and Edinburgh (even if nobody seems to be able to run the franchise properly).

The downsides are that Id argue it’s dwarfed culturally by Manchester on the other side of the Pennines, and it’s been appallingly let down at local and national level when it comes to public transport planning and investment to the extent it is becoming somewhat of a crisis in rush hour, but I could think of much worse places to live.

My fiancee's parents recently moved from Guiseley to Ripon due to the poor air quality and traffic there. Their house is a short walk from Studley Royal Park & Fountains Abbey, which are exceedingly pleasent. The centre of Ripon is nice too with the Cathedral and all.

They moved to Ripon because of its poor air quality and traffic?

No, from Guiseley. Was too busy.

Pulpstar said:

ydoethur said:

Pulpstar said:

numbertwelve said:

I’m going to stick up for Leeds, which is partly because I live there, but also (having lived in a fair few places) because I genuinely do think it has a lot going for it. Friendly folk, a lot of open spaces, great shopping, a lot of very nice suburbs, places like Ilkley, Harrogate, York, the North York Moors and the Dales on your doorstep, and not too far from Northumbria and the Lakes. Decent connections to London, Newcastle and Edinburgh (even if nobody seems to be able to run the franchise properly).

The downsides are that Id argue it’s dwarfed culturally by Manchester on the other side of the Pennines, and it’s been appallingly let down at local and national level when it comes to public transport planning and investment to the extent it is becoming somewhat of a crisis in rush hour, but I could think of much worse places to live.

My fiancee's parents recently moved from Guiseley to Ripon due to the poor air quality and traffic there. Their house is a short walk from Studley Royal Park & Fountains Abbey, which are exceedingly pleasent. The centre of Ripon is nice too with the Cathedral and all.

They moved to Ripon because of its poor air quality and traffic?

No, from Guiseley. Was too busy.

I assumed that was what you meant, but in a world where nothing makes sense it's nice to be sure!

All this shows is that Channel 4 people have little knowledge of their country. All those places (though I do not know Nottingham or Hull) are pretty nice places. The ones I would like least, tbh, are Brighton (too up itself) and Cambridge - far too flat).

Roger said:

I was talking to a guy this afternoon who told me the following story.

His 80 year old father voted Brexit because he believed it would mean the NHS would get extra money. Meanwhile his sister who lives in Spain and lives off the income from renting her property in London has been told she will now have to pay Spanish tax on this income.

As a result she can't afford to live in Spain any longer so she and her family are having to move back and her father is heartbroken.

Brexit is a dogs breakfast and Cameron should be shot

The Spanish are quite correct to tax her income from that source.

numbertwelve said:

I’m going to stick up for Leeds, which is partly because I live there, but also (having lived in a fair few places) because I genuinely do think it has a lot going for it. Friendly folk, a lot of open spaces, great shopping, a lot of very nice suburbs, places like Ilkley, Harrogate, York, the North York Moors and the Dales on your doorstep, and not too far from Northumbria and the Lakes. Decent connections to London, Newcastle and Edinburgh (even if nobody seems to be able to run the franchise properly).

The downsides are that Id argue it’s dwarfed culturally by Manchester on the other side of the Pennines, and it’s been appallingly let down at local and national level when it comes to public transport planning and investment to the extent it is becoming somewhat of a crisis in rush hour, but I could think of much worse places to live.

I also like Leeds, and have happy memories of getting drunk there in the days when I had less waist. May I recommend "The Nightmare Stacks", wherein the town centre is destroyed by a weaponised dragon whilst defended by squaddies in CVRT Scimitars. The main action revolves around Quarry House.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nightmare-Stacks-Laundry-Files-Novel/dp/0425281191
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2017/06/crib-sheet-the-nightmare-stack.html

http://www.telerealtrillium.com/responsibility/environment/case-study-quarry-house-combined-heat-and-power-unit-outperf

Ishmael_Z said:

But I don't think either Bristol or Cardiff would thank you for that pairing. Bristol and Bath would be more like it.

Bath are on the phone. They want a word...

Cyclefree said:

All this shows is that Channel 4 people have little knowledge of their country. All those places (though I do not know Nottingham or Hull) are pretty nice places. The ones I would like least, tbh, are Brighton (too up itself) and Cambridge - far too flat).

Nottingham is a pretty nice place in my experience. Too many concrete buildings in the centre, but that's true of most cities/towns including Oxford and Cambridge.

Cyclefree said:

Beverley_C said:

Liverpool is a buzzing town, lots going on and it feels very open thanks to the Mersey being hard to build on. Prices are low and crime is about 1/3rd of Manchester's level.

Manchester has better infrastructure and also has lots to recommend it, but feels a bit "stuffier". Graham Brady's patch (Altrincham and Sale West) is often listed amongst the UK's "top ten places to live" and Media City is not far away. Having said that, the M60 is worse than a joke - the M25 of the north particularly around the Trafford Centre

My son loves living in Manchester and we have family there too. I like Liverpool as well.

But - let’s be honest - the list misses out the best place in the UK: Cumbria - stunning lakes, mountains, the sea, good restaurants, views to die for and some of the best beaches in the UK.

Isle of Wight too

Roger said:

I was talking to a guy this afternoon who told me the following story.

His 80 year old father voted Brexit because he believed it would mean the NHS would get extra money. Meanwhile his sister who lives in Spain and lives off the income from renting her property in London has been told she will now have to pay Spanish tax on this income.

As a result she can't afford to live in Spain any longer so she and her family are having to move back and her father is heartbroken.

Brexit is a dogs breakfast and Cameron should be shot

Come off it: she should have been paying tax anyway in Britain and there will also be a double taxation treaty. You’re being spun a yarn.

NickPalmer said:

Willingness to move somewhere isn't the only test of what people like, and we tend to vary with age, don't we? Nottingham's a pleasant, inexpensive place with great clubs without being especially interesting for visitors, while Liverpool has some really striking features but also feels a bit rougher. Unlike Richard N I'd rather live in Brighton for cultural affinity than anywhere else in Sussex, which IMHO is generally pretty but dull. It's fortunate that we don't all want to live in the same place...

Brighton's a bit weird. It tries to be posh and whatnot but ultimately it's a south coast seaside town with a crap beach.

Liverpool is brilliant. I don't know why, but I always have a smile on my face while I'm there.

Has anybody stuck up for Winchester or Lincoln yet?

Harrogate is nice, but York is better so that's that argument sorted.

Glasgow is not good. It's not just that it suffers in comparison to Edinburgh, it's not great in and of itself. It keeps trying but it never stops being Glasgow.

Cyclefree said:

But - let’s be honest - the list misses out the best place in the UK: Cumbria - stunning lakes, mountains, the sea, good restaurants, views to die for and some of the best beaches in the UK.

Possibly true, but if you are going to bring landscape in to consideration we have to start talking about the Highlands

Xenon said:

AndyJS said:

Cyclefree said:

All this shows is that Channel 4 people have little knowledge of their country. All those places (though I do not know Nottingham or Hull) are pretty nice places. The ones I would like least, tbh, are Brighton (too up itself) and Cambridge - far too flat).

Nottingham is a pretty nice place in my experience. Too many concrete buildings in the centre, but that's true of most cities/towns including Oxford and Cambridge.

Nottingham is a nice city, albeit quite small.

The problem is that almost all of the surrounding areas where people live are really dodgy.

Which places did you have in mind? Rushcliffe and Broxtowe aren't bad.

Cyclefree said:

All this shows is that Channel 4 people have little knowledge of their country. All those places (though I do not know Nottingham or Hull) are pretty nice places. The ones I would like least, tbh, are Brighton (too up itself) and Cambridge - far too flat).

Brighton is great. Unique.

Acorn_Antiques said:

Places with poor reputations often acquire them through snobbery as much as any genuine deficiency; and most towns or cities of any size vary dramatically between different neighbourhoods anyway. One of my cousins moved to Grimsby a few years ago, and when I went up there for her wedding I thought it was really nice.

Oh, and hello everyone.

I've spent time in (Great) Grimsby and Cleethorpes. They're not great by any stretch: I think the best you can say is that they're not actually rubbish. Given that there are many rubbish places in the UK that's not actually a bad thing, but I'd stop short of recommending them, to be honest. They're sort-of OK. Better than Newport-ish.