If London was destroyed, which city should be Britain's new capital? Watch
- 18-12-2010 17:47
(Original post by L i b)
- 18-12-2010 17:48
Because it's a northern ****hole?
As for legal and financial services centre: Edinburgh ****s all over Leeds in that regard.It is in the banking, finance and insurance sectors that Leeds differs most from the financial structure of the region and the nation. The city is the location of one of the largest financial centres in England outside London. Tertiary industries such as retail, call centres, offices and media have contributed to a high rate of economic growth. The city also hosts the only subsidiary office of the Bank of England in the UK. In 2006 GVA for city was recorded at £16.3 billion, with the entire Leeds City Region generating an economy of £46 billion.Over 124,000 people work in financial and business services in Leeds, the largest number of any UK city outside London.
I'm not sure how this compares to Edinburgh - but general concensus doesn't consider Leeds a ****hole, nor economically irrelevant.Last edited by Organ; 18-12-2010 at 17:52.
- 18-12-2010 18:13
Oxford would probably survive without its two universities (whereas Cambridge would die and practically disappear overnight if they lost theirs), and I nominated it because it's a manageable size yet isn't completely stuck in the Dark Ages.
Leeds wouldn't work... the Eton-Oxbridge educated Home Counties politicians would struggle as it's not exactly a genteel environment and they don't exactly speak RP up there.
(Original post by Bubbles*de*Milo)
- 19-12-2010 04:08
What was the 'fail'? In what World is the ROI a part of the UK?
And for the good friday agreement I was just saying an important event which gave the example of them being separate states..
(Original post by anti-duck)
- 19-12-2010 04:11
They might aswell just relocate our capital city to the US, we're already so far up their asses.
Manchester/Birmingham either way my 2 fave cities ;P