I don't understand the pull of the capital. It's overcrowded, noisy and dirty, even in its 'desirable' areas. The oil sheikhs and Russian oligarchs can keep it. I'd much rather live up here even if I had enough money to live in London!
I don't understand the pull of the capital. It's overcrowded, noisy and dirty, even in its 'desirable' areas. The oil sheikhs and Russian oligarchs can keep it. I'd much rather live up here even if I had enough money to live in London!
This is not in any way a slight against either Yorkshire or Newcastle. Just an observation that one man's meat is another man's poison.
15 years on, I now love living in such a rural area (and also married with kids!) but it's pointless if you want to easily see the latest bands, have a large and sophisticated social circle, easily meet people you do non-rural business with, enjoy the latest in fashion or food, easily travel to other places without driving, etc..
On the flip side, I can easily go off roading, take my daughters to see farm animals every week, zero traffic jams, low crime, low cost of living, etc, so it's all swings and roundabouts! (And we even have fibre Internet, oddly, so it even ticks my geek box ;-))
A friend of mine recently moved him and his start up from London to Keswick and is loving it - it's all about aligning where you live with whats important to you.
ps. Given the love of football up here (sadly) you'll be needing that foot of yours!
When living in London, I used to make frequent trips to The Globe (£7 tickets), National Theatre (£12), Sadler's Wells (£15), Museums (free) plus other great Opera's, plays, contemporary dance, etc all over the city, all for around £15 (usually a lot less) or free.
I've since moved out of London as I started missing the countryside, but don't be so quick to dismiss everyone who does not make the same choices as you do. The grime, overcrowding, noise & smoke of the city is more than compensated for by the amazing public transport and world class cultural events (again, for <£15 -- Newcastle has great cultural venues but even if they are of the same standard I could not afford to go regularly as it was more than twice as expensive)
I would never have discovered my love for Classical music, Ballet or Opera if the opportunities weren't so numerous and the tickets so cheap.
Living in the US I'm well aware of urban sprawl and the near inability to define imaginary borders. However for the sake of argument, wikipedia claims a bit over 8 million inhabitants in London.
Some long division and making the HUGE assumption that The Globe only permits admittance to locals (LOL I'm guessing its probably 90% rich tourists like myself) then the average local can only visit The Globe once every 16 years rather than your "frequent trips". If my estimate of 90% tourist statistics is correct, then the average London resident can only physically visit The Globe once every 160 years. Of course the average lifespan of a london resident probably does not approach 160 years. And there are more cultural activities than just The Globe. But lets say you want to do something every weekend... Personally I'd take the train and live somewhere else, but if you can find 160*52 = 8352 other equally cheap and worthy cultural activities then it would scale.
"I would never have discovered my love for Classical music, ... if ... the tickets so cheap."
For me it was free audio rentals at the public library. Back when they used vinyl and magnetic tape. They freely loan CDs now, there is a limit but its ridiculous like 10 loaned at a time. I used to visit my local library every week, but the local symphony only plays something like 8 different performances per year, so do the math there. In this modern era its trendy to claim people only want someone elses streaming selections rather than having a mp3 of their own and making their own selection decisions, regardless of how ridiculous that is, its also more or less free.
I live on what amounts to a very small landed estate technically in the suburbs, but somewhat rural. I visit Chicago roughly annually and soak in some culture. I'm glad I don't live there, so I can trivially afford to visit, and my tourist dollars are crowding the locals out of the very cultural activities they supposedly pay $3000/month to live nearby, while I pay about a third that to live in a vastly superior location about 100 miles away. You'd be surprised what a couple extra thousand dollars per month adds up to in the long run.
But we are getting to one of those points where more of the benefits of a city should be transferable remotely. I would like to live outside London but the developer community is a massive draw. As well as culture. Also I am a native Londoner so it is home. But the cost of property is a huge issue.
About scalability, as someone already said, there are so many venues available that pretty much whatever you wanted to do, there was always available seats for you -- just perhaps not in your first choice of venue (even after restricting your ticket price to £15 or less) Heck, as you're already in London and the public transport is free (you've got a travelcard as you have to commute to work anyway), you can go and do/watch/listen to something for free every night of the week.
Point taken about CD's in the library. But somehow even though I had the opportunity to take them out of the library before, I never made use of it. I guess I never knew I'd like classical music. But as the live performance was so cheap, I tried it and found I really liked it.
And now I live on the outskirts of London. I pay about the same in rent (bigger place) but hardly ever go into London. Mainly because I used to live about 12minutes from Waterloo and now it's more like an hour and a half (which means all trips have to be planned for weekends; as I can't really be bothered to head out after a full day's work)
Would I rather still live in London? Possibly not. But I'm definitely happy I lived there for a couple of years.
>>You'd be surprised what a couple extra thousand dollars per month adds up to in the long run
Well, like I said, there really is no change in my rent (but I now have a two bed flat and not a one bed), and I now own a car (additional expense). I've also stopped eating out, as restaurants are nowhere near as cheap as they were in London (expensive restaurants were a lot more expensive, but I've never found places that do £2.50 mains like in Tooting, for example) -- on the flip side I always enjoyed cooking, so this isn't a big deal for me. I am also living closer to work (as I work outside London now), so I guess my quality of life is better & the commute is less stressful (and the pollution is lower).
I'm just not as ready as you are to dismiss all the benefits of living in a city. But hey, we're all different. Just saying that I had a point of view very similar to yours until I was forced (SO's job change) to live in London for awhile. Now I understand the delights of living in London (but I can understand why others may not -- just wish people would give it a try :)
It's swings and roundabouts I guess.
Overall, my love of the countryside trumps cheap access to live plays/concerts/public transport/museums/etc; that's why I moved out.
My point is just that there are definitely reasons why people would choose to live in the city (reasons I did not fully appreciate until I lived in London)
Swings & roundabouts, as you say :)
Much more so than most other US cities, where everything is pay-to-play and you have to pay for driving and parking as well.
The wages are so good here, so long as you don't blow it on a £2k pcm flat in a tendy part of town you can save a lot of money, very quickly.
Myself by having a 35-50min (depending on traffic and my exhuastion!) I find my accomodation costs are comparatively very low, despite still getting a London weighted income. This means I can not only service my modest flats mortgage easily, but am also buying a place in the middle of the mountains, so I can be a hermit.
Last time I looked outside of London, I would earn less than half what I get in London. I'm happy living in Zone 4 (where 1 is the central area), which means my rent is cheap. Going for a meal out or similar probably costs less than up north. At least comparing it to Manchester / Leeds / Lake District.
However, it is very non-terminal. I think five more years, then rent my London place, move either to subberbs and expensive commute, but house. Or hopefully, give up working for someone else all together. Not only did I meet my business partner via London network of friends, but also I built enough of a cash pile to be able to work full time on it.
None of those things would have happened if I was on £35k with £700pcm costs. I'll take £150k with £1200pcm every time.
And your government is making sure they do keep it, by "reducing net migration" of working people whilst granting a Tier 1 visa to anyone with one million pounds in the UK banking system. It's "pay to stay," and the offer stands at US $1.6 million.
Refer: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/visas-immigration/working/...
Maybe I'm only confused because I've never lived in a village, but... You're paying significantly less than £700 pcm (including bills and council tax) for that?
I could quite happily rent a two bedroom cottage in the lake district and pay all my bills out of that £500.
I am going to guess that you live within some commutable distance of your or your wife's family, and that one of the things you would lose moving to London would be that connection to family.
Its probably the biggest thing holding most of us from heading for a nice cheap rural life.
PS, apply for a grant from the Yorkshire Tourist board !