Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In terms of London it i leading money market and banking centre with the largest inter Banking market in the world, is the largest Foreign Exchange in the world, is home to the largest derivatives market in the world, and is the worlds most international financial centre. London is home to more international company HQ's and international banks than any other city and does a lot of international trading.
NYC's success relies far more heavily on domestic US Business in relation to corporate finance and securities, New York's real strengths are in relation to the NYSE/NASDAQ.
In terms of the future, I can see London remaining a very attractive place for international business, we have a long history of trading with countries such as India and China, and have even set aside the Royal Docks specifically to meet Chinese and Asian growth. In terms of international stock markets, it is the Chinese and other such emerging economies who might well overtake NYC in terns of trade and not London, although one thing is for sure London will be there waiting with open arms for Chinese Banks and Financial Institutions, just as it has done in terms of financial institutions from across the globe.
Funny interview with Bullish Miller in the article.
He's clearly protective about the status of New York City real estate, and isn't quite successful at downplaying the role the new liberal mayor in driving away foreign investors. For a number of reasons (not just his liberal politics), De Blasio is the kind of mayor that would definitely make investors think twice about buying residential real estate there.
In terms of London it i leading money market and banking centre with the largest inter Banking market in the world, is the largest Foreign Exchange in the world, is home to the largest derivatives market in the world, and is the worlds most international financial centre. London is home to more international company HQ's and international banks than any other city and does a lot of international trading.
NYC's success relies far more heavily on domestic US Business in relation to corporate finance and securities, New York's real strengths are in relation to the NYSE/NASDAQ.
In terms of the future, I can see London remaining a very attractive place for international business, we have a long history of trading with countries such as India and China, and have even set aside the Royal Docks specifically to meet Chinese and Asian growth. In terms of international stock markets, it is the Chinese and other such emerging economies who might well overtake NYC in terns of trade and not London, although one thing is for sure London will be there waiting with open arms for Chinese Banks and Financial Institutions, just as it has done in terms of financial institutions from across the globe.
This is a really silly point; boasting about high net worth individuals owning property in London. Wow, how awesome.. Wait a second, why exactly?? Here is the thing - they are both awesome cities (I actually prefer London for several reasons) but NY is still the political and economic superior. The issue with such wealthy people owning property in London is that it is having a harmful effect for British people - the super wealthy are purchasing property in London but not actually living there. The UK doesn't tax foreign wealth, or collect anywhere near enough in council taxes, so local schools are underfunded and locals are priced out of the property market. How has London's property prices managed to increase every year by at least 5% when the rest of the country has only just emerged from recession?
The UK economy is dangerously reliant on financial services, an industry full of bubbles right now. As I said, there is much I love about London (I did live in the city for a while), but its got nothing to do with its financial services and banking industry. The world's richest owning assets in the city benefits nobody but them.
This is a really silly point; boasting about high net worth individuals owning property in London. Wow, how awesome.. Wait a second, why exactly?? Here is the thing - they are both awesome cities (I actually prefer London for several reasons) but NY is still the political and economic superior. The issue with such wealthy people owning property in London is that it is having a harmful effect for British people - the super wealthy are purchasing property in London but not actually living there. The UK doesn't tax foreign wealth, or collect anywhere near enough in council taxes, so local schools are underfunded and locals are priced out of the property market. How has London's property prices managed to increase every year by at least 5% when the rest of the country has only just emerged from recession?
The UK economy is dangerously reliant on financial services, an industry full of bubbles right now. As I said, there is much I love about London (I did live in the city for a while), but its got nothing to do with its financial services and banking industry. The world's richest owning assets in the city benefits nobody but them.
I was boasting about individuals owning property, I was stating that London is the worlds premier centre for banking and indeed International Company HQ's. In terms of the US even their debt is owned by the Chinese, who rather ironically use British Companies to administer it.
In terms of London's Economy, the largest increase in any sector is predicted to be in relation to London's hi-tech industries and not finance. Indeed London's economy is starting to diversify, and as well as a global financial centre London is also a leading legal, accountancy, Media, ICT and tech hub (tech city), as well as a global knowledge hub, creative hub, cultural hub, tourist hub, retail hub and international transport hub/gateway, with Banking and Financial Sector only employing around 8% of London's total workforce.
There may be some growth in Banking due to the relocation of further Chinese Banks in the UK, however in terms of Foreign Banks we don't use public money to bail them out, and as long as they stick to the regulatory rules they are more than welcome to do business in London.
The fastest area of growth being hi-techs with 27% of all job growth in London comes from the tech/digital sector, with approximately 582,000 people now employed by the tech/digital sector in London, indeed between 2009 and 2012, the tech/digital sector in London grew by 16.6%. Whilst major tech and digital companies have been brought into Tech City in the last 3 years from global markets including the US, Europe and Asia; in recent weeks, US firm Box and social game developer Rekoo have located in London, joining the raft of leading tech companies – among them Facebook, Google, Twitter, Amazon, Cisco, Intel, Microsoft, FourSquare and Pinterest – already based in the capital
Lets also not forget London's growing knowledge economy both as an educational centre and a centre for medical research, bio-techs and pharma. Whilst the state of the art Francis Crick Institute is due to open next door to the British Library at St Pancras next year. Lets not forget the one in five of major pharma drugs used in the world today originates from the UK and that The Royal Marsden in London and its academic partner, The Institute of Cancer Research, have discovered or developed more new anti-cancer drugs than the National Cancer Institute in the USA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by QS World University Rankings
Perhaps only Boston can rival London's credentials as a nerve-center of global academia, with the city's UCL and Imperial College London both ranked among the world's top five universities, and LSE second in the world for social sciences.
World-class facilities such as The British Library, which constitutes one of the most extensive and significant collections of books and manuscripts in the world, make London a magnet for students and researchers from all over the planet.
Good Lord. London looks so dreary and depressing from those pictures. I have been there several times and I didn't think much of it to be honest...looked a bit grim. And the grey weather makes it look even worse.
Funny interview with Bullish Miller in the article.
He's clearly protective about the status of New York City real estate, and isn't quite successful at downplaying the role the new liberal mayor in driving away foreign investors. For a number of reasons (not just his liberal politics), De Blasio is the kind of mayor that would definitely make investors think twice about buying residential real estate there.
Another London publication heralding London as the the most important city in the world. Ha ha.
British seem very insecure when it comes to the United States. London is much older and is the capital city. The UK pours most of its wealth into that one city. Meanwhile, New York is simply one of many commerce centers in the United States. We have San Francisco, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, Boston, etc. Yet even with that, New York is still richer (by every single measure there is) and more important than London.
I know that must hurt, but get over it. These British "best cities" lists all seem so transparent and desperate...like the ones here trying so hard to let us know how much "better" London is than New York.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
