Take this shit back to Reddit.

Go get around Slough for a weekend by public transportation and tell me how it compares to living in a suburb of Nashville or Dallas with a car you can lease for the same as that bus fare.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49820721)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49821117)

And there's schemes like where families who are designated as below a certain income threshold get massive discounts to all sorts of museums and and sights. It's causing controversy because while a middle class family would have to spend £100 for four to enter a castle, the "deprived" family only pays £4 or £5. And of course the subsequent complaints that poor folks (many now migrant heritage) are plaguing the sights and freeloading at other people's expenses. There's no question the UK really cannot afford this kind of generosity and welfare state but it exists at the moment so I'd rather be a poor freeloader in the UK than a poor broke family in rural Mississippi or West Baltimore.

The UK also has a scheme where they give limited mobility (whatever) people free cars! A few million cars have been allotted this way. There's no shortage of abuses of the system but they're suckers. Everyone complains but no one dares reform it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49821154)

I haven't tried living in rural Alabama, but I'm guessing this is better.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49820589)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49821145)

Easily Alabama.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49820613)

https://x.com/flapprdotnet/status/2044600064262201495?s=61

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49820843)

https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/rankings_by_country.jsp?title=2025&displayColumn=5

https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/rankings_by_country.jsp?title=2026&displayColumn=5

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49820397)

Now go to the white areas of Mississippi or Alabama. They are far nicer places than the nicest / least shitty place in the UK.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49820471)

That said, the suburbs in Rankin/Madison County are OK

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49821273)

On one hand you're comparing an entire country to individual states, not Surrey versus Connecticut or the west Midlands to Alabama. It is unfair. On the other hand, most of the UK has always been noticeably more modest than their peers in the US. People live in smaller housing and there are apartments aplenty with bedrooms smaller than a typical master bedroom's walk in closet in a standard American subdivision. On the other hand, London is shockingly expensive with staggering levels of wealth paying insane prices for the housing you get. On my last trip to London talked to someone who'd paid $5M for a floor of townhouse. Not the whole townhouse but a floor. Yes, it's Notting Hill, but even so. How does that work in a country with sharply lower salaries than the US?

I'd say that the top 5 million people in the UK out of a population of 60+ million (can't keep track of the latest numbers, all due to mass migration) live very well, in expensive London terraced houses or handsome old Georgian rectories or nice suburban villas, with upmarket cars and plenty of foreign travel and private schools. And the global rich in London distort that perception of wealth even further.

That still leaves you with the 55+ million who have far more modest lives. And they are poorer than the typical family in Mississippi or Alabama. Most towns outside London are pretty shitty, this is an overlooked part of the UK, as the way wealth in the UK organizes itself the money outside London is almost entirely in the countryside and country villages and smaller market towns, not the secondary cities (Edinburgh and Bristol being the exception among the secondary cities). The rich and UMC in the smaller cities commute from lovely country villages. This is a reverse of the US, where the rural areas are poor and rural small towns are shitty.

But aspects of the UK lifestyle is more manageable for the poor and the bottom 25%. There's something to be said for completely free NHS services and a generous welfare state, though the latter is part of the current economic crisis in Britain, which really can't afford its first world lifestyle the way it likes to think it can.

Long way of saying, yes, UK is in denial, but there's still plenty of money in the UK and poor people probably do have it better over there.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49820787)

Perhaps one key difference that is in the UK's favor is size. There should be less risk of being without a decently connected airport within a 2 hour drive in the UK than in the US

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49821336)

For some reason they put brexit to a vote btw but not “should there be more Indians and pakis?”

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49821094)

I don't think there is a way to avoid Western collapse and violence unless a Western country that can take the burden of world leadership emerges and restructures the world around its chosen identity

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49821506)

The UK has no real system of financial aid or merit aid or scholarships for higher education.

You're on stronger grounds re healthcare costs. But their health system has its own challenges and plenty of people pay extra for private insurance to cover the gaps or pay out of pocket for quicker access to private doctors.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49821206)

high gdp is probably a necessary condition for first world status but once you've achieved that, when people think of local “living standards” they think of some combination of how easy it is for locals to afford a steak dinner of european standards + how culturally pleasant the country is and whether you can live a reasonably dignified life around white people. you can live a high quality first world existence in the UK countryside even if dividing the output of its auto plants and multinational conglomerate HQs gives you a lower number than the same number in mississippi. at the same time the UK is in fact pathetic compared to the US in terms of economic output. but not necessarily quality of life.

the people who use this to say GDP is meaningless are retarded shitlibs. but at the same time the eggheads who use this to say that the UK is poorer than mississippi would almost 100% of the time rather live in a generic UK countryside town than in rural mississippi.

even a first tier global city like shanghai is only ~$33k gdp per capita but PPP bumps it up to $67k. just dividing output by population is a very specific metric that doesn’t correlate one-to-one with local quality of life or how "rich" its people are.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857406&forum_id=2...#49821214)