Jump to content

Talk:United Kingdom: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Notification of altered sources needing review #IABot (v1.5.4) (TheDragonFire)
No edit summary
Line 96: Line 96:
This is factually incorrect. This is just the government's borrowing.
This is factually incorrect. This is just the government's borrowing.


No. The last comment is incorrect. UK Government Debt did indeed increase from c 35% of GDP pre-crash to c 85% of GDP post-crash, at which level it has more or less stablised. Government Borrowing has fallen from c £145 billion per annum in 2010 (i.e. 10% of GDP) to c £60 billion per annum now (i.e. 3% of GDP).
⚫
External Debt: The comments re the UK's external debt are misleadingly one-sided and ignore the fact that the UK is also one of the world's largest creditors. Its "Net International Investment Position (the sum of its external borrowing and loans) is modestly negative and very much in the middle of the global rankings.

⚫
External Debt: The comments re the UK's external debt are misleadingly one-sided and ignore the fact that the UK is also one of the world's largest creditors. Its "Net International Investment Position (the sum of its external borrowing and loans) is modestly negative and very much in the middle of the global rankings.

I agree with the above comments. This whole economic section seems determined to present a negative view of the UK economy. The UK's NET INVESTMENT POSITION (which is what really matters) is actually in credit. The fact that the country is both a major creditor and a major debtor reflects its large financial sector and is arguably a sign of strength rather than a sign of weakness. Also, whilst it is true that UK inequality has widened since the 1970s, the situation has stabilized since the late 1990s and has in fact improved since the 2008 crash. Thus, for almost a decade now, inequality in the UK has been narrowing, not widening as this article misleadingly suggests.


For example, it owed 5,010 bn in pensions with no assets [unfunded] as of 2010.
For example, it owed 5,010 bn in pensions with no assets [unfunded] as of 2010.

Revision as of 13:57, 5 October 2017

Former good articleUnited Kingdom was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 3, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
July 22, 2006Good article nomineeListed
September 30, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
February 11, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
October 3, 2008Good article reassessmentDelisted
January 22, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
March 6, 2015Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Delisted good article

Template:Vital article Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

WikiProject iconGuild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconThis article was copy edited by Chaosdruid, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 17 May 2011.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Debt

Total UK government debt rose quickly from 44.4% of GDP in 2007 to 82.9% of GDP in 2011, then increased more slowly to 87.5% of GDP in 2015.[245][246]


This is factually incorrect. This is just the government's borrowing.

No. The last comment is incorrect. UK Government Debt did indeed increase from c 35% of GDP pre-crash to c 85% of GDP post-crash, at which level it has more or less stablised. Government Borrowing has fallen from c £145 billion per annum in 2010 (i.e. 10% of GDP) to c £60 billion per annum now (i.e. 3% of GDP).

External Debt: The comments re the UK's external debt are misleadingly one-sided and ignore the fact that the UK is also one of the world's largest creditors. Its "Net International Investment Position (the sum of its external borrowing and loans) is modestly negative and very much in the middle of the global rankings.

I agree with the above comments. This whole economic section seems determined to present a negative view of the UK economy. The UK's NET INVESTMENT POSITION (which is what really matters) is actually in credit. The fact that the country is both a major creditor and a major debtor reflects its large financial sector and is arguably a sign of strength rather than a sign of weakness. Also, whilst it is true that UK inequality has widened since the 1970s, the situation has stabilized since the late 1990s and has in fact improved since the 2008 crash. Thus, for almost a decade now, inequality in the UK has been narrowing, not widening as this article misleadingly suggests.

For example, it owed 5,010 bn in pensions with no assets [unfunded] as of 2010.

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171766_263808.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.194.83.28 (talk • contribs) 16:37, 5 January 2016‎ (UTC)[]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:21, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[]

The UK is not sovereign

THe UK is still occupied by (a) foreign power(s), and is therefore not sovereign, by any measure. We should use simple language and refer to it merely as a "country", "state", or "unitary state" (meaning the word "sovereign" should be removed). The notion of "sovereignty", at the end of the day, is really just an ideal. There is no individual human or country ("nation-state") that is or ever will be truly "sovereign", unless perhaps the Earth is flat. "Sovereign" and "sovereignty" are just words. Good Wall of the Pyrenees (talk) 17:56, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[]

What "foreign power(s)"? Frankly, this comment is absolute nonsense. David J Johnson (talk) 21:40, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[]
A rather startling and extraordinary claim. It requires extraordinary evidence, and is just not suitable for wikipedia. I recommend you write a blog, and perhaps think whether a forum concerned with alternate history might be better suited for your efforts.  DDStretch  (talk) 22:20, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[]
I would be interested in knowing who is supposedly occupying the UK. However, I accept your point that no country is truly sovereign. But international law draws a distinction between sovereign states and dependent states and puts the UK in the first, and countries such as Bermuda in the second. TFD (talk) 23:33, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[]
Yeah well the United States Armed Forces are still occupying the UK. So it is difficult for one to say that the UK is sovereign. Again, sovereignty is an ideal. Let's be realistic. The idea of sovereignty isn't even British, it's French and German. And/or perhaps Chinese. Thanks for asking me to write a blog. I'm sure I'd enjoy getting a Tumblr or something like that but I'm just not interested right now. I really appreciate the invite to do that though. Good Wall of the Pyrenees (talk) 13:55, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[]
Oh of course, those forces which were asked to stay in Europe after helping defeat the Nazis and will leave promptly when requested? Isn't it bizarre that this occupying force in Europe allowed Italian Police to walk into one of their establishments and arrest a harboured fugitive? You'd think as an occupier, they would actually own and control their own bases lol. Rob984 (talk) 14:33, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[]
That's an etymological fallacy that "that holds that the present-day meaning of a word or phrase should necessarily be similar to its historical meaning." International law uses the term sovereign state. If you want to change the term then you need to persuade them. But the problem is they would need to adopt a new term to describe the same states now recognized as sovereign. Indeed the concept was continental, not British, since English law recognized the Queen as both sovereign and state. But it has become generally accepted in international affairs. TFD (talk) 22:44, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[]
"Silly" discussion, not to be taken seriously
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Just as a silly side question, if we were to accept the OP's assertion that the UK is not sovereign due to the American forces stationed there, how would that affect the UK's own Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia? Sovereign bases of a supposedly non-sovereign country located on what would be the territory of another sovereign state. --Khajidha (talk) 14:33, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[]
As the whole idea that the UK is not sovereign is absurd we are speculating which is not what wikipedia is for, but as an aside the sovereign base areas existed and were not transferred to Cyprus when it gained independence, so they have never been on territory of another sovereign state. MilborneOne (talk) 17:13, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[]
Cyprus is a different case, they are sovereign bases, that is an enclave of the UK on the island. The so-called US bases in England are RAF stations which host detachments of the USAF. I'd guess the Italian position is similar. I think I hear the sound of bees buzzing in a bonnet here. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:12, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]
There is British Army Training Unit Suffield in Canada. TFD (talk) 15:31, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[]
My point was that the "Sovereign" in the name of the base areas is derived from UK's own sovereignty. Which the OP said didn't exist. Which would mean that their territory would be part of Cyprus. Or that they had somehow gained sovereignty from a non-sovereign source. But my post really wasn't meant to be taken all that seriously. --Khajidha (talk) 13:02, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Scots rebellion was about British sovereignty, not Catholicism

The section in 'History' under "After the Acts of Union of 1707", should mention that the King George I, and the House of Hanover were German, and he barely spoke English, and that the Scottish uprising was not just about Protestantism, but that the House of Hanover were not thought of as British by almost anyone in Britain. The uprising had a lot to do with British sovereignty, not just Catholicism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.55.165 (talk) 15:19, 3 September 2017‎ (UTC)[]

Languages

What does "de facto official" mean? Best I can guess would be "unofficial" but if so then it's an odd way of saying it 87.254.69.136 (talk) 21:50, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[]

"Unofficial" implies something that is not recognised by officialdom, for instance one might say "exceeding the speed limit by 5 mph on a motorway is unofficially tolerated". The problem with much English law and procedure is that it is so ancient that there was never a formal declaration, just accepted use by officials. IIRC, from the reign of Edward III (1327-1377) English became the language of statute law and the courts, so for nigh on 650 years has been the language of officialdom, but there was never a "making English the official language Act". Of course the situation becomes more complex once you add in Welsh, Scots and Gaelic. Hence the quite specific term de facto official; that is English is the language of officialdom.
Another example which may help you. Murder clearly is one of the most serious crimes there is, currently attracting a life sentence, in the past the death sentence. I'm sure you would agree it is "officially" a crime, and yet – basic murder is a crime "contrary to common law",[a] not a statuary offence. So is killing just "unofficially" prohibited?
HTH, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 22:27, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Notes

  1. ^ NB, this was certainly the case about 30 years ago, later legislation may have changed it.
I don't think of case law as any less official than statute law myself (also although the core of the law of murder is established from case law, there are plenty of statutory references to it), but both the explanation and the example help me to understand what you mean when you say 'official' and hence also by 'de facto official'. So that does help. Thanks. 87.254.69.136 (talk) 05:16, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:40, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[]

Unitary sovereign state vs sovereign country

Let's call the UK what it is, a unitary sovereign state, and not do this mess of calling it a "sovereign country" with a Wikilink to the sovereign state page.

I suggest we focus on the real truth and not try to mislead readers of the English Wikipedia for political ends, such as Brexit or whatever else the agenda is of those Wikipedia editors who want the UK to be listed as a "sovereign country". I suggest the content "sovereign country" is replaced with "unitary sovereign state" - with the Wikilinks I've already added to my suggested new content (2 Wikilinks, one to the "Unitary state" page and the other to the "Sovereign state" page). This is also slightly more detail and informs the reader that the UK is a unitary state, and not a federation like the US, Germany, or Russia. I know Wikipedia is all about consensus, but when Wikipedia is being used for what appears to be political means, that's an area when criticisms of the site start. First past the post (talk) 15:45, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[]

This one keeps coming up. "sovereign country" is a non-term that keeps both camps happy, so please leave it alone. See Talk:United_Kingdom/Archive_30#Opening_sentence and many preceding entries. FYI, it has nothing to do with Brexit. BTW, I'm shortening your title to a title rather than a statement. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:20, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:11, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:United_Kingdom&oldid=803915333"