189
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2026
189 points (99.5% liked)
UK Politics
5464 readers
81 users here now
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Maybe I'm biased, but I find it hard to believe that those 150 million (nearly half the population of the US?) would see a notable drop in the quality of their lives if their iPhones were Samsung, or Huawai, or any other non-domestic company's.
You're right in that "meaningfully improve" and "disproportionate" aren't precise or scientific terms, either.
And re: colonialism, I think more people have managed international trade without going coloniser than did, so it can't be seen as the sole origin. Needs more to germinate.
On the main issue, I'd say while GDP is far from perfect, it's better to have the measure than not. Even if it works best as part of a range of measures and not over relied upon as it tends to be in popular understandings at the moment, in my view anyhow.
Temper it with more inequality stats, and also median wages vs. cost of living.
Yeah, it's a continuum. Consider the Vikings: they'd do raiding, they'd set up trading posts, they'd do elite replacement, and sometimes they'd move in with their families, do farming and set up businesses.
It's also the case that internal power dynamics within the elites would sometimes shift non-coercive trade to something more coercive, a small faction would benefit hugely, but on a wider scale, it'd be a net loss for the nation doing it. Maintaining a long-term military occupation with a lengthy logistic chain isn't cheap, and unanticipated changes in circumstances can drive the cost for higher. That's one of the causes of the collapse of empires.
Yup, competing factions in power on both sides of the relationship could knock things about.
Vikings were amazing, we (or at least I) still often underestimate or forget their reach. The idea of Vikings in the Middle East and North Africa trading and marrying, and generally being part of the flow of goods, people, and ideas always seems wild.
Anyhow, it's been lovely set of exchanges and I've learnt things and: thanks.