Willing to adapt? - U.K. economy

So, in 1900, who had:

• the richest country in the world

• the largest military

• the center for world business & finance

• the world's strongest education system

• the world center for innovation and invention

• the currency used as the world standard of value

• the highest standard of living?

England.

My, how things changed in the last 100 years for this great country.  I remember watching 1940s and 1950s movies with British actors, and they were full of "Stiff upper lip, old man" and similar phrases as England was portrayed as a country of people stiff as starch, tied to a long history of Victorian behavior and a sense of superiority belied by its loss of leadership in the world.  America, with its larger physical size and population took the lead in agriculture, and later manufacturing.  Slowly, America took the lead on all the measures mentioned above.

Now, England is facing additional crises.  One of the oldest, most popular and largest retailers, Woolworth's, has gone bust and all stores are closing.  As America's first lady shows off new half-million dollar china in the White House, the famous crystal and china maker Waterford Wedgewood is in the British equivalent of bankruptcy and may not survive.  Housing mortgage approvals are down more than 70% this year as real estate values tumbled (despite Russion buying).  So now the Bank of England is expected to cut the primary lending rate between banks to the lowest level ever since the creation of the central bank in 1694. (read article here)  Yet, there are those who think this move unwise because they fear the British currency will fall versus the Euro and other currencies.

Stiff upper lip?  Hold on and wait for things to get better without an historical rate cut?  Bankers in England are already showing a great reluctance to make new loans, despite central bank prodding.  These are the same bankers who have felt they should not agree to joining the European common market - and converting to the Euro currency - they seem willing to "go it alone" even if such actions crash the economy, kill businesses, jobs and the lifestyle of a few million residents in the United Kingdom.  

What do Britain's economic leaders expect to happen?  What was not so long ago an English colony, India, is rapidly becoming a global economic engine far more important than England.  Serious change has happened over the last 100 years - and if England, its businesses and its people are to remain serious competitors they have to adapt to global changes.  England may be a great place, but so are a lot of other places on the globe.  Today, it's not about who you were - but who you are becoming.  And it's unclear that the U.K. is becoming a stronger competitor able to deliver solutions to global customers that are superior and at a fair price (perhaps Guinness and single malt Scotch being the long-term exceptions).

The shifts in competition unleashed by digitization and globalization will not bypass England and the other U.K. countries.  They must adapt to these changes if they want to maintain a lifestyle to which its citizens have become accustomed.  Right now, what England needs all the adaptability it can muster to deal with global changes unlike any ever before seen.  And lowering the interest rate to record levels will be just the first change in the old status quo if England is to remain a world competitor.  Perhaps a Prime Minister with the last name Singh or Gupta is in the country's future?

Comments

[LetUsHavePeace]

Adam: Your need to amend your comment. The United Kingdom of England, Scotland and Ireland did not have the "largest military". The Dual Monarchy of Austria and Hungary, Russia, the Republic of France and the German Empire all had standing armies at least five times the size of the British Army. Neither did Britain have the world's "strongest education system". The British themselves conceded that the German education system was far superior in the technical subjects that mattered, and American schools had already begun to consciously model themselves on the German system. The United States was the "richest" country in terms of a "standard of living". Your point remains valid, nevertheless.

[Adam Hartung]

I used secondary sources for my post, so I'm not well positioned to argue your points of fact. You may be right! I appreciate that you found the post and its comments valuable. Please continue commenting!