In England, "the north" is seen as poor and "the south" is seen as rich, and the north is indeed much poorer than the south. In 1964, the Oxford Union debated "When going North, wogs begin at Barnet" <http://books.google.com/books?id=fGI3Bgy54OcC&lpg=PA15&pg=PA...>; while humorous, of course, it was based on a real perception in "the south" of "the north". In this video of northern Brexit voters <https://vimeo.com/172932182>, people talk about "the south" as if it were a foreign country that they could never move to, with wealth their region could never hope to achieve.

This is very different from in the US, where New Yorkers might similarly call anything west of the Hudson River <http://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/...> "rural" or "the West", but, generally speaking, wouldn't make the distinction based on a perceived wealth gap. No New Yorker would claim that Dallas or Atlanta or Phoenix or Pittsburgh or Boise is "poor", nor would the residents of those cities concede that NYC is wealthier (as opposed to larger or more glamorous or more exciting). I've made this point elsewhere. Quoting myself <http://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1eymi7/number_of_cit...>:

---

Consider the US's 10 largest metro areas <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_metropoli...>: In order, NYC (~7% of the total US population), LA (~5%), Chicago (3%), DC, San Francisco Bay area, Boston, Philly, Dallas, Miami, and Houston. They comprise one third of the country's population and the list is overall a very balanced one:

* 3 in the Northeast, 1 in the mid-Atlantic, 1 in the Southeast, 1 in the Midwest, 2 in TX, 2 on the West Coast

* 5 in the Sunbelt, 5 not

* 5 on the East Coast, 5 not

* 5 on the East Coast, 2 on the West Coast, 3 in between

Etc., etc.

Now, consider this map of the UK <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom#Demographics> and this list of the largest UK urban areas <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_areas_in_the_Uni...>. Note how, other than London, only one (Southampton/Portsmouth) of the top ten is below the Severn Wash line. Greater London is gigantic, relatively speaking, compared to its US counterparts--13% of the entire country's population (!)--and has no national peers the way LA and Chicago are real rivals to NYC.

This causes a huge imbalance, wherein London 1) sucks up most of the capital and human energy that would otherwise supply cities south of the Severn Wash, and 2) sucks up much of the capital and human energy that would otherwise supply the country north of the Severn Wash. No region of the United States is grossly wealthier or poorer than others to the extent that the Severn Wash in the UK divides the poor north with the wealthy south.

----

The previous Conservative government mentioned forming a "Northern Powerhouse" <http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/elections2015/ele...> to help relieve the above imbalance. Devolution can't be only at the home-nation level, though, because England is so much larger than the other three combined. If England wants Scotland to stay in the union, it will have to break itself up for unity's sake. Regional devolution will hopefully give the new states/provinces a chance to compete with Greater London on a more equal footing and, as in other federations around the world, come up with innovative, local-specific solutions to their own issues.