>>510189596The UK's manufacturing base had relied on monopolised overseas resources and the nation's control of global trade for over 100 years.
The US Navy took control of the global shipping lanes during WW2 and subsequently prevented the UK from exerting any influence over them afterwards (Suez Crisis). US also used its dominance over global trade to discourage any imperialist efforts by Europe, enforcing 'free market principles' on the planet which was seen as a righteous cause by the American voter base.
With no Royal Navy controlled resource imports the UK manufacturing industry was forced to compete on equal terms with developing manufacturing bases in Korea, Japan, mainland Europe and other regions that were having US money pumped into them in vast amounts.
We couldn't compete with the rock bottom labour costs of such manufacturers and the entire manufacturing industry in the country fell to shit. The same thing that has happened to the US to some degree when everyone started switching to Chinese manufacturing in the 80s.
The fact that our old factories weren't destroyed also ended up counterproductive as the developing/rebuilding economies of Germany and others were built back up using the latest tooling and machines from the United States. Meaning by the late 50s the stuff still being made in the UK was poor quality by comparison.
The UK has been in massive debt ever since WW2 as well, which means treasury needs overall GDP to keep increasing to prevent a deflation and debt spiral. That forced the UK to transition to a service economy which heavily relied on an ever-increasing population. But in an enclosed island nation that has inevitably led to spiralling property costs and ever decreasing GDP per capita.
Just to clarify I'm not 'blaming' the United States and saying you 'did a bad thing'. Your country only acted in its own best interests which is the most one can expect from any nation.
America won WW2. Everyone else lost.