RANT - Fed up with life here in the UK

[Sdrawkcab]

The UK is still one of the best places to live in the World. Definitely in the top 5 all things considered.

 

We really aren't, not even close.

 

List of countries by Human Development Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The UN ranks all countries on a Human Development Index based on several different factors which all affect quality of life. According to them, we are 26th on that list. Spend 5 minutes researching social welfare in places like Sweden and Denmark and you'll see how awful ours is by comparison.

 

If we don't do something soon, we're going to end up like the USA.

[Sunnyknight]

We really aren't, not even close.

 

List of countries by Human Development Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The UN ranks all countries on a Human Development Index based on several different factors which all affect quality of life. According to them, we are 26th on that list. Spend 5 minutes researching social welfare in places like Sweden and Denmark and you'll see how awful ours is by comparison.

 

If we don't do something soon, we're going to end up like the USA.

 

I'm moving to Norway or Switzerland. Cya all.

[Sdrawkcab]

I'm moving to Norway or Switzerland. Cya all.

 

Norway is pretty damn great, see:

 

OK it's a Micheal Moore clip, so you have to take some of what he says with a pinch of salt. Still, shows how much better it could be if you had a government who actually acts in the interests of the people.

[broc]

Norway is a great country to visit, I suspect it would be a great place to live too. Their leaders haven't squandered their oil revenues like ours have. They have banked a lot of it & spent a huge amount on infrastructure projects. They are heavily into hydroelectric power generation. Their fishing industry is booming as they have managed and conserved their fish stocks inside their vast territorial waters.

[superatticman]

So why isn't there a mass exodus to these countries?

[broc]

So why isn't there a mass exodus to these countries?

I am sure there are loads of reasons; family ties, language, inertia...... the belief that things might get better here one day.....

[pcstru]

The UN ranks all countries on a Human Development Index based on several different factors which all affect quality of life. According to them, we are 26th on that list. Spend 5 minutes researching social welfare in places like Sweden and Denmark and you'll see how awful ours is by comparison.

 

If we don't do something soon, we're going to end up like the USA.

 

What, ranked, 3rd?

[pcstru]

I am sure there are loads of reasons; family ties, language, inertia...... the belief that things might get better here one day.....

36% tax rate...

 

Personally I think the tradeoff is probably worth it but for many, low rates of income tax is seen as a "good thing".

[Sdrawkcab]

What, ranked, 3rd?

 

Oh damn, I hadn't noticed that. Clearly the disparity between rich and poor in the US is much bigger than I thought.

 

For the record, I'd be happy to pay 36% tax if it meant I got access to the awesome social welfare system they have in Norway. If you watch that video I linked it says that, amongst other things, that the government there subsidises a two week holiday for all citizens. Can you imagine if anyone raised that in our parliament here? They'd never be taken seriously again!

 

And yeah the reason there isn't a mass exodus to these countries is for a lot of reasons. Government is rarely a deciding factor in choosing where to live, imo.

[Sunnyknight]

So why isn't there a mass exodus to these countries?

 

I'd base it more towards their figures for religion (from my OWN perspective).

[Sirbendy]

It really isn't a minority and it is frustrating. Certainly in the area I live, I see these people with 3/4 kids living in a council house that would cost upwards of £300k and they're renting it for the price of a studio flat. The kids have a blackberry/iphone/expensive clothes and there's a massive 60inch flat screen in the living room with sky. Me and my Mrs cant even get a mortgage for anything with more than 1 bedroom, the thought of having a house and family seems completely unachievable. I don't know anyone my age with a house that hasn't had help from their parents, something that I'm not going to get.

 

I can only see it getting worse and more people ending up living off benefits and living above their means.

 

I feel very fortunate. I have a mother (single parent) who's an accountant. I was always brought up with "careful spending" and second/third hand things, living in a council house, and I never felt hard done by. On the contrary - I had some of my most enjoyable times going to the local tip/junk electronics store/car boot and coming back with things that others had got shot of, that I could then dismantle/fix/tinker with.

 

Now, she's bought that house. She's also left it in trust to my kids (2 so far). I grew up not spending, hell I'm still so tight I squeak when I walk. I have always lived on "if you don't have it in the bank, and it's not essential, you don't need it/spend it". I've only ever used my current account, currently sat at the 4.5k mark. Must do something about it..more to the ISA.

 

Missus is from a family of 6, also grew up with minimal money, hand me down everything, beans on toast meals etc.

 

I got the missus into saving - organised her first bank account (never had one before), ran her through the costs of things, got her round to my way of thinking. Then we moved out and started renting..that got more expensive, but we still saved as much as we could. Then we saw a house @ 115k, and the temptation to buy was high..mentioned it to my mother, who I still let manage my finances apart from the current acc.

 

"Go for it". I said don't be silly, I can't afford a mortgage..

 

"Ah. Yes. Right. Here's a statement of your finances, your ISAs, building societies, shares, fallback car fund. Here are the docs. You can afford it, I think you should go for it. "

 

We were able to put down a 35k deposit on the house, without breaking a sweat on the remaining savings. I now have 71k left to pay. We still scrimp and save, we stretch our money - end of life foods like pasta in bulk, animal feed in bulk from farms (SO cheap, I can recommend it.), ebay clothes /toys for the kids and us, cheapest prices I can find for anything. Missus is self employed ATM (approx 19k/year), but has just had 2 job offers in addition to that, one for 3 days a week, one for full week at 25-30k. I'm part time on 11.5k/year.

 

Kids are on part time nursery places to save costs, along with my part time meaning I take them in the PM. Time you can't get back, that no financial recompense can replace. I opted for the reduced hours and pay.

 

My place is an ex-council concrete wimpy, on a council estate. Most of the houses seem to be privately owned now. There are some families that are a PITA, and some kids who quite frankly should be shot - I had words with one who was hassling and abusing my elderly neighbour - he told me to fsck off. I told him to stop being a gobby sh1te and go do his homework. He said he'd "do my car", I said I'd laminate him to the road, and give him a count of 10 to start running. Also asked his name, which he gave me..then said I could also cheerfully report him to his school..as I used to go there and almost certainly knew his teachers.

 

You know, he's not been seen up our street since. He was apparently well known for hassling the older residents.

 

As I say, I feel amazingly lucky to be where I am now. My brother lives in Devon, huge house, Merc SLK, expensive tastes..in mums words "I close my eyes when doing his accounts, don't go there. ". I worry about him, but he's not stupid..

 

Then we look at the mother-in-law. Lovely person, yes. Signed off long term sick, missus who is also signed off medically. They are each others carers. Full motability for both, new car every 3 years, council 3 bed on the social tariff for everything, big TV, buys things like they're going out of fashion until she gets bored of them etc. She's as capable as me..no reason she couldn't have done at least a desk job. Doesn't save or plan, forever whinging about money.

 

She's offered to "help" me fill in a DLA claim so I can "get a motability car" - I've declined, and it's a mystery to her why. I'm disabled, but I'm not about to lie to exaggerate it.

 

Now Jems brothers/sister have grown up, they've all got jobs (at long last), but they're constantly amazed at her savings.."you've got loads of money, can I borrow a tenner?"..it's like educating pork sometimes. At least 1 has got it right - just heard he's working and saving like mad for a deposit. Fair play to the lad. Always thought he'd do OK. He always said "I'm able, so I'll do anything. Anything is better than sitting around like this."

 

We need more of that. He worked in a pound shop at first, then did callcentre work..not glamorous, not good hour wise..now he's just landed a job as a data analyst for something..far better pay.

[NikChillin]

There are very few places in the world which have weathered the global financial crisis. So, wherever you think of, they most likely will have had a reduction in income.

Houses of parliament? MP's were asking for a 10% pay rise recently.........

[superatticman]

Oh damn, I hadn't noticed that. Clearly the disparity between rich and poor in the US is much bigger than I thought.

 

For the record, I'd be happy to pay 36% tax if it meant I got access to the awesome social welfare system they have in Norway. If you watch that video I linked it says that, amongst other things, that the government there subsidises a two week holiday for all citizens. Can you imagine if anyone raised that in our parliament here? They'd never be taken seriously again!

 

And yeah the reason there isn't a mass exodus to these countries is for a lot of reasons. Government is rarely a deciding factor in choosing where to live, imo.

 

That's because in Britain, you still have the ability to make change from within.

 

However, I agree with the sentiments on here that we almost had it too good from the mid 90s to the mid 2000s. John Prescott's utter stupidity in announcing that 'we're all middle class now' was typical of that regime. What he and a fair proportion of the electorate failed to realise was that all they'd actually done was borrow lots of money of which gave themselves a false sense of financial well being. Even better was to follow with the arrival of cheap labour from Eastern Europe. This was a massive positive for the middle class and above because it meant they could pay less for services such as building, driving and other manual trades as well as unskilled labour. However, what they failed to realise was that this very much opened the flood gates for the ruthless financially oriented employment market. This has also filtered across to Education where Universities are now taking in the more affluent from other countries rather than British youngsters. Why shouldn't they? The precedent has been set so why should there be any discrimination against foreign students willing to pay for their education?

[tmcd35]

Personally I think the tradeoff is probably worth it but for many, low rates of income tax is seen as a "good thing".

 

Checks and balances. Low rate of income tax is seen as a good thing because we are constantly being screwed over in other ways. 20% VAT? Fuel Tax? and probably 100 other levies hidden away. Don't we have something like the most complex tax system in the world? I'm sure I read somewhere, if you added up all the hidden taxes the average person pays the equivalant of a 40% income tax rate anyway. Besides, what is the percentage if you just add N.I. contributions to the basic rate of income tax? N.I. as long since been another wording for Income Tax anyway.

 

I'd be happy to pay 40%, maybe even a little more, if the entire tax system was overhauled and simplified, and we were seen to be getting our moneys worth out of key public services.

[ADMaster]

I’d say our tax system over here is complex and full of loop holes. I too fall in the make too much for full benefits, but not enough to make it on one income.

We are $17 trillion in debt and I get back more money on tax returns then I pay in.

If I’m not mistaken your VAT is similar to our sales tax. In place of a very complex tax code I’d like to see a tax code fit on one page.

A flat XX% sales tax. No income tax, no property tax etc. I think this is the fairest tax for all. If the rich want to spend $$ on shiny things they pay flat %. If I want to save my money I don’t pay.

Someone who works for cash to avoid income tax will now pay based on what they spend.

All the drug dealers who spend their ill-gotten gains on the latest things will now pay tax just like everyone else.

[pcstru]

A flat XX% sales tax. No income tax, no property tax etc. I think this is the fairest tax for all. If the rich want to spend $$ on shiny things they pay flat %. If I want to save my money I don’t pay.

 

The problem with this is it leaves the government having to deal with large fluctuations in taxable income. It also has the effect of decreasing tax in proportion to income, because other than the odd Lamborgini, peoples basic needs are much the same.

[sted]

surely thats where a flat tax comes in. earn so much before youre taxed (with additions for kids up to say 3) then everything after that is taxed at x% same for everyone the more you earn the more you pay and much simpler

[pcstru]

surely thats where a flat tax comes in. earn so much before youre taxed (with additions for kids up to say 3) then everything after that is taxed at x% same for everyone the more you earn the more you pay and much simpler

Not sure I follow. The suggestion by @ADMaster was for a flat sales tax and eliminate income tax. Sales tax by it's nature varies with the amount of things being sold. IMO your suggestion - a progressive income tax is the only fair way. We just need to eliminate loopholes that allow people to avoid paying their fair share. That seems to involve (at least) two things, first ensuring that when people divert income into their company, live off expenses that they can't then avoid capital gains when they sell shares and take dividends and second ensuring companies are taxed fairly in the countries where they are generating income (so Amazon can't claim that their costs and profits continently occur in a low tax regime when they are creaming billions from customers in the UK).

[ADMaster]

Yes there may be fluctuation in tax revenue to begin with, but I think it would stabilize. Similar to how folks on all the benefits don’t have much incentive to work because they can make more money than someone with a low paying job. What is the incentive for someone to be a successful entrepreneur? That person progressively pays a higher tax rate based on how much profit they make. A low paid worker may pay 15% and a very high paid owner may pay 30%. In my opinion this is unfair.

Let’s say the low paid worker makes $10,000 @ 15% tax is $1,500

And the high paid owner makes $100,000 @ 30% tax is $30,000

If the owner paid just 15% too that would be $15,000

Still ten times more than the low paid worker, but the same rate. That is the nature of percentages.

Now the owner has an extra $15,000 he could hire a new worker, give the current workers a raise, reinvest in his shop etc.

A progressive income tax only punishes success.

The flat sales tax is aimed at individuals, I’m not sure how you would tax a business with this model, but I’m sure there is something out there better than all the loop holes we have now.

[localzuk]

Yes there may be fluctuation in tax revenue to begin with, but I think it would stabilize. Similar to how folks on all the benefits don’t have much incentive to work because they can make more money than someone with a low paying job. What is the incentive for someone to be a successful entrepreneur? That person progressively pays a higher tax rate based on how much profit they make. A low paid worker may pay 15% and a very high paid owner may pay 30%. In my opinion this is unfair.

Let’s say the low paid worker makes $10,000 @ 15% tax is $1,500

And the high paid owner makes $100,000 @ 30% tax is $30,000

If the owner paid just 15% too that would be $15,000

Still ten times more than the low paid worker, but the same rate. That is the nature of percentages.

Now the owner has an extra $15,000 he could hire a new worker, give the current workers a raise, reinvest in his shop etc.

A progressive income tax only punishes success.

The flat sales tax is aimed at individuals, I’m not sure how you would tax a business with this model, but I’m sure there is something out there better than all the loop holes we have now.

 

That has been proven a false concept. Reduced taxation of higher earners does not boost investment and trickle wealth down. It doesn't increase tax revenue. GW Bush showed this during his years. The tax cuts he implemented in the USA were supposed to boost tax revenue through "trickle down economics". Instead, tax revenue was something like $3tn less than it would have been without the changes.

[featured_spectre]

Whilst I agree a flat percentage on principle, it also has the potential to lose billions from various avenues.

 

Football players make on average £86000 a week in the premiership. They are taxed at 50%, which means £43000 goes to the government per week. If we had say a flat 20% (for example) then on the footballers wages, the government would only get £17200, thereby making a deficit.

 

Factor in most footballers also import food, drink, cars, and pay for houses through a corporation and "gift" them to themselves, they pay no stamp duty etc. It isn't a good system.

[ADMaster]

I still believe that things would balance out. Forget about the business tax for a moment, ideally all of those loop holes would be closed.

Let’s focus on the individuals tax.

First the government should balance the books better and not spend what they don’t have, much like us individuals must do.

Second the money that will be lost because the footballers will not pay as much will be made up for in other avenues.

The organized crime rings / drug rings who spend their money on the latest because they don’t want that much cash lying around, and a deposit like that at the bank would be suspicious.

Free lancers that do side jobs or individuals, some may report properly some will not.

Folks that work for cash only because if they were on the books it would interfere with their benefits.

Your 1.5% of people on benefits not working, that can afford to get their kids the latest phones and TV’s etc.

Illegal aliens that are not paying income tax because they are not a citizen and working for a company that will pay them cash off the books.

Tourism, visitors to your country that otherwise wouldn’t pay income tax would pay sales tax.

 

All of these additional streams of tax revenue would be picked up if the tax was sales only.

 

Finally as others have said I too look for local first, I like to save money, but something made here is my preference over something made abroad.

[pcstru]

Now the owner has an extra $15,000 he could hire a new worker, give the current workers a raise, reinvest in his shop etc.

And they will probably want healthy, educated workers. Paid for by tax payers. They will want to transport goods by road and rail, again paid for by taxpayers. A lot is made of the fact that rich people tend to be employers, as if by some feudal principle the taxes paid by their serfs are proxy taxes for them. I remember listening to one over privileged old biddy who was incensed that she would no longer get tax relief for her sponsorship of her pet arts project. She was outraged that she would be asked to pay tax instead - as if everyone has such choices!

 

Progressive tax recognises that entrepreneurs stand on the shoulders of the society that has provided educated, healthy workers, good transport, communications and infrastructure. They are able to make good profits for themselves and live extremely comfortably by virtue of that and their hard work. The former often seems overlooked.

Edited October 26, 2013 by pcstru

[featured_spectre]

Flat tax serves nobody well unless there is no debt in the country, and the infrastructure in place, healthcare is paid for as a percentage of the earnings of everyone, and education system is covered by various taxes (gains tax, corporation tax, etc). You will never find a perfect system, because in this day and age, nothing so perfect can exist. There will always be loopholes which people/businesses will exploit.

 

When a perfect system is created, let me know, I'll be the first to champion its adoption.

 

FYI, the system you are proposing @ADMaster is communism.

[ADMaster]

@nephilim

We must have a misunderstanding somewhere, I am not advocating communism at all. Communism simply defined is a government structure in which the government owns everything, no private property.

If you took the first sentence of my last post as government owning everything, apologies that is not the case. I only meant for the sake of this discussion forget businesses, because I’ve not fully thought out how a fair business tax would work.

I am for capitalism, the tax structure I suggest would allow for personal success and not punish it, that is not communism.

As you say there will always be loop holes in any system. We may have to agree to disagree. Apologies to the OP for hijacking your thread.