Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

gfplux

GwylimT wrote: »

People do find higher taxes harder to accept. We live in Sweden, due to higher taxes all childcare is free at point of use, it is available at the weekend as well which is handy for many workers. You pay a small fee each month if you want the nursery to supply nappies etc I think it is about £70 a month.

Education is very good, all extras such as ingredients for cooking, sport shoes, lunch etc are included at no extra cost.

Parental leave is good, 480 days, with 320 of those days being paid at 80% of your income. This can be shared however you like, however if you share you can be off work at the same time as your partner and you are both paid. You can also take this on a part time basis, so if i go part time at work my parental leave will continue to be paid at a half rate until the allocated days are over.

The state pension can be drawn from the age of 61 (they are thinking of changing his to 63), typically people will receive around half their income, but many people also have private or work pensions. So the average person had a pension worth 70% of their salary on retirement, this means most have plenty in retirement. Those who worked a low income, or couldn't work due to disability receive a topped up pension of £560 a month. Even with the state pension the more you pay the larger pension you will receive.

If you are elderly and need home care, or a care/nursing home this has a cost, you pay 4% of your overall fees unless your income is low, if you own property you can choose to pay this in one lump sump when your property is sold (any unused years are refunded) or after death from your estate.


If you lose your job you are paid 80% of your salary for the first 200 days then 70% for the next hundred. If you are not part of a union you are instead paid a fixed fee of £25 a day. After 300 days you are enrolled into a job scheme and paid 65% of your previous dalary until you find work.

If you are ill you receive 80% of your pay in sickness benefits, you are also well supported, for example you will be givem treatment to assist you in getting back to work, such as physio etc to get you work fit. You can return on reduced hours and benefits will make up the shortfall in wages until you are well enough to go back on your previous full hours.

Thank you Gwylim.
We live in Luxembourg which has similar benefits.
Our Daughter has close friends in Sweden and often visits.
She loves Sweden and thinks it’s very civilised.

gfplux

During this Christmas and New Year break which resembles the phoney war while we wait for the politiciens to get back to Brexit this blog posting addresses some of the issues facing Britain in the next few months.
The blogger is clearly anti Brexit but in the absence of any pro Brexit it is still worth a read by both sides.

http://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.lu/2017/12/2018-year-that-brexit-gets-real-and.html

GreatApe

Moby wrote: »

Take it from someone who has worked in the criminal justice system for 30 years this is not true. Ask any young black male in the inner city for example. Look at the profile of our prison population.

Actually I think free markets often produces poor quality food and encourages people towards ill health and a bad lifestyle. Watch the Super Size Me documentary for a good example. The rest of your comparisons are puerile of course. I've previously posted links for you to read re. relative poverty. You either believe them or you don't.

There is a generation gap bigger than ever before due to the hoarding of property and wealth by the older generations. Even when they die these resources will be passed on to family therefore limiting the spread and opportunities of children from less wealthy backgrounds. We need a major increase in inheritance tax to deal with this.

Not true. It's a harsh reality due to the hoarding of property and wealth to a narrowing section of the population.

Already told you....repeating the mantra does not make it true.

Civilised people learn from history. Idiots repeat the mistakes.;)

An even sillier person ignores human nature. Technology is a force for good but also in the wrong hands can cause all sorts of problems. Donald Trump doesn't believe in global warming because it doesn't suit his business model and he's removing the barriers to drilling again all over the place!

Have no idea what you are talking about.

Rather incoherent and confused.

We had huge access to other countries resources all over Africa, India and the Middle East. It was called the British Empire. We had a system though where the wealth was not equally spread but held by the mercantile middle classes and the rich landowners. Political systems matter as to how the wealth is spread...Like I said if you know your history you can learn a lot.

How can we both live in the same country yet have so differing views?

Before you suggest I'm rich and you are poor. I grew up on a council estate and lived in hackney a very poor borough most my life. I went to one of the worse primary schools in hackney and then a terrible secondary school. My parents were poor when they were young and my grand parents were very poor for all but the later quarter of their lives. So I have seen it all.

Right now when I look around me and the 100+ families I know I don't see any poverty at all. Some of them have zero income yet are not poor the state gives them sufficient funds to live a decent life. I do see a lot of difficult lives due to dysfunctional behavior addictions and violence people lead difficult lives but it is not die to the economy or capatilism it is due to addictions and dysfunction

So why do we have such differing views?
The only thing I can think of is that you are lying on your assessments or perhaps you see the poverty but do not see (or willingly omit) the underlying dysfunctional issues. Perhaps you are trying hard to pin the blame of dysfunctional lives onto the Tories or free markets but that would be absurd

gfplux

This long read by a Cameron adviser on why remain lost the referendum is good background information to fill the time while there is no Brexit news.

https://www.politico.eu/article/why-we-lost-the-brexit-vote-former-uk-prime-minister-david-cameron/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Moby

Tromking wrote: »

Perhaps we are better people, or our democrats who we vote for are. The argument against PR was always that it produces weak Government and encourages the lunatic fringe. As we’ve never voted for a party that would end FPTP I would say the intincts of the British people are spot on. I think I read somewhere that the AfD could be the official opposition in the Bundestag if Merkel throws her hat in with the second biggest party. Scary stuff, and would never happen in the UK because we’re better people.

Tromking ignore it if you will but Britain First are alive and kicking.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

kabayiri wrote: »

Do you not think a Corbyn PM would push the Tories even further to the right in response?

Not if they're smart.

Look at the polling data - the only reason Corbyn is in with a chance of becoming PM is precisely because the Tories have swung too far right and alienated a decent chunk of the centre ground voters,, who are holding their noses and voting Corbyn.

A genuinely popular, centrist, candidate leading a moderate party on either side would win a landslide in today's climate.

Instead we had the 'too far right' Mayhem losing her majority and the 'too far left' Corbyn failing to capitalise.

I feel like there is yet more polarisation in politics coming, and also more regional politics (the SNP have shown a lead there).

Maybe.

But the extremists can never achieve anything lasting.

Extreme Right version of Tories get in and anger half the country, who then vote Extreme Left version of Labour in to demolish everything the Tories did, rinse and repeat.

It's a cycle of destruction and economic vandalism where nothing good for prosperity and uniting the country is ever achieved.

I reckon the UK public will become sick of it sooner or later and a genuinely uniting, sensible, compromising, middle ground, statesman-like politician will emerge and lead us back into sanity.

The only real question is how much pointless damage is done before that happens.

And IMO the same thing holds true for Brexit. The majority would be happy with a centrist compromise. The extremists are pushing for their own version of the truth that is not supported by the majority.

kabayiri

Moby wrote: »

Tromking ignore it if you will but Britain First are alive and kicking.

I think we have more chance of seeing the rise of a party anchored around a religious cause, like Islam.

Why wouldn't they? When I look at Islam there is a strong collective nature about it, with common codes of conduct and dress and even a local tax. This suits politics.

Trying to throw a defining loop over the right is a lot more tricky. When does Nationalism become regional for example..the right often fractures.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

gfplux wrote: »

The blogger is clearly anti Brexit but in the absence of any pro Brexit it is still worth a read by both sides.

http://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.lu/2017/12/2018-year-that-brexit-gets-real-and.html

Interesting article.

The author makes three points well worth discussing here in the following excerpts:

One:

first, what was agreed in phase 1 is not contingent on the outcome of phase 2. It defines the agreed exit terms.

I think I'd agree with that, largely because he's spot on with point...

Two:

Second, phase 2 is not going to yield a future trade deal, it can only (both because of the terms of the Article 50 process, and the timescale) yield a political framework within which that trade deal can be negotiated once Britain has become a third country. There will be no trade deal in March 2019, nor will there be one for a long time after that, and very probably this will mean a significantly longer transition period than is currently envisaged by either the UK or the EU.

There won't be 'a deal' by Mar 2019 - there will only be a framework within which a deal can be negotiated while the transitional arrangements hold us in place for now.

So with that in mind - the previous exit terms agreed will be the final ones - they're not conditional upon anything else that really can be agreed by 2019.

But the real choice, yet to be made, is here in point....

Three:

there isn’t going to be anything remotely close to the current trade arrangements unless the UK stays in the single market via EFTA/EEA and signs a customs treaty very similar to customs union membership.

If the terms are going to be something like CETA then that is going to be a long way from the current situation, especially as regards services, and, in turn is going to be incompatible with having an open border in Ireland.

So where will they end up?

Similar arrangements to today just called something different to keep the Brexit Ultras from losing too much face?

Or a meaningful loss of trade and prosperity that will let Corbyn in at the next election?

Interesting times...

gfplux

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Interesting article.

The author makes three points well worth discussing here in the following excerpts:

One:



I think I'd agree with that, largely because he's spot on with point...

Two:



There won't be 'a deal' by Mar 2019 - there will only be a framework within which a deal can be negotiated while the transitional arrangements hold us in place for now.

So with that in mind - the previous exit terms agreed will be the final ones - they're not conditional upon anything else that really can be agreed by 2019.

But the real choice, yet to be made, is here in point....

Three:



So where will they end up?

Similar arrangements to today just called something different to keep the Brexit Ultras from losing too much face?

Or a meaningful loss of trade and prosperity that will let Corbyn in at the next election?

Interesting times...

Hamish,
The Times are not only interesting but I can’t help myself finding it all exciting.

Moby

GreatApe wrote: »

How can we both live in the same country yet have so differing views?

Before you suggest I'm rich and you are poor. I grew up on a council estate and lived in hackney a very poor borough most my life. I went to one of the worse primary schools in hackney and then a terrible secondary school. My parents were poor when they were young and my grand parents were very poor for all but the later quarter of their lives. So I have seen it all.

Right now when I look around me and the 100+ families I know I don't see any poverty at all. Some of them have zero income yet are not poor the state gives them sufficient funds to live a decent life. I do see a lot of difficult lives due to dysfunctional behavior addictions and violence people lead difficult lives but it is not die to the economy or capatilism it is due to addictions and dysfunction

So why do we have such differing views?
The only thing I can think of is that you are lying on your assessments or perhaps you see the poverty but do not see (or willingly omit) the underlying dysfunctional issues. Perhaps you are trying hard to pin the blame of dysfunctional lives onto the Tories or free markets but that would be absurd

You say I'm 'lying' but acknowledge yourself that you see 'a lot of difficult lives due to dysfunction'. Then you acknowledge 'poverty' because I see it....it's just that I willingly omit the dysfunctional issues behind it ??? I have no idea what you are talking about mate and I don't think you do either!