hutpik:
Hi Franglais.But surely thats the Point.It doesn’t really matter what you pay in ‘‘social costs’’,as whats in your pocket is the Money you can spend.The Swedish system is quite good,You pay a lot of taxes but you[and your employer]lots into the '‘social’'system to cover all these so called ‘‘safety net’’ costs which the state use.Most wages are structered by the state\employers\unions so the working man doesn’t have to fight for better wages.I’m not sure about ‘‘lower take home pay’’.Having been born in the UK,lived in Holland and Canada and now here it see quite a good ratio between wages and standards.Also something which most people forget is the ‘‘quality of life’’
“Quality of life” is too often forgotten, you’re right.
Some of the reason is probably the cost of housing in the UK? Anyone wanting to raise a family must chase money above all else at the expense of all else it seems. A greater proportion of wages goes to housing now than ever before I think.
It’s difficult to comment without going off on a political tangent, but I think the UK is going the wrong direction. We don’t need more privatisation of hospitals, geriatric care, etc with cash being syphoned off. We need a better National Health and Social Care system. Staffed by people who aren’t chasing the biggest bucks but are committed to the system itself. Those who give service, content to know they in turn will be looked after when the need arises. No need for big salaries of you don’t need to find private hospitals schools and hospices.
Freedom of choice? Some politicos want us to be free to be exploited and ripped off by scammers. They want us to have the freedom to choose 2nd best (operates at a profit by their mates).
Sorry. I’m off on a rant…
I’ll go get another bottle of soma.
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk