Britain worst place in Europe - to live!

Britain is the worst place to live in Europe, according to a study.

Although Britons earn high incomes that money is cancelled out by long working hours, poor annual leave, rising food and fuel bills and a lack of sunshine.

We have the highest after-tax household income of £35,730-a-year, more than £10,000 above the European average.

But most of it goes on keeping a "roof over our heads, food on the table and our homes warm", according to the uswitch.com European Quality of Life Index.

Ann Robinson of uSwitch.com, said: "There is more to good living than money - and this report shows why so many Brits are giving up on the UK and heading to France and Spain."

Poppy

 
  • Like
Reactions: virtuallysorted

Dominic Taylor

Free Member
Jun 19, 2008
1,173
254
Bath
Blah blah grass is greener over there, blah blah....

Only problem with Spain and France is that they're full of the French and Spanish ;)

That said I have lived in France and fancy living in Spain at some point next summer :)

I just think all these doom and gloom reports are to cover up slow news days and to moan - something we Brits excel at ;)
 
Upvote 0
Sounds like a report that someone made up over a boozy lunch. We went to see family in France in August and all was not well.

Property prices were nearly the same as the UK, as was food, drink…I wonder why, it could not have anything to do with the _ _? Could it.

Oh, and they had a very rainy year to boot, global warming er global raining more like...
 
Upvote 0
Britain is the worst place to live in Europe, according to a study.

Although Britons earn high incomes that money is cancelled out by long working hours, poor annual leave, rising food and fuel bills and a lack of sunshine.

We have the highest after-tax household income of £35,730-a-year, more than £10,000 above the European average.

But most of it goes on keeping a "roof over our heads, food on the table and our homes warm", according to the uswitch.com European Quality of Life Index.

Ann Robinson of uSwitch.com, said: "There is more to good living than money - and this report shows why so many Brits are giving up on the UK and heading to France and Spain."

Poppy

Take it from someone who has just returned to live in the UK after five years in Canada, the country that always seems to come top of these ridiculous surveys.

Take them with a pinch of salt!! The UK is not only light years ahead in technology, business, travel, cars, infrastucture ... the list goes on but it has more character, history and culture than North America 10 times over.

Everyone thinks the grass is greener, it just isn't!!
 
Upvote 0
Take it from someone who has just returned to live in the UK after five years in Canada, the country that always seems to come top of these ridiculous surveys.

Take them with a pinch of salt!! The UK is not only light years ahead in technology, business, travel, cars, infrastucture ... the list goes on but it has more character, history and culture than North America 10 times over.

Everyone thinks the grass is greener, it just isn't!!

I dont think we are that far ahead.

I cant even get cable TV or a mobile phone signal where I live.
 
Upvote 0
We apparently had the best health service in the world for 20 years, but no thought of including the rest of europe at the time, we mushrooms. Treated to a taste of urban ledgons for years about the standard of living in the UK.

One thing i got to say if this is true long live EU and President Blair, another way to undermine the ruling elite in the UK. (i would rather a united commonwealth) but we have never been asked what we want and never do get asked.
 
Upvote 0
I have been looking for somewhere to live for most of my life:eek: I have lived in Scotland, England, Wales , Norway , Germany , Belize as well as traveling and spending time in over 50 countries.

I still cannot find anywhere that I prefer over Scotland. ( one big issue I have is the weather)

Everywhere has the plus and negative points but on balance I still think Scotland has more to offer than most.

At the end of the day no where is perfect, it is all about finding a balance that you are happy with. If you are not happy where you are move and try somewhere else.

I am just back from the USA and I really like the USA and I can see myself spending more and more time their but I am not sure I would want to live their all year round. I am off to Canada on Saturday and I rate Canada above all other countries I have been to but again I am not sure I could live their 365.

Everyone is looking for something different in life and your environment without doubt plays a big part, for me a huge part. You just have to find somewhere you like and get the balance.

As you can gather from above I am still looking but I may actually have found it by having a home in Scotland and the ability to travel when I want.

Britain worse place to live in Europe to live? I do not think so by a long way!
 
Upvote 0
We apparently had the best health service in the world for 20 years
The NHS is the principal reason why our family, and many others that I know, hesitate to ever return to Britain. It's just not safe. You don't see it until you experience other systems. This opinion never wins me friends, and some people get very upset when I say it (sorry!), but that doesn't take away from the basic truth of it.

In other respects, though, Britain is much preferred over other countries in Europe. The usual decency of British people and our sense of fair play, for example, are attributes often overlooked.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
The NHS is the principal reason why our family, and many others that I know, hesitate to ever return to Britain. It's just not safe. You don't see it until you experience other systems. This opinion never wins me friends, and some people get very upset when I say it (sorry!), but that doesn't take away from the basic truth of it.

In other respects, though, Britain is much preferred over other countries in Europe. The usual decency of British people and our sense of fair play, for example, are attributes often overlooked.

If you are going to make broad sweep statements like that it might be best if you back them up, or at least qualify them with "in my opinion".

In what way is it not safe? To whom is it not safe? Where are the examples, the data that shows it is substantially less safe than many other systems?

This sort of statement is guaranteed to lose you friends and get a knee jerk reaction because it is a facile, unsubstantiated and unhelpful remark made from an ideological viewpoint, unhindered by fact or observation.

Less safe than the American system is for the uninsured? Less safe than a system that virtually guarantees personal bankruptcy if you are ill twice?

There is a lot wrong with the NHS, but to call it unsafe, and so unsafe as to prohibit a return to this country, is not only foolish I think, but also brings into question your judgement and your knowledge. That 'many others' agree with you shows merely that you travel in a narrow comfort zone in that Southern State; one which you seem loathe to put down full roots in given your harking back here on such a regular basis.
 
Upvote 0
If you are going to make broad sweep statements like that it might be best if you back them up, or at least qualify them with "in my opinion".
It's based on personal experience: An uncle who died because the emergency team gave him a wrong dose, a young niece who almost died in childbirth because of reckless negligence, my wife would have died if we hadn't moved out of the country and doctors here realised what lingering problem remained from having our second child, my father-in-law's life was saved because he had a heart attack here and not at home...and so it goes on.

My mother-in-law was diagnosed with a form of cancer. The waiting list for the follow-up check was 12 months, and for treatment another 12 months after that - by which time she'd be dead. They used some of their life savings to get the follow-up test done within a week - only to learn that the original results were wrong (either accidentally muddled with someone else's results or just plain wrong). In this case, the mistake turned out well - save for the heart-ache endured before the results were corrected.

For non life-threatening ailments, the system is OK. The problems come when it's something serious. As a British politician recently observed, the NHS is the third largest employer in the world after the Chinese Red Army and the Indian National Railways. As some of the smartest people in the world, we deserve better than this bloated monster.

Again, I expect to win no friends by saying this, and of course many nurses who work on the "front lines" are wonderful, but I'm just relaying the principal reason why many British families living overseas are hesitant to return. You can like it or not (and probably not), and I apologise for getting you riled up.

Re your comment about the uninsured in the US, that's for another thread. Suffice it to say that I know many people here without health insurance, and they get excellent and very prompt treatment.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
The NHS is the principal reason why our family, and many others that I know, hesitate to ever return to Britain. It's just not safe. You don't see it until you experience other systems. This opinion never wins me friends, and some people get very upset when I say it (sorry!), but that doesn't take away from the basic truth of it.

In other respects, though, Britain is much preferred over other countries in Europe. The usual decency of British people and our sense of fair play, for example, are attributes often overlooked.

I have used the health service for myself or family members in Norway , Germany and France and I cannot say they were any better than the UK version.

Some people I was having this discussion with last week in the USA were considering returning to the UK were saying the opposite to yourself. The health service was to them a massive plus for the UK compared to the insurance they are paying in the US.

I suspect it comes down to personal experience for everyone when they come in contact with health services.
 
Upvote 0
I suspect it comes down to personal experience for everyone when they come in contact with health services.
I'm sure you're right. It does come down to personal experience, and that's what lies behind many of our opinions and biases. No system is perfectly right or perfectly wrong. Usually, a system is strong in one area and weak in another. Yes, I have strong opinions on the matter based on personal experience, but I know from other Brits who live overseas that I'm not alone in my attitude. We could do so much better in this area.
 
Upvote 0
It's based on personal experience: An uncle who died because the emergency team gave him a wrong dose, a young niece who almost died in childbirth because of reckless negligence, my wife would have died if we hadn't moved out of the country and doctors here realised what lingering problem remained from having our second child, my father-in-law's life was saved because he had a heart attack here and not at home...and so it goes on.

My mother-in-law was diagnosed with a form of cancer. The waiting list for the follow-up check was 12 months, and for treatment another 12 months after that - by which time she'd be dead. They used some of their life savings to get the follow-up test done within a week - only to learn that the original results were wrong (either accidentally muddled with someone else's results or just plain wrong). In this case, the mistake turned out well - save for the heart-ache endured before the results were corrected.

For non life-threatening ailments, the system is OK. The problems come when it's something serious. As a British politician recently observed, the NHS is the third largest employer in the world after the Chinese Red Army and the Indian National Railways. As some of the smartest people in the world, we deserve better than this bloated monster.

Again, I expect to win no friends by saying this, and of course many nurses who work on the "front lines" are wonderful, but I'm just relaying the principal reason why many British families living overseas are hesitant to return. You can like it or not (and probably not), and I apologise for getting you riled up.

Re your comment about the uninsured in the US, that's for another thread. Suffice it to say that I know many people here without health insurance, and they get excellent and very prompt treatment.

Again it comes down to personal experience. My experience has been the total opposite of yours.

ie when it is serious the service is great and when it is not serious the service is just okay. No need to go into details but have had more than my fair share of death and serious illness around me over the years and the service has always been outstanding. Including when my father died and when my father in law had a heart attack and that required 5! by passes.

I personally have to visit the hospital on a fairly regular basis and have also been treated privately for the same condition, I cannot say that the NHS was any better or worse than the private route.

Like I said it is all subjective to personal experience. To me the NHS is one of the plus points of being in the UK.
 
Upvote 0
It's based on personal experience: An uncle who died because the emergency team gave him a wrong dose, a young niece who almost died in childbirth because of reckless negligence, my wife would have died if we hadn't moved out of the country and doctors here realised what lingering problem remained from having our second child, my father-in-law's life was saved because he had a heart attack here and not at home...and so it goes on.

My mother-in-law was diagnosed with a form of cancer. The waiting list for the follow-up check was 12 months, and for treatment another 12 months after that - by which time she'd be dead. They used some of their life savings to get the follow-up test done within a week - only to learn that the original results were wrong (either accidentally muddled with someone else's results or just plain wrong). In this case, the mistake turned out well - save for the heart-ache endured before the results were corrected.

For non life-threatening ailments, the system is OK. The problems come when it's something serious. As a British politician recently observed, the NHS is the third largest employer in the world after the Chinese Red Army and the Indian National Railways. As some of the smartest people in the world, we deserve better than this bloated monster.

Again, I expect to win no friends by saying this, and of course many nurses who work on the "front lines" are wonderful, but I'm just relaying the principal reason why many British families living overseas are hesitant to return. You can like it or not (and probably not), and I apologise for getting you riled up.

Re your comment about the uninsured in the US, that's for another thread. Suffice it to say that I know many people here without health insurance, and they get excellent and very prompt treatment.

I actually do agree with a lot of your posts but not this Unfortunately during the 5 years I was in Canada I know of 2 incredibly serious medical blunders, within my family. Humans run health services everywhere, meaning that they make mistakes.

In my own personal experience I found it an incredible financial strain having to pay monthly insurance premiums for my family's medicine (actual treatment is free there thank goodness). Not to mention that I had to wait 2 weeks for an appointment in my local surgery. In the UK my kids get free pescriptions and I can get an appointment the same day.

Anyway as for British families overseas not wanting to return, I did it in a heartbeat given the opportunity and I know of many others.
 
Upvote 0

directmarketingadvice

Free Member
Aug 2, 2005
10,887
3,530
The NHS is the principal reason why our family, and many others that I know, hesitate to ever return to Britain. It's just not safe

On July 17th 1987, the Chicago Tribune ran a story about the findings of a study of 32 US hospitals.

They looked at autopsy results and said:

"Overall there was a major discrepancy between the diagnoses before death and the autopsy findings afterwards in 34% of the cases."

"These are serious discrepancies" said Dr Robert Anderson, a member of the study team, "More than 10% of all autopsies showed that a better diagnosis may have resulted in a better outcome".

("better outcome" = "not dying")

So, is the US health system "safe"? Doesn't sound like it.

Personally, I think our willingness to give healthcare to everyone is one of the things that makes this country great.

Steve
 
Upvote 0
"Overall there was a major discrepancy between the diagnoses before death and the autopsy findings afterwards in 34% of the cases."

"These are serious discrepancies" said Dr Robert Anderson, a member of the study team, "More than 10% of all autopsies showed that a better diagnosis may have resulted in a better outcome".
It would be really interesting if figures like this were available for every type of health care system. In addition to wrong diagnosis, we should measure number of deaths due to long wait time and also correlate chance of survival with level of personal income (to see how big a factor it really is).

Anyway, I'm sorry to have taken the thread off track.
 
Upvote 0

newsh1

Free Member
Apr 24, 2009
70
11
York
Well at least Chairman Brown has got us at the top of one list! No doubt he will put some positive spin on it though. Afterall his aim has been to create a country where the majority work for the state, a high number live off the state, loads of the population live off drink and drugs, and our schools produce numerous kids who can't even read or write basic English. Yes Gordon you have achieved re-creating Communist Russia circa 1979.
 
  • Like
Reactions: virtuallysorted
Upvote 0
Having travelled the world rather a lot, I use my own rather informal gauge of how much citizens enjoy living in a country - and that's how many people voluntarily walk the streets on an evening.

- It indicates how safe a country is.
- It indicates how many people have sufficient money to eat out or entertain.
- It reveals how good (or bad) is the climate.
- It reveals how much community spirit is present.

On this gauge, much of Britain does very well - and so does much of Western Europe in general. The starkest contrast is between New York (always packed and full of activity) and Moscow (where hardly anyone walks on city streets). Rio is great, but Sao Paulo is not. Caracas does well (despite living under a dictator), but the three Guianas do not. Marakesh does well, but Nepal does not. The streets of Haiti and Bangladesh, for example, are crowded - but I wouldn't call this voluntary.
 
Upvote 0
Again it comes down to personal experience. My experience has been the total opposite of yours.

ie when it is serious the service is great and when it is not serious the service is just okay. No need to go into details but have had more than my fair share of death and serious illness around me over the years and the service has always been outstanding. Including when my father died and when my father in law had a heart attack and that required 5! by passes.

I personally have to visit the hospital on a fairly regular basis and have also been treated privately for the same condition, I cannot say that the NHS was any better or worse than the private route.

Like I said it is all subjective to personal experience. To me the NHS is one of the plus points of being in the UK.

Totally agree when it comes to the major stuff,first class.

When it comes to the quality of nursing and general staff,its gone seriously down hill in many cases especially in the larger hospitals.IMHO.

And of course waiting times are a disgrace.

Earl
 
Upvote 0
Totally agree when it comes to the major stuff,first class.

When it comes to the quality of nursing and general staff,its gone seriously down hill in many cases especially in the larger hospitals.IMHO.

And of course waiting times are a disgrace.

Earl

Sadly it is down to finance.

The NHS is full of beaurocrats that cost an absolute fortune, This is paid for by the ground floor workers (Nurses,Doctors, Sisters etc) and us, the patients. Now with all these so called trusts about I find it incredulous that a cost cutting measure they seem very reluctant to introduce is to cut down on the amount of managers they seem to employ in them. It also begs the question as to why in the majority of packages offered to these people is private health care.

I personally think that if all the beaurocracy was reduced by a large amount then the NHS would once again be the envy of the world.
 
Upvote 0
Having travelled the world rather a lot, I use my own rather informal gauge of how much citizens enjoy living in a country - and that's how many people voluntarily walk the streets on an evening.

- It indicates how safe a country is.
- It indicates how many people have sufficient money to eat out or entertain.
- It reveals how good (or bad) is the climate.
- It reveals how much community spirit is present.

On this gauge, much of Britain does very well - and so does much of Western Europe in general. The starkest contrast is between New York (always packed and full of activity) and Moscow (where hardly anyone walks on city streets). Rio is great, but Sao Paulo is not. Caracas does well (despite living under a dictator), but the three Guianas do not. Marakesh does well, but Nepal does not. The streets of Haiti and Bangladesh, for example, are crowded - but I wouldn't call this voluntary.

Good way of looking at it:)
 
Upvote 0
Well, all I can say is be careful of the red lights. :rolleyes::D
That's another interesting gauge! Driving from the centre of Moscow to Sheremetyevo airport in late afternoon is mind-boggling. There are literally hundreds of women standing along the edge of the road looking for "business".

So, the operative word is "walking", not "standing" or "gawking". :)
 
Upvote 0
worst place to live yet so many people try and get over from other places to live here!;):|

Thats only because they get given everything , all the other Countries shift em through to the UK..

Well at least Chairman Brown has got us at the top of one list! No doubt he will put some positive spin on it though. Afterall his aim has been to create a country where the majority work for the state, a high number live off the state, loads of the population live off drink and drugs, and our schools produce numerous kids who can't even read or write basic English. Yes Gordon you have achieved re-creating Communist Russia circa 1979.

LOL spot on ...



Actually the Grass is a hell of a lot Greener here in Mallorca ...:)
 
Upvote 0
On July 17th 1987, the Chicago Tribune ran a story about the findings of a study of 32 US hospitals.

They looked at autopsy results and said:

"Overall there was a major discrepancy between the diagnoses before death and the autopsy findings afterwards in 34% of the cases."

"These are serious discrepancies" said Dr Robert Anderson, a member of the study team, "More than 10% of all autopsies showed that a better diagnosis may have resulted in a better outcome".

("better outcome" = "not dying")

So, is the US health system "safe"? Doesn't sound like it.

Personally, I think our willingness to give healthcare to everyone is one of the things that makes this country great.

Steve


Health care is not free its very expensive but i do agree with you. But its strange when in Scotland cancer drugs are free and in England they cost , so much cheaper in Scotland if you have cancer, why is that ? This is a fundamental reason why Scotland is becoming a great place to live and England is not such a great place to live.
 
Upvote 0
On the subject of health, I was given a prescription for a drug that was 80% cheaper to buy over the counter than pay the prescription charge...?

Why are we paying too much for every thing whilst in Europe they see the benefits from the EU, we on the other hand seemed to be ripped off by our own government. And i got to say this government and future ones seem tobe of the same likeness still gonna rip of the English and any one they have control over in the UK.

Maybe its not a change of country we desire but a real change in the political system.
 
Upvote 0
Health care is not free its very expensive but i do agree with you. But its strange when in Scotland cancer drugs are free and in England they cost , so much cheaper in Scotland if you have cancer, why is that ? This is a fundamental reason why Scotland is becoming a great place to live and England is not such a great place to live.


Nah Scotland had always been a great please to live:)
 
Upvote 0
If your an Eskimo.;)

Its bleeding freezing in winter spent some of my childhood in the hinterland.

some of the most beautifull scenery in the world,but the mean gits won't turn the heating up.:p

Earl

Heating has been turned up and the whole world is screaming turn it down:) They forget some of us are getting something out of global warming!

And we are not mean , just careful;)
 
Upvote 0

cjd

Business Member
  • Nov 23, 2005
    15,989
    3,428
    www.voipfone.co.uk
    Although Sonic is definitely cooler than Mario, so maybe it's a bit more complicated than I first thought.
     
    Upvote 0

    kate1

    Free Member
    Oct 29, 2007
    1,656
    244
    United Kingdom
    Having lived in France I can say its definately not a case of the grass being greener. Paying cotistations through wages, (similar to our NI) Then paying on top 20 euros to see a doctor, paying for scans, x rays etc, then to get 65% back - thats why you dont wait long, because you have to pay. Higher unemployment, food is no cheaper - infact its probably dearer.
     
    Upvote 0

    directmarketingadvice

    Free Member
    Aug 2, 2005
    10,887
    3,530
    Health care is not free its very expensive but i do agree with you. But its strange when in Scotland cancer drugs are free and in England they cost

    You keep banging on and on about this. Is it even true?

    Up to 150,000 cancer patients in England can now start applying for free prescriptions on the NHS.

    Gordon Brown announced in September he was abolishing charges for the treatment of cancer and its effects from 1 April.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7838234.stm

    So, isn't this just another one of these grudges you hold towards the Scots (though, for some reason, not the Welsh) that's based on a lack of knowledge?

    Steve
     
    Last edited:
    Upvote 0
    You keep banging on and on about this. Is it even true?



    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7838234.stm

    So, isn't this just another one of these grudges you hold towards the Scots (though, for some reason, not the Welsh) that's based on a lack of knowledge?

    Steve

    Please provide me with the facts regarding University fees when England dont have to pay or Scotland has to pay even when going to English University.

    The point of this is that a National Parliament brought you these benefits before Westminster fell into line knowing what a vote loser it was.

    Any one read the damning report about the NHS in all the paper today or dont we believe that either.

    I am for a Scottish parliament Steve and I want an English one to and i want the English to debate if they feel that they want to stay in a union with the other country's of UK. Simple, fair, why the fear...!

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8274384.stm take a look at one of the partys looking for fairness for the English people
    Lords call for an end to Barnett


    _46069278__45411260_006778199-1-1.jpg
    The Lords committee said a new system should be put in place

    The system which helps decide the level of public funding in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland has been condemned as "arbitrary and unfair".
    A Lords committee said the Barnett formula should be scrapped as Scotland's needs were not as great as other parts of the UK.
    The system was set up in the 1970s as a short-term fix but became the established funding formula for the UK.
    The Scottish National Party repeated its call for full fiscal autonomy.
    The Treasury said it would examine the report but that there were no current plans to change the system.
    The committee of peers argued that the Barnett formula should be replaced by a system which recognises changing population levels and the differing economic needs of the devolved nations.
    They said England and Scotland had markedly lower overall needs per head of population than Wales and Northern Ireland.
     
    Last edited by a moderator:
    Upvote 0

    Latest Articles