The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH

	Quote:
	Like a house?

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Yes.

Maybe post-Brexit, it will go back to pre-EC affordability.

Every cloud, and all that...

	Quote:
	Maybe post-Brexit, it will go back to pre-EC affordability. Every cloud, and all that...

Home ownership in Switzerland is currently about 40%. In Germany it's about 50%. First-time buyer age is around 40. Perhaps people need to adjust their expectations and realise that home ownership isn't a right.

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Home ownership in Switzerland is currently about 40%. In Germany it's about 50%. First-time buyer age is around 40. Perhaps people need to adjust their expectations and realise that home ownership isn't a right.

Switzerland has workable and fair rental laws which comprehensively protect tenants as well as landlords.

You can't out-price the housing market for buyers in the UK if they are only going to fall into the hands of piss-taking landlords.

If you are going to bring other countries into the discussion, you have to level the playing field accordingly.

[amogles]

	Quote:
	Switzerland has workable and fair rental laws which comprehensively protect tenants as well as landlords. You can't out-price the housing market for buyers in the UK if they are only going to fall into the hands of piss-taking landlords. If you are going to bring other countries into the discussion, you have to level the playing field accordingly.

I don't think it's wrong to say the Swiss model is a fair and decent one that the UK could learn a thing or two from.

In the UK home ownership is deeply ingained in people's psyche. Many people still think deep down that if you can't get together enough money to buy something, however nasty, you deserve to be taken for a ride by rogue landlords. That may have been an acceptable viewpoint in Victorian times (if then) but it is time to reassess that and create fair conditions for tenants.

As much as I dislike it as a homeowner here, I think Eigenmietwert goes a long way towards keeping the renter/owner financial balance in check.

I can't say I'm too saddened by the talk of it being revoked, out of a purely selfish reaction, but I think overall it may be the wrong move. I would have preferred it to be removed for retired people rather than everyone tbh.

	Quote:
	Switzerland has workable and fair rental laws which comprehensively protect tenants as well as landlords. You can't out-price the housing market for buyers in the UK if they are only going to fall into the hands of piss-taking landlords. If you are going to bring other countries into the discussion, you have to level the playing field accordingly.

Piss-taking landlords could be put in check overnight if a government would come along and abolish housing benefit. Landlords are able to take the piss in the UK because of an artificially State inflated housing market.

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Piss-taking landlords could be put in check overnight if a government would come along and abolish housing benefit. Landlords are able to take the piss in the UK because of an artificially State inflated housing market.

An interesting approach. I'm not sure the landlords are going to let them live there for free though. I think your policy might need a bit of refinement.

	Quote:
	An interesting approach. I'm not sure the landlords are going to let them live there for free though. I think your policy might need a bit of refinement.

However it's easy for for councils and landlords to ask for high rents when they know that bill for it all is going straight to Johnny Taxpayer.

[marton]

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Piss-taking landlords could be put in check overnight if a government would come along and abolish housing benefit. Landlords are able to take the piss in the UK because of an artificially State inflated housing market.

The Swiss social welfare system also pays the rentals for people who qualify so what is different from the UK?

[amogles]

	Quote:	marton
	The Swiss social welfare system also pays the rentals for people who qualify so what is different from the UK?

maybe I'm mistaken, but I generally have the impresion it's more difficult to claim social welfare in Switzerland. Maybe misuse is on the increase here too, but largely it goes to the people who really need it. Also when it comes to houses, the Swiss never did anything stupid like the Brits as in selling large numbers of council houses. There are still plenty of houses owned by local authorities where they can accomodtae the needy without making greedy landlords rich in the progress.

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Piss-taking landlords could be put in check overnight if a government would come along and abolish housing benefit. Landlords are able to take the piss in the UK because of an artificially State inflated housing market.

	Quote:	Loz1983
	However it's easy for for councils and landlords to ask for high rents when they know that bill for it all is going straight to Johnny Taxpayer.

Kind of answers your earlier point about why so many people try to become/remain home owners in the UK vs CH or DE.

	Quote:	marton
	The Swiss social welfare system also pays the rentals for people who qualify so what is different from the UK?

The difference is in the "people who qualify" bit. Can you imagine the Swiss rules of social payments being applied in the UK? There would be a riot...

[J2488]

	Quote:	amogles
	maybe I'm mistaken, but I generally have the impresion it's more difficult to claim social welfare in Switzerland. Maybe misuse is on the increase here too, but largely it goes to the people who really need it. Also when it comes to houses, the Swiss never did anything stupid like the Brits as in selling large numbers of council houses. There are still plenty of houses owned by local authorities where they can accomodtae the needy without making greedy landlords rich in the progress.

Misuse in the UK isnt exactly widespraed, unless you're the Daily Mail type.
A tiny percentage of the welfare budget goes to fraudulent claims, so small in fact that it is irrelevant to the big picture. Thats the case both in switzerland and in the UK.

[marton]

	Quote:
	Kind of answers your earlier point about why so many people try to become/remain home owners in the UK vs CH or DE. The difference is in the "people who qualify" bit. Can you imagine the Swiss rules of social payments being applied in the UK? There would be a riot...

"Can you imagine the Swiss rules of social payments being applied in the UK?" Which rules are you referring too?

	Quote:	marton
	"Can you imagine the Swiss rules of social payments being applied in the UK?" Which rules are you referring too?

I could imagine uproar if the asylum seekers in the UK got the same stipends they get here, for example, or if they were allowed to seek work (albeit on a limited basis) as per here.

	Quote:	marton
	"Can you imagine the Swiss rules of social payments being applied in the UK?" Which rules are you referring too?

When you drop onto the social payments from being on the RAV you have to review your budget with the authorities.

(Was going to write an example of someone I know but it's a bit sensitive).

[marton]

	Quote:
	When you drop onto the social payments from being on the RAV you have to review your budget with the authorities. (Was going to write an example of someone I know but it's a bit sensitive).

I could only find this example for pensioners but it did not look too stressful.
My UK pension when converted to CHF does not give me much more .

[TobiasM]

I liked this Tweet, in yer face Boris.

[marton]

Boris Johnson was concerned the prime minister was preparing to send a public signal that she would like to see a close long-term relationship with the rest of the EU along the lines of Norway, or Switzerland – with more leeway over freedom of movement.

Source

Sounds like a reasonable idea but "more leeway over freedom of movement" is unlikely to fly!

	Quote:	marton
	Boris Johnson was concerned the prime minister was preparing to send a public signal that she would like to see a close long-term relationship with the rest of the EU along the lines of Norway, or Switzerland – with more leeway over freedom of movement. Source Sounds like a reasonable idea but "more leeway over freedom of movement" is unlikely to fly!

I call BS on this. If May would choose to go in this direction then the only one that would be resigning is herself as she wouldn't last a month. The voters wouldn't accept such a deal and besides it would go against what Theresa May said in her Lancaster House speech earlier this year.

	Quote:
	8. Free trade with European markets That starts with our close friends and neighbours in Europe. So as a priority, we will pursue a bold and ambitious Free Trade Agreement with the European Union. This agreement should allow for the freest possible trade in goods and services between Britain and the EU’s member states. It should give British companies the maximum freedom to trade with and operate within European markets – and let European businesses do the same in Britain. But I want to be clear. What I am proposing cannot mean membership of the Single Market. European leaders have said many times that membership means accepting the “four freedoms” of goods, capital, services and people. And being out of the EU but a member of the Single Market would mean complying with the EU’s rules and regulations that implement those freedoms, without having a vote on what those rules and regulations are. It would mean accepting a role for the European Court of Justice that would see it still having direct legal authority in our country. It would to all intents and purposes mean not leaving the EU at all. And that is why both sides in the referendum campaign made it clear that a vote to leave the EU would be a vote to leave the Single Market. So we do not seek membership of the Single Market. Instead we seek the greatest possible access to it through a new, comprehensive, bold and ambitious Free Trade Agreement. That Agreement may take in elements of current Single Market arrangements in certain areas – on the export of cars and lorries for example, or the freedom to provide financial services across national borders – as it makes no sense to start again from scratch when Britain and the remaining Member States have adhered to the same rules for so many years. But I respect the position taken by European leaders who have been clear about their position, just as I am clear about mine. So an important part of the new strategic partnership we seek with the EU will be the pursuit of the greatest possible access to the Single Market, on a fully reciprocal basis, through a comprehensive Free Trade Agreement. And because we will no longer be members of the Single Market, we will not be required to contribute huge sums to the EU budget. There may be some specific European programmes in which we might want to participate. If so, and this will be for us to decide, it is reasonable that we should make an appropriate contribution. But the principle is clear: the days of Britain making vast contributions to the European Union every year will end.

	Quote:	Loz1983
	I call BS on this. If May would choose to go in this direction then the only one that would be resigning is herself as she wouldn't last a month. The voters wouldn't accept such a deal and besides it would go against what Theresa May said in her Lancaster House speech earlier this year.

I call BS on that. There is zero evidence "the voters" wouldn't accept such a deal - 48% clearly would as they voted remain and a certain unknown fraction of the 52% Brexits probably would accept a EEA or Swiss type deal.


As for May, remember the majority of her own party is pro Remain.