retiring to finland

How to? Read other's experiences. Find useful advice on shipping, immigration, residence permits, visas and more.
User avatar
Pursuivant
Posts: 15094
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:51 am
Location: Bath & Wells

Re: retiring to finland

Post by Pursuivant » Sun Aug 14, 2016 5:18 pm

Finland's got exactly the same "queue jumping" system. On public system, "the queue is 3-6 months"... on private side, 15000 euros, how about next week tuesday?


"By the pricking of my thumbs,
Something wicked this way comes."

Re: retiring to finland

Sponsor:

Finland Forum Ad-O-Matic
 

Tiwaz
Posts: 2596
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:21 am

Re: retiring to finland

Post by Tiwaz » Tue Aug 16, 2016 3:18 pm

biscayne wrote: As regards Ireland, you are totally correct - I am actually Irish, and can testify that while the public system is excellent once you are in it, gaining access is difficult. This is the case particularly for chronic conditions which affect quality of life but are not life threatening such as a hip replacement - waiting on the public system can mean 2 years or more. Whoever can afford it gets private insurance which is a bit different to the US, I think of it more as supplementary insurance - you end up seeing the same consultant, and being treated in the same hospital, lying in the same ward as a public patient (unless there is a private room free and there may not be) but you have essentially "jumped the queue" because you had extra insurance and the consultant took you on his "other book". It is a disgraceful situation.

Slovenia: I only had the normal universal public insurance everybody has, which you fund via your pay, it is taken directly from your salary and costs about 25e per month, or the state pays if you are unemployed. I got the same treatment anyone would get. There are no out of pocket expenses there at all, not for prescriptions, nothing. I will definitely retire there, unless something changes, and am looking into going back. It had the best quality of life (for my taste), so far in my travels. But these things are individual.
You misunderstood what I tried to explain. I guess I was not quite clear.
My point was more on Ireland becoming the "Celtic Tiger" some time ago when they were still in the pisspoor end of EU-flock, like Slovenia is today.
Lots of cash were handed over to Ireland, which enabled the nation to cut taxes while not cutting on spending money.

Today, Slovenia is in same situation. They receive lots of cash from EU, which enables them to maintain level of services etc which their own economical capability would NOT permit. 2014 which was my sample year they made 1,2 billion euro deficit. Put on top of that 800 million EU handed them, maintaining same level of services etc on their own would have required 2 billion euro deficit.

So in short, while Slovenia might look quite tempting location now, it is unwise not to look at HOW they pay for those services and on how solid foundation funding them is. Because there is never a free lunch. Someone, somewhere always has to pay for the lunch. And with the way things are turning with EU, odds are that Slovenia will not have much more "free lunches".

Put this into perspective. If every Slovenian pays 25 euros for healthcare, it means 50 million euro budget for it. Assuming each and every Slovenian pays it from their own pocket, from babies to grannies. It is not exactly huge budget, even for small nation.
So either funds come from elsewhere, or there has to be something they pay extremely little for.


PJG
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2016 10:13 pm

Re: retiring to finland

Post by PJG » Tue Aug 16, 2016 6:00 pm

Ireland were most certainly NOT in the pisspoor end of the EU. To suggest that EU money allowed for cuts in taxation is absolute bollox. You need to re-educate yourself if that understanding is the result of some form of education, because it's absolutely wrong.

The celtic tiger period had SFA to do with EU funding, much of which was negotiated at the cost of Irish fisheries and agriculture outputs via reduced quotas in the first place via the CAP and fisheries policies of the EU treaties.

Irish GDP outgrew that of the UK in the late 1990's, and overtook US GDP in 2003. A highly educated workforce, a strong work ethic and progressive corporate taxation policies at government level had all led to a boom in employment with multinationals and a growth in per-capita income, all during a time when the GND of Ireland was at the lowest level. None of that was effected using EU funding, so get your facts right before you try to draw dumb assed comparisons again.


Tiwaz
Posts: 2596
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:21 am

Re: retiring to finland

Post by Tiwaz » Fri Sep 02, 2016 7:28 am

PJG wrote:Ireland were most certainly NOT in the pisspoor end of the EU. To suggest that EU money allowed for cuts in taxation is absolute bollox. You need to re-educate yourself if that understanding is the result of some form of education, because it's absolutely wrong.

The celtic tiger period had SFA to do with EU funding, much of which was negotiated at the cost of Irish fisheries and agriculture outputs via reduced quotas in the first place via the CAP and fisheries policies of the EU treaties.

Irish GDP outgrew that of the UK in the late 1990's, and overtook US GDP in 2003. A highly educated workforce, a strong work ethic and progressive corporate taxation policies at government level had all led to a boom in employment with multinationals and a growth in per-capita income, all during a time when the GND of Ireland was at the lowest level. None of that was effected using EU funding, so get your facts right before you try to draw dumb assed comparisons again.
Don't talk !"#¤%.
Ireland WERE in pisspoor end of the EU. That is REQUIREMENT for being net receiver. Which Ireland has been for huge chunk of it's existence. Those below middlepoint of what qualifies as rich and poor in EU are receivers. Those above the middlepoint pay. Ireland was firmly under it until expansion brought even more poor nations into fold. And Ireland was so poor by EU standards for long time that up to 4% of Irish GNP were EU MONEY TRANSFERS! FOUR percent.

And indeed, EU funds WERE the reason for Celtic tiger. You can afford to keep artificially low taxes when your budget receives big, no strings attached income injections from other nations.
Irish education and work ethics? Don't make me laugh. What Ireland did gain were offices of big corporations that were taking advantage of low taxes. They made profit elsewhere, but had it taxed in Ireland. Saved a pretty penny and made some cash for Ireland. Various offices though, from call centers to whatevers, were often NOT manned by Irish. Hell, I have received some recruitment approaches trying to pull me to Ireland.

So don't you talk bollox yourself. Ireland owes huge part of it's "success" to EU giving them lots of free money, which they could use to keep their taxes artificially low to lure in multinationals.

As for growth. Yeah, it is damn easy to receive massive growth numbers when you start from zero.

So stop being butthurt about reality and admit it. Irish dream was built on receiving free money and had legs of clay. When free money stopped being a thing, suddenly Irish tiger was proven to be not highly trimmed wildbeast but overfed and lazy housecat.


Post Reply