Comparing costs of living in UK and USA

Jan 8 2008 by Keith Hellawell

OVER the New Year Bren and I spent a few days in Palm Beach, Florida where I visited one of my company’s headquarters.

It is a number of years since I crossed the Atlantic other than for a holiday. I may have mentioned that in the early eighties our family lived for a short while in Los Angeles when I was on an exchange visit with one of their senior police officers.

On that visit I was impressed by the standard of living enjoyed by the ordinary working family. In those days it was uncommon for a new home in this country to have an integrated washing machine or dishwasher.

Central heating was still an extra and electric garage doors were something we could only dream about. Yet 25 years ago these facilities were found in the most modest of new properties in America.

Times have changed. We now expect all of these things and more when we purchase a new home. Air conditioning and under-floor heating are even becoming common.

The negative side for us is the cost. Even though Palm Beach is one of the most expensive places to live in, the equivalent home in Huddersfield would cost at least twice as much. Part of this is due to the strength of the pound against the dollar but that’s not the whole reason. The cost of tradesmen is less than here and energy and insurance costs are much lower than ours.

The cost differential can be seen in other areas. There is absolutely no justification for imported Japanese cars to cost half the price they do here.

New Lexus 430 hybrids are priced at $34,700. We have to pay approaching £40,000 for the same vehicle. I can understand their home produced goods costing more when exported but not double the price, which they are.

However, the most astounding thing is the cost of our vehicles on sale in the States – Jaguar saloons for example with a list price 20% below their UK level, which is indefensible ...

Continuing with motoring, the cost of their fuel is $3:50 a gallon, their “licence fee” - equivalent to our road fund tax - is $35 a year; there are no congestion charges and the man who chauffeured us around paid a total of $150 per year to comprehensively insure his Cadillac and Dodge pick up truck.

The sum total of this is a much lower cost of living for the American family. You can almost equate a £1 for $1 when you buy meals, provisions, goods and services. This being the case you might expect their wages to be much lower than ours. They are not. We held a party for our employees and their partners, among whom were police officers, teachers and nurses who are all paid at a similar level to us.

You may be thinking they are taxed at a much higher level but again you would be wrong. Having business interests here and in the USA I can compare deductions. Taking account of local and regional taxes they pay a similar proportion of their earnings to the state.

It is true they have to pay substantial sums for health care but almost every employer in America makes provision for this within their employment package.

There is no doubt we have more material possessions in this country than we did two decades ago but we borrow heavily to achieve them.

We pay a much higher proportion of our wages to put a roof over our head and provide personal transport than our American cousins do, which leaves the average family here with little. disposable income to spend on leisure time or save for the future.

Nowadays we own more and we owe more but I am not so sure we are any better or happier for it.

Asprin call final straw

I HAVE to comment about the irresponsible and thoughtless comments by the Chief Constable of North Wales, Richard Brunstrom.

I consider him to be a disgrace to the service he represents and a dangerous, self-opinionated publicist.

It was bad enough when he declared motorists more dangerous than hardened criminals. Even worse when, without permission, he showed the press a photograph of a decapitated motorcyclist.

But to say that aspirins are more dangerous than ecstasy is appalling.

Last year, contrary to the view of his own professional body, he submitted a paper calling for the legalisation and availability of all illegal and dangerous drugs.

If his Police Authority or the Association of Chief Police Officers had any bottle he would have been unceremoniously removed from office at that time but he was not.

The controversy he caused then was clearly insufficient to feed his ego so he has now come out with this drivel which has no foundation in fact.

This man is a public servant on a salary approaching £150,000 a year. He was appointed to protect the public from harm then appears to support the contrary. I hope 2008 will see the end of him.