In the case of nation-states, rights are granted by the consensus of the people of the country not to violate them. They are not granted by a piece of paper or an international court.thommot wrote:There also things called human rights, which I'm sure the UK rules for spousal visas violate if they ever get challenged in an independent court. Of course the UK also wants to leave the jurisdiction of the european court of human rights.secret.simon wrote:But in any case, I am sure you would agree that it is for a democratically elected government, and not for a person having an interest in the outcome, to make the rules.
I was likely already drafting my response to your post and hence missed the updates.thommot wrote:I clarified the post to say "an entirely British couple".secret.simon wrote: Non-EEA spouses of British citizens are subject to IHS during their immigration journey.
There is a case to be made for getting rid of NI Credits that are marked for people who do not work. As conceived, the NI system was contributory and perhaps it would be better and stronger if it went back to its roots.
Is that your definition of "humane"?thommot wrote:an increase of 5 percentage points to my tax rate.
I suppose mine is much lower. I appreciate the fact that I am not shot dead in the streets by a police that is supposed to protect me. That given that I am an obvious rank outsider, people are pleasant to me. That is "humane" enough for me.
I did not understand this post. Can you elucidate further?thommot wrote:I also do wonder how other countries have much lower fees, yet not any higher tax rate? Perhaps because the rich don't pay any taxes in the UK? (The NI is a big hoax, as you stop paying the NI exactly when there's some progression in the tax rate.)