Indian couple chooses Luxembourg over US for better quality of life despite lower salaries
Luxembourg: In 2020, Bengaluru-based couple Prateek Gupta and Neha Maheshwari made the decision to move to Luxembourg, opting for a better quality of life over the higher salaries they could have earned in the US or Dubai. In an interview with Live Mint, the couple shared their reasons for the move and how their life has changed since relocating to Europe.
Neha, who works in finance at a German real estate company, and Prateek, a senior analyst at Amazon, admitted that while staying in India or moving to countries like the US or Dubai would have provided them with greater financial opportunities, the lifestyle in Europe was more appealing. "Continuing in India or moving to the US would have given us more career and earning opportunities. But we wanted to experience the superior quality of life that Europe offers," Prateek explained.
One of the key factors behind their decision was the balance between income and the services available in Luxembourg. While the couple pays around 28% of their income in taxes, slightly lower than in India, they feel that the services they receive, including healthcare and social security, make it worthwhile. "We contribute 3% of our income to government-sponsored health insurance, which covers most medical needs, except dental treatment," Neha shared.
Another aspect of Luxembourg's tax system that appeals to the couple is the 2% unemployment fund contribution. "If someone loses their job, the government pays 80% of their last drawn salary for up to two years, or until they find new employment," Neha explained. This security, along with healthcare coverage, means they don’t need a separate emergency fund.
The couple also spoke about the affordability of luxury cars and travel in Europe. They purchased a Mercedes A-class for €43,000, which is far more affordable than in India, where a similar car would cost ₹55 lakh. "I wouldn’t easily buy a luxury car priced over ₹50 lakh in India, but in Luxembourg, it’s within my means due to my income in euros," Prateek noted.
Additionally, they find traveling around Europe to be more budget-friendly. Since they earn and spend in the same currency, they can enjoy holidays across Europe without worrying about exchange rates. "The proximity between countries also makes travel cheaper, as we can simply drive around," Prateek said.
Though the couple acknowledges that they could have earned more in other countries or stayed in India for bigger pay increments, the overall quality of life in Luxembourg has proven to be the deciding factor.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
2020 Delhi riots: Court orders framing of charges against 25 accused in head constable death case
New Delhi (PTI): A court here has ordered framing of several charges, including murder, arson and dacoity, against 25 accused in a 2020 northeast Delhi rioting case pertaining to the assault of a police team that left head constable Ratan Lal dead.
Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala also said the Constitution does not vest any right to a protester to use violence, assault, murder or damage any property. Therefore, the argument that the accused were exercising their constitutional rights, is totally misconceived, the court said.
The court was hearing the case against 27 people accused of being a part of a riotous mob that attacked and "brutally assaulted" a police team at the Chand Bagh protest site when officials tried to stop them from blocking the main Wazirabad road on February 24, 2020.
In its 115-page order passed on November 22, the court noted that Lal's postmortem report showed a firearm wound and 21 other external injuries.
"This firearm wound as well as five other wounds were found sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Thus, the death of HC Ratan Lal took place because of the assault and gunfire shot received in the incident," the court said.
Lal, who was suffering from mild fever and was advised to rest by his colleagues, joined duty in view of the grave tension in the area under Dayalpur police station limits.
He helped the then DCP Shahdara DCP Amit Sharma and ACP Gokalpuri Anuj Kumar pacify a crowd and control it as the situation started heating up, the prosecution said.
Lal succumbed to 24 injuries he received while shielding officers when a riotous mob started attacking them.
Apart from Lal, the then DCP and ACP also sustained serious injuries, while 50 other policemen were also among the injured.
The court said on the day of the incident the protestors had a "clear objective" of resorting to violence so that they could show their strength to the government.
"The protesters not only gathered to show protest against CAA/NRC, rather they came well equipped with weapons with a mindset to use the same against the police force," it said, adding the riotous mob had the objective to "brutally" beat or assault the police officials wherever possible and also aimed to commit vandalism, loot and arson.
The court noted that a few days before the incident, a meeting was held, where it was decided to block the road and resort to violence when stopped by police.
"After the attempt to block main Wazirabad road on February 23, 2020, was neutralised by police, the emphasis on joining the protest in large numbers on February 24 and carrying weapons, shows that the organisers and speakers of the protest had framed a clear-cut mindset to attack police force," the court said, adding it was a preplanned criminal conspiracy.
"The preparations made to keep weapons in the tent of protest, or gathering of protesters equipped with different weapons, could not be a matter of coincidence. Moreover, keeping women and juveniles in the front to start pelting stones upon police, also appears to be a well-thought strategy," ASJ Pramachala said.
Noting the statements of the witnesses, the judge said there was a "persistent abetment" to incite violence by the organisers and speakers of the protest.
Ordering framing of charges of criminal conspiracy against 11 organisers and speakers of the anti-CAA/NRC meeting, the court said there was "prima facie" evidence against them.
The organisers were Mohammed Salim Khan, Saleem Malik, Mohammed Jalaluddin alias Guddu Bhai, Shahnawaz, Furkan, Mohammed Ayub, Mohammed Yunus, Athar Khan, Tabassum, Mohammed Ayaz and his brother Khalid.
The court also ordered framing charges against 14 other accused under various Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections for attacking the police team and rioting.
These include the provisions for murder, attempt to murder, attempt to commit culpable homicide, mischief by fire or explosive substance, causing grievous hurt to a public servant, committing rioting when armed with a deadly weapon, dacoity, unlawful assembly and sections of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.
The 14 accused are Mohammed Sadiq, Suvaleen, Nasir, Arif, Mohammed Danish, Ibrahim, Badrul Hasan, Shadab Ahmed, Imran Ansari, Ravish Fatima, Adil, Sameer, Mohammed Mansur and Irshad Ali.
The matter has been posted on December 3 for formal framing of charges.
During the proceedings, the court also refused to entertain the argument of a defence counsel that his client Saleem Malik could not be prosecuted in the case as he was already being prosecuted in the larger conspiracy case.
It said, "Just because the accused is also named in the case of the larger conspiracy, he does not get exemption from prosecution in this case."
The judge, meanwhile, discharged one Mohammed Wasim alias Bablu, saying his identity as a part of the riotous mob was not established.
"Merely based on call detail records (CDRs) and appearance of this accused in some CCTV footages, which pertained to prior in time than the incident in question, I do not find sufficient evidence to presume that it was Wasim, who had thrown petrol bomb or that he was present in the mob."
The court also discharged another accused Sahid alias Shahbaz from whom a robbed pistol of a police official was recovered, saying he could be only charged under IPC section 412 (dishonestly receiving property stolen in the commission of a dacoity).
It said, "This accused cannot be presumed to be part of rioters, merely based on recovery of the robbed pistol. He is discharged for remaining charges."
The northeast Delhi riots, which started on February 24, 2020 and continued till February 26, 2020, resulted in the death of more than 50 people and lef over 200 people injured.
