Rishi Sunak no more bailouts

[Elpresidente29]

He said government cannot go on like this...

It is difficult, because I think some companies have looked at the support and said "actually, we will be better off if we stop trading and claim support" and have thus stopped trading when they could have stayed open. My favourite example is our local (chain) bakery. I have no idea why they have closed. All I can assume is that profits were down and this is easier.

But we didn't, JustAnother nor do we actually have to hand.

So they work with what we do have!

So how do they suggest people in this country make a living? After they have sucked all the resources up to a very small and decreasing group of people over the last 30-40 years, they owe all of us under 50 this much. They have deliberately made it harder for people to earn a living in their financial system, now they make it impossible, and then pop up wisely to tell us their substitute can't last forever. Redistribute actual resources then, with rationing of all the essential needs.

@The80sweregreat there are a small dishonest group of second home owners who technically put their places to rent & claim as small businesses - there is already a check underway to stop this - have they managed to get extra money via state support re corona? I don't know - but I suspect after this you will be finding HMRC & local gov very busy checking on this & other business cheats - I say this as a second(v small) home owner who pays full council tax & who cant visit it & has no intention of doing so until we are allowed - because I care about other people & I am not dishonest & I suspect its a very low number

I know some employers are not using the furlough scheme as intended. I work for a med-large employer, the majority of roles are classed as essential and the company is still very much functioning but they have furloughed 25% of head office staff as it's an easy £2500 per month cost saving.

Why isn't that using the furlough scheme as intended? Your company have to consider the long term impacts of this pandemic on their business, which for 99% of businesses is a huge unknown. Making a 25% saving on head office salaries now means they may not have to make those people, or those in other roles, redundant a few months down the line.

Redistribute actual resources then, with rationing of all the essential needs

Can you explain specifically what you mean here? Are you suggesting that the state confiscates assets and hands them out to whomever it deems worthy?

*I think young people must be furious

Their future ruined to save a majority 80+, some 60+

We used to say freely on the Elderly Parents board that people live too long now - but covid 19 has put the kibosh on anyone saying that.

I think that is one of the most disgusting things I've ever read on MN.

• Well yes, it is disgusting. But unfortunately it is true. This is the first time in history we have had people living for so long, most of it as unproductive dependents. There has never been a plan for this, there has never been any public discussion, other than make all of us under 50 to work harder and harder for less.

It would have to be allocated on the basis of need, not to "whoever it deems worthy". That is what has been happening. This is a crisis time. We ought to be able to ration food at least - that's happened before. And we need something to prevent homelessness of most of the working population. Your ideas?

So they work with what we do have!

If it was purely just that Id agree but there an agenda in the Tory party about fucking the poor and those without the resilience to weather this. Theres nothing stopping Sunak switching to a keynesian model right now, borrow while its cheap, invest it in public services, house building and infrastructure upgrading also invest it in people give them the confidence to spend some money and watch the economy flourish, but there in lies the problem landlords (many of who are MP's) wont be happy with that, they wont invest it in public services because with the privatisation agenda a well functioning public service is going to hinder the sale to the bidder and so on

I'm so excited, local chippy opened up for online orders. I'm not going to cook today and can I claim a gold star for supporting a local business. I might have fish and chips every night for a week!!!

@LaurieMarlow surely public sector paycuts = less tax!

@sunflowery

My point is simple. You made the statement above. I pointed out that since public sector workers are paid by the state even if they were taxed at 90 percent, they are not contributing to the treasury. Surely you know this?

Why isn't that using the furlough scheme as intended? Your company have to consider the long term impacts of this pandemic on their business, which for 99% of businesses is a huge unknown. Making a 25% saving on head office salaries now means they may not have to make those people, or those in other roles, redundant a few months down the line.

It wasn't meant to help bolster up the rainy day fund, but to keep businesses afloat and able to pay their staff now.

I suspect that what will happen is the furlough scheme will be stopped in stages, according to when businesses are allowed to operate again. If you run a factory or a warehouse, for example, you'll be expected to return your workforce pretty sharpish. If you run a pub, you'll probably receive support for longer.

Are there no criteria at all?? You just say I need furlough and get the cash? Can’t the just introduce some sort of checks to monitor?

In all the panic and the rush to be seen to do something there just wasn't time, and the element who are taking advantage were sadly to be expected

As for Rishi Sunak saying this before exit plans are decided, personally I saw it as just more pressure to get a move on - also a message to those who perhaps expect too much not to expect any more

My point is simple. You made the statement above. I pointed out that since public sector workers are paid by the state even if they were taxed at 90 percent, they are not contributing to the treasury. Surely you know this?

But they contribute to society, yes along with many other jobs. Are you proposing everyone employed by the government should be axed? Maybe a good time to ship trump and his private healthcare plans in, and pay companies big amounts of money to outsource essential services I suppose.

It would have to be allocated on the basis of need

@ThrowingGoodAfterBad

I just want to be clear. You are suggesting that individual assets are confiscated? Do you mean property? Are you aware that property rights are the foundation of individual freedom and protection from authoritarian and despotic state control? What assets do you want to see confiscated? From whom?

*I know some employers are not using the furlough scheme as intended. I work for a med-large employer, the majority of roles are classed as essential and the company is still very much functioning but they have furloughed 25% of head office staff as it's an easy £2500 per month cost saving.

Why isn't that using the furlough scheme as intended? Your company have to consider the long term impacts of this pandemic on their business, which for 99% of businesses is a huge unknown. Making a 25% saving on head office salaries now means they may not have to make those people, or those in other roles, redundant a few months down the line.*

Because they don't need to do it - they aren't closed and the business isn't currently impacted. But by taking up furlough money they and every other employer who's done this is making it more costly. The govt should have restricted furlough to only those businesses who needed to close and then it could have been more affordable longer term. Now, if they stop it at the end of June, it will be stopped for everyone whereas with stricter controls those businesses such as shops, restaurants etc who really cannot operate, will have to make mass redundancies.

Well yes, it is disgusting. But unfortunately it is true. This is the first time in history we have had people living for so long, most of it as unproductive dependents. There has never been a plan for this, there has never been any public discussion, other than make all of us under 50 to work harder and harder for less. I'm still working and paying taxes in my late 60s, been employed and paying my dues for over 50 years, my siblings are also in their 60s and working and paying taxes, I know a nurse in her 80s still working in a local hospital. I know loads in their 60s and 70s doing childcare so their under 50s kids can work without paying for childcare. Plenty of us aren't unproductive dependents thank you. If you're lucky you might get to be an unproductive dependent over 60, I hope you are treated with a bit of respect.

@BovaryX but they are paid by the state to do a job that needs doing, how can you saying paying for a service is a drain?

@Servers
That may be so. But it is false to state that public sector workers contribute to the treasury

I don’t think they expected this number people furloughed at all. Certain sectors shut down, not because they were told they had to, but because of the practicalities. I work in the construction industry and all our sites had to close in March. We were forced to do this because hotels closed (no accom for the teams that we use - sites are nationwide) and many trade shops closed or only allowed delivery/click and collect which isn’t practical.

IMO the money should have been spent on:

• More transport options to allow staggered shifts for people going to work, complying with social distancing
• topping up wages to allow a reduction in time spent at work and staggered shifts
• supporting businesses in sectors that are most impacted eg. hospitality, some retail
• Financial support for those shielding
• Better sick pay for those with CV or suspected CV to relieve the financial burden if they can’t work for that 1-2 week period

The payment for crisis by future generations is nothing new. The UK made its last payment against the debt from WW2 in 2006. The detested boomers spent most of their working lives paying for an event that finished before they were born.

Public sector workers bore a disproportionate burden of the cost of austerity, it would take a very brave government to repeat that exercise, particularly in the case of NHS employees. While a Tory government penalising pensioners would be committing political suicide.

The sensible and fair thing would be to look at the beneficiaries of the last few weeks and increase the tax burden on them. Yes, I’m looking at you, Amazon and big supermarket chains. I don’t suppose it will happen though.

The economic fallout from this will be epic.

My knowledge of anything tax related is very scarce I'm afraid ; I know in five live phone in today a tea shop owner was saying she isn't entitled to any money but her staff are currently on furlough , so many have slipped though the net regarding any help.
The second home thing is a disgrace but it never fails to disappoint me the lengths people will go to avoid tax or claim when for something when they don't really need the dosh etc. (Probably the same people that then complain about benefit fraud and such like! )

@sunflowery

You seem to be missing the point. Public sector workers are paid by the state. Their salary comes from the treasury. Even if they were taxed at 90 percent, they would not be contributing extra funds to the treasury