Rishi Sunak no more bailouts

[Elpresidente29]

He said government cannot go on like this...

The scheme wasn't a good idea.

Too many businesses are using it while paying out big bonuses to top execs and paying shareholders.

It should have been a strict eligibility scheme or a scheme where it's an interest free loan repaid like a student loan (x percentage of profit). If companies can afford to pay bonuses out to the CEO, then they can afford to pay back the government loan.

My company has asked everyone to take a tiered pay cut with the highest earners taking the biggest cut, but hasn't used the government scheme. Im glad they did that so we're all in it together rather than take advantage of a scheme we don't desperately need.

Taxing the big supermarkets and amazon is a great idea. As others say , it won't happen.

IMO the money should have been spent on

I actually think your ideas are really sensible.

However, I don’t think there was the time to work through that kind of detail at the point where Furlough was introduced.

Worth looking at these measures now though as a more targeted use of precious money.

The young will be screwed over again unfortunately.
I remember my mum always complaining about the WW2 debts accrued and how long it took to pay the US loans etc! ( she was 14 when ww2 broke out)
The 1970s were not a great time economically I can honestly see us returning to those kind of days within a year!
I'm dreading it.

There is abuse of the furlough scheme by employers. It’s not the employees fault. I’m awaiting delivery of essential goods to my home that were meant to be delivered 5 days after lockdown. The company has shut (whilst still taking money for new orders online) and is refusing to deliver or refund. I have pointed out to them the government guidance which states that home delivery is allowed.

Lots of small business are keeping going because they have to whereas big businesses have worked out it cheaper for them to furlough staff rather than continue to trade legally (and in a modified way to socially distance)

The top executives of companies using furlough should be expected to have lower incomes. Dividends should be much lower. If companies are making a net profit and using furlough then some of the profits should be returned to the pot. Second home owners able to gain money - these type of ridiculous ways some people can work a system to gain extra money is wrong/unethical/immoral whatever you want to call it and sadly (some) people are just plain greedy and take, take take

It's all take by some companies who can afford to contribute more.

Aren't we all in this together then!

You’re missing the point @BovaryX. We don’t just pay income tax, the treasury gets revenue from a whole range of taxes, public sector workers pay those. If we don’t treat the sick, educate children, maintain the transport infrastructure among many other things, we don’t have a society. If that happens and it’s every one for themselves we end up with anarchy.

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

I swear to God, the amount of public sector workers on here who can’t grasp the basics of your point is staggering.

I’ve had this exact conversation with posters on here many times. 🤯

@BovaryX

You can’t pretend that the fact that I provide a service is irrelevant. That IS a contribution to treasury. Yes, in terms of cash flow a public sector worker costs the treasury more than it gets back in taxes (obviously) but by your logic all nurses, teachers and police are a drain on treasury.

I’ve contributed the last two months by carrying on doing my essential job and paying my taxes so that the government have more income available to pay for people to be furloughed.

I think people grasp it, but what's the point you are trying to make? Shall we outsource it all so that people are paid less by companies who are paid by the government to run the services and take a nice little skim off of the top? Then technically the workers are sort of contributing to the treasury as technically they aren't paid directly by the treasury, even though they pay the companies an extortionate amount? Or do we just get rid of the entire public sector? Literally what point are you trying to make, I think that's what people dont understand

There is abuse of the furlough scheme by employers

If there is abuse of the system, the cause is the system enables that abuse. When the government opens its purse, if people who really don't need help avail themselves of it? Why is anyone surprised?

@LaurieMarlow I grasp the point that you’re trying to make but I think it’s a fairly moot point when we NEED the services the government provide. If the government didn’t pay public sector works it would have to be done privately and profit would have to be made and everything would end up costing more.

Plus it’s kind of shit to be told I’m basically a drain that doesn’t contribute when I’ve been working my arse off the last two months.

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 thought it was meant to stop mass redundancies during a national emergency and help flatten the curve by enabling people to stay at home?

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.

They're not impacted just now but they'll be looking to the future and making forecasts. I don't know who you work for, and maybe they are one of the few companies that will be completely unaffected by this, but I know that lots of companies are already looking at redundancies down the line if the knock on effects are as expected. Without the furlough scheme these would have been made right at the start of the lockdown.
Surely it's better these don't happen in the middle of a pandemic, and are delayed as much as possible?

but what's the point you are trying to make?

Here’s the point ...

The money required to pay public sector workers (and therefore all the various tax they pay) is generated from tax revenue raised by the private sector.

If the tax revenue raised by the private sector is severely hit, there will be a knock on effect on the amount of money available to fund that public sector.

They are not divorced from each other.

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

This is true, but I believe some of the disquiet comes from what too many actually do
Nobody in their right mind would want to lose genuinely essential workers, but sadly the colossal number of those contributing very little may have to go
And please don't anyone tell me "there's no spare left" and that "all the hangers on went years ago" ... I could fill pages with those in our own local authority alone

This problem would be a lot smaller if the government had paid attention to what was happening in Italy and acted promptly, instead of making jingoistic statements and burying their heads in the sand.

I think people grasp it, but what's the point you are trying to make

The point I am making is that the statement that less pay for public sector workers will result in lower tax receipts is false and shows a strange ignorance about how the public sector is bankrolled. The public sector does not contribute to the treasury, it is paid for by the treasury. It's an economic fact. Stating it should not be controversial.

Who do people think have to meet the costs of redundancy and notice pay if employers fold and can’t pay it? The government have to pay.

I think if employers fold, no-one pays.

Obviously employees will then be on UC, but that isn't going to cost more than furloughing indefinitely.

The furlough scheme makes sense as a short-term measure, on average, if it keeps some companies alive that would otherwise go under as a result of short-term issues. But the government has no capacity to judge the merits of the life-support on case-by-case basis, so at some point it is going to say to companies, you've had x months of support, now you're on your own.

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?

We can start with food rationing and water and energy. Food rationing has been done before, in times of need.
Are you aware that water and energy were state-owned in Britain, owned by us, all of us, not long ago, and they were taken away in a despotic and authoritarian action by certain groups of rich people?

We do not need ideology and labels right now. We need practical solutions to the base human facts that there are resources in the land and people need them. If you stop thinking about the finances, the financial representation of resources, btw, and think of the resources the comments people are making about public sector staff being drains are total nonsense as well. Start from the resources.

The housing issue is the thorniest, although ownership of that too was once more widely distributed, until the options were taken away by authoritarian acts.

@Alsohuman

Nice little sermon.

Plus it’s kind of shit to be told I’m basically a drain that doesn’t contribute when I’ve been working my arse off the last two months.

I’m certainly not telling you you’re a drain. I’m just explaining how our economy is arranged.

And I totally agree we need the public sector and public sector workers.

What I’m saying is, what happens when we just cannot afford the services, whether we need them or not?

As tax receipts plummet, we can’t keep borrowing for ever. What do we do?

Sweetheart1313 those are sensible suggestions and I particularly picked up on the one re people shielding.

Something really needs to be worked out to give financial help to this group who are being advised not to work, and staying at home all of the time means that bills will increase.
Also, there needs to be some kind of employment protection put in place for them.

State employed Teachers can't be self employed?
The only way round it all to be a ' small state ' society is for parents to pay for private schooling , private health care across the board and the council taxes cover the things they do now. Police and the courts systems would have to be publicly funded?
DWP and HMRC , DVLA could be ' hived off' but as they don't make any profits I doubt anyone would want to buy and run those!
It would be only the middle and upper classes that would be able to afford to have children.
I have known colleagues in the past that have thought this might be a good idea! ?
Especially schools!
It would save a fortune.

Before I get flamed i think all this is a bad idea but I bet there are people who would welcome it if it came in! Some people loath the poor in society.

Yet more casual ageism.

Taken to the point where comment about the increase of death rate of fellow citizens allows free reign to some to fan ill defined & ignorant statements about the value of human life.

‘I’m not ageist, some of my best friends are older than me...’

We can start with food rationing and water and energy. Food rationing has been done before, in times of need

That's a great idea @ThrowingGoodAfterBad! Precisely what is needed to try to extricate from an enforced, global lockdown and the cessation of economic activity. Food rationing! No matter there is a supply glut and a collapse in demand. Something tells me there is a fatal flaw in your cunning plan.....