Gov to fund furlough scheme at 80% until October!

[caperberries]

Aibu to consider this unsustainable? What is the reasoning behind this?

CountryCasual well obviously they can’t hike taxes to extortionate levels instantly, it will be hikes off set with cuts. We can’t say to millions of people you can’t work and we won’t financial compensate you. I don’t want higher taxes either- who does- but this is a unique situation and I’m happy to support those losing their incomes. God knows tomorrow I could be one of them.

If they do raise taxes the very least they can do is look at household income rather than just individual. Families who have unequal or sole income don’t need less food, warmth or shelter than families with equal/two incomes.

Take the money from £££££ billions weapons budget

If they do raise taxes the very least they can do is look at household income rather than just individual near on impossible- you’d also have to look then at family set up, as a couple could be on a high income than a single person but they could have children. Unless everyone in the entire country has to fill out a tax return- then all the unemployed people can be hired by hmrc

The problem is people have taken onto much debt and are committed, this is not Going to end anytime soon and so people will have to take pay cuts and the economy will adjust accordingly, some people who have maxed out mortgages and leasing expensive cars and holidays and other luxurys will need to cut back. If no one can afford to pay a certain price for a product or service then the price will have to come down or that product can not financially survive, supply and demand.

@OnlyFoolsnMothers

I support any plan that helps prevent widespread poverty, obviously I don’t want anybody to suffer. However, I don’t want to have my home repossessed because the government decide we can afford to pay an extra X% in tax. If they simply raised taxes 10% we couldn’t survive it.

CountryCasual I completely understand you being upset personally but logically you understand why taxes need to go up.

@OnlyFoolsnMothers

They could easily allow people to be taxed as a couple. In fact that’s how the system did work for many years, it changed to allow women independence but in light of CV and the families who will be massively disadvantaged by having unequal income it would only be fair to reinstate it.

If family A has one parent earning £50k and the other caring for a disabled child, whilst family B have two parents earning £25k each... do family A need less food, shelter or basics? No...so why are they £3500 better off per year in our current tax system?

@RandomLondoner, well explained. It’s likely all other currencies will be in the same situation after this, so the pound shouldn’t be at a disadvantage.

“Our kids and grandkids will be paying this for decades to come...” blah blah blah
Yes. Quite. But those kids still need fed, clothed and housed in the here and now. I’d rather my sons paid more tax as adults than we lost the means to bring them up in the elevated circumstances we are currently in (we have a house and can feed and provide for them - this isn’t outrageous extravagance I’m talking about).

CountryCasual no but I assume family A may be entitled to careers allowance, if you consider that to be too low then again we should raise taxes to help.
I agree with you with regards to child benefit and the stupid way that’s now calculated.

I think furlough is absolutely right. I was unemployed after leaving uni, for 2 months,and it was demoralising. The pittance you get is terrible,let alone the uncertainty. It really affected my MH and I developed a painkiller addiction, not because of I hasten to add, but it definitely played a part.

Being unemployed in a pandemic would be even worse. 80percdnt of your monthly wage leaves many without. Let alone all the anxiety.

There are some of course who I think furlough is a joke. My friend, who worked for a teaching agency wne now receives 100quid mote a month than I do (I work full time in probation) sitting on her srse. She has no Bill's as she lives with her parents who still pay her phone bill. I am slightly bitter.

But her experience doesn't mean I think it right that furlough should be stopped for every bugger else,many of whom have homes,mortgages and children. Furlough isnt perfect but it's all we have. I'm actually really impressed with the government furlough scheme.

Without people will lose their homes and go bankrupt. It keeps money circulating. It’s an amazing provision. I wish we had this available in the US. I lost my job and get nothing as I’d been in it 2 weeks and DH found out today he may lose his in 2 weeks. His project did have funding for 12 months now they’ve cut the hours in half. I wish they’d keep them all for 6mths in that case as hopefully things would be looking a bit better by then but who knows

Let's be honest the reality is that furlough will still exist in some forms in 2021 by October many more people would be working so the bill will come down. But, for industries like aviation, pubs, gyms, hospitality and others who might not be ready support will still exist for them. Furlough can't be taken away to zero. Even the Tories understand the implications - rise in mortgages/rents being unpaid, bills getting unpaid, relative poverty rising etc...

At its current level it's unsustainable long term, but hopefully over the next few weeks and months business will start to take the cost back and people will return to work as advised to do so by the government.

Some attitudes are just terrible on this thread like we chose to be furloughed and chose this to happen. I'm grateful I get 80% pay but I've worked since I left school I paid my taxes like everybody else so why should we not get our 80% ?
Don't know what people expect us to do say no thanks we don't want the money we will starve and be homeless or shall we go back to a workplace that isn't open so we can't go back ? Just ridiculous!

hmm.. what is the alternative? Capitalism. Where the state doesn't interfere in propping up companies or meddles in market forces so companies either adapt to survive or go bust.

Prior to this crisis, over 10% of companies were essentially zombie companies using debt to stay afloat and not really generating any real value. By allowing these companies to survive, the capital that should be invested in healthy growing productive companies is squandered. And then we cry about falling productivity etc.!

For those who end up unemployed, we should fix the system to support the individual. The taxes we will end up paying to support the furlough scheme and therefore prop up these zombie companies could have gone towards a more focused and more relevant UC scheme to support the individual. But the government doesn't care about the individual.

And if you think companies pay their fair share in tax, well, I wish I was as innocent as you - life must be so rosy.

And to those comments that talk about just printing money, quantitative easing etc., I highly encourage you to read up on it to understand the destructive impact it has on an economy. You can't just "print" money without any consequences, just ask Zimbabwe.

Absolutely fine if it’s used correctly. If a company opens however, the furlough scheme should not be used as an excuse for individuals to refuse to go to work. And I’m doubtful tbh that a company can survive until October if closed. Employees may be okay with furloughed pay, but the companies themselves aren’t going to be in great shape.

The government have a responsibility to ensure people don’t lose their homes and starve to death. Not to disabled people though apparently! Plenty have been hosptialised or died due to starvation.

I run a care home and some of my staff who aren't in vulnerable groups have been asked to be furloughed and don't seem to understand why they've been told no! Interestingly we're recruiting but hardly anyone has applied ( rated good with an excellent reputation). This isn't just for carers but for a cook, cleaners and an administrator. We've no covid in the home. We thought people wanted jobs at the moment but it seems workingin care is still beneath many. Sad.

What are people whose workplaces are closed supposed to do? There are only so many jobs in tesco et al and most of the positions were followed by the self-employed and unemployed.

The UC system cannot cope with the already vast increase in claimants. It doesn't have the infrastructure for such a rapid increase in claims and they're struggling both IT wise and staff wise. They could hire more staff and fast-track a more robust IT system but that would cost £££££ and take time people with no income just don't have.

Furloughed is continuing. It will not continue in its current form.

Companies will need to prove they have no choice and can't implement safeguards. There will be checks furloughed employees aren't working. Possible a way for workers who are still working but doing alot more work, to report their employer.

There's very little chance it will continue allowing companies to claim as they have been able to. Wouldnt surprise me if later down the line they go back and do checks on companies that claimed it.

@OnlyFoolsnMothers
There are lots of reasons one parent may work whilst the other doesn’t.
Family A may have several small children or an adult with health issues. They may simply have wage inequality but either way they will be hit much harder by a tax increase than another house with the same income split equally between two parents.

I think long-term what we actually need to realise is that it’s not that the level of furlough was too high, but that the level of UC is too low and the benefits system is too clunky and difficult to navigate.

What is happening now is unique and needed a quick solution, but in reality someone facing redundancy or who lost their job because the business folded today isn’t any more or less worthy than someone who was in that position in 2009 or 2014 or even 2018.

It’s not the time to have the conversation because there are other priorities, but at some point we have to have the conversation to discuss the fact that so many people could not cope with the safety net that the benefits system offers, therefore is it fair and acceptable that someone in this position in 2021 or 2024 has to accept such a low level of assistance.

And is it acceptable that someone with no choice, due to disability or caring responsibility, gets such a low level of assistance in a country like ours.

The decimation of the benefits system has been allowed and accepted because of the myth that it was easy to fiddle and overly generous. That myth has been, hopefully, shattered by so many people realising that it’s actually neither of those things.

"The government have a responsibility to ensure people don’t lose their homes and starve to death."

What? Since when? Why do you guys think we live in a socialist country? The government doesn't owe anyone a living! If it did, we would have thousands of homeless people, children in poverty etc. Why is this acceptable when you are not affected but when there is the slightest risk that you might lose your job, all of a sudden, it's the government's job to protect you?

I wouldn't necessarily assume you'll end up repossessed if you can't pay the mortgage due to job loss countrycasual. There are going to be a lot of people in that position, repossession costs banks money and there's the possibility of very poor publicity putting lots of people out of their homes. If you bought recently I assume your LTV is quite high, and lots of repossessions means there's the risk of the houses not shifting as easily. If all these risks can be avoided by giving what might well only need to be short term wiggle room to borrowers, that could be an attractive option to banks.