To SCREAM from the rooftops that furlough needs to be extended at least 6 more months

[Marg33t]

Furlough saves jobs and saves people's health. Why is the extension not announced today?

People are losing their jobs at a rapid rate as it's near to the 30-45 days for consultations for redundancies. It needs to be extended or more people will lose their jobs. Other counties are running it until next year and it makes me feel sick that we aren't protecting and saving jobs!

The problem is that if not on furlough and with som many people hitting the job market at once most of us will have to go on benefits. Maybe not as much as furlough costs but then there will be knock on effects - house repossessions so councils will have to find emergency accommodation for everyone, health problems from low income, increased crime, etc all things although not a direct cost will all increase due to mass redundancies.
Plus if all the businesses fold then there will be no jobs to go back to once this is all over.

I think doing the 50% back to work thing is a good idea, it means businesses that are not viable in any way will still have to make redundancies bit a lot of business will still be able to cling on and be back up and running 100% next year having retained skilled staff etc

@ChaChaCha2012
“Tax payers have paid for PPE contracts that produced nothing, testing and tracing that is ineffectual, an app that never even materialised, the utter shitshow that is Brexit, and HS2 which has zero economic benefit. If people are saying we can't afford furlough, I trust they're up in arms about the aforementioned?”

Spot on.

I'm not against furlough but where is the money going to come from? It can't go on for a year because we can't afford it.

We'll afford it because we need to afford it. We spent a lot more bailing out the banks in 2008.

I find the bitterness towards the furloughed absolutely baffling. You're in a secure job and you begrudge money to people in sectors that are not so fortunate?
Believe me, people are not all sitting around having a lovely holiday with their free money. They are desperately stressed and want to work, epecially the self-employed. Yet are called callous and granny-killers for questioning their industries being locked down for a year or more. Can't win really.

I think the answer lies not with extending furlough or with a single scheme but a package of measures.

A four day week, a universal basic income, plus targeted support for specific sectors that are still unable to trade.

We need people to have some confidence so that they spend money. It is most important for those on average and below average salaries to feel a boost to their finances as they are more likely to spend money and support other businesses.

When you elect morons like Johnson, you get a paucity of innovation boldness and vision. So we can only bemoan what we haven't got.

Personally, I'd have looked at ways to funnel furlough into reskilling/retraining/further education. Which would have boosted the education and training sector, and helped forge a workforce ready to engage with the post Covid landscape as well as helping peoples sense of self worth.

The problem with that is that it's investing in people. And we already know that's not how we do things in the UK. Despite the fact there's plenty of scope in a scheme like that to funnel money to more Tory mates. Which after all is the single most important thing about this pandemic. If Tory cronyies don't come out richer than they went in then people will have died for nothing.

I wonder if there are figures out there that say how many people are still on full furlough? Although isn’t it down to 70% paid by the government as of 1/10?

For example, when I was on full furlough, so 80% of my average wage, I was receiving £185 a week. Obviously I don’t pay tax on that, but all of that goes back into the economy. I contributed (in a small amount, obvs) to keeping money going in to supermarkets, small businesses etc. Now I’m back at work but my hours are reduced by roughly 5 hours a week, so the furlough scheme tops that up. Those 5 hours a week are my commuting costs and a third of my grocery budget. By topping my wages up, I am able to feed our child, pay our bills, buy his school uniform, buy Christmas and birthday presents. Money that, however little, goes back into the economy.

If I was to lose my job or have to quit because without the top up, I can’t afford to work there, I would not be able to spend any of that. We would apply for free school meals for my son and the uniform grant, taking consistently more from the government. I would apply for UC/tax credits and I would stop any extraneous spending.

People in work are always going to be better than people out of work. Pre lockdown, I’m sure studies showed that the majority of people receiving some sort of benefits were actually in some sort of employment anyway, so supporting workers is not a new concept, it just doesn’t play in to the benefit scrounging narrative that is so popular with MSM and MN.

Tourism in particular, and hospitality in tourism areas, are well used to the ebbs and flows of the season. Covid hit at the end of the winter season and halved the summer season, meaning both industries will now struggle to make it through to next season. The season that we were allowed to have was largely successful, which means next years will be, too.

Yes individual businesses will falter and inevitably go under, but that doesn’t mean whole industries need to be written off as unviable. Still now, even with the current restrictions, 3/4 of our holiday homes, if not more, are full.

This ‘where is the money coming from?’ Question as well. Money is a social construct that serves the people that have it. There is nothing stopping them changing the way society works so that everyone benefits in the wake of an unprecedented situation... except that it would stop benefitting them.

I’ve just watched the chancellors speech - I think it’s very reasonable?

Me too it seems that businesses will have to show they are losing revenue because of covid but have the ability to bounce back, so essentially businesses unable to trade due to govt restrictions. Seems a fair balance as long as checks are in place.

Sunak is very good at answering questions, in stark contrast to the embarrassing PM.

We can't afford it. Who's paying? My taxes, my kids taxes? My grandchildren's taxes?

This is a shit situation and people will be victims but sometimes life is just shite. I'm sorry but furlough has cost around £30bn A MONTH. I'd support furlough for those industries that can not reopen like nightclubs and theatres but that's all.

The uk stopped paying debts for WWII around 2005. This is eclipsing that.

Obviously jobs like theatre and aviation will fall though the net as both not functioning at all or at a very low level? Am I right with that or are they included somehow?

Me too it seems that businesses will have to show they are losing revenue because of covid but have the ability to bounce back, so essentially businesses unable to trade due to govt restrictions. Seems a fair balance as long as checks are in place.

This should really been a condition of the original furlough but I think it has to be set up and implemented so quickly there wasnt time to add checks that a company was eligible and adversely affected.
My cousin works in a high street shop. They only brought 40% staff back and the rest are furloughed. They are nearly trading at pre covid levels but the staff that are there are run off their feet.

@sarahc336 I hear you. It was the same for me. Smug Facebook posts and messages from friends saying how much they were enjoying time at home, learning new hobbies, doing up their gardens, getting fit etc while I was killing myself working longer hours than ever and facing huge stress.
I know it's not the same for all on furlough but we can't pay indefinitely to prop up jobs that are not sustainable.

@MrsArchchancellorRidcully

We can't afford it. Who's paying? My taxes, my kids taxes? My grandchildren's taxes?

This is a shit situation and people will be victims but sometimes life is just shite. I'm sorry but furlough has cost around £30bn A MONTH. I'd support furlough for those industries that can not reopen like nightclubs and theatres but that's all.

The uk stopped paying debts for WWII around 2005. This is eclipsing that.

Is it really £30bn on furlough a month though? The BBC showed a graph before the chancellor did his speech and it showed that borrowing is at £150bn this year now. Yes a huge amount, but that’s total, not just furlough. That surely must include everything thrown at the NHS, all the scheduled borrowing and all the brexit costs?

That’s how I understood, I could well be wrong. I’ll have a look now, but it’s incredibly clever to cause uproar over furlough and put the borrowing figures out there without clarifying what the borrowing was for.

Yes, a quick google says £8.2billion specifically on furlough in June, £6.9billion in July. Nowhere near £50 billion a month.

People saying "we can't afford it" might want to think about the enormous knock on effect of mass unemployment. If millions of people lose their jobs and income, the money they currently spend on services, goods, debts etc won't be spent. The businesses that rely on that spending will fail. More people will lose jobs. Rents will have to fall if no one can pay the current prices. House prices might crash, or at any rate, dip enough to put lots of people into negative equity. It's not as simple as it sounds. There are huge costs coming whichever way we look at it.

*£30 billion.

Also, £150bn since April, so this financial year, not since January, apologies.

We can't afford it. Who's paying? My taxes, my kids taxes? My grandchildren's taxes

We still have to pay for these people through benefits. Extending the furlough scheme gives people money in their pockets beyond sub standard living (as is the case with UC). That money will be spent on goods and services, helping out / rebuilding some areas of the economy and paying taxes.

www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/july2020

For those interested. A quick scan shows that the £150bn is roughly three times the borrowing Ffor the same period last year, which, while still a lot, isn’t as devastating as I expected. It also highlights things like the Plan for Jobs scheme that was already being planned was included in originally planned government expenditure. There’s the massive sums of money given to TfL etc and it also includes the bounce back loan schemes, which means that the money has plans to be repaid anyway.

It’s not a clear cut FURLOUGHED PEOPLE ARE SCUM SUCKING FREELOADERS. In fact, a Which article dated 8th September stares that £35.4bn has been paid out for furloughed wages, so a fifth of the total borrowing.

Furthermore, roughly £3.5bn is being investigated as being paid out wrongly or fraudulently claimed, so 10% should (in theory) be reclaimed.

People saying "we can't afford it" might want to think about the enormous knock on effect of mass unemployment.

instead of artificially keeping jobs that are already gone, much healthier to put an end to it NOW and encourage workers to look elsewhere.

The economy has not collapsed (yet) ,there are many gaps that need to be filled and workers needed. It's about time we redirect the work force.

Paying people to stay home doing nothing is ludicrous.

@SerendipityJane

I'm not against furlough but where is the money going to come from? It can't go on for a year because we can't afford it.

I wish people would stop with this bollocks. I'll believe there is no money when we are selling Trident for scrap, and Buck House has a for sale sign outside. If we can spunk (I will say it again) £110 billion on Brexit - so far then we can damn well find enough money to stop people from starving on the streets.

Yes, yes, yes. Thank you for saying so, @ SerendipityJane

My exH drives a bus for a big Edinburgh bus co.
Obvs the number of buses running was dramatically reduced during lockdown as workers, schoolchildren and tourist numbers dropped.
But they will return in due course and it makes sense to keep the trained and experienced workforce going if poss as the longer term costs to the company and society of long term large unemployment numbers are considerable too. This is good news for a change.

@SantaClaritaDiet

People saying "we can't afford it" might want to think about the enormous knock on effect of mass unemployment.

instead of artificially keeping jobs that are already gone, much healthier to put an end to it NOW and encourage workers to look elsewhere.

The economy has not collapsed (yet) ,there are many gaps that need to be filled and workers needed. It's about time we redirect the work force.

Paying people to stay home doing nothing is ludicrous.

Rishi Sunak has addressed that today. Wage support for viable businesses will continue in the form of topping up wages of people in work, reduced hours due to Covid, for six months. Furlough will end in October as usual.

Please read my above figures. Furloughed wages have been a fifth of the total borrowing.

@SantaClaritaDiet

People saying "we can't afford it" might want to think about the enormous knock on effect of mass unemployment.

instead of artificially keeping jobs that are already gone, much healthier to put an end to it NOW and encourage workers to look elsewhere.

The economy has not collapsed (yet) ,there are many gaps that need to be filled and workers needed. It's about time we redirect the work force.

Paying people to stay home doing nothing is ludicrous.

Which are the jobs you think are already gone?

@SantaClaritaDiet sorry, I keep pressing post before I'm ready.

Which are the artificial jobs now, do you think? Which industries should these people be directed towards?

In any case- my post was about the "can't afford it" argument. Your response seems more about the ethics, which are also relevant but not the same argument.

We can't afford it. Who's paying? My taxes, my kids taxes? My grandchildren's taxes? [] The uk stopped paying debts for WWII around 2005. This is eclipsing that.

Debt, like religion and Britains Got Talent is a man made construct.

(I place the emphasis on "man" by the way.)

Most of the chatter here seems to think it's some immutable law of nature.

To be overly philosophical, debt can only exists where the mechanism to recover it does too.