Aibu to think the new Sunak scheme is woeful

[Marg33t]

New scheme is going to make lots of people lose their homes and starve.

Employers to pay 1/3rd of wages is way too high. They will cut viable jobs that will bounce back otherwise.

I'm happy to pay my taxes for all that need it to continue to receive furlough as this scheme will keep people in poverty.

Aibu to think it's a mistep?

I think we have hit a time where some industries are going to die out and not be sustainable anymore it’s terribly sad . A bit like when the mines and factories were closed and people had to find work elsewhere and do things they never thought they would . I think only certain industries are going to have jobs now and people will need to just go there , caring work , the food industry , trades and so on . It’s almost like we are being dragged back in time .

Furlough is not sustainable sadly. It could be at least a year before we have enough people vaccinated to go to some level of normality. And we cannot afford to pay people to sit at home on 80% salary when we don't know that those jobs (or as many of them) are actually going to exist going forward.

Moving to this type of scheme:

• encourages those businesses, such as galleries, who could adapt and make a go of things and keep staff on reduced hours to do so rather than stay closed taking money for nothing

• encourages those people who don't have any hours coming up to look for work out of, say, the arts. This is crap for them, obviously, but it is better for those people to be redeployed in the (hopefully) short term doing something else. My BIL was made redundant in an events job and has lined up interviews and offers in a prison, a care home, a warehouse and freelance in a niche area within his industry within 4 days (we do live in the south east - other areas may be harder hit). All of this is better for us as a society, noting that we need to fund essential services and have little money to do so, than paying him to sit at home. It would be better to direct grant money to arts when they are in a position to start up again to get things going rather than to keep people in stasis now. I am a higher earner in a secure industry, but there are not enough of us to pay enough tax out of our surplus earnings (post mortgage - no mansion here!, childcare, bills) to support all the arts industry, events industry, hospitality industry. I would love to ride to the rescue (and have always voted on the basis that I would happily pay more tax for better services) but it won't be enough.

• sorts out the situation in which some companies claimed furlough money but then kind of got their employees to do a bit of work on the side - illegal, but it certainly happened. Those employers can take the money but need to put in themselves and actually bring employees back legitimately

To be honest, really, I think it is not going to be enough to keep lots of jobs and to ensure everyone can maintain the same standard of living, but I think it is the best we can do. Remember, Rishi Sunak signed the scheme off, but the people who actually designed it will be civil service economists - they will not be the type of people who will be disconnected from reality and unaware of how Crap this will be for some.

@SleepaholicsAnonymous

The problem is that employers make economic decisions, particularly when they are struggling to survive.

From the employer's point of view, if they have three people on the same pay but only enough work for one, they can either:

a) keep one employee, make two redundant, pay 1 x a single salary

b) keep two employees doing 50% hours each, and make one redundant. They will then pay 1.66 x a single salary

c) keep all three employees doing 33% hours each. Then they will pay 1.66 x a single salary.

So they will choose option a)

It's shocking actually that Sunak - who had a career in banking before he married the daughter of a billionaire - does not realise this basic maths.

Or maybe he does and is just giving the appearance of the Government doing something useful.

@AlohaMolly

Also, the £150 billion borrowed is total borrowing, not just borrowed for Covid. I wonder how much of that has gone towards brexit?

www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/sep/23/no-deal-brexit-will-cost-uk-more-than-covid-report

I think we have hit a time where some industries are going to die out and not be sustainable anymore

But why would that be the case, unless covid lockdown goes on forever, which economically it can't, or it won't just be those industries going down the shitter I can promise you.

As PP says, plenty of money to pay for their no-deal Brexit despite loss of tax revenue.

I am a higher earner in a secure industry

Yes, so it's therefore very easy to sit and pontificate that it's okay to let whole sectors go under from that very safe position.
It's incredibly short-sighted, the long-term economic cost from the lost tax revenue will dwarf the support payments.

Thanks @SleepaholicsAnonymous what an interesting —horrific— read.

@SleepaholicsAnonymous

But I think RS does understand that. If there is only enough work for one and employees are interchangeable then it is likely more efficient for a company to have two made redundant, not keeping on more people than needed when you have no idea whether the company will ever sustain three. That's the point. A company WOULD keep on someone under the RS scheme if they have skills that they can provide that others can't but can't work at full capacity yet.

If things were open as normal at the moment and we just let the virus do its thing, would vast numbers of people be going to the theatre, gigs etc?

I'm not in the UK - but was at a classical music concert last night attended by 1000 people. The capacity for the concert hall is 1200, but 1000 is the current limit for an indoor event. Masks were compulsory and there was no interval. There was an empty row every six rows to create 'sections'. I think there are plenty of people who would go to a concert in the UK if they could. But the UK really needs to sort out the track and test system.
Frequent testing is so important to keeping things running - not as normal, but as close to it as is feasible. I do think that putting the money into that - and not schemes like the half price burgers - would allow life to semi-normalise, and maybe allow the shut-down sectors to function again. And there'd be no need for half-price meals and half-hearted bail-outs.

Wishcaptain, perhaps factor in uncertainty about future demand as well as keeping skills mix. Unless you think recruitment would be easy for the skills required, they may be a trade off between what is immediately optimal based on 'enough work for one employee' now and having capacity to meet any future increase in demand. In some firms where skills are limited, there may be an incentive in your (i recognise simplified) example to keep the two or three, depending on the firm's financial resources.

Can they please cancel Brexit and put some of that money into helping struggling industries?

We can't afford Brexit on top of Covid.

It’s not his fault. Doing more is completely unsustainable.

There are too many people who are quite comfortable with the last 6 months.

We should not be locking down for something that only has a serious affect on a small portion of the population. The economy should keep moving, healthy people under 60 should get the virus and develop immunity while the elderly and those with compromised immune systems are shielded.

We should not be trashing our economy and society for something that was the 24th leading cause of death in the UK last month.

Personally, I find it very telling that pre covid, so many indulged in benefits bashing and claimed that benefits are enough to live on, but now the suggestion that they just go on Universal Credit if people's earnings are too low, would be met with horror and protest!!

It's ok when it's 'other people'

Universal Credit has actually been increased by nearly £100 a month since the start of the pandemic. It's almost as if they didn't want all the new applicants realising just quite how little people were expected to survive on.

They promised no more austerity to pay for the economic damage caused by COVID. Yet the other day they said they are considering another freeze on benefits. The ten bloody years freeze to bail out the bankers just ended this year!!

@MaxNormal

I accept I am lucky. I am aware of my privilege.

Go on, show me that is the case then.

That (a) all the entities in these sectors will recover quickly enough to pay lots of tax long term and that keeping them, all of them, however unviable they seem in stasis now, sitting on the sofa doing nothing is better than (b) bringing the sectors back later through grants etc and having people who could be learning new skills temporarily redeployed elsewhere paying taxes in the meantime is a good use of money. Because someone in theTreasury with an economic background will have literally costed this and come to the opposite conclusion. RS won't be doing this for fun.

I'm in a particular hard hit industry but my hotel has sustained our numbers due to numerous circumstances and a bit of luck.

Head office has made 50% of the work force redundant because they know in 3 months we can hire numerous 0 hour contracts on different job titles and restructure and get away.

This isn't just about mass redundancies this is a roll back of workers rights.

RS won't be doing this for fun.

If they're so economically literate what are they planning at with Brexit then?
Why wouldn't the affected sectors bounce back quickly, if they were profitable pre-covid?
Have a read of this article, it makes my point perfectly clear: www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/sep/24/sunak-warned-winter-economy-plan-not-enough-to-stop-wave-of-job-losses?fbclid=IwAR1wG0JjK5KFbIhVvlEgPj6YUGvF0fNgBR7kLfKxhZm72pljHvp9UZM9AgU

@ichifanny

I think we have hit a time where some industries are going to die out and not be sustainable anymore it’s terribly sad . A bit like when the mines and factories were closed and people had to find work elsewhere and do things they never thought they would . I think only certain industries are going to have jobs now and people will need to just go there , caring work , the food industry , trades and so on . It’s almost like we are being dragged back in time .

I agree with this. When the pandemic has died out then the Arts will re-emerge.

Surely this must have happened in the 1918 pandemic?

If I can mention ‘knock on ‘ effects too which is underrated- people going to theatre, club of some kind or a gig often eat out before show, go for a drink, get takeaways, get cabs etc. Little night time life? Then these businesses all suffer. Places like Butlins and Haven — works all year round usually with mini music weekends, small special interest conferences etc outside summer season — offers lots of local work, in areas that often struggle for decent jobs. If we get to the level of saying plenty of people don’t care about the arts, then lots of people aren’t interested in a beautician or a garden centre- — it doesn’t make their staff any less worthy of decent support. I don’t know if many are aware but arts money when it’s there tends to get directed to the ‘big boy’ theatre owning groups etc— it isn’t being directed at the average owner of a small club or the freelancers that supply it. Personally it’s not just the arts though, I think it’s a rushed package and would have been better to target underlying issues such as commercial rent payments across the board— and also beef up UC for those who have been working till covid, in order to cover off far more things.last thing you want is a liar if evictions/repossessions. Finally if I can just say, none of this would have been quite such a nightmare if the government hadnt spaffed away over 200 billion on a totally unnecessary Brexit , and millions and millions on covid related contracts for mates of theirs that didn’t even pass the sniff test!!

It will re emerge. We’ll use the tax revenue as we will from every other sector.

@cambrianexplosion

Personally, I find it very telling that pre covid, so many indulged in benefits bashing and claimed that benefits are enough to live on, but now the suggestion that they just go on Universal Credit if people's earnings are too low, would be met with horror and protest!!

It's ok when it's 'other people'

Universal Credit has actually been increased by nearly £100 a month since the start of the pandemic. It's almost as if they didn't want all the new applicants realising just quite how little people were expected to survive on.

They promised no more austerity to pay for the economic damage caused by COVID. Yet the other day they said they are considering another freeze on benefits. The ten bloody years freeze to bail out the bankers just ended this year!!

100% agree. I feel 'fortunate' that I'm on benefits and so largely will not be affected by Covid financially because I live on the minimum anyone can live on anyway. The way people on this thread, and others, have reacted at being told they, or relatives, could/should apply for UC is actually quite hurtful to read.

I have complete sympathy for those who are going to lose anything (jobs, homes etc) from this pandemic, but those who had fuck all left to lose* in the first place are the ones who will be forgotten in all of this, as usual.

*Apart from the will to live, I'm close to losing that reading some of the privileged bullshit on this thread.

It's useless if you work in an industry that's still completely closed on government orders - as it's not possible to work any hours at all.

@MaxNormal

I didn't vote for Brexit. I don't think it is a good plan or economically best. But people did vote for it in a referendum, including a majority of Tory voters in the last election. So they have a mandate for it. It's irrelevant to the question of what to do about the arts sector though really - even if we were not doing Brexit, it still would play out the same on the value for money analysis even if we would have more money to spend.

@allofthetings

Can they please cancel Brexit and put some of that money into helping struggling industries?

We can't afford Brexit on top of Covid.

Yes, I agree. But BJ only got elected on a single issue and that was Brexit (if we can remember any time pre-Covid!). And there are an awful lot of interested parties and donors that BJ has to answer to who supported and funded his campaign. Being a Tory donor and getting in to the policy directing group for £50,000 is the biggest return on investment there is in the business world.

[quote wishcaptainbarnaclewasmyboss]@MaxNormal

I accept I am lucky. I am aware of my privilege.

Go on, show me that is the case then.

That (a) all the entities in these sectors will recover quickly enough to pay lots of tax long term and that keeping them, all of them, however unviable they seem in stasis now, sitting on the sofa doing nothing is better than (b) bringing the sectors back later through grants etc and having people who could be learning new skills temporarily redeployed elsewhere paying taxes in the meantime is a good use of money. Because someone in theTreasury with an economic background will have literally costed this and come to the opposite conclusion. RS won't be doing this for fun. [/quote]
I work in the tourism sector in a small tourism based town, so the hospitality industry within that is essentially tourism based too. The vast majority of us were furloughed until both sectors were allowed to reopen, at which time we were all brought back on part time furlough. i don’t know anyone that is still on full furlough, working no hours at all.

Within this sector and tourism based hospitality, we are used to earning our money over the summer period and making it last during winter. Good businesses are used to it and manage it well.

Covid hit at the end of the winter and we were not allowed to open as usual. Most accommodation businesses are able to make a finite amount of money - for example, we have x amount of properties and once they’re full, we can’t earn more than that.

We were fully booked right from the moment we were allowed to open and are around 3/4 full until the end of September and busier in October than we’ve ever been. Come November, as is the pattern, there are no bookings. We are a viable successful business but haven’t necessarily earned enough to get through the winter without the support being offered by the government, because we had almost half our season removed.

Our business will bounce back next year UNLESS there is another nation wide lockdown, and there will be many businesses in a similar position.

I hadn't seen sunaks latest announcement.

I need to work out what this means for employees.