Eat Out To Help Out: Brilliance or Lunacy?

[verdantverdure]

On the day the Covid Inquiry convenes I thought I'd ask your opinion on Eat Out To Help Out.

Covid case numbers and deaths were low, as we'd done a phased return out of the first lockdown.

Then we had Eat Out To Help Out and it all kicked off again within weeks.

What did you think? At the time? Now?

YABU Eat Out To Help Out was brilliant, I loved it.

YANBU Eat out To Help Out was a bloody stupid idea that was obviously going to help the virus spread, leading to another wave, more economic devastation, and tens of thousands of us dead. And it didn't even help the hospitality industry because it screwed up Christmas which is usually their most profitable quarter.

It was utter madness.

Madness in the same league as lockdown.

There was a really good podcast on this where they tried to work out the impact. They came to the conclusion it might have brought the need for the autumn lockdown forward by about 3 days. I was surprised it didn't have more impact, but it made sense when the data read explained.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001mlhx

Well I'd certainly love to see the maths on that given the Tier system and how many thousands died between EOTHO and lockdown.

Brilliant - supported businesses who needed the help. We know now that lockdowns were unnecessary, but at the time some people had to be encouraged to get out and about again.

I don't think it really made that much difference to people getting COVID - but it felt like a waste of money.

It was obviously stupid at the time and remains so now.

Interestingly it struck me that the people who most enthusiastically embraced "eat out to help out" where the same ones who most slavishly embraced even the worst excesses of lockdown guidance.

We went out for as many walks as we liked during the lockdowns. But no way would we have eaten out in the crowds that summer.

It was all totally illogical.

I thought it was madness at the time and to date nothing has changed my mind. The whole response was weak though, we should have locked down harder, faster and for longer. The "risk it for a biscuit" scheme was just a symptom of a country that didn't want to accept the reality of a once in several generations health disaster.

Interestingly it struck me that the people who most enthusiastically embraced "eat out to help out" where the same ones who most slavishly embraced even the worst excesses of lockdown guidance.

Not true in my case or true of people I know.

Though I'd have been eating out just the same regardless of the discount.

We now know that Covid was spread by prolonged person to person contact. Sitting next to another group in a restaurant probably wasn’t enough, and if you were out with your family you’d probably be seeing them at home if restaurants had continued to be closed - perhaps at even closer quarters and for longer. It was important for the hospitality industry.

It was hell for hospitality staff.

Trying to run shifts that were way busier than usual as well as navigating all the restrictions and trying to make customers follow the rules. Customers seemed to be particularly arsehole-ish about everything, waiting times, missing menu items, without caring that we were struggling to fulfil.

Covid then ran riot through our entire staff at Christmas so Christmas was cancelled. There was no financial gain at all.

Lunacy - because takeaways were not covered.

So it wasn't maximising turnover for businesses, nor was it something that was really open to everyone - we never used it because we have a CEV person in the household and it really wasn't suitable

I think it was a lifeline for hospitality and there supply chain

went ever week loved it pubs near us worked amazingly with council felt totally safe massive outdoor area tables very well spaced table service only
had to pre book time slot to leave as well

Ridiculous. It was basically the government giving freebies to the rich. If you could afford to pay half of your meal then you got the other half for free. But if you didn’t have the money to pay half you got nothing. So the rich got cheap meals and the poor got fuck all.

It would have been better to give a certain amount of free vouchers to everyone for spending at restaurants, so it wasn’t just restricted to the rich who had disposable income.

It was a great idea! It was literally only 3 days a week for 4 weeks and the weather was great at the time and everyone was basically dining Al fresco. I took advantage of it multiple times! It probably saved countless food establishments and there was no September wave which we would have seen if it had an effect after august mixing.

Interesting.

I didn't think it a great idea but people I knew who used it were already out and about more than strictly necessary so were just slightly more so and everyone else ignored it but I don't think staff loved it or that it has a huge financial benefit long term.

So overall - not a good idea.

It was Eat Out to help out. Not eat in. Takeaways benefitted throughout the pandemic. It was to help restaurants and sit down and establishments

I love it! Ate out loads.

From a cost point of view it was probably a bit nuts, but from a Covid point of view I didn't see the problem.

But then I (as a medical person) always thought lockdown/closing schools etc was a ridiculous move. Seems I am being proved right, though I was called a granny killer on here many many times!

Well, I really enjoyed it. Dishy on Rishi. Had some lovely meals at deserving restaurants.

It was obvious it was to hasten herd immunity. Fuck anyone vulnerable who then caught Covid and died. Why wait for the vaccine, when their lives were worthless anyway

You didn’t have to be rich 🙄 restaurants are not the reserve of the wealthy. Wetherspoons were doing it for goodness sake and all the differently priced establishments in between.

I heard that on BBC R4 More Or Less. Was surprising.

Well I hope that the enquiry will conclude that any sort of lockdown was not in the best interests of the population as a whole regardless. Too much evidence being collected now as to the detriment of that policy. So, EOTHO was not a disaster, the total lockdown was.

Covid would have trashed Christmas anyway as data shows. Although we weren't in lockdown again until after Christmas.

I think it was a silly scheme that cost the govt and therefore us taxpayers money, but I did enjoy some fairly cheap meals out.