What did Rishi mean when he said they can't protect all households?

[TopBitchoftheWitches]

Doesn't sound good imo.

I did a double take when the BBC completely misinterpreted the rules the morning after BoJo’s announcement: ‘only go to work if you are a key worker’. Mismanagement of messaging that has caused workplaces to shut down unnecessarily.

We only have to look at some of the football teams........

I did a double take when the BBC completely misinterpreted the rules the morning after BoJo’s announcement: ‘only go to work if you are a key worker’. Mismanagement of messaging that has caused workplaces to shut down unnecessarily.

The BBC have form for mis-reporting. I remember one of Gordon Brown's budgets where he raised the upper NIC limit (meaning more people paid more NIC), but BBC were reporting it as a saving for workers. I just don't think they have any attention to detail - just parrot what they think has been said. That Steph McGovern has made a whole series of foul ups on BBC breakfast programme which seem never to be corrected nor apologised for.

He means, “If the measures put in place now don’t help your business / employer to keep you financially viable then tough shit.”

I did a double take when the BBC completely misinterpreted the rules the morning after BoJo’s announcement: ‘only go to work if you are a key worker’. Mismanagement of messaging that has caused workplaces to shut down unnecessarily.

Especially when the general publics perception is that keyworkers appear to only be NHS, Teachers and Shop workers when there are whole industries out there that keep the country ticking over - you can't put the essential infrastructure work on hold eg Water treatment plant, electric, gas and for that there is a whole supply chain required to provide materials etc

I think he meant they will try to keep people from destitution but he can't keep everyone in the manner to which they had become accustomed

People lost their homes in the nineties when mortgage interest rates skyrocketed to 13%

That was the eighties. They started coming down in the nineties.

My friends who have been furloughed include a solicitor and an information analyst. Both jobs that are perfectly possible to do at home

A lot of my construction professionals colleagues’ jobs can be done from home. Construction sites in Scotland have been closed and there is no work so many of them have been furloughed. You can only work from home if there is work to do.

Factories and offices shut down, when they should not have done so

All over MN we have people telling us how unethical it is to be buying things that aren’t essential and those of us who suggest we are doing so to keep the economy going are told “BUT PEOPLE WILL DIE”

Factories are closed because people don’t understand there is still a need to keep commerce running and have convinced themselves they shouldn’t be shopping.

I'm shocked that he has increased the UC standard element. This now means that even more people who wouldn't otherwise have qualified even without losing their jobs or being furloughed, will now qualify ?? The extra help should have been targeted at those going onto UC who have lost their jobs and taken a huge drop in income , not across the board for everyone.

I don't believe he thought as many businesses would all but stop and put 90%+ of their employees on furlough, the projected figures show that. The furlough grants came at the same time as the leisure/ hospitality/ retail lockdown and I feel it was aimed at the time at these sectors and any other businesses that physically couldn't operate then it was going to be 'trickled' down to other businesses in other sectors that started to suffer as the days/ weeks went on.

The fact that people didn't think they could go to work (even though it is in the conditions of furlough) meant that rather than potentially pay to set up remote working etc companies just clawed the furlough. I know someone who has refused to go to work in a large workshop with 2 other people in it (definitely 2m apart) despite been fit and healthy and having no childcare- he says he'd rather get 80% to stay at home. How is it going to be possible to continue supporting it this type of scenario?

"they can’t pay out money to everyone who needs it."

There is no bottomless pit of money to pay nearly everyone to stay home for 18 months
... longer than that in fact, since some on MN won't accept the vaccine for their family and want to be subsidised forever by other people

The economy is already suffering its biggest blow since the Great Depression
... and people want several months more of this ?

We should restart the economy in summer, to prevent mass bankruptcies among businesses and the self-employed
and hence even worse unemployment

• about 1 in 10 workers have lost their jobs already and this will ramp up

Restarting the economy means reopening the schools

That was the eighties. They started coming down in the nineties.

It was 13.9% at the end of 1990. Which yes, I know, some people would argue is the last year of the eighties rather than the first year of the nineties. It peaked in 1989 at 14.9% though, so yes, I was wrong to say it skyrocketed in the nineties, when it was actually the late eighties. My apologies. It doesn't affect the salient point of my post though- mortgages are risky undertakings.

I agree @BigChocFrenzy back to work by May 1st I think.

longer than that in fact, since some on MN won't accept the vaccine for their family and want to be subsidised forever by other people

Oh, it won't just be Mumsnetters that would refuse it. Regardless, we'll all be cracking on long before a vaccine becomes available, so it's a moot point. I think we need an effective treatment more than a vaccine at this point.

That is why they need to allow low risk businesses outside the big cities start working again.

"The extra help should have been targeted at those going onto UC who have lost their jobs and taken a huge drop in income , not across the board for everyone."

Most people who have gone onto UC on the past have had a big shock and struggled

It's very irritating that those who never thought they would need UC are claiming it's too little
Talk about entitled

btw, I have never claimed any kind of benefit, but as a high rate taxpayer who paid for many years for others,
I resent this recent flood of claimants thinking they are more worthy than others and demanding more
You all cost me money !

Have convinced themselves they shouldn't be shopping
I think this is true but is there also an element of people realising that they don't really need to buy as much stuff as they used to buy?
If so will they go back to how they were or will 'we don't really need all this unnecessary stuff' become a long-term trend?

" we'll all be cracking on long before a vaccine becomes available, so it's a moot point"

It is the point:
Some very anxious people want to stay home for years , being subsidised by others, until it is "safe" to come out

• when COVID no longer exists ?

They also want to stop schools opening - because their kids would either go or be left behind.

I think we need an effective treatment more than a vaccine at this point
I realise you probably mean a preventative treatment (?) but it seems likely that we will develop better ways of providing respiratory support for people who have the virus?
Necessity being the mother of invention and all that!

*Some very anxious people want to stay home for years , being subsidised by others, until it is "safe" to come out

• when COVID no longer exists ?*

Yes. And some hide themselves away from the lizard people. They'll either get on with it or they'll face financial ruin. Once restrictions are lifted, I doubt there'll be a universal credit entitlement for conscientious objectors to real life.

People keeping kids off school without an accepted reason for doing so will be fined and eventually prosecuted.

That is why they need to allow low risk businesses outside the big cities start working again.

Lots of low risk businesses were never prohibited from working in the first place. That's the problem - too many employers closed down unnecessarily. There is quite a long list of shops etc allowed to open.

I realise you probably mean a preventative treatment

No, actually, I meant a medicine that works to actually fight the virus. I think they're testing every pre-existing medication that has a hope in hell of working to see if it also helps those suffering from COVID-19.

Some very anxious people want to stay home for years , being subsidised by others, until it is "safe" to come out

Which is why furlough etc needs to end 30/6 and only available afterwards for those on the "most vulnerable" list. That will drastically reduce the number of people eligible and force the "worried well" lower risk workers back to work.

The area I'm really confused about is the SBRG of £10k. I myself have received this- I have physically been shut down because of lock down but it is still covers more than my fixed costs for 3 months- I have furloughed my staff. The only thing is I'm unsure when I will be able to open up shop again so this might need to cover my wage "indefinitely" too. I know a builder who pays £150 a month rent a room in a business centre to keep his paperwork and computer because he has no room at home. He has literally just been given £10k too and he's still able to work. I know that some in some businesses £10k won't even touch the sides but it does seem a bit "off" to give it people (including me I if I can open up in May) when others are getting absolutely nothing. I'm also worried how we pay this back eventually as I know Sunak has already hinted at it.

If you look into it, I think a vaccine is a good few years away. The quickest they have ever developed a vaccine is four years.

Fast tracking this vaccine has to mean not testing it's safety or efficacy to the same standards that other vaccines are. Bill Gates, when talking about a vaccine, admitted this over the weekend. Governments will have to decide how much of a trade off they are willing to accept - speed Vs safety.

Look at other vaccines eg dengue fever and the early measles ( I think it was). Only after it had been administered did problems arise. With dengue fever it actually caused a worse disease in vaccinated children than in unvaccinated children.

I do think treatments, either antivirals or possibly drugs that already exist eg chloroquine or remdesivere will be the way forward before a vaccine.

People who want to keep their kids off school also don't want their kids to drop behind all the other kids.
Thier 'solution' to this problem will be to fear monger and insist that schools need to be kept closed, they will prefer it that all children are held back rather than back down and let their child go back.