When will this shit end?

[Copperface]

13 minutes ago, hodgey123 said:

You'd have to hope it's the government realising that there will still be a period of rockiness even after all restrictions are lifted as some are reluctant to go out, or at the very least a lag back to 'normal' behaviours?

Possibly. but find it difficult to see Sunak agreeing to pay for people to be furloughed when no restrictions are in place.

Could just be there as a safety net/framework in place should they (hopefully not) find themselves in the position of having reintroduce some level of restriction for whatever reason.

The six months UC uplift as well as the Job Retention Scheme (furlough) are enabled under the Coronavirus Act anyway, unlike the restrictions/lockdowns etc (which are not), and that will be due for a further review around September, so Hancock could easily lapse them both then, which would work quite neatly and explain the six months.

Edited February 19, 2021 by Copperface

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, Copperface said:

Possibly. but find it difficult to see Sunak agreeing to pay for people to be furloughed when no restrictions are in place.

Could just be there as a safety net/framework in place should they (hopefully not) find themselves in the position of having reintroduce some level of restriction for whatever reason.

The six months UC uplift as well as the Job Retention Scheme (furlough) are enabled under the Coronavirus Act anyway, unlike the restrictions/lockdowns etc (which are not) , and that will be due for a further ministerial review around September so Hancock could easily lapse them both then, which would work quite neatly and explain the six months.

Of course, they can take out the restrictions any time and gives a couple of months for companies to remove people from furlough without a 'cliffs edge'. Just because there is a system a place, doesn't mean people will use it

 

[Mellotr0n]

1 minute ago, Copperface said:

Possibly. but find it difficult to see Sunak agreeing to pay for people to be furloughed when no restrictions are in place.

Could just be there as a safety net/framework in place should they (hopefully not) find themselves in the position of having reintroduce some level of restriction for whatever reason.

The six months UC uplift as well as the Job Retention Scheme (furlough) are enabled under the Coronavirus Act anyway, unlike the restrictions/lockdowns etc (which are not) , and that will be due for a further ministerial review around September so Hancock could easily lapse them both then, which would work quite neatly and explain the six months.

Far too early to say with any surety, isn't it? If hosps and deaths are close to zero for a number of weeks, there won't be any (broadly noticeable) restrictions after that.

I think it's a safety net, and them using some common sense to know they have it in place if needed, rather than endlessly having to re-update it.

[steviewevie]

Here you go...Fake Sage, doomster egghead nerds etc etc.

https://www.pscp.tv/w/1vAxRwgpeDkKl

[st dan]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

Here you go...Fake Sage, doomster egghead nerds etc etc.

https://www.pscp.tv/w/1vAxRwgpeDkKl

Might watch this and be thankful my phone is insured, as I’m sure I’ll end up throwing it against the wall within the first 5 minutes. 

[efcfanwirral]

 

15 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Are you on the 2 million (I think?) people that have fallen through the cracks?

I would've been if I'd needed it - luckily digital marketing is a good industry to be in at this time. 

The reason for me was that I went freelance in Dec 2018 after being employed for the rest of that tax year, so my first tax return went in April 2019, which is what the scheme was decided on (3 years of tax returns up to that date).  

my first full tax year of freelance work ended on 5th April 2020, just as the scheme was starting. I kind of get the reluctance at that point as it would've been hard to sort out. But the language around it was shocking, with the reasoning being given that too many would declare themselves self employed and defraud the system, along with a worrying rhetoric in the daily mail etc about all freelancers being tax avoiders. 

So anyone "newly" self employed who weren't eligible could in theory submit their SECOND full year tax return in 6 weeks time (third return overall for me), which will cover a full year of earnings right up to just before the start of the pandemic and STILL not qualify for any help if nothing changes. 

I can only see the mechanics of the system from a very lucky position , I can't imagine what those in similar situations tax year wise but in shut down industries have gone through this last year, and will continue to. 

Edited February 19, 2021 by efcfanwirral

[Mellotr0n]

3 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Here you go...Fake Sage, doomster egghead nerds etc etc.

https://www.pscp.tv/w/1vAxRwgpeDkKl

I can't help but find Independent Sage really childish and funny.

Imagine there was an Independent FA in the world of football, who had pretend official meetings and broadcast it, all about how they would do things if they were the real FA. It's so funny.

Edited February 19, 2021 by Mellotr0n

[Ozanne]

1 minute ago, efcfanwirral said:

 

I would've been if I'd needed it - luckily digital marketing is a good industry to be in at this time. 

The reason for me was that I went freelance in Dec 2018 after being employed for the rest of that tax year, so my first tax return went in April 2019, which is what the scheme was decided on (3 years of tax returns up to that date).  

my first full tax year of freelance work ended on 5th April 2020, just as the scheme was starting. I kind of get the reluctance at that point as it would've been hard to sort out. But the language around it was shocking, with the reasoning being given that too many would declare themselves self employed and defraud the system, along with a worrying rhetoric in the daily mail etc about all freelancers being tax avoiders. 

So anyone "newly" self employed who weren't eligible could in theory submit their SECOND full year tax return in 6 weeks time (third return overall for me), which will cover a full year of earnings right up to judt before the start of the pandemic and STILL not qualify for any help

I can only see the mechanics of the system, I can't imagine what those in similar situations but in shut down industries have gone through this last year, and will continue to. 

You hear quite regularly about those self employed that have fallen through during the pandemic, they kept getting mentioned in the Commons but there doesn’t seem to much done about it. It really sad and I feel for those people. 

[shoptildrop]

17 hours ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Manchester rates still dropping, albeit at an agonizingly slow rate.

This thread is encountering near-weather-thread levels of rollercoasterism.

I think we're going to be ok.

I'm in Tameside 😞 

[steviewevie]

I wonder if we'll go into tiers...up north cases now higher than down south...bit like after the first lockdown.

[efcfanwirral]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

You hear quite regularly about those self employed that have fallen through during the pandemic, they kept getting mentioned in the Commons but there doesn’t seem to much done about it. It really sad and I feel for those people. 

The fact so much noise has been made about it but nothing has been done tells me it has to be ideological - all I can think of is that they want people under the control of big companies and not to have their own unlimited earning potential, so maybe they think this will put people off trying to be self employed in the future. I also worry that the whole "proper jobs" thing comes into it and that killing off some of the less desirable parts of the arts is good for them. 

 

[zahidf]

13 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Here you go...Fake Sage, doomster egghead nerds etc etc.

https://www.pscp.tv/w/1vAxRwgpeDkKl

 

[Mellotr0n]

2 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

The fact so much noise has been made about it but nothing has been done tells me it has to be ideological - all I can think of is that they want people under the control of big companies and not to have their own unlimited earning potential, so maybe they think this will put people off trying to be self employed in the future. I also worry that the whole "proper jobs" thing comes into it and that killing off some of the less desirable parts of the arts is good for them. 

 

Weird that - as it would go completely against the Tories' free market, Lord Sugar anyone-can-make-it-in-business philosophy.

The arts bit yes, they're certainly less fussed about, given those dreadfully tone deaf "retraining" ads they put out before.

[Copperface]

10 minutes ago, Mellotr0n said:

Far too early to say with any surety, isn't it? If hosps and deaths are close to zero for a number of weeks, there won't be any (broadly noticeable) restrictions after that.

I think it's a safety net, and them using some common sense to know they have it in place if needed, rather than endlessly having to re-update it.

Possibly. I think there's also an element of politics at play as well, with the local elections in May to be considered (if they go ahead). The Government is desperate for them to carry on as normal and local councils are trying to get them delayed until autumn because of logistical difficulties at this time. This gives the Govt top cover so they can't be attacked over withdrawing support and the real possibility of large scale redundancies until at least the autumn, when the elections might well have taken place.

[Mr.Tease]

1 hour ago, fraybentos1 said:

Oh and the repeated good news re vaccinated people & transmission.

How long before they start saying 'being vaccinated  reduces transmission' and not ' we don't know'. Cause we do know now really don't we.

It's very good news, but I'm not a fan of the tone of a few posts making out that people who are focused on whether it stops transmissions or not and by how much are being stupid- My clients are people with cancer and the families of people with cancer- the transmission rates and odds of me catching covid and passing it on to them are very important to me when assessing how much exposure risk I can take in my day to day life, and what risk I pose to them.

It would be great if I didn't have to give a f*** (and I do hope we reach that point- all this risk calculation stresses me out!), and the more people get vaccinated the less risk is involved, but some of us are in situations where we have to be ultra cautious.

[DeanoL]

12 minutes ago, Copperface said:

Possibly. but find it difficult to see Sunak agreeing to pay for people to be furloughed when no restrictions are in place.

Maybe, but the drive for furlough is demand for services, not restrictions in place. And the whole point of it is to allow jobs to continue to exist, in a sort of suspended animation, until demand returns to what it was. It'd be utterly crazy to remove all furlough as soon as restrictions are removed, as demand just won't suddenly return (and even if it does, there's often a whole supply chain that needs to start functioning again to cater for that demand).

Yes, if you're on furlough and then the furlough scheme ended and you were immediately made redundant, you might think "well at least I got 12 months of pay" but if that happens widely, the furlough scheme has utterly failed in what it was meant to do. It wasn't meant to support people who were out of work - it was meant to keep the jobs existing.

It'd actually look really bad for a Tory government if we get mass redundancies as it just means they've been paying out that money as "welfare" for a year. The only way Sunak can justify the whole scheme is if the majority of jobs it was used for still exist when it finally ends. 

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

You hear quite regularly about those self employed that have fallen through during the pandemic, they kept getting mentioned in the Commons but there doesn’t seem to much done about it. It really sad and I feel for those people. 

I think part of the problem with that is that some of the people who have fallen through the gaps were genuinely self-employed and just had bad timing. But there are certainly a huge number of people who have "fallen through the gap" because they're company directors that are employing themselves at minimum wage and then taking dividends, because it's a tax benefit, and now finding out furlough only covers their declared wage. And it's easy to set those two groups against each other as they're often on opposite ends of the social spectrum.

[efcfanwirral]

2 minutes ago, Mellotr0n said:

Weird that - as it would go completely against the Tories' free market, Lord Sugar anyone-can-make-it-in-business philosophy.

The arts bit yes, they're certainly less fussed about, given those dreadfully tone deaf "retraining" ads they put out before.

That's what I thought too - but maybe the free market now just means established players can work in a deregulated environment, with no new competition allowed. 

[DeanoL]

You guys racked up about 75 pages while I was away the past week (it's very weird staying in a hotel right now - but we're having to sort out the house we need to move to).

Anything big happen? I see we're back to moaning about up and downvotes so Neil was right, my happiness didn't last.

[EasyUserName]

18 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

 

 ... But the language around it was shocking, with the reasoning being given that too many would declare themselves self employed and defraud the system,  ...

 

 

A good thing their other schemes were not likely to be defrauded ...

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/07/fears-grow-over-uk-firms-ability-to-repay-covid-business-loans

 

Only £26 Billion lost acording to this estimate (yes, I appreciate it is an estimate, but not a good figure in any event).

[EasyUserName]

8 minutes ago, Mellotr0n said:

Weird that - as it would go completely against the Tories' free market, Lord Sugar anyone-can-make-it-in-business philosophy.

The arts bit yes, they're certainly less fussed about, given those dreadfully tone deaf "retraining" ads they put out before.

I think that is more of a branding thing (the "free market" thing).  I would have thought their actual policy approach was "enriching them & their mates whilst laughing in your face, and *still* getting re-elected". 

[Copperface]

11 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Maybe, but the drive for furlough is demand for services, not restrictions in place. And the whole point of it is to allow jobs to continue to exist, in a sort of suspended animation, until demand returns to what it was. It'd be utterly crazy to remove all furlough as soon as restrictions are removed, as demand just won't suddenly return (and even if it does, there's often a whole supply chain that needs to start functioning again to cater for that demand).

Yes, if you're on furlough and then the furlough scheme ended and you were immediately made redundant, you might think "well at least I got 12 months of pay" but if that happens widely, the furlough scheme has utterly failed in what it was meant to do. It wasn't meant to support people who were out of work - it was meant to keep the jobs existing.

It'd actually look really bad for a Tory government if we get mass redundancies as it just means they've been paying out that money as "welfare" for a year. The only way Sunak can justify the whole scheme is if the majority of jobs it was used for still exist when it finally ends. 

I think part of the problem with that is that some of the people who have fallen through the gaps were genuinely self-employed and just had bad timing. But there are certainly a huge number of people who have "fallen through the gap" because they're company directors that are employing themselves at minimum wage and then taking dividends, because it's a tax benefit, and now finding out furlough only covers their declared wage. And it's easy to set those two groups against each other as they're often on opposite ends of the social spectrum.

Yep, but that maybe is what the roadmap is partly designed to achieve to give some idea of an a planning framework. Support for viable jobs is the aim. Many others will go down the pan when support is withdrawn. The Government really had to support those who it was affecting directly by imposing restrictions which directly removed the means to trade eg hospitality, tourism, non essential retail etc.

Edited February 19, 2021 by Copperface

[st dan]

13 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I wonder if we'll go into tiers...up north cases now higher than down south...bit like after the first lockdown.

Not sure they’ll go back to tiers, or at least I hope they don’t. Did they even work well when they were introduced? I assume not because the Liverpool City Region went from the lowest tier in the country to one of the worst in a matter of weeks.

[Crazyfool01]

7 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

You guys racked up about 75 pages while I was away the past week (it's very weird staying in a hotel right now - but we're having to sort out the house we need to move to).

Anything big happen? I see we're back to moaning about up and downvotes so Neil was right, my happiness didn't last.

quite a lot of the better kind of jabs happened too 🙂 

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, st dan said:

Not sure they’ll go back to tiers, or at least I hope they don’t. Did they even work well when they were introduced? I assume not because the Liverpool City Region went from the lowest tier in the country to one of the worst in a matter of weeks.

Yeah, not sure they work either...but the argument was made by Burnham and co that it was too early for NW and elsewhere to exit lockdown last spring, which is why ended up with restrictions from August onwards.

[DeanoL]

2 minutes ago, Copperface said:

Yep, but that maybe is what the roadmap is partly designed to achieve to give some idea of an a planning framework. Support for viable jobs is the aim. Many others will go down the pan when support is withdrawn.

What jobs won't be viable by October if all restrictions are lifted at that point and everyone has been jabbed?

Anything related to international travel maybe? And some stuff in town centres because of the WFH migration but that doesn't feel like it'll be an immediate effect - they'll need to reopen and judge demand, which will be artificially high to start because of the novelty.

Some companies will and have been going bankrupt anyway (yeah you can cut your wage bill to zero but if you have fixed cost assets like office space, performance spaces, etc, a year with no income can still do you in). But that will have already happened by then.