You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/rishi-food-vouchers-and-vat/page/4/#post-11288771
I an not too worried if I am, and you are certainly an example of what I was talking about.
TJ. I'm sure it will rise by the same in similar countries (Germany/France) , its a global problem not just a Tory problem.
God this forum is shit.
Please explain how the **** I quote a message because nothing so far works, including the quote or reply icons
You think France and Germany are keeping people in jobs better than the UK?
What I think is irrelevant, the fact is that that they are. As TJ says you appear to have been fooled by the way the UK fiddles its unemployment figures.
Show us the proof of how you know that dazh? Also yes I don't think its possible to save every livelihood, I think the sad fact is that due to covid, certain industries are doomed regardless of any amount of propping up. We were oversaturated with food, beverage and clothing outlets anyway, it was a bloated economy to begin with.
And no it won’t save the economy but it’s better than nothing and is a great message to people to get out and about and get back to a normal life as much as is possible.
Well put. I think that is the underlying message, please go out and spend your money.
a great message to people to get out and about
Is that a great idea with this pandemic? I think a better solution would be to continue to support bars and restaurants so they can reopen when it is safe to do so (ie, continued business rate freeze, rent support, extended furlough terms for hospitality staff etc) rather than encouraging people to go out and increase the real risk of a second wave.
johndoh
Member
a great message to people to get out and aboutIs that a great idea with this pandemic?
Not really, no.
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
The wee bump in deaths there is looking ominous...
poor people spend a higher % of their money on stuff like food and clothes and power nd spend locally
whilst that might be the case, they are often more conscious of price when they spend, as a result of which shop at cheaper places, who tend to source goods outside of the UK. I bet that, of the average pound spend in primark, a miniscule amount stays in the UK (for each item you're using, what, 1 minutes of a shop assistant's time, and maybe another 1.5 minutes of 'backroom' time, including the whole UK supply chain - so ~35p is staying in the uk) - the rest goes to shareholders or straight to whichever cheap country produces the goods. Conversely, a wealthy consumer may buy some hebden-sourced trousers from a physical store - probably keeping at least £50 in the UK
Best not compare us the the Mercans though - tell most of them not to slam their cock in a door and they would do it just to show that they Live In The Land of The Free.
God this forum is shit.
Please explain how the **** I quote a message because nothing so far works, including the quote or reply icons
Highlight and copy the text you want to quote. Press the B-QUOTE icon, paste the text, then press the B-QUOTE icon again.
johndoh
Member
Best not compare us the the Mercans though – tell most of them not to slam their cock in a door and they would do it just to show that they Live In The Land of The Free.
Not really comparing, just showing the obvious warning of what too much "normal" will mean.
Conversely, a wealthy consumer may buy some hebden-sourced trousers from a physical store – probably keeping at least £50 in the UK
Fkn hell! Are you trying to prove Kelvin right with his earlier comment? Blaming the poor for not supprting the UK economy by buying £120 trousers? Nice!
We were oversaturated with food, beverage and clothing outlets anyway, it was a bloated economy to begin with.
I see cruel and dystopian thatcherite economics is still alive and well. Of course the fact that millions will see their longterm employment prospects destroyed and be doomed to poverty and servitude, resulting in another lost generation is just collateral damage.
it was a bloated economy to begin with
Hmm… we only have a few pubs and restaurants here. All were busy and did a roaring trade. All are currently either shut or only have room for a few tables of customers at once. Nothing bloated.
I know it’s boring to keep pointing it out… but this rescue package is great for all the ‘Spoons outlets around the country, but is leaving many small indie and family run businesses to go out of business this year.
There is no bloat. There is a government looking after vested interest, not supporting the businesses that they are forcing to be either shut or running unprofitably at below normal capacity. Capacity that would be fully utilised if we got the virus under control, rather than doing these media management campaigning flawed economic interventions. People want their locals open and busy again, they don’t need financial motivations to go out, they need the virus under control so they can get on with doing so.
Yes Kelvin but there is a Pret on every corner in London and it seems that they are closing many now. Thats what I'm talking about, not the one pub and cafe in your village.
Dazh, I dont see how keeping these places open long term is compatible with risk mitigation, its an unfortunate consequence that many will lose jobs, Rishi Sunak should have strengthened the benefits system to look after these people, but thats a much harder calculation to make than just cutting vat.
I feel there are many, many people out there thinking the same as me... Sod going out for a meal, even a totally free one, when it's evident that we are still utterly unprepared to prevent a second spike/wave.
Ditto pubs.
People have realised that they can cook for themselves,they can entertain themselves and they dont need to fly to Magaluf for a stag do, unfortunately that means certain industries are goin to take a big hit regardless of Vat cuts
Blaming the poor for not supprting the UK economy by buying £120 trousers? Nice!
I'm not blaming anyone for anything, just pointing out fact. Those with more disposable income put significantly more money into the local economy, definitely in absolute terms, and probably in terms of income as well (until you get to the really high levels, anyway). Eating out is a good example - 90% of a restaurant bill probably goes back into the local economy, compared to very little if you buy a pack of pasta at asda.
I dont see how keeping these places open long term is compatible with risk mitigation, its an unfortunate consequence that many will lose jobs
The way to keep these places open and save millions of jobs is to get on top of the virus by eradicating it with a proper lockdown, then managing subsequent smaller isolated outbreaks with efficient testing and tracing and localised isolation and quarantines. But of course we haven't done that, because it's apparently too difficult or too expensive, even though many other countries have managed it.
You protect the economy by protecting people from the virus, not by encouraging them to go to the pub or a restaurant when the virus is still in circulation. The reason we are now facing a collapse in the hospitality sector and millions of job losses is because the government completely failed in its task to suppress the virus, and has now essentially given up on that. The result will be a growing second wave, with a collapsing economy to amplify it. This is going to spin out of control very quickly.
We cant do that anymore Dazh, people wont go for it, that ship has sailed.
The abundance of Prets wasn’t due to “bloat”, it was down to an eat at your desk culture. Working from home is killing Prets. The government isn’t going to save them with these measures either.
VAT change looks simple… but it’s really little help when the problem is that the virus hasn’t been controlled, not that prices are wrong.
We cant do that anymore Dazh
At some point we will have to. The economic damage of not doing so will bite harder and harder otherwise. I don’t expect the government to wake up to the fact ‘till the autumn. Which coincidently is when they are planning to have a proper track/trace/isolate procedure in place. Probably when we’ll finally get the contact tracing app to use as well. It’s not about what we need to do, it’s about why we haven’t already done it.
Kelvin, thats what I was trying to get at, the economy has changed because of Covid, all of these food places are surplus now. I don't think we should be even attempting to prop them up.
people wont go for it, that ship has sailed.
The ship never got out of harbour. The people did go for it, and on the whole observed the lockdown very well. It was the government who lost their bottle, not the people. And they'll have to do it again, because the potential for mass death hasn't changed. When the second wave hits they'll face the same decision as they did in March about whether to accept hundreds of thousands of dead people in a few months, or whether to take action by locking down again.
all of these food places are surplus now
If by "now" you mean while we have mitigations in place because we don't have the virus under control, then that's true. It's also true of most of retail and the arts. We should be 'propping them up' until they can open again properly. We should be at that point already... but we're not... because of government decisions (and lack of good governance)... until we are, the government can either help, or be prepared for the financial and social costs ahead of us from unemployment and closed businesses... or it can flap about trying to look useful.
We need to get cases low, have a proper track/trace/isolate in place, have a working contact tracing app in use, and support businesses that can't properly open 'til we have. We also need to offer support to businesses closed by order of the government due to local outbreaks. Diverting funds to outlets trading freely, while mandating others stay closed without financial assistance, is odd... don't you think?
away and bile yer heid. That’s political right there…And clear bullshit.
Say I had no savings, how does 1400 over 3 months constitute support? It doesn’t even cover my rent…
tell me, how would you live on that for 3 months? I’d like to hear how?
There's circumstances that you're not disclosing that's resulted in that figure. If you want to talk through what they may be then then I'm happy to do so. Just drop me a PM.
I won't be boiling my head though.
This isn't really any hidden circumstances at all. I'll make it clear if you like: Don't mind people knowing.
Max they'll give you is £784.89, which constitutes £375.00 max toward your rent. and £409.89 standard allowance
Applied April 15th. They make you wait 5 weeks for payment
22 May 2020 £777.83 (tenner earnings submitted)
22 June 2020 £721.14 (£100 earnings submitted)
16th april to the 21 july is 3 months and 4 days living on - £1608.97. to be exact.
So you tell me, if no savings, how would you have lived on that?
Which is still not the point anyhow, point is what makes me uniquely unqualified for proper government support? The arbitrary cut off date they applied of tax returns for 2018/19 was an utter scandal. All just cause the gov couldn't be arsed dealing with a few potentially fraudulent claims (Rishi Sunaks exact words.) Even more galling was that they all latest.
Result, earnings decimated and savings decimated. Cheers, just exactly what I needed. Was nice being one the people the gov wasn't leaving behind.
I really just didn’t like the photo opportunity.
I don’t Really get why they do these types of things.
If you want to do it here that's fine. Makes boring reading for folk though.
The max rent of £375 is probably because you're under 35 and living in shared accommodation (known as the shared accommodation rate, under the LHA rules) or you live in an area that's got low rental costs, again defined by the Local Housing Allowance rate. I'm not defending the policy, just explaining it.
So the level of income for you as a single person with your individual circumstances (no partner/ children/health conditions etc) that the state would ensure you had to have to live on was £784.89 pcm.
Or £2,354.67 over your three month period.
Which is still not the point anyhow..
The rest, SEISS/furlough/policy, is your fight and others on here to discuss - like hell I want to get wrapped up in that. I was just trying to correct some of the incorrect things that are frequently posted (and there's more littered about this thread) about primary welfare and ensure people reading - the 99% that don't post all the time - are not mislead by the 1%.
Bit miffed on the stamp duty freeze. I completed in May.
bearnecessities, i think the point with UC is while it provides a basic safety net it does not take account of your situation before you needed it. If you had a decent income and outgoing before the reduced income feels a bit like going over a cliff edge. It would make more sense for it to taper down, pay people's full mortgage or rent for a few months, give people time adjust and reduce outgoing, or even just keep everything ticking over for a few months until people can get back into work.
As a higher earner it is a bit galling to see how little you get when you need help, especially if a partner works, versus how much you've tax you've paid in. And yes I did claim UC although they made it difficult, insisting my wife went into the job centre to prove she was during working hours (despite it being me instigating the claim and her already having to jump through numerous online hoops to prove who she was) despite being in full time education.
The few thousand UC I got helped but in no way did it even start to make up any shortfall. Im lucky, I have a very big overdraft facility which kept the roof over our head, we're now desperately paying that down, lock down and some prudent decision making is definitely helping with that but if it all goes wrong again it's my pre-arranged credit which will keep a roof over our heads not UC.
bearnecessities
Subscriber
If you want to do it here that’s fine. Makes boring reading for folk though.The max rent of £375 is probably because you’re under 35 and living in shared accommodation (known as the shared accommodation rate, under the LHA rules) or you live in an area that’s got low rental costs, again defined by the Local Housing Allowance rate. I’m not defending the policy, just explaining it.
So the level of income for you as a single person with your individual circumstances (no partner/ children/health conditions etc) that the state would ensure you had to have to live on was £784.89 pcm.
Or £2,354.67 over your three month period.
Which is still not the point anyhow..
The rest, SEISS/furlough/policy, is your fight and others on here to discuss – like hell I want to get wrapped up in that. I was just trying to correct some of the incorrect things that are frequently posted (and there’s more littered about this thread) about primary welfare and ensure people reading – the 99% that don’t post all the time – are not mislead by the 1%.
Mate, I just gave you the numbers, they are correct, you are correcting f all.. I don't need you to explain anything I'm quite aware of how it works, your numbers are wrong.
Or £2,354.67 over your three month period.
april 15 to july 21, is clearly 3 months I've told you the payment received.. You are the one giving out wrong information.
Why are you insistent on being such an arse over this?
You've still not explained how you would live on 1600 quid over 3 months?
Applied April 15th. They make you wait 5 weeks for payment
22 May 2020 £777.83 (tenner earnings submitted)
22 June 2020 £721.14 (£100 earnings submitted)16th april to the 21 july is 3 months and 4 days living on – £1608.97. to be exact.
You dates don't stack up. If you claimed on the 15th of the month your assessment period runs from 15th to 14th - which means you get paid 7 days later on the 21st.
But then you say that you're paid on the 22nd, which means that you would have claimed on the 16th. But if that's the case why did you pick a range which ends on the 21st - the very day before you get paid.
Is that what this is, you're trying to justify your definition of "x amount over 3 months" by missing out one day?
Why are you insistent on being such an arse over this?
We’re all wondering that.
Your point was clear, claiming Universal Credit does not offer you anywhere near the help that the furlough and self employed assistance would have, despite you paying your taxes to the same extent as those helped by those two schemes.
Nothing to do with the help announced for hospitality this week though, so perhaps just leave it there.
We’re all wondering that.
Nice chap aren't you. Do you like wading in and ganging up on someone? Feel good do you now? 'cos your little comment has made me feel shit. Bravo, big man.
How many times do I have to say I'm not justifying anything about the bloody policy.
You dates don’t stack up. If you claimed on the 15th of the month your assessment period runs from 15th to 14th – which means you get paid 7 days later on the 21st.
You don't get paid 7 days later, you get paid 5 weeks after applying
Is that what this is, you’re trying to justify your definition of “x amount over 3 months” by missing out one day?
I'm not justifying, I'm explaining how it works in reality, if I add in the other day, then it become 4 months at x amount.
What exactly are you trying to justify here? I've asked, how would you survive on this?
Your whole premise is the political statement (and yes, you are being extremely political here) That the government has covered everyone. That's bollocks.
I've been fine due to having a few months wages in the bank as a matter of course. But if someone didn't have that then in no way would universal credit have "covered" them. That's my point.
The details I'm showing are just illustrative to that point of someone being left high and dry during the covid period..
Once again, how would you live on this?? Please explain how the government has covered everyone and there's loads of help available over the covid period?
Your next statement will be ready on 18 July 2020. Check again then.
On 22 July 2020 you will be paid any money you are entitled to.
The amount you get is based on your circumstances from 16 June to 15 July 2020.
If your payment falls on a bank holiday or weekend you'll usually get it earlier.
applied 15th, assessment period runs from next day. since you are being such a pedant.
Do you like wading in and ganging up on someone?
Apologies, I didn’t realise this was a private conversation.
This is obviously an emotive subject with complex scenarios. To attempt a summary from someone with no skin in the game:
Universal Credit is much maligned, and prone to statements. It is, from what I can see, intended to deliver the amount a family can survive on. Bear is trying to put that across, personally I think it's pretty good at what it does. But it's being conflated with:
The Covid support systems, which have been really good for a lot of people, but have utterly failed a lot of others. Bear, this is where you need to wind it in a bit. It's obviously ****ing galling to hear about people like me being gifted stamp duty when the govt has failed to provide you with the same support as everyone else, just because of how you pay your tax. I can't think of a single reason why Binners, Seosam et all can't have thisextra support. It's NOT the same as Universal Credit, which is a safety net. This is a disaster fund to help maintain normality, they deserve more help.
fair comments, richp.
Universal credit is intended to save government money by deliberately impoverishment of people
It's an absolute pittance and not enough to survive on.
Disagree in part TJ, UC clearly IS enough for people to survive on. In my experience, when my family broke up and my ex needed to claim UC, the process was, despite my fears, not horrendous and the amount given wasn't a pittance. I was and am overpaying maintenance and other stuff to balance the two households. But IME it is a survivable amount. No, it isn't generous, yes, it should be more. IMO, the best thing would be to raise the minimum wage and UC - then you can lift more out of poverty and still incentivise work.
I can’t think of a single reason why Binners, Seosam et all can’t have thisextra support.
It just seems like a completely arbitrary decision. You have two groups of people, employees and freelancers, both of whom pay tax and NI on their earnings in exactly the same way (PAYE)
So they’ve decided that Group A will receive full government support and will be furloughed on 80% of salary, but Group B will get nothing at all.
It’s beyond any logical reason, but it’s very real. I’ve been luckier than most but a lot of people are in serious trouble, and nobody seems to give a shit.
I’m sure you can imagine the anger and resentment.
Martin Lewis has been extremely active all along in lobbying the government to include PAYE Freelancers in the furlough scheme, as it makes no sense not too, but they’re not interested