People on Furlough can only borrow £4.50.

[Switch625]

On 28/07/2020 at 19:34, spacedin said:

Plus I have a Help to Buy ISA.Incidentally I'm not sure where I stand with the ISA, the bonus could potentially take me over the savings threshold if it's counted like that.

So do I and it isn't.

https://www.helptobuy.gov.uk/help-to-buy-isa/how-does-it-work/

It is a bonus applied AFTER you instruct your solicitor or conveyancer to apply for the government bonus. i.e. don't touch the ISA until they tell you too and follow their instructions to the letter.

[Fromage Frais]

On 26/07/2020 at 13:05, dirtysteve said:

Staggering because as of July 19th it’s still as high as 9.5M. That’s a staggering amount of people still furloughed and potentially facing redundancy.

Yes as hospitality opened 4th.

Yes not all places have opened but chains and holiday area places have for sure.

You would think that would have brought it down by a million or more at least..... buts its grinding up.

Anything rolled out by the government quickly becomes the status quo it seems.

[Fromage Frais]

On 26/07/2020 at 13:05, dirtysteve said:

Staggering because as of July 19th it’s still as high as 9.5M. That’s a staggering amount of people still furloughed and potentially facing redundancy.

Yes as hospitality opened 4th.

Yes not all places have opened but chains and holiday area places have for sure.

You would think that would have brought it down by a million or more at least..... buts its grinding up.

Anything rolled out by the government quickly becomes the status quo it seems.

[Tulip_mania]

13 minutes ago, Fromage Frais said:

Yes as hospitality opened 4th.

Yes not all places have opened but chains and holiday area places have for sure.

You would think that would have brought it down by a million or more at least..... buts its grinding up.

Anything rolled out by the government quickly becomes the status quo it seems.

I think those numbers are cumulative, i.e. anyone who has ever been on furlough. It appears to have gone down from ~25% of the workforce to ~20%, but still seems quite high as most factories, shops etc either have reopened, or never will. Only Theatres, nightclubs, live music and sports stadiums really still restricted from opening.

[NobodyInParticular]

On 7/26/2020 at 7:11 AM, HovelinHove said:

Mind boggling, and none of these can get a mortgage, and might not be able to get one for a few months after they come off furlough...if they retain their jobs. How many of those will end up unemployed? 2-3 million? And these aren’t just sandwich sellers.

My wife works for a physiotherapist, and they furloughed their staff at the start of lockdown. The owner tried to get the staff to start work again at the beginning of July as their was huge growing demand for people to have treatment, but the physios wanted none of it, they are enjoying their holiday too much. The business may go bust now though, or at the very least lay off half the physios in September.

I personally think that everyone who was furloughed should have a higher rate of income tax after this. Why should others have to pay for it?

More likely, the staff felt H&S provisions were insufficient.

[HovelinHove]

42 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

More likely, the staff felt H&S provisions were insufficient.

They are all under 40...they do not need H & S provisions.

[NobodyInParticular]

9 hours ago, HovelinHove said:

They are all under 40...they do not need H & S provisions.

I didn't realise under 40s weren't able to get COVID at all. Maybe some have asthma or diabetes or have a spouse in a shielding category?

[Simhadri]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53618571

Coronavirus: More than half of furloughed staff 'back at work'

 

 

[spyguy]

7 minutes ago, Simhadri said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53618571

Coronavirus: More than half of furloughed staff 'back at work'

 

 

Which begs the question - Are the other half laid off?

[NobodyInParticular]

1 hour ago, spyguy said:

Which begs the question - Are the other half laid off?

The scheme is still ongoing, so why would they have been laid off? There are many places of work still not able to open (and some thought they were about to) that still need to furlough workers just because of restrictions, even absent insufficient demand for widgets.

Edited August 1, 2020 by NobodyInParticular

[HovelinHove]

3 hours ago, NobodyInParticular said:

I didn't realise under 40s weren't able to get COVID at all. Maybe some have asthma or diabetes or have a spouse in a shielding category?

Same goes for the flu. The risk of death under 40 from COVID is minuscule. 

[Habeas Domus]

2 hours ago, HovelinHove said:

Same goes for the flu. The risk of death under 40 from COVID is minuscule. 

The risk of YOU dying under 40 may be miniscule, but the risk of infecting someone else who goes on to die is still rather high.

The reactions I'm seeing to this pandemic is just more evidence that most people are mathematically illiterate - they have no idea how exponential growth works.

[HovelinHove]

4 hours ago, Habeas Domus said:

The risk of YOU dying under 40 may be miniscule, but the risk of infecting someone else who goes on to die is still rather high.

The reactions I'm seeing to this pandemic is just more evidence that most people are mathematically illiterate - they have no idea how exponential growth works.

I have a Ph.D. and worked in virology for 15 years, so I know precisely how it works. I am also familiar with how economies work, something you clearly are not, and if working age people who are extremely unlikely to suffer severe ill effects of this virus are just allowed to get on with life while elderly and vulnerable are shielded, then we will still have an economy left after this. Moreover we will be closer to herd immunity and slow the spread of the virus in the winter. Oh, and I am over 50 and have an elderly mother who I care for. I take a very different approach And am ver careful, but I do not believe others should be sitting on their backsides doing nothing using me as an excuse.

Edited August 1, 2020 by HovelinHove

[zugzwang]

6 minutes ago, HovelinHove said:

I have a Ph.D. and worked in virology for 15 years, so I know precisely how it works. I am also familiar with how economies work, something you clearly are not, and if working age people who are extremely unlikely to suffer severe ill effects of this virus are just allowed to get on with life while elderly and vulnerable ares shielded, then we will still have an economy left after this. Oh, and I am over 50 and have an elderly mother who I care for. I would take a very different approach, but I do not believe others should be sitting on their backsides doing nothing using me as an excuse.

No-one knows precisely how Covid-19 works, or the etiologies of its many sequelae.

Moreover, you manifestly know nothing about the science of beating the disease - hence your reckless promotion of herd immunity, rejected by virologists and healthcare experts everywhere in the world.

If the UK economy is knackered then it's the trillion pounds of debt your Tory friends ran up subsidising an echo housing bubble 2010-19 that's to blame, not the cost of the furlough scheme.

[GregBowman]

32 minutes ago, HovelinHove said:

I have a Ph.D. and worked in virology for 15 years, so I know precisely how it works. I am also familiar with how economies work, something you clearly are not, and if working age people who are extremely unlikely to suffer severe ill effects of this virus are just allowed to get on with life while elderly and vulnerable ares shielded, then we will still have an economy left after this. Oh, and I am over 50 and have an elderly mother who I care for. I would take a very different approach, but I do not believe others should be sitting on their backsides doing nothing using me as an excuse.

Wow so well put - I am an engineer originally and now consultancy blah blah. The ignorance and fear mongering without any regard to the data is breath taking - didn't really expect it on here to be fair.

I am used to carrying out risk assessments and it is obvious to anyone with half a brain that the 'exponential' risk is to:

People over 70

Our chubby friends

Those with underlying health problems

A slightly enhanced  risk in BAME communities

Outside these groups the risk is very very low. 

We are as a family care for my 90 year old Mum she has had carers three times  a day throughout this and a member of the family visiting lunch and bed time. She is in better health now than when all this started. My brother and I are both engineers and know how to follow protocols as do the rest of the family. We looked at the risk adjusted our behaviour to suit and surprise surprise it seems to have worked.

20 hours ago, NobodyInParticular said:

More likely, the staff felt H&S provisions were insufficient.

Seriously have you ever managed people ? Listen to yourself 

1. They are in health care provision, they will be pretty good at following protocols

2. It is not worth not going by the book because it invalidates your insurance.

More likely they are like 95% of the population and think their behaviour has no consequence they are just the same as the people who have crowded onto beaches - ignorant of the actual risk and using it as excuse to justify their actions

 

Edited August 1, 2020 by GregBowman

[GregBowman]

5 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

No-one knows precisely how Covid-19 works, or the etiologies of its many sequelae.

Moreover, you manifestly know nothing about the science of beating the disease - hence your reckless promotion of herd immunity, rejected by virologists and healthcare experts everywhere in the world.

If the UK economy is knackered then it's the trillion pounds of debt your Tory friends ran up subsidising an echo housing bubble 2010-19 that's to blame, not the cost of the furlough scheme.

He is not being reckless just saying make your own mind up

Obese people get it bad as do people with underlying health conditions 

The furlough scheme is now a joke and only putting off the inevitable 

You don't ' beat' this you work around it waiting for a vaccine is la la land. Follow protocols, test on a massive scale, provide massive resource to heal people if they do get ill, work on therapies not unicorn cures as you would any other condition alongside the search for a vaccine

 

 

Edited August 1, 2020 by GregBowman

[NobodyInParticular]

Hopefully protocols are strong enough, but the reason given by the original poster sounds unlikely.

Edited August 1, 2020 by NobodyInParticular

[HovelinHove]

1 hour ago, GregBowman said:

He is not being reckless just saying make your own mind up

Obese people get it bad as do people with underlying health conditions 

The furlough scheme is now a joke and only putting off the inevitable 

You don't ' beat' this you work around it waiting for a vaccine is la la land. Follow protocols, test on a massive scale, provide massive resource to heal people if they do get ill, work on therapies not unicorn cures as you would any other condition alongside the search for a vaccine

 

 

Oh no...I just got exposed to Zugwang. He is on my ignore list because he is an absolute bell end, but for some reason I was able to read your quote of him.

To your points. yes, following a systematic approach to the data Will yield the best results. I was Uber cautious at the beginning (Early Feb), telling all my friends to avoid public transport, socialise less etc then when the demographic data emerged in mid March I realised that it was nothing like The Spanish flu and therefore needed a tiered approach. Yes, lockdown for a few weeks to get things under control, but after that everyone under 40 should have been let out to party basically. In that event COVID would have swept through that age group, barely causing more than a runny nose, and we would have had 20-30% immunity by now, which would slow the spread of the virus as other groups emerged from hiding. In addition we are much better at treating it now. Anyway, I have come to realise that the majority of people (engineers and Ph.D. chemists aside) are thick as mince.

[GregBowman]

2 hours ago, HovelinHove said:

Oh no...I just got exposed to Zugwang. He is on my ignore list because he is an absolute bell end, but for some reason I was able to read your quote of him.

To your points. yes, following a systematic approach to the data Will yield the best results. I was Uber cautious at the beginning (Early Feb), telling all my friends to avoid public transport, socialise less etc then when the demographic data emerged in mid March I realised that it was nothing like The Spanish flu and therefore needed a tiered approach. Yes, lockdown for a few weeks to get things under control, but after that everyone under 40 should have been let out to party basically. In that event COVID would have swept through that age group, barely causing more than a runny nose, and we would have had 20-30% immunity by now, which would slow the spread of the virus as other groups emerged from hiding. In addition we are much better at treating it now. Anyway, I have come to realise that the majority of people (engineers and Ph.D. chemists aside) are thick as mince.

? and even some of those !

[spacedin]

4 hours ago, HovelinHove said:

Oh no...I just got exposed to Zugwang. He is on my ignore list because he is an absolute bell end, but for some reason I was able to read your quote of him.

To your points. yes, following a systematic approach to the data Will yield the best results. I was Uber cautious at the beginning (Early Feb), telling all my friends to avoid public transport, socialise less etc then when the demographic data emerged in mid March I realised that it was nothing like The Spanish flu and therefore needed a tiered approach. Yes, lockdown for a few weeks to get things under control, but after that everyone under 40 should have been let out to party basically. In that event COVID would have swept through that age group, barely causing more than a runny nose, and we would have had 20-30% immunity by now, which would slow the spread of the virus as other groups emerged from hiding. In addition we are much better at treating it now. Anyway, I have come to realise that the majority of people (engineers and Ph.D. chemists aside) are thick as mince.

I'm not sure I really agree with you however, imagine if the government infected everyone 40 and under. It would be extremely unethical to do so but at least they'd know who had it and would achieve a level of herd immunity without exposing the middle aged/elderly to it if they also forced quarantined everyone. 

But then, a better idea would be to purposefully infect young people to find out which vaccine works the best. 

[HovelinHove]

3 hours ago, spacedin said:

I'm not sure I really agree with you however, imagine if the government infected everyone 40 and under. It would be extremely unethical to do so but at least they'd know who had it and would achieve a level of herd immunity without exposing the middle aged/elderly to it if they also forced quarantined everyone. 

But then, a better idea would be to purposefully infect young people to find out which vaccine works the best. 

There’s a difference between deliberately infecting everyone, and allowing the virus to run its natural course. Historically people have died from viruses all the time, and this is not a particularly deadly virus, but we have become so risk averse in the West (or we are being manipulated for the Evil Reset) that we hide at the faintest hint of sickness.

[MinistryMan]

20 hours ago, NobodyInParticular said:

The scheme is still ongoing, so why would they have been laid off? There are many places of work still not able to open (and some thought they were about to) that still need to furlough workers just because of restrictions, even absent insufficient demand for widgets.

Thousands furloughed are still working by my reckoning.

A straw-poll on family & friends and the girlfriend (she’s well respected in hospitality), shows several major employers have pulled a fast one by either topping staff up to 100% pay so long as they work upto 20hrs a week on the quiet, or worse, agree a new contract on 80% of their old pay, but don’t tell HMRC, gov continues to pay the furlough, which equals 100% of employees new wages and employee returns to work for 15-20hrs a week, but must keep it quiet to keep their job. It’s rife I tell you.

The GF gets a call everyday from some hospitality group asking to keep it quiet their staff are on furlough but still working, but please can she help them out and advise, but mustn’t use personal names or direct email addresses when contacting them just in case HMRC are watching!

And I’m talking some big household names playing the furlough fiddle!

[NobodyInParticular]

30 minutes ago, MinistryMan said:

Thousands furloughed are still working by my reckoning.

A straw-poll on family & friends and the girlfriend (she’s well respected in hospitality), shows several major employers have pulled a fast one by either topping staff up to 100% pay so long as they work upto 20hrs a week on the quiet, or worse, agree a new contract on 80% of their old pay, but don’t tell HMRC, gov continues to pay the furlough, which equals 100% of employees new wages and employee returns to work for 15-20hrs a week, but must keep it quiet to keep their job. It’s rife I tell you.

The GF gets a call everyday from some hospitality group asking to keep it quiet their staff are on furlough but still working, but please can she help them out and advise, but mustn’t use personal names or direct email addresses when contacting them just in case HMRC are watching!

And I’m talking some big household names playing the furlough fiddle!

I am in favour of the scheme to get us through difficult times, but that is absolutely disgusting.

[spacedin]

1 hour ago, NobodyInParticular said:

I am in favour of the scheme to get us through difficult times, but that is absolutely disgusting.

I agree, the attitude of these companies stinks. 

Edited August 2, 2020 by spacedin

[dugsbody]

6 hours ago, HovelinHove said:

There’s a difference between deliberately infecting everyone, and allowing the virus to run its natural course. Historically people have died from viruses all the time, and this is not a particularly deadly virus, but we have become so risk averse in the West (or we are being manipulated for the Evil Reset) that we hide at the faintest hint of sickness.

Are you volunteering to take one for the team? I know I'm still taking precautions because we just don't know what the long term impact is. What if you go about your life, not caring about the virus "because we've become too risk averse", you contract it and it turns out the long term impact is permanent heart damage leaving you unable to perform activities to the standard you're used to? What if a vaccine arrives six months later that would have prevented this?

The problem our planet has is that we have entered into a culture war. People of a certain disposition no longer want to listen to scientists or experts, seeing them as part of some (mythical) "liberal elite" out to control their lives and force them to be multicultural and other such awfulness.

So we end up with people like you deciding that because "the other side" is in favour of caution over the virus, you're going to believe the opposite. 

And it is going to get worse. I see volatile times ahead.