Nationwide Index Mar 21

[GregBowman]

50 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

And the 3.5 million young Britons still living in the family home because they can neither afford to rent or buy?

Who and what should we blame for that?

No one ? Blame isn't very productive and doesn't help them - it is what it is and we should start looking for solutions from here 

[GregBowman]

20 hours ago, spyguy said:

Laying off a large number of people is a ballache.

And it costs money.

Airlines have no cash flow at the mo.

If they announce lots of layoffs then they might be insolvent.

Theyll be hoping people will f-off before they have to lay off and take a cash hit. Adn that the access to cash improves in the meantime.

 

 

Yep exactly redundancy costs 

[Money Frugality]

1 hour ago, zugzwang said:

And the 3.5 million young Britons still living in the family home because they can neither afford to rent or buy?

Who and what should we blame for that?

They can afford to rent. They’re enjoying the free ride in a nice home fully paid for. Human nature. 

[househunter123]

2 hours ago, zugzwang said:

And the 3.5 million young Britons still living in the family home because they can neither afford to rent or buy?

Who and what should we blame for that?

 

How about greedy BtL LLs that prey off the needy and desperate, buying with impunity backed by the govt, and the MPS with millions of pounds worth of property in addition to their own. The MPs need low paid workers/migrants  as the businesses that donate to them too. 

 

not in my back yard

 

NIMBY, an acronym for the phrase "not in my back yard", or Nimby, is a characterization of opposition by residents to proposed developments in their local area, as well as support for strict land use regulations.

 

[zugzwang]

1 hour ago, Money Frugality said:

They can afford to rent. They’re enjoying the free ride in a nice home fully paid for. Human nature. 

 

It's a reversion to Victorian penury. Multiple generations huddled under one roof even though the UK is fantastically richer today than it was even thirty years ago.

A boomerang generation of kids that should be living independently and making families of their own.

[StuartMc]

On 31/03/2021 at 14:59, ST675R said:

I agree that a lot of redundancies are being put off due to the furlough scheme for all the reasons others have given plus the simple burying of the head in the sand that goes on.

 

Burying your head in the sand and hoping for a miracle is what the government has been doing this whole time, so why shouldn't everyone else do it?

But that's probably a wise course in this case. I expect from past performance that when the time comes for the government to face awkward decisions coming out of furlough, rather than making the difficult correct choice to make companies stand on their own two feet, they will instead bail them out with yet more money borrowed from the future. Or maybe screw over the employees by excusing some of obligations due to the workers.

Stuart
 

[ST675R]

22 hours ago, StuartMc said:

 

Burying your head in the sand and hoping for a miracle is what the government has been doing this whole time, so why shouldn't everyone else do it?

But that's probably a wise course in this case. I expect from past performance that when the time comes for the government to face awkward decisions coming out of furlough, rather than making the difficult correct choice to make companies stand on their own two feet, they will instead bail them out with yet more money borrowed from the future. Or maybe screw over the employees by excusing some of obligations due to the workers.

Stuart
 

That sounds about right. Most likely would be a bit of both I'm guessing.

I think it will reach the point where there is two tiers of benefits:

1: Those on regular benefits from before Covid getting bugger all

2: Those still on furlough or (Insert your own new program name) and kept in stasis on 2K ish per month.

I can't see that ending well.

 

[msi]

12 minutes ago, ST675R said:

That sounds about right. Most likely would be a bit of both I'm guessing.

I think it will reach the point where there is two tiers of benefits:

1: Those on regular benefits from before Covid getting bugger all

2: Those still on furlough or (Insert your own new program name) and kept in stasis on 2K ish per month.

I can't see that ending well.

 

Could be a good way to introduce a 2nd 'Contributions based' welfare net alongside the current 'needs based' one.  Having an 'enhanced UC' rate that is paid when you can show a good work record encourages work and challenges the perception of welfare from a 'lifestyle' to a safety net.

Not sure what rate to use, but something like 1 weeks median pay for every 1.5 years of full NI would give you a real wage safety net for 2 months after 12 years of work

[ST675R]

28 minutes ago, msi said:

Could be a good way to introduce a 2nd 'Contributions based' welfare net alongside the current 'needs based' one.  Having an 'enhanced UC' rate that is paid when you can show a good work record encourages work and challenges the perception of welfare from a 'lifestyle' to a safety net.

Not sure what rate to use, but something like 1 weeks median pay for every 1.5 years of full NI would give you a real wage safety net for 2 months after 12 years of work

I think that's pretty much what they have in France, if you get laid off your benefits are a high % of your previous salary for a certain period of time.