Should Furlough end ?

[Rileybobs]

Transmission, the origin was china it's not rocket science to understand the correlation.

When the virus was just in China it probably travelled to other nations by plane. Now the virus is in other countries what is the difference between it travelling by plane, train or bus?

The poster I was querying claimed that theatres and nightclubs should be open because you don’t have to fly to them. So yes, I would say it is on a par with rocket science for me to understand the correlation.

[Down_Rover]

No such thing as self employed furlough.

There was an equivalent furlough scheme for self employed who were prevented from working

I think it was aimed at the likes of self employed bar owners/restauranters.

[Spiral]

Too many of you on here are treating this as though debt is the issue. The biggest issue with covid is not debt, but the double whammy of a supply side and a demand side shock, and you can't even begin to address govt debt until you've stabilised the country from the effects of these shocks, which in the context of covid are intrinsically related. Household debt is not govt debt and it shouldn't be treated the same way. While lowering debt/GDP is a sensible long-term goal, the measures we're taking today aren't (or rather, shouldn't be) primarily concerned with national accounts, but rather trying to prevent sustained, long term depression-era demand slumps or ever more severe contractions to the economy. High debt/GDP makes debt servicing more expensive over 2, 5, 10 year periods, sure, but too many of you on here are ignoring that the cost of servicing debt is also a product of market confidence in our ability to pay up, and that is informed by the productivity of the nation. Japan's debt, for instance, looks obscene when you first see it but it is a very productive nation and so its debt levels have been more manageable than a country whose debt to GDP is far lower but whose economy is is far less productive.

The UK lost its AAA credit rating for the first time in over 30 years as it dropped to Aa1 in 2013. Not 2008, or 09 during the financial crisis, but in 2013, at the time the govt was hell bent on shrinking the size of the state, and the drop in the rating was because of subdued growth with little sign of a turnaround as much as it was because of the UK debt burden, something that is rather predictable when you redundify loads of public sector workers and don't pay the ones left enough money for them to recycle into the economy. Without intervention of some sort, it'll be the annihilation of whole industries which will never return. Such a permanent blow to the nation's productivity will have as big if not greater a bearing on the price of our debt than the mere total owed. The free market will not pick this up, and neither solely will free-market oriented supply-side ideology, because supply-side ideology is sort of in opposition to public health goals right now. (For example, rates cuts on concert venues won't matter much if the concert venue is told it is to remain closed, and an income tax cut won't exactly help those without an income). Evidence throughout history shows that govt intervention during crisis can be the adrenaline shot needed to spur growth. This is something that is usually antithetical to Tory ideology, but we'll see if they're pushed into common sense sooner or later. Save the economy first, think about debt after. You can't pay back your debt if you don't have an economy left to create value.

Last thing I'll say, there's no such thing as back to normal. Even if, knowing what we know now about covid, you were to be so cold as to let the virus take its natural course and kill tens of thousands, remove all social distancing guidelines and let folks gather like we're back in January 2020, the simple fact of the matter is that people, now in the knowledge that covid is much more dangerous than a flu like they (and I, admittedly) might have initially thought when it started making news - those people will do what they feel it takes to stay safe. Allow cinemas to open at full capacity, go for it, great, but good luck actually convincing folks to go. The behaviour of people will affect the economy. It's nonsensical to assume enough people are going to fully participate in the economy in the way they did before this virus hit. I know for a fact I'm not going to a footy match (were they to open to crowds) until this is all over, even if a vaccine is years away, because I don't want to kill my family or be deprived from seeing them by self isolating every time I come into contact with some infected person. I can't be alone in thinking like that.

[Marney&Mee]

Too many of you on here are treating this as though debt is the issue. The biggest issue with covid is not debt, but the double whammy of a supply side and a demand side shock, and you can't even begin to address govt debt until you've stabilised the country from the effects of these shocks, which in the context of covid are intrinsically related. Household debt is not govt debt and it shouldn't be treated the same way. While lowering debt/GDP is a sensible long-term goal, the measures we're taking today aren't (or rather, shouldn't be) primarily concerned with national accounts, but rather trying to prevent sustained, long term depression-era demand slumps or ever more severe contractions to the economy. High debt/GDP makes debt servicing more expensive over 2, 5, 10 year periods, sure, but too many of you on here are ignoring that the cost of servicing debt is also a product of market confidence in our ability to pay up, and that is informed by the productivity of the nation. Japan's debt, for instance, looks obscene when you first see it but it is a very productive nation and so its debt levels have been more manageable than a country whose debt to GDP is far lower but whose economy is is far less productive.

The UK lost its AAA credit rating for the first time in over 30 years as it dropped to Aa1 in 2013. Not 2008, or 09 during the financial crisis, but in 2013, at the time the govt was hell bent on shrinking the size of the state, and the drop in the rating was because of subdued growth with little sign of a turnaround as much as it was because of the UK debt burden, something that is rather predictable when you redundify loads of public sector workers and don't pay the ones left enough money for them to recycle into the economy. Without intervention of some sort, it'll be the annihilation of whole industries which will never return. Such a permanent blow to the nation's productivity will have as big if not greater a bearing on the price of our debt than the mere total owed. The free market will not pick this up, and neither solely will free-market oriented supply-side ideology, because supply-side ideology is sort of in opposition to public health goals right now. (For example, rates cuts on concert venues won't matter much if the concert venue is told it is to remain closed, and an income tax cut won't exactly help those without an income). Evidence throughout history shows that govt intervention during crisis can be the adrenaline shot needed to spur growth. This is something that is usually antithetical to Tory ideology, but we'll see if they're pushed into common sense sooner or later. Save the economy first, think about debt after. You can't pay back your debt if you don't have an economy left to create value.

Last thing I'll say, there's no such thing as back to normal. Even if, knowing what we know now about covid, you were to be so cold as to let the virus take its natural course and kill tens of thousands, remove all social distancing guidelines and let folks gather like we're back in January 2020, the simple fact of the matter is that people, now in the knowledge that covid is much more dangerous than a flu like they (and I, admittedly) might have initially thought when it started making news - those people will do what they feel it takes to stay safe. Allow cinemas to open at full capacity, go for it, great, but good luck actually convincing folks to go. The behaviour of people will affect the economy. It's nonsensical to assume enough people are going to fully participate in the economy in the way they did before this virus hit. I know for a fact I'm not going to a footy match (were they to open to crowds) until this is all over, even if a vaccine is years away, because I don't want to kill my family or be deprived from seeing them by self isolating every time I come into contact with some infected person. I can't be alone in thinking like that.

Long time lurker?

[Spiral]

Long time lurker?

Come again?

[Jenny55]

Yes

For those saying that some sectors still can't open, I narrow it down to foreign tourist companies and the Air services that support them.

I think the problem of lockdown has been misread from the offset, as the government has twisted and turned to appease the media.
They should have stuck with the herd immunity they first invoked. Stopping perfectly healthy people from doing their job, to protect a very small percentage of the population, has knocked the country for 6.
We should have concentrated all our efforts into shielding those small minority that were at risk, and it should have been easy enough to put the steps in place to protect them, in fact easier than the mass changes that have occurred.

Spot on that Colburn. They have dug a hole so deep, it will be difficult to climb out of. Regarding the media and in particular the BBC, whatever the government do they will still be criticised by Keunsberg et.al.

[Colburn_Claret]

What's the relevance of flying?

It was in response to which businesses need to continue furlough. Imo the only businesses that still require it are the Airlines and support services. I cant see any need for nightclubs or rheayres to remain shut.

[Colburn_Claret]

It's not just elderly people with an underlying health condition.

It doesn't matter what age they are.
The people with underlying health conditions know who they are. The NHS know who they are. They are the only people that need shielding. It isn't, and never was necessary for the whole of the country, to go into lockdown.

[Rileybobs]

It was in response to which businesses need to continue furlough. Imo the only businesses that still require it are the Airlines and support services. I cant see any need for nightclubs or rheayres to remain shut.

Nightclubs are required to remain closed by law. Airlines are still operating. So why should airlines have access to the furlough scheme but not nightclubs?

[Jakubclaret]

When the virus was just in China it probably travelled to other nations by plane. Now the virus is in other countries what is the difference between it travelling by plane, train or bus?

The poster I was querying claimed that theatres and nightclubs should be open because you don’t have to fly to them. So yes, I would say it is on a par with rocket science for me to understand the correlation.

Sorry, understandably so I thought the other poster was opposed to flying as mode of transport bearing in mind how the virus first (LIKELY) hit the UK but as you rightfully state it's irrelevant now regarding the mode of transport, I'm personally opposed to any non essential travelling with arrivals & departures from & to the UK, if you are trying to contain something internally the usual idea is to contain something externally as well & the isolation & quarantine doesn't go far enough.

[Quicknick]

Yes

For those saying that some sectors still can't open, I narrow it down to foreign tourist companies and the Air services that support them.

I think the problem of lockdown has been misread from the offset, as the government has twisted and turned to appease the media.
They should have stuck with the herd immunity they first invoked. Stopping perfectly healthy people from doing their job, to protect a very small percentage of the population, has knocked the country for 6.
We should have concentrated all our efforts into shielding those small minority that were at risk, and it should have been easy enough to put the steps in place to protect them, in fact easier than the mass changes that have occurred.

The best post on here. I agree with every word.

It is as if the government has been pursuing a policy to ensure herd immunity cannot be reached. It's interesting that the countries who have had the most success effectively locking people up have got the worst 'second waves', although it should be stressed, second waves where people don't seem to know they've got it. Not much different to the first one.

[KateR]

my simple opinion is that no country has had what I call the second wave yet, need to get the global first wave in hand before the second happens, just my way of thinking.