Coronavirus: social, economic and other changes as a result of the pandemic

[oddoneout]

I must remember to look at the signs that recently appeared in town encouraging us to explore, shop etc. I think they are part of the district council's market towns initiative which has been running for 3 years, but it would be mildly interesting to see if EU money is involved.
An item in the local rag raised a possible positive from coronavirus relating to changes to ways of working. The fire service has a fair number of retained firefighter vacancies and was suggesting that people now WFH who were likely to continue doing so at least in part might like to consider putting themselves forward. In theory that might also apply to the likes of lifeboat volunteers, but a difficulty there is that in many locations the locals don't live near to the stations as the houses are now all secondhomes/AirBnB etc

[Bryn]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/19/uk-furlough-scheme-pays-out-millions-to-foreign-states-and-tax-exiles?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

[french frank]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...e_iOSApp_Other

I'd have liked that article to explain the matter in a bit more detail. Wealthy people are 'behind' companies which benefited - but they don't actually pocket the money themselves, do they? It goes to employees who otherwise might lose their jobs or have their pay cut. Does one really expect (I mean, in reality expect) the wealthy to fork out from their own wealth to protect their employees from hardship?

[Bryn]

I'd have liked that article to explain the matter in a bit more detail. Wealthy people are 'behind' companies which benefited - but they don't actually pocket the money themselves, do they? It goes to employees who otherwise might lose their jobs or have their pay cut. Does one really expect (I mean, in reality expect) the wealthy to fork out from their own wealth to protect their employees from hardship?

No, one expects them to play the system and get the relatively poor to pay the bill via the tax system. One might hope that democratically elected legislators might frame legislation to prevent such milking by the rich and powerful.

[french frank]

One might hope that democratically elected legislators might frame legislation to prevent such milking by the rich and powerful.

Yes, but the story could have made that point more clearly. What legislation would actually help those employees, not necessarily well paid or in secure jobs?

[Bryn]

Yes, but the story could have made that point more clearly. What legislation would actually help those employees, not necessarily well paid or in secure jobs?

Such decisions are beyond my training or pay grade but should not be beyond those of the legislators concerned.

[oddoneout]

I'd have liked that article to explain the matter in a bit more detail. Wealthy people are 'behind' companies which benefited - but they don't actually pocket the money themselves, do they? It goes to employees who otherwise might lose their jobs or have their pay cut. Does one really expect (I mean, in reality expect) the wealthy to fork out from their own wealth to protect their employees from hardship?

There have been reports of employees who are "officially" furloughed being expected to continue working (others have apparently chosen, without pressure, to game the system). The state bung obviously won't go to the employee nor appear in the books. There is also the question of how many of those well-off individuals or businesses actually make up the 20% difference between the state money and the employee's earnings. As one of those people(together with most of my fellow casual staff colleagues) who fell between the cracks of qualification for furlough payment all three times it was theoretically applicable I am doubly resentful(although not in the least surprised) at the news.

[french frank]

Such decisions are beyond my training or pay grade but should not be beyond those of the legislators concerned.

The bailing out of supermarkets was rebalanced by some of the supermarkets (eventually) handing their windfall back. Easy done because they had done well out of lockdown. But I agree with you: legislation which would have forced Mr Martin to take on a good proportion of the responsibility for looking after his Wetherspoons employees would have been good.

[oddoneout]

No, one expects them to play the system and get the relatively poor to pay the bill via the tax system. One might hope that democratically elected legislators might frame legislation to prevent such milking by the rich and powerful.

But that would disadvantage those of use to the party, so won't happen, although in this case I think it was initially the haste with which it was put together that created the "porous" framework and led to opportunities to ignore the spirit and intentions. Subsequent iterations are I would suspect done in the (full) knowledge of same.
Slightly off topic(but only slightly since it is another case of using the emergency Covid radar to push things through), talking of framing legislation to prevent unintended consequences, it is my opinion that the bill currently going through to increase police powers in the matter of protests has been deliberately framed to enable an "open to interpretation" (in the state's favour)approach, unless there is going to be a very clear definition of the point at which 'noise' and 'disruption' become actionable.

[Frances_iom]

It's the "enabling act" done in slow motion - with an 80 strong majority of non-thinking new MPs the Lord Protector (or rather his mates somewhat to the right of Pati Patel) can get what they want through and some 3 years in which to do it, before they need 'go' to the country with full police powers to clear any tedious demonstrations - these powers will long outlast the covid restrictions but having demonstrated that house arrest of the majority can be policed will make a very docile low pay workforce given the expected high unemployment rate.

[Anastasius]

It's the "enabling act" done in slow motion - with an 80 strong majority of non-thinking new MPs the Lord Protector (or rather his mates somewhat to the right of Pati Patel) can get what they want through and some 3 years in which to do it, before they need 'go' to the country with full police powers to clear any tedious demonstrations - these powers will long outlast the covid restrictions but having demonstrated that house arrest of the majority can be policed will make a very docile low pay workforce given the expected high unemployment rate.

Well, given the events in Bristol, perhaps we need those police powers since the protesters are having great difficulty in understanding the word 'peaceful' protest.

[oddoneout]

Well, given the events in Bristol, perhaps we need those police powers since the protesters are having great difficulty in understanding the word 'peaceful' protest.

A source of immense frustration and disappointment to those trying to draw attention to the problematic aspects of the bill. There will always be those who descend to violence, and sabotage justified and reasonable protest, more often than not(in my opinion) for no reason to do with the protest itself but just because the individuals concerned enjoy mindless violence and destruction - the itinerant and ever present rent-a-mob. The loosening of lockdown restrictions(whether actual or perceived) coupled with better weather will I fear see more of such incidents.

[Joseph K]

[Bryn]

Well, given the events in Bristol, perhaps we need those police powers since the protesters are having great difficulty in understanding the word 'peaceful' protest.

https://thegreatcritique.wordpress.com/2021/03/21/there-is-more-than-one-way-of-looking-at-the-violence-in-bristol/

I was alerted to this response by a Chris Williamson tweet.

[Bryn]

I think Bristol Mayor, Marvin Rees, has hit the nail on the head in his response, broadcast on BBC News, just now.