• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

scaramanga said:
What if their monthly bills are already over that figure?

That's before food, clothing, transport, repairs, etc.
Click to expand...

Maybe they've extended themselves further than they need.
I'm coming from a place of working with and for people typically with incomes of less than £1000/month from which they have to pay monthly bills as well as the other things you add there.

The mitigation to this argument is the ridiculous south of England mortgage situation which I accept distorts the situation
 
Glenda's Legs said:
If your cloth is already cut to living on more than that, then it's not so easy.
The £2500 furlough payment is taxable. So it's actually c. £2000. Live in or around London/home counties and rent/mortgage could take a significant chunk of that. Add council tax, household bills, feeding yourself and family, and it soon whittles away.
Yes of course people do manage to live on less, but to do so isn't necessarily easy.
Click to expand...

I'm a debt adviser so you're singing my song.
 
I heard there were 16 million adults with savings of less than a £100 in the uk.

That explains some of the lack of resilience.

The main reason for low savings levels is because various benefits are means tested. So there is effectively a double incentive for the feckless to spaff periodic earnings up the wall.
 
scaramanga said:
What if their monthly bills are already over that figure?

That's before food, clothing, transport, repairs, etc.
Click to expand...
Genuinely this not meant as a dig - it's meant as a debate point.
But that goes against Tory ideology of having larger govt and extreme state support and high taxes to fund such support.
And that is going to be an uncomfortable question that will have to be handled after this.
The argument that people "should be able to survive on 2.5k" is as equally naive as Tory policy about what people can survive on.
People will cut their cloth according to their income levels and prices where they live. It only takes an income of around 100k to be in the UK top 1% - 2.5k a month ( net from appx 40k salary) is a good income, but doesn't make you rich, and doesn't go that far in most major UK cities.

So any talk of a reduction is a terrible idea. We need to fund survival now and then tweak the tax system in the future. We should all be looking out for eachother - at a time of uncontrollable income suppression that means the higher the earner, the more financial help they will get. Going forward they should pay more back by way of a change to tax rates - probably just adding one tier to income tax
 
monkeybarry said:
Genuinely this not meant as a dig - it's meant as a debate point.
But that goes against Tory ideology of having larger govt and extreme state support and high taxes to fund such support.
And that is going to be an uncomfortable question that will have to be handled after this.
The argument that people "should be able to survive on 2.5k" is as equally naive as Tory policy about what people can survive on.
People will cut their cloth according to their income levels and prices where they live. It only takes an income of around 100k to be in the UK top 1% - 2.5k a month ( net from appx 40k salary) is a good income, but doesn't make you rich, and doesn't go that far in most major UK cities.

So any talk of a reduction is a terrible idea. We need to fund survival now and then tweak the tax system in the future. We should all be looking out for eachother - at a time of uncontrollable income suppression that means the higher the earner, the more financial help they will get. Going forward they should pay more back by way of a change to tax rates - probably just adding one tier to income tax
Click to expand...
I think the answer is to have everyone back at work. That starts with opening schools and nurseries.

fudge the unions.
 
monkeybarry said:
This is when to close parks.
Give a warning. 15 mins later, if adherence to rules hasn't occurred, start shutting it down and moving people on.
Click to expand...

Viruses hate sunlight. Vitamin D helps fight infection.

Can’t blame any of them. And being more than 2 meters from other ‘households’ people should be allowed out their flats.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
that furlough salary is bloody well judged but it does make me wonder how we expect pensioners to survive on a fraction of that.
 
JerusalemMan said:
Crazy to think that people would 'struggle' to live on £2500/month.
They easily could, but perhaps a re-evaluation of lifestyle would be in order.
Click to expand...

Mostly house prices mate, average 3 bed semi in the south east is probably around 600 plus bills, food etc on top and it all adds up. Agree people need to stop buying range rovers on credit and generally racking up credit card debt and buying clothes on Klarna etc but that just seems to be the culture these days foiled by marketing and social media influencers.
 
scaramanga said:
They're nowhere near each other.
Click to expand...
Except for the ones that are.
And hey, maybe they are all households - it's very possible there are 5/6 people living together..... although unlikely.

The issue is, once you allow a lax approach to social distancing you can't put a lid back on it.
 
monkeybarry said:
This is when to close parks.
Give a warning. 15 mins later, if adherence to rules hasn't occurred, start shutting it down and moving people on.
Click to expand...

Agree. Those who aren't exercising are clearly breaching the guidelines, aren't they?

It's one thing to debate what the guidelines should. It's another to openly flout them, and be seen to get away with doing so. The latter isn't going to help anything going forward.
 
monkeybarry said:
Except for the ones that are.
And hey, maybe they are all households - it's very possible there are 5/6 people living together..... although unlikely.

The issue is, once you allow a lax approach to social distancing you can't put a lid back on it.
Click to expand...
I think if the govt can't do the right thing then it's up to people to do it in enough numbers to make it unenforceable.
 
monkeybarry said:
Except for the ones that are.
And hey, maybe they are all households - it's very possible there are 5/6 people living together..... although unlikely.

The issue is, once you allow a lax approach to social distancing you can't put a lid back on it.
Click to expand...

Being indoors in places like offices, cinemas etc is where the virus spreads. Outdoors with sunlight disinfecting and fresh air the potential for catching or passing on the virus is negligible if you’re not touching others.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
My parents reckon they are the only people in their cul de sac who haven’t had family and friends round in the last few days, at least 20 houses
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back