"If you test positive for covid.....
Sound like encouragement to catch it if you’re broke?"
80% of applications are denied and it's found that low income earners are less likely to test to avoid having to isolate |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"If you test positive for covid.....
Sound like encouragement to catch it if you’re broke?
80% of applications are denied and it's found that low income earners are less likely to test to avoid having to isolate"
Yep. People can’t afford to sit at home. So many people slip through the nets. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Single mum. Off work for at least 2 ekks with covid. I've been rejected for the payment because I earn to much (£10 a week too much). So even though ssp won't cover my bills and rent, I can't get help. Thank god for jewelry I can sell |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The telegraph is reporting the government is considering giving a £500 one of payment regardless of employment status. "
Is that not just to boost the economy though rather than a covid or isolation payment.
I know there has been talk about each household in the UK being given a small lump sum before. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"The telegraph is reporting the government is considering giving a £500 one of payment regardless of employment status.
Is that not just to boost the economy though rather than a covid or isolation payment.
I know there has been talk about each household in the UK being given a small lump sum before."
Apparently not. A 12 page document has been leaked (apparently)
The stats on how many people come forward for testing and isolate when told are shameful. Test and trace is a waste of space because people won’t isolate. There’s even people going to work with symptoms because they can’t afford not to. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The telegraph is reporting the government is considering giving a £500 one of payment regardless of employment status.
Is that not just to boost the economy though rather than a covid or isolation payment.
I know there has been talk about each household in the UK being given a small lump sum before.
Apparently not. A 12 page document has been leaked (apparently)
The stats on how many people come forward for testing and isolate when told are shameful. Test and trace is a waste of space because people won’t isolate. There’s even people going to work with symptoms because they can’t afford not to. "
I saw something today about a person being contacted by test and trace last week and told to isolate until 26/12/2020. Useless  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The telegraph is reporting the government is considering giving a £500 one of payment regardless of employment status.
Is that not just to boost the economy though rather than a covid or isolation payment.
I know there has been talk about each household in the UK being given a small lump sum before.
Apparently not. A 12 page document has been leaked (apparently)
The stats on how many people come forward for testing and isolate when told are shameful. Test and trace is a waste of space because people won’t isolate. There’s even people going to work with symptoms because they can’t afford not to. "
So even if somebody doesn't work they would get 500 pounds?
I don't see how that is gonna work they should just not reject most of the people that currently apply for the 500 pound grant. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The telegraph is reporting the government is considering giving a £500 one of payment regardless of employment status.
Is that not just to boost the economy though rather than a covid or isolation payment.
I know there has been talk about each household in the UK being given a small lump sum before.
Apparently not. A 12 page document has been leaked (apparently)
The stats on how many people come forward for testing and isolate when told are shameful. Test and trace is a waste of space because people won’t isolate. There’s even people going to work with symptoms because they can’t afford not to.
I saw something today about a person being contacted by test and trace last week and told to isolate until 26/12/2020. Useless "
My friend's daughter got contacted by track and trace the day her 10 days should have been up but thankfully she had isolated anyway because straight away her mom told her that she had tested positive. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"The telegraph is reporting the government is considering giving a £500 one of payment regardless of employment status.
Is that not just to boost the economy though rather than a covid or isolation payment.
I know there has been talk about each household in the UK being given a small lump sum before.
Apparently not. A 12 page document has been leaked (apparently)
The stats on how many people come forward for testing and isolate when told are shameful. Test and trace is a waste of space because people won’t isolate. There’s even people going to work with symptoms because they can’t afford not to.
So even if somebody doesn't work they would get 500 pounds?
I don't see how that is gonna work they should just not reject most of the people that currently apply for the 500 pound grant. "
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The telegraph is reporting the government is considering giving a £500 one of payment regardless of employment status.
Is that not just to boost the economy though rather than a covid or isolation payment.
I know there has been talk about each household in the UK being given a small lump sum before.
Apparently not. A 12 page document has been leaked (apparently)
The stats on how many people come forward for testing and isolate when told are shameful. Test and trace is a waste of space because people won’t isolate. There’s even people going to work with symptoms because they can’t afford not to.
So even if somebody doesn't work they would get 500 pounds?
I don't see how that is gonna work they should just not reject most of the people that currently apply for the 500 pound grant.
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think. "
To be honest I think that is absurd.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
https://www.liverpool.gov.uk/communities-and-safety/emergency-planning/coronavirus/help-for-people-and-communities/benefits-advice-and-support/test-and-trace-support-payment/
Both me and my sister have it and neither of us qualified we both have very different circumstances |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I've been insisting for a long time that we should not expect people to lose out financially, if they have to isolate for the benefit of the country. People have to pay rent and feed themselves and family. Most were refused help on the current scheme.
We're either going to do this properly or we should stop pretending that we are.
The highest priority for our attention has to be those who have just become infected. They will infect others unless we help them to be secure at home |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've been insisting for a long time that we should not expect people to lose out financially, if they have to isolate for the benefit of the country. People have to pay rent and feed themselves and family. Most were refused help on the current scheme.
We're either going to do this properly or we should stop pretending that we are.
The highest priority for our attention has to be those who have just become infected. They will infect others unless we help them to be secure at home "
I recently tested positive with few symptoms have not been outside the door since before Xmas but NHS have been sending links for assistance and support to prevent going out, altho Iv not needed it, a lot of people might do, and having that offered support may make it easier for people to isolate properly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I've just returned to work for three days after isolating and have to isolate again
Fortunately my employer will pay me whilst I'm off and is treating all staff quite well
Shame that's not the case for everyone |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I've been insisting for a long time that we should not expect people to lose out financially, if they have to isolate for the benefit of the country. People have to pay rent and feed themselves and family. Most were refused help on the current scheme.
We're either going to do this properly or we should stop pretending that we are.
The highest priority for our attention has to be those who have just become infected. They will infect others unless we help them to be secure at home "
Well said |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I've been insisting for a long time that we should not expect people to lose out financially, if they have to isolate for the benefit of the country. People have to pay rent and feed themselves and family. Most were refused help on the current scheme.
We're either going to do this properly or we should stop pretending that we are.
The highest priority for our attention has to be those who have just become infected. They will infect others unless we help them to be secure at home
I recently tested positive with few symptoms have not been outside the door since before Xmas but NHS have been sending links for assistance and support to prevent going out, altho Iv not needed it, a lot of people might do, and having that offered support may make it easier for people to isolate properly. "
Hope you are getting back to full health.
The problem in winter is that prepay heating is very expensive. People can get evicted easily too. And if people need to feed kids and keep a family secure, if they're on zero hours type work arrangements, it's nothing like what a millionaire working in government faces. Most people are not any longer living with much money or security. The system has to be designed to work for them. As they may typically work around lots of others, we need to keep them with some financial means that are immediate, helping to top up expensive prepaid energy meters and buy food for family at home all day long. £500 for 2 weeks helps. It should be paid quickly though |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've been insisting for a long time that we should not expect people to lose out financially, if they have to isolate for the benefit of the country. People have to pay rent and feed themselves and family. Most were refused help on the current scheme.
We're either going to do this properly or we should stop pretending that we are.
The highest priority for our attention has to be those who have just become infected. They will infect others unless we help them to be secure at home
I recently tested positive with few symptoms have not been outside the door since before Xmas but NHS have been sending links for assistance and support to prevent going out, altho Iv not needed it, a lot of people might do, and having that offered support may make it easier for people to isolate properly. "
We had this to all though when you click on the links and follow what you need to do to get support nothing happens.
We had a call yesterday from the isolation support team asking if we need help during our self isolation after a positive test and being told to self isolate.
We told them no as our isolation period ran out on the 6th!
The lady said, yes sorry there is a backlog!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The way I heard it of george eustace this morning is it's in the pipeline for when we eventually come out of lockdown.
But it's still not confirmed as of yet. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The way I heard it of george eustace this morning is it's in the pipeline for when we eventually come out of lockdown.
But it's still not confirmed as of yet."
Mind you its fucking hard getting a straight yes or no to anything. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
"
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening"
Yes.
I think this kind of spend, erring on the side of too generous, would save money in the long run. Bringing cases, hospitalisations and deaths down, helping to end lockdown. And also reducing medium to long term morbidity/disability. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I wouldn't get your hopes up.
This is just one of many proposals, and very very slim chance of it happening.
I'm sure a journalist will ask BJ at the 5pm briefing tonight. "
I'm not.
I'm saying supporting people to isolate will slow spread. That's been obvious for months. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"I would of thought This country is in enough debt already, why make the hole any bigger? Sooner or later somebody is gonna have to repay all this money
"
The hole made bigger to help the people who would struggle to make ends meet if they had to isolate? Did you say the same when there were multi million pound contracts been given out to friends and acquaintances of the Government as we will be paying for that a lot longer than for this? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I would of thought This country is in enough debt already, why make the hole any bigger? Sooner or later somebody is gonna have to repay all this money
The hole made bigger to help the people who would struggle to make ends meet if they had to isolate? Did you say the same when there were multi million pound contracts been given out to friends and acquaintances of the Government as we will be paying for that a lot longer than for this?"
Also, person A contracts it and feels fine. Can't afford to skip work, so doesn't. Person A gives it to person B who spends weeks in ICU.
I'm sure that spending £500 to keep person A at home would have been cheaper... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I would of thought This country is in enough debt already, why make the hole any bigger? Sooner or later somebody is gonna have to repay all this money
The hole made bigger to help the people who would struggle to make ends meet if they had to isolate? Did you say the same when there were multi million pound contracts been given out to friends and acquaintances of the Government as we will be paying for that a lot longer than for this?"
U.K. paid 160 billion for bailouts 2010 this so far has cost £400 billion ,if people think there was austerity then what will this turn into |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I would of thought This country is in enough debt already, why make the hole any bigger? Sooner or later somebody is gonna have to repay all this money
The hole made bigger to help the people who would struggle to make ends meet if they had to isolate? Did you say the same when there were multi million pound contracts been given out to friends and acquaintances of the Government as we will be paying for that a lot longer than for this? U.K. paid 160 billion for bailouts 2010 this so far has cost £400 billion ,if people think there was austerity then what will this turn into "
Well yes, isn't it a shame the government have prolonged the pain rather than imposing effective controls from the start  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I would of thought This country is in enough debt already, why make the hole any bigger? Sooner or later somebody is gonna have to repay all this money
The hole made bigger to help the people who would struggle to make ends meet if they had to isolate? Did you say the same when there were multi million pound contracts been given out to friends and acquaintances of the Government as we will be paying for that a lot longer than for this?
Also, person A contracts it and feels fine. Can't afford to skip work, so doesn't. Person A gives it to person B who spends weeks in ICU.
I'm sure that spending £500 to keep person A at home would have been cheaper..."
This:
It comes as the BMJ thinks the support should be a lot more than £500
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4972
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If you test positive for covid.....
Sound like encouragement to catch it if you’re broke?
80% of applications are denied and it's found that low income earners are less likely to test to avoid having to isolate"
That's because currently done through local authorities and funds are limited. Discussion is now to do it through treasury....but don't hold your breath |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim "
It's not even definite if it is going to happen yet. But I agree some would scam it just like furlough got scammed.
They have to weigh up the benefits of doing it though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"Great so all those who broke all of the guidance can now get a hand out.
Stupidity.com"
That is hardly fair, you don't know if people purposely broke guidelines, they could be in work, go food shopping etc |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Great so all those who broke all of the guidance can now get a hand out.
Stupidity.com
That is hardly fair, you don't know if people purposely broke guidelines, they could be in work, go food shopping etc"
It was aimed at those who did in fairness. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
It's not even definite if it is going to happen yet. But I agree some would scam it just like furlough got scammed.
They have to weigh up the benefits of doing it though."
It's funny how people are happy with politicians creaming off £11b but god forbid anyone else tries to blag the system. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It’s what should have been happening from the start.
People should have been incentivised to test from day 1 to cut community transmission.
It also often works out not much more expensive to pay out universally than to put a complicated eligibility system into place.
It’s months and months too late |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It’s what should have been happening from the start.
People should have been incentivised to test from day 1 to cut community transmission.
It also often works out not much more expensive to pay out universally than to put a complicated eligibility system into place.
It’s months and months too late "
Yup. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"Great so all those who broke all of the guidance can now get a hand out.
Stupidity.com
That is hardly fair, you don't know if people purposely broke guidelines, they could be in work, go food shopping etc
It was aimed at those who did in fairness."
As in what situations? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?"
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I would of thought This country is in enough debt already, why make the hole any bigger? Sooner or later somebody is gonna have to repay all this money
Dont worry
They will get it all back."
Most likely the evil "dole scroungers" , disabled and vulnerable, hope not but won't be suprising |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks."
I still think it's cheaper to (safeguard for fraud but) err on the side of paying out, than letting this continue to rip. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I would of thought This country is in enough debt already, why make the hole any bigger? Sooner or later somebody is gonna have to repay all this money
Dont worry
They will get it all back.
Most likely the evil "dole scroungers" , disabled and vulnerable, hope not but won't be suprising "
Well its already been made clear its not going to be ones who can most afford it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks."
Their mates would have to test positive to get £500.
If someone is thick enough to deliberately catch Covid to get £500 then there are bigger issues.
Also, you can’t base the entire system around the tiny number of scammers who’ll try and take advantage. You have to deal with the majority. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
It's not even definite if it is going to happen yet. But I agree some would scam it just like furlough got scammed.
They have to weigh up the benefits of doing it though.
It's funny how people are happy with politicians creaming off £11b but god forbid anyone else tries to blag the system."
says a lot about people. I wonder if they're like thst due to the demonisation of those on welfare by Cameron and his cronies |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
It's not even definite if it is going to happen yet. But I agree some would scam it just like furlough got scammed.
They have to weigh up the benefits of doing it though.
It's funny how people are happy with politicians creaming off £11b but god forbid anyone else tries to blag the system.
says a lot about people. I wonder if they're like thst due to the demonisation of those on welfare by Cameron and his cronies "
Undoubtedly so.
The benefits system was decimated on the back of it despite the DWP’s own figures for error and fraud being 0.5% |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
Their mates would have to test positive to get £500.
If someone is thick enough to deliberately catch Covid to get £500 then there are bigger issues.
Also, you can’t base the entire system around the tiny number of scammers who’ll try and take advantage. You have to deal with the majority. "
Yes. The majority support lockdown and control measures, it's shown repeatedly.
This £500 (or whatever) just means that the choice "do I help with pandemic efforts or feed my kids" becomes less stark for those who aren't so well off. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I would of thought This country is in enough debt already, why make the hole any bigger? Sooner or later somebody is gonna have to repay all this money
The hole made bigger to help the people who would struggle to make ends meet if they had to isolate? Did you say the same when there were multi million pound contracts been given out to friends and acquaintances of the Government as we will be paying for that a lot longer than for this?
Also, person A contracts it and feels fine. Can't afford to skip work, so doesn't. Person A gives it to person B who spends weeks in ICU.
I'm sure that spending £500 to keep person A at home would have been cheaper..."
Yeah but we're kind of trusting the great British public that they won't just take the money and work anyway. I mean nobody would have taken the furlough mo ey but kept working all the way through would they? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks."
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I would of thought This country is in enough debt already, why make the hole any bigger? Sooner or later somebody is gonna have to repay all this money
The hole made bigger to help the people who would struggle to make ends meet if they had to isolate? Did you say the same when there were multi million pound contracts been given out to friends and acquaintances of the Government as we will be paying for that a lot longer than for this?
Also, person A contracts it and feels fine. Can't afford to skip work, so doesn't. Person A gives it to person B who spends weeks in ICU.
I'm sure that spending £500 to keep person A at home would have been cheaper...
Yeah but we're kind of trusting the great British public that they won't just take the money and work anyway. I mean nobody would have taken the furlough mo ey but kept working all the way through would they? "
I'm not saying fraud doesn't happen. I'm saying that erring on the side of paying out will be cheaper in suppressing the virus, given what we know about levels of fraud. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
Their mates would have to test positive to get £500.
If someone is thick enough to deliberately catch Covid to get £500 then there are bigger issues.
Also, you can’t base the entire system around the tiny number of scammers who’ll try and take advantage. You have to deal with the majority. "
I'm on the same page as you...just came across in a different way |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"I would of thought This country is in enough debt already, why make the hole any bigger? Sooner or later somebody is gonna have to repay all this money
The hole made bigger to help the people who would struggle to make ends meet if they had to isolate? Did you say the same when there were multi million pound contracts been given out to friends and acquaintances of the Government as we will be paying for that a lot longer than for this?
Also, person A contracts it and feels fine. Can't afford to skip work, so doesn't. Person A gives it to person B who spends weeks in ICU.
I'm sure that spending £500 to keep person A at home would have been cheaper...
Yeah but we're kind of trusting the great British public that they won't just take the money and work anyway. I mean nobody would have taken the furlough mo ey but kept working all the way through would they?
"
I think there is a controversial proposal is to share positive test data with the police, meaning someone who breaches isolation rules when infected could face prosecution which could prove a stumbling block for some who wanted to claim but would also obviously mean if caught being out you would be fined |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
"
That was late last night just before bed when the thread started. I've seen more about it this morning...and as I said on any last post i may have come across wrong. I'm in favour of everyone getting it who have caught it...but more so the ones who have been on their own since the virus came.
I was pointing out that what could happen but not saying i would stop it for that reason... it the government probably would |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening"
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Great so all those who broke all of the guidance can now get a hand out.
Stupidity.com"
This isn't true because I got covid but we have been shielding and I have probably less left the house handful of times since October.
We came in contact with someone on the 23ed December when my friend gave me a lift to an essential to an essential medical appointment.
I don't think blaming people and there is a lot of that going on at the moment is helping anyone.
Anyone who is on a low income should be financially supported. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?"
I think the vast majority wouldn't do this but that was a guy on the radio this morning that said he is skint and if one of his mates tested positive he would order a test and get them to take the swab. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I would of thought This country is in enough debt already, why make the hole any bigger? Sooner or later somebody is gonna have to repay all this money
The hole made bigger to help the people who would struggle to make ends meet if they had to isolate? Did you say the same when there were multi million pound contracts been given out to friends and acquaintances of the Government as we will be paying for that a lot longer than for this?
Also, person A contracts it and feels fine. Can't afford to skip work, so doesn't. Person A gives it to person B who spends weeks in ICU.
I'm sure that spending £500 to keep person A at home would have been cheaper...
Yeah but we're kind of trusting the great British public that they won't just take the money and work anyway. I mean nobody would have taken the furlough mo ey but kept working all the way through would they?
I'm not saying fraud doesn't happen. I'm saying that erring on the side of paying out will be cheaper in suppressing the virus, given what we know about levels of fraud."
You're probably right. Bit of a knee jerk response from me. As someone who is skint it just sticks in the craw when I know of so many people who have "played the system". It certainly brings out the worst in people. Probably include myself in that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I think the vast majority wouldn't do this but that was a guy on the radio this morning that said he is skint and if one of his mates tested positive he would order a test and get them to take the swab."
Yep I heard something along them lines when a answered it...but it seemed I came across wrongly on it  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I would of thought This country is in enough debt already, why make the hole any bigger? Sooner or later somebody is gonna have to repay all this money
The hole made bigger to help the people who would struggle to make ends meet if they had to isolate? Did you say the same when there were multi million pound contracts been given out to friends and acquaintances of the Government as we will be paying for that a lot longer than for this?
Also, person A contracts it and feels fine. Can't afford to skip work, so doesn't. Person A gives it to person B who spends weeks in ICU.
I'm sure that spending £500 to keep person A at home would have been cheaper...
Yeah but we're kind of trusting the great British public that they won't just take the money and work anyway. I mean nobody would have taken the furlough mo ey but kept working all the way through would they?
I'm not saying fraud doesn't happen. I'm saying that erring on the side of paying out will be cheaper in suppressing the virus, given what we know about levels of fraud.
You're probably right. Bit of a knee jerk response from me. As someone who is skint it just sticks in the craw when I know of so many people who have "played the system". It certainly brings out the worst in people. Probably include myself in that. "
Fair enough.
Fraud pisses me off too. And so much about this has made me angry.
But the way to stop this is to keep people away from each other, and this seems to be a way to enable those who otherwise can't, to isolate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
instead of these hair brains schemes why dont they just make a text from track and trace or a positive test part of the eligibility for furlough ... but you must have ons or the other... that way people would be encouraged to test and download the app as it would ensure their wages are covered should they end up having to isolate |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth."
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered."
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If you test positive for covid.....
Sound like encouragement to catch it if you’re broke?"
On the BBC news app it says...
Government sources are playing down reports of plans for a universal payment of £500 to people needing to self isolate......
And also says...
It is a proposal drawn up by senior officials but it has not been considered by the PM.
X
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it."
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious. "
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now."
also if you aren’t going out you havent spent the petrol or bus fare and that covers these £1 delivery, and it also assumes you have literally nobody in your life that could pick up some shopping for you for ... its 10 days , realistically that could be just one shop
jm not saying not one person falls through the cracks , but we have to stop writing policy for the cracks... you write policy for the middle of the bell curve and you have things like local council discretionary funds for the scenarios that need a more personal touch |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
also if you aren’t going out you havent spent the petrol or bus fare and that covers these £1 delivery, and it also assumes you have literally nobody in your life that could pick up some shopping for you for ... its 10 days , realistically that could be just one shop
jm not saying not one person falls through the cracks , but we have to stop writing policy for the cracks... you write policy for the middle of the bell curve and you have things like local council discretionary funds for the scenarios that need a more personal touch "
Exactly and we do understand that it is difficult for people in that situation.
My sister is in that situation and we were fortunate enough when she was told to self isolate that we could help her out financially and whilst I know some and not as fortunate, I think we will just be creating more long term problems to solve the short term. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now."
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo "
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
what i dont understand is in scotland (might have been glasgow but was on Scottish news) taxi drivers are due to be awarded a grant (i think it was about £1500 which is nothing in comparison to the work they have lost but thats another point) but it was specifically said if you were on universal credit (the people who need the money most i would think) then you would not qualify as it could mess with the universal credit calculation and result in you losing the other benefit
wouldnt this blanket £500 do the same? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"what i dont understand is in scotland (might have been glasgow but was on Scottish news) taxi drivers are due to be awarded a grant (i think it was about £1500 which is nothing in comparison to the work they have lost but thats another point) but it was specifically said if you were on universal credit (the people who need the money most i would think) then you would not qualify as it could mess with the universal credit calculation and result in you losing the other benefit
wouldnt this blanket £500 do the same? "
Nicola sturgeon has pushed for the DWP to disregard that. They can’t insist on it as UC is Westminster controlled, but their intention is that it be ignored for UC purposes |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds."
yeah the money should be for people who lose earnings by staying home - i really think an extension to eligibility to furlough (if your employer doesn’t already have a full sick pay policy) is surely the easiest way - the admin for it is already set up the employer keeps paging you and claims it back
if we really want to tackle the online shopping issue they could set up a scheme with supermarkets where you are given a voucher code for free delivery with your positive test or track and trace notification ... actually if these were made priority delivery slots it would also solve the fact that you ate meant to stay home for 10 days but might bot be able to get a delivery for a week or more at short notice |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds."
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff. "
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?"
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
"
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Is it back dated?...kidding.."
No it isn't at that is why it's very unfair.
People saying people that are on benefits that haven't lost any money there costs go up but actually it will probably take at least a week to get the money to these people by which point there needy able to go out again.
Surely is better to target support. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
"
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at ."
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
"
You are summising as we all are . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are ."
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are .
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
"
So it's happening then ?
From when ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are .
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
"
The leaked document, it wasn't me.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are .
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
So it's happening then ?
From when ?"
It's not definite it's been proposed which is what this thread is about.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are .
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
So it's happening then ?
From when ?
It's not definite it's been proposed which is what this thread is about.
"
So summising then ...
"No 10 has said there are no plans to pay everyone in England who tests positive for covid £500 to self isolate "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are .
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
So it's happening then ?
From when ?
It's not definite it's been proposed which is what this thread is about.
So summising then ...
"No 10 has said there are no plans to pay everyone in England who tests positive for covid £500 to self isolate "
"
It was among a list of suggestions on a leaked document. That doesn't make it a proposal does it ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are .
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
So it's happening then ?
From when ?
It's not definite it's been proposed which is what this thread is about.
So summising then ...
"No 10 has said there are no plans to pay everyone in England who tests positive for covid £500 to self isolate "
"
The leaked document came from the Treasury department.
They can deny that it is proposed but it is in black-and-white.
The government also said 8 days before Christmas there was no plans to change the Christmas bubbles.
Then 5 days before what happened? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Great so all those who broke all of the guidance can now get a hand out.
Stupidity.com
That is hardly fair, you don't know if people purposely broke guidelines, they could be in work, go food shopping etc
It was aimed at those who did in fairness.
As in what situations?"
So a large group hold a rave and then numerous people who attended test positive.
You think they should be entitled to a £500 handout?
If so then thats why benefits Britain needs to stop. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are .
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
So it's happening then ?
From when ?
It's not definite it's been proposed which is what this thread is about.
So summising then ...
"No 10 has said there are no plans to pay everyone in England who tests positive for covid £500 to self isolate "
The leaked document came from the Treasury department.
They can deny that it is proposed but it is in black-and-white.
The government also said 8 days before Christmas there was no plans to change the Christmas bubbles.
Then 5 days before what happened?"
That has nothing to do with this discussion |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?"
There are always going to be anomalies in any system. Nothing can be 100% fair.
The point is that people are not getting tested because they cannot afford to self-isolate. So this would help stop that happening so much
That one or two people would benefit more is just one of those things.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are .
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
So it's happening then ?
From when ?
It's not definite it's been proposed which is what this thread is about.
So summising then ...
"No 10 has said there are no plans to pay everyone in England who tests positive for covid £500 to self isolate "
The leaked document came from the Treasury department.
They can deny that it is proposed but it is in black-and-white.
The government also said 8 days before Christmas there was no plans to change the Christmas bubbles.
Then 5 days before what happened?
That has nothing to do with this discussion "
Of course it does because you were the one that said it's not been proposed and the government have said they've got no plans so it's relevant because I am pointing out to you that history tells us that doesn't mean a thing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
There are always going to be anomalies in any system. Nothing can be 100% fair.
The point is that people are not getting tested because they cannot afford to self-isolate. So this would help stop that happening so much
That one or two people would benefit more is just one of those things.
"
It's more than 1 or 2 people it is thousands.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Great so all those who broke all of the guidance can now get a hand out.
Stupidity.com
That is hardly fair, you don't know if people purposely broke guidelines, they could be in work, go food shopping etc
It was aimed at those who did in fairness.
As in what situations?
So a large group hold a rave and then numerous people who attended test positive.
You think they should be entitled to a £500 handout?
If so then thats why benefits Britain needs to stop."
You can’t base policy on the tiny amount of people who are breaking rules in such a stark way.
The vast majority of people contracting covid are doing so through work or accepted risks rather than raves |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are .
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
So it's happening then ?
From when ?
It's not definite it's been proposed which is what this thread is about.
So summising then ...
"No 10 has said there are no plans to pay everyone in England who tests positive for covid £500 to self isolate "
The leaked document came from the Treasury department.
They can deny that it is proposed but it is in black-and-white.
The government also said 8 days before Christmas there was no plans to change the Christmas bubbles.
Then 5 days before what happened?
That has nothing to do with this discussion
Of course it does because you were the one that said it's not been proposed and the government have said they've got no plans so it's relevant because I am pointing out to you that history tells us that doesn't mean a thing."
So you believe in some of what the government says but not everything .
Gotcha. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Great so all those who broke all of the guidance can now get a hand out.
Stupidity.com
That is hardly fair, you don't know if people purposely broke guidelines, they could be in work, go food shopping etc
It was aimed at those who did in fairness.
As in what situations?
So a large group hold a rave and then numerous people who attended test positive.
You think they should be entitled to a £500 handout?
If so then thats why benefits Britain needs to stop.
You can’t base policy on the tiny amount of people who are breaking rules in such a stark way.
The vast majority of people contracting covid are doing so through work or accepted risks rather than raves"
People need to take personal responsibility and I believe the vast majority are doing the right thing and self isolating when told to do so.
Also We are assuming That the majority of this are not because they cannot self isolate without causing series financial detriment, When in reality if the system that is already in place Worked properly that would be the solution. So I think it is better To fix the loopholes and not deny those that need it, Rather than just giving everyone 500 pounds.
A lot of households that would actually be a 1000 pounds as 2 adults leave there. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It’s easy to see why the Tories have been able to decimate the benefits system with some of the attitudes on here.
"
Why because I don't think the everybody should just be given 500 pounds whether they need it or not?
The benefits system is means tested so it's not even the same thing.
The benefits system was decimated because the government wanted to reduce National debt, So what do you think will happen after this? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
to be fair if its suggested 7-14 day for payment thats a perfectly reasonable timeline ... wages and benefits are paid in arrears and certainly not more often than 7-14 days so you would be receiving money now from the wages for what you have already worked, then in 7-14 days you get cash for the days you couldn’t work, then you would be back out at work for the next wage
if you dont have immediate access to money that was already an unrelated to covid issue that heading out to work that day wouldn’t solve instantly either
(unless we are suggesting cash in hand folk which is a whole other ball game) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
That was late last night just before bed when the thread started. I've seen more about it this morning...and as I said on any last post i may have come across wrong. I'm in favour of everyone getting it who have caught it...but more so the ones who have been on their own since the virus came.
I was pointing out that what could happen but not saying i would stop it for that reason... it the government probably would "
It’s standard in many other countries to financially support those isolating. Yes , their is some abuse of the system however, overall, it is very rare that this happens. The population as a whole benefits from greater suppression of the virus. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are .
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
So it's happening then ?
From when ?
It's not definite it's been proposed which is what this thread is about.
So summising then ...
"No 10 has said there are no plans to pay everyone in England who tests positive for covid £500 to self isolate "
The leaked document came from the Treasury department.
They can deny that it is proposed but it is in black-and-white.
The government also said 8 days before Christmas there was no plans to change the Christmas bubbles.
Then 5 days before what happened?
That has nothing to do with this discussion
Of course it does because you were the one that said it's not been proposed and the government have said they've got no plans so it's relevant because I am pointing out to you that history tells us that doesn't mean a thing.
So you believe in some of what the government says but not everything .
Gotcha."
Don't twist my words you seem hell bent on trying to "catch me out"
I have put my opinion and my reasons you have tried to pick holes in it.
I do believe that people on low incomes should be supported, I do not believe everybody should just be given 500 pounds.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It’s easy to see why the Tories have been able to decimate the benefits system with some of the attitudes on here.
Why because I don't think the everybody should just be given 500 pounds whether they need it or not?
The benefits system is means tested so it's not even the same thing.
The benefits system was decimated because the government wanted to reduce National debt, So what do you think will happen after this?"
The benefits system was decimated because they needed an easy scapegoat.
The percentage of benefit fraud Is tiny but you wouldnt think so reading the headlines. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It’s easy to see why the Tories have been able to decimate the benefits system with some of the attitudes on here.
Why because I don't think the everybody should just be given 500 pounds whether they need it or not?
The benefits system is means tested so it's not even the same thing.
The benefits system was decimated because the government wanted to reduce National debt, So what do you think will happen after this?"
this is ine of the reasons i hate snp ... their policies are free for all when there are plenty of folk who can pay
i dont understand why thinking cash should be diverted to those that need makes you a tory that only cares about the rich |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It’s easy to see why the Tories have been able to decimate the benefits system with some of the attitudes on here.
Why because I don't think the everybody should just be given 500 pounds whether they need it or not?
The benefits system is means tested so it's not even the same thing.
The benefits system was decimated because the government wanted to reduce National debt, So what do you think will happen after this?
The benefits system was decimated because they needed an easy scapegoat.
The percentage of benefit fraud Is tiny but you wouldnt think so reading the headlines. "
Exactly.
Disability benefits were massacred despite the fact the DWP's own figures stated that error and fraud was around 0.5% |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It’s easy to see why the Tories have been able to decimate the benefits system with some of the attitudes on here.
Why because I don't think the everybody should just be given 500 pounds whether they need it or not?
The benefits system is means tested so it's not even the same thing.
The benefits system was decimated because the government wanted to reduce National debt, So what do you think will happen after this?
this is ine of the reasons i hate snp ... their policies are free for all when there are plenty of folk who can pay
i dont understand why thinking cash should be diverted to those that need makes you a tory that only cares about the rich "
Because it's easy to make asumption's like that.
The people commenting and making assumptions about my opinion on this have no idea of my personal situation or the way I vote. Just for the record I'm very anti the tory's and have never voted for them, nor do I read the daily mail.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
That was late last night just before bed when the thread started. I've seen more about it this morning...and as I said on any last post i may have come across wrong. I'm in favour of everyone getting it who have caught it...but more so the ones who have been on their own since the virus came.
I was pointing out that what could happen but not saying i would stop it for that reason... it the government probably would
It’s standard in many other countries to financially support those isolating. Yes , their is some abuse of the system however, overall, it is very rare that this happens. The population as a whole benefits from greater suppression of the virus."
That's the point a lot of people are just ignoring. We know that large numbers of people are not taking tests because they cannot afford to self-isolate.
So there are two choices. Ignore it, and continue with the the current shit storm, or incentivise people to test and isolate by making sure that the vast majority are not financially fucked by having to isolate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are .
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
So it's happening then ?
From when ?
It's not definite it's been proposed which is what this thread is about.
So summising then ...
"No 10 has said there are no plans to pay everyone in England who tests positive for covid £500 to self isolate "
The leaked document came from the Treasury department.
They can deny that it is proposed but it is in black-and-white.
The government also said 8 days before Christmas there was no plans to change the Christmas bubbles.
Then 5 days before what happened?
That has nothing to do with this discussion
Of course it does because you were the one that said it's not been proposed and the government have said they've got no plans so it's relevant because I am pointing out to you that history tells us that doesn't mean a thing.
So you believe in some of what the government says but not everything .
Gotcha.
Don't twist my words you seem hell bent on trying to "catch me out"
I have put my opinion and my reasons you have tried to pick holes in it.
I do believe that people on low incomes should be supported, I do not believe everybody should just be given 500 pounds.
"
I'm not trying to catch you out .
You are doing that for yourself.
You have an opinion which is based on something that hasn't happened yet and maybe never will.
I'm not picking holes in your opinion. You opinion is based on nothing because nothing has happened despite me repeatedly telling you this was a suggestion not a given.
I'm fed up with your attitude to anyone who doesnt agree with you .
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
It would cost more to try and have a system that paid people what they lost. Plus it would add lengthy delays to people getting the money, which would put people off and totally defeat the point of the whole thing.
Plus people on low incomes don’t just have delivery fees added to their outgoings. If you have to get deliveries then you can’t, for example, go shopping for reduced items and the likes. Also shopping deliveries all have a minimum spend. Someone who has £15/£25 a week budget doesn’t have £40 to get an asda order delivered.
We have been having home deliveries for nearly year and our average spend is probably only an extra £7 a week including delivery charge as You can often get slots with sainsbury's £1 if you choose the 4 hour time slot.
I'm not saying It shouldn't be given to those who need it, But I think it would feel like a kick in the teeth to someone who has had to self isolate on a low income but wasn't entitled to the £500 But somebody who doesn't work or earns a lot of money now automatically get it.
If you have £15/£20 a week for your shopping then have to self-isolate unexpectedly then having to use £7 of that to cover a Sainsbos delivery charge is a massive chunk.
Tesco charge £4 on top of delivery charge if your order is under £40 so again likely a minimum of £5 off your £15/20 for delivery. That’s a huge percentage.
Anyone who viewed that as a kick in the teeth should aim their ire at the government for having a shit system rather than begrudging it. The whole “I didn’t get it so they shouldn’t” race to the bottom is utterly tedious.
That is a very small minority of the population.
I am so helping and supporting people and it should be targeted with those that most need it not just a blanket here is 500 quid.
I absolutely didn't say that it's a race to the bottom.
All this money will need to paid Back at some point, Who do you think is going to suffer the most when that happens?
It will be the very people you are raising concerns about now.
The number of people who can’t suddenly find extra money for shopping is absolutely not, at the moment, a small minority. People are skint.
Targeting the £500 is leading to people missing out and that’s why we have the issue of people not being able to afford to self-isolate so they don’t test. We’ve tried that and it’s not working
We can afford MP pay rises and Eat Out so we can afford this. To be frank, we can’t afford not to do it imo
I am specifically talking about people that are either retired or not working and the numbers involved regarding extra costs is a maximum of 10 pounds In most cases so like I said I don't see the point in someone who is not losing any money by not being able to go to work being given 500 pounds.
It encourages them to get tested. It encourages them to stay home.
And, again, it’s cheaper and quicker to set up an auto system than to have a system that has eligibility that needs assessed and sorted by staff.
Giving 500 pounds to every adult that is Contacted by track and trace with no criteria is absurd.
For example me and my partner were contacted and even though there was no loss of earnings And our costs probably whet up by about 10 pounds for those 10 days we would have been given a 1000 pounds.
The family a 5 next door who did lose a very significant amount of earnings because her husband is a self employed delivery driver would have also got a £1000.
How is that fair?
You had no loss of earnings many do loose out.
Yes so target the money on those people not on me.
Unfortunately one size doesn't fit all .
Some cant isolate because they cant get a delivery date from the supermarket or afford a home delivery. Some cant afford to not work after testing positive so continue to spread the virus by working. These are the people its aimed at .
That's the point this 500 pounds they are talking about isn't, it is going to be given to everybody.
And the money won't be instant so it won't help people who in that moment physically cannot afford to do an online shop.
You are summising as we all are .
No im not it was in my leaked document.
The money will automatically be given to anyone who is Contacted by track and trace 7 to 14 days after contact.
So it's happening then ?
From when ?
It's not definite it's been proposed which is what this thread is about.
So summising then ...
"No 10 has said there are no plans to pay everyone in England who tests positive for covid £500 to self isolate "
The leaked document came from the Treasury department.
They can deny that it is proposed but it is in black-and-white.
The government also said 8 days before Christmas there was no plans to change the Christmas bubbles.
Then 5 days before what happened?
That has nothing to do with this discussion
Of course it does because you were the one that said it's not been proposed and the government have said they've got no plans so it's relevant because I am pointing out to you that history tells us that doesn't mean a thing.
So you believe in some of what the government says but not everything .
Gotcha.
Don't twist my words you seem hell bent on trying to "catch me out"
I have put my opinion and my reasons you have tried to pick holes in it.
I do believe that people on low incomes should be supported, I do not believe everybody should just be given 500 pounds.
I'm not trying to catch you out .
You are doing that for yourself.
You have an opinion which is based on something that hasn't happened yet and maybe never will.
I'm not picking holes in your opinion. You opinion is based on nothing because nothing has happened despite me repeatedly telling you this was a suggestion not a given.
I'm fed up with your attitude to anyone who doesnt agree with you .
"
What attitude is that exactly? so you have just confirmed that the way you are replying to me is based on your personal feelings towards me rather than my opinion.
Lots of people on this thread have had very similar opinions to me but it is just me you have chosen to target.
If my opinions upset you so much maybe it's best we avoid each other on the forums. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
That was late last night just before bed when the thread started. I've seen more about it this morning...and as I said on any last post i may have come across wrong. I'm in favour of everyone getting it who have caught it...but more so the ones who have been on their own since the virus came.
I was pointing out that what could happen but not saying i would stop it for that reason... it the government probably would
It’s standard in many other countries to financially support those isolating. Yes , their is some abuse of the system however, overall, it is very rare that this happens. The population as a whole benefits from greater suppression of the virus.
That's the point a lot of people are just ignoring. We know that large numbers of people are not taking tests because they cannot afford to self-isolate.
So there are two choices. Ignore it, and continue with the the current shit storm, or incentivise people to test and isolate by making sure that the vast majority are not financially fucked by having to isolate. "
So you think they will then isolate after being given their handout?
Can't believe anyone is that naive. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The telegraph is reporting the government is considering giving a £500 one of payment regardless of employment status.
Is that not just to boost the economy though rather than a covid or isolation payment.
I know there has been talk about each household in the UK being given a small lump sum before.
Apparently not. A 12 page document has been leaked (apparently)
The stats on how many people come forward for testing and isolate when told are shameful. Test and trace is a waste of space because people won’t isolate. There’s even people going to work with symptoms because they can’t afford not to. "
It was never going to work here. The trailing was done on the Isle of Wight to get their data to show how many signed up and how it worked before it was launched. A closed group, predominantly of an older demographic etc etc. Then add that people couldn't afford to self isolate, so if they signed up they were potentially going to suffer big time. The numbers that signed up were very small and then there were reports of those who changed the SIM card after they realised this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
That was late last night just before bed when the thread started. I've seen more about it this morning...and as I said on any last post i may have come across wrong. I'm in favour of everyone getting it who have caught it...but more so the ones who have been on their own since the virus came.
I was pointing out that what could happen but not saying i would stop it for that reason... it the government probably would
It’s standard in many other countries to financially support those isolating. Yes , their is some abuse of the system however, overall, it is very rare that this happens. The population as a whole benefits from greater suppression of the virus.
That's the point a lot of people are just ignoring. We know that large numbers of people are not taking tests because they cannot afford to self-isolate.
So there are two choices. Ignore it, and continue with the the current shit storm, or incentivise people to test and isolate by making sure that the vast majority are not financially fucked by having to isolate.
So you think they will then isolate after being given their handout?
Can't believe anyone is that naive."
No need to be so rude
People who are not isolating purely because they cannot afford it will isolate if they have the financial means to do so
This isn't aimed at people who are choosing not to do so because they don't want too or think it's all shit. It's about the people who feel they can't as the financial penalty of not being paid is too high |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
That was late last night just before bed when the thread started. I've seen more about it this morning...and as I said on any last post i may have come across wrong. I'm in favour of everyone getting it who have caught it...but more so the ones who have been on their own since the virus came.
I was pointing out that what could happen but not saying i would stop it for that reason... it the government probably would
It’s standard in many other countries to financially support those isolating. Yes , their is some abuse of the system however, overall, it is very rare that this happens. The population as a whole benefits from greater suppression of the virus.
That's the point a lot of people are just ignoring. We know that large numbers of people are not taking tests because they cannot afford to self-isolate.
So there are two choices. Ignore it, and continue with the the current shit storm, or incentivise people to test and isolate by making sure that the vast majority are not financially fucked by having to isolate.
So you think they will then isolate after being given their handout?
Can't believe anyone is that naive.
No need to be so rude
People who are not isolating purely because they cannot afford it will isolate if they have the financial means to do so
This isn't aimed at people who are choosing not to do so because they don't want too or think it's all shit. It's about the people who feel they can't as the financial penalty of not being paid is too high "
Agreed and that is why I feel there needs to be targeted support.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
What a joke here you go £500 for catching it.
Dont worry bout those that have been stripped of all lively ood due to loosing jobs being made redundant with no suppory or help from the goverment.
Absolute jokers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
That was late last night just before bed when the thread started. I've seen more about it this morning...and as I said on any last post i may have come across wrong. I'm in favour of everyone getting it who have caught it...but more so the ones who have been on their own since the virus came.
I was pointing out that what could happen but not saying i would stop it for that reason... it the government probably would
It’s standard in many other countries to financially support those isolating. Yes , their is some abuse of the system however, overall, it is very rare that this happens. The population as a whole benefits from greater suppression of the virus.
That's the point a lot of people are just ignoring. We know that large numbers of people are not taking tests because they cannot afford to self-isolate.
So there are two choices. Ignore it, and continue with the the current shit storm, or incentivise people to test and isolate by making sure that the vast majority are not financially fucked by having to isolate.
So you think they will then isolate after being given their handout?
Can't believe anyone is that naive.
No need to be so rude
People who are not isolating purely because they cannot afford it will isolate if they have the financial means to do so
This isn't aimed at people who are choosing not to do so because they don't want too or think it's all shit. It's about the people who feel they can't as the financial penalty of not being paid is too high
Agreed and that is why I feel there needs to be targeted support.
"
We've tried that and it hasn't worked
People are missed in targeted support. There's always someone just over any cut off.
Whereas a short burst of a universal support means no one is missed, and it can be quick and easy to implement (which saves costs in staffing and organising). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
That was late last night just before bed when the thread started. I've seen more about it this morning...and as I said on any last post i may have come across wrong. I'm in favour of everyone getting it who have caught it...but more so the ones who have been on their own since the virus came.
I was pointing out that what could happen but not saying i would stop it for that reason... it the government probably would
It’s standard in many other countries to financially support those isolating. Yes , their is some abuse of the system however, overall, it is very rare that this happens. The population as a whole benefits from greater suppression of the virus.
That's the point a lot of people are just ignoring. We know that large numbers of people are not taking tests because they cannot afford to self-isolate.
So there are two choices. Ignore it, and continue with the the current shit storm, or incentivise people to test and isolate by making sure that the vast majority are not financially fucked by having to isolate.
So you think they will then isolate after being given their handout?
Can't believe anyone is that naive.
No need to be so rude
People who are not isolating purely because they cannot afford it will isolate if they have the financial means to do so
This isn't aimed at people who are choosing not to do so because they don't want too or think it's all shit. It's about the people who feel they can't as the financial penalty of not being paid is too high "
i think some peoples gripe though is that this cash will just be blanket applied to all when we should be targeting the group that cannot afford to isolate ...
rather than me and you and wee jeanie get £500 each and your working from home anyway so have got lots of spare cash to treat yourself to a fortnight of takeaways, and im retired so ive got a wee bung in the bank but cant get a hone delivery slot so still head out to the shops every day anyway and wee jeanie would lose out on £1000 of wages so actually £500 isn’t going to cover the bills and she still needs to go work and continues to spread it too
we could instead give jeanie £1000, i could get access to priority delivery slots and well you and me wouldn’t get any cash but the “pot” also saved £500 and nobody is spreading and nobody is worse off
*random steroetypes were used in this example... im not retired , you might not work from home and wee jeanie might actually be a bampot having a 100 person rave |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
That was late last night just before bed when the thread started. I've seen more about it this morning...and as I said on any last post i may have come across wrong. I'm in favour of everyone getting it who have caught it...but more so the ones who have been on their own since the virus came.
I was pointing out that what could happen but not saying i would stop it for that reason... it the government probably would
It’s standard in many other countries to financially support those isolating. Yes , their is some abuse of the system however, overall, it is very rare that this happens. The population as a whole benefits from greater suppression of the virus.
That's the point a lot of people are just ignoring. We know that large numbers of people are not taking tests because they cannot afford to self-isolate.
So there are two choices. Ignore it, and continue with the the current shit storm, or incentivise people to test and isolate by making sure that the vast majority are not financially fucked by having to isolate.
So you think they will then isolate after being given their handout?
Can't believe anyone is that naive.
No need to be so rude
People who are not isolating purely because they cannot afford it will isolate if they have the financial means to do so
This isn't aimed at people who are choosing not to do so because they don't want too or think it's all shit. It's about the people who feel they can't as the financial penalty of not being paid is too high
Agreed and that is why I feel there needs to be targeted support.
We've tried that and it hasn't worked
People are missed in targeted support. There's always someone just over any cut off.
Whereas a short burst of a universal support means no one is missed, and it can be quick and easy to implement (which saves costs in staffing and organising)."
we tried one method ... it doesn’t mean another wouldn’t work ... extending furlough to cover isolation periods when the workplace absence policy would mean you dont get paid would work
the admin for it is already there, no additional set up costs, no means testing required, the payments would come in line with your standard pay schedule etc etc etc |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
That was late last night just before bed when the thread started. I've seen more about it this morning...and as I said on any last post i may have come across wrong. I'm in favour of everyone getting it who have caught it...but more so the ones who have been on their own since the virus came.
I was pointing out that what could happen but not saying i would stop it for that reason... it the government probably would
It’s standard in many other countries to financially support those isolating. Yes , their is some abuse of the system however, overall, it is very rare that this happens. The population as a whole benefits from greater suppression of the virus.
That's the point a lot of people are just ignoring. We know that large numbers of people are not taking tests because they cannot afford to self-isolate.
So there are two choices. Ignore it, and continue with the the current shit storm, or incentivise people to test and isolate by making sure that the vast majority are not financially fucked by having to isolate.
So you think they will then isolate after being given their handout?
Can't believe anyone is that naive.
No need to be so rude
People who are not isolating purely because they cannot afford it will isolate if they have the financial means to do so
This isn't aimed at people who are choosing not to do so because they don't want too or think it's all shit. It's about the people who feel they can't as the financial penalty of not being paid is too high
Agreed and that is why I feel there needs to be targeted support.
We've tried that and it hasn't worked
People are missed in targeted support. There's always someone just over any cut off.
Whereas a short burst of a universal support means no one is missed, and it can be quick and easy to implement (which saves costs in staffing and organising).
we tried one method ... it doesn’t mean another wouldn’t work ... extending furlough to cover isolation periods when the workplace absence policy would mean you dont get paid would work
the admin for it is already there, no additional set up costs, no means testing required, the payments would come in line with your standard pay schedule etc etc etc "
oh and a contact reference from track and trace or positive test reference being the criteria for eligibility would actually encourage more to test or download the app as it would essentially work like having an insurance policy |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
That was late last night just before bed when the thread started. I've seen more about it this morning...and as I said on any last post i may have come across wrong. I'm in favour of everyone getting it who have caught it...but more so the ones who have been on their own since the virus came.
I was pointing out that what could happen but not saying i would stop it for that reason... it the government probably would
It’s standard in many other countries to financially support those isolating. Yes , their is some abuse of the system however, overall, it is very rare that this happens. The population as a whole benefits from greater suppression of the virus.
That's the point a lot of people are just ignoring. We know that large numbers of people are not taking tests because they cannot afford to self-isolate.
So there are two choices. Ignore it, and continue with the the current shit storm, or incentivise people to test and isolate by making sure that the vast majority are not financially fucked by having to isolate.
So you think they will then isolate after being given their handout?
Can't believe anyone is that naive.
No need to be so rude
People who are not isolating purely because they cannot afford it will isolate if they have the financial means to do so
This isn't aimed at people who are choosing not to do so because they don't want too or think it's all shit. It's about the people who feel they can't as the financial penalty of not being paid is too high
i think some peoples gripe though is that this cash will just be blanket applied to all when we should be targeting the group that cannot afford to isolate ...
rather than me and you and wee jeanie get £500 each and your working from home anyway so have got lots of spare cash to treat yourself to a fortnight of takeaways, and im retired so ive got a wee bung in the bank but cant get a hone delivery slot so still head out to the shops every day anyway and wee jeanie would lose out on £1000 of wages so actually £500 isn’t going to cover the bills and she still needs to go work and continues to spread it too
we could instead give jeanie £1000, i could get access to priority delivery slots and well you and me wouldn’t get any cash but the “pot” also saved £500 and nobody is spreading and nobody is worse off
*random steroetypes were used in this example... im not retired , you might not work from home and wee jeanie might actually be a bampot having a 100 person rave "
We've tried that with the current set up and it's not working because with any cut off for support there's always people who just miss out,
Far better you get £500 you don't need than Mary, Bob and Sue, who currently would miss out just because they are not covered in the current rules but are actually struggling so have to go to work with symptoms because they can't afford not too,
We've done targeted support and it hasn't worked.
The options are widen the support, which would likely fall to local authorities who are already footing costs for the current scheme, or blanket it to cover everyone,
IMO they need to blanket it and back it up with decent isolation enforcement (back in the swine flu outbreak people isolating got four random phone calls a day to ensure they were at home). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I heard of a possible loophole whereby one person gets a possive test and brings his mates in on it to get the £500. Fact is you always get some dodgy buggers...but something like this in the beginning for "all" the low paid and gig crowd would really have been beneficial.
But it seems to go against the grain to look out for the worst off in society methinks.
That was quick, you didn't seem to know what people were talking about when the thread was started yesterday
If people are so desperate for 500 quid that they are willing to get covid then they have to have more problems than you would think
We all know there are scammers out there but lets not be under any illusion that it is only people who may need/ want 500 quid but I think for the hardworking people who wouldn't be able to stop work for another two weeks an only get sick pay this will be a godsend for most and will encourage them to stay off
That was late last night just before bed when the thread started. I've seen more about it this morning...and as I said on any last post i may have come across wrong. I'm in favour of everyone getting it who have caught it...but more so the ones who have been on their own since the virus came.
I was pointing out that what could happen but not saying i would stop it for that reason... it the government probably would
It’s standard in many other countries to financially support those isolating. Yes , their is some abuse of the system however, overall, it is very rare that this happens. The population as a whole benefits from greater suppression of the virus.
That's the point a lot of people are just ignoring. We know that large numbers of people are not taking tests because they cannot afford to self-isolate.
So there are two choices. Ignore it, and continue with the the current shit storm, or incentivise people to test and isolate by making sure that the vast majority are not financially fucked by having to isolate.
So you think they will then isolate after being given their handout?
Can't believe anyone is that naive.
No need to be so rude
People who are not isolating purely because they cannot afford it will isolate if they have the financial means to do so
This isn't aimed at people who are choosing not to do so because they don't want too or think it's all shit. It's about the people who feel they can't as the financial penalty of not being paid is too high
i think some peoples gripe though is that this cash will just be blanket applied to all when we should be targeting the group that cannot afford to isolate ...
rather than me and you and wee jeanie get £500 each and your working from home anyway so have got lots of spare cash to treat yourself to a fortnight of takeaways, and im retired so ive got a wee bung in the bank but cant get a hone delivery slot so still head out to the shops every day anyway and wee jeanie would lose out on £1000 of wages so actually £500 isn’t going to cover the bills and she still needs to go work and continues to spread it too
we could instead give jeanie £1000, i could get access to priority delivery slots and well you and me wouldn’t get any cash but the “pot” also saved £500 and nobody is spreading and nobody is worse off
*random steroetypes were used in this example... im not retired , you might not work from home and wee jeanie might actually be a bampot having a 100 person rave "
I completely agree with you the people who are really struggling and in some of the situations described in this thread need Immediate support Like a food Box or somebody to physically go and collect shopping and then those that really do need the support can have it longer term in regards to a one off payment to help cover rent and loss of earnings for example.
As I have said I do not disagree with those that really need it having it, I just don't think it should be a blanket thing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The telegraph is reporting the government is considering giving a £500 one of payment regardless of employment status.
Is that not just to boost the economy though rather than a covid or isolation payment.
I know there has been talk about each household in the UK being given a small lump sum before.
Apparently not. A 12 page document has been leaked (apparently)
The stats on how many people come forward for testing and isolate when told are shameful. Test and trace is a waste of space because people won’t isolate. There’s even people going to work with symptoms because they can’t afford not to. "
Can you blame them though?
Its either eat and survive or go into poverty and starve.
Dont need to ask that question to decided what choice any sane human being would take.
Save lives my arse, so what, people are supposed to sacrifice their own lives for others?
The government can fuck right off.
They need to support people properly if they want this to be effective, if everyone was given what they earn on a monthly basis before covid, no one would have left the house. And if they didnt fuck us self employed, i too would be dwelling in my flat.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think if it's not a blanket thing it just will not work. Everyone on here seems to think that one group will need it more then another (myself included). So if this is about really getting to grip with this and get people to isolate. It seems the only answer to pay all...as they say we are all in this together. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The telegraph is reporting the government is considering giving a £500 one of payment regardless of employment status.
Is that not just to boost the economy though rather than a covid or isolation payment.
I know there has been talk about each household in the UK being given a small lump sum before.
Apparently not. A 12 page document has been leaked (apparently)
The stats on how many people come forward for testing and isolate when told are shameful. Test and trace is a waste of space because people won’t isolate. There’s even people going to work with symptoms because they can’t afford not to.
I saw something today about a person being contacted by test and trace last week and told to isolate until 26/12/2020. Useless "
Luckily it was Doctor Who's phone. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Single mum. Off work for at least 2 ekks with covid. I've been rejected for the payment because I earn to much (£10 a week too much). So even though ssp won't cover my bills and rent, I can't get help. Thank god for jewelry I can sell"
This is new idea they are proposing and it would be a £500 payment to anyone, regardless of employment or savings etc, if they test positive. You wouldn't need to apply it would be an automatic entitlement if you got Covid. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
If they do decide to bring in this £500 payment it may be a good idea to have a register of individuals convicted of COVID related offences (parties, masks etc) and exclude them from receiving payment..
May help discourage some individuals in the first place and help balance out the issue of some refusing to pay fines...
Plus it also has some element of community based justice!!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *usybee73Man
over a year ago
in the sticks |
So if your on for example 120 a week on benefits etc and government gives you 500 quid plus your benefits
Hmmm I wonder what people will do?
Bit ill thought out, especially with testing not exactly reliable, never mind who will pick up the tab |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So if your on for example 120 a week on benefits etc and government gives you 500 quid plus your benefits
Hmmm I wonder what people will do?
Bit ill thought out, especially with testing not exactly reliable, never mind who will pick up the tab"
Maybe have a blowout on the internet ..who knows but its irrelevant now as it's not happening. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth."
I assumed it would be just for workers, it seems it isn't ( if it happens ) In which case I would say it should only be available for workers yes |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I think the vast majority wouldn't do this but that was a guy on the radio this morning that said he is skint and if one of his mates tested positive he would order a test and get them to take the swab."
Blimey, what some people will do for a few bob |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *usybee73Man
over a year ago
in the sticks |
"
Yes. £500 regardless of circumstances. It’s a proposal at the moment I think.
To be honest I think that is absurd.
There are lots of people who can't afford to stay off work so won't go for a test and then go to work with symptoms, which then spreads a bit more. Helping people out for the time they have to isolate may stop some of the spread that is happening
I totally understand that and I think that people who need it should absolutely get it.
I don't see how somebody doesn't work or somebody who is retired for example loses any income by having to stay indoors.
Yes your outgoings increase slightly if you need to pay for delivery for example but not £500 worth.
I assumed it would be just for workers, it seems it isn't ( if it happens ) In which case I would say it should only be available for workers yes"
Depends on the word workers, if they are on furlough... they are being paid to stop at home  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mad rush now on with scammers getting false results to make a claim
So do they get a positive result and then scam? What are they scamming?
I think the vast majority wouldn't do this but that was a guy on the radio this morning that said he is skint and if one of his mates tested positive he would order a test and get them to take the swab.
Blimey, what some people will do for a few bob "
The other thing people haven't considered is it isn't if you test positive, It's if you get contacted by track and trace so there's nothing stopping someone Saying they've been in contact with several members of their family or friends when actually they haven't just so their friends get 500 pounds each.
I do understand that will probably be a small portion of society but it is open to abuse and like I said many times I think it should just be targeted support. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Single mum. Off work for at least 2 ekks with covid. I've been rejected for the payment because I earn to much (£10 a week too much). So even though ssp won't cover my bills and rent, I can't get help. Thank god for jewelry I can sell"
Sorry to hear about your troubles xx |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *usybee73Man
over a year ago
in the sticks |
"I am not with you, they are at home as asked already, this and the potential 500 are two different things"
Furlough people are payed by the state, state says stay at home... what are you struggling with? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's not going to happen but if it did I think the first ones to get it should be the low paid in the gig economy especially those working zero hour contracts who will almost certainly have bugger all in the back and find it Nye impossible to isolate without this help.
Paid yes but comfortably paid a can quite take the hit of 2 weeks...that her if it ever comes in I would like to see prioritized |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I got £200 when I isolated with it to help with my loss of income. Government funded through work, along with sick pay. wasn’t a full help but better then a slap on the bum .. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
