Coronavirus vaccine | Page 40 | Vital Football

Coronavirus vaccine

Buddha said:
I think I posted this elsewhere but the whole thing about fining people just isn't fair. To the rich a fine is a mere inconvenience whereas to poor people a fine of a few hundred pounds could cause severe hardship, possibly devastation.

.
Click to expand...

If you don't breach the lockdown rules you don't get fined.
 
ThreeSixes said:
If you don't breach the lockdown rules you don't get fined.
Click to expand...

But you may be able to breach the rules and not get fined, especially if you have access to a private jet. No excuses for breaking lockdown, other than survival, but it's much harder for some.
 
jogills said:
But you may be able to breach the rules and not get fined, especially if you have access to a private jet. No excuses for breaking lockdown, other than survival, but it's much harder for some.
Click to expand...

Yep, but the particular case was a 400 person wedding. That doesn't sound like poverty to me
 
ThreeSixes said:
If you don't breach the lockdown rules you don't get fined.
Click to expand...

ThreeSixes said:
Yep, but the particular case was a 400 person wedding. That doesn't sound like poverty to me
Click to expand...

This is my point. The rich can afford to break the rules whereas the poor cannot.

What good is it saying, "If you don't breach the lockdown rules you don't get fined", if the only people who a fine will hurt are the poor?
 
Buddha said:
This is my point. The rich can afford to break the rules whereas the poor cannot.

What good is it saying, "If you don't breach the lockdown rules you don't get fined", if the only people who a fine will hurt are the poor?
Click to expand...
But, under the new (proposed) scheme, even a poor person could afford to break the rules as they can use the payout to pay the fine. At least the system will help them in that respect.
Comes to something when the great British public have to be bribed to stick to the rules
 
Nobby_66 said:
But, under the new (proposed) scheme, even a poor person could afford to break the rules as they can use the payout to pay the fine. At least the system will help them in that respect.
Comes to something when the great British public have to be bribed to stick to the rules
Click to expand...

But isn't this all just a result of the givernment having made mistakes all the way along? I'm not partcularly Tory-bashing here, I reckon any government would have found this an incredibly difficult situation to deal with, and I know that hindsight is a wonderful thing.

When the first lockdown happened there was much more compliance. There was a general feeling of solidarity, and most of the people were prepared to do exactly what they were told to do by the goverment.

Fast forward best part of a year and all people have seen is constant mismanagement by the government. The Cummings affair was perhaps the start of it. Trust in the government's handling of the pandemic has diminished. Add to this the inevitable weariness that people are feeling due to be locked up at home unable to see their family and friends, coupled with the anxiety of not knowing when this will be over, and I think it's not so surprising that people are breaking the rules more than they were initially.

Damned right the government should be bribing people, it should be doing everything it can to encourage people to stick to the rules. How about they fine the rich and bribe the poor?
 
Nobby_66 said:
Totally agree Captain and I have every empathy with people in that boat but, and unless someone can produce stats to prove me wrong, I cant believe that 80% of those testing positive are in that position. Most people on a half decent wage can cope for a week or two and most would be entitled to SSP.
When this thing all kicked off, I decided that, due to uncertainty of getting overtime and/or having to isolate, I would put a few quid away each month as a contigency (let's face it, there's nowhere to spend the stuff at the moment.) and so far haven't had to touch it. I know not everyone is that lucky to be able to do that but I'm not exactly paid mega bucks.
Click to expand...

SSP is not worth a piss in the water feature though. Currently SSP is £95.85 a week. So on that basis I'd lose almost £1350 for self isolating for two weeks and my wife about the same. We have some spare money in our monthly budget but nowhere near enough to cover that kind of loss of income within a month.

The fact when self isolating you can't be put on furlough (although I know of quite a few people who have been by their bosses to help them out financially) adds to the decision many normal working class people are having make tough decisions about. If there was a 'incentive' other than to not just do what's right for the greater good and morally but to also help out financially when they have a positive Covid test I think we may well have got on top/a bit better grip of this a bit quicker but thats only my opinion.

When George Eustace was on BBC breakfast this morning he needed the reasoning as to why this payment might be a good idea explained to him as he just couldn't seem to grasp the idea that this payment wasn't to make people self isolate once having a test, it was to encourage more people to seek a test in the knowledge that if they tested positive they'd receive this ' one off compensation payment' .He just couldn't get his head round the fact a lot of people appear to be put off getting a test by the fear of losing two weeks money. Just shows a lot of MP' don't get the tough decisions a lot of 'normal' folk are having to make for themselves balancing up the health and financial implications both may have.
 
Last edited:
Nobby_66 said:
Sorry but this is open to too much abuse and should be means tested. The piss takers will have a field day, do you really think people will take the £500 and isolate like a good boy/girl? /QUOTE]


You are so correct, Nobs; if rolled out in the manner alluded to by Hancock, more than a tad naive by HMG. I acknowledge that the job of governing can`t be easy in this unprecedented climate, but when this is all over, I suspect that many will be surprised at the large volume of fraud that has been occurring
Click to expand...


You are so correct, Nobs; if rolled out in the manner alluded to by Hancock, more than a tad naive by HMG. I acknowledge that the job of governing can`t be easy in this unprecedented climate, but when this is all over, I suspect that many will be surprised at the large volume of fraud that has been occurring
 
Last edited:
It's a terrible idea. £500 for getting a positive test for something where the vast majority of people have no or minimal ill effect - no idea what will happen there !
 
ThreeSixes said:
It's a terrible idea. £500 for getting a positive test for something where the majority of people have no or minimal ill effect - no idea what will happen there!
Click to expand...

That's not the point though. Just because they might feel minimal or no effects themselves they could still pass the virus on. That's why they need to self-isolate.
 
This £500 payment is not about getting people to self isolate though. It's about getting people that may have Covid symptoms getting tested, in the knowledge they will not lose two weeks income if they get a test and test positive. The idea is to get more people being tested.

As for the people not isolating, its simple if you've tested positive and been paid the £500 you have to pay it back, and you get a £200 fine on top.
 
Johnson is going to clarify the £500 for self isolating on tv tonight. It might not be a simple as it appears on the surface, so assumptions may be a bit premature.
I decided a while ago that to get upset with selfish or ignorant people who do not follow the guidelines is a fruitless task. It will just wear you out as sadly there seems an inexhaustible supply in the UK.
 
Captainreblue said:
This £500 payment is not about getting people to self isolate though. It's about getting people that may have Covid symptoms getting tested, in the knowledge they will not lose two weeks income if they get a test and test positive. The idea is to get more people being tested.

As for the people not isolating, its simple if you've tested positive and been paid the £500 you have to pay it back, and you get a £200 fine on top.
Click to expand...
Yep, getting more people tested is great, especially those that don't because of the risk of losing money but I'm not talking about them, I reckon they are (just) a minority.
That last paragraph has been my point all along but impossible to follow up. Just look at the amount of fraud going on with furlough and eat out to help out. )There were allegedly 50 eateries in Southend Borough alone that are under investigation for defrauding that scheme alone.)
Let's just say that half of the 80% that don't isolate are well paid so don't need the money, they're just piss takers. Are you happy that you'll be paying for them in taxes for years to come? Let alone the public health risk they pose.
By all means give it to genuine cases, I would never argue that.
BTW, I got ssp mixed up with self certification which many employers pay at full rate for 7 days which, I believe, they are looking at reducing the isolation period to. I fully accept your point re ssp.
 
ThreeSixes said:
What I am saying is, people are going to try and catch the virus to get £500
Click to expand...
Or at least take less care in the knowledge that they'll get paid if they catch it. Could be counter productive as people in that income bracket may be taking all the right precautions for fear of having to isolate.
 
Nobby_66 said:
Yep, getting more people tested is great, especially those that don't because of the risk of losing money but I'm not talking about them, I reckon they are (just) a minority.
That last paragraph has been my point all along but impossible to follow up. Just look at the amount of fraud going on with furlough and eat out to help out. )There were allegedly 50 eateries in Southend Borough alone that are under investigation for defrauding that scheme alone.)
Let's just say that half of the 80% that don't isolate are well paid so don't need the money, they're just piss takers. Are you happy that you'll be paying for them in taxes for years to come? Let alone the public health risk they pose.
By all means give it to genuine cases, I would never argue that.
BTW, I got ssp mixed up with self certification which many employers pay at full rate for 7 days which, I believe, they are looking at reducing the isolation period to. I fully accept your point re ssp.
Click to expand...

That says more about the dodgy folk of Southend, Nobs;)

Sadly the people that don't/won't self isolate you're never going to change but I don't know how you deal with them (other than rounding them up and shooting them along with the anti vaxers'). Clearly more needs to be done to get people tested without fear of it having big financial implications for them to do so.

SSP is toilet and a lot of companies are stopping recognising self certification. Our place only pay full sick pay if you're signed of by the doctor.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.