politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The headline of the day

Jeeeezus

Only in America.....

Good Advice

FPT @Beibheirli_C

Just checked on the system - Tony's my 4th cousin twice removed, not my 5th cousin.

Sorry for misleading folks...

FPT

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

peter_from_putney said:

Does anyone know what "London Lockdown" is likely to really mean. Is it likely for instance to prohibit drivers from entering and/or leaving the Capital? ... That really would be draconian and ultra-depressing.

Such things do ultimately require consent. 100,000 met coppers can’t control 7m Londoners otherwise. I’m guessing compulsory closure of pubs etc, and maybe control of main stations? Basically reduce the reasons to leave the house and make it an arse to leave London.

With the army in support of course they can, in France and Belgium police now checking valid reasons for being outside eg exercise, to buy food and with permits required for key workers

Be extremely careful when considering putting the army on the streets in those circumstances. Their training is completely different from that of the police*. I hope we can all agree they would not have firearms, but it’s still putting an infantryman in an impossible position. Also it’s a numbers game - it can LOOK like the police and army are controlling the streets. But it only works with public consent (assuming no one is arguing we arm them and start shooting).

*Thats why they only fill in for static guarding roles for the police usually, to free up the Met.

We are facing the biggest national emergency since the second world war, if the army have to support the police to maintain order and lockdown if required then so be it.

The police should be left yo do it initially but if some still will not comply the army as a lsst resort must be added too

yes everyone should stay at home and starve while waiting for eviction after the crisis like good little boys and girls

Your policies are going to throw so many on the dole your systems are going to fail and they will be left with no money. For the first time ever since I left college I know more unemployed people than I do employed. I dont think you realise the scale of what is going on. Ok only anecdote but if 6 of my 10 friends have been laid off this week and that is repeated amongst paye.....you have huge problems

Hence why Universal Credit is being easier to get immediately without having to go into the JobCentre or wait for it.

ah yes the joy of universal credit where suddenly your home is too big or costs more than the number for your area.....have you ever applied for it? I unfortunately have had due to my age two periods of unemployement in the last 10 years

first one I got sanctioned for not looking for work just after they signed off my four interview claim forms for expenses for the last week because apparently I didn't use the right app for job searching

Then 2 years ago when I applied then got a letter stating that I have been declined because I didnt turn up for the initial interview which apparently they tried to text me the date of but the text didnt go so they gave up. I checked the phone number they had the correct one.

That dwp system yes?

Yes I recently had to unfortunately and I had to book the initial interview by calling up and getting a date and time and confirming I would attend that - no texting involved. Oh and the initial interview has been scrapped due to COVID19. So yes that system.

well mine was before covid in 2018 and I attended the job centre in person and filled in all the forms and they told me I would be contacted and let know the date. First contact was 10 days later by text saying my claim had been cancelled as they couldnt text me

perhaps you can understand me being a little dubious

Mine was more recent and I attended in person and was told everything was complete on that day and told about the option to get an immediate advance which I claimed that day and was automatically confirmed as accepted and was in the account that same week. The advance was 6 weeks worth of payments, to be repaid via deductions from UC (or via taxes) over a 12 month period, so on week 5 a second payment on top of the advance came.

Now the interview has been scrapped because of COVID so any new applicants can immediately get the advance and still get a payment on week 5 too.

Take the advance and a single claimant is then trying to live on £291 per month after the repayment deduction.

It would be a very simple, inexpensive, and humane matter to make that first month's payment after say one week. Indeed it would save the admin overhead of advances.

The claimant has been paid MORE net with an advance and then regular payments than they would have if they'd just been regularly paid for the time that had passed weekly or fortnightly. That's the whole point of it being an advance. Under the pre-UC system I believe you still had to wait a fortnight didn't you to get something, now you get a bonus chunk immediately to be repaid over a year which if you've just lost a job is when you most need the money, up front.

Its not perfect, but its better than nothing and certainly not true to say there's a 5 week wait still. Come week 5 you've been paid for ~9.9 weeks not 5 weeks which is when you need it most.

rcs1000 said:

JM1 said:

@rcs1000 When would you expect to see the number of new cases in Italy start to level off? I'd have hoped to see it the next few days I think. Assuming they have a 24-48h turnaround for new tests, the new cases today would have been sampled yesterday or Monday (i.e., 7 days after the lockdown). If the most severe symptoms arise 7 days post infection, that would suggest that we should begin to see a small decline over the next few days if the lockdown is working I think? (I admit to being a little disappointed in the spike today, although could be due to many reasons).

In Wuhan, the reported cases only started to drop 10-11 days after the beginning of the lockdown. They continued to rise right up until that point.

I'm going to go for a peak on Friday, with declining numbers from then on.

And I will also forecast that by a week Friday, they'll have more than halved compared to the peak.

FPT

Philip_Thompson said:
» show previous quotes
Yes the advance needs repaying, but why shouldn't it? But you're in a better position getting a week one payment repaid over 12 months than getting regular payments from week one only. You're now basically getting paid ahead of schedule for 12 months (if you need to be on UC that long, or via taxes if not) which is an improvement and has axed the 5 week wait.
well I cant answer for universal credit as when I came under it I never managed to make a claim because they cancelled it then I was back in work a week later. However when I did claim JSA it was like this

My rent was 850 a modest two up two down house so had a bedroom for my son.
He didnt live with me so only got 650 HB

On top of that I got 72£ a week jsa for a total of 284 a month so total was

650+284 = 934

I had to pay 850 rent out of that 30 electric, 30 gas , 20 internet 10 mobile phone
for a total of 940 leaving me -6 for for food for the month and getting to interviews....before you say it yes my house was bigger than my strict needs but been there 15 years and in work for 15 years when the firm went bust so I got no payout and left with them owing me wages. You cant just move immediately

rcs1000 said:

JM1 said:

@rcs1000 When would you expect to see the number of new cases in Italy start to level off? I'd have hoped to see it the next few days I think. Assuming they have a 24-48h turnaround for new tests, the new cases today would have been sampled yesterday or Monday (i.e., 7 days after the lockdown). If the most severe symptoms arise 7 days post infection, that would suggest that we should begin to see a small decline over the next few days if the lockdown is working I think? (I admit to being a little disappointed in the spike today, although could be due to many reasons).

In Wuhan, the reported cases only started to drop 10-11 days after the beginning of the lockdown. They continued to rise right up until that point.

I'm going to go for a peak on Friday, with declining numbers from then on.

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

peter_from_putney said:

Does anyone know what "London Lockdown" is likely to really mean. Is it likely for instance to prohibit drivers from entering and/or leaving the Capital? ... That really would be draconian and ultra-depressing.

Such things do ultimately require consent. 100,000 met coppers can’t control 7m Londoners otherwise. I’m guessing compulsory closure of pubs etc, and maybe control of main stations? Basically reduce the reasons to leave the house and make it an arse to leave London.

With the army in support of course they can, in France and Belgium police now checking valid reasons for being outside eg exercise, to buy food and with permits required for key workers

Be extremely careful when considering putting the army on the streets in those circumstances. Their training is completely different from that of the police*. I hope we can all agree they would not have firearms, but it’s still putting an infantryman in an impossible position. Also it’s a numbers game - it can LOOK like the police and army are controlling the streets. But it only works with public consent (assuming no one is arguing we arm them and start shooting).

*Thats why they only fill in for static guarding roles for the police usually, to free up the Met.

We are facing the biggest national emergency since the second world war, if the army have to support the police to maintain order and lockdown if required then so be it.

The police should be left yo do it initially but if some still will not comply the army as a lsst resort must be added too

yes everyone should stay at home and starve while waiting for eviction after the crisis like good little boys and girls

Your policies are going to throw so many on the dole your systems are going to fail and they will be left with no money. For the first time ever since I left college I know more unemployed people than I do employed. I dont think you realise the scale of what is going on. Ok only anecdote but if 6 of my 10 friends have been laid off this week and that is repeated amongst paye.....you have huge problems

Hence why Universal Credit is being easier to get immediately without having to go into the JobCentre or wait for it.

ah yes the joy of universal credit where suddenly your home is too big or costs more than the number for your area.....have you ever applied for it? I unfortunately have had due to my age two periods of unemployement in the last 10 years

first one I got sanctioned for not looking for work just after they signed off my four interview claim forms for expenses for the last week because apparently I didn't use the right app for job searching

Then 2 years ago when I applied then got a letter stating that I have been declined because I didnt turn up for the initial interview which apparently they tried to text me the date of but the text didnt go so they gave up. I checked the phone number they had the correct one.

That dwp system yes?

Yes I recently had to unfortunately and I had to book the initial interview by calling up and getting a date and time and confirming I would attend that - no texting involved. Oh and the initial interview has been scrapped due to COVID19. So yes that system.

well mine was before covid in 2018 and I attended the job centre in person and filled in all the forms and they told me I would be contacted and let know the date. First contact was 10 days later by text saying my claim had been cancelled as they couldnt text me

perhaps you can understand me being a little dubious

Mine was more recent and I attended in person and was told everything was complete on that day and told about the option to get an immediate advance which I claimed that day and was automatically confirmed as accepted and was in the account that same week. The advance was 6 weeks worth of payments, to be repaid via deductions from UC (or via taxes) over a 12 month period, so on week 5 a second payment on top of the advance came.

Now the interview has been scrapped because of COVID so any new applicants can immediately get the advance and still get a payment on week 5 too.

Take the advance and a single claimant is then trying to live on £291 per month after the repayment deduction.

It would be a very simple, inexpensive, and humane matter to make that first month's payment after say one week. Indeed it would save the admin overhead of advances.

The claimant has been paid MORE net with an advance and then regular payments than they would have if they'd just been regularly paid for the time that had passed weekly or fortnightly. That's the whole point of it being an advance. Under the pre-UC system I believe you still had to wait a fortnight didn't you to get something, now you get a bonus chunk immediately to be repaid over a year which if you've just lost a job is when you most need the money, up front.

Its not perfect, but its better than nothing and certainly not true to say there's a 5 week wait still. Come week 5 you've been paid for ~9.9 weeks not 5 weeks which is when you need it most.

The claimant does not get more by claiming an advance.

As I said before, it would be a simple, economically sensible, and humane change to pay the first payment earlier.

rcs1000 said:

JM1 said:

@rcs1000 When would you expect to see the number of new cases in Italy start to level off? I'd have hoped to see it the next few days I think. Assuming they have a 24-48h turnaround for new tests, the new cases today would have been sampled yesterday or Monday (i.e., 7 days after the lockdown). If the most severe symptoms arise 7 days post infection, that would suggest that we should begin to see a small decline over the next few days if the lockdown is working I think? (I admit to being a little disappointed in the spike today, although could be due to many reasons).

In Wuhan, the reported cases only started to drop 10-11 days after the beginning of the lockdown. They continued to rise right up until that point.

I'm going to go for a peak on Friday, with declining numbers from then on.

Do you think the Western lockdowns have achieved the same level of social distancing as they did in Wuhan?

I guess there's not a train seat to be had out of London for tomorrow or Friday

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

FPT

Philip_Thompson said:
» show previous quotes
Yes the advance needs repaying, but why shouldn't it? But you're in a better position getting a week one payment repaid over 12 months than getting regular payments from week one only. You're now basically getting paid ahead of schedule for 12 months (if you need to be on UC that long, or via taxes if not) which is an improvement and has axed the 5 week wait.
well I cant answer for universal credit as when I came under it I never managed to make a claim because they cancelled it then I was back in work a week later. However when I did claim JSA it was like this

My rent was 850 a modest two up two down house so had a bedroom for my son.
He didnt live with me so only got 650 HB

On top of that I got 72£ a week jsa for a total of 284 a month so total was

650+284 = 934

I had to pay 850 rent out of that 30 electric, 30 gas , 20 internet 10 mobile phone
for a total of 940 leaving me -6 for for food for the month and getting to interviews....before you say it yes my house was bigger than my strict needs but been there 15 years and in work for 15 years when the firm went bust so I got no payout and left with them owing me wages. You cant just move immediately

No system is perfect but its a safety net and better than nothing. It doesn't help scaring people with myths about the system though.

Its not a myth its my experience of the system.....a myth is made up

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

peter_from_putney said:

Does anyone know what "London Lockdown" is likely to really mean. Is it likely for instance to prohibit drivers from entering and/or leaving the Capital? ... That really would be draconian and ultra-depressing.

Such things do ultimately require consent. 100,000 met coppers can’t control 7m Londoners otherwise. I’m guessing compulsory closure of pubs etc, and maybe control of main stations? Basically reduce the reasons to leave the house and make it an arse to leave London.

With the army in support of course they can, in France and Belgium police now checking valid reasons for being outside eg exercise, to buy food and with permits required for key workers

Be extremely careful when considering putting the army on the streets in those circumstances. Their training is completely different from that of the police*. I hope we can all agree they would not have firearms, but it’s still putting an infantryman in an impossible position. Also it’s a numbers game - it can LOOK like the police and army are controlling the streets. But it only works with public consent (assuming no one is arguing we arm them and start shooting).

*Thats why they only fill in for static guarding roles for the police usually, to free up the Met.

We are facing the biggest national emergency since the second world war, if the army have to support the police to maintain order and lockdown if required then so be it.

The police should be left yo do it initially but if some still will not comply the army as a lsst resort must be added too

yes everyone should stay at home and starve while waiting for eviction after the crisis like good little boys and girls

Your policies are going to throw so many on the dole your systems are going to fail and they will be left with no money. For the first time ever since I left college I know more unemployed people than I do employed. I dont think you realise the scale of what is going on. Ok only anecdote but if 6 of my 10 friends have been laid off this week and that is repeated amongst paye.....you have huge problems

Hence why Universal Credit is being easier to get immediately without having to go into the JobCentre or wait for it.

ah yes the joy of universal credit where suddenly your home is too big or costs more than the number for your area.....have you ever applied for it? I unfortunately have had due to my age two periods of unemployement in the last 10 years

first one I got sanctioned for not looking for work just after they signed off my four interview claim forms for expenses for the last week because apparently I didn't use the right app for job searching

Then 2 years ago when I applied then got a letter stating that I have been declined because I didnt turn up for the initial interview which apparently they tried to text me the date of but the text didnt go so they gave up. I checked the phone number they had the correct one.

That dwp system yes?

Yes I recently had to unfortunately and I had to book the initial interview by calling up and getting a date and time and confirming I would attend that - no texting involved. Oh and the initial interview has been scrapped due to COVID19. So yes that system.

well mine was before covid in 2018 and I attended the job centre in person and filled in all the forms and they told me I would be contacted and let know the date. First contact was 10 days later by text saying my claim had been cancelled as they couldnt text me

perhaps you can understand me being a little dubious

Mine was more recent and I attended in person and was told everything was complete on that day and told about the option to get an immediate advance which I claimed that day and was automatically confirmed as accepted and was in the account that same week. The advance was 6 weeks worth of payments, to be repaid via deductions from UC (or via taxes) over a 12 month period, so on week 5 a second payment on top of the advance came.

Now the interview has been scrapped because of COVID so any new applicants can immediately get the advance and still get a payment on week 5 too.

Take the advance and a single claimant is then trying to live on £291 per month after the repayment deduction.

It would be a very simple, inexpensive, and humane matter to make that first month's payment after say one week. Indeed it would save the admin overhead of advances.

The claimant has been paid MORE net with an advance and then regular payments than they would have if they'd just been regularly paid for the time that had passed weekly or fortnightly. That's the whole point of it being an advance. Under the pre-UC system I believe you still had to wait a fortnight didn't you to get something, now you get a bonus chunk immediately to be repaid over a year which if you've just lost a job is when you most need the money, up front.

Its not perfect, but its better than nothing and certainly not true to say there's a 5 week wait still. Come week 5 you've been paid for ~9.9 weeks not 5 weeks which is when you need it most.

The claimant does not get more by claiming an advance.

As I said before, it would be a simple, economically sensible, and humane change to pay the first payment earlier.

The claimant has more for 12 month until its repaid by claiming an advance. Hopefully you can get a new job within 12 months.

Your system only works if you made the first payment an advance and then paid in advance all along, which has to my knowledge never been how the system works even pre-UC.

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

FPT

Philip_Thompson said:
» show previous quotes
Yes the advance needs repaying, but why shouldn't it? But you're in a better position getting a week one payment repaid over 12 months than getting regular payments from week one only. You're now basically getting paid ahead of schedule for 12 months (if you need to be on UC that long, or via taxes if not) which is an improvement and has axed the 5 week wait.
well I cant answer for universal credit as when I came under it I never managed to make a claim because they cancelled it then I was back in work a week later. However when I did claim JSA it was like this

My rent was 850 a modest two up two down house so had a bedroom for my son.
He didnt live with me so only got 650 HB

On top of that I got 72£ a week jsa for a total of 284 a month so total was

650+284 = 934

I had to pay 850 rent out of that 30 electric, 30 gas , 20 internet 10 mobile phone
for a total of 940 leaving me -6 for for food for the month and getting to interviews....before you say it yes my house was bigger than my strict needs but been there 15 years and in work for 15 years when the firm went bust so I got no payout and left with them owing me wages. You cant just move immediately

No system is perfect but its a safety net and better than nothing. It doesn't help scaring people with myths about the system though.

Its not a myth its my experience of the system.....a myth is made up

Not you sorry, benpointer. That people won't get payments for 5 weeks is a myth - it used to be true but isn't now.

SandyRentool said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Surely the problem isn't so much that they are shooting each other, but that they are incompetently failing to shoot each other dead?

The solution is clearly more powerful weapons.

And some training.

Philip_Thompson said:

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

peter_from_putney said:

Does anyone know what "London Lockdown" is likely to really mean. Is it likely for instance to prohibit drivers from entering and/or leaving the Capital? ... That really would be draconian and ultra-depressing.

Such things do ultimately require consent. 100,000 met coppers can’t control 7m Londoners otherwise. I’m guessing compulsory closure of pubs etc, and maybe control of main stations? Basically reduce the reasons to leave the house and make it an arse to leave London.

With the army in support of course they can, in France and Belgium police now checking valid reasons for being outside eg exercise, to buy food and with permits required for key workers

Be extremely careful when considering putting the army on the streets in those circumstances. Their training is completely different from that of the police*. I hope we can all agree they would not have firearms, but it’s still putting an infantryman in an impossible position. Also it’s a numbers game - it can LOOK like the police and army are controlling the streets. But it only works with public consent (assuming no one is arguing we arm them and start shooting).

*Thats why they only fill in for static guarding roles for the police usually, to free up the Met.

We are facing the biggest national emergency since the second world war, if the army have to support the police to maintain order and lockdown if required then so be it.

The police should be left yo do it initially but if some still will not comply the army as a lsst resort must be added too

yes everyone should stay at home and starve while waiting for eviction after the crisis like good little boys and girls

Your policies are going to throw so many on the dole your systems are going to fail and they will be left with no money. For the first time ever since I left college I know more unemployed people than I do employed. I dont think you realise the scale of what is going on. Ok only anecdote but if 6 of my 10 friends have been laid off this week and that is repeated amongst paye.....you have huge problems

Hence why Universal Credit is being easier to get immediately without having to go into the JobCentre or wait for it.

ah yes the joy of universal credit where suddenly your home is too big or costs more than the number for your area.....have you ever applied for it? I unfortunately have had due to my age two periods of unemployement in the last 10 years

first one I got sanctioned for not looking for work just after they signed off my four interview claim forms for expenses for the last week because apparently I didn't use the right app for job searching

Then 2 years ago when I applied then got a letter stating that I have been declined because I didnt turn up for the initial interview which apparently they tried to text me the date of but the text didnt go so they gave up. I checked the phone number they had the correct one.

That dwp system yes?

Yes I recently had to unfortunately and I had to book the initial interview by calling up and getting a date and time and confirming I would attend that - no texting involved. Oh and the initial interview has been scrapped due to COVID19. So yes that system.

well mine was before covid in 2018 and I attended the job centre in person and filled in all the forms and they told me I would be contacted and let know the date. First contact was 10 days later by text saying my claim had been cancelled as they couldnt text me

perhaps you can understand me being a little dubious

Mine was more recent and I attended in person and was told everything was complete on that day and told about the option to get an immediate advance which I claimed that day and was automatically confirmed as accepted and was in the account that same week. The advance was 6 weeks worth of payments, to be repaid via deductions from UC (or via taxes) over a 12 month period, so on week 5 a second payment on top of the advance came.

Now the interview has been scrapped because of COVID so any new applicants can immediately get the advance and still get a payment on week 5 too.

Take the advance and a single claimant is then trying to live on £291 per month after the repayment deduction.

It would be a very simple, inexpensive, and humane matter to make that first month's payment after say one week. Indeed it would save the admin overhead of advances.

The claimant has been paid MORE net with an advance and then regular payments than they would have if they'd just been regularly paid for the time that had passed weekly or fortnightly. That's the whole point of it being an advance. Under the pre-UC system I believe you still had to wait a fortnight didn't you to get something, now you get a bonus chunk immediately to be repaid over a year which if you've just lost a job is when you most need the money, up front.

Its not perfect, but its better than nothing and certainly not true to say there's a 5 week wait still. Come week 5 you've been paid for ~9.9 weeks not 5 weeks which is when you need it most.

The claimant does not get more by claiming an advance.

As I said before, it would be a simple, economically sensible, and humane change to pay the first payment earlier.

The claimant has more for 12 month until its repaid by claiming an advance. Hopefully you can get a new job within 12 months.

Your system only works if you made the first payment an advance and then paid in advance all along, which has to my knowledge never been how the system works even pre-UC.

it only works though when the claimant got paid for the last month at work...in my first case I didnt as I turned up to work to find the doors locked and we all found out the firm had gone bankrupt....only reason I survived then is I had a few thousand in the bank.

Second time because they decided to cancel my claim I wouldnt have had anything until week 7 apart from again I had built a buffer in the bank and even though I got back into work before my claim went through so was out of work 4 weeks it was touch and go.

I was lucky because I earn more than I spend and could stash some. A hell of a lot of people arent in that position

SandyRentool said:

The government appears to be in denial of the failure of its recommendations to bite.

And why are the bloody pubs still letting people in anyway? That clown who runs Spoons should be first against the metaphorical wall.

Or, they are playing a more subtle game. We have been told to avoid pubs, cafes etc. So, obviously, the Brits pack the places to the gills, whether out of bloody mindedness or 'better use it before it goes' mentality. Now, they can say that due to the failure of the public to listen to the advice, more stringent measures are needed.

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

peter_from_putney said:

Does anyone know what "London Lockdown" is likely to really mean. Is it likely for instance to prohibit drivers from entering and/or leaving the Capital? ... That really would be draconian and ultra-depressing.

Such things do ultimately require consent. 100,000 met coppers can’t control 7m Londoners otherwise. I’m guessing compulsory closure of pubs etc, and maybe control of main stations? Basically reduce the reasons to leave the house and make it an arse to leave London.

With the army in support of course they can, in France and Belgium police now checking valid reasons for being outside eg exercise, to buy food and with permits required for key workers

Be extremely careful when considering putting the army on the streets in those circumstances. Their training is completely different from that of the police*. I hope we can all agree they would not have firearms, but it’s still putting an infantryman in an impossible position. Also it’s a numbers game - it can LOOK like the police and army are controlling the streets. But it only works with public consent (assuming no one is arguing we arm them and start shooting).

*Thats why they only fill in for static guarding roles for the police usually, to free up the Met.

We are facing the biggest national emergency since the second world war, if the army have to support the police to maintain order and lockdown if required then so be it.

The police should be left yo do it initially but if some still will not comply the army as a lsst resort must be added too

yes everyone should stay at home and starve while waiting for eviction after the crisis like good little boys and girls

Your policies are going to throw so many on the dole your systems are going to fail and they will be left with no money. For the first time ever since I left college I know more unemployed people than I do employed. I dont think you realise the scale of what is going on. Ok only anecdote but if 6 of my 10 friends have been laid off this week and that is repeated amongst paye.....you have huge problems

Hence why Universal Credit is being easier to get immediately without having to go into the JobCentre or wait for it.

ah yes the joy of universal credit where suddenly your home is too big or costs more than the number for your area.....have you ever applied for it? I unfortunately have had due to my age two periods of unemployement in the last 10 years

first one I got sanctioned for not looking for work just after they signed off my four interview claim forms for expenses for the last week because apparently I didn't use the right app for job searching

Then 2 years ago when I applied then got a letter stating that I have been declined because I didnt turn up for the initial interview which apparently they tried to text me the date of but the text didnt go so they gave up. I checked the phone number they had the correct one.

That dwp system yes?

Yes I recently had to unfortunately and I had to book the initial interview by calling up and getting a date and time and confirming I would attend that - no texting involved. Oh and the initial interview has been scrapped due to COVID19. So yes that system.

well mine was before covid in 2018 and I attended the job centre in person and filled in all the forms and they told me I would be contacted and let know the date. First contact was 10 days later by text saying my claim had been cancelled as they couldnt text me

perhaps you can understand me being a little dubious

Mine was more recent and I attended in person and was told everything was complete on that day and told about the option to get an immediate advance which I claimed that day and was automatically confirmed as accepted and was in the account that same week. The advance was 6 weeks worth of payments, to be repaid via deductions from UC (or via taxes) over a 12 month period, so on week 5 a second payment on top of the advance came.

Now the interview has been scrapped because of COVID so any new applicants can immediately get the advance and still get a payment on week 5 too.

Take the advance and a single claimant is then trying to live on £291 per month after the repayment deduction.

It would be a very simple, inexpensive, and humane matter to make that first month's payment after say one week. Indeed it would save the admin overhead of advances.

The claimant has been paid MORE net with an advance and then regular payments than they would have if they'd just been regularly paid for the time that had passed weekly or fortnightly. That's the whole point of it being an advance. Under the pre-UC system I believe you still had to wait a fortnight didn't you to get something, now you get a bonus chunk immediately to be repaid over a year which if you've just lost a job is when you most need the money, up front.

Its not perfect, but its better than nothing and certainly not true to say there's a 5 week wait still. Come week 5 you've been paid for ~9.9 weeks not 5 weeks which is when you need it most.

The claimant does not get more by claiming an advance.

As I said before, it would be a simple, economically sensible, and humane change to pay the first payment earlier.

The claimant has more for 12 month until its repaid by claiming an advance. Hopefully you can get a new job within 12 months.

Your system only works if you made the first payment an advance and then paid in advance all along, which has to my knowledge never been how the system works even pre-UC.

I am not suggesting payment in advance of the claim - that would clearly be ludicrous. I am asking for payment to be earlier than FIVE weeks after claiming.

The old system was first payment two weeks after claiming - I cannot see why that can't be replicated under UC.

But if you stick with monthly payments you then get paid for 2 weeks on week 2, then for 4-5 weeks on weeks 6 and 7. You still need to go a month without a payment, you've just deferred it by a fortnight.

With an advance you can get an immediate months payment in advance and not have to repay that for a year, meaning over the course of a year you have more money than you would have otherwise - even if you get a new job and go back off UC you still get to keep it and only have to repay that via PAYE over the course of a year. That's more of a cushion than used to exist.

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

peter_from_putney said:

Does anyone know what "London Lockdown" is likely to really mean. Is it likely for instance to prohibit drivers from entering and/or leaving the Capital? ... That really would be draconian and ultra-depressing.

Such things do ultimately require consent. 100,000 met coppers can’t control 7m Londoners otherwise. I’m guessing compulsory closure of pubs etc, and maybe control of main stations? Basically reduce the reasons to leave the house and make it an arse to leave London.

With the army in support of course they can, in France and Belgium police now checking valid reasons for being outside eg exercise, to buy food and with permits required for key workers

Be extremely careful when considering putting the army on the streets in those circumstances. Their training is completely different from that of the police*. I hope we can all agree they would not have firearms, but it’s still putting an infantryman in an impossible position. Also it’s a numbers game - it can LOOK like the police and army are controlling the streets. But it only works with public consent (assuming no one is arguing we arm them and start shooting).

*Thats why they only fill in for static guarding roles for the police usually, to free up the Met.

We are facing the biggest national emergency since the second world war, if the army have to support the police to maintain order and lockdown if required then so be it.

The police should be left yo do it initially but if some still will not comply the army as a lsst resort must be added too

yes everyone should stay at home and starve while waiting for eviction after the crisis like good little boys and girls

Your policies are going to throw so many on the dole your systems are going to fail and they will be left with no money. For the first time ever since I left college I know more unemployed people than I do employed. I dont think you realise the scale of what is going on. Ok only anecdote but if 6 of my 10 friends have been laid off this week and that is repeated amongst paye.....you have huge problems

Hence why Universal Credit is being easier to get immediately without having to go into the JobCentre or wait for it.

ah yes the joy of universal credit where suddenly your home is too big or costs more than the number for your area.....have you ever applied for it? I unfortunately have had due to my age two periods of unemployement in the last 10 years

first one I got sanctioned for not looking for work just after they signed off my four interview claim forms for expenses for the last week because apparently I didn't use the right app for job searching

Then 2 years ago when I applied then got a letter stating that I have been declined because I didnt turn up for the initial interview which apparently they tried to text me the date of but the text didnt go so they gave up. I checked the phone number they had the correct one.

That dwp system yes?

Yes I recently had to unfortunately and I had to book the initial interview by calling up and getting a date and time and confirming I would attend that - no texting involved. Oh and the initial interview has been scrapped due to COVID19. So yes that system.

well mine was before covid in 2018 and I attended the job centre in person and filled in all the forms and they told me I would be contacted and let know the date. First contact was 10 days later by text saying my claim had been cancelled as they couldnt text me

perhaps you can understand me being a little dubious

Mine was more recent and I attended in person and was told everything was complete on that day and told about the option to get an immediate advance which I claimed that day and was automatically confirmed as accepted and was in the account that same week. The advance was 6 weeks worth of payments, to be repaid via deductions from UC (or via taxes) over a 12 month period, so on week 5 a second payment on top of the advance came.

Now the interview has been scrapped because of COVID so any new applicants can immediately get the advance and still get a payment on week 5 too.

Take the advance and a single claimant is then trying to live on £291 per month after the repayment deduction.

It would be a very simple, inexpensive, and humane matter to make that first month's payment after say one week. Indeed it would save the admin overhead of advances.

The claimant has been paid MORE net with an advance and then regular payments than they would have if they'd just been regularly paid for the time that had passed weekly or fortnightly. That's the whole point of it being an advance. Under the pre-UC system I believe you still had to wait a fortnight didn't you to get something, now you get a bonus chunk immediately to be repaid over a year which if you've just lost a job is when you most need the money, up front.

Its not perfect, but its better than nothing and certainly not true to say there's a 5 week wait still. Come week 5 you've been paid for ~9.9 weeks not 5 weeks which is when you need it most.

The claimant does not get more by claiming an advance.

As I said before, it would be a simple, economically sensible, and humane change to pay the first payment earlier.

The claimant has more for 12 month until its repaid by claiming an advance. Hopefully you can get a new job within 12 months.

Your system only works if you made the first payment an advance and then paid in advance all along, which has to my knowledge never been how the system works even pre-UC.

it only works though when the claimant got paid for the last month at work...in my first case I didnt as I turned up to work to find the doors locked and we all found out the firm had gone bankrupt....only reason I survived then is I had a few thousand in the bank.

Second time because they decided to cancel my claim I wouldnt have had anything until week 7 apart from again I had built a buffer in the bank and even though I got back into work before my claim went through so was out of work 4 weeks it was touch and go.

I was lucky because I earn more than I spend and could stash some. A hell of a lot of people arent in that position

If the claimant hasn't been paid for their last month they're pretty f***ed under almost any system.

Getting six weeks welfare up front, rather than 2 weeks welfare after 2 weeks, is presumably a better safety net for those who've been shafted like that?

rottenborough said:

SandyRentool said:

The government appears to be in denial of the failure of its recommendations to bite.

And why are the bloody pubs still letting people in anyway? That clown who runs Spoons should be first against the metaphorical wall.

Or, they are playing a more subtle game. We have been told to avoid pubs, cafes etc. So, obviously, the Brits pack the places to the gills, whether out of bloody mindedness or 'better use it before it goes' mentality. Now, they can say that due to the failure of the public to listen to the advice, more stringent measures are needed.

And by the time that dance is over a further 50k have been infected.

Philip_Thompson said:

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

peter_from_putney said:

Does anyone know what "London Lockdown" is likely to really mean. Is it likely for instance to prohibit drivers from entering and/or leaving the Capital? ... That really would be draconian and ultra-depressing.

Such things do ultimately require consent. 100,000 met coppers can’t control 7m Londoners otherwise. I’m guessing compulsory closure of pubs etc, and maybe control of main stations? Basically reduce the reasons to leave the house and make it an arse to leave London.

With the army in support of course they can, in France and Belgium police now checking valid reasons for being outside eg exercise, to buy food and with permits required for key workers

Be extremely careful when considering putting the army on the streets in those circumstances. Their training is completely different from that of the police*. I hope we can all agree they would not have firearms, but it’s still putting an infantryman in an impossible position. Also it’s a numbers game - it can LOOK like the police and army are controlling the streets. But it only works with public consent (assuming no one is arguing we arm them and start shooting).

*Thats why they only fill in for static guarding roles for the police usually, to free up the Met.

We are facing the biggest national emergency since the second world war, if the army have to support the police to maintain order and lockdown if required then so be it.

The police should be left yo do it initially but if some still will not comply the army as a lsst resort must be added too

yes everyone should stay at home and starve while waiting for eviction after the crisis like good little boys and girls

Your policies are going to throw so many on the dole your systems are going to fail and they will be left with no money. For the first time ever since I left college I know more unemployed people than I do employed. I dont think you realise the scale of what is going on. Ok only anecdote but if 6 of my 10 friends have been laid off this week and that is repeated amongst paye.....you have huge problems

Hence why Universal Credit is being easier to get immediately without having to go into the JobCentre or wait for it.

ah yes the joy of universal credit where suddenly your home is too big or costs more than the number for your area.....have you ever applied for it? I unfortunately have had due to my age two periods of unemployement in the last 10 years

first one I got sanctioned for not looking for work just after they signed off my four interview claim forms for expenses for the last week because apparently I didn't use the right app for job searching

Then 2 years ago when I applied then got a letter stating that I have been declined because I didnt turn up for the initial interview which apparently they tried to text me the date of but the text didnt go so they gave up. I checked the phone number they had the correct one.

That dwp system yes?

Yes I recently had to unfortunately and I had to book the initial interview by calling up and getting a date and time and confirming I would attend that - no texting involved. Oh and the initial interview has been scrapped due to COVID19. So yes that system.

well mine was before covid in 2018 and I attended the job centre in person and filled in all the forms and they told me I would be contacted and let know the date. First contact was 10 days later by text saying my claim had been cancelled as they couldnt text me

perhaps you can understand me being a little dubious

Mine was more recent and I attended in person and was told everything was complete on that day and told about the option to get an immediate advance which I claimed that day and was automatically confirmed as accepted and was in the account that same week. The advance was 6 weeks worth of payments, to be repaid via deductions from UC (or via taxes) over a 12 month period, so on week 5 a second payment on top of the advance came.

Now the interview has been scrapped because of COVID so any new applicants can immediately get the advance and still get a payment on week 5 too.

Take the advance and a single claimant is then trying to live on £291 per month after the repayment deduction.

It would be a very simple, inexpensive, and humane matter to make that first month's payment after say one week. Indeed it would save the admin overhead of advances.

The claimant has been paid MORE net with an advance and then regular payments than they would have if they'd just been regularly paid for the time that had passed weekly or fortnightly. That's the whole point of it being an advance. Under the pre-UC system I believe you still had to wait a fortnight didn't you to get something, now you get a bonus chunk immediately to be repaid over a year which if you've just lost a job is when you most need the money, up front.

Its not perfect, but its better than nothing and certainly not true to say there's a 5 week wait still. Come week 5 you've been paid for ~9.9 weeks not 5 weeks which is when you need it most.

The claimant does not get more by claiming an advance.

As I said before, it would be a simple, economically sensible, and humane change to pay the first payment earlier.

The claimant has more for 12 month until its repaid by claiming an advance. Hopefully you can get a new job within 12 months.

Your system only works if you made the first payment an advance and then paid in advance all along, which has to my knowledge never been how the system works even pre-UC.

I am not suggesting payment in advance of the claim - that would clearly be ludicrous. I am asking for payment to be earlier than FIVE weeks after claiming.

The old system was first payment two weeks after claiming - I cannot see why that can't be replicated under UC.

But if you stick with monthly payments you then get paid for 2 weeks on week 2, then for 4-5 weeks on weeks 6 and 7. You still need to go a month without a payment, you've just deferred it by a fortnight.

With an advance you can get an immediate months payment in advance and not have to repay that for a year, meaning over the course of a year you have more money than you would have otherwise - even if you get a new job and go back off UC you still get to keep it and only have to repay that via PAYE over the course of a year. That's more of a cushion than used to exist.

I believe they start recouping the advance from your your first months uc payment onwards unless they have changed it.

Besides it doesnt change the point its not really a safety net purely because hb is based purely on what you need not what you have and you can always downsize that quickly. I think 2 months minimum of paying your rent as is to give you time to downsize is needed

algarkirk said:

Has anyone noticed that the number of children that schools would have to continue providing for is potentially enormous? The more I thought around local people, the more there were - mostly because of the jobs a parent does, many of them menial but essential.

Interesting point. I also thought, if you were one of the kids who had to go back to the empty school, whilst all your mates are in the park, you might be a bit peed off.

SandyRentool said:

Shops to close and transport restrictions in The Smoke, so Sky have been briefed.

Senior source? Did he mention whacking the moles?

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

FPT

Philip_Thompson said:
» show previous quotes
Yes the advance needs repaying, but why shouldn't it? But you're in a better position getting a week one payment repaid over 12 months than getting regular payments from week one only. You're now basically getting paid ahead of schedule for 12 months (if you need to be on UC that long, or via taxes if not) which is an improvement and has axed the 5 week wait.
well I cant answer for universal credit as when I came under it I never managed to make a claim because they cancelled it then I was back in work a week later. However when I did claim JSA it was like this

My rent was 850 a modest two up two down house so had a bedroom for my son.
He didnt live with me so only got 650 HB

On top of that I got 72£ a week jsa for a total of 284 a month so total was

650+284 = 934

I had to pay 850 rent out of that 30 electric, 30 gas , 20 internet 10 mobile phone
for a total of 940 leaving me -6 for for food for the month and getting to interviews....before you say it yes my house was bigger than my strict needs but been there 15 years and in work for 15 years when the firm went bust so I got no payout and left with them owing me wages. You cant just move immediately

No system is perfect but its a safety net and better than nothing. It doesn't help scaring people with myths about the system though.

Its not a myth its my experience of the system.....a myth is made up

Not you sorry, benpointer. That people won't get payments for 5 weeks is a myth - it used to be true but isn't now.

Aaaargh!!! I give up.

Standard claim = first payment after 5 weeks. Bear in mind most people don't get advice from CA or similar. If they do take the advance they are living of even less for the rest of the year.

Only if they blow through their advance and if they do that they presumably needed it so good job they got it! Or they screwed up their budgeting.

As I said the killer is housing benefit the difference between that and rent is the killer

Especially if they've made the 'mistake' of remaining in the family house after the kids have left home.

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

HYUFD said:

Time_to_Leave said:

peter_from_putney said:

Does anyone know what "London Lockdown" is likely to really mean. Is it likely for instance to prohibit drivers from entering and/or leaving the Capital? ... That really would be draconian and ultra-depressing.

Such things do ultimately require consent. 100,000 met coppers can’t control 7m Londoners otherwise. I’m guessing compulsory closure of pubs etc, and maybe control of main stations? Basically reduce the reasons to leave the house and make it an arse to leave London.

With the army in support of course they can, in France and Belgium police now checking valid reasons for being outside eg exercise, to buy food and with permits required for key workers

Be extremely careful when considering putting the army on the streets in those circumstances. Their training is completely different from that of the police*. I hope we can all agree they would not have firearms, but it’s still putting an infantryman in an impossible position. Also it’s a numbers game - it can LOOK like the police and army are controlling the streets. But it only works with public consent (assuming no one is arguing we arm them and start shooting).

*Thats why they only fill in for static guarding roles for the police usually, to free up the Met.

We are facing the biggest national emergency since the second world war, if the army have to support the police to maintain order and lockdown if required then so be it.

The police should be left yo do it initially but if some still will not comply the army as a lsst resort must be added too

yes everyone should stay at home and starve while waiting for eviction after the crisis like good little boys and girls

Your policies are going to throw so many on the dole your systems are going to fail and they will be left with no money. For the first time ever since I left college I know more unemployed people than I do employed. I dont think you realise the scale of what is going on. Ok only anecdote but if 6 of my 10 friends have been laid off this week and that is repeated amongst paye.....you have huge problems

Hence why Universal Credit is being easier to get immediately without having to go into the JobCentre or wait for it.

ah yes the joy of universal credit where suddenly your home is too big or costs more than the number for your area.....have you ever applied for it? I unfortunately have had due to my age two periods of unemployement in the last 10 years

first one I got sanctioned for not looking for work just after they signed off my four interview claim forms for expenses for the last week because apparently I didn't use the right app for job searching

Then 2 years ago when I applied then got a letter stating that I have been declined because I didnt turn up for the initial interview which apparently they tried to text me the date of but the text didnt go so they gave up. I checked the phone number they had the correct one.

That dwp system yes?

Yes I recently had to unfortunately and I had to book the initial interview by calling up and getting a date and time and confirming I would attend that - no texting involved. Oh and the initial interview has been scrapped due to COVID19. So yes that system.

well mine was before covid in 2018 and I attended the job centre in person and filled in all the forms and they told me I would be contacted and let know the date. First contact was 10 days later by text saying my claim had been cancelled as they couldnt text me

perhaps you can understand me being a little dubious

Mine was more recent and I attended in person and was told everything was complete on that day and told about the option to get an immediate advance which I claimed that day and was automatically confirmed as accepted and was in the account that same week. The advance was 6 weeks worth of payments, to be repaid via deductions from UC (or via taxes) over a 12 month period, so on week 5 a second payment on top of the advance came.

Now the interview has been scrapped because of COVID so any new applicants can immediately get the advance and still get a payment on week 5 too.

Take the advance and a single claimant is then trying to live on £291 per month after the repayment deduction.

It would be a very simple, inexpensive, and humane matter to make that first month's payment after say one week. Indeed it would save the admin overhead of advances.

The claimant has been paid MORE net with an advance and then regular payments than they would have if they'd just been regularly paid for the time that had passed weekly or fortnightly. That's the whole point of it being an advance. Under the pre-UC system I believe you still had to wait a fortnight didn't you to get something, now you get a bonus chunk immediately to be repaid over a year which if you've just lost a job is when you most need the money, up front.

Its not perfect, but its better than nothing and certainly not true to say there's a 5 week wait still. Come week 5 you've been paid for ~9.9 weeks not 5 weeks which is when you need it most.

The claimant does not get more by claiming an advance.

As I said before, it would be a simple, economically sensible, and humane change to pay the first payment earlier.

The claimant has more for 12 month until its repaid by claiming an advance. Hopefully you can get a new job within 12 months.

Your system only works if you made the first payment an advance and then paid in advance all along, which has to my knowledge never been how the system works even pre-UC.

I am not suggesting payment in advance of the claim - that would clearly be ludicrous. I am asking for payment to be earlier than FIVE weeks after claiming.

The old system was first payment two weeks after claiming - I cannot see why that can't be replicated under UC.

But if you stick with monthly payments you then get paid for 2 weeks on week 2, then for 4-5 weeks on weeks 6 and 7. You still need to go a month without a payment, you've just deferred it by a fortnight.

With an advance you can get an immediate months payment in advance and not have to repay that for a year, meaning over the course of a year you have more money than you would have otherwise - even if you get a new job and go back off UC you still get to keep it and only have to repay that via PAYE over the course of a year. That's more of a cushion than used to exist.

I believe they start recouping the advance from your your first months uc payment onwards unless they have changed it.

Besides it doesnt change the point its not really a safety net purely because hb is based purely on what you need not what you have and you can always downsize that quickly. I think 2 months minimum of paying your rent as is to give you time to downsize is needed

They do.

Btw has the character limit on blockquotes been removed?!

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Benpointer said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

FPT

Philip_Thompson said:
» show previous quotes
Yes the advance needs repaying, but why shouldn't it? But you're in a better position getting a week one payment repaid over 12 months than getting regular payments from week one only. You're now basically getting paid ahead of schedule for 12 months (if you need to be on UC that long, or via taxes if not) which is an improvement and has axed the 5 week wait.
well I cant answer for universal credit as when I came under it I never managed to make a claim because they cancelled it then I was back in work a week later. However when I did claim JSA it was like this

My rent was 850 a modest two up two down house so had a bedroom for my son.
He didnt live with me so only got 650 HB

On top of that I got 72£ a week jsa for a total of 284 a month so total was

650+284 = 934

I had to pay 850 rent out of that 30 electric, 30 gas , 20 internet 10 mobile phone
for a total of 940 leaving me -6 for for food for the month and getting to interviews....before you say it yes my house was bigger than my strict needs but been there 15 years and in work for 15 years when the firm went bust so I got no payout and left with them owing me wages. You cant just move immediately

No system is perfect but its a safety net and better than nothing. It doesn't help scaring people with myths about the system though.

Its not a myth its my experience of the system.....a myth is made up

Not you sorry, benpointer. That people won't get payments for 5 weeks is a myth - it used to be true but isn't now.

Aaaargh!!! I give up.

Standard claim = first payment after 5 weeks. Bear in mind most people don't get advice from CA or similar. If they do take the advance they are living of even less for the rest of the year.

Only if they blow through their advance and if they do that they presumably needed it so good job they got it! Or they screwed up their budgeting.

Quite a lot of people I have seen have lost theire job, or partner, or got ill and spent a while living off their savings before they even think about asking for help, and they haven't got a clue how to make a UC claim. They are already getting into debt, short of food, skimping on the heating etc. by the time the claim is made.

Now admittedly, we don't tend to see the people for whom this is easy-peasy but for those less-switched on, shall we say, the system is a nightmare, and frankly, cruel.

Indeed to give you an example I am 54 so new jobs dont come easy. I am now so scared of being unemployed and what it means that when I chose my new home I deliberately chose it to fit housing benefit criteria so I now live in what is basically a studio flat...I cant have my son over to stay anymore because its too small. If I get made unemployed though and cant find a job which is increasingly likely at my age then at least hb will cover the rent.

TfL making major changes to public transport:

https://twitter.com/VinnyMcAv/status/1240417200172871680

Jonathan said:

Get Stringer Bell to sort it out.

Isn't he in self isolation as well?

SandyRentool said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Surely the problem isn't so much that they are shooting each other, but that they are incompetently failing to shoot each other dead?

The solution is clearly more powerful weapons.

Ah, so the NRA wanting free availabilty of assault weapons makes perfect sense now.....

JM1 said:

PS As an aside, I was a bit alarmed earlier to read (Guardian LiveBlog) that France had only performed 44,000 tests total (of which 9134 are positive). That's 5 times as many positive results per test performed relative to the UK. So at least in terms of tests we should be in a better place for understanding what's going on here.

Surely it depends who they are tested and where? If they are testing residents of villages in the French Alps and getting that rate, then France is in real trouble. OTOH, if they are testing people who present themselves to medical staff then a high rate is unsurprising.

Beibheirli_C said:

JM1 said:

PS As an aside, I was a bit alarmed earlier to read (Guardian LiveBlog) that France had only performed 44,000 tests total (of which 9134 are positive). That's 5 times as many positive results per test performed relative to the UK. So at least in terms of tests we should be in a better place for understanding what's going on here.

Surely it depends who they are tested and where? If they are testing residents of villages in the French Alps and getting that rate, then France is in real trouble. OTOH, if they are testing people who present themselves to medical staff then a high rate is unsurprising.

But... I thought our UK testing approach was only to test those suspected and we're only seeing a positive result in approx 5% of cases.

For PBers...general tips....try and sleep, exercise, eat well...lay off the booze (a bit), take zinc...and drink lot's of hot drinks...not coffee or tea- things with water...good night

tyson said:

For PBers...general tips....try and sleep, exercise, eat well...lay off the booze (a bit), take zinc...and drink lot's of hot drinks...not coffee or tea- things with water...good night

rooibos tea is my go-to staple. Delicious, sugar-free, no caffeine.

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

GideonWise said:

SandyRentool said:

The government appears to be in denial of the failure of its recommendations to bite.

And why are the bloody pubs still letting people in anyway? That clown who runs Spoons should be first against the metaphorical wall.

Why were flights coming in from Italy a few days before lock down? Don't do it to yourself mate. If you start thinking about this stuff it's hard to shake the rage.

Presumably at least partially because Brits who'd flown to Italy needed to return home. What would you have done? Said 'screw you' an epidemic has broken out where you've travelled to so you're on your own now Jack.

We should have done what New Zealand did (but sooner) - a 2 week quarantine for everyone entering the country.

Anyway, bedtime. Stay safe.

Is your bedtime usually dangerous?

MarqueeMark said:

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

GideonWise said:

SandyRentool said:

The government appears to be in denial of the failure of its recommendations to bite.

And why are the bloody pubs still letting people in anyway? That clown who runs Spoons should be first against the metaphorical wall.

Why were flights coming in from Italy a few days before lock down? Don't do it to yourself mate. If you start thinking about this stuff it's hard to shake the rage.

Presumably at least partially because Brits who'd flown to Italy needed to return home. What would you have done? Said 'screw you' an epidemic has broken out where you've travelled to so you're on your own now Jack.

We should have done what New Zealand did (but sooner) - a 2 week quarantine for everyone entering the country.

Anyway, bedtime. Stay safe.

Is your bedtime usually dangerous?

It can be. Many people die in their beds....

Bernie unleashing his grumpy old man...
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/488349-sanders-when-asked-about-timeframe-for-2020-decision-im-dealing-with-a-f-ing

Beibheirli_C said:

MarqueeMark said:

SandyRentool said:

Philip_Thompson said:

GideonWise said:

SandyRentool said:

The government appears to be in denial of the failure of its recommendations to bite.

And why are the bloody pubs still letting people in anyway? That clown who runs Spoons should be first against the metaphorical wall.

Why were flights coming in from Italy a few days before lock down? Don't do it to yourself mate. If you start thinking about this stuff it's hard to shake the rage.

Presumably at least partially because Brits who'd flown to Italy needed to return home. What would you have done? Said 'screw you' an epidemic has broken out where you've travelled to so you're on your own now Jack.

We should have done what New Zealand did (but sooner) - a 2 week quarantine for everyone entering the country.

Anyway, bedtime. Stay safe.

Is your bedtime usually dangerous?

It can be. Many people die in their beds....

It's got something to do with eating cheese

http://tylervigen.com/view_correlation?id=7

Sainsbury's delivery. Midnight rolls over. New day of deliveries appears on their list. 8th April (3 week maximum window). Not a single slot available.

I reckon they have blocked everything out until further notice, while they sort out a priority system for 70+ and disabled etc.

The right thing to do, but they could tell people.

https://twitter.com/HelenBranswell/status/1240371431659245568

https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1240371160078000128?s=20

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1240371160078000128?s=20

I load of drunk kids think they are immortal. That's as old as the hills.

rcs1000 said:

JM1 said:

@rcs1000 When would you expect to see the number of new cases in Italy start to level off? I'd have hoped to see it the next few days I think. Assuming they have a 24-48h turnaround for new tests, the new cases today would have been sampled yesterday or Monday (i.e., 7 days after the lockdown). If the most severe symptoms arise 7 days post infection, that would suggest that we should begin to see a small decline over the next few days if the lockdown is working I think? (I admit to being a little disappointed in the spike today, although could be due to many reasons).

In Wuhan, the reported cases only started to drop 10-11 days after the beginning of the lockdown. They continued to rise right up until that point.

I'm going to go for a peak on Friday, with declining numbers from then on.

That will be positive news (in the circumstances). I hope it happens.

Andy_JS said:

London Underground/bus news:

40 stations without interchanges to be closed.
Waterloo & City suspended.
Night Tube suspended.
Bus services reduced.

Suspending the night tube will make cleaning easier; reduced bus services might also. I do not really see how the rest helps and cannot see an explanation online. We've mentioned before the paradox that reducing services increases passenger congestion which presumably is one of the things you want to avoid. Perhaps there are good reasons that will be explained in the morning.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Why have the government leaked a lockdown is coming?

The earliest reports listed "sources within the mayor's office".

rottenborough said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1240371160078000128?s=20

I load of drunk kids think they are immortal. That's as old as the hills.

And beyond a couple months of this there are going to be a hell of a lot more of them. This virus does leave them near invincible, 1 in 1,000 to 1 in 10,000 odds are near enough to zero to continue normally.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Andy_JS said:

London Underground/bus news:

40 stations without interchanges to be closed.
Waterloo & City suspended.
Night Tube suspended.
Bus services reduced.

Suspending the night tube will make cleaning easier; reduced bus services might also. I do not really see how the rest helps and cannot see an explanation online. We've mentioned before the paradox that reducing services increases passenger congestion which presumably is one of the things you want to avoid. Perhaps there are good reasons that will be explained in the morning.

People who don't need to travel are going to be strongly encouraged not to use public transport in London. I expect that's how they're hoping to reduce numbers.

https://twitter.com/NadineDorries/status/1240376308804313090

Hubei reporting zero new cases today.