Eat Out to Help Out.

Grandad1943

There are obviously those in high-risk groups by way of health concerns, and those that do not have any disposable income to additionally spend beyond everyday living expenses. Those persons cannot go out and spend.

However, there are those which can take up the Chancellors plea and "go out and spend", for we have not in many cases spent anything beyond buying essentials during the lockdown.

In that, large numbers spending to save jobs and the economy is surely far better than the chancellor borrowing huge amounts trying to achieve the same.

So will those without the disposable income to spend, receive a tax refund for the amount they're going to pay for other people to have a cheap meal?

Oohhh Grandadis that a qualification to your nasty sweeping generalisation of a judgement? Well well well well.

suziewoozie

Oohhh Grandadis that a qualification to your nasty sweeping generalisation of a judgement? Well well well well.

A qualification to what. Please explain???????????

"spending to save jobs and the economy is surely far better than the chancellor borrowing huge amounts trying to achieve the same."

Think about it! It comes down to more or less the same thing. For a start, QE costs the government nothing. Secondly, the people who would buy government bonds are those with disposable income - the very same people you're encouraging to spend money in restaurants.

The difference is that borrowing could target investment on sustainable projects, which would benefit the whole country and its future.

In regard to your post @10:11 today, those without the disposable income to spend extra may often be those in low paid jobs in the hospitality industry.

Therefore those with the ability to spend extra, by going out and spending in pubs, restaurants and hotels may well preserve the jobs of those in that low paid work. For it will is the case that many businesses in that industry are facing financial failure at present.

When the above takes place those low paid workers face even worse hardship by way of unemployment and living on Universal Credit Benifits.

The above is the real truth of the situation.

I am going out to dinner this evening with Mr GG13, AC and two GC.

Tomorrow for the first time since 18th March I will walk along to the local shops at the other end of my road and will try to purchase something in several of them. I know I am fortunate to be able to afford to do so, but it is in my opinion my moral duty to do so.

We are also beginning to look at places in England for a staycation as I am not comfortable flying at the moment and we have decided to support our Country in any way we can.

The only way that you are going to create demand is to restore confidence.

Confidence that it is physically safe to go into aerosol filled restaurants,etc

Confidence that you have a secure job

Confidence in your pension payment

Confidence that the government appears to know what it is doing, and is taking sufficient measures to restore demand in the economy

Until at least three of those areas are ticked demand will be sluggish.

I can remember the call to support Britain’s economy during the 60s because our economy was slowing and reversing from the immediate growth after the war when demand led economics produced such growth.

It didn’t work.

We joined the EU

Am I the only one who thinks this is being used to encourage people to start going out again. Once they realise the restaurants are implementing safe distancing and other measures they will, hopefully, continue to use those establishments after the "eat out to help out" scheme finishes.

Oldwoman70

Am I the only one who thinks this is being used to encourage people to start going out again. Once they realise the restaurants are implementing safe distancing and other measures they will, hopefully, continue to use those establishments after the "eat out to help out" scheme finishes.

The economy is in much much deeper trouble than issues with restaurants etc.

Yes Whitewave - but there are other schemes being implemented. This is just one of many.

Oldwoman70

Yes Whitewave - but there are other schemes being implemented. This is just one of many.

The question is

Are these schemes sufficient to create the demand that is needed in order to stabilise the economy.

Without this demand the high unemployment will continue.

Demand comes from 4 main areas.

Consumption- like eating in restaurants. Consumption will inevitably slow as unemployment increases

Investment - very tricky as we know that investment had slowed to a halt last year

Government spending - yet to be announced in full and not yet taking effect

Export- Hmm that is where brexit hits in.

All 4 of these areas have to be in good health for a country to see good economic growth

The only area that the government has control over is its spending, and demand will start from there. But it has to be sufficient to tackle the type of recession we are facing, and imo it has so far fallen pitifully short.

Why does the phrase ‘virtue signalling’ keep coming to my mind ?

As well as vastly increased government spending the treasury needs to support targeted industry or business.

Many other phrases come to my mind.

suziewoozie

Why does the phrase ‘virtue signalling’ keep coming to my mind ?

Who are you talking about suzi?

A veiled post is not pleasant is it?

Jane10

Many other phrases come to my mind.

Does this need reporting? As it is the very thing that has been called out as nasty and unpleasant.

High quality training for high quality jobs was mentioned here earlier and I agree. Apprenticeships are also desperately needed to bring skilled youngsters into the many areas lacking in the workforce.
It did occur to me that many in the hospitality trade are demoralised, out of work graduates who have second class degrees from second class unis and who would have been far better off pursuing a vocational training. They now have huge debts to pay off too, so we need to help them where we can. It wasn't their fault that degrees in media studies and surfing led them to nowhere.

I have decided to report both posts as they represent the very veiled, posts GN HQ were asking to stop because they cause such a lot of unpleasantness and upset.

If they are being directed at me then I suggest you write a reasonable post which disagrees with my argument.

Otherwise it says a lot more about yourselves I am afraid.

Ellianne

High quality training for high quality jobs was mentioned here earlier and I agree. Apprenticeships are also desperately needed to bring skilled youngsters into the many areas lacking in the workforce.
It did occur to me that many in the hospitality trade are demoralised, out of work graduates who have second class degrees from second class unis and who would have been far better off pursuing a vocational training. They now have huge debts to pay off too, so we need to help them where we can. It wasn't their fault that degrees in media studies and surfing led them to nowhere.

Yes I think an excellent apprenticeship scheme would be so good for the young, as I think they have taken the brunt of this crises.

One of the schemes is to encourage employers to take on apprentices - something sadly lacking in the past. I don't know how much more the government can do - they are investing millions in trying to help people back to work, in all areas.

suzi and jane GNHQ have requested that I wait to see if you would identify the person in your posts.

Over to you

Oldwoman70

One of the schemes is to encourage employers to take on apprentices - something sadly lacking in the past. I don't know how much more the government can do - they are investing millions in trying to help people back to work, in all areas.

One thing Roosevelt did is create a wealth tax.

There has been lots of calls for one from a Sunak, but the suggestion is that he will increase tax but for everyone, leaving him being accused of favouring the wealthy again.

The point is that Roosevelt fundamentally changed the structure of the USA economy and it may be argued that the U.K. needs something on such a scale now.

May I say something?

The scheme does not begin until August.
It is not vouchers.
It is not £10 off a meal.

It is 50% off your meal, up to a maximum of £10.

Whitewave - who would you include in your "wealth tax". Millionaires (obviously), company owners (those who provide employment), people with savings over a certain amount (I note those advocating a wealth tax are never specific on this point), based on the value of a property owned (many people are property rich cash poor), income (again no specifics).