ccfcway
Well-Known Member
can they not furlough them ?
Coronavirus Thread (Off Topic, Politics) (192 Viewers)
- Thread starter BackRoomRummermill
- Start date
can they not furlough them ?
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
They can, anyone can do that, however premier league clubs are not exactly strapped for cash, the risks that smaller companies face don't really apply. Spurs and Bournemouth were coming under big pressure as at first they were leaving players alone and laying off backroom staff, I read that Harry Winks got a cheque for about £600k or something as he had some kind of bonus payable in March, whereas some people were getting laid off who earned a pittance comparatively. Collymore was going on about it I think.
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
I very much enjoyed reading that, thank you
skyblueusername
Well-Known Member
Charities should be for good causes that you couldn't justify spending tax money on, like caring for old donkeys, cats and dogs etc.
The NHS should be funded fully so as not to need charity backing.
NortonSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
Footballers contracts are ring fenced. They are bullet proof with regards to what clubs are able to do.
I don't quite get the urge to strip footballers of their salaries TBH, many of them do very good charitable things without seeking publicity and after all the clubs agree to pay them without having a gun to their heads.
Where I do agree is that when other staff are being laid off it is a supportive gesture for players to back these staff. However you would have thought with the shitloads of money floating about in the top league these clubs could hold on to staff for 3/6 months or so before pulling the plug, especially those that compete in the champions league, but if you get 100 million pounds for coming last then perhaps all should have contingency money set aside?
I don't quite get the urge to strip footballers of their salaries TBH, many of them do very good charitable things without seeking publicity and after all the clubs agree to pay them without having a gun to their heads.
Where I do agree is that when other staff are being laid off it is a supportive gesture for players to back these staff. However you would have thought with the shitloads of money floating about in the top league these clubs could hold on to staff for 3/6 months or so before pulling the plug, especially those that compete in the champions league, but if you get 100 million pounds for coming last then perhaps all should have contingency money set aside?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Pisses me off. Same as school crowdfunders for equipment like we’re sub Saharan Africa or something.
“If a rich man wants to help the poor, he should pay his taxes gladly“ - Clement Attlee, PM who founded the NHS.
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
I saw Zuckerberg has committed $25m to the coronavirus effort- that’s about 14 hours worth of Facebook revenue ($21billion in one quarter)
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
The richer you are the easier it is to get even richer
hill83
Well-Known Member
Well yeah. But charity does it no harm.
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
I have no issue with people accumulating wealth and material ‘things’ if they like, but keep a sense of perspective, do the right thing, pay your taxes, don’t be asking for bailouts and handouts- basically don’t be a prick. Problem is that soon as these people accumulate extravagant wealth they do seem to turn into pricks.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
I'm pretty uncomfortable with that myself, manna from heaven for the Tories as that's their ideal, a voluntary funded charitable service.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I just don’t get why we’d want to slide back to the 1800s, “please guv, spare a penny for the sick”. Beveridge would be spinning in his grave.
Again no slight on those that donate, especially in exceptional circumstances, more a commentary on the fact it exists at all.
Again no slight on those that donate, especially in exceptional circumstances, more a commentary on the fact it exists at all.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Isn't the point though is it? It should be fully funded by tax take, if that means paying a bit more tax, particularly the very wealthy and / or spending a bit less on other things then that's what should be happening. Not relying on charity to top it up.
hill83
Well-Known Member
Well yeah. Repeating the fuck out of myself. Of course you are right.
SkyBlueDom26
Well-Known Member
France cases dropped by nearly 3k today.... and the deaths went up by 10, maybe a sign they are starting to flatten?
France Coronavirus: 56,989 Cases and 4,032 Deaths - Worldometer
France Coronavirus: 56,989 Cases and 4,032 Deaths - Worldometer
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
The bottom line is the people running the country are philosophically opposed to the very concept of an NHS, it goes against their every principle.
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
maybe so- there are so many figures around I can’t keep up. Just saw that alcohol sales over here are higher than they’d be at xmas- it’s a boozy lockdown over here.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It goes without saying Hill
hill83
Well-Known Member
It’s not a direct NHS charity though tbf. It’s an ‘extra curricular’ charity. Like helping paramedics with ptsd for example. Not a direct NHS fund. Still shouldn’t be needed though tbf.
mark82
Super Moderator
Typical 21st century journalism. Assume it's from IS news? They'll have not bothered sending someone to Italy, they'll have just been recorded as stock footage.
covmark
Well-Known Member
This is a great point. Myself and my workmates were talking about this very issue. Every one of us said we'd gladly pay another 5/10% tax to fund the NHS.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
I'm not having a go at you, people can donate to what they like it's just a shame these things exist
Johhny Blue
Well-Known Member
Problem is it's the same people complaining about lack of funding that bitch about paying too much tax
cc84cov
Well-Known Member
I posted this yesterday nick many said was lazy poor journalism on here
hill83
Well-Known Member
I’ve been beating that drum for years. Including on here.
I’d even argue that if people can afford health insurance, BUPA etc, they should be doing that rather than using the NHS.
Johhny Blue
Well-Known Member
This is a good time to donate to all kinds of charities if you can. Food Banks, Animal Shelters etc
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
That's an interesting argument however. I mean, does it validate the idea of private healthcare? Does that give government the excuse not to fund state healthcare better?
covmark
Well-Known Member
Yeah, if I could afford for my whole family to have private health insurance, then I'd obviously pay for it. Maybe the extra £45/£50 per week would pay for it.
However I think the amount I've paid in tax for the NHS should cover us and I'd be willing to pay more.
Me and the wife have had some real shit times. The NHS has been there for us every step of our most darkest of times.
I'd rather I paid for that. Rather than pay for private healthcare. I'd like to help other people that are in the situations we've been in.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It's a very complex story but the basic underlying factor is austerity. This is complemented by the NHS structure e.g. The internal market commissioner / provider split and the bureaucracy it causes, independent Trusts, adoption of 'best practice' from other sectors in relation to procurement that isn't always appropriate. No overarching aggregated capital spending on equipment, majority of Trusts in massive deficit so unable to invest. Haemorrhaging staff due to lack of respect from government demonstrated through real terms pay cuts over 10 years. Trusts spending fortunes on PFI deals.
It's pretty much all on the Tories but New Labour's PFI deals play their part.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
That's how the German system works
hill83
Well-Known Member
Didn't know that.
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
I would say...
Many years of underfunding, neglect, secretly privatising the NHS, running it down, trying to introduce US Healthcare processes- it’s no surprise the NHS was under strain. An average Conservative does not believe in an NHS, it’s an alien concept to them. So they cut funding, lost nurses, refused pay rises, started deporting key medical staff etc etc. But Boris is just the latest of people do that, that started before him. Not all on him. You could even say he’s unlucky that this happened on his watch because whenever it happened the guy in charge was going to have a tough time after they’d stripped the NHS to the bone.
What is on him, and only him, is the shambolic response he’s been in charge of. Virtually every single thing he had to do he got wrong. Wrong advisors, wrong advice, wrong strategy, bad communication, no equipment, all compounded by piles of lies and his usual routine of disappearing completely as soon as the going gets tough. It was always going to be hard going, but the actions of this government have exponentially made it worse. Any other walk of life and he’d be immediately sacked along with a few more in there, in this case it’ll be spun into a triumph. Any success that does happen from now is down to the people in the NHS, and only them, it’s not the government- if we do get it under control then it then it will be in spite of the government.
As an example- these ventilators we keep being told are on the way, about to be ramped up- 10,000 from Dyson and all that great stuff. Good news is, we’ve got more ventilators.... 30 of them. Just watch the reaction on the face of the newsreader here, she can’t even hide the incredulity at it.