Are U1of 3million+ #ExcludedUK Getting NO Govt Support? Join us!

Grumpy_chap

I think we should include Mike Ashley within the 3 million #Excluded NO support.
Yeah, OK, he probably did claim CJRS for some of his staff, but what a pittance?
Yeah, he probably could have claimed CBILS, but that does not count
Yeah, he could defer some of the tax payments, but that'll still need to be paid one day so unfair
BUT,
He did lose all of Debenhams and got zilch from the tax payer
And he is a Ltd Co. Director and his dividend payments will likely be less, so someone should make that up to him
And the value of his shares have probably gone down

#MoreMoneyforMike

Jonesy1977

boyleminer said:

People on this forum are obsessing with the 3 million figure without knowing for sure how many people have been left behind. There is a valid argument that some people may fall into more than one category but there are more groups appearing all the time with more people who have been excluded. There are also many people who did receive something but nowhere near enough to cover their living costs. Many people had to apply for the bounce back loan so officially they have been supported but as they don’t know when their business can reopen again the bounce back loan could jeopardise their livelihoods even further.  Nobody can say with absolute certainty how many people have been left out but what we can say with absolute certainty is these are real people with real families with real lives who through no fault of their own are facing serious hardship. Perhaps before picking at flaws in the campaign, try see things through the perspective of those good hard working tax payers who’s lives have been ripped apart by these massive loopholes in all support packages and maybe offer something constructive rather than being ridiculously negativity. You could also say nothing at all. It’s easier to get on with your own lives than it is to !!!!!! and moan about people who are being condemned to poverty 

With the absolute greatest of respect, I think you are missing the point.  The #Excluded claims are being debunked on this thread including by people who have already said (like me) that they are included in the list of the forgotten.  These claims are damaging the very real and legitimate issues facing individuals (such as yourself) caught out in an imperfect system and who need support.  Many of the claims are factually wrong (as detailed in the threads) and this matters, because if the claims are wrong the campaign is going nowhere and that does nothing to help.....you it merely drowns out your voice.  I really and genuinely wish you luck here, I think that it sounds like you truly have fallen into a systemic crack that needs remedy...............but there are not 3 million others standing with you (as much the campaign would like us to believe)

jimkelly

Why are you bringing people like Mike Ashley in to the debate and comparing him to one man band local tradesmen like joiners, plasterers, builders, electricians, plumbers?

Just because they are both Ltd company directors?  So, that must automatically mean they all have a few hundred million in the bank doing nothing.  

Grumpy_chap

jimkelly said:

Why are you bringing people like Mike Ashley in to the debate and comparing him to one man band local tradesmen like joiners, plasterers, builders, electricians, plumbers?

Just because they are both Ltd company directors?  So, that must automatically mean they all have a few hundred million in the bank doing nothing.  

It is no more ridiculous than some of the claims made by #ExcludedUK.

The connection is not that they are both Ltd Co. Directors so must all have a few hundred million in the bank.  The connection is they are both Ltd Co. Directors so must all have suffered loss because of coronavirus.

ComicGeek

jimkelly said:

Why are you bringing people like Mike Ashley in to the debate and comparing him to one man band local tradesmen like joiners, plasterers, builders, electricians, plumbers?

But again, all the local tradesmen that I know have been back at work for many, many weeks now, and all of the construction sites that I work on are all operating fully again. Is it just because their mates with different tax/company structures are getting 'free' money while just sitting around doing nothing?

I absolutely believe that those most affected should be helped more. But not by giving handouts to everyone, and to those who shouldn't get it (like me!) - I would rather manage the issue myself rather than making my son's generation suffer further. But those who are really struggling, despite having suitable business preparations, savings etc - yes, they should be helped!

Grumpy_chap

ComicGeek said:

I absolutely believe that those most affected should be helped more. But not by giving handouts to everyone, and to those who shouldn't get it (like me!). But those who are really struggling, despite having suitable business preparations, savings etc - yes, they should be helped!

Now, there's a thing!  Those that choose self-employment or start their own Ltd Co. do so in the full knowledge and awareness of the vagaries of that way of working compared to taking a regular employment and build their own resilience.  Those with suitable business preparations, savings, won't be really struggling.
This seems to be a campaign by the #rash&feckless to bail them out.

Galloglass

The issue will always come down to whether the original decision was [legally] rational. If you trust the government with 41% of the nation's annual income, there has to be some legal oversight on these decisions. That's the court's job and here is an example of where the irrationality of decisions have been challenged and won. Note the comment from Rose LJ

The threshold for establishing irrationality is very high, but it is not insuperable.  This case is, in my judgment, one of the rare instances where the SSWP's refusal to put in place a solution to this very specific problem is so irrational that I have concluded that the threshold is met because no reasonable SSWP would have struck the balance in that way. 

https://cpag.org.uk/news-blogs/news-listings/court-appeal-finds-dwps-treatment-earnings-under-universal-credit

If the pressure group gets going, they will have to establish the irrationality of government's decision - not the irrationality of someone deciding one form of incorporation / tax wrapper over another. What people have decided to do it not relevant. It is what the government decided to do is the bit to be challenged.