Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

So David Cameron (we are in it together) really wants to fuck up our children then!

660 replies

belleMarie · 23/06/2012 23:14

How can anyone be taken in by this muppet? whilst him, Sam (and her £1000 pound frocks) and kiddies eat good, sleep good, shit good - we're basically screwed?

His hate for the poor/have-not is staggering and apart from a a couple of grunts here and there, this man is unstoppable.

Cameron to axe housing benefits for feckless under 25s as he declares war on welfare culture
Prime Minister gives exclusive interview to the MAIL ON SUNDAY
Reveals housing benefit will be scrapped for under 25s, who'll be forced to live with their parents
Dole money will be stopped for those who refuse to find work
Mr Cameron shares his views on Euro2012, Jimmy Carr, and what really happened when he left his daughter in the pub

Radical new welfare cuts targeting feckless couples who have children and expect to live on state handouts will be proposed by David Cameron tomorrow.
His bold reforms could also lead to 380,000 people under 25 being stripped of housing benefits and forced to join the growing number of young adults who still live with their parents.
In a keynote speech likely to inflame tensions with his deputy Nick Clegg, the Prime Minister will call for a debate on the welfare state, focusing on reforms to ?working-age benefits?.

Among the ideas being considered by Mr Cameron are:
Scrapping most of the £1.8 billion in housing benefits paid to 380,000 under-25s, worth an average £90 a week, forcing them to support themselves or live with their parents.
Stopping the £70-a-week dole money for the unemployed who refuse to try hard to find work or produce a CV.
Forcing a hardcore of workshy claimants to do community work after two years on the dole ? or lose all their benefits.
Well-placed sources say Ministers are also taking a fresh look at plans to limit child benefit to a couple?s first three children, although Mr Cameron is not expected to address this issue directly tomorrow.
Speaking exclusively to The Mail on Sunday, Mr Cameron said: ?We are sending out strange signals on working, housing and fa8milies.?

He argued that some young people lived with their parents, worked hard, planned ahead and got nothing from the State, while others left home, made little effort to seek work and got a home paid for by the benefits system.

?A couple will say, ?We are engaged, we are both living with our parents, we are trying to save before we get married and have children and be good parents. But how does it make us feel, Mr Cameron, when we see someone who goes ahead, has the child, gets the council home, gets the help that isn?t available to us???
?One is trapped in a welfare system that discourages them from working, the other is doing the right thing and getting no help.?
Asked if he would take action against large families who were paid large sums in benefits, he replied:
?This is a difficult area but it is right to pose questions about it. At the moment the system encourages people not to work and have children, but we should help people to work AND have children.?
His plan to axe housing benefit for the under-25s will have exemptions for special cases, such as domestic violence, but he said: ?We are spending nearly £2 billion on housing benefit for under-25s ? a fortune. We need a bigger debate about welfare and what we expect of people. The system currently sends the signal you are better off not working, or working less.?
He also favours new curbs on the Jobseeker?s Allowance, demanding the unemployed do more to find work. He said: ?We aren?t even asking them, ?Have you got a CV ready to go?? ? A small minority of hardcore workshy, an estimated 5,000 to 10,000, could be forced to take part in community work if they fail or refuse to find work or training after two years.
The Prime Minister wants to show he is committed to radical policies, but his speech could exacerbate strains with Coalition partner Mr Clegg, whose Lib Dems oppose drastic welfare cuts.
It follows the row over plans to revive O-levels and will fuel rumours the Coalition could end long before the 2015 Election. ?As leader of a political party as well as running a Coalition it?s right sometimes to make a more broad-ranging speech,? said Mr Cameron.
A Government official said: ?Decent folk are fed up with the increasing abuse of the welfare system. Responsible people who work damned hard, often on low incomes, to support themselves, are sick and tired of seeing others do nothing and live off the state.
?Labour threw ever greater sums of money at the problem and made it worse. If we want to encourage responsibility we have be bold enough to tackle these issues. We suspect some of those who refuse point-blank to seek work are working on the black market and claiming fraudulently.?
But a Labour source said: ?It is easy for rich Tories with big houses to have grown-up children at home while they find their feet. It?s different if you live in a tiny council flat and your daughter is a single mum.? Ministers said curbs on housing benefit for the under-25s, had helped slash the welfare bill in Germany and Holland

OP posts:
YoYoYoItsTillyMinto · 24/06/2012 20:16

socks loads of people live with thier parents in their twenties because they cannot afford their own place. DB did this. DP's cousins do this. its really normal.

YoYoYoItsTillyMinto · 24/06/2012 20:23

nowthen of course i am not immune to misfortune - DP & i have had enough death & illness in our families.

i guess we assume that good times cannot be taken for grated so plan for the bad times.

JosephineCD · 24/06/2012 20:26

The idea that people are supposed to move out into their own place by their early 20s is a fairly recent one in the west and does not exist at all in much of the world. People that think their responsibility to their children ends once they reach 18 are sorely mistaken.

marriedinwhite · 24/06/2012 20:33

Well actually Gordy our remaining parents are 75 and 76 respectively. DH and I are the only family to look after our two elderly mothers. Fortunately, if they wish they will be able to stay in their homes because a combination of their and our wealth will ensure they can with full nursing care if necessary. If either wants to come and live in a flat close to us we will buy it for them. If we didn't have the means to do that then we would have to buy a property with a downstairs bathroom and bedroom for them to live in and take care of them to the best of our ability until they were considered frail and unwell enough to need NHS nursing care.

That's what my grandmother did, what my mother did and what I shall do. My DH's sisters did it too for their parents. That's how we were brought up. To care for our own rather than look to the state to do it for us. FWIW DH's family is working to lower middle, mine is upper middle so it crosses class boundaries.

Socknickingpixie · 24/06/2012 20:33

its only normal if you actually want to and all parties do so by choice its not normal to be forced to

Floggingmolly · 24/06/2012 20:39

I stopped reading at "cutting housing benefit, forcing them to support themselves". Why exactly should it be otherwise?

CremeEggThief · 24/06/2012 20:43

How is this going to work when there is a shortage of jobs in this age group?

Socknickingpixie · 24/06/2012 20:45

my mother lives in a house owned by me, so does my brother, my eldest daughter lives inderpendantly with no state benefits. out of the properties i own should any member of my family need them then they will be given to them. im lucky enough to have been able to work hard in a well paying industery there are many people who work equally hard in not so well paying jobs.
these lower paid jobs are essential things that for our country to opperate effectivly need to happen we would be totally fucked if every single minimum wage or lower paid worker just stopped. its a fact of life that if we dont want to have a subclass of people living in tin shacks then we need to supliment lower earners rent. its not rocket science

NowThenWreck · 24/06/2012 21:08

JosephineThe idea that women go out to work and make their own living before getting married is a fairly recent one in the West and doesn't exist in much of the world.
Just because something is fairly recent, doesn't mean it has no value.

edam · 24/06/2012 21:16

well said, socknicking.

edam · 24/06/2012 21:18

I kind of wish every minimum wage worker WOULD go on strike just to show the well-off who begrudge them a few crumbs from the pie how much they depend on low paid workers.

LST · 24/06/2012 21:21

Ooo edam that would be the day....

breadandbutterfly · 24/06/2012 21:43

Agree with those who have stated this whole thing is just a way of trying to detract attention from the big stories about top Tories and their tax affairs - the Guardian had a leading story on this. DC has foolishly stated that Jimmy Carr is morally wrong for evading taxes - not long before the papers spot that so are all the Cabinet, Tory donors, advisers etc.

So trying to throw people off the scent - working nicely.

This won't get made into policy - the Daily Mail readers HATe this one, so do the BBC readers, Sun readers, Telegraph readers - no Tory supporters like this one (contrary to the impression of a tiny minority of Tory apparatchiks on this thread).

AThingInYourLife · 24/06/2012 22:04

"its a fact of life that if we dont want to have a subclass of people living in tin shacks then we need to supliment lower earners rent."

No, it is not a fact of life.

The massive taxpayer subsidies going to BTL landlords charging enormous rents are scandalous.

We need more housing, more social housing, proper rights for private tenants and caps on rent.

There are undeserving scroungers making out like bandits from the ridiculous amounts being spent on housing benefit.

They're just not young people in minimum wage jobs. That's not who the welfare stare supports any more.

Empusa · 24/06/2012 22:10

"its a fact of life that if we dont want to have a subclass of people living in tin shacks then we need to supliment lower earners rent."

Problem is, there are some people out there who seem to think that isn't a bad thing. They seem to think doing a low paid job is a reason to be punished.

Socknickingpixie · 24/06/2012 22:19

ofcourse if you do earn large amounts and think everyone else should be able to as well you could put your money where your mouth is and get your companies to pay more but then again that would just impact on how much you or your husband were able to earn.

ohhh the shame of it your cleaner earning the same amount as you hahahaha

xDivAx · 24/06/2012 22:44

socknickingpixie Obviously, you earn more money than the feckless under 25's (I'm not being rude, I am 24 and apparently feckless for being so) if you read my post up thread, then you will see that actually, I am not!

But my point of this post.... I like the fact that you see it from the other point of view and are even willing to stand up for said feckless!

I would also like to add that some people seem to be missing the point, this is not about the under 25's being benefit scroungers... This is about Tories specifically discriminating against a certain age group, regardless of their status. Hard working young adults are being 'picked on' when I know plenty of over 25's who are feckless and workshy. Some are even my family and it really grates on me. But apparently my sister who is 29 and never worked a day in her life is worth more to the government than the likes of people like me who are under 25 and worked damned hard since they left school. I don't claim housing benefit, but I would like to think that, should I need to, I would be able to get help.

It would far better for me than having to drag my 16 month old and OH back to my mum's (who lives 80 miles away), or OH's. When neither of them have the room! And which one would be responsible for us anyway? The Tories probably wouldn't care if we were split up as long as it saved them what must seem like pocket change to such politicians and the like money!

I'm not saying that the feckless don't exist, but I'm damn sure they don't all exist in the under 25 category. Thet should try sorting the root causes as many posters have already mentioned.

I also agree that this is Probably just a way to detract attention, but I'm easily wound up and yes I took the bait!

I will probably have more to say but this post is already long enough 😃

xDivAx · 24/06/2012 22:45
  • :o
Socknickingpixie · 24/06/2012 23:10

xdivax im confused why dig at me i compleatly agree with you and have posted several times in this thread saying dont penilise anybody who works or has a legit reason not to work no matter what there age.

athing i also agree with you, but no damn well the gov much prefers to target those who are less able to defend themselves who would need public funds to test it in court and wouldnt get them. its way more trendy to target poor people because lots of people think the word benefit recipent equates to scrounging scum and crappy press releases like the one we are all commenting on perpetuates this.perhaps if it were trendy to target people who can often afford to fight back or those that pay the higer taxes or have more power then we wouldnt even be having this convo. who knows

but as things stand at the mo tin shacks and homelessness is the way they are going

Empusa · 24/06/2012 23:10

I asked this on the other thread, but would like to see if anyone on here had a solution.

For those who support this. Imagine you are under 25, you got a ok paid job, you moved out of your parents house into rented accommodation, everything seemed fine. Then you get made redundant, you are tied into a rental contract, the only way you can break the contract is to pay off the remaining rent for the rest of the contract, unfortunately you cannot afford it all. What do you do if there is no HB to bail you out while you look for a new job?

xDivAx · 24/06/2012 23:41

Sorry socknickingpixie I wasn't actually having a dig at you, if you can believe it, I was actually praising you. But having re-read my post i can understand why you thought that I was having a dig!

xDivAx · 24/06/2012 23:43

socknickingpixie

But my point of this post.... I like the fact that you see it from the other point of view and are even willing to stand up for said feckless!

Ludoole · 25/06/2012 00:35

If im expected to house my ADULT children at 25, will Mr Cameron continue to give me child benefit-i think not...
Btw, my 19 year old niece lost her mother at 15 and was passed from pillar to post as her father wouldnt step up to the mark. Where exactly would she be expected to go...? Shes holding down a full time job at the moment and sofa surfing so i guess its exactly what the PM expects.

Our kids will have nothing. Jobs are poorly paid and private rents are extortionate in proportion. To top it all, this government is making secondary school qualifications worthless-but thats an entirely different thread....

JosephineCD · 25/06/2012 01:00

How is "this government making secondary school qualications worthless"?