Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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:
FioFio · 26/06/2012 17:28

you are only given your hours 3 weeks in advance usually, hence why people cannot do 2 different jobs unless the two jobs have completely different hours. ie. one days, one nights but maybe it's common sense that people just stop sleeping and take berocca instead

YoYoYoItsTillyMinto · 26/06/2012 17:35

one of my cleaners has >1 job. she fits cleaning around working on a zero hours contract. she is good so i have helped her get CRB checked etc for one job working in a school.

mumeeee · 26/06/2012 17:39

I only heard about this ridiculous notion yesterday. We have encouraged our children to be independent. DD2 is 22, just finished uni and has a low paid job. She is looking for a better one. She is not coming home bur staying in her uni town with some of her friends. She is very hard working and has grown up a lot during her uni years. If she needed housing benefit it would be very unfair for her to have to come and live at home again. She is not a child and making under 25's lice at home is treating them like children and putting a lot of pressure on both them and their parents.

looktoshinford · 26/06/2012 17:46

YABU OP

Only a generation of MNers who grew up under new labour could ever think that the taxpayer should pay for your kids to leave home.

Anywhere else in the world such a situation would be laughed at. Well done to the Tories for proposing to sort it out.

LST · 26/06/2012 17:47

Pha. People are so deluded.

carernotasaint · 26/06/2012 18:02

Want to be Supermum they want him to KEEP himself AVAILABLE ALL ALL ALL week (above and beyond the 12 hours hes contracted to do) JUST IN CASE he MIGHT be needed. Sorry am i not making it clear enough. I cant make it any clearer than that FFS.
And comparing an investment bank to a high street shop. Christ on a fucking bike.

Socknickingpixie · 26/06/2012 18:02

want2bsupermum fyi. for housing benefit purpose it is irrelivant how many days a week a person spends at a claiments property they can even stay continuiously for 3 months if they want. the rules that cover this are do they maintain a property elsewhere and do they pay council tax elsewhere. if the answer to this is yes then no rules are being broken. the only exception to this is if they are living togather as man and wife or living apart but as a formal and commited couple.

a neighbour of mine recently went to stay with her daughter who is a HB claiment as she was ill (from what i can gather this consisted of occasional bouts of hysteria and the vapers) she is intending to stay for approx a year during this time she wont list her main residence as unfurnished or anything so is still paying at her actual home. the claiment informed HB in writing that this was happening to be told its not an issue due to the mum maintaining and having an intention to return to her actual property.

LineRunner · 26/06/2012 18:04

How do you 'help' some one get CRB checked for a school? Surely either they fill the form in and, well, check out ok - or they don't.

LineRunner · 26/06/2012 18:05

Oh, and people on a proper wage do have an entitlement to council housing. This is so misunderstood on MN.

carernotasaint · 26/06/2012 18:05

So if hes asked to come in and says he cant because hes got to go to his other job.
His employer then says " i thought i asked you to keep your self available in case i need you"
But the young lad in question wont have to worry about being "got rid of" will he because there isnt loads of unemployed people waiting to replace him.
Oh wait ...........

LineRunner · 26/06/2012 18:08

Sorry YoYo don't mean to sound like the Awkward Squad there, just wondering.

Socknickingpixie · 26/06/2012 18:25

out of the 210 people i currently employ, only 20 are in what would be concidered to be highly skilled jobs i pay them silly money because it means i get to keep hold of them.and i seriously need to keep hold of them

the rest of them are all employed at the nmw for there age for at least 16 hours per week. we make sure that normally everyone works the same shifts each day/week as best as we can. i personally know every single person who works for me they are all hard working decent good people. but going by the ammount of HB letters we have to issue every single minimum wage employee recives it. its a catch 22 suituation if i paid them twice as much i would end up employing less people or not able to offer the compleatly company funded college/uni places and the inhouse training that we do.

i strive very hard to make sure that every single person who works for me is valued and has the opertunity to progress academicly as well as hands on stuff with qualifications and in house personal skils.so they have the best oppertunity they can have that is with in my ability to control and provide.

i started life in a LA house with skint parents and i would very much like to help as many people as i can to get a leg up iykwim. with out the HB top up some of these hardworkers would be better off money wise if they didnt work because after the legally required personal deductions from allowable income HB only disallow a further £25 a week so why penilise these people anymore just because they happen to be under 25 its crap and it sucks.

Socknickingpixie · 26/06/2012 18:26

line runner i expect she means helped with paperwork or paid the fees for her

LineRunner · 26/06/2012 18:30

SockNick, but your minimum wages are being topped up by taxpayers like YoYo? And of course the workers themselves through their own undervalued labour.

YoYoYoItsTillyMinto · 26/06/2012 18:31

LR - she was working for an agency who wanted to push any costs/admin work on to her & her english was not good enough to understand the process.

YoYoYoItsTillyMinto · 26/06/2012 18:34

sock - what are the barriers to entry in your industry? i am wondering why your staff dont set up and complete against you?

YoYoYoItsTillyMinto · 26/06/2012 18:39

(1) the barriers to entry define why you run the co. & they work for you (2) what you add to the process

(hope my nosiess ok)

Socknickingpixie · 26/06/2012 19:04

linerunner im saying i have no problem with my tax funding hb and i also value the labour that the workers provide if i didnt i wouldnt bust a gut to make sure they are valued. so should i stop paying for them all to attend courses and gain quillifications,stop full pay compassionate leave,and all the other perks they have. employ less people just so i can pay them more?

yoyo i run it because i belive in it and i know its a service that my community needs and i love the work. we have a very low staff turnover rate at any level i hope its because i make it inviting ect and more beneficial than starting out by yourself but should anybody decide to start up on there own there is more than enough of the work to go around and sadly probally always will be so it wouldnt be a compertition its never come up but if it did i expect i would incourage it, chances are most people would decide the overheads arnt worth it

Want2bSupermum · 26/06/2012 19:04

care I have done both jobs and I know there isn't much difference between the two. Both are very similiar in that they don't require much in way of skills and there are million and one people ready to take your place. I was paid GBP10/hr which for central London is not a lot. This was reduced to GBP9/hr a month after I started. I only stayed because it was a good company to work for and I could see positions opening up. I was also required to sign a contract saying I was available whenever they needed me (5am though 10pm). However, my boss was understanding because I went to her and said I worked a 2nd job (which was also forbidden but ignored for those in low paid positions).

sock She was living there as a couple (her parents lived in Reading so she used this as her address) and not claiming to do so. This continued until they saved up enough to buy their own place. That money spent on housing her bf could have been saved which would result in many of us paying less in tax or services being provided to others who are denied due to lack of funds.

twofingerstoGideon · 26/06/2012 19:18

Has anyone actually considered how parents on low wages, who lose significant amounts of tax credits once their children are over 18, will be able to afford to keep another adult? Where are they meant to get the money from to support these adult children? It's all very well saying under 25s have to stay at home, but two adults on NMW or a single parent on, say, £20K/year would find it practically impossible to survive.

light hearted link

JosephineCD · 26/06/2012 19:48

The adult children would be on JSA.

twofingerstoGideon · 26/06/2012 19:57

£56.25 to cover all their food, extra heating/water bills, clothes, travel costs, incidental expenses etc. ? It is very likely they would need to be fairly heavily subsidised by their parents.

LineRunner · 26/06/2012 19:58

How much is JSA? How does that compare with actual cost of living?

LineRunner · 26/06/2012 19:58

You are telepathic, twofingers.

JosephineCD · 26/06/2012 19:59

£56.25 to cover all their food, extra heating/water bills, clothes, travel costs, incidental expenses etc. ? It is very likely they would need to be fairly heavily subsidised by their parents.
As opposed to being heavily subsidised by everyone else?

Swipe left for the next trending thread