if you voted for the Tories, you should feel personally responsible when you see homeless people on the streets ...

[aufaniae]

...once their policies start to bite.

They want to removing housing benefit for under 25s, many of whom have children. Just one of their policies which will drive people into homelessness.

I thought this was meant to be a civilised country. If the safety net is removed, many people including children will fall through it, some of them ending up on the streets.

How can anyone support that?

Discrimination laws are just a construct that can easily be deconstructed when the cash to sustain that construct runs out.

We are bound by European law though, aren't we?

It may be that what they're proposing is illegal by European law. (Of course many Tories want us out of that too)

This could well be a policy lever to get out of the EU, as well, then.

As in "We can't afford to stay in the EU...."

what ever happened to discrimination laws?
If they are to be ebolishing them, what is there to protect the disabled, elderly, and ethnic minorities aswell as the young?

It's meant to be a safety net, you're not meant to set up camp in the safety net! Like I said who are all these under 25s who are economically sorted enough to start families? Oh sorry I forgot, they aren't sorted but decided to start a family anyway, well now they may have to pay for those CHOICES. I want the tax take supporting those without choices, the disabled, the newly unemployed, not becoming a way of life for people.

A young person may have left home as a single 18 year old, and there may be a sofa available for them at their family home now that they're losing housing benefit aged 24, but is a sofa good enough for a 24 year old with children? How about the 22 year old sibling, who has also started a family and are loosing their home at the same time - where should they go with their children?

A 22 or a 24 year old without a secure home shouldn't have children in the first place! You seem to be missing the minor detail that is the fact that no one has to have a child they can't afford. It is a choice. If the consequence of that choice means they live a shit life, then they should have thought about that when they decided not to bother going to get their free contraception.

Bravo! and congratulations on your tenacity!!!!

But still people don't get it. . . . . . .

I want the tax take supporting those without choices, the disabled, the newly unemployed, not becoming a way of life for people.

That's well put. There is one other category - carers who choose to do what they could leave the state to do - and the state would do it badly and at vast expense.

rose glad to see you have returned!

I have just managed to read through all of this thread and some of the nonsense on here and all I can say is thank god for outrage, fairy, therose and London.... You have said everything I would have said.

The sense of entitlement from some people in this country astounds me, how you can expect the state to foot the bill for your family is beyond me!

It's time for everyone to take responsibility for themselves and their family.

But what about the newly unemployed?
What about those 18-25yo that had families when secure but are then laid off or made redundant?
What will happen to them, after all they would have put tax in aswell as everyone else!

Choices outraged are not always there for some people, as i said upthread contraception does have a failure rate and having an abortion for financial reasons isn't a decision most women would make.

Also what about men that walk out on their families etc,

Lets be honest how many 18-25 year olds in a financial position, without state help, to have a family?! Not many, goodness not many overs 30's are.

I'm aware that contraception fails, but oddly enough it doesn't seem to fail too often when people who aren't entitled to any benefits other CB get to the stage where they can't afford more children.

My contraception failed, and I don't agree with abortion, but I can afford my children without benefits. We have a law which states that women have the choice to abort, if we take that away, then I won't mind supporting families who had children they couldn't afford. Until then, I think people need to take responsibility for the choices they make. If everyone made the same bad choices, then who would support them when there was no one left paying tax?

The newly unemployed and those who have been made redundant deserve to have a safety net, but it would take a very driven 18-24 year old to be properly secure enough in their career that they could afford children. The only people of that age that can really afford to have children while they are still young are those that have a lot of family money or trust funds.

BlingBubbles I don't think the left wing MN views are the majority in the country (especially if you look at some of the shocking posts on the 10 Downing Street facebook page about "evil benefit scroungers" and "fucking immigrants" and so on.)

bling welcome to the party!

Grovel, there are several more groups who I would prefer the tax take to support, those were just one examples. I certainly agree re carers, IMO carers should be paid a living wage by the state rather than the meagre carers allowance they get at present. I would for example, ditch child benefit altogether to give much more generous benefits to carers and the disabled.

I don't think it's about being full left wing - which I am not - but about taking responsibility for the financial situation of your family.

Careful london you will be booted off MN at this rate!

Not child benefit!! How would they pay for dc then?!

BlingBubbles, I'm not full left wing either. I was just saying that a lot of MN posters sound very left wing, and that's not necessarily representative of the population.

yes as it's really laughable to take child benefit away, you know the money used to feed and clothe a child!
yes really funny drive children into even further poverty along with them also being made homeless.

Lets hope you are never in the position where you lose absolutely everything but your will wiped of your face & your dc will suffer as a result-something i wouldn't wish on any child-poverty, ie no money, no food, unclean, no home

Things don't last forever, it's a well known fact that money can change and marriages can and do break-up.

You really are not getting it are you. If you need child benefit to feed your kids you can't afford kids!

But it's interesting that you think it's vital that we give everyone money for giving birth, rather than prioritising the disabled and carers for example.

Well of course i do, as my dh has been made redundant!-i don't think £100 jsa a week between us all is going to feed or clothe them is it? Considering i also have bills to pay too!

Are you discussing absolute poverty or relative poverty pumpkin because there is a difference or don't you know that?