Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that a blanket ban on benefits for under 25s

325 replies

pointythings · 02/10/2013 12:23

Is not only blatantly unfair but also unworkable?

Under a future Tory government, you can leave school at 18, work, lose your job at 23 and be forced straight onto workfare, because you are not eligible for benefits - never mind that you've worked and paid in!

And isn't it blatant age discrimination? Every time I think the Conservatices can't sink any lower, they do...

OP posts:
youretoastmildred · 03/10/2013 14:53

Infantalising the under-25s sends a very harmful message - not the "everyone must take responsibility" one they think they are sending

ArtemisiaofCaria · 03/10/2013 15:35

what about estranged/orphaned students in full time education?

Elfhame · 03/10/2013 16:53

And make it a bloody big spoon too!

Portofino · 03/10/2013 20:13

Murder, there were some figures on BBC website this morning. I will go find, but I think it was about 1 million neets. 380k claim JSA. 480k claim HB.

Portofino · 03/10/2013 20:14

As I said earlier, I was MARRIED and had a mortgage at 25. It is quite ridiculous that I should be supported by my parents if I lost my job.

Misspixietrix · 03/10/2013 20:26

The area in which I live has the highest rates of Teenage Pregnacies and consequent Single Parent rates. Can see this plan going swimmingly...

MurderOfBanshees · 03/10/2013 20:26

porto Oh I'd just like to see the supporters of shit like this actually make an effort to look up some facts for a change rather then tell us about the person their cousin's friend's uncle's hamster knows.Grin

LittleMissWise · 03/10/2013 20:33

Porto I was married with a mortgage and expecting my second child by the time I was 25. Because my siblings and I had moved out, our parents had downsized, I would have loved to see their faces if they had had to support my brother, who was 23 with a mortgage and a baby then, and I had had to move back in! Or they had had to contribute to keeping two extra families and mortgages going!

Portofino · 03/10/2013 20:57

1.09 million people under the age of 25 are not in education, training or employment
410,000 are claming Jobseeker's Allowance, at a cost of about £1.2bn a year
£380,000 under-25s receive housing benefit, costing £1.8bn
SOURCES: DWP, IFS, Crisis

Portofino · 03/10/2013 20:59

So what are the other half doing? In a relationship with a wage earner? That must count for a few.

Portofino · 03/10/2013 21:02

So basically just over a third are even claiming HB. Bank of mum and dad, partner, independently wealthy? How many are SAHMs for example?

ukatlast · 03/10/2013 21:05

Scameron clearly not after the youth vote....

soul2000 · 03/10/2013 21:08

Maybe Ed Milliband can offer the vote to 14 yr olds and give them the chance to ban school uniform. Ukatlast

Portofino · 03/10/2013 21:12

My brain is tired and I cannot do the sums. Country has 60 million people and about 300k of them are under 25 and claim housing benefit. And some of them will be working too of course. 400k claim JSA so allowing for some of the HB ones working, about 100 - 200k are probably living with their parents anyway.

pumpkinsweetie · 03/10/2013 21:22

Cameron hates the young, the poor, the disabled, the jobseekers, the working class, sahm.... And the list goes on...
Is there any particular lot he likes, rich toffs of course.

This party are the opposite of robin hood.

ukatlast · 03/10/2013 21:35

soul2000 'Maybe Ed Milliband can offer the vote to 14 yr olds and give them the chance to ban school uniform.'

Sounds good to me soul2000 - well maybe 16 year olds.

Wallison · 03/10/2013 21:41

Skipping to the end so apologies for not reading the whole thread Blush but I wonder if the thinking behind this policy is that Cameron and Osborne have been and continue to be financially supported by their parents to a massive degree, and so think that everyone else is as well. Are either of them self-sufficient in that they work for all the money they spend?

BoffinMum · 03/10/2013 21:52

I read that Sam Cam has a job at Smythsons that pays £300k and goes around saying 'one of us has to earn some proper money'. Dave has a trust fund in seven figures.

Threalamandaclarke · 03/10/2013 21:54

Sheriff of Nottingham? Pumpkinsweetie

HorryIsUpduffed · 03/10/2013 22:56

The Tory defending this on Question Time has said that jobless under-25s are all living with their parents, so the taxpayer shouldn't have to fund through benefits what is essentially a lifestyle choice to live alone.

What. The. Fuck.

BoffinMum · 03/10/2013 23:01

Eh? It's simply not true. Many had been working before being laid off, for example.

boschy · 03/10/2013 23:26

pile of pants. theoretically, having a big (mrtgaged) house, we can and will continue to give our DC a roof over their heads as long as a) they need it and b) we can provide it

we're property rich(ish) and cash poor (less than zero). so yes, in our rural area they can have a bed - and perhaps even a job - but how do they get to and from that j0b? buses limited; cars expensive, insurance ludicrous.

so they move to town - but withut a a job or any financial support?

MurderOfBanshees · 03/10/2013 23:36

Wow, so now they are just outright lying about it??

MelanieCheeks · 04/10/2013 07:12

What happens in countries outside the UK? What do their school-leavers/ unemployed graduates do?

moominleigh94 · 04/10/2013 07:49

I'm old enough to vote now, and for a long time, thought I wouldn't do it because there was no party I fully agreed with. After this, I'll be voting - and I think anyone my age who doesn't would be an idiot. I don't care who, as long as it's not Tory, and when they realise that they are suddenly losing a proportion of the vote thanks to this age bracket, maybe - unless he's still busy shitting out that silver spoon Grin - Cameron will realise that just because he's a rich toff, doesn't mean people will take it lying down.

This expectation that people will live with their families is ridiculous. The bedroom tax means a lot of families will have to downsize; mine included - they're currently on the council list, for a property big enough for them and my brother and sister. Both my parents and OH's parents live in an area with no jobs at all - not even waitressing and bar work, as someone further up the thread naively suggested. Couple that with the fact that now I'm 19, my parents don't get child benefit - a huge loss for a family that exists on benefits, as my dad has been found unfit for work and told he'll never be fit for work - how the hell are they going to house and support me, my OH and a baby?

On the other side; with housing benefit and other benefits, my OH and I can live where we do now - in a large town, close to big cities, with work opportunities going (I currently work part-time for my uni and am waiting on a reply from a call centre, at the same time as studying 30 hours a week, and my OH has just moved here so he's looking for a job) -, plenty of choices with regards to childcare, and vaguely affordable with benefits, so that we can work to get off benefits.

Option A resigns me to a life on benefits because we'll never get off the first rung. Option B may involve me having to rely on benefits for a short time, but the long-term prospects are much better. Why can David Cameron not see that choosing option A, which he is doing, is possibly the most ridiculous notion ever?

Sorry for the essay Blush

Swipe left for the next trending thread