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

[pointythings]

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...

I used to work with young people who had experienced early childhood trauma. They had the sort of abused childhoods that would make you weep and send donations to the NSPCC. By the time they got to me they had learnt about self preservation - but at the expense of being able to develop any of the sort of social skills, self care etc that you learn in a supportive and loving family. Some were care leavers, all were vulnerable but not entitled to any extra support or help. They were invisible. Most did want jobs or training - sadly, most just could not cope with the work / training at that point in their lives... but could have got there in time and with support (...most of which has now been cut). This sort of blanket policy will again penalise the most vulnerable in society. I work F/T and pay my taxes and am proud to know that my money goes into our welfare system, because I know how valuable it is.

"So, stay at home, where possible, mostly will be possible, and save."

So say they had an opportunity to move out and to another town with better/different career opportunities they should just stay put, just in case? Until they are 25?

But even if an under 25 year old wasent paying much tax, that wouldn't necessarily help them if they were to lose thier job?! And not everyone has the option of either staying at home, or moving back home. You really haven't thought your argument for this ban through, much like Cameron himself!

Linking to contributions and time restricting would be fairer, that way no benefits are paid if they havent worked. Too many see having a child as a way of not having to work hence lots have children in their teens or early twenties with no way of supporting a child. If we could break that cycle future children and their children would benefit.

Agree happy mummy

HappyMummyOfOne, I disagree. Having sex and getting pregnant happens, simple as that. Benefits are there if you need them. I don't think you or anybody else have any proof that many teenagers/young people get pregnant TO get benefits. They won't be living this fantastic life with free money, you don't get much money on benefits at all. They will usually be struggling.

No benefits to be paid if you haven't worked?! I honestly cannot see how you could want this. People need money to live... you can't just go out and get a job just like that

I wish life was as easy as some people on this thread seem to think it is.

Get a job, easy as that!

The callousness is bad enough but there is inverted racism from a poster on this thread too.

What do you think would incentivise the work shy then?

If they get no benefits I think they should not have to pay National Insurance.

What about all those who finished uni whilst the recession was in full swing? Was it their fault they weren't working full time and studying full time? Was it their fault the economy went down the pan and companies were shutting up left, right and centre?

Shouldn't they have been able to claim JSA while they job hunted?

I escaped an abusive relationship at 21 with a one year old child. It was hard enough to find a landlord which would accept housing benefit. To not be able to claim this at all will cripple people.

I would imagine that in fact my situation is far from uncommon. If you're young and with an abusive twat it seems their twat manual instructs them to knock you up before you're 20, or as soon as possible after that. How the fuck are women supposed to escape? I couldn't have supported myself for five years. I couldn't have gone to live with my mum - no room and she was on housing benefit herself. Added to that my sister was unable to find a job after A levels for 4 years, so that was another burden on my mum. There is no way, unless the benefits system had identified both of us as dependants (and my DS) that we could have managed it.

And what about people with horrible abusive parents? Where they moved out at 16 for their own sanity, they shouldn't be forced to move back either. (Also more likely to end up in an abusive relationship if you have abusive parents!)

Aaaaaaaaaaargh. Am 25 now anyway and also managed to escape the terrifying country but Jesus. I am frightened for Britain's poor, and young, and elderly. Maybe I'll move back when I'm rich and try and rescue as many as I can.

If you're going to deny benefits based on contributions, it should be for all ages.

Note that I am not advocating this in any way at all - the measure of a society is in how it treats its weakest members, after all.

So you go to university, leave at 21 or 22 and don't go back to live with parents because maybe you are one of the lucky ones who get a job in another city, so you find somewhere to live, maybe sign a tenancy agreement binding you for a year etc etc. Then you get made redundant or sacked (remember there is no employment protection for 2 years now you can be booted out for no reason at all) and how will the rent be paid until the end of the year, food bought, bus fares paid. I can't see how anyone cannot see this could be a real problem for the type of young people who have every intention of working but just hit a blip for a while until they hopefully find someone else.

This will make me responsible theoretically for my kids till they are 25 in terms of providing a roof over their head if they hit hard times, I will do this, but many won't/can't.

This, coming from people who were handed wealth on a plate by an accident of birth and have no idea at all what it means to have no money at all, or even have to work in a daily grind job to pay the bills, as tbh alot of them could stop work and live off the trust funds, really makes me angry. These rich people in charge no more deserve their inherited money than someone who intends to live on benefits when they could work (if they could find one of these plentiful jobs) but for some reasons they think it gives them some sort of moral high ground over everyone else.

When this affects the Daily Mail classes children, then they will be astounded "but I pay taxes why can't my kids get help?!"

What about the kids who move out of home due to abuse, parents deciding they don't want kids anymore when they get to 16?

Under 25s looking for work would need something to pay for travel to interviews and suitable clothing.

Maybe a free travel pass and clothing voucher is an option.

Congrats on starting your own business arethere. Guess you must have had a fair lump of capital to pay the insurance on the bouncy castle (given their unfortunate propensity for having people fall off them and suffer spinal injury)
I'm in my early 30s - if I lost my job now, at least I have a cushion of rainy day money that I have saved up so I could pay the mortgage for a few months. Took me a couple of months to get my first job - didn't claim JSA as nicely supported by my mummy and daddy. Would've been bit of a bummer with no nicely-off generous mummy and daddy and no access to JSA, given that I came out of uni in debt with no chance to have saved a money cushion.

I wonder what will happen to families like ours? We live in MOD married quarters, once your child is 18 they don't have to house them. So, what am I supposed to do if we move and they say DS1 can't live with us(highly unlikely I know, but just incase)? Am I meant to throw him out on to the streets with no money and no job?

Excellent post, whitequeen.

YoniBottsBumGina

Having just read about this announcement I am a little confused about the comments on this thread. From what I understand it is not saying that under 25's will get no money, it is saying that they will have to sign up to workfare and be either in training, education or 'employment' e.g. Workfare placement to get the money. (JSA and housing benefit)

Whilst I don't agree with many if the Tory policies, workfare included, I think maybe this announcement has been misunderstood.

Here is the link. After reading the thread about people having to move back with parents, not being able to pay rent etc, maybe I have misunderstood?

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-young-people-under-25-would-not-be-able-to-claim-employment-or-housing-benefits-under-tory-government-8853560.html

afromom if you have read the thread and still do not understand why this is wrong, there is a problem.

• Education costs money. Courses cost money, travel costs money, exams cost money, resources cost money. If someone does not have this available, they cannot take up an education.
• The same applies to training. Unless this is delivered with subsidised travel, the young person ends up out of pocket and with nothing to live on. Unless you are lucky enough to have obtained a highly paid job at a young age, saving is very difficult given the current cost of living. The other thing is that 'training' often includes apprenticeships, which legally pay below NMW.
• Workfare - there is nothing 'fair' about workfare. All work should be paid at NMW.

Lastly, how is it ever acceptable that someone who is under 25, who has worked and paid in, should be refused support just because of their age? That is discrimination, plain and simple.

The Tories are playing the 'young people are scrounging scum' card. And a lot of people are buying it, sadly.

For those who agree with a blanket ban, what do you think about the below?
What do you think should or would happen to the below?

16 year old
Fled family home from sexual, emotional and physical abuse from both biological parents.
Now living in supported housing and attending full time college.
Currently claiming HB and IS.

18 year old
Left family home, through choice, as felt if she didn't she would become more unwell and cycle would continue. Mum has sever and prolonged MH and Dad last few years sever depression, has younger siblings who she has brought up. Social services have been involved with family for years.
Lived in supported housing and attending full time college. Went to Uni which was her dream, said this would have never happened if had not left home.
Claimed HB and IS.

16 year old
Mum died and Dad died shortly after, brought up by sibling who was a few years older, shortly before she left physical abuse from sibling.
Claimed HB and IS, whilst living in supported housing and attending full time college.

20 year old
Mum died and Dad not interested. Long history of offences, using alcohol and cannabis daily.
Moved into supported housing.
Claimed HB and JSA.
Went on training through JSA and gained full time employment.
Offending stopped when moved into supported housing, said she had never been told anything positive, when she did responded positivly.

Above are just a few examples. The list could continue.

What do you think the life may have been for these young people?
What about costs to other services, police,prison,probation,social services,MH services etc...