To wonder why you get less job seekers allowance if you're under 25?

[MyTeaHasGoneCold]

I really don't get it.

Things do not cost less if you are under 25. Food, clothes, transport costs, etc are not cheaper just because you are under 25. They cost the same for everyone so what's the reasoning behind paying them less?

The only thing I can think of is that under 25's are maybe more likely to be living at home than over 25's...except that doesn't always work because I know plenty of people younger than that who don't live at home and people older than that who do. Yet the over 25 would still get more JSA purely on the basis of their age.

AIBU?

[x2boys]

I agree LST its quite possible a person of fourty may have made no NI contributions but a person of under 25 has worked since they left school and have just lost their job but I think there is an assumption under 25,s have made less NI contributions etc.

[sarahquilt]

I was the same Spartak. Most people I know were living in shared accommodation until late 20s or early 30s and they all had good jobs. It's just the way it is.

[eyebags63]

I think young people are just an easy target for money saving. It is the same reason that NMW is lower for young people, apprenticeship rates of pay are shameful, student fees have been increased to 9k, EMA scrapped, etc, etc.

The assumption is all young people are potential scroungers, should accept living in poor conditions or have middle class parents who can afford to support them until they are 25.

The NI contributions aspect of it is clearly a joke as NI is just another tax, it doesn't get put into a separate 'pot' of money to pay out. I don't understand why some people suddenly feel superior and more entitled because they have "paid their NI". It is just a bollocks argument used to justify the shitty treatment dished out to youngsters in this country.

[Suzannewithaplan]

It's to save money on benefits, make younger people feel disengaged from society so that they don't vote and don't become politically active or informed.

It also gives the impression that they are somehow less than full adults.

That way those in power can do what they want without being questioned or challenged

[Suzannewithaplan]

If you are not considered a proper grown up until you are 35, not expected to live independently from your parents until you are 35 then you are less likely to question authority, less likely to be an independent thinker.

[SomethingAboutNothing]

Actually eyebags when I had to go onto JSA when I was made redundant I could only claim for 6 months because that was all my NI contributions made me eligible for, so they do take that into account for those over 25.

As others up thread have said, plenty of people earning money for years are only able to afford to live in a shared house, so why should people on benefits automatically be able to I claim for the full rent on a house/flat?

[JazzAnnNonMouse]

Because ageism only applies to the old.

If the gov suddenly decided that all over 60s wage would suddenly drop because some of them would've paid off their mortgage just like some under 25s would still live with their parents there would be national outcry.

Young people are an easy target as they 'don't vote' (actually I'm 23 and I don't know anyone my age that didn't vote.)

Most under 25s that I know do not live with their parents.

[googoodolly]

Because younger people generally don't have households to support. Most of them can go back home, get help from their parents, or live in house-shares, and don't need as much money as older people who have mortgages and families to support, I would guess.

[LightastheBreeze]

i don't think you are seen as financially independent from parents until 25. I think that is the age that you can go to university and don't have your parents income taken into account also.

[melissa83]

Its a silly rule. Age 25 is ridiculously old to live with or have anything to do with your parents finances

[Uptheairymountain]

eyebags - NI contributions are actually kept in a different pot:

"The National Insurance Funds are used to pay for certain types of welfare expenditure and National Insurance payments cannot be used directly to fund general government spending. However, any surplus in the funds is invested in government securities, and so is effectively lent to the government at low rates of interest."

So when the government say they're cutting welfare, it's not actually their money to cut. It's a little like saying right, I want to save money so I'm going to tell those at No 53 to stop buying stuff so I can borrow any money they save instead.

[Appletini]

It sucks. Not everyone can rely on the bank of mum and dad.

[Ilovenewts]

Because people care less about us ? I lost my (well paid) job at 24 and didn't get les JSA - is it new ? However under 30s do get less HB so I nearly lost the home I'd had for 3 years because of my age. Which is a load of shite.

[Marnierose]

Because it should be easier to get a job?

[arethereanyleftatall]

Because there's absolutely no reason an able bodied under 25 shouldn't have a job.
An older person often has more responsibilities, or more experience and is looking for a job at their level, and can't take a job at mcds.

[Ilovenewts]

Yeah because it's that easy I was out of work for 2 months and applied for every job going professional level or otherwise. I only managed to get a job in a pizza place after I started taking some of my qualifications off my CV.

[Ilovenewts]

And I disagree that an older qualified person shouldn't be looking at min wage jobs. A job is a job regardless of age.

[Appletini]

"Because there's absolutely no reason an able bodied under 25 shouldn't have a job.
An older person often has more responsibilities, or more experience and is looking for a job at their level, and can't take a job at mcds."

This is one of the most ridiculous posts I have ever read on MN.

[ilovesooty]

There's no reason why someone should be able to turn down work not at "their level" by virtue of being over 25.

[TheBuskersDog]

Slightly different but same age discrimination, my son is 21 and severely learning disabled and will never be able to work, can never improve his 'lot' in life.
When it is assessed how much of his benefits he must contribute towards his care package from Social Services he has a lower allowance because he is under 25, but elderly people (I think 75+ but may be wrong) get to keep even more of their money. Also many of the things that can be deducted are weighted towards the elderly, help with doing your hair, podiatry etc.
He is a physically able young man, needs to be out and about doing things and imo people like him need more money to live off than elderly ladies who have lived their life, don't want to be out persuing hobbies or going on holiday and don't eat much.

[deakymom]

clearly its because your slimmer and don't need as much food? i left home at 18 no subsidy from them

[deakymom]

"there is absolutely no reason why an able bodied young person should not have a job?" move to my area and find a job! all there is this week is the fabled zero hour contract one (fabled because they take people on train them give them hours one week nothing the next then advertise for more workers) or a voluntary job or you could work in the heart foundation shop which is advertised as "full time" but is in reality 6 hours on a sunday none of these pay the rent yes the economy is getting better but not for everyone and NOT everywhere

[Pumpkinpositive]

Because you haven't made the same NI contributions as someone older?

What about someone over 25 who has a very checkered if not almost non existent work history? As opposed to a 24 year old who has worked every day since the age of 16?

I am well over 25 and I think it's outrageous. But then, I've never really understood a lower minimum wage for 16-18 year olds.

And I'm on the fence about taxation for under 18s at all. No taxation without representation and all that. #commie

[justmyview]

Because it's more reasonable to expect people under 25 to share a house with flatmates?

[Ilovenewts]

Whys that just ? Compared to say some 26 ? Or 29 ?