Torys to cut housing benefit of young

[nomadking]

What has home ownership to do with this? Under 21, on benefits and able to afford their own home.

Here we go again "feckless and lazy youths" not my experience the young round my town bust a gut trying to get work and usually they are scuppered by the older generation not wanting to even pay minimum wage if they can get an immigrant to do it for less. In the last three years a slew of housing is full of eastern Europeans undercutting local labour who can't undercut back as they have all the bills many migrants don't bother themselves about. Nothing against the eastern europeans id do the same in their position but expecting british youth to compete with them is ridiculous. Have a guess which generation usually says "I won't get out of bed for less then 25k" hint it isn't the young I can't believe how easy it has been for this government to get us all at each others throats at a time when cosy stitch ups have been the norm.

Housing benefit bill has exploded because so many private renters have been allowed to charge stupid rents and rather then anyone telling them to come back to planet earth we hit those who have no other choice great plan.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by nomadking

What has home ownership to do with this? Under 21, on benefits and able to afford their own home.

It was a direct response to the claim that the young are somehow feckless and it's why they can't get on the housing ladder. I pointed out that every age group from the age of 54 downwards is falling off the ladder as a direct rebuttal.

It could also be asked what a good part of the posts have to do with it but I think it came down to the prejudice that is constantly spouted, almost invariably by those who have relatively little contact with this age group beyond the worst kind, that this generation is a disaster.

Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.

That relate to this generation? Nope - it's a quote from Socrates, who died in 399 B.C.E, a mere 2,414 years ago.

As I said, viewing the young with contempt appears to be a long-standing tradition.

But I (and quite a few others) are not viewing the young with contempt - we are just stating that having a rented place of your own, if you can't afford it, isn't a right.

My son-in-law, after he left Uni, shared a house for two years with four of his friends - because they were all on relatively low wages at the time, they couldn't afford their own (rented) place; so they shared a house.

Not sure what the problem is with doing this?

---------- Post added at 20:01 ---------- Previous post was at 19:57 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Yes, but that was 1918, before the benefits kicked in.

100 Years War, actually....

[Ignitionnet]

The problem is, Hugh, this will affect young parents and the most vulnerable more than others.

It's too indiscriminate.

I would far rather see a programme of social housing building, you know the kind of housing that Thatcher destroyed to buy votes from her newly created property owning classes, alongside a more contributory form of welfare.

Along with this the welfare cap shouldn't go down. The formula it was calculated on was agreed and had cross-party support.

I would also suggest there's no reason why, if we're cutting housing benefit from the 18-20s, we shouldn't cut it from everyone else.

I appreciate this wouldn't be politically expedient as it wouldn't be a policy whose effect is felt most on groups that don't generally vote for the Conservative party anyway, but we're all in it together and all that.

Ah well they are lowering the benefit cap to pay for new apprenticeships I mean you wouldn't want the company's that will benefit to pay too much far better to hit the vulnerable again and it's always popular as this and many other forums show.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Hugh

My son-in-law, after he left Uni, shared a house for two years with four of his friends - because they were all on relatively low wages at the time, they couldn't afford their own (rented) place; so they shared a house.

Not sure what the problem is with doing this?

As I said before I have no issue in house sharing where it's appropriate

But Housing Benefit covers situations where what you are earning isn't enough to cover your housing needs, even if you are working full time and sharing. The blanket removal support where you might need it no matter the circumstances is wrong.

[Bulky]

Originally Posted by richard s

Well we have/had the bedroom tax, now we have housing benefit cuts for the young - we have 750,000 unemployed young people.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-10004709.html

Whats next!

Excellent news

Originally Posted by BenMcr

As I said before I have no issue in house sharing where it's appropriate

But Housing Benefit covers situations where what you are earning isn't enough to cover your housing needs, even if you are working full time and sharing. The blanket removal support where you might need it no matter the circumstances is wrong.

I agree with you - one size fit all simplistic solutions very rarely work.

Originally Posted by BenMcr

The blanket removal support where you might need it no matter the circumstances is wrong.

Good job they don't plan a "blanket removal of support" then isn't it .This plan is only aimed at those on JS ,it will not include the disabled or those with children .Having a job has never meant that you can automatically afford housing it has always been tough at the start but that is an encouragement to better oneself instead of sitting on the dole relying on state money

Yes cutting the cost of the disabled is taken care of with P.I.P so much cheaper then D.L.A.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Right. So what does that say about every other age group up to the age of 54, all of whose home ownership rates have also fallen since 1992?







I have actually just realised I posted those same graphs to you in another post along similar-ish lines, where you were supporting government cash being used to subsidise the wealthier, not poorer, retirees. Oddly the costs of that policy appear to outweigh the savings of this one but that's fine, right?

I hope for your sake that you have saved adequately for your own retirement and have enough for private healthcare throughout it, as given your willingness to shaft the 'feckless' young we may all find they collectively grow a pair and return the favour to us at some point.

Beyond that I've nothing more to say to you on the matter. There are of course feckless members of the younger generation but, as the Roman texts show, there always have been, and there is absolutely no reason to think this generation is worse than any other beyond the prejudice that members of every generation seem to hold towards the previous one. Sorry to say that your personal experience means nothing. The whole point of progress is to try and give our kids a better life than us, not complain about how feckless and hopeless they are and do what we can to drag them down to what was our level 20 years ago.

Maybe if we treated them better rather than telling them their exams are too easy, they're thick, they're lazy, etc, they would do better.

Maybe if we invest more in them we will all do better.

You really do let yourself down sometimes you know. I have merely responded to your persistent attacks on older people which wear a bit thin when you refuse to accept that many of them have only got where they are by forfeiting the sort of things most young people today take for granted - many examples of which I have given. You on the other hand lump all older people into one group and like to tell us all how well off they all are and how they've somehow enjoyed the best of everything only to leave the youth to foot the bill. Sorry but that's patent nonsense. Tell my mum and dad how well off they are after a lifetime of scrimping and saving and taking bugger all out of the system. Nobody helped them, they did it all on their own.

Given that I have two teens I'm hardly likely to want to see them 'shafted' by anyone am I? My youngest will not be able to decide for himself but my eldest has made his own choices, he earns what he does, saves what he does and spends what he does. If he decides to spend his money on clothes, booze and holidays he'll be reliant on us for longer than I'd like. We may or may not fulfil his expectations in that regard. If on the other hand he decides to live at home, save for a deposit etc. we will do our best to help him because doing precisely that is the only reason we have what we do. Yes my lad has a loan and will have to work hard to get on the property ladder but so what? I doubt his life will bear any relation to the life my father in particular endured throughout which if he didn't work we didn't eat.

Luckily I have made provision for the future and one of the reasons for that is that I want to help my kids if at all possible. If I'd had the cars and holidays I could have had, I wouldn't have been able to it. Adequate or not well who knows? Crystal balls are in short supply around these parts but that was my choice. I'm not whining about what I've done, it was my choice and I'm proud that I followed my parents' example and saved for the future. I would hope my eldest does likewise, it's his life however and if he wants the trappings and bling then he won't get much sympathy from me when he tells me he can't afford the mortgage for a flat.

Anyway I sense you're as likely to moderate your views as I am to alter mine so forgive me for not indulging your agenda further. Best of luck with all that bitterness you appear to have.

[Taf]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Yes cutting the cost of the disabled is taken care of with P.I.P so much cheaper then D.L.A.

Especially when so many disabled will suddenly become "able" in the eyes of the government, not worthy of aid, and the budget will go to help "those most in need". One heck of a get-out clause that.

Our 23 year old disabled twins are DESPERATE to find work of any kind. They have completed college, plus course after course designed to "enter the workforce", but still nothing.

CV's have NEVER been answered. Jobcentre visits have become pointless, but they still go there and allow themselves to be forced to go through the motions over and over, by a staff that is as bored with it all as they are.

Even voluntary work has dried up completely.

Apprenticeships? Don't make me laugh......

[techguyone]

Wouldn't it be a shame if the Conservative mindset of blanket benefit withdrawal on the most needy, cost them the election. It's surely their most unpopular policy choice, it's certainly pee'd off a large proportion of the populace (no I'm not talking about benefit scroungers living in 5 bed houses etc etc)

IDS really does need taking out back and uhh 'talking' too, he's completely disconnected with reality.

Imagine that, Labour sneak in (with some SNP help) all because of IDS effectively, wow that's a mind ****

---------- Post added at 18:33 ---------- Previous post was at 18:28 ----------

Originally Posted by Taf

Especially when so many disabled will suddenly become "able" in the eyes of the government, not worthy of aid, and the budget will go to help "those most in need". One heck of a get-out clause that.

Our 23 year old disabled twins are DESPERATE to find work of any kind. They have completed college, plus course after course designed to "enter the workforce", but still nothing.

CV's have NEVER been answered. Jobcentre visits have become pointless, but they still go there and allow themselves to be forced to go through the motions over and over, by a staff that is as bored with it all as they are.

Even voluntary work has dried up completely.

Apprenticeships? Don't make me laugh......

Yes after all, any savings made are a drop in the Ocean compared to the Foreign Corruption Package we give out each year...

(Ok I know I don't always make the most coherent arguments, but it's so hard to take a Government seriously when they bang on about 'having to make cuts' then they give away so much money in Foreign aid or they suddenly decide people are now 'fit' despite clearly not being - simply to meet a target)

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by techguyone

Wouldn't it be a shame if the Conservative mindset of blanket benefit withdrawal on the most needy, cost them the election. It's surely their most unpopular policy choice, it's certainly pee'd off a large proportion of the populace (no I'm not talking about benefit scroungers living in 5 bed houses etc etc)

I

Therin is the nub of the problem: Too many people on the state teat. Benefits seen as a right rather than a safety net for the most vulnerable. A legacy of the last administrations attempt to get all the popule on state benefits so they all will vote Labour to avoid losing benefits.