MrSmith Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 What will happen to someone under 25 who has a child? Or an asylum seeker under 25?. I think the people with children will continue to get housing benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackLakeland Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 I put the word "trainee" into Reed Recruitment, to see what sort of chance a young person has at finding employment. If there were plenty of jobs for them there'd be opportunities with few or no applicants. If you look at the jobs advertised and the number of applicants you can see that it's not that easy.... http://www.reed.co.uk/jobs?keywords=trainee I would also assume that there will be other applicants from other job sites... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackLakeland Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 I think the people with children will continue to get housing benefits. And what about someone who has worked from the age of 16 to 24 and then is made redundant. Will they be evicted even though they've paid more into the system than someone who has kids but has never worked? It seems a little unfair.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 The we lock them up, we can't be held to ransom by this underclass, that just won't work. yes, 3 million or whatever prison places magically appear? wonder which would be cheaper anyway, housing benefit or prison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanman Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 I put the word "trainee" into Reed Recruitment, to see what sort of chance a young person has at finding employment. If there were plenty of jobs for them there'd be opportunities with few or no applicants. If you look at the jobs advertised and the number of applicants you can see that it's not that easy.... http://www.reed.co.uk/jobs?keywords=trainee I would also assume that there will be other applicants from other job sites... I think that's a totally false test. People need to get off their arses and look for work. There are far too many in people in Britain who do nothing and rely on on the state to provide. There are also far too many people who think this is how it should be! I've done many poorly paid jobs in my life but each one has contributed in some way in my being able to get the next better job. Employers would much sooner see someone with experience of employment even if its the most menial than someone who has no experience. I feel sorry for the youth of Britain mainly because many of them believe that the state has the responsibility to provide for them and they are supported in this view by far too many people. Very few people are now brought up with a strong worth ethic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 And what about someone who has worked from the age of 16 to 24 and then is made redundant. Will they be evicted even though they've paid more into the system than someone who has kids but has never worked? It seems a little unfair.. It seems more than a little unfair to me, either everyone should be entitled to housing benefits or no one should be entitled, I'd go with everyone that has worked and no one that hasn't worked, but I’d limit it to six months and after that it would be a bed and food in return for work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 yes, 3 million or whatever prison places magically appear? wonder which would be cheaper anyway, housing benefit or prison Obviously the prison places would be significantly cheaper if I was in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Obviously the prison places would be significantly cheaper if I was in charge. good job yer not then or half the population would be banged up for various reasons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 good job yer not then or half the population would be banged up for various reasons No they wouldn't, the vast majority would be working, some would be banged up, the population would be much lower and housing would be affordable to all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mossdog Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Or it may turn out to be a good thing. Housing benefit is keeping rent prices way higher than they should be. If half the people renting can't afford to rent, who will the evil landlords rent to? If they can't keep the money for nothing payments coming in from "property portfolios" they'll sell up = more supply of houses = lower house prices. Housing benefit's one of the sillier benefits anyways. It should be limited to 6 month/1 year periods to help people out of difficult situations. And on top of that,all student accommodation should pay council tax like the rest of us. Can someone give a real reason why student accommodation escapes council tax in this day and age? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.