scrapping the housing benefits for under 25's

johngalway

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Some people would suggest that starting a discussion about a social problem is doing something productive. This is how social problems like institutional homophobia were tackled.

And others would suggest removing a necessary element of protection for some very genuine people because they have been tarred with the big bad generalisation brush would be cold hearted stupidity, but that's just my take on it.

Monty Burnz

johngalway wrote: »

And others would suggest removing a necessary element of protection for some very genuine people because they have been tarred with the big bad generalisation brush would be cold hearted stupidity, but that's just my take on it.

For the umpteenth time, surely nobody has a problem with genuine people who want to work getting help if they can't find it?

Chucken

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Yes. I understood it to be referring to people who wanted to sponge, not to people who wanted to work. Perhaps the OP could clarify if I understood her correctly.

What she said....
should we scrap housing benefits for under 25's saving 2 billion euro a year

IMO i think its a great idea and i feel it would stop young girls getting pregnant at such a young age


A big sweeping statement that smacks of arrogance tbh

SusieBlue

I wouldn't be surprised if this was brought in by the government, though. Sounds exactly like the kind of thing they'd do.

They're already raising the retirement age to 68. If you happen to turn 18 before end of the school year, your parents are no longer entitled to children's allowance because "your over 18, you should be supporting yourself".

When the government run into budget issues, it seems the first thing they do is target the vulnerable, instead of looking into their own deep pockets.

Lyaiera

I'd say we should take away all these scroungers benefits and make them work for the state. All the money we save from not giving them benefits we can put into employing people who will drag them out of bed in the morning and put them to work sweeping the roads all day long. They can have their breakfast in their tenement housing, provided to them by other scroungers who will be forced to get up a little earlier to make breakfast for their "peers." These can be the scroungers who have shown they can work a little, and they'll do better because they can take an extra bit of porridge for themselves for their own breakfast. Because we certainly won't feed them too much because that'll make them lazy and tired, and hunger is good motivation to get off your arse. If they've worked hard for the morning they can get some chips out of a chip van at lunch (there must be tonnes of them around the country) before going back to sweeping the roads. Come teatime they can have some bread and hard cheese and glass of water. The scroungers who worked hard for the afternoon can have a cup of tea, sugar and milk too if they want. Then they can sit and watch the news until 9pm when it's lights out and the power is cut as they have to be up at 5am to start sweeping roads again (during the winter they can stay up until 10pm and sleep until 6.30am because of the light.)

On sundays the male scroungers and the female scroungers can meet up in the morning for a cup of tea and some bread and marmalade. From 5pm to 7pm they can have a cheile, but only with set dancing because we don't want them scroungers getting too close and having ideas of knocking up the female scrounger so she has to take time off to have a baby. I know this isn't perfect and some of the crafty scroungers will find a way to get pregnant. The woman can be put on light duty then, cleaning offices for the civil service (I know this will take away from real people's cleaning job but I can't think of a better solution.) She can have the child then and after two weeks of bonding the child can be taken away and put in supervised care/foster care. When the child is old enough to know its parents are complete wasters and knows enough not to want to turn out like them it can meet them on the Sunday's from 5pm to 7pm instead of the scroungers going to the cheile. They probably don't care about the child and would prefer to go to the cheile but that's tough ****. They brought a child into the world the least they can do is set an example to the child how it shouldn't turn out.

nadey

i did say i should have explained my self better i am sorry about that

for people living in the care of the state and for people born with intellectual disabilities obviously there should be a exception

for people who lost their jobs and have payed their taxes also theres an exception for them

i just feel for the people who have not worked a day in their lives i dont see why they should get benefits

i know their are people who are looking for jobs but there are others that just dont bother at all are happy to stay on the dole and get benefits

why should people get money for doing nothin

the money they could save from it can go towards more important use like hospitals

mattjack

WhiteRoses wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised if this was brought in by the government, though. Sounds exactly like the kind of thing they'd do.

They're already raising the retirement age to 68. If you happen to turn 18 before end of the school year, your parents are no longer entitled to children's allowance because "your over 18, you should be supporting yourself".

When the government run into budget issues, it seems the first thing they do is target the vulnerable, instead of looking into their own deep pockets.

That's a nasty one,I know of family's with this issue and what they are being told to do is to try get the child registered as homeless.

nadey

even to get the people out of work on a fas course at least then they have earned to the right to benefits

Madam_X

There should be monitoring of those who aren't trying to find work (in fairness though: some of them are not employable - it's silly to say to a junkie or homeless person with serious mental problems "Get a job").

nessie911

nadey wrote: »

i did say i should have explained my self better i am sorry about that

for people living in the care of the state and for people born with intellectual disabilities obviously there should be a exception

for people who lost their jobs and have payed their taxes also theres an exception for them

i just feel for the people who have not worked a day in their lives i dont see why they should get benefits

i know their are people who are looking for jobs but there are others that just dont bother at all are happy to stay on the dole and get benefits

why should people get money for doing nothin

the money they could save from it can go towards more important use like hospitals

I have never worked a tax paying job in my life. I am 22. Have just finished my degree for which I got a first class honours degree , I have been applyin for jobs for months. I have signed on, have not gotten anyting as of yet. But according to you I should get noting at all while I search for jobs.

How do you suggest I live, or other people who are in my situation live???

Monty Burnz

nessie911 wrote: »

I have never worked a tax paying job in my life. I am 22.

I think I had about 5 tax-paying jobs by the time I finished college. My parents didn't have the money to fund my social life.

nadey

Chucken wrote: »

What she said....
should we scrap housing benefits for under 25's saving 2 billion euro a year

IMO i think its a great idea and i feel it would stop young girls getting pregnant at such a young age


A big sweeping statement that smacks of arrogance tbh

i didn't mean to be arrogant but as i said in other postd i knew girls that were just in it so they could move out of home and be with their boyfriends

i know its not always the case and accidents do happen for some girls but i was just stating from what i have seen from girls that i used to know

im not only saying about young mothers i say also gave reasons for other people on benefits

i do apologize for not explaining myself better in my OP but if you seen my last post a few minutes ago were i have explained myself better

i just feel the money they could save from scrapping the housing benefits under 25's and put towards hospitals

nessie911

Monty Burnz wrote: »

nessie911 wrote: »

I have never worked a tax paying job in my life. I am 22.

I think I had about 5 tax-paying jobs by the time I finished college. My parents didn't have the money to fund my social life.

My father didnt fund mine either. I didnt realy have one, and when I did go out it was paid for by my baby sitting.

nadey

nessie911 wrote: »

I have never worked a tax paying job in my life. I am 22. Have just finished my degree for which I got a first class honours degree , I have been applyin for jobs for months. I have signed on, have not gotten anyting as of yet. But according to you I should get noting at all while I search for jobs.

How do you suggest I live, or other people who are in my situation live???

why couldn't you work when you were in school

there are many other students are in secondary and in uni and still manage to work

Lyaiera

nadey wrote: »

why couldn't you work when you were in school

there are many other students are in secondary and in uni and still manage to work

People in school and university shouldn't have to work. They should be spending their time studying and having a little fun and I'll happily pay my taxes so they can do that.

nadey

Lyaiera wrote: »

People in school and university shouldn't have to work. They should be spending their time studying and having a little fun and I'll happily pay my taxes so they can do that.

i worked and still managed to study

get them selfs into a routine there is time to do both

mattjack

nadey wrote: »

i didn't mean to be arrogant but as i said in other postd i knew girls that were just in it so they could move out of home and be with their boyfriends

i know its not always the case and accidents do happen for some girls but i was just stating from what i have seen from girls that i used to know

im not only saying about young mothers i say also gave reasons for other people on benefits

i do apologize for not explaining myself better in my OP but if you seen my last post a few minutes ago were i have explained myself better

i just feel the money they could save from scrapping the housing benefits under 25's and put towards hospitals

Sometimes young women may have to move out.Bringing home a new baby to house where there may be other siblings may not be an option.
Parental pressure may lead them to move out.

And we're not just talking about a young women , we could be talking about a child here too.

Or maybe they may just wan't their independence,their own home and I would agree with you some may genuinely abuse whatever benefits are there.

If housing benefits for under 25s were scrapped, would it create an underclass of homeless people between the ages of 18 to 25.

The theory behind the idea is good, enforcing it .. I dunno , may create more problems in the long term.

nessie911

nadey wrote: »

nessie911 wrote: »

I have never worked a tax paying job in my life. I am 22. Have just finished my degree for which I got a first class honours degree , I have been applyin for jobs for months. I have signed on, have not gotten anyting as of yet. But according to you I should get noting at all while I search for jobs.

How do you suggest I live, or other people who are in my situation live???

why couldn't you work when you were in school

there are many other students are in secondary and in uni and still manage to work

Just because I didn't have a tax paying job does not mean I was not workin. I have been runnin my family home since I was 12, shopin, cleanin, dinners etc. Including looking after my dad through chemo, running the farm when he was too sick to do it. And I continue to run my family home wit looking after my family home, along wit continuein to care for my dad through Parkinsons disease and a 2nd diagnosis of cancer. He can do a lot of his own looking after, but did require me to be free at the weekends to help him etc.

So laust because someone is not working in paid employement does not mean they are not working. We all don't have a rosey life.

nadey

nessie911 wrote: »

Just because I didn't have a tax paying job does not mean I was not workin. I have been runnin my family home since I was 12, shopin, cleanin, dinners etc. Including looking after my dad through chemo, running the farm when he was too sick to do it. And I continue to run my family home wit looking after my family home, along wit continuein to care for my dad through Parkinsons disease and a 2nd diagnosis of cancer. He can do a lot of his own looking after, but did require me to be free at the weekends to help him etc.

So laust because someone is not working in paid employement does not mean they are not working. We all don't have a rosey life.

you are the same as my self if you had read my last posts i had far from a rosey life as you have said put i still manged to work and save

did you get a grant for college ??

the work you did do how come you didn't save to put on rent and bills

nessie911

nadey wrote: »

nessie911 wrote: »

Just because I didn't have a tax paying job does not mean I was not workin. I have been runnin my family home since I was 12, shopin, cleanin, dinners etc. Including looking after my dad through chemo, running the farm when he was too sick to do it. And I continue to run my family home wit looking after my family home, along wit continuein to care for my dad through Parkinsons disease and a 2nd diagnosis of cancer. He can do a lot of his own looking after, but did require me to be free at the weekends to help him etc.

So laust because someone is not working in paid employement does not mean they are not working. We all don't have a rosey life.

you are the same as my self if you had read my last posts i had far from a rosey life as you have said put i still manged to work and save

did you get a grant for college ??

the work you did do how come you didn't save to put on rent and bills

I didn't mean it in the sense that you had a rosey life. I meant it in the sense that lots of people have a cross to bear, and who are we to decide who should get what, esp if we are goin to based that decision on age.

I did get a grand, which covered my rent, and the money I got from baby sitting which was not regular income was saved until It was needed to cover bills etc.

I was living away from home for college. So I would not have been able to manage a part time job along with college and all my other responsibility's.

Cee-Jay-Cee

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Why should being under 25 make you less entitled to being housed by the state?

Do you magically become more mature and more deserving when your 26?

I'd stretch that further, why should anyone of any age be entitled to be housed by the state? Isn't it enough that theyre getting dole for doing absolutely nothing...they can pay for their own rent out of that!

0066ad

nadey wrote: »

as i said before if i've paid my tax please god i never do lose my job but if i did and i had to sign on then why shouldn't i

i would only be claiming back the tax that i have worked for

can i ask what tax you have paid?

Was it your baby sitting money?

Was it your tips from the pub?

Was it working with your dad?

Was it your Inheritance?

Odysseus

nadey wrote: »

should we scrap housing benefits for under 25's saving 2 billion euro a year

IMO i think its a great idea and i feel it would stop young girls getting pregnant at such a young age

You haven't met many homeless have you? What about those abused at home?

nadey

0066ad wrote: »

can i ask what tax you have paid?

Was it your baby sitting money?

Was it your tips from the pub?

Was it working with your dad?

Was it your Inheritance?

what has any of my income got to do with this ???

and i dont understand when you said was it my baby sitting money

Nodin

nadey wrote: »

what has any of my income got to do with this ???
.........

...because no-one believes you have a house at 21 unless you inherited the money. It's more believable than your 'girls I know' crap, but thats not saying much.

nadey

Odysseus wrote: »

You haven't met many homeless have you? What about those abused at home?

yes i have met the homeless whats the point you are trying to make ?

as i said in my other posts there should be exceptions depending on the circumstances of the person

Vicar in a tutu

nadey wrote: »

should we scrap housing benefits for under 25's saving 2 billion euro a year

IMO i think its a great idea and i feel it would stop young girls getting pregnant at such a young age

Are you for real? I dont think girls get themselves pregnant for a house.

Gone Drinking

There was a thing on Adrian Kennedy a few months back about girls getting pregnant for more benefits and there was no lack of callers (young girls) claiming to have done it on purpose, having never worked but now have a house and get x amount. Claiming to purposely having more kids to get more.

They were bragging about it on the radio and laughing, thats how young they were.

I'm not saying they're all like that and I don't agree with scrapping it for under 25s but some people need to be means tested more than others.

nadey

Nodin wrote: »

...because no-one believes you have a house at 21 unless you inherited the money. It's more believable than your 'girls I know' crap, but thats not saying much.

if you dont believe me then thats your problem and not mine

if you had read my other posts you will have seen that my nanny had left me money in her will

i also bought the house with my boyfriend not that is any of your business or anybody elses for that matter and it has nothing to do with the topic

as i said believe me or not i dont care and i dont see what i would gain from saying that i own my home

Nodin

nadey wrote: »

if you dont believe me then thats your problem and not mine

if you had read my other posts you will have seen that my nanny had left me money in her will

.....................

So you could avoid welfare and get a house due in no small part to an inheritance but want to take the benefit from those who have no inherited wealth?

Lovely.

Odysseus

nadey wrote: »

yes i have met the homeless whats the point you are trying to make ?

as i said in my other posts there should be exceptions depending on the circumstances of the person

My point is the amount of new homless such a foolish plan would make, pook fcuker out every nigh, getting moved on, get back to sleep, only to be moved on again. And you want more people to experience that

nadey

Nodin wrote: »

So you could avoid welfare and get a house due in no small part to an inheritance but want to take the benefit from those who have no inherited wealth?

Lovely.

inherited wealth what do you think i was left a million euro i wish sadly my nanny wasn't a rich women and either am i far from it have you seen the price drop in houses these days again my personal life has nothing got to the thread

why should people get benefits if they have not earned the right to it

but there should be exceptions depending on the person circumstances

nadey

Odysseus wrote: »

My point is the amount of new homless such a foolish plan would make, pook fcuker out every nigh, getting moved on, get back to sleep, only to be moved on again. And you want more people to experience that

no i wouldn't wish for a person to be homeless who would?

as i said it depends on the person circumstances

why should a person get benefits for doing nothing and does not bother looking for a job at least get the person to do some type of work like a fas or tus what ever they call it now at least then they would earned the money they get

Muir

nadey wrote: »

inherited wealth what do you think i was left a million euro i wish sadly my nanny wasn't a rich women and either am i far from it have you seen the price drop in houses these days again my personal life has nothing got to the thread

why should people get benefits if they have not earned the right to it

but there should be exceptions depending on the person circumstances

Not everyone can get a job right now. Particularly a young person with little experience because you currently need 2 years experience for many entry level jobs, just because employers can afford to be picky because there are so many looking for work.
So some people might need help starting off even if you don't think they have 'earned' the right. You don't know the circumstances of everyone else. You say you've had it hard etc. but so have most other people, that's part of life. You were lucky that you had any kind of inheritance, most people don't. Most people have to start off life on their own with no help from anyone.

Nodin

nadey wrote: »

inherited wealth what do you think i was left a million euro i wish sadly my nanny wasn't a rich women and either am i far from it have you seen the price drop in houses these days again my personal life has nothing got to the thread

It was you who set yourself and your "life" up as an example of the 'hard worker' who never got anything from the state, remember?

why should hard working people have to struggle to pay rent bills ect
when some people on the dole just sit on the bums all day and get everything paid for them
this country is backwards
you work hard and you struggle
dont work and get a easy life

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79502967&postcount=45

from 17 i moved out got my own place and depended on no still working and working my ass off in college
i've worked very hard to where i am today
i have my own home and my own car that i bought out of my hard earned money
i have my dream job that i love and wouldn't change for the world

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79503761&postcount=104

nadey wrote: »

why should people get benefits if they have not earned the right to it

Do you want people to go homeless?

0066ad

nadey wrote: »

what has any of my income got to do with this ???

and i dont understand when you said was it my baby sitting money

"from 17 i moved out got my own place and depended on no still working and working my ass off in college" You say you depended on no one, but your parents paid your college fees

"i have my own home and my own car that i bought out of my hard earned money" You say you bought these out of your hard earned money, then you say you couldn't do it without your grandmothers inheritance

You then say people should only get welfare if they deserve it and have had paid taxes

I'm asking what taxes have you paid?

Was it your baby sitting money?

Was it your tips from the pub?

Was it working for your dad?

Was it your inheritance?

SusieBlue

But if you hadn't gotten your inheritance (which I don't begrudge you, but this is valid) can you 100% definitely say you wouldn't need state assistance now?

Whether it be for housing, dole or otherwise? If you never got the inheritance, I'm almost certain you'd be struggling more for money than you are now.

That's why I find it really ironic that you're bashing people who use it and need it when you've had been handed a huge wad of money you didn't work for.

I'm the same age as you, my OH works full time, we have a good bit of savings and we're barely able to pay rent these days. Noway would I be able to afford a mortgage for another few years.

Which leads me to believe that you must have gotten a considerable chunk of money to say you were able to afford a house. Its so ironic and hypocritical of you to look down on those needing state housing when you might have needed it yourself if you hadn't inherited money.

Monty Burnz

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Which leads me to believe that you must have gotten a considerable chunk of money to say you were able to afford a house.

To be fair, you don't exactly need to be minted these days to buy a place. You'd get this place for 100k, 90k mortgage with your 10k deposit, and you'd have a mortgage of less than €400 per month. Getting the mortgage is the tricky bit.

Smidge

I always find it interesting that no-one gave a damn what was going on in "under-privileged" areas when times were good and people were getting their new Range Rovers and second homes in Bulgaria

No-one gave a fiddler's fart how "these people" lived their lives.
These people were invisible as they have been for so many generations.
But suddenly, they are public enemy No:1

People don't give a damn about these "scroungers" situations, they only now acknowledge their existence because they feel these "scum" are impacting their taxes.

We really give legs to our own stereotypes as begrugding b*stards.


"I'm losing an extra 50 quid a week/month in my taxes to pay for these calculating scroungers"
"I don't give a damn that my peers and fellow country men who have suffered abuse, neglect and social exclusion at the hands of this state as long as I can still get my facial":rolleyes:

Odysseus

nadey wrote: »

no i wouldn't wish for a person to be homeless who would?

as i said it depends on the person circumstances

why should a person get benefits for doing nothing and does not bother looking for a job at least get the person to do some type of work like a fas or tus what ever they call it now at least then they would earned the money they get

How many of these under 25s are doing that?

Monty Burnz

mishkalucy wrote: »

I always find it interesting that no-one gave a damn what was going on in "under-privileged" areas when times were good and people were getting their new Range Rovers and second homes in Bulgaria

No-one gave a fiddler's fart how "these people" lived their lives.
These people were invisible as they have been for so many generations.
But suddenly, they are public enemy No:1

People don't give a damn about these "scroungers" situations, they only now acknowledge their existence because they feel these "scum" are impacting their taxes.

We really give legs to our own stereotypes as begrugding b*stards.


"I'm losing an extra 50 quid a week/month in my taxes to pay for these calculating scroungers"
"I don't give a damn that my peers and fellow country men who have suffered abuse, neglect and social exclusion at the hands of this state as long as I can still get my facial":rolleyes:

I used to have a similar perspective. Now I'm inclined to think that welfare causes social exclusion, creates the underclass.

nadey

WhiteRoses wrote: »

But if you hadn't gotten your inheritance (which I don't begrudge you, but this is valid) can you 100% definitely say you wouldn't need state assistance now?

Whether it be for housing, dole or otherwise? If you never got the inheritance, I'm almost certain you'd be struggling more for money than you are now.

That's why I find it really ironic that you're bashing people who use it and need it when you've had been handed a huge wad of money you didn't work for.

I'm the same age as you, my OH works full time, we have a good bit of savings and we're barely able to pay rent these days. Noway would I be able to afford a mortgage for another few years.

Which leads me to believe that you must have gotten a considerable chunk of money to say you were able to afford a house. Its so ironic and hypocritical of you to look down on those needing state housing when you might have needed it yourself if you hadn't inherited money.

lol people are really getting off topic my personal life has nothing to do with this thread

but just to answer your question and this will be the last time i will answer about my income because im just getting tired of say ing the same thing over and over again

yes if my nanny hadn't of left me money i still would have managed i just bought my house a few weeks after my 21st birthday im 22 next month in august i have been saving money from working and tips and baby sitting

also for birthdays and christmas i would always ask for money instead of useless presents that i would never like

i only recived my nannys money a year ago so i was doing fine without it before i was still working and and had rented a room in a shared house

i was not left millions of euro from it my nanny wasn't a freaking millionair sadly maybe then i could of paid someone to iron this pile of washing next to me

its not as if i bought the house all my myself my boyfriend and i paid half of it each i have a mortgage we didn't pay the house off in one lump sum

have people seen the prices of houses these days they are dropping like mad

i really dont care if people think its the truth or not what do i have to gain from saying i own a house

if i lost my job i should get what ever benefits i am entitled to simply because i have worked in a taxed job since i was 16 i have paid enough taxes

and again as i said over and over again it would depend on the circumstances of the person and im not going into detail of the circumstances again typing long enough now

for people who dont bother looking for a job why would they get benefits what have they done to earn it that money when hospitals need that money so much more

Smidge

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I used to have a similar perspective. Now I'm inclined to think that welfare causes social exclusion, creates the underclass.

I think welfare is the catalyst of long term exclusion of certain sectors of society.

Monty, you can't blame people for using a crutch when you have amputated one (or more)of their limbs!

nadey

Monty Burnz wrote: »

To be fair, you don't exactly need to be minted these days to buy a place. You'd get this place for 100k, 90k mortgage with your 10k deposit, and you'd have a mortgage of less than €400 per month. Getting the mortgage is the tricky bit.

thank you everyone else here must have bout their homes for millions and millions of euro as they find it so shocking a person can buy a home these days

Monty Burnz

mishkalucy wrote: »

I think welfare is the catalyst of long term exclusion of certain sectors of society.

Monty, you can't blame people for using a crutch when you have amputated one (or more)of their limbs!

Indeed, but to continue the metaphor, if you give their kids a crutch from birth they'll probably never learn to walk on their own. What was meant to help them ends up handicapping them.

It's a complex area, probably more suited to politics or sociology than AH.

SusieBlue

Okay, fair enough. This plan of action is seriously flawed though. It'd never work.

What about women like a lot our own Mothers? A lot of Irish mammies who'd be in their 50's or 60's wouldn't have gone to college, it wouldn't have been the social norm back then. Most (not all, not tarring everyone with the same brush) worked in fairly low paying jobs until marrying. Most would then quit their jobs to stay home with the children with the husband supporting. I know a lot of families with that kind of set up.

She would never have paid much tax. If for whatever reason, the marriage ended, would you let someone like that out on the streets? You'll probably say no.

But that kind of person would come under your criteria of people who don't deserve council houses. See what I mean about sweeping generalisations?

nadey

Odysseus wrote: »

How many of these under 25s are doing that?

i dont know how many people do it sorry i do not have a list of every single person

but it would be good for people to work for their money it gets them expericence and looks good on their cv's that they weren't sitting on the bum doing nothing in the tough times we are having now

mikemac1

WhiteRoses wrote: »

What about women like a lot our own Mothers?Most (not all, not tarring everyone with the same brush) worked in fairly low paying jobs until marrying. Most would then quit their jobs to stay home with the children with the husband supporting. I know a lot of families with that kind of set up.

Or be forced to leave their jobs

There was a rule in the seventies that a women had to resign from the civil service when she got married
I'd say a good few on boards had mammys in this situation

Seems ridiculous but yeah, that was the rule at the time
Married women forced to give up their jobs and lose pension rights



One day a clever lawyer is going to sue the State over these pensions and it could be a colossal payout

A lot of Irish mammies who'd be in their 50's or 60's wouldn't have gone to college,

College?
It would have been an exception to do the Leaving Cert!
Rare enough to the Inter Cert even

Just the way it was back then

College was for those with means to support you

IrishAm

You saved up the 15-20 grand needed to put a deposit on a gaff at 21 years of age just from saving your birthday money, working as a waitress and from babysitting?

:pac:

SusieBlue

nadey wrote: »

but it would be good for people to work for their money it gets them expericence and looks good on their cv's that they weren't sitting on the bum doing nothing in the tough times we are having now

Jobs aren't exactly falling from the skies these days, you know. I was employed by the same place for 5 years, they let me go last month. I've sent out over 50 CV's, willing to work minimum wage, yet no one wants to employ me.

You'll also probably be glad to know that I'm not entitled to dole (despite working for 5 years) because I'm in full time education.

Finding a job, even a menial, minimum wage job, is a lot harder than you think when there are literally THOUSANDS of people willing to work for low wages.