Conservatives pledge 'tough love' benefit rules for under-25s

[u/TheWorldIsGoingMad]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cklyjy9pv93yo

[u/TheWorldIsGoingMad]

The party has also said it would look closer at whether parents' earnings and savings should be factored into welfare payments for their children.

I don't even know where to start with this policy, what about families who have become estranged ?

But I suppose the basic question is an adult independent at 18 ?
I'd have thought the answer was yes, obviously, but why stop at 25 (a purely arbitrary figure) anyway ?
Why not 65 ?
In fact why not make it applicable in the opposite direction as well, kids are responsible for their parents once they are 65, or in fact under 65 as well.....

No, this is the thin end of a very, very, long wedge....

[u/Tortillagirl → u/TheWorldIsGoingMad]

Just ensuring no under 25 wants to consider voting tory unless they are upper class.

[u/TheWorldIsGoingMad → u/Tortillagirl]

Good point. And not just the "children" either, I can't say the parents would be very happy about it, or even the possibility of it, either. Particularly if their neighbours were below the income threshold and their "children" got all the benefits no questions asked.
No, this particular suggestion would be a big big vote loser.

[u/Sweaty_Ad_4049 → u/TheWorldIsGoingMad]

Well, they can live with their parents

[u/TheWorldIsGoingMad → u/Sweaty_Ad_4049]

Can they though ?
Have they got the room ?
Have they all had a big fallout ?
Are the young people (sorry "children") "difficult" to live with, particularly if they don't want to be there anyway.

But my earlier point overrides all of this anyway :

I suppose the basic question is an adult independent at 18 ?
I'd have thought the answer was yes, obviously, but why stop at 25 (a purely arbitrary figure) anyway?
Why not 65 ?
In fact why not make it applicable in the opposite direction as well, kids are responsible for their parents once they are 65, or in fact under 65 as well.....

[u/Chiang-Kai-Shek-]

Stupid policy that eill get the few young Tory voters to not vote them. Should make a policy that prioritises or helps young people get into work not this

[u/Sweaty_Ad_4049]

Why is the Tory so anti teenage

[u/TheGoober87 → u/Sweaty_Ad_4049]

Because hardly any of them vote.

[u/CuriousGeorgeToday → u/TheGoober87]

And the ones that do none of them vote conservative so they're not losing any voters anyway. This is to appeal to older voters as usual that they'll be tough on the next generation.

[u/Sweaty_Ad_4049 → u/TheGoober87]

Yes, but they are gonna be more of them, and the elder are gonna die.... Right?

[u/StreamWave190]

I'm not strictly opposed to this.

There is a growing problem among the 18–25 age bracket of not just unemployment but chronic non-engagement with educational, employment and training opportunities.

It's deeply connected with the growing reported levels of mental ill-health (some of which is real, but much of which is psychosomatic and downstream of social contagion) and these people do need to have pressure and penalties applied to force them to engage with the opportunities that exist. Because for a lot of these 'mentally ill' young people, they've decided that the benefits are a legitimate lifestyle and that they have a right to opt-out of working and contributing.

But the stark reality, simply on the data, is that as of 24 August, there were ~8,000 graduate vacancies in the UK job market.

In 2025, ~800,000–900,000 students graduated from a British university.

Unless there's a clear plan to fix the economy, land use, planning and taxation systems, which would allow for businesses to succeed, expand, and take on and train up new, young staff, and for young people to start their own businesses – online and retail – this isn't actually going to work.

[u/TheWorldIsGoingMad → u/StreamWave190]

I agree with all you have said, but I disagree with the proposal for a means tested requirement for parents to be responsible for their children till they're 25.

[u/wolfo98]

Pitting the generations against each other is never a good policy, whether it’s the triple lock or this policy. Even if it’s a well thought out policy, we should set out our stall based on fairness across the ages, not on the basis of age.

What is the Conservatives plan to address welfare ? Like him or not, Andy Burnham is moving to end the triple lock and bring it to a National Care service. What is the Tory response to this?

[u/Candayence → u/wolfo98]

Andy Burnham is moving to end the triple lock

He's effectively announced he's putting it in the 2030 manifesto, he's not actually ending the triple lock.

[u/TheWorldIsGoingMad → u/wolfo98]

>>What is the Conservatives plan to address welfare ? Like him or not, Andy Burnham is moving to end the triple lock and bring it to a National Care service. What is the Tory response to this?<<

The Triple Lock is unsustainable, it's totally unfair (a double lock - earnings and/or inflation at best would have been more reasonable). It was bought in by a weak government (Cameron's, an over rated PM in my view) because inflation happened to be low for that year and they didn't like the adverse newspaper headlines. But, particularly as pensioners are more likely to vote is is now very difficult to get rid of.

[u/BNDisarray]

Honestly this is a good policy - it signals a subconscious shift in the Tory view: a slow decoupling of the State from the people…literally smaller State stuff, which is what I thought we all wanted? No longer will people at 18 automatically get absorbed into the welfare system/into state control. Also, if anyone bothered to read more, this policy also includes a massive amount of extra support to get young people into work. The next step is more complicated: make sure there are the jobs available for them!

[u/squeakstar]

wtf - at this point I think they are trying to be hated by everyone