on my own on a low wage

Chrysalis

do you think unsupportive parents dont exist? You will probably find far from it and is fairly common. Even ones who support their kids, to do it all the way up to 25 is quite a long time, all I am saying is the law shouldnt assume people below 25 are been subsidised and should treat them as equal taxpayers.

How does it also account for people who choose not to have further education.

Oldernotwiser

Chrysalis wrote: »

do you think unsupportive parents dont exist? You will probably find far from it and is fairly common. Even ones who support their kids, to do it all the way up to 25 is quite a long time, all I am saying is the law shouldnt assume people below 25 are been subsidised and should treat them as equal taxpayers.

How does it also account for people who choose not to have further education.

Of course there are unsupportive parents but that's hardly the government's fault!

I don't understand your last sentence.

bestpud

I agree is more opportunity for under 25s to gain an education now, and more support for them to do so, than there ever has been. You can gain up to your first level three qualification completely free of tuition fees up to the age of 25 for a start.

There is simply no need for a single person of that age to be working part time imo.

But that said, I can see the point that it suddenly become 'ok' for that single person to be working part time once they hit their 25th birthday. But then, relating back to the above, most people would be working full time unless studying. In which case the under 25s get more free tuition and the over 25s can get some tax credits.

I also think tax credits to a single person working part time will not be generous! It still pays to get a full time job - in terms of immediate income and future career plans imo.

The OP has no reason to be working part time and the consequence of that is a lower income. I'm not sure how them getting tax credits would enhance their future career or earnings tbh.

Oldernotwiser

I just don't understand when it became socially acceptable for people to work part time; I never heard of it until I joined MSE. Now it seems that people think it's their right and the government has to make up the difference by paying tax credits or HB. The world just seems to be getting madder!

tghe-retford

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I just don't understand when it became socially acceptable for people to work part time; I never heard of it until I joined MSE. Now it seems that people think it's their right and the government has to make up the difference by paying tax credits or HB. The world just seems to be getting madder!

It's something you may want to raise with your MP, or the press. If there is an issue with people working part time, its the Government who needs to be told of it. I'm sure if the voters tell them, they will force single people into full time work and mandatory college courses.

However, I know of some people who even think 37.5-40 hours a week isn't enough and that single people should work more hours because "they don't have responsibilities of having a family" or "have nothing better to do".

DenBo_4

deleted deleted deleted

Chrysalis

There is low paid full time jobs as well which I actually expect are mainly filled by under 25 workers. Somehow we are now talking as if single people only do part time jobs, I am reffering to single people in low paid full time employment.

Oldernotwiser

tghe-retford wrote: »

It's something you may want to raise with your MP, or the press. If there is an issue with people working part time, its the Government who needs to be told of it. I'm sure if the voters tell them, they will force single people into full time work and mandatory college courses.

I really don't get you; forcing single people into full time work - why not -it's the normal thing to do. Why should anybody be subsidised for working part time without a reason? I also still don't see what you're on about with this mandatory evening classes business - it's totally untrue and why do you see further education as a bad thing that nobody would do voluntarily? Human beings are designed to be learners all their lives; education isn't just something that's done to you when you're a child!

Do you have some kind of hang up about your own education?

tghe-retford

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I really don't get you; forcing single people into full time work - why not -it's the normal thing to do. Why should anybody be subsidised for working part time without a reason? I also still don't see what you're on about with this mandatory evening classes business - it's totally untrue and why do you see further education as a bad thing that nobody would do voluntarily? Human beings are designed to be learners all their lives; education isn't just something that's done to you when you're a child!

Do you have some kind of hang up about your own education?

I do have a hang up about being forced to do what the Government wants and being labelled as "scum" if I do not comply. And strictly, thanks to the 10p tax rate abolition and because virtually all part time workers cannot claim benefit, the low paid are subsidising the tax cut the middle earners got this year.

It's not easy being young and single if you have had a different start to adulthood like I have or haven't been through college or university.

Oldernotwiser

tghe-retford wrote: »

It's not easy being young and single if you have had a different start to adulthood like I have or haven't been through college or university.

But as you obviously seem to see college and university as being beneficial, why do you keep posting about people being "forced" to improve their qualifications and having further education "imposed" upon them? I would've thought that you would welcome being able to make up the opportunities that you missed when you were younger. It still doesn't make sense to me.