Cameron, No dole for under 25's

[truman]

But that's the whole idea, they don't. Everyone who signs on has to go on some course or another a couple of months. This is therefore not news, it's Tory rhetoric for the conference to make Cameron appear popular instead of talking about policies.

 

If it's no different to now why did you imply that there may be riots on the streets?

[Cyclone]

The motivation will be no money if they are not working or in education, and it will still be their choice. No one will be forced to stay in education.

 

I think you've missed my point entirely.

 

They will in effect be forced to return to education if they are unemployed. Their benefits will not be based on results, but on attendance and so their motivation will still be lacking.

[Mecky]

But that's the whole idea, they don't. Everyone who signs on has to go on some course or another a couple of months. This is therefore not news, it's Tory rhetoric for the conference to make Cameron appear popular instead of talking about policies.

 

It's not improving their skillsets. Offer them apprenticeships with official trade certificates at the end and if they don't accept the courses, so what?

[poppet2]

If it's no different to now why did you imply that there may be riots on the streets?

 

Because the situation will not change.

[truman]

Because the situation will not change.

 

We have no riots now so that means we won't have any in the future....?

[L00b]

If they are not immutable then why not change them now to be more effective for those under 18?

Are you agreeing that educational methods are not immutable, then, Cyclone?

It is 'free' in that no immediate payment is required and the payment is potentially permanently deferred. You are correct though, it's not really free, but then it never was and never can be, someone must always pay for it.

My (french) HND was free. Completely so. No fees whatsoever. Well, the taxpayer paid for it, to the same extent as he paid for primary/secondary (and a sizeable portion of the tertiary).

 

These qualifications turn out ready-employable students with practical professional (both generic and profession-specific) skills grounded in profession-specific theoretical knowledge. Sales, international trade, accountancy, healthcare, electrical, etc.

 

The same applies for vocational training/courses (non-Uni based, i.e. Brevet d'Etudes Professionnelles, typically for manual-type jobs). Again, completely free. No fees whatsoever.

 

The immediate-/near immediate- employment rate out of (free) BTS is only topped by that of (elitist, extortionate, statistically-irrelevant at scale) Business Schools.

 

Doesn't seem such a bad idea to me, to get many unemployed into such courses (and the like). I would certainly never suggest that they should be force-enrolled into basket-weaving degrees or more-of-the-same-and-still-just-as-pointless "training" by A4E and their like. I'm sure you've already implied that

All that has happened is that the burden is moved from the tax payer to the student (as a deferred kind of tax effectively).

At whose expense do you think the Gvt would ramp up education for the 18-25 unemployed?

[Cyclone]

Are you agreeing that educational methods are not immutable, then, Cyclone?

I never claimed that they were.

My (french) HND was free. Completely so. No fees whatsoever.

The tax payer paid for it.

 

These qualifications turn out ready-employable students with practical professional skills grounded in profession-specific theoretical knowledge. Sales, international trade, accountancy, healthcare, electrical, etc.

 

The same applies for vocational training/courses (non-Uni based). Again, completely free. No fees whatsoever.

Again, someone is paying, it's just not the student.

 

The immediate-/near immediate- employment rate out of (free) BTS is only topped by that of (elitist, extortionate, statistically-irrelevant at scale) Business Schools.

 

Doesn't seem such a bad idea to me, to get many unemployed into such courses (and the like). I would certainly never suggest that they should be force-enrolled into basket-weaving degrees or more-of-the-same-and-still-just-as-pointless "training" by A4E and their like. I'm sure you've already implied that

No, I don't think I did.

At whose expense do you think the Tories will ramp up education for the 18-25 unemployed?

I'm not quite sure what you're asking me here.

[L00b]

I never claimed that they were.

You suggested it. Quite strongly. Here we are again

The tax payer paid for it.

Again, someone is paying, it's just not the student.

See the last question above, and the last portion of the post below.

No, I don't think I did.

meant to type 'inferred', rather than 'implied', my bad.

 

Have you sufferred a sense of humour bypass?

I'm not quite sure what you're asking me here.

It's a simple and plenty clear enough question, and you're not hard of understanding.

 

I'll paraphrase it, just in case: who will pay for the Gvt's policy, if it is enacted under this plan?

[Anna B]

Nobody seems to be mentioning the elephant in the room...

 

2,500,000 unemployed,

only 500,000 job vacancies.

 

2 million jobs needed. What's being done about this? From what I here on the ground (not government rhetoric) banks are still reluctant to lend to small businesses.

 

But lets just beat up the unemployed rather than tackle the real solution.

[alchresearch]

It's not improving their skillsets. Offer them apprenticeships with official trade certificates at the end and if they don't accept the courses, so what?

 

It depends on the course length and topic. A CV writing and penmanship course isn't going to take too long but it adds something to their skills set.