Cameron, No dole for under 25's

[Mecky]

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.

 

Yes, well they can do that while their working towards a skilled or trade job

[Happ Hazzard]

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

What is the "real solution"?

[truman]

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.

 

Start worrying about the 2 million jobs when the 500,000 are filled...

[avidcameron]

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.

 

Do you mean apply a solution to tackle the real problem?If you tackle solutions then no progress can be made.

[Cyclone]

Start worrying about the 2 million jobs when the 500,000 are filled...

 

Presumably the 500k are rapidly turning over, ie positions are filled and new ones become vacant.

 

---------- Post added 04-10-2013 at 12:10 ----------

 

You suggested it. Quite strongly. Here we are again

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

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

Apparently we both see inferences and implications in each others posts that were not intended.

 

Have you sufferred a sense of humour bypass?

Did I miss a joke?

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?

 

The government will, which means the taxpayer will. But this applies to all government policies, hence my confusion as to what you were really asking.

[angos]

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.

 

No I didn't miss your point,

 

Now someone can get money for doing nothing, so they have no motivation to get a job or train.

If they have to train or work to get money they will have some motivation to improve themselves because not doing so will leave them still having to do something to get money.

 

Which to choose.

 

A Nothing for £100,

B Training 40 hours a week for £100

C Working for 40 hours a week for £200

 

Most people will choose C, the ones that choose B will eventually want C and the ones that choose A will be happy doing nothing for £100.

 

Remove A and most people will still choose C, with everyone else choosing B, How many do you think will want to continue with B when with a little effort they could be in a position to choose C.

 

I can't see there being very many, if any, that will choose B indefinitely when for the same amount of hours and a little effort they could chose C.

[L00b]

Apparently we both see inferences and implications in each others posts that were not intended.

Bygones.

The government will, which means the taxpayer will.<...>

Indeed, and whereby, going all the way back to our earlier exchanges (#131/132/134), as the Tories' plan is to taxpayer-fund 'more learning' for 18-25 unemployed, they could do worse than fund:

practical and trade skills directly relevant to employers. The sort of courses which output turnkey (moderately specialised) employees ready to get on with things from the get-go.

by making them free access, and which would be a small, but IMHO positive, change to the existing system.

[Anna B]

What is the "real solution"?

 

Proper sustainable jobs. Not the crappy 0 hours scams that pass for job vacancies.

 

Please read the 'Housekeepers in Hotels' thread on Sheffield Discussions thread, to see how people desperate for jobs are being exploited. Then we might have something to discuss.

[tinfoilhat]

Proper sustainable jobs. Not the crappy 0 hours scams that pass for job vacancies.

 

Please read the 'Housekeepers in Hotels' thread on Sheffield Discussions thread, to see how people desperate for jobs are being exploited. Then we might have something to discuss.

 

Don't you think a better educated workforce will attract more investment or start up on their own?

[Anna B]

Don't you think a better educated workforce will attract more investment or start up on their own?

 

We're not really talking about a better educated workforce tho' are we?

 

That's just smoke and mirrors for stopping the dole and 'cutting' unemployment figures. The courses will be done on the cheap, and rubbish. How many people do A4e get into employment with their 'courses'? I think the figure is about 4 out of 100, and that is surprisingly high if you've actually seen the 'quality' of these so called back to work schemes. Basically they provide Emma Harrison with a multi-million pound income and that's about it.

 

This will be more of the same.

 

As for starting your own business, sorry to say it, but most fail, (according to statistics almost 80% fail in the first year.) And again, in spite of the propoganda, there is precious little help from the government, and many people end up in debt and worse off than when they started.