And fuck me if the MPs aren't talking sense on this one:
Young people in England should not receive state benefits unless they are working, training or in education, a committee of MPs says.
MPs are suggesting adopting a system used in Holland to reduce the number of 16 to 25-year-olds not in education, employment or training - "Neets".
They said the Dutch equivalent of jobseeker's allowance was dependent on being in work, education or training.
The Dutch may spend a large amount of time smoking weed, wearing clogs, cycling, and looking at tulips, but they do seem to do things better.
And the report's wording is quite amusing:
The report said: "It is crucial that young people, particularly those who are most disadvantaged, should not be deterred by the benefits system from accessing opportunities in education and training.
What they actually mean is, that it's all too easy to just sit at home doing fuck all and being paid for it, and so they shouldn't be tempted by the benefits system to do that.
The MPs also raised concerns about the term Neets, saying it was a negative term that risked "stigmatising the young people to whom it is applied".
They stigmatise themselves, by expecting the taxpayer to fund their existence with no contribution from themselves. And I'm sure they'd prefer the term "NEET" to "Fucking lazy chav", which would be my choice.
1 comment:
Hmm,
Sounds like vote winning propaganda to me.
NEETS are not going to vote so no danger in threatening to remove their benefits.
Most floating voters appear to be in the low/middle income who pay a lot of tax which pays these benefits so any policy like this is going to be attractive to them.
Post a Comment