Employment is needed to everyone as per his/her qualifications.However still many qualified and deserving people are unemployed especially in developing countries.
To compensate them a nominal unemployment allowance is provided though it is not sufficient enough to meet their day to day requirements.
I think providing any type of assistance will loose power of working efficiency, thinking and achievement of particular goal. If any assistance is there he will not fully prepared to focus on target.
Only positive measures are efficient, from an incentives point of view, sometimes called as workfare in the relevant literature. Such measures can include or focus on internships in the private sector of the economy. There is a nice brief book by R. Solow on Workfare, have a look at it.
Yes, it may be advocated provided that the person is actually 'educated' and actually 'not getting any work (not JOB) to earn money for his/ her minimum basic needs'.
I think nobody will get a lot of such people in any country.
I feel, if someone is underemployed but not in PSU according to his qualifications, he deserves some govt.support.
Only active labour market policy is useful for unemployed persons. Unemployment allowances to educated youth is good measure only for very short period that could be treated as a needed financial support in a transition period from unemployment to employment. If this transition is long ...the economic policy of the country for sure is not efficient.
You are right Blagica.
I donot think that it should be too Long.
However best conditions is that if such youth gets good job within 1 year of their period getting unemployment allowances
Keep in mind that sometimes youth stay at home, particularly young women, doing lots of unpaid work (cooking, taking care of the children, ...). That has to do with gender inequality, usually in developing countries, because they didn't have the opportunity to study adequately.
You may consider some support because they are usually very poor and do a lot of things. The idea here is to guarantee a minnimun of well-being to the household.
There are two sides to the story of cash payments to those in need. In this case the youth who spent years accumulating human capital in hopes of finding better occupations are considered the group in need. One side which I wish to advocate here is the side that suggests such actions will weaken the incentive for finding a job. The budget spent on this measure could be spent on creating jobs. Assume we have 2 million unemployed educated youngsters. Also assume we pay each person 750 $ a month for six month. That is 9 billion dollars; an enough budget for starting 180000 workshops employing 30 workers which results in 5.4 million jobs. The estimates are rough and based on rule of thumb but still if one looks closely, creating means of acquiring cash seems more beneficial than giving the money itself.
Depending on the culture and wealth of the country, some youth may misuse money if they not skilled in business. Loan them after training them
The unemployment allowance given out by government is usually short-lived and is only beneficial in the shorten period. This implies the future of the recipients or beneficiaries are not adequately taken care of. A case in point is the N-power program (a plan of 2 years only) in Nigeria which has already stopped and majority of those who benefited, enjoyed it for 1year - others 6months only, and they are back again to the labour market and without any means of income. I think the best alternative move by the government should be to show the unemployed graduates the path to create sustainable jobs by themselves in the first place, rather than giving them the money. This can be done through workshops and seminars, bringing vocational centres closer to their locations, and making the vocational trainings free of charge. This will equip them, motivate them and make them creative and or innovative - consequently churning out a vibrant group of entrepreneurs who will become the solution to the problem of unemployment in their countries, rather than seeking the solution from the government of the day. It is a well known fact that entrepreneurs are usually self-employed and also employers or job creators, who drive their economies to higher levels of economic growth and development if, given the appropriate environment.
why only to support educated youths? The logic is strange, also uneducated unemployed youths require livelihood. Educated youths might have even received support by the government for their education. Still it is urgent to discuss, if a government has a responsibility to provide a basic livelihood to anybody. However I do not see how governments are able to finance such support.
It would be good policy but most governments are too poor to afford to implement it. In my country, governments gives loans to youth groups.
Yes, the allowance will decrease their stress so that they can try for job with relax. It will help them to overcome the depression of being unemployed.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Econ
- Manufacturing
- Industry