Thursday, June 09, 2005
Where's my iPod?
At a time when I'm struggling for motivation in the face of impending exams, this article caught my attention.
My initial reaction was: oh no, how far has our society fallen that we are forced to "bribe" a group of people, young adults, to want to improve their prospects. However, I do not think we should give up all hope for Britain yet.
The scheme is aimed at those who are not academically minded and are looking for a job having left school. It's purpose is to better equip such people for job hunting and the world of work in general so that they are more likely to find gainful employment (rather than claim benefits from the state I suppose).
From a purely economic point of view, perhaps it makes sense. The "incentives" (as they are officially labeled) will cost the taxpayer about £870,000. If a large proportion of those who take part enter employment sooner and over their lives pay more in taxation (and the state less in benefits) than the scheme will cost then it will have been a success - the benefits will have outweighed the costs. In addition to this, there are clearly social gains to be made. For example, a person taking part in such a scheme may feel like they are trying to "improve" themselves, that they are being pro-active and attempting to make a contribution to society. This of course is undermined by the fact that they're getting "incentivised" to take part in the scheme but you see what I am getting at. Their sense of self-worth is increased and perhaps their they feel more associated with the society they live in.
So, given that there are clearly potential benefits to the scheme, does this mean it is such a bad thing for offering iPods and cash to encourage participation? Surely anything that can improve a person's quality of life and thereby help that person to make a worthwhile contribution to society should be encouraged? I would say so. We all receive incentives of some sort or another during our lives: "If you do your homework you can watch that TV programme later", "if you get good grades we'll give you £x" etc. Education is already incentivised, this scheme simply takes that to another level.
While our immediate reaction is, "this is terrible", it isn't really a "new" idea. Just a re-working of a long established practice. It does not represent another nail in the coffin of our society.
Another interesting link that I've stumbled accross. This bloke is clearly mad, but it's very entertaining: Daily Dancer
My initial reaction was: oh no, how far has our society fallen that we are forced to "bribe" a group of people, young adults, to want to improve their prospects. However, I do not think we should give up all hope for Britain yet.
The scheme is aimed at those who are not academically minded and are looking for a job having left school. It's purpose is to better equip such people for job hunting and the world of work in general so that they are more likely to find gainful employment (rather than claim benefits from the state I suppose).
From a purely economic point of view, perhaps it makes sense. The "incentives" (as they are officially labeled) will cost the taxpayer about £870,000. If a large proportion of those who take part enter employment sooner and over their lives pay more in taxation (and the state less in benefits) than the scheme will cost then it will have been a success - the benefits will have outweighed the costs. In addition to this, there are clearly social gains to be made. For example, a person taking part in such a scheme may feel like they are trying to "improve" themselves, that they are being pro-active and attempting to make a contribution to society. This of course is undermined by the fact that they're getting "incentivised" to take part in the scheme but you see what I am getting at. Their sense of self-worth is increased and perhaps their they feel more associated with the society they live in.
So, given that there are clearly potential benefits to the scheme, does this mean it is such a bad thing for offering iPods and cash to encourage participation? Surely anything that can improve a person's quality of life and thereby help that person to make a worthwhile contribution to society should be encouraged? I would say so. We all receive incentives of some sort or another during our lives: "If you do your homework you can watch that TV programme later", "if you get good grades we'll give you £x" etc. Education is already incentivised, this scheme simply takes that to another level.
While our immediate reaction is, "this is terrible", it isn't really a "new" idea. Just a re-working of a long established practice. It does not represent another nail in the coffin of our society.
Another interesting link that I've stumbled accross. This bloke is clearly mad, but it's very entertaining: Daily Dancer
# posted by GrecianEd @ 12:01 pm 
Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home
<< Home
