Ok hoodied creature number 1 got a huge envelope of paper from the college he wishes to go to in September.

 

It actually took us a while to find the bit of paper with his offer of a place on in between all the information about financial incentives!

 

He is 16!

Have you got a child - no - shame you could have had £155 per week to pay someone else to look after it.

 

Hey look EMA - free money - on no mum has a job - ha no free money for you!

 

Hey look "grants" for vocational courses (road sweeping for beginers!) - oh no you have a brain - bad luck no ££ for your academic courses!

 

I am sure incentives are required to increase the number of 16 year olds going into further education, but shouldn't these be universal?

 

Why do we always seem to reward negativity?

 

Don't the kids that would be staying on anyway deserve some reward too?

 

....... and should kids be 'punished' just because mum has a job?

 

 

 

as i see it the incentives are there to encourage kids from poor homes to stay on and learn, in which case incentives are a good idea (my youngest, 16 in three weeks time should get £30 per week). but paying kids from well off families will be seen as a waste of money... of course the salient point is, where IS the cut off line between 'poor' and 'well off'..

Any money is a bad idea

 

It will leave kids who have no interest in learning just slacking for a couple of years as it is free money (the dole is not available at 16-18) so many kids will just stay on at school and not learn hard as they just want the money. I would rather 6th forms were full of kids that are bright and want to get ahead in life

 

Grants for text books, transport costs, lunch vouchers and so on is far more preferable than simply handing out free money to bribe kids to stay at school

Edited July 12, 200718 yr by Vic Vega

I understand the concept of helping those who aren't financially secure to move onto education post 16, but at the end of the day, I honestly don't believe it is spent on that. I think when I was at College EMA was £50 a week or similar? For most of my friends, £19 would go on a weekly bus ticket, and the other £31 would go on shoes/jackets/trousers etc and just generally be pissed away.

 

If the money is genuinely spent on educational things, I have no objections, but I'm not convinced it is.

 

Personally I never recieved a penny throughout my two years at College, and I get no benefits now that I'm at Uni ... yes, I'm fairly secure financially and my parents have never, and would never, see me short of money. BUT I can't imagine the reaction if at the beginning of every month I went to them and said "Everyone else gets it from the Government, can I have my £50 from you now?"

 

It always felt to me that I was smart, I was trying to do something with my life, and I was trying damned hard, and I never got anything back; whereas some people were there to make a bit of disposable income while they didn't really care whether they were there or not. Of course, that's a generalisation and I don't want to offend anyone, because obviously not everyone who gets financial support doesn't want to be there!! But, there were a few cases like that while I was there, which made me MAD!

I've never had grants,bursaries or the ema through college and University because of my family income ^_^ and I ain't bitter.

 

The problem with the ema is doesn't it go to the 16 year old's pocket, like said above you don't know what it will be spent on.

It's also ludicrous that people on the dole are penalised if they decide to study.

 

My cousin wants to study and claims JobSeeker's Allowance - however, when he took all his course info to the Job Centre, he was told if he studied at all - full or part time - he was eligible for no money whatsoever.

 

How absolutely ridiculous is this? Even a part-time evening course would ensure you're disqualified from claiming JSA. Madness.

My cousin wants to study and claims JobSeeker's Allowance - however, when he took all his course info to the Job Centre, he was told if he studied at all - full or part time - he was eligible for no money whatsoever.

 

Well how on earth would one seek a job when in full time education :unsure:

I've never had grants,bursaries or the ema through college and University because of my family income ^_^ and I ain't bitter.

 

The problem with the ema is doesn't it go to the 16 year old's pocket, like said above you don't know what it will be spent on.

 

Exactly, the money should be spent on educational stuff and so on, there is nothing stopping ppl spending it on booze, cigarettes, DVD's, x box games or whatever

 

Thats why it should be paid in the form of book vouchers and bus passes and so on instead of hard cash

None of this $h!t would be happening if proper apprenticeships were bought back

 

The bright kids could learn and study to get into university the less bright kids could learn a trade

Well how on earth would one seek a job when in full time education :unsure:

 

he was planning to do a part-time evening course - which would hardly affect his ability to search for jobs during the day, would it?

Well how on earth would one seek a job when in full time education :unsure:

 

You could easily "seek" a Part-Time job... I did Part-Time work as a student... I'm with Russ on this one, people should not be penalised for being in education.. You can do pretty much all Uni courses on a Part-Time basis over 6-8 years, you only have to go in twice a week, which leaves you with another 4 days to actually work. Frankly, I dont see what the problem is, the Govt goes on about "Education, Education, Education", yet it penalises people who are stuck in the benefits/poverty trap who DO want to "get up off their arses" and do summat positive to better themselves...... It seems the Govt would rather people just sit around and do fukk all than go out an do a Part-Time Uni course..... <_<

 

he was planning to do a part-time evening course - which would hardly affect his ability to search for jobs during the day, would it?

 

100% FULL TRUTH.....

Honesty is not always the best policy when it comes to governments, if I was out of work and wanted to study etc even if it was part time in the evening I would keep my mouth shut and not tell the job centre

 

 

Honesty is not always the best policy when it comes to governments, if I was out of work and wanted to study etc even if it was part time in the evening I would keep my mouth shut and not tell the job centre

 

Agreed mate, I probably would as well....

the only reason I can think of why they get all jumpy around the JSA and part time is the possibility of bursaries and grants and the like.

the only reason I can think of why they get all jumpy around the JSA and part time is the possibility of bursaries and grants and the like.

 

Still short sighted in the extreme though

 

If learning something is going to get that person a job or more skills to get the job and so on and they actually get into work it saves the government lots of money in benefit payments in the long term when that person stops claiming

 

I think that JSA agencies staff like high unemployment figures as it keeps them in a job :rolleyes:

I think that JSA agencies staff like high unemployment figures as it keeps them in a job :rolleyes:

 

Now we couldn't have them seeking JSA now could we :lol:

I think that JSA agencies staff like high unemployment figures as it keeps them in a job :rolleyes:

 

So how come the actual Unemployment figures keep getting "massaged" all the time mate...? If you're on Sickness benfits or, indeed, go into education, you dont actually get counted as "unemployed" do you...? :rolleyes:

I've always been against EMA - and not just because I don't get it :lol:

 

My household income is above the required amount, but can my parents afford to pay me £30 a week just for turning up to lessons? No they bloody can't!

 

And are these students spending all the money on transportation and books etc? It's unlikely. And fair dues, I'd spend the money on clothes, booze etc if I had it!

 

And just because students go to lessons doesn't mean they're learning - the whole point of the financial incentive. They could be turning up and p***ing about and just get paid for it! And even worse they could be distracting those who actually want to learn.

 

The focus should be on level of understanding and the equality of learning - not college and consortium attendance figures :rolleyes:

 

EMA should be an option for everyone. I really could use the money, maybe not now, but save it up for Uni. It is unfair to exclude students from EMA because their household income is too 'high'.

 

It's just not f***ing fair :cry:

 

 

EMA should be an option for everyone. It is unfair to exclude students from EMA because their household income is too 'high'.

 

It's just not f***ing fair :cry:

 

No offence mate but there is no money tree out there, all the money that is paying these allowances are coming from the taxpayer so if it is just paid out willy nilly we would get the son of the Duke Of Westminster and Roman Abramovich getting £30 a week of taxpayers money as they would be entitled to it too, now as a 40% rate taxpayer I want to see my money used wisely and just handing out £30 a week to any old tom, dick or harry to stay on at school is just plain wrong, I don't want to see money handed out to kids of wealthy families.

 

Education is an obligation, it should not be seen as a paid activity

 

All EMA should be scrapped or alternatively just paid out to those that are on the absolute breadline

Edited July 12, 200718 yr by Vic Vega