Applications for the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support scheme are now open.
Lower- and middle-income workers who are involuntarily unemployed can complete activities and earn points to receive payouts of up to $6,000 over 6 months. https://str.sg/pncF
Here are some potential "bullshit" or questionable aspects of the article about the **SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support scheme**:
### 1. **"Up to $6,000" Misleading Promise**
- The headline emphasizes **"up to $6,000"**, but this is likely the **maximum** payout, not what most people will receive.
- Many applicants may only qualify for partial amounts after jumping through bureaucratic hoops.
### 2. **"Involuntarily Unemployed" – Who Really Qualifies?**
- The term **"involuntarily unemployed"** is vague. Does it include gig workers, contract workers, or only full-time employees?
- Government schemes often have **strict eligibility criteria** that exclude many struggling jobseekers.
### 3. **"Complete Activities and Earn Points" – Bureaucratic Hurdles**
- The requirement to **"complete activities"** (likely training courses, job applications, or interviews) sounds like **busywork** rather than real help.
- If the process is too cumbersome, many who need help might give up before receiving any payout.
### 4. **Only for "Lower- and Middle-Income" Workers**
- What defines "middle-income"? If the cutoff is too low, many who are struggling but slightly above the threshold get **excluded**.
- Meanwhile, **high-income professionals** who lose jobs may have better safety nets anyway.
### 5. **6-Month Limitation – Is It Enough?**
- Unemployment can last much longer than 6 months, especially in a bad economy.
- The temporary nature of the payout may not address **long-term unemployment struggles**.
### 6. **Is This Just a Way to Boost SkillsFuture Numbers?**
- The government may be **padding stats** to show "more people engaged in upskilling" rather than actually solving unemployment.
- Forcing jobseekers into **pre-selected courses** may not align with real job market needs.
### **Conclusion:**
While the scheme **sounds helpful on paper**, the devil is in the details. Many such programs end up being **more about optics than real support**, with **too many conditions** and **too little actual payout** for those who need it most.
Would you trust this to actually help the unemployed, or is it just another **half-measure**?
Lower- and middle-income workers who are involuntarily unemployed can complete activities and earn points to receive payouts of up to $6,000 over 6 months. https://str.sg/pncF
Here are some potential "bullshit" or questionable aspects of the article about the **SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support scheme**:
### 1. **"Up to $6,000" Misleading Promise**
- The headline emphasizes **"up to $6,000"**, but this is likely the **maximum** payout, not what most people will receive.
- Many applicants may only qualify for partial amounts after jumping through bureaucratic hoops.
### 2. **"Involuntarily Unemployed" – Who Really Qualifies?**
- The term **"involuntarily unemployed"** is vague. Does it include gig workers, contract workers, or only full-time employees?
- Government schemes often have **strict eligibility criteria** that exclude many struggling jobseekers.
### 3. **"Complete Activities and Earn Points" – Bureaucratic Hurdles**
- The requirement to **"complete activities"** (likely training courses, job applications, or interviews) sounds like **busywork** rather than real help.
- If the process is too cumbersome, many who need help might give up before receiving any payout.
### 4. **Only for "Lower- and Middle-Income" Workers**
- What defines "middle-income"? If the cutoff is too low, many who are struggling but slightly above the threshold get **excluded**.
- Meanwhile, **high-income professionals** who lose jobs may have better safety nets anyway.
### 5. **6-Month Limitation – Is It Enough?**
- Unemployment can last much longer than 6 months, especially in a bad economy.
- The temporary nature of the payout may not address **long-term unemployment struggles**.
### 6. **Is This Just a Way to Boost SkillsFuture Numbers?**
- The government may be **padding stats** to show "more people engaged in upskilling" rather than actually solving unemployment.
- Forcing jobseekers into **pre-selected courses** may not align with real job market needs.
### **Conclusion:**
While the scheme **sounds helpful on paper**, the devil is in the details. Many such programs end up being **more about optics than real support**, with **too many conditions** and **too little actual payout** for those who need it most.
Would you trust this to actually help the unemployed, or is it just another **half-measure**?