This article is an analysis of the possible effects of the proposed youth wage subsidy. The conclusion of the analysis is that the policy may do more harm than good.
Given that the prime directive of any business is to maximise profits (read also as not to incur unnecessary expense) the wage subsidy is likely to create a situation where existing employment is shifted from un-subsidised employees to new subsidised employees, with little or no growth in employment except where growth in employment occurs that would have occurred anyway, even without the wage subsidy. So the state will then pay a double whammy, first for the youth wage subsidy, much of which has little or no effect on new employment, and then also for the unemployment that it creates amongst unsubsidised labour.
The Direct Democracy Forum‘s approach is to stimulate youth employment by paying the youth to advance their employment prospects through further education and training whilst at the same time stimulating the job market so there are more jobs to employ the newly skilled and more employable youths, and that anyway they are then more desirable as potential employees and as young entrepreneurs.
You will see that DDF policies are all aimed at these sorts of goals rather than at supporting a welfare state with welfare entitlements.
The buck stops at the ballot box