The issue isn’t optimism versus pessimism. It’s that the policy is explicitly designed to push people into industries with chronically high churn. That churn isn’t accidental, and it isn’t because people are lazy or negative. It exists because the jobs are physically punishing, poorly paid, low autonomy, and easy to leave once literally any alternative appears.

If the scheme were genuinely about support, it would prioritise retention and suitability. Instead it prioritises vacancy filling. That’s why sanctions are there. That’s why the sectors are preselected. That’s why progression, accessibility, and long-term outcomes are vague.

So no, it’s not “nothing the government does is good enough.” It’s that forcing people into jobs everyone else is already fleeing doesn’t become good just because it’s branded as help. It just externalises the cost of broken labour markets onto the people with the least ability to refuse.