The ‘youth package’ fails to win people over: two in three believe the Government’s measures are insufficient

The promise of air conditioning in all schools is not enough to cool the heated tempers of the public: the youth package set out in the 2027 Budget Law and explained by the Prime Minister on Instagram does not fully convince those directly affected. Even with the introduction of tax relief on production bonuses of up to 2,500 euros a year and a ‘symbolic’ 1 per cent for those letting to under-35s, most young people do not consider the Government’s response to the protests over high rents, the high cost of living and insufficient investment in school facilities to be sufficient.

This has been highlighted by a survey carried out by Skuola.net immediately after the measures were introduced, which saw a very high level of participation, gathering the views of 2,076 young people.
This figure alone demonstrates just how deeply the issue of generational policies resonates. The findings, however, reveal a profound gap between the measures implemented and young people’s actual expectations.
How are the announced measures being assessed? As many as 67 per cent of participants (practically two in three young people) described the measures as a ‘poor response to demands’. In effect, this is a rejection that brands the package as inadequate and disappointing in the face of the structural challenges faced on a daily basis by the ‘under’ generation.
Meanwhile, only a minority support the Government’s moves: 17 per cent consider it an ‘excellent response’, whilst a further 16 per cent describe it as no more than a ‘good response’.

The reasons behind this scepticism are explained by the countless comments left by users in response to the poll. Keeping a dispassionate eye on the country’s political dynamics, many young people interpret the measures not as a genuine shift in policy in their favour, but as a purely political manoeuvre.
Scrolling through the most popular reactions, the prevailing tone of the criticism is unequivocal: “They’re gearing up for the election campaign!”, declares one user, garnering thousands of likes. This sense of disillusionment is widely shared by those who highlight the timing of the government’s intervention: “Nothing in four years, and now, with the elections just round the corner, we’re making more promises. Right,” writes another young person. And again: “Ah, couldn’t it have been done before? How strange that it’s happening right now,” concludes a third commenter with bitter irony.

There are also those who examine the measures on their own merits, setting them aside from political conspiracy theories to reject them outright on the basis of their substance. What fails to convince is the practical effectiveness of bonuses and incentives in the face of a labour market that has ground to a standstill: “A tax cut is useless if starting salaries are starvation wages and people only work on precarious contracts,” points out one young man.
“Rent discounts? The problem is actually finding a place to live in the big cities, and being able to afford the deposit and the guarantees required,” echoes another user, highlighting how, according to many under-30s, these measures are merely stopgap measures incapable of resolving the real structural issues behind the high cost of living.

Yet, as highlighted by the 33 per cent who are in favour (including those who rated the measures as ‘excellent’ or ‘good’), there are also those who welcome the changes in the ‘youth package’ with approval, seeing them as a concrete and tangible sign of progress. “It was about time someone remembered us and tackled the flat-rate tax,” comments one survey participant, speaking on behalf of those who will benefit directly from the housing regulations.
Those who appreciate the government’s fiscal efforts take a similar line, calling for greater pragmatism: “We’re always ready to complain: in the meantime, let’s take these concessions that put money in our pockets; there’s time to improve things,” remarks a young worker, urging his peers to see the glass as half full and not to systematically politicise every initiative.