You seem to have a very low standard regarding "proofs". The article you cited derives broad macro-economic conclusions from storified anecdotes. In the particu

You seem to have a very low standard regarding "proofs". The article you cited derives broad macro-economic conclusions from storified anecdotes. In the particular case of a "masseuse course" the agency just doesn't see it as a valuable and accredited program. Such courses prefer taking money from participants directly rather than trying to make bureaucracies believe in them. And yes, then the participants have to pay to attend. They might even have illusions on their employment prospects. If they were to attend an actual physiotherapy course, things may be different. The problem with these types of programs in Germany is that they are mostly privately funded. That is a problem yet to be addressed. People tend to attribute the "being stuck" in welfare to the welfare system itself. That may happen, I just don't see it as a significant factor. The subsidizing of low-skilled labor is a different problem, and is partly addressed by the recent minimum wage. The US is an entirely different place. Lower unemployment, but there, even many employed workers have a much harder life and live in poorer conditions than jobless Germans. Full Healthcare, and mostly free education, for starters.