To: 07/20/2022 16:43
The reform of Hartz IV is only a small reform, think Hans Joachim Viewegeright Because the idea of having more people in wages and bread is neglected. False incentives – as economists call them – are not corrected.
“The quality of a welfare state is measured not just by the level of social support, but by its ability to get people out of trouble.” Very fair, one would like to shout out to Hubertus Heil. Unfortunately, the cornerstones presented by the Federal Minister of Labor for his Citizens Benefits Act do not do this idea justice. It is mainly about more services, less requirements and less controls.
On the other hand, the idea of getting more people into wages and bread is overlooked. The corresponding measurements remain unclear. It is true that the existing further training bonus should be made indefinite and an additional monthly further training allowance should be introduced.
However, the fundamental problem that those who want out of Hartz IV initially have little of what they have earned remains for most benefit recipients. Perverse incentives, as economists call them, are not corrected.
At most a reform
For the moment, it is not a reform, at most a small reform. Rather, it seems that Heil wants to get rid of the unloved name Hartz IV, which is almost associated with trauma in the SPD, with the title of citizen money. The labor market reforms associated with this name have made an important contribution to Germany’s economic recovery.
Above all: the idea of “demanding and promoting” was correct. And it would be disastrous if only the idea of financing remained with the income of future citizens – and there was practically no talk of claims. Under Heil’s plans, anyone collecting state benefits need not fear penalties for six months, even if they default on their obligations.
It needs to be improved
Is it appropriate? Solidarity is not a one-way street. It is right that people who depend on aid are supported by the community in solidarity. But those who receive state benefits – and therefore live off taxpayers’ money – must also do their part to find regular employment. Personal approaches or requests for placement proposals with Pôle Emploi should not be seen as an impertinence, but as the rule.
Especially since there is nothing more important for society and for the individual than the fact that people with a regular job earn their living. This part is massively overlooked in Heil’s plans – there is still a dire need for improvement here.
Comments always reflect the opinion of the respective author and not that of the editors.