> That's just not true. Bürgergeld does not cover real rent costs for example.
Yep. That's where "Wohngeld" comes in.
> This thread is full of propaganda from the neoliberal and extreme right like this
This is not true. I live in Germany. I have family members in the system on both sides. I read news from all isles.
Fact is, our social welfare state is unmatched compared to any other country. Nowhere else will you get welfare benefits this high. Our welfare benefits are so high, the sudden drop in benefits reduces benefits from earning more money by insane margins. There is a good calculation example here [1]
Wenn Sie Bürgergeld erhalten, haben Sie keinen Anspruch auf Wohngeld. Allerdings ist Wohngeld eine vorrangige Leistung. Wenn Sie dadurch Ihre Hilfebedürftigkeit beseitigen oder vermeiden können, können Sie einen Wohngeldantrag stellen (ab dem 1. Juli 2023 sind Sie verpflichtet, einen Wohngeldantrag zu stellen).
For a more full picture have a look at https://www.ifo.de/publikationen/2024/aufsatz-zeitschrift/lo... (though the ifo is not always trustworthy). There exist specific scenarios where there is not enough money remaining when you pick up work with a better salary. Even I know scenarios like that, for example when getting unemployment benefits, all money earned at the side is lost, which is just stupid if you wanted people to slide into work (through being self-employed for example). That should be a percentage, so that you have more at the end when completing a freelance project for example, instead of having worked for nothing.
What makes it rightwing propaganda is taking these cases and claiming that it would explain why people don't want to work anymore - which is not true, neither the connection nor that people don't want to work. And to combine it with the statement that the welfare benefits are high, when they are not - the problem, if there is one, is that earned money reduces the benefits 100%, instead of on a sliding scale. It's not the amount, as in 99% of scenarios being on state welfare completely sucks in Germany, it's the scenario of not having enough money for food at the end of the month, being scared to heat in the winter and each unforeseen bill a mayor crisis.
Also, it is also not okay to not mention that bürgergeld is still combined with sanctions. If not taking up (usual shitty ) work it can be lost, or missing a summoning, etc. Being in that system is thus highly stressful. Those sanctions were supposed to go away, instead they were made harder. Thanks SPD.
If these sanctions did stay in place… then why is chancellor Scholz (SPD) currently rallying to reintroduce them?[0] of course, he’s a populist, but that doesn’t make your statement true.
> What makes it rightwing propaganda is taking these cases and claiming that it would explain why people don't want to work anymore
I still don't agree it's right wing propaganda. Bürgergeld is just one part of a larger picture of why people don't want to work anymore. The reality is that social welfare in its entirety is too close to what you can earn with low skilled work, wages are too low and benefits are too high and cut off too suddenly.
> It's not the amount, as in 99% of scenarios being on state welfare completely sucks in Germany
Again, I can not confirm. I have lived on state welfare (Hartz IV) for my entire life before moving out of my parents.
> it's the scenario of not having enough money for food at the end of the month, being scared to heat in the winter and each unforeseen bill a mayor crisis.
This is not true in my experience. I don't know where you're getting this information from. Heating costs were always covered unless you heat like a maniac and unforseen bills are not happening. Where should they? Your apartment and car fixing costs are covered. You can read more about this here: [1]
> Also, it is also not okay to not mention that bürgergeld is still combined with sanctions. If not taking up (usual shitty ) work it can be lost, or missing a summoning, etc. Being in that system is thus highly stressful. Those sanctions were supposed to go away, instead they were made harder. Thanks SPD.
Why shouldn't they take up shitty work? It's not undignified. My mother stocked shelves for Aldi. She worked gas stations. She did community work. She couldn't hold a job for long. It's hard work and that's okay. You don't have the right to dodge shitty work just because you don't think it's gratifying. It's also not as stressful as you make it out to be. You have to remember, you're still getting so much stuff for free there are millions of people who would die for that chance. A little stress still makes it worth it.
Yes, you need to be smart with money. That's okay. Welfare should not make for a live of comfortable spending. But people don't live in a state of desolation. The point of welfare is to enable people who can't work to live a dignified live. Not a comfortable one. We're just so out of touch in Germany, people on our welfare system can't see their incredible privilege.
> This is not true in my experience. I don't know where you're getting this information from. Heating costs were always covered unless you heat like a maniac and unforseen bills are not happening. Where should they? Your apartment and car fixing costs are covered. You can read more about this here: [1]
That does not fit together at all. The article is covering a legal decision from 2020 where one woman forced the jobcenter to cover car repair costs. So before, it was not covered. So you just did not have a childhood in the system where stuff like this was covered.
> Why shouldn't they take up shitty work? It's not undignified.
That's not the point. The claim above was that you can comfortable live on Bürgergeld without having to work. Which you usually can't, since it would be taken away (or at least significantly reduced) if you tried that.
> The reality is that social welfare in its entirety is too close to what you can earn with low skilled work
So which other social welfare systems than Bürgergeld are you aiming at here?
> That does not fit together at all. The article is covering a legal decision from 2020 where one woman forced the jobcenter to cover car repair costs. So before, it was not covered. So you just did not have a childhood in the system where stuff like this was covered.
I did, but we did not experience this specific case. I lived in a small town and the Government paid for my public transport costs. They do provide a car as well if you need it for work or for educational purposes. They also pay for transport if you're sick and need to see a doctor. Of course, if you're on welfare with a car without a need for a car, they won't cover anything, which is fair.
> That's not the point. The claim above was that you can comfortable live on Bürgergeld without having to work. Which you usually can't, since it would be taken away (or at least significantly reduced) if you tried that.
I've not said this once.
> So which other social welfare systems than Bürgergeld are you aiming at here?
I'm asking again, are you even German? There are lots of other opportunities which we do provide. We pay for your Apartment with Wohngeld, even if you do work and don't earn enough. We pay for your healthcare costs. We pay for school supplies, trips and education costs for children. In my city, there are a lot of subsidised offers like free access to public pools. You have access to free TV and internet if you're on welfare. You can get a free social carer who will manage your expenses, if you yourself are not able.
I am not trying to be rude, but you're again discussing from a point of severe misinformation and you're lacking crucial knowledge about how our system works. You've been corrected multiple times in this thread for spreading misinformation, like heating costs not being covered by the government.
It's the other way around. You seem to take your information from the AFD or FDP bubble and are thus thoroughly misinformed in how the system works and what effect it has on the people under it. I did not react to your question for my nationality as it's ad hominem. Be assured that I know german politics and social systems perfectly well.
You ignore which limits and obligations are placed under the bürgergeld system, and how stiffling the bureaucracy is. For example, yes, Schuldbedarf is covered, but only up to an amount. Depending on the school that can be not enough, and then be a big problem. You also implied (and even said directly) that aids like Wohngeld and Bürgergeld can be combined, which is wrong.
> They do provide a car as well if you need it for work or for educational purposes
I just linked you to an article showing that they did not.
>> That's not the point. The claim above was that you can comfortable live on Bürgergeld without having to work. Which you usually can't, since it would be taken away (or at least significantly reduced) if you tried that.
> I've not said this once.
It is impossible to read your comments without seeing that this is what you want to say. You also directly agreed with comments saying the same. I quoted you already on that.
> Fact is, our social welfare state is unmatched compared to any other country. Nowhere else will you get welfare benefits this high. Our welfare benefits are so high, the sudden drop in benefits reduces benefits from earning more money by insane margins.
It's very funny, because people with the same political opinions as you in my country are absolutely positive that this is the case for my country instead (France).
And in practice they are pretty similar (as are many European systems unsurprisingly, we all draw inspiration on each other) and as someone who knows the French social system fairly well I can assure you that the trope you hear from right wing politicians on TV is nothing but lies.
Both can be right in their own way. I'm not saying we should get rid of our welfare. I'm just saying our people are missing the point. It's incredible privilege to live here. You think they would get the same welfare in the US, in China, Ghana or Russia? Think again. They should be grateful is what I'm saying.
No that's not what you're saying, you're saying that they live easily and have no incentive to work, which I'm arguing against. You also said this lack of incentive to work is causing inflation, which I'm also arguing against.
Now I agree with you that even though their live is still tough, they are still very lucky to live in Germany as opposed to many other places on earth.
But that wasn't the topic and you moved the goalpost.
> No that's not what you're saying, you're saying that they live easily and have no incentive to work
Well you‘re free to quote me on that. I haven‘t been saying this at all.
> which I'm arguing against.
No, you’re arguing for falsehoods. Posters here are stating that things that are covered aren‘t and that people on Bürgergeld live in abhorrent poverty, which is demonstrably untrue.
> You also said this lack of incentive to work is causing inflation, which I'm also arguing against.
I haven‘t. Again, please do quote me.
> But that wasn't the topic and you moved the goalpost.
No, the topic was that you (among others) think people on Bürgergeld starve, are in dire need of heating and live in depressed states for lack of funding. These are lies. You‘re lying. I’ve no idea why.
You're right I mistook you and nkmnz from whom you defended the original argument.
> and that people on Bürgergeld live in abhorrent poverty, which is demonstrably untrue.
It's only untrue if you define “abhorrent” as worse as everywhere. But that's not a good criteria because then the entirety of the world population today is affluent by even 1800 standards, and most European people in 1800 were themselves in a very good situation compared to Paleolithic humans. So of course people can survive with much less but that doesn't mean these people are suffering. It's as saying to someone with a missing foot that he's OK since others have lost both legs.
People living on social welfare are definitely struggling and only ascetic people would put themselves voluntarily under such a standard of living. And evidently pretty much anyone claiming it's not a harsh life isn't willing to live with so little.
> think people on Bürgergeld starve, are in dire need of heating and live in depressed states for lack of funding.
Skipping meal is routine, and mental health issues are indeed a problem for those people. You are the one lying to yourself.
> It's only untrue if you define “abhorrent” as worse as everywhere
> So of course people can survive with much less but that doesn't mean these people are suffering.
I‘d argue that as long as you‘re surviving entirely on someone else‘s money without being forced to work, you can argue for my point. Think about this: Never before in history did you have the chance to rely entirely upon the effort of others for your basic human needs. In almost no other country on earth can you survive with most of your needs met just because you happen to live there, even if you‘re not born there. This is insane privilege.
> And evidently pretty much anyone claiming it's not a harsh life isn't willing to live with so little
Nope, sorry. You‘re saying this from a privileged western perspective.
I‘m not comparing humans of the past, I‘m comparing it with the huge majority of people living on earth, right now. A person living on German welfare is so far removed from the average poor Afghan farmer, people in Favelas living in poverty , Ethiopians living under warlord rule or even the average poor person in the US they might as well be royalty. And again, welfare isn‘t supposed to provide an entirely struggle free life. It‘s supposed to have you meet your basic human needs. We give our people so much more than that. Public schooling, free access to public pools, additional housing money in cities, free internet for people on welfare, and a car. It’s delusional if one thinks that‘s still not enough.
Skipping meals is not routine, that‘s untrue as well. We have soup kitchens here. I’ve been there myself as a poor student.
> Think about this: Never before in history did you have the chance to rely entirely upon the effort of others for your basic human needs. In almost no other country on earth can you survive with most of your needs met just because you happen to live there, even if you‘re not born there. This is insane privilege.
Let's flip it upside down: never before[1] in history could you be bared from earning your food from your own work, and same for housing. That's the entire reason why people need welfare: there's no berries or roots to harvest, no game to hunt, no fields to farm, no vacant lot to build your house on with the help of your family and friends. All of this is behind the control of the gatekeepers who own the means of subsistence. The modern world is a prison in that regard.
> Nope, sorry. You‘re saying this from a privileged western perspective.
No, you misread me: barely nobody with your or my standard of living would voluntarily adopt this lifestyle. You act as if the ability not to work was a luxury that made all this worthwhile, but the truth is almost nobody ever voluntarily leave the wage-slavery state to take advantage of this luxury. Why that in your opinion?
> I‘m not comparing humans of the past, I‘m comparing it with the huge majority of people living on earth, right now. A person living on German welfare is so far removed from the average poor Afghan farmer, people in Favelas living in poverty , Ethiopians living under warlord rule or even the average poor person in the US they might as well be royalty
As I said in another thread, you cannot compare struggle between regions of the world or time periods, because all the poor people in the world today have access to things even royalty couldn't dream about. Infant death in Afghanistan (45/1000) is comparable to the level in Germany in the 50s and is roughly a tens of European infant mortality until the beginning of 19th century. Even in royal families, child death were consistently a terrible problem for millennia. And that's a problem that's almost non-existent in today Afghanistan. Same for food, as famine as disappeared almost everywhere in the world and people in Favelas have access to food in a diversity and quality (both in taste and in food safety) that would make aristocrats from the past in awe. Does that mean that Afghan farmers and people in Favelas are not struggling by your definition?
> Skipping meals is not routine, that‘s untrue as well. We have soup kitchens here. I’ve been there myself as a poor student.
Please read the massive literature about how many people refuse to go there even when it's close to their home (it's not always, especially in suburban or rural places) because they're “worth more than this”.
> It‘s supposed to have you meet your basic human needs. We give our people so much more than that. Public schooling, free access to public pools, additional housing money in cities, free internet for people on welfare, and a car.
You fail to realize how almost all of these (that is, everything except access to public pools) can be basic human needs in modern societies: schools are a no-brainer of course and I really don't understand how you can put it in your list, but so is housing. Cars and internet connection are only necessities because we shaped the world around it, but here's the world we live in: internet is basically mandatory for many government-related stuff and so are cars when you don't live in cities. Locking people out of the normal world isn't a rational move no matter how “morally good” it sounds.
(Also, since I can't find it easily on the web, does welfare in Germany genuinely provide access to a car? That sounds really clever actually, because the lack of mobility is a huge blocker for people to get back to the job market once they've lost access to a car here in France, and we are subsidizing people who are practically stuck without opportunity to get a job which is a terrible policy).
[1] at least not before the “enclosure movement” in Britain in the early modern period, where this madness came from.
> Let's flip it upside down: never before[1] in history could you be bared from earning your food from your own work, and same for housing. That's the entire reason why people need welfare: there's no berries or roots to harvest, no game to hunt, no fields to farm, no vacant lot to build your house on with the help of your family and friends. All of this is behind the control of the gatekeepers who own the means of subsistence. The modern world is a prison in that regard.
This is a false equivalence. There are odd-jobs now like they were in the past, with much better benefits. There are two classes of people on welfare: Those wo can't work and those who could but don't, for whatever reason. The first class couldn't work hunter or gathering jobs in the past and the second class would be forced to do so out of necessity. The modern world is not a prison for these people, but instead provides a cushion for our nation's weakest. These people wouldn't have had the opportunities you state. They would have just died instead.
> No, you misread me: barely nobody with your or my standard of living would voluntarily adopt this lifestyle.
I agree entirely. 95% of the world's population do not have our standard of living. Which is why they try to migrate into the west. Even European countries with the lowest standards of welfare provide lifestyles and opportunities that seem like luxury to poor people from all over the world.
> You act as if the ability not to work was a luxury that made all this worthwhile, but the truth is almost nobody ever voluntarily leave the wage-slavery state to take advantage of this luxury. Why that in your opinion?
You are correct, they don't and that is not my opinion of European natives. But people leave the state of real slavery and spend their entire life savings with hopes to cross over into the West. Europe will have to protect the standards of welfare like Denmark already does, if we want to keep benefits up to standard for the people who are already here.
> Does that mean that Afghan farmers and people in Favelas are not struggling by your definition?
Of course not, they just struggle differently.
> Please read the massive literature about how many people refuse to go there even when it's close to their home (it's not always, especially in suburban or rural places) because they're “worth more than this”.
That struggle is entirely self-made and quite frankly, not the problem of the Government. Opportunities are readily available. There is no shame in going to a soup kitchen. I had the same sentiment in the past, went there, and dropped any prejudice, because I was hungry.
> You fail to realize how almost all of these (that is, everything except access to public pools) can be basic human needs in modern societies
You would think, but this even the richest country on the earth doesn't provide good schooling to poor children.
> internet is basically mandatory for many government-related stuff
This made me laugh. It's still Germany we're talking about.
> Also, since I can't find it easily on the web, does welfare in Germany genuinely provide access to a car
We do. More often than not, if the Government deems that you don't need a car, you're granted free public transport. I've made use of this system. It was fine.
> because the lack of mobility is a huge blocker for people to get back to the job market
I'd wager the largest blocker for people to get back into the job market is that wages haven't kept up with welfare costs. There is an incredibly sharp drop off point for welfare benefits. For most people able of only unskilled labor, there is a loss of money if they start working at minimum wage level.
We have failed our immigration efforts because of a couple of factors, one of which being the availability of welfare benefits. I know how this sounds, but it's true. Compared to other European nations, for example, only about every fifth Ukranian refuge has found work here. Poland, which does not provide a lot of welfare for refugees, has seen a working rate of 70% in the same group. This problem is twofold however, refugees by and large benefit from unskilled labour and manufacturing, work which is rare to come by in Germany.
I'm not saying we should lower benefits. The only possibility I see is an increase of wages, which by and large isn't really possible in Germany; our infrastructure and global economic competitiveness is declining. The job market is in a dire situation right now and jobs opportunities are getting less available each day. Germany is in a catastrophic state right now and there's no solution. We have a fast aging population, rising inflation, housing, and food costs and too few workers.
> You would think, but this even the richest country on the earth doesn't provide good schooling to poor children.
Interesting to see how the topic you know the best (from your GF as I understand it) is exactly the one where government isn't doing enough. You see what I mean by TV giving you wrong impressions on topics you're less familiar with …
You‘re really going to make your point with an Article from 2007 of a mentally ill man that didn‘t even answer his letters from the Arbeitsamt? He didn‘t even apply for aid. Also, you never have to go hungry in Germany. Anyone can go to a Suppenküche and get meals for free.
Your other article is from 2022, the middle of the Ukraine war which caused an incredible explosion in heating costs. There is no mention of welfare there. Even then, if you actually read the stats behind it, Germany was still in the top 3 EU wide by a far margin. Also, as per the Statistisches Bundesamt, the people polled gave self assessed answers in these polls. There is no information to be found on the severity or degree of how many funds they were lacking, or even what „enough heating“ is supposed to mean. Bit disappointing to be honest.
These articles do not support your point at all. What even is your point? Are you even German? You‘re discussing from a point of severe misinformation. I really don‘t get your agenda here.
Given the full thread, you claimed both things here:
>> It is free money for everyone. Everyone obviously excluding the people who work full-time and who are paying taxes so that "everyone" can live of Bürgergeld.
> Oh wow, the exact thing people have been saying would happen has happened. Turn's out Quasi-UBI is a drain on tax paying citizens after all. Amazing.
The first one is not my statement, but a direct quote from the top poster.
The second comment makes no statement about it being free and easy. Just that UBI money is being largely spent on leisure activities. It also is a drain on taxes.
Nowhere there do I talk about easiness or inflation - at all. On the contrary, you‘ve been alerted of your easily disproven statements multiple times in this thread and not just by me. Let‘s keep being civil about this though.
Yep. That's where "Wohngeld" comes in.
> This thread is full of propaganda from the neoliberal and extreme right like this
This is not true. I live in Germany. I have family members in the system on both sides. I read news from all isles.
Fact is, our social welfare state is unmatched compared to any other country. Nowhere else will you get welfare benefits this high. Our welfare benefits are so high, the sudden drop in benefits reduces benefits from earning more money by insane margins. There is a good calculation example here [1]
[1]: https://x.com/sozi_simon/status/1737361321186701336