As of: February 5, 2024, 7:43 p.m
By: Fabian Hartmann
Comments
Press
Split
The increase in citizens' allowance at the beginning of the year attracted many critics.
Economist Bernd Raffelhüschen even calls for a radical reform of the reform.
Munich - Since January last year, citizens' money has replaced the previous Hartz IV - but some politicians and economists are already calling for a reform of the reform.
The Union is also taking a position - recently CDU top politician Carsten Linnemann announced that his party wants to tighten the rules for citizens' money in the future: "When we are in government, we will be the first major reform package to abolish citizens' money in its current form “.
In this context, the CDU General Secretary also called for sanctions to be tightened.
Anyone who refuses to work should face harsh sanctions, said Linnemann.
Ultimately, this should mean that when it comes to paying out citizens’ money, you can “focus on those who really need it again”.
Economist Bernd Raffelhüschen from the University of Freiburg believes Linnemann's approach in the
Focus
interview is the right approach.
But he also expresses doubts about the CDU Secretary General's proposal.
Citizens' money: Raffelhüschen calls for a return to the “principle of supporting and demanding”
While the Schröder government's Hartz reforms reformed the labor market from 2003 onwards, this aspect clearly took a back seat with the reform of citizens' benefits last year.
“It has become a kind of right to income, at least in terms of direction.
“That’s why what Carsten Linnemann announced is completely correct,” explains Raffelhüschen.
“It makes sense to return the citizen benefit reforms to the principle of supporting and demanding.
That was what the Hartz reform did,” explained Raffelhüschen in an interview with
Focus
.
According to the economist, Germany must return to the principle of the so-called subsidiary welfare state.
“That means: The welfare state is there to help those who cannot help themselves,” explains the Freiburg economist.
The German welfare state, on the other hand, is currently based on the basic assumption that “everyone can do something”.
And that social assistance should only contribute what the individual is unable to do themselves.
“That means: increasing social assistance is actually what we should have as a norm in our welfare state.
According to the principle: Every person can do something, and what they can do, they should do.
And if it’s not enough, we’ll increase it,” says Raffelhüschen.
Bernd Raffelhueschen, Professor of Finance and Director of the Research Center for Generational Contracts at the Albert-Ludwigs-University Freiburg © Reiner Zensen via www.imago-images.de
Raffelhüschen calls for so-called activating social assistance
However, Raffelhüschen also admits that there is an aspect of the CDU's proposal that does not go far enough for him.
The Freiburg economist calls for a type of social assistance that should motivate people to work more.
“We primarily don’t need any sanctions for total objectors.
What is more important is that we say to citizens: If you leave basic security and do something - which everyone can do - then we will help you.
Then we give something in return for you doing something yourself,” emphasizes Raffelhüschen in
Focus
.
Currently in Germany people still rely on a principle of social assistance, which “punishes helping people to help themselves” if someone does something.
According to Raffelhüschen, motivation to work more can come in the form of activating social assistance.
Those who do not adhere to these rules must be confronted with courage and say: “Social assistance for those who do nothing must be a benefit in kind,” emphasizes the economist.
Raffelhüschen has little hope that his suggestions will be implemented
“I published this decades ago as a Freiburg blueprint: activating social assistance leads to someone taking a mini-job and helping themselves.
Because the mini-job is not sufficient, we still have to give him money.
But for doing the mini-job,” the economist explains as an example.
But what does the economist demand regarding the current amounts of citizen's money?
How does he feel about the increase, and how could the existing citizen's allowance regulations be changed if necessary?
In these questions too, Raffelhüschen follows an approach similar to that already outlined by CDU General Secretary Linnemann.
So you should say to those who don't work and possibly refuse it: "You get a subsistence level - maybe half of what there is today - but you get it as a voucher.
So no cash payments,” explains the Freiburg economist.
However, Raffelhüschen sees the chances of implementing these approaches as “zero”.
Especially because he had already proposed this more than 25 years ago as part of the so-called Freiburg blueprint.
What prevents politicians from making cuts to citizens' benefits?
But such proposals are not that easy to implement: the bottom line is that political actors in Germany have little scope to cut citizens' money.
“Politics has little influence on it,” said constitutional lawyer Prof. Joachim Wieland in an interview with ZDF.
Finally, the Federal Constitutional Court ordered very precise guidelines for ensuring the minimum subsistence level.
These requirements go back to compliance with “human dignity, which guarantees everyone in Germany that they don’t have to go hungry, don’t have to freeze and have a roof over their head,” adds Wieland.
It is certainly possible to make fundamentally minor changes to the citizen's money statutes.
“But in principle, due to the requirements of the Constitution and the Federal Constitutional Court, citizens’ money is hardly suitable for saving a lot of money,” emphasizes the constitutional lawyer.
(Fabian Hartmann)