In Germany, Hartz IV is currently being discussed again. Parts of SPD want to replace this social benefit with a basic income of solidarity. The FDP deputy and FDP general secretary of North Rhine-Westphalia, Johannes Vogel, does not believe this.
The ruling mayor of Berlin has called for se days DieWiedereinführung of job creation measures, short ABM. They have that? No wonder, because Michael Müller (SPD) was sogeschickt to dress his proposal from Moth box into a chic new garment: "Solidarity-based basic income" he called him. This sounds good in denOhren of first time-it sounds almost like "unconditional basic income". In truth, however, two basic income Nichtsgemeinsam-except that y are both huge projection surfaces.
Johannes Vogel, MDB, is labour market and pension policy spokesman of FDP Bundestag group and secretary general of Free Democrats of North Rhine-Westphalia. © PrivateIn reality, Müller long-term unemployed simply wants to offer a job at state. He could also have said: "From you shall become anyway nothing more, but flowers in front of red Town hall need Malwieder Water"-only that of course does not sound as sexy as a "solidarischesGrundeinkommen". In 1990s, DenArbeitsbeschaffungsmaßnahmen already had such an employment programme. Even sober labour market researchers are still turning to horrors today if y are to give some information in return. That was eineBeschäftigungsrapie in continuous loop. Anyone proposing ZurWiederholung does so eir against better knowledge or AusUnkenntnis.
Instead of permanently parking people, we should stick to each individual in spite of all adversity in plan to get m out endlichaus dependence and to allow m to enter EchtenArbeitsmarkt. If you can't do that right away, we should allow branches wage subsidies and concrete, personal accompaniment DenWiedereinstieg. The use of innovative Finanzierungsmodellewie is also a so-called passive-active transfer, in which, until now, passively rendered cash benefits are converted into means of active labour market policy by Jobcenter.
What really needs to changeBut it is quite obvious: debate is fired less by KonkretenVorschlag, but simply by term "basic income". Nehmenwir false thrust of Müller, refore, as an occasion to lead RichtigeDebatte and to think about where re is tatsächlichHandlungsbedarf. This is not to increase political rule sets oderuns even to adopt principle of demand and promotion. It is crucial that we fairermachen our welfare state in concrete terms. For trust in protective function of social network FürÜbergangsphasen, vicissitudes of life or blows of fate must intaktsein – especially in times of change. To this end, this network must be Möglichstunbürokratisch, would be designed in a manner that is upward. Two concrete proposals:
Date Of Update: 10 April 2018, 12:02
