NationStates Jolt Archive

Inspired by this rather memorable incident :

German Town Blasted for Cutting Beggar's Benefits

Is begging a type of employment? The small German city of Göttingen attracted nationwide scorn last week after reducing a man's welfare payment by subtracting his panhandling proceeds. A wave of scorn has prompted the city to reconsider its miserly ways.

German policy makers who are skeptical of stimulus spending as a solution to the financial crisis have become fond of pointing to the mitigating effects of their country's generous social welfare system. They may want to reconsider.

In one German city at least, local welfare administrators seem to be following the national politicians' penny-pinching ways. One unemployed welfare recipient in Göttingen, a university town in the state of Lower Saxony, who had turned to asking passersby for spare change was informed last week that his €351 monthly welfare payment would be subsequently docked by €120. The amount was determined to be the man's expected monthly income from begging.

The city's department for social services had extrapolated the sum on the basis of a departmental employee's informal tabulation of the beggar's €7.40 in "earnings" over the course of a single day. ...

Source (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,616509,00.html)

So, do you think they've gone too far here?
Or would you think this a reasonable measure in these times?

Sounds like an entrepreneur to me!

It's fair. It's income, the same as other income. The fact that it's panhandling doesn't make it holy in any way.

Here in the US, he could get in trouble for not filing and paying self employment tax. :p

It's fair. It's income, the same as other income. The fact that it's panhandling doesn't make it holy in any way.

Here in the US, he could get in trouble for not filing and paying self employment tax. :p

I would agree if this was about deducting his income AFTERWARDS.
What they did in this case was estimate how much they think he's going to make, and deducted it up front.

Heaven forbid they help him find a job instead of pontificating about the evils of social welfare.

You know, if the government-any government- began a program by which people were matched up to jobs that met their capabilities, trained if necessary, moved if necessary and provided with transportation if necessary, the expense of such a program would probably be less than the price of welfare and unemployment.

But that would be socialism. ;)

I would agree if this was about deducting his income AFTERWARDS.
What they did in this case was estimate how much they think he's going to make, and deducted it up front.

True, they should find out if the 7.40 that he earned that day (by his own admission) was typical. If it was average for a day, then they should be able to extrapolate that into the future, and he could submit an earnings statement if his income changed substantially and would change his benefits.

How do you suppose, though, that we keep track of this accurately? It seems impossible. The urge to lie would be too great, and accountability too small.

Heaven forbid they help him find a job instead of pontificating about the evils of social welfare.

You know, if the government-any government- began a program by which people were matched up to jobs that met their capabilities, trained if necessary, moved if necessary and provided with transportation if necessary, the expense of such a program would probably be less than the price of welfare and unemployment.

But that would be socialism. ;)

How is that Socialism? I'd support it in an instant.

The only question is, could you handle the competition from the influx of newly trained clowns?

True, they should find out if the 7.40 that he earned that day (by his own admission) was typical. If it was average for a day, then they should be able to extrapolate that into the future, and he could submit an earnings statement if his income changed substantially and would change his benefits.

How do you suppose, though, that we keep track of this accurately? It seems impossible. The urge to lie would be too great, and accountability too small.

But then, the actual sums we're talking about are equally miniscule... do you really think that the money spent on calculating all this will be less than what they might save by subtracting his "income" from the benefits?

But then, the actual sums we're talking about are equally miniscule... do you really think that the money spent on calculating all this will be less than what they might save by subtracting his "income" from the benefits?

I don't know. I'm not privilege to those numbers. However, if he had a person working at a lawn service 10 hours a week and making an equal amount, and they subtracted his earnings, this wouldn't even be an issue. No one would look twice.

How is that Socialism? I'd support it in an instant.

The only question is, could you handle the competition from the influx of newly trained clowns?

:eek:

Um...

I have seniority. ;)

if it keeps him from begging, its a good thing. if it is now his permanent "job" that he is expected to work at every day, its a bad thing.

Heaven forbid they help him find a job instead of pontificating about the evils of social welfare.

You know, if the government-any government- began a program by which people were matched up to jobs that met their capabilities, trained if necessary, moved if necessary and provided with transportation if necessary, the expense of such a program would probably be less than the price of welfare and unemployment.

But that would be socialism. ;)

Ouch. What he said. Sounds so easy but yet again...

You know, if the government-any government- began a program by which people were matched up to jobs that met their capabilities
Maybe they should train him to be a better panhandler?

Some people can actually make decent money from panhandling.

Now, this is completely anecdotal but I recall reading something about a guy who was making $250 per day in California. Adjust that for cost of living and taxes and it's still a hell of a lot of money. Apparently he kept his new Lincoln carefully out of sight during his shift.

Inspired by this rather memorable incident :

Source (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,616509,00.html)
Well, first of all - Göttingen isn't a "small" German city. It's ranked #60 in Germany with around 121.000 inhabitants. I should know. I live there.
So, do you think they've gone too far here?
Or would you think this a reasonable measure in these times?
And seeing how my unemployed welfare application hasn't been processed yet, although I'm eligible to receive money starting, well, right now, today, April 1st - I really have to say that THOSE MOTHERFUCKERS SHOULD GET THEIR FUCKING PRIORITIES STRAIGHT!

It's bad enough that people have to rely on a welfare check. What's even worse is when city employees don't have anything better to do than go check - during their fucking lunch-break no less - on how much money a beggar might be making a month. Yet they neglect what they're supposed to do, and that is processing the damn applications.

Besides, if I'm not completely mistaken, even while on welfare you are allowed to make some money on the side as long as it doesn't reach more than € 400.

I truly believe that the city employee should be beaten with a stick. I'd do that. For free. With a big stick. Repeatedly! :mad::mad::mad:

Some people can actually make decent money from panhandling.

Now, this is completely anecdotal but I recall reading something about a guy who was making $250 per day in California. Adjust that for cost of living and taxes and it's still a hell of a lot of money. Apparently he kept his new Lincoln carefully out of sight during his shift.

Those types of stories often arrive pre-packaged with an authentic O'Reilly flavour attached, unfortunately.

I wouldn't argue it's possible for someone to actually make some money. But, I would say it's unlikely that most people are making anything, really.

I knew a violinist, when I was living in Leicester, that would make maybe 50 pounds over a weekend, by standing in doorways and playing for change - but he wasn't close to making $250 a day... then again, maybe Californians just love giving money to beggars.

Maybe they should train him to be a better panhandler?

Investment banker?