Post: #1

NYT Wrote:COPENHAGEN — It began as a stunt intended to prove that hardship and poverty still existed in this small, wealthy country, but it backfired badly. Visit a single mother of two on welfare, a liberal member of Parliament goaded a skeptical political opponent, see for yourself how hard it is.

It turned out, however, that life on welfare was not so hard. The 36-year-old single mother, given the pseudonym “Carina” in the news media, had more money to spend than many of the country’s full-time workers. All told, she was getting about $2,700 a month, and she had been on welfare since she was 16.

In past years, Danes might have shrugged off the case, finding Carina more pitiable than anything else. But even before her story was in the headlines 16 months ago, they were deeply engaged in a debate about whether their beloved welfare state, perhaps Europe’s most generous, had become too rich, undermining the country’s work ethic. Carina helped tip the scales.

With little fuss or political protest — or notice abroad — Denmark has been at work overhauling entitlements, trying to prod Danes into working more or longer or both. While much of southern Europe has been racked by strikes and protests as its creditors force austerity measures, Denmark still has a coveted AAA bond rating.

But Denmark’s long-term outlook is troubling. The population is aging, and in many regions of the country people without jobs now outnumber those with them.

But few experts here believe that Denmark can long afford the current perks. So Denmark is retooling itself, tinkering with corporate tax rates, considering new public sector investments and, for the long term, trying to wean more people — the young and the old — off government benefits.

“In the past, people never asked for help unless they needed it,” said Karen Haekkerup, the minister of social affairs and integration, who has been outspoken on the subject. “My grandmother was offered a pension and she was offended. She did not need it.

“But now people do not have that mentality. They think of these benefits as their rights. The rights have just expanded and expanded. And it has brought us a good quality of life. But now we need to go back to the rights and the duties. We all have to contribute.”
.......
Joachim B. Olsen, the skeptical politician from the Liberal Alliance party who visited Carina 16 months ago in her pleasant Copenhagen apartment, is particularly alarmed. He says Sweden, which is already considered generous, has far fewer citizens living on government benefits. If Denmark followed Sweden’s example, it would have about 250,000 fewer people living on benefits of various sorts.

“The welfare state here has spiraled out of control,” Mr. Olsen said. “It has done a lot of good, but we have been unwilling to talk about the negative side. For a very long time it has been taboo to talk about the Carinas.”

Already the government has reduced various early-retirement plans. The unemployed used to be able to collect benefits for up to four years. Now it is two.

Students are next up for cutbacks, most intended to get them in the work force faster. Currently, students are entitled to six years of stipends, about $990 a month, to complete a five-year degree which, of course, is free. Many of them take even longer to finish, taking breaks to travel and for internships before and during their studies.

In trying to reduce the welfare rolls, the government is concentrating on making sure that people like Carina do not exist in the future. It is proposing cuts to welfare grants for those under 30 and stricter reviews to make sure that such recipients are steered into jobs or educational programs before they get comfortable on government benefits.

Robert Nielsen, 45, made headlines last September when he was interviewed on television, admitting that he had basically been on welfare since 2001.

Mr. Nielsen said he was able-bodied but had no intention of taking a demeaning job, like working at a fast-food restaurant. He made do quite well on welfare, he said. He even owns his own co-op apartment.

Unlike Carina, who will no longer give interviews, Mr. Nielsen, called “Lazy Robert” by the news media, seems to be enjoying the attention. He says that he is greeted warmly on the street all the time. “Luckily, I am born and live in Denmark, where the government is willing to support my life,” he said.

Some Danes say the existence of people like Carina and Mr. Nielsen comes as no surprise. Lene Malmberg, who lives in Odsherred and works part time as a secretary despite a serious brain injury that has affected her short-term memory, said the Carina story was not news to her. At one point, she said, before her accident when she worked full time, her sister was receiving benefits and getting more money than she was.

“The system is wrong somehow, I agree,” she said. “I wanted to work. But she was a little bit: ‘Why work?’ ”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/21/world/...697E8C84E7

I personally have nothing against welfare, but plenty against leeching off it. It's extremely shameful. But from welfare to leeching, there might be an unavoidable downward spiral, though...

Post: #2

(04-21-2013 09:56 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  “Luckily, I am born and live in Denmark, where the government is willing to support my life,” he said.

I'm aware America has more issues than Denmark overall, but the lack of any concept of self-reliance is sickening.

Post: #3

whats really going to blow the Denmark system out of the water is when the immigrants from Turkey, Greece, and North Africa realize the Dane's are so clueless that all they have to do is show up and claim persecution or something and they will be fed and housed for life.

Post: #4

My grandfather taught me that "if you don't work, you don't eat". Plain and simple. Why should I have less of my money because of onerous taxes so that others can sit on their asses and do nothing?

Post: #5

Quote:she was getting about $2,700 a month

Most people when given the alternative between a generous handout like that and busting their ass working for a living will choose the former. The Danes have really incentivised people to become welfare bums its no surprise so many of citizens live off the government tit.

Post: #6

A bloated welfare system is not unique to Denmark. Via Zero Hedge :

Quote:Emmerich analyzes disposable income and economic benefits among several key income classes and comes to the stunning (and verifiable) conclusion that "a one-parent family of three making $14,500 a year (minimum wage) has more disposable income than a family making $60,000 a year." And that excludes benefits from Supplemental Security Income disability checks. America is now a country which punishes those middle-class people who not only try to work hard, but avoid scamming the system. Not surprisingly, it is not only the richest and most audacious thieves that prosper - it is also the penny scammers at the very bottom of the economic ladder that rip off the middle class each and every day, courtesy of the world's most generous entitlement system.

I wrote recently here on welfare:

Quote:Welfare, in the form of "helping" single, poor mothers with their spawn, needs to be eradicated.

When you subsidize something, you get more of it. And single mothers are disproportionately low in IQ, high in time preference, and high in impulsivity (as are their babies' daddies), precisely the sub-population one would least like to pass on their genes to the next generation (the R^2 of the heritability of IQ is >= 50% in western nations).

It's not that difficult to not let a guy bust inside you if you're a woman, and not that difficult to not bust inside a girl, if you're a guy.

So by subsidizing the reproduction of women and men low in IQ, high future time preference, and high in impulsivity, you will only get more people low in IQ, high in future time preference, and high in impulsivity. Probably not what you want happening in your country.

"But... but... think of the children! They don't deserve to be blamed for the bad decisions of their parents," bleeding heart PC liberals might try and argue. Maybe, maybe not... but who's to blame, and to be held accountable for this? Taxpayers, or the kids' parents for blindly and selfishly conceiving such children?

"But... but... think of the foregone human capital," bleeding heart liberals with a sightly greater understanding of economics might try and argue. Okay, I'm thinking of it. However, as we've already established via twin adoptions studies, nature matters at least slightly more than nurture. So we are not foregoing much human capital at all, as these children are disproportionately low in IQ, high in time preference, and high in impulsivity, as a result of inheritance from their parents. Factor in the return on investment aspect of it, and the NPV of investing in the offspring of single mothers is clearly negative.

Post: #7

The danish welfare is sponsoring non western immigrants to breed. (Arabs, somalians, pakistani, morrocans and the turkish especially)
The more children you get, the larger the welfare check.
The problem is: Danish families don't breed enough to sustain a population. Arab families have 3-4 children per mother while the danish mother will only have 1-2 children.
5 % of danish citizens are non western immigrants, while non western immigrants recieve 40 of the welfare checks.
That means that we pay non westerners to out breed us.

One thing about the S.U. (Student stipends)
That you have to think about, is that the cost of living is expensive in Denmark. While $990 sounds like a lot of money you have to consider public transportions expenses, School book expenses, expensive food and rent.

For a 1 room appartment in the suburbs of Copenhagen, i pay $1000 a month.
A cup of coffee in a coffee shop is around $5.

Free education is a benefit in the long run, as the well educated will earn more in the future, and thereby pay more taxes. The theory is, that the system should get as many educated citizens as possible.

There are a lot of people like lazy robert.
They are like parasites.
Old people are wealthy, but of course people won't refuse to get money. Naturally, elderly people accept the pensions. Blame the state, not the people.

People in Denmark are getting a larger and larger sense of entitlement. And the collective hamster might be the ruin of danish people.
Free healthcare and free education - it's good for the people, i believe.
But the free pay checks make people lazy, and it is only a cost for the working and taxpaying citzens.

Post: #8

In general, "human interest" stories could be an excellent ploy for politicians/journalists looking to drum up opposition against a PC cause, while pretending to be trying to garner support for it.

For example, pretending like you're illuminating the benefits of affirmative action for girls in traditionally male-centric fields.

Shadow a female investment banking analyst for a day, showcasing how she spends her whole day prancing around in heels, flirting with more senior guys, and gossiping away on FBook/GChat with her sorority sisters, while her male coworkers put together models and pitch-books.

Post: #9

All Americans should play with this (warning may cause depression/rage)


http://www.adp.com/tools-and-resources/c...lator.aspx

Post: #10

(04-21-2013 09:56 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  I personally have nothing against welfare, but plenty against leeching off it.

That's a little like saying, "I personally have nothing wrong with leaving money on the ground, but plenty against people taking it." It's inherent in the nature of government welfare, that 'leeching' is going to happen.

(04-21-2013 09:56 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  But from welfare to leeching, there might be an unavoidable downward spiral, though...

Not only is it unavoidable, it's hardly a 'spiral' - it happens from the outset. The government will never operate a welfare program that will only grant to those truly in need, if only because such a program is hard to administer without intimate knowledge of the beneficiaries. Also, when government does it, it goes from being a benevolence to a duty - something that welfare recipients are owed.

Kabal, thanks for the link to Zero Hedge. That is fucking ridiculous, I never knew it was that bad, that welfare recipients take more money home than middle income households. Fucking mind-boggling.

Post: #11

You can add to this that politicians can turn the welfare dependents into a reliable voting bloc by saying the other side will cut their benefits. The incentive is that soon enough both parties will defend benefits and begin to promise bigger and even better benefits.

(04-21-2013 01:29 PM)basilransom Wrote:  

(04-21-2013 09:56 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  I personally have nothing against welfare, but plenty against leeching off it.

That's a little like saying, "I personally have nothing wrong with leaving money on the ground, but plenty against people taking it." It's inherent in the nature of government welfare, that 'leeching' is going to happen.

(04-21-2013 09:56 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  But from welfare to leeching, there might be an unavoidable downward spiral, though...

Not only is it unavoidable, it's hardly a 'spiral' - it happens from the outset. The government will never operate a welfare program that will only grant to those truly in need, if only because such a program is hard to administer without intimate knowledge of the beneficiaries. Also, when government does it, it goes from being a benevolence to a duty - something that welfare recipients are owed.

Kabal, thanks for the link to Zero Hedge. That is fucking ridiculous, I never knew it was that bad, that welfare recipients take more money home than middle income households. Fucking mind-boggling.

Post: #12

I think more and more people are waking up to this bullshit, fedualism-in-the-making system. Trends don't last forever. Southern Europe served as the wake-up call for the rest of Europe.

If a sufficiently large group of highly intelligent people decide to work together to change something, it will happen. But not within the political system, where the welfare recipients vote together for whatever party offers them the most loot. It's an exiting time.

Up to know, cultural taboos especially in Scandinavia, of the need of having "pity on those less fortunate" have been strong, but the next generation who've experienced the consequences of immigration and welfare first hand will not be so "kind".

Post: #13

The welfare state in the advanced industrial nations is in the process of collapse and the process is going to be very ugly

Post: #14

(04-21-2013 02:04 PM)MrXY Wrote:  The welfare state in the advanced industrial nations is in the process of collapse and the process is going to be very ugly

True, but I expect most of the ugliness to come from the hoodwinked middle class. The ones on constant welfare (food stamps, free health insurance, subsidized rent, etc.) will get to keep theirs via perpetual inflation. Money will keep getting printed to subsidize the government dependents because now they're arguably the biggest voting block.

How will the middle class protest these things, though? Will it be through peaceful or violent means?

What do you think?

Post: #15

I might move to Denmark and live off their government for a few years