Folien

Poverty and Social Exclusion in Germany
Contemporary Issues in Social Welfare
● http://www.peer-review-social-inclusion.eu
vgl. Zick, Andreas, Lobitz, Rebecca, Gross, Eva Maria (2010): Krisenbedingte Kündigung der Gleichwertigkeit, in:
Heitmeyer, Wilhelm (Hrsg.), Deutsche Zustände Folge 8, S. 78, Berlin (hier Grafik aus SZ vom 4.12.2009)
Germany has a well developed social
security system
Social security in Germany is expensive
Social budget in 2010 rd. 761 billion Euros
= 30.4 % of the GDP (Sozialleistungsquote)
Abbildung: eigene Darstellung
(Quelle: Sozialbudget 2010, www.bmas.de)
Germany protects gainful employment: The
security system is concentrated
(1) on regular employment,
(2) on providing cash benefits (pensions,
unemployment benefits) and
(3) preserves the income situation of the labour
market (principle of equivalence)
Conclusion: For structural reason the system
doesn‘t prevent poverty.
Translation:
Zeitarbeit = time work
geringfügig = mini jobs = less than
400 Euro per month
befristet = temporary work
♂
♀
in Teilzeit = part time work
“High overall unemployment, the low employment levels of some
groups, labour market segmentation, facilitating reconciliation of work
and family life and flexible working, as well as insufficient active
inclusion measures emerge as the main challenges that Member
States identify as needing to be addressed to create inclusive labour
markets. A wide range of policy actions and measures are proposed
to address these issues. A particular concern is the low employment
levels of some groups - older workers, low-qualified, migrants,
disabled and young people.” (p. 5)
“It is striking that many of the measures (…) generally focus more on
encouraging people to take up work through activation measures
(often coupled with an increased emphasis on sanctions and
conditionality) rather than on increasing the availability of decent
quality jobs. (…), there is very little attention given to tackling the
issues of labour market segmentation, low pay and high earnings
inequality.” (p. 6)
83 per cent of children living in an
„academic“ household start to study.
23 per cent of the children living in an „nonacademic“ household start to study.
Quelle: Statistisches Bundesamt, Sonderauswertungen Mikrozensus 2001 und 2005; HIS Studienanfängerbefragung
2005 aus: BMAS (Hg.) 2008: 3. Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht der Bundesregierung S. 58 - 70
7
Prof. Dr. Jürgen Boeckh, FB Sozialwesen
8
1. The economic restriction
2. The political restriction
3. The legal und institutional restriction
4. The instrumental restriction
5. The social restriction
6. The supranational restriction
„In any European welfare state these six restrictions will influence the
question if the complete ÜBERWINDUNG of poverty and social
exclusion will be an illusion or not. Or BESCHEIDENER: Up to which
extent poverty and social exclusion could be reduced.“ (Hauser, Richard
2010: 37)
Tabelle
Overall Employment Rate - Erwerbstätigenquote*)
Insgesamt
Jahr
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
%
Deutschland
65,5
67,2
69,0
70,1
70,3
71,1
Früheres Bundesgebiet (ohne
Berlin)
66,6
68,1
69,7
70,7
70,6
71,2
Neue Bundesländer
(inkl. Berlin)
61,3
63,5
66,1
67,9
69,2
70,7
Nachrichtlich
Quelle: http://www.amtliche-sozialberichterstattung.de/D5erwerbstaetigenquote.html; own compilation
*) Anteil der Erwerbstätigen im Alter von 15 bis unter 65 Jahren an der Bevölkerung derselben Altersgruppe. Die Quote bezieht sich auf Personen
Tabelle
Employment rate by gender ratio*)
Insgesamt
Jahr
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
70,1
70,3
71,1
%
Deutschland
65,5
67,2
69,0
Männer
Gesamtdeutschland
71,3
72,8
74,7
75,8
75,4
76,0
West
Ost
73,3
63,5
74,6
66,0
76,2
68,9
77,2
70,7
76,4
71,4
76,8
73,0
Frauen
59,6
61,5
63,2
64,3
65,2
Gesamtdeutschland
Quelle: http://www.amtliche-sozialberichterstattung.de/D5erwerbstaetigenquote.html;
West
59,7
61,6
63,2
64,2
64,7
Ost
58,9
61,0
63,2
65,0
66,9
66,1
own
compilation
65,6
68,3
Average: 37,28 %
3 % treshold
economic growth in 2010: 3.7 per cent
economic growth 2000 – 2010 (average: 1.16 per cent)
The average net income decreased
by 2.4 per cent since 2000
Especially in the low income section
the employed lost more than a fith
of their real net income (inflation
rate included)
In the high income section there is a
small increase of 0.8 per cent.
Prof. Dr. Jürgen Boeckh, FB Sozialwesen
14
Employment
Subsidies by relatives
Pension system
Unemployment benefits
Any other sources
Prof. Dr. Jürgen Boeckh, FB Sozialwesen
16