welt.de
German Parental Allowance Loses 38% Purchasing Power Since 2007
A study by the Institute of the German Economy (IW) reveals that Germany's parental allowance (Elterngeld) has lost 38 percent of its purchasing power since 2007 due to uncompensated inflation, impacting the middle class and exceeding a broken governmental promise to adjust the allowance.
- What is the extent of the Elterngeld's loss in purchasing power since 2007, and what are the immediate consequences for German families?
- The German parental allowance (Elterngeld) has lost 38 percent of its purchasing power since its introduction in 2007, according to a study by the Institute of the German Economy (IW). This is due to inflation, which has not been compensated for. The minimum monthly payment of €300 has remained unchanged, while the IW calculates it should be €413 to maintain its original value.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of the declining value of the Elterngeld, and what systemic changes are needed to address this issue?
- The continued erosion of the Elterngeld's value highlights a systemic issue in Germany's social welfare system. The lack of inflation adjustments, coupled with reduced eligibility thresholds, will likely exacerbate income inequality and disproportionately impact families with moderate to higher incomes. The government's broken promise to adjust the allowance points towards a weakening commitment to social support.
- How does the government's failure to adjust the Elterngeld for inflation affect different income groups, and what are the broader implications for social welfare?
- The IW study reveals that the decline in the Elterngeld's purchasing power disproportionately affects the middle class. The maximum monthly payment of €1800 should be €2480 to compensate for inflation. The government's failure to adjust the allowance reflects a broader trend of insufficient inflation adjustments for social benefits.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The headline and introduction immediately emphasize the significant loss of purchasing power of Elterngeld. This framing sets a negative tone and predisposes the reader to view the program unfavorably. The article primarily focuses on the negative aspects, reinforcing this negative perception. The sequencing of information places the criticisms early on, influencing reader interpretation.
Language Bias
The language used is generally neutral, but the repeated emphasis on "Verluste" (losses) and "Kürzungen" (cuts) contributes to the negative framing. Phrases like "deutlich weniger wert" (significantly less valuable) are loaded and could be replaced with more neutral descriptions. Suggesting that the Elterngeld must "rise" to compensate for inflation rather than stating the current situation as the program's purchasing power being lower could be more neutral.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the reduction in the purchasing power of Elterngeld, but omits discussion of potential counterarguments or positive aspects of the program. It doesn't explore alternative solutions or government perspectives on why adjustments weren't made sooner or the reasoning behind the changes to income limits. The lack of diverse viewpoints could limit a reader's understanding of the complexities surrounding Elterngeld.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the issue solely as a loss of purchasing power without considering other relevant factors that might influence the effectiveness or fairness of the Elterngeld system. It implicitly suggests that inflation adjustments are the only solution, neglecting other potential policy changes.
Gender Bias
The article uses gender-neutral language ("Mütter und Väter"), avoiding explicit gender bias. However, the focus is on the economic impact, neglecting potential gendered effects on childcare responsibilities or career choices that might result from the Elterngeld changes.
Sustainable Development Goals
The study reveals a significant loss in the purchasing power of parental allowance (Elterngeld) in Germany since its introduction in 2007. This reduction disproportionately affects middle-class families and those with lower incomes, potentially pushing them closer to poverty. The fact that the minimum monthly allowance of €300 has remained unchanged since 2007, while inflation has eroded its value, exacerbates this issue. The reduction in the upper income limit for eligibility further restricts access to this crucial support for families.