>Het grote probleem zijn de inactieven, dat zijn mensen tussen de 25 en 64 die niet werken en ook geen job zoeken. Voor de duidelijkheid: inactieven zijn een andere groep dan de werklozen. Werklozen zoeken een job, inactieven niet. Het kan hier gaan om ontmoedigde werklozen (die ook geen uitkering meer krijgen), huismannen en -vrouwen, langdurig zieken, studenten of mensen die al voor hun 64 met pensioen zijn.
How tf do these people manage to live? I can’t imagine there are so many lottery winners.
>According to the researchers, the solution to the problem consists of reforms in the labor market. Work should yield more, they think. “In our country, for every 100 euros that a boss pays for a single person, 53 euros goes to the state treasury, compared to 35 euros in the Netherlands.
For so many “independent experts”, economists and researchers, lowering taxes is always the ultimate wildcard solution for any problem. They forget to mention that super riches and corporations can dodge the taxes and pay, in proportion, less than half of a normal worker, or that 1 billion EUR is evaded each day to tax havens in Belgium…
And, if there is so many long term sick here in Belgium, maybe the government should enforce that companies comply with the law regarding working conditions.
I hope that the Work Inspectorate is not as *”efficient”* controlling well-being work conditions as they control the sulfur from Arcelor Mittal in Ghent.
Maybe researching and controlling work conditions, accidents or industrial sickness, Belgium could be in a better level of “inactive” people…
AI will automate 300 million jobs. Belgian governement, hmm let’s force more people to work…
I hate how they frame this as a problem only. It’s not like stay-at-home moms or dads don’t contribute anything to society. And not every person in their early sixties is capable of starting a new (meaningful) job. There will always be a significant part of the population that doesn’t have a (paid) job, voluntarily or not. Making it more worthwhile to work is one solution. But we will also need to ensure that the services those “inactive” people provide now (daycare, medical care, housekeeping) are still available (and affordable) as well.
I would totally stay at home too if I could afford it! No hate towards those people.
1% of people owns 25% of wealth. What is the most concerning fact ?
I personally know people with a chronic illness that would love to work a few days per week BUT they lose money when they work. So for them it is better to stay home and do some volunteer work. Quick explanation: stay home = full uitkering. Go to work a few days: partial uitkering + loon – transportkost – extra belast. The goal of working is to earn more, not to have less. So they don’t work.
Perhaps huismannen and huisvrouwen should be excluded.
8 comments
>Het grote probleem zijn de inactieven, dat zijn mensen tussen de 25 en 64 die niet werken en ook geen job zoeken. Voor de duidelijkheid: inactieven zijn een andere groep dan de werklozen. Werklozen zoeken een job, inactieven niet. Het kan hier gaan om ontmoedigde werklozen (die ook geen uitkering meer krijgen), huismannen en -vrouwen, langdurig zieken, studenten of mensen die al voor hun 64 met pensioen zijn.
How tf do these people manage to live? I can’t imagine there are so many lottery winners.
>According to the researchers, the solution to the problem consists of reforms in the labor market. Work should yield more, they think. “In our country, for every 100 euros that a boss pays for a single person, 53 euros goes to the state treasury, compared to 35 euros in the Netherlands.
For so many “independent experts”, economists and researchers, lowering taxes is always the ultimate wildcard solution for any problem. They forget to mention that super riches and corporations can dodge the taxes and pay, in proportion, less than half of a normal worker, or that 1 billion EUR is evaded each day to tax havens in Belgium…
And, if there is so many long term sick here in Belgium, maybe the government should enforce that companies comply with the law regarding working conditions.
I hope that the Work Inspectorate is not as *”efficient”* controlling well-being work conditions as they control the sulfur from Arcelor Mittal in Ghent.
Maybe researching and controlling work conditions, accidents or industrial sickness, Belgium could be in a better level of “inactive” people…
AI will automate 300 million jobs. Belgian governement, hmm let’s force more people to work…
I hate how they frame this as a problem only. It’s not like stay-at-home moms or dads don’t contribute anything to society. And not every person in their early sixties is capable of starting a new (meaningful) job. There will always be a significant part of the population that doesn’t have a (paid) job, voluntarily or not. Making it more worthwhile to work is one solution. But we will also need to ensure that the services those “inactive” people provide now (daycare, medical care, housekeeping) are still available (and affordable) as well.
I would totally stay at home too if I could afford it! No hate towards those people.
1% of people owns 25% of wealth. What is the most concerning fact ?
I personally know people with a chronic illness that would love to work a few days per week BUT they lose money when they work. So for them it is better to stay home and do some volunteer work. Quick explanation: stay home = full uitkering. Go to work a few days: partial uitkering + loon – transportkost – extra belast. The goal of working is to earn more, not to have less. So they don’t work.
Perhaps huismannen and huisvrouwen should be excluded.