The “spartan luxury lifestyle” of an alg ii recipient

Text anonymized, people confused – Part 2

A rule set, which nobody in this high knows

As in Part 1: text anonymized, people described confused, one in the paper has "The world" published an article that describes the "spartan luxury lifestyle" of an ALG II-Empfangerin is to document, irritates. He does this, among other things, because the figures and the way in which z.B. the account extracts were represented, did not appear coherent.

Corresponding reactions to the newspaper article were not lacking. Thus kopperschlaeger notes in addition.net:

Here simply nothing at all is correct! The day of posting is always the last day of the previous month (except for mishaps and delays), since the law states that the standard benefit must be available to the recipient on the first day of the month. If, for example, the first day of a month is on a Monday, the credit is usually made on the preceding Friday. Also the rule set amount in your pamphlet does not correspond to the current rule set of 382 euro, was allowed thus hardly from 01.03.2013 its.

The same goes for the allegedly separate display of standard rate and rent: this is also not the case in online banking at any bank I know of, since only the total amount of standard rate and KdU (costs of accommodation = rent plus heating costs) is displayed….

Also the Friday author Harald Blumenau settles the documentation in the area of the "iMarchen" and accuses the world of the "Campaign journalism".

To counter the growing suspicions that the text was a made-up story, the "World" offered another chat with Susanne Muller.

In fact irritates already at the beginning the indicated rule set in height of 372 euro monthly. Since as booking day the 01.03.2013, the current standard rates for single persons are to be applied, which means that Susanne Muller had to receive 382 euros. A sanction is neither mentioned in the text, nor would it be conclusive, since this would result in a higher amount than 10 euros even in the first stage.

However, the fact that she does not cut corners is one of the aspects emphasized in the text, because Ms. Muller’s efforts are aimed at not noticing that she is not actually trying to find employment, but rather that she is investing time and effort in more or less subtly convincing her employer that she is unsuitable. So where did the missing 10 euros disappear to??

Anonymizing data is not really an easy job

The riddle’s solution is understandably simple: according to the author, the standard rate, as well as other data, was changed in order to protect Susanne Muller’s identity. For this, not only the name was changed, as indicated at the end of the text, but also the data that could lead to an identification and thus to a prosecution. to an identification and thus to a pursuit by the responsible authority, were adapted. However, the text omits one hint of it.

This shows that anonymizing data is not really an easy job, because on the one hand, care must be taken that the change in the data does not lead to the story behind it being doubted per se, and on the other hand, of course, all data must be adjusted accordingly. It is not clear from the text that the data itself has been changed, nor in which area, or in which way. whether the relations would be kept.

The result is a constant irritation among readers. Also the argumentation that even the standard rate in its height must be changed, convinces little, because over the fact that Mrs. Muller lives alone, which was written in the text of the more often clearly, from the standard rate for singles still nothing comes out.

This change of the standard rate, especially at the beginning of the text, bears the danger that critical readers will doubt the report itself. Because if here 10 euros was finally corrected downwards, how is it with the other data in the text? Does the mentioned haircut really cost 15 Euro and is there a hairdresser Yilmaz?? Is there the "Cafe Morgenrot", on which Mrs. Muller, as on every day on which she receives the ALG II money, eats breakfast before she gets her hair cut by Yilmaz? Or is it, since this could also offer conclusions about Mrs. Muller’s true identity, rather a synonym for a fit body?? How high is the price of breakfast really?? Has the rent been corrected and if so, in which direction??

All these are questions, which are not treated in the text or in notes to the text and therefore the intention of the text, to want to present here only an alternative life plan, appear questionable.

Carefree

The "World" The chat, which was supposed to give Mrs. Muller half an hour to prove that Susanne Muller really exists (which is absurd in the end, since another person could have been sitting at the keyboard), and to give some more insight into her feelings and thoughts, did not lead to much.

When asked whether she is not ultimately cheating in order to remain in the reference for so long despite her lack of real efforts to gain employment, she answers:

Of course it is not possible without trickery. It can be seen as a form of fraud, but since I do not cheat individuals, I do not feel bad about it.

Whether she is a role model? "No, in fact I have never thought about it before. But now that you ask, I could imagine that I might be encouraging people to risk quitting "

Susanne Muller is remarkably unconcerned about her future and any emergencies that may arise. So the risk that electrical equipment could be defective and need to be replaced is not really a cause for concern for her.

If I am honest, I am not afraid, because I have good brand devices, and they are only four years old. And if I do, I have to donate blood or plasma more often.

Here it shows up then also that this carelessness only by a previous rough financial cushion as well as also special possibilities, which z.B. will be open only to certain people. Susanne Muller had, as the article informs, 30.000 euros, which it then used up within three years. In this respect, too, the text leaves questions unanswered, because although she already quit her job in October 2004 and had used up her savings after three years, it remains that she emphasizes her ten-year Hartz IV phase in her applications. The Hartz IV phase is used here as a synonym for the phase without gainful employment? The time of benefit receipt cannot be meant, since this only approx. 6 years.

The text is confusing in this respect – although a "alternative life plan" The documentary is meant to be a portrayal of a person who is in control of his desires and needs, but because of the anonymization, which is not done in a recognizable and transparent way, as well as the linguistic portrayal of life, it is not clear if the documentary was really meant to be so neutral.

Mrs. Muller’s comment concerning the chat, in which she thanks the discussion participants, seems then also somewhat suffisant to cynical. While they are themselves or. Although Ms. Muller sees her life as lazy, impudent and free, she obviously could not imagine that others also live similarly, do not have some of their opportunities thanks to ALG II or even do not pursue gainful employment for other reasons: "I would like to thank all readers for the numerous contributions to the discussion, even though this was done in your working hours."

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.