10 ms·
Ah, interesting. In the Netherlands it was different and there was an opposite effect, actually I moved out to support my parents. Because my dad was dependent
by IkmoIkmo 5y ago
Ah, interesting. In the Netherlands it was different and there was an opposite effect, actually I moved out to support my parents.
Because my dad was dependent on the state (disability) he received a supplemental income to get his living standard to the absolute legal minimum (set at 70% of minimum wage) that all Dutch citizens have a right to regardless of circumstance.
However, the government assumes that if there's say 4 people living in one home, that they're a household that can share certain costs, e.g. rent, heating, furniture etc. This means the minimum living standard can be attained with less money, so they cut your benefits. The more adults there are, the higher the discount. As I aged from a kid to a young adult, living at home meant his income was cut.
Second, any income that the household makes (e.g. from my job), would be cut from his benefits, as we shared a household. e.g. if I earned 500 euros, he'd get 500 euros less.
This meant that to live at home, a large portion of my minimum wage earnings (parttime, next to my studies) would go simply to make up for the cuts to my dad's benefits. Minimum wage is about 1500 here, so working a 33% job would net me 0 euros as the entire 500 went to my dad who got cut from 900 to 400 due to my job.
It's a weird system that definitely is grounded in some sound logic, but also creates edge cases that aren't creating useful outcomes. It pushed me out of the house, into an expensive housing market, left my dad (who wasn't very healthy) alone in a house, that also happened to be a social home that now has empty bedrooms. It also could've pushed me to quit my job as there was no real incentive in the short-term to work, but I knew long-term it wasn't viable.