Woman bakes cakes to pay back social benefits

it’s not, our system is really discouraging for people on government subsidies to try anything at all. family member of mine is on subsidies because he’s been “afgekeurd” due to a chronic illness. now he has to be extremely secretive if he does anything for someone that gets him any sort of money (like doing some painting, or repair work, it’s smth he enjoys and people know his income is very limited so will offer to pay a bit for it— cannot stress enough that this is a little amount, not even hitting 100 i’d say and it’s a very rare occurrence). he’s been “reprimanded” for it before, so he’s pretty scared to try and pick up any sort of side-job to stay active in society. it kills social interactions as well, it’s hard to build connections if everything you do and everywhere you go is being scrutinized.

on top of that, if he manages to save some extra money and wants to get some takeout for us, or go have a drink with someone, the person he’s doing it for will get triple warned to not tell anyone because he’s scared his subsidies will be limited if he’s spotted doing something “extra”.

it’s honestly dehumanizing. i understand completely there needs to be a line and that the country can’t afford to give subsidies to people who are working, but it creates a pretty terrible environment for people who are unable to work to sustain themselves but would like to participate in society still.

If you are on welfare, you're not allowed to accept groceries from friends or family. This is also considered as income, you have to report it as such. Basically, feeding someone who's poor and hungry is not gonna help the person at all. My brain exploded. Make laws that will actually help the society, this is not it. It will also not help to 'catch criminals'.

Social benefits can be very hard to navigate here. I myself are currently 12k in debt at uwv for making too much next to my benefits. I should have communicated better about how much I was working but I just didn’t have the energy left for that after working.

I know it sounds stupid but I do have a real brain injury, it’s very hard to deal with agencies like uwv on your own:(

The title of this post is either a wrong interpretation of the article or a misunderstanding.

The woman made cakes as a hobby, because she did so she is forced to pay back the social security money she received because the municipality states she could have made money from this and see this as some sort of a job that could have generated money.

She is not ordered to bake cakes to pay back the money, she is ordered to pay back the money because she bakes cakes.

In the Netherlands we do have social welfare to catch people if they fall, but it causes people to end up in the "poverty trap" if you're in it for too long.

What I mean is that the rules discourage and/or disallow ANYTHING that could make you money or improve your position on the job market; the only thing you're basically allowed to do is apply for jobs.

So... you have an almost-finished education (unfinished for whatever reason) that would take another half a year or year of schooling, netting you a diploma and thus increasing the chance to get a job by tenfold? Who cares. If you're in school, you could also work, so you're not allowed to go to school.

You have a hobby you're good at... like carpenting or wood turning? Why shouldn't you create, repair or restore furniture and then sell it, and if it goes really well, you turn it into a business? Touch luck. If you can do that, you could also work, so you're not allowed to do it.

In the Netherlands, if you're on welfare, the only thing you're allowed to do in many municipalities is sit on your arse and send out job applications. Anything else, and you're "working" or "doing activities that could be treated as work and thus have monetary value", which is not allowed when you're on welfare.

That's called the poverty trap: you're in a poor situation, but you get discouraged or disallowed to try and improve that situation.

The same thing is when you get subsidies such as rent susidy or healthcare subsidy when earning a low wage: it could be that, if you switch jobs and you earn more, your extra earnings will be less than the subsidy you're going to lose, which will put you in a financially WORSE position than you were before, even though you work more hours or get better pay. This effectively discourages people to try and improve, because to improve you'll have to go backwards first, which many people can't afford.

The system is like a socio-economic prison. People who struggle can't have any savings or make any attempt to dig themselves out the hole without being punished for it. It seems designed to make people give up on life completely rather than encourage them to get back on their feet.

Next is the one who does gardening and gives some tomatoes to the neighbours!

It is also considered a commercial activity and people should not do the gardening and have their own veggies.

This is a strange situation indeed and I personally think it's inhumane that they are forcing her to repay the fictitious 'overpayment' made to her, on the basis that she made a cake every few days and didn't sell them... but could have sold them in theory.

If my understanding is correct, she would've had to repay benefits if she had helped out some friends with plumbing problems in their apartments too right? In theory, she could charge them for those activities, even if she actually only helped out as a friend.

17k of benefits in 5 years? How can you live on that alone?

I think the government is run by people living in a bubble so they don't get to experience any of the struggles they should find a solution for, that's why most of the solutions are half assed and clearly lacking empathy.

Welfare should be there to give people a chance to 1) guarantee minimal living standards and 2) to encourage people to come to the economy. If aperson on welfare wants go be productive that's great! People on welfare that earn money doing things they enjoy even for 1 day a week or less should be celebrated! I can bet my left kidney that the total abated costs of health issues due to sedentarism + mental health costs of having depression due to being at home feeling useless, are way higher than whatever the government wants to tax them or decrease their welfare payments with.

Another example that irritates me a lot is: there are so many small towns with almost zero public transport, so everyone has to have a car. If you have limited mobility then it means youre fucked? How do blind people in small towns get to work? Do they work at all? What about people in wheelchairs? Are people in small towns not allowed to have a disability? We shouldn't design our public transport based on the average user only; we should also consider the most vulnerable users.

As someone said (George Carlin?): decrease the salaries of the politicians and you will see how quickly they change things.

I think her municipality shouldn’t pursuit her to the end and drive her to corner since she is receiving social welfare and now she has debts over 17k, there was chance her municipality could encourage to find jobs since she is talented with baking cakes. She will be always stuck in social welfare so in the end, it cost municipality money anyway with her new debts now, discouraging to find job. She can say now immerse pressure and stress due 17k debts and psychological problems.

If you have bijstand, there are a couple of rules you should adhere to, like informing them of 'professional hobbies', like baking hundreds of cakes and receiving money for them (even if you don't make a profit).

And if you can bake cakes on this scale, chances are you could find a reliable source of income as well.

Our country and their overly detailed laws… there are real abuses of welfare; maybe go after those instead of this type of bullshit. But yeah, people should learn not to post their lives on social media; nothing good can come of it.

What bothers me most about his is that it's a hobby and they assume it has a potential to make money... IMO it only has potential to make money, if someone is willing to hire you at the moment of that claim the welfare office made.

Probably everyone in the "bijstand" in the Netherlands can also prostitute him/herself as well. I'm waiting for the day they tell welfare recipients to sell their organs, because those are assets... (/s.....just for clarity)

The "sociale dienst" just as the UWV, make way too many assumptions, and "assume" that everything can be turned into a commercial enterprise and you can earn money... even if it's not even close to the amount to live on. There exists this idea that it's about work, but actually, it should be about having a liveable monthly income. An employee from the sociale dienst once told me I had to get out of the bijstand, but he acknowledged I could only work 2 hours a week. In theory; if someone would pay me 150 euro an hour, i would not need government support; but that's so hypothetical. If you're also disabled, and have no relevant education, such a wage is a pipedream.

But, go ahead, ask back 17k, and let someone get in financial trouble. Go homeless... being homeless costs more than a monthly bijstand payment for the local government. And I'm not even considering the long term damage. I was homeless a few years ago... lived in a shelter, that cost the city about 5k a month (bijstand and subsidies to pay for my stay in the shelter), so they wnated me out and in a regular apartment ASAP; which was a lot cheaper. Now I just cost them bijstand (and the national government other "toeslagen"). Heck, go to jail... costs the state more than 200 a day...

What, IMO, would be the just thing to do, is give a reasonable fine... 17k is not reasonable (even if it's a total over 5 years; should've spotted it earlier, not pile it up, a lot of people won't properly recover from this kind of fine, especially not if you have welfare or are at that level of income), and set this woman up for a program to make a trade out of her hobby, so she can get out of the bijstand, earn money, get back on her feet, pay back a reasonable fine, and move on with her life.

The reasoning given by court is very weird-

According to the court, the question is not whether recipients paid for the cakes, but whether the labor of baking cakes represents an economic value in society. “In other words, the question is whether, in society, compensation can be negotiated for personalized cakes. The court is of the opinion that this is the case.”

So if I am doing an activity of cooking day in day out that also has an economic value, Cleaning my house every day has a economic value etc etc

Despite the merit of the case, OP you aren’t strong at reading comprehension and understanding of the content. You title is very USA

Difficult to prove indeed but it just looks like they made tax free money

They should cut benefits as they see it as a problem and nstead of wasting money on investigators. This is inconsistent.

They should apply the same strictness for social housing.

I believe she should informed them about her decision before hand.

This could have been handled better, but the behaviour of the woman in question is not acceptable. Everyone that ever ordered a custom cake, knows these are not cheap. They are expensive cause it takes someone considerable manual labor to make such a cake.

So the people who ordered a cake from this woman, might have ordered this cake from an actual bakery doing the same thing. That bakery would have paid someone to do it (creating jobs), added VAT,... basically creating economic activity.

But now the government has been paying for someone to make the cakes. I'm very far from a free market capitalist, but I don't think that's something the government should be doing?

If this woman is so good at making cakes, she should have set up her own company, or get a job at a bakery.

Baking hundreds of cakes but still cashing in social benefits on the backs of taxpayers. Yeah no. I rather see that money go to people who actually need it.

Fair. You could also argue that people can game the system by going on welfare and earning on the side. Agree with comments that she should have been transparent with her actions.

Government welfare doesn't get people out of poverty, rather it keeps them poor.

If you have these baking skills and the client base: Why didn’t she go pro a couple of years ago and make herself an income? Perhaps this could have stopped her need for welfare. Win for everyone: the municipality, the taxpayers and of course herself.

If someone is trying to create a source of income that allows them to contribute to their country and society by not being purely dependent on the state, I think is a good thing.

Is it though? Her benefits are paid by taxes. By selling cakes she generated income over which she did not pay any taxes. The same taxes that allow her benefits to exist.

This kind of money for someone that clearly doesn’t have a reliable source of income is devastating.

Benefits actually are a reliable source of income. She knew the rules, fucked around, and found out.

Depands.. It she is not disabled or anything she could have gotten a job to make cakes somewhere.. if she can put hours and hours of time in baking she can also put those hours in some kind of work. Maybe I sound harsh but I know enough people that work secretly and collect welfare or Wahjong (don't know the correct translation). It's a bit of a thing nowadays because I hear other people talking about the same thing with people they know. And they aaaalways just call it a hobby.. I had one friend that worked outside her welfare as well and made a bit of money, but she was in an accident and het 'brain' could shut off, don't know how to say this, but half het face would start hanging and then she needed to lie down. For her I don't mind because making creative things was her oxigen ever since I knew here. She was actually stuck while wanting to make something of herself. It the cake lady is the same they should let her be.

Great!!! Finally some good news