Apart from the obvious humanitarian benefit, higher social welfare rates have helped to sustain consumer expenditure and the local economy and are probably also a factor in the fact that social unrest hasn't been more widespread in response to the doubling/tripling of unemployment rates. Less well off people spend a greater proportion of their income on locally produced goods and services and so this is a much more efficient (as well as progressive) form of economic stimulus than tax cuts for the better off would be.
The huge pressure on public expenditure (with 5 Billion in cuts planned) will also put pressure on unemployment benefits rates - especial with inflation running at -5% - but politically it will be almost impossible to cut benefits at a time when we are considering bailing out the banks to the tune of up to 90 Billion.
However the Government may well fall and the current fiscal position is unsustainable, so there are going to be huge pressures and battles ahead... notes from no w here
The huge pressure on public expenditure (with 5 Billion in cuts planned) will also put pressure on unemployment benefits rates
Hokey-dokey.
Local job losses translate into loss of local purchasing power leading to a loss of government revenue so let's cut the money flowing to unemployment benefits and cut local purchasing power even more.
Does ANYBODY even remotely associated with ANY government understand dynamic systems?