Majority of Germans for the radical reform of Hartz IV

Hartz IV – to date, the basic safety introduced in 2002 is very controversial in Germany. The SPD wants to abolish them – just like the majority of Germans.

In the SPD, this is the main attraction for years: the Grundsicherung Hartz IV, whose leaders want to overcome controversies since the introduction of unemployment insurance in the foreseeable future. Party leader Andrea Nahles recently called for a "welfare state reform in 2025" and announced: "We will leave Hartz IV behind us".

With the majority of German citizens, it meets with approval. According to a representative survey conducted by the Civey Opinion Research Institute for the information portal t-online.de, about 53% of Germans would like a fundamental reform of Hartz IV, and about 34% would be even very happy.

In contrast, about 37% said they wanted to keep Hartz IV in its current form. A good 9% were undecided on the issue. Young people in particular support the call for radical reform. Two-thirds of young people aged 18 to 29 voted in favor. Most of the opponents of the reform belonged to the group of 65 and over.

Radical reform of social legislation was encouraged, particularly in the new federal states. About 60% supported this request and 31% rejected it. In the old Länder, just over 50% were in favor of a radical reform of Hartz IV and around 40% opposed it.

Significant deviations have been observed among supporters of the various parties. While supporters of the Union and the FDP were clearly in favor of maintaining Hartz IV – about 61 and 57% – rejected supporters of the SPD, the Greens (about 67%) and in particular the Left (a little less than 87%), an extension of the current Hartz. -IV regulations decided to. Supporters of reform (just under 48%) and opponents (around 40%) maintained balance almost in the AfD.

The Civey polling institute surveyed 5,086 people online for this representative survey from 20 to 27 November: "Should the unemployment benefit II called" Hartz IV "be maintained in its current form or be fundamentally changed? ? "