The new plan of the Ministry of Welfare to redefine subsidies

According to Mehr news agency, government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani wrote in a note in Iran newspaper: “The structure and system defined in subsidizing tithes needs to be changed after a decade. Because the economic and social indicators have changed and the indicators of the last decade cannot be used to measure the financial ability of people in the society. Therefore, the Ministry of Cooperatives has been obliged to define these indicators to identify people who have high financial ability so that they can be excluded from the process of receiving subsidies. But with what logic does this happen?

An important fact for all governments is that their resources are not unlimited. In addition to the limited resources of the governments, the cash subsidy payment mechanism has been established in all the governments of the world with the aim of supporting the society. Based on These two facts, it is necessary to protect as much as possible from the damage the most acceptable The community section should take place. This view is different from the approach of providing equal subsidy to all society.

Two families three no one consider Both families live in a deprived area and have a monthly income of 3 to 6 million Tomans. The first family remained in the same place and the second family moved to get better job opportunities and in other conditions to work Two family members are provided for them. With this change, the income of this family will increase to 20 to 30 million Tomans. Naturally, the second family must inevitably lose a part of these incomes in order to maintain their job opportunities. Expenses such as transportation and housing rent, which were not much for this family in their primary residence. In this situation, the subsidy of 350 thousand tomans is approximately 5 to 10 percent of the income of the first family. But for the second family, it is less than 2%. Now you are supposed to divide your limited resources between these two families. Here three thoughts are opposed to each other. The first thought believes that the government has nothing to do with supporting these families. From the point of view of these people, this is an example of the government's interference in society and the market, and it should not do this. The result of this thinking leads to the widening of “inequality” in the society. The second thinking believes that limited resources should be paid equally to everyone. From the point of view of this thinking, justice means “equality”. This egalitarian thinking, in practice in communist societies with failure and collapse opposite turned Because it did not consider the reality of limited government resources and did not pay attention to the fact that in this approach what happens in practice is the distribution of poverty.

But the third thinking believes that the government should provide the most support to those who are more vulnerable. According to this thinking, among the two hypothetical families discussed here, government support for the first family can lead to a significant improvement in his quality of life, but the same support will not have much effect on the second family. This situation can be seen in larger dimensions.

No government can claim to eradicate poverty completely. The resources and facilities of no government are enough to economically lift the poor as much as the most prosperous part of the society. On this basis, the effort of the 14th government is to reduce “the percentage of inequality” and “the amount of inequality”. For this purpose, the Ministry of Cooperation, Labor and Social Welfare currently Compilation is a mechanism rather than through “examination.” wideAnd relying on the tools and technologies that are available to us today, the society should set a more precise goal for government support. Therefore, 6 indicators have been defined Based on Those decimals reset and those with higher incomes are excluded from receiving subsidies so that the government can provide more assistance to the victims the most acceptable The community sector should provide.

The long-standing Iranian society has also shown that if it is confident, the money and charity credits it pays (or the benefits it loses) will go to the hands of individuals. more needy The society will come, it will definitely participate and accompany in this work.