Economic babysitting

I was reading the paper about the opposition´s budget presentation the other day. Now the 3 parties vary a bit on the severity of the taxation scale, but summarised they all want less taxreliefs for people that earn over a certain amount and more money for those who are ill, unemployed, retired or in education.
I find it pretty hard to argue against that.. But our minister of finance, dear conservative Anders Borg sounds like an old scratched vinyl when he for the umpteenth time comments that that sort of support to the less fortunate in society will only weaken the incentive to work!
Has he ever peaked in to a check from the dole office??? They could double it and any wage would still make it worth working. Does he really think that we like teenagers would skip school just because we can get away with it, that just because it would become bearable to admit we sometimes fall ill would start calling in sick every other day? I´m convinced most people like to be useful, and urely the general idea of a welfare nation is that as many as possible should be able to get an education that allows them to get a job that they actually enjoy doing? Does he himself have some little leprechaun from the Moderate party who chases him out of bed and off to the office every morning?
It makes me think a little of China´s one child policy. Studies show that the threat of severe penalties if the singular kid gets a sibling, is far less effective than to simply educate the women (A.Sen, 2001, Development as freedom).
Certainly some people get stuck in a rut, and others might not need sick benefits if they got help to train in to something different. But to take away all means to lead a decent life BEFORE anyone has seen any of these fancy actions is just like pulling the plug before you pour in the water.
We´ve grown up. Babysitter can go home.