With that in mind, you can design a system so that it's lenient - allowing more people to pass through it, including those that shouldn't - or so that it's strict - preventing anyone who has even the slightest whiff of dodginess from achieving success.
How would you design yours?
I would rather have a welfare system that
Gave 0% extra money, 5% get less than they should
0(0.0%)
Gave 1% extra money, 4% get less than they should
0(0.0%)
Gave 2% extra money, 3% get less than they should
0(0.0%)
Gave 3% extra money, 2% get less than they should
2(2.7%)
Gave 4% extra money, 1% get less than they should
6(8.0%)
Gave 5% extra money, 0% get less than they should
67(89.3%)
(In real life, of course, getting down to an "extra payouts of 0%" probably means that more than 5% wouldn't get their money. And vice versa. The closer to "perfection" you get, the harder it becomes to move that extra step.)
Context: Thinking about this comment.
