-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add reported but unmodelled benefits #14
Conversation
Also added poverty measures (absolute and relative) with references. |
@@ -50,16 +50,33 @@ class family_net_income(Variable): | |||
definition_period = ETERNITY | |||
|
|||
def formula(family, period, parameters): | |||
benefits = [ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
benefits = [ | |
BENEFITS = [ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@@ -50,16 +50,33 @@ class family_net_income(Variable): | |||
definition_period = ETERNITY | |||
|
|||
def formula(family, period, parameters): | |||
benefits = [ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could family_net_income
and total_benefit_value
live somewhere outside the reform directories to be more accessible?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah yeah, that's definitely a good solution - was thinking of something similar because with the current way is a bit inelegant to redefine in reforms.
This adds input variables for all other weekly benefits in the FRS, such as Severe Disability Allowance, Maternity Allowance and more bespoke benefits. Also, the linting has been set at 79 characters per line.