Sure, people on social benefits don't get hugely rich. The urban legends about asylum seekers' benefits have been rather inflated. But what is wrong here, if anything?
I think it is quite natural that we can't arrange a good or even an average personal income for people who may be
- unable to speak local languages
- often illiterate (in Finland, literacy a basic requirement for any job whatsoever, in this sense there are no "entry level jobs")
- unable to leave home due to cultural restrictions and traditions
- even if able to leave home and able to speak local languages, unable to communicate with persons of opposite sex who are not family members, due to cultural restrictions and traditions
What is the income injustice - or actually any relevant newsworthiness - here?
We can't fix this by increasing benefits. We may be able to do something to it by offering language and other training, and by rescuing those who are kept as house-slaves against their will or who are otherwise exploited. And to do that, we'd need to drop some politically correct assumptions about who is oppressing who. A hint: this time, the oppressor isn't the white male and his alleged violent culture.