the legislature has chosen the fairest, most adequate and most reasonable solution for fulfilling its duties (cf. BVerfGE 130, 263 <294> with further references). From a constitutional perspective, the crucial matter is to ensure that the amount of benefits to secure a dignified minimum existence does not fall below that minimum level and is fixed at a level that is justifiable, subject to constitutional review, as actually capable of supporting minimum needs. a) Since the Basic Law itself does not stipulate any exact quantification of the claim to benefits, the substantive review of the amount of social benefits necessary to secure a dignified minimum existence is limited to examining whether these benefits are evidently inadequate (BVerfGE 125, 175 <225 and 226>; 132, 134 <165, para. 78>). Based on a comprehensive assessment (cf. BVerfGE 130, 263 <295>), this review looks at the amount of benefits as a whole and not at individual elements based on which this amount is calculated. Social benefits are only deemed to be evidently inadequate if it is obvious that they are in no way, in their totality, capable of ensuring that persons in need, living in Germany today, are assured of a life that can physically, socially and culturally be regarded as dignified. 81 b) Beyond this review of evident circumstances (Evidenzkontrolle), the Federal Constitutional Court examines whether the resulting level of benefits can be justified at any given time on the basis of reliable figures and plausible calculation procedures. In doing so, the Federal Constitutional Court does not put itself with its own expertise in the place of the legislature, but merely reviews the legislative parameters set for calculating benefits which, while not precisely quantifiable under the Constitution, are guaranteed as a fundamental right. If these parameters can be justified in a way that is transparent and, from an objectively differentiated perspective, plausible, then they are consistent with Art. 1 sec. 1 in conjunction with Art. 20 sec. 1 GG (cf. BVerfGE 125, 175 <225 and 226>; 132, 134 <165 and 166, para. 79>; see above C I 1 b). 82 aa) The legislative parameters set for calculating the level of benefits paid to secure existence must be objectively justifiable. Not even a political compromise may result in an outcome that cannot be justified on objective grounds; figures drawn from thin air and wild estimates do not satisfy the constitutional requirements (cf. BVerfGE 125, 175 <237 and 238>; 132, 134 <170 and 171, paras. 90 and 91.>). 83 bb) The nature and amount of benefits must be explicable with a method by which the necessary facts are, in essence, fully and accurately determined, and by which the calculation stages involve transparent figures and stay within reasonable parameters within this procedure. Calculating the minimum subsistence level on the basis of a basket of necessary goods and services and subsequently determining and evaluating the prices to be paid for them is an admissible way to calculate the level of benefits, as is using consumer statistics (cf. BVerfGE 125, 175 <234 and 235>). If the legislature decides to use the statistical model, it must take precautions against the concomitant specific risk of underfunding current needs. The Constitution does not prevent the legislature from subsequently removing certain individual items from the 84 13/29