The Household Finances and Welfare Survey was announced today. The results are shocking.

The Household Finances and Welfare Survey was announced today. The results are shocking.

On the day the poultry suit was announced three years ago, I saw the results of the poultry suit very positively.

===========
“In the four years of the Moon Jae In government, the market income of middle-income earners increased the fastest. Instead, disposable income of low-income earners increased the most. This means that the state’s finances worked efficiently. It’s a very good sign that the taxes we paid were used efficiently.

However, this is not just an accomplishment of the Moon Jae In government, but a change that has been done the same for the Park Geun Hye government. The disposable income of low-income earners rose the fastest after passing the Park Geun Hye and Moon Jae In governments. However, Korea is not yet a good country. Compared to other OECD countries, Korea’s fiscal role is the most insufficient. France reduces the poverty rate in a market of 37 percent to 8 percent through its national finances. It is getting better, but it still has a long way to go.”

But can the positive changes continued in both the Park Geun-hye administration and the Moon Jae-in administration continue even in the Yoon administration, which ignores the role of finance

===============

Unfortunately, however, concerns have become a reality. It couldn’t be worse.
The 24-year income distribution index has gotten worse. This is the first time in 10 years. The content is even more problematic.

The reason why I saw the results of poultry clothing positively during the Moon Jae-in administration is that market income has the highest increase in median income, and disposable income has the highest increase in lower income.

24 years is the opposite. As for market income, median income is 1.8 percent and disposable income is the highest among the highest income earners (fifth income quintile). Both the market and fiscal policies are in disarray.

But why did the distribution of income deteriorate in both market income and disposable income? Surprisingly, both the poor (1st quintile) and the second lowest class (2nd quintile) earned income decreased. It is extremely rare that the absolute amount of earned income has decreased, not that the growth rate has decreased. The first quintile’s earned income increased by -1.3% from the previous year, the second quintile increased by -0.7, and the third quintile of the middle class by 1.5%. Earned income in the fifth quintile (top 20%) increased by 3.7%.

However, public transfer income, the fiscal role of the state, increased 4.5% in the third quintile of the middle class, but increased 8% in the fifth quintile and 5.1% in the first quintile.

No, market income increased the most in the 5th quartile, but public transfer income also increased more in the 5th quartile than in the 1st and 3rd quartiles. In addition, the comprehensive real estate tax, which is a tax paid only by the high-income class, was reduced. And it is said that the gold investment tax, which is a tax paid by the high-income class, will not be introduced, and the dividend income tax will now be further reduced.

I was a person who considered our country’s economy quite positively. Both the growth side and the income distribution side were the same.

The media has always mentioned that Korea’s growth engine turns off and income inequality worsens. However, indicators show that this was not the case. Good economic growth and income inequality have been rapidly easing. However, economic growth has deteriorated since 2011, and income inequality has deteriorated 24 years. The shepherd boy always says growth and distribution are poor, so even if a real wolf appears from 23, people’s awareness seems to be lessened. This time, it feels like a real wolf appeared.

Speaking of which, let’s also look at the growth side. During the five years of the Moon Jae-in administration, Korea grew 12.7 percent. During the same period, the average OECD growth rate was 9.5 percent and the U.S. growth rate was 12.4 percent. It was even better than the OECD average.

However, the problem starts in 2013. Korea’s economic growth rate stands at 4.5 percent over the past three years. 7.4 percent of the U.S. is incomparable and even below the OECD average of 5.1 percent. In three years, a country with a better growth rate than the United States has become a country below the OECD average.

Sometimes, data comparing the economic growth rate of each government from a partisan perspective are circulated on Facebook. I don’t think the comparison between the economic maturity stage and the regime ignoring the global economic environment is very meaningful. However, I think the benchmarking growth rate compared to the OECD average during the same period is meaningful.

In that sense, a country that had very good growth and distribution by 22 years and 23 years and 24 years and 2 years of growth and distribution deteriorated very much.

Still, economic growth seems to be recovering from the third quarter of this year. It seems to be a little better in 26. However, I don’t know the distribution. In the fiscal policy of 26, AI and R&D have expanded, but welfare is not much different. In particular, in terms of taxation, the tax cuts for the ultra-rich have been expanded.

What should I do? I don’t want any new system. Politicians are trying to make political achievements by introducing something new under heaven.
I think it is more efficient to strengthen the existing good system.

Specifically, let’s strengthen the basic living security system, EITC, and integrated care. If these three are strengthened, disposable income inequality can be improved quickly.