[Editorial] Provoking Class Warfare

The presidential office has posted a series of articles under the heading of, “Polarization: A Time Bomb That Should Be Defused,” on its website. The first article in the series is titled, “Miracle and Desperation: Two Koreas,” and provokes public anger against those in higher income brackets presenting the government’s welfare policies.

The article suggests that Korea is a place where the top 20 percent of the population in terms of income, who made their fortunes through gambling and speculation in a “casino” economy, disproportionately possess wealth, leaving little for the other 80 percent of the population. When the article says, “A casino economy is a hundred or a thousand times more cruel than a jungle where a full lion does not hunt any more,” it is goading the middle class. Comparing the highest-earning 20 percent to gamblers in casinos and a lion in the jungle is insulting to the majority of Koreans who earn their money by working hard for it.

This article points out that “the public should be asked whether they need a social security net, not whether they want a tax cut or a tax increase.” Even those who argue for a tax cut do not object to the government strengthening the social security net.

Economic experience has shown that a tax cut can lead to more brisk corporate activities and higher consumption, which in turn can increase tax revenues. As a result, many developed nations employ tax-cut fiscal policies. Yet the presidential office still regards those who support a tax cut as evil.

Worse yet, the article says, “A strong growth engine needs to have commensurately strong brakes.” This is preposterous. According to the modern growth and welfare model, the government should help the people and the companies who are ahead of others to run faster and to distribute the fruits of their economic success to society. At the same time, it should help those who lag behind with a social security net. A leftist policy that puts “brakes” on smoothly running companies may be popular among the public for the time being, but will do little to raise taxes for welfare policies.

The government seems to be trying to bring 80 percent of Koreans to its side by inciting hostility against the other 20 percent. This paper wants to ask the government officials who wrote this series of articles which group they belong to: the highest 20 percent or the lowest 80 percent? Are they a new vested rights bracket?

A sane government would not openly post an article that divides its public. Because of a government policy that drives the public apart, and its leftist tone, funds that should be invested and spent domestically are going abroad. This slows economic growth and creates unemployment, which further increases the gap between Korea’s rich and poor.

The series of articles might end with a socially revolutionary theory of some sort. The presidential office should make clear who wrote the articles and what the intention behind them is.