Ruling Party: "Trying Basic Income Could Burn Down the House"... Rather Advocating Caution

[Asia Economy Reporter Park Cheol-eung] Concerns are mounting within the ruling party that the introduction of basic income could actually lead to a regression in overall welfare policies. As the conservative opposition party opens the door to discussions on basic income and ignites the debate, voices calling for caution within the ruling party are growing louder.

Kim Ki-sik, a former 19th National Assembly member and policy committee member of the The Future Research Institute, recently analyzed in a report titled "A Critical Review of Welfare Discourse in the Progressive Camp" that "when large-scale budget projects like basic income become the focus of policy and political discussions, there is a high risk that discussions on expanding or reforming other welfare systems will be marginalized or shelved."

Kim also pointed out, "Given the significant conflicts and resistance surrounding the minimum wage at present, the basic income debate is highly likely to shift toward discussions about abolishing the minimum wage." The Future Research Institute serves as a think tank for The Better Future, the largest group of lawmakers from the 86 Group within the Democratic Party of Korea.

There is a perspective that fiscal expansion is difficult and that existing welfare systems will be downgraded. Regarding disaster relief funds, the institute argued, "The contraction in consumption due to COVID-19 stems more from psychological concerns about infection risk than from a decrease in disposable income," and "cash payments directly given are more likely to be saved or held rather than leading to additional consumption increases."

The most urgent task, it emphasized, is not basic income but the expansion of employment insurance and the full introduction of unemployment assistance. Kim stated, "Providing benefits at a higher level than disaster relief funds for a considerable period can help ease the burden on self-employed individuals, non-regular workers, and unemployed youth who have been most affected by the COVID-19 crisis. In the mid-to-long term, it can serve as a groundbreaking opportunity to build a social safety net that prepares for the ongoing employment instability."

Seoul Mayor Park Won-soon also prioritizes the expansion of employment insurance. On the 10th, Mayor Park wrote on Facebook, "At first glance, distributing cash to all citizens may seem fair. However, as Democratic Party lawmaker Shin Dong-geun pointed out, it actually reduces the redistributive effect and strengthens inequality." He added, "Providing thick, focused support to those in crisis is more effective in every aspect. This is why no Nordic welfare state, including Sweden, which adopts the principle of universal welfare, has introduced universal basic income."

The conservative criticism of basic income based on the "lack of overseas examples" is also echoed within the progressive camp. Of course, this differs from criticisms like those from independent lawmaker Hong Jun-pyo, who calls it a "socialist-style rationing system." The concern is that accepting conservative logic to introduce basic income could lower the overall welfare level.

Former Democratic Party lawmaker Kim Boo-kyum recently warned on Facebook, "I am wary of conservative basic income discussions," explaining, "It is the idea of reducing existing welfare and downsizing the state to fund basic income, then having people purchase social security services from the market. This argument is mainly made by right-wing parties in Europe." He also advocates prioritizing the introduction of universal employment insurance and unemployment assistance.

In fact, the opposition parties propose welfare system reform as a prerequisite for introducing basic income. Park Hyung-joon, former election committee chairman of the United Future Party, said at a study meeting for first-term lawmakers held at the National Assembly members' office building that day, "Basic income is an issue worth trying from the United Future Party's perspective," adding, "If we talk about basic income as a program using the leftover or accumulated costs from welfare system reform, and if basic income is seen as a way to make self-development and job choice more flexible, then a program can be designed. The most important thing is labor market reform. Without that, neither the left nor the right can do anything."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.