[Initial View] No Reason to Insist on 20,000 Won Communication Fee Payment Now

[Asia Economy Reporter Lee Ji-eun] The reporter's father is a taxi driver. Earlier this year, upon hearing that using a taxi-hailing app requires quite a bit of data, I switched his phone plan from a call-centered plan to a data-centered one. Shortly after, the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak, which brought our economy to a complete halt, occurred. My father stopped driving the taxi at some point, saying there were no passengers. He often complains that even though he hardly uses any data, the charges keep coming in regularly, which frustrates him.

However, when I asked him if he wanted a 20,000 won reduction in his communication bill, he replied, "There's no need for that." The reason was simple. There are other ways to save on communication costs, such as switching to a budget phone plan instead of a major carrier or bundling services. He was also concerned that the money distributed as 20,000 won per person to all citizens is not free but ultimately comes from taxpayers.

The ruling party and government seem determined to push for a 20,000 won reduction in communication fees. On the 14th, Lee Ho-seung, the Blue House economic chief, expressed strong determination regarding the 20,000 won communication fee during an interview on CBS Radio's "Kim Hyun-jung's News Show," saying, "I cannot understand the criticism of communication fee support." He even gave a specific example, saying, "If a family has four middle school or older children, they can save 80,000 won on communication fees." However, 60% of the public are not criticizing because they are unaware that a family of four with middle school children could save 80,000 won by receiving the 20,000 won support.

The idea of "20,000 won communication fee support" itself is very good. The problem lies in the timing. Those who need support most urgently right now are marginalized groups such as single-parent families, impoverished families, and elderly families. Self-employed individuals and small business owners facing bankruptcy due to COVID-19 also desperately need support. Instead of spending 900 billion won to reduce communication fees, that money should be concentrated on supporting the marginalized. If there are people burdened by communication fees, they can switch to cheaper plans like budget phones on their own.

The National Assembly Budget Office's criticism also makes sense. In its analysis of the 4th supplementary budget bill, the office said about the 20,000 won communication fee support project, "Providing subsidies only to mobile communication service subscribers and users may cause fairness issues." Some might argue that in this era where the number of mobile phone subscribers exceeds the population, there are hardly any non-subscribers. However, my father was a non-subscriber until recently because I had a duplicate line under my name for his phone. Moreover, among non-subscribers, there is a high possibility that some marginalized groups lack the means to subscribe to a carrier.

Although the origin of COVID-19 has already declared "the end," most countries around the world are still struggling with the virus. South Korea also once saw daily new COVID-19 cases drop to single digits, raising hopes that there would be no further spread, but now there are concerns about a second wave. With increased population movement around Chuseok and the upcoming flu season, there is a real possibility of additional COVID-19 spread.

It would be appreciated and pleasant to receive a 20,000 won reduction in communication fees. Who would feel bad about getting money? But that's all there is to it. My joy would be momentary, but the suffering of marginalized people is ongoing. If limited public funds are not used meaningfully, there may come a time when we deeply regret the wasted value of the 900 billion won we spent in vain.

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