중앙헤럴드  시작페이지설정  즐겨찾기추가
최종편집 : 2017.8.5 토 18:02
NewsOpinion
Sweden's Radical Universal Welfare
Yang Yoon-woo  |  yyw10096@cau.ac.kr
폰트키우기 폰트줄이기 프린트하기 메일보내기 신고하기
승인 2016.05.09  12:26:56
트위터 페이스북 미투데이 요즘 네이버 구글 msn

 How would your life change if, from one day, you were able to receive basic living expenses of $2500 every month? The Swedish government decided to implement a social welfare program, which provides basic income to the citizens. The advocators of this new bill pinpoint that every citizen has the fundamental right to receive basic living expenses, whether or not they are employed, in order to alleviate income inequality. In contrast, the critics cast doubts that 1/3 of the people working would begin to retire from work and thus worsening the economy.

 

Sweden actually has seen the side effects of excessive social welfare from its neighbor, Norway. Norway had gone through a catastrophe because the government had provided too much welfare for every aspect of people’s daily lives such as education, nurturing and health insurance. As a result, the citizens became couch potatoes and the country was filled with so called ‘free-riders’. They did not work. Actually, they did not have to have jobs at all because they were able to continue their current lifestyles. This example indicates that excessive social welfare can impede the betterment of a society. Yet, the Swedish government intends to try a drastic experiment that the Norwegian government failed with. In the bigger picture, the citizens are mandated to pay more of their taxes from their income so that the government can beef up the budget. This means that some people would receive less income than before. If such rapid retirement occurs, it would make the whole country itself poor. Therefore, a judicial consideration of this bill is crucial beforehand.

 

Instead of paying out a fixed guaranteed income to every citizen, it is more rational and effective to strengthen the existing social welfare programs than to tackle specific human needs. Although such a bill could reduce the gap between the poor and the rich instantly, it is ineffective when it comes to reducing income inequality. Furthermore, people are likely to misuse the money. For example in Korea, Seongnam Province provided shopping vouchers at a total of 40,000,000,000 won, to people in their twenties. The point of giving out free vouchers was to aid them in seeking jobs but a survey addresses that most of the vouchers were spent on purchases of alcohol. Even the congressmen manipulated social welfare in order to obtain votes and this is the perfect example of political populism.

 

Excessive universal welfare has not shown satisfying results before now. If Sweden finally implements the guaranteed income program, it will be the first government to endorse it. It is unlikely to bring about a positive outcome but the Swedish government’s consistent passion towards its citizen and the betterment of society should also be somehow respected. Humans always make mistakes. Therefore, it is absurd that we should create a ‘perfect’ bill. What’s most significant is that we should go through trials and errors in order to beget more effective and efficient bills

< 저작권자 © 중앙헤럴드 무단전재 및 재배포금지 >
폰트키우기 폰트줄이기 프린트하기 메일보내기 신고하기
트위터 페이스북 미투데이 요즘 네이버 구글 msn 뒤로가기 위로가기
이 기사에 대한 댓글 이야기 (0)
자동등록방지용 코드를 입력하세요!   
확인
- 200자까지 쓰실 수 있습니다. (현재 0 byte / 최대 400byte)
- 욕설등 인신공격성 글은 삭제 합니다. [운영원칙]
이 기사에 대한 댓글 이야기 (0)
 
신문사소개기사제보광고문의불편신고청소년보호정책개인정보취급방침이메일무단수집거부
우)156-756 서울 동작구 흑석동 221 학생문화관 2층 언론매체부(중대신문 편집국) | 전화 02-820-6245
팩스 02-817-9347 | 인터넷총괄책임 : 방송국장 | 게시판총괄책임 : 편집국장| 청소년보호책임자 : 김다혜
Copyright 2011 중앙헤럴드. All rights reserved. mail to webmaster@cauon.net