• 한국사회정책
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.71-96
• /
• 2018

Globalization, deindustrialization, and the revolutionary development of technology has led to the concerns that existing social policies might not be fit for the current and upcoming society. At the same time, the idea of universal basic income has drawn significant attentions as the alternative to the old welfare state. There are pros and cons of basic income, and scholars of both sides stand against each other with their equivalently strong logics. In this situation, some governments have planned or conducted field experiments in order to estimate the causal effects of basic income. This study explores the Finnish and Dutch basic income experiments in methodological perspective. All the World have been watching the experiments in these two countries with keen interest. The results of these experiments will surely influence on the pros and cons of basic income in numerous countries, including South Korea. It is important to precisely figure out the methodological meanings and limitations of the experiments, for the experiments in both countries deal with only some partial components of basic income and have been exposed to many threats to internal validity. Therefore, scholars for and against basic income should be careful in interpreting the findings from these experiments. This study elucidate the methodological meanings and limitations of the Finnish and Dutch basic income experiments. Furthermore, this study extracts some lessons from these experiments that would be useful if scholars would have an opportunity to design and conduct a basic income experiment in South Korea.

• The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology
• /
• v.8 no.3
• /
• pp.221-227
• /
• 2022

This study purports to deal with so-called basic income policy that Korea society has paid a great amount of attention to in welfare policy area. As an introduction, the definitions of basic income policy, and her natures and characteristics, and ideological foundation will be covered. Then, this study will discuss current debating issues upon basic income policy around the world such as basic income policy vs pre-existing social security systems, basic income policy and labor supply, the potential effect of basic income policy upon income redistribution, and feasibility of basic income as an actual policy. In conclusion, this study will investigate major criticisms on basic income policy and suggest viable paths that interested researcher should take for further study on basic income.

• 한국사회정책
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.37-71
• /
• 2018

Since 2016, public and political interest on basic income has been increased beyond academic interest. The recent debate on basic income has expanded on issues regarding to the concrete implementation of basic income moving further than the debate on conception of the basic income in the abstract level. This study examines major critiques of basic income which was raised from social policy area and makes a counter-argument on these critiques. Major points summarized as follows. First, the problem of jobs and social insurance exclusion is not serious enough to call for basic income. Second, existing social security systems will be crowded out by excessive financial burden if basic income is introduced. Third, policies to cultivate citizens' capacities to cope with a technological change should be given priority over basic income. This study disputes these critiques by counter arguing four points. First, it is necessary to reconstruct welfare state based on basic income, given the labor market changes, such as long-term trend of employment change, newly emerging employment of platform companies, and inconsistency of platform labor and social insurance. Second, hypothesis of crowding-out effect on social security system is just a criticism that can be applied to the basic income initiative of the right-wing. Also, it is unable to find a logical basis or evidence of this hypothesis from the historical process of welfare state development or previous studies. Third, it is necessary to discuss how to reconfigure existing social security system and basic income which are complementary to each other and also have consistency with labor market as a configuration, not as a matter of choosing between basic income and social security system. Fourth, de-laborization does not mean a refusal to labor but a free choice, and the basic principle of social security is not needs but right. In conclusion, in order to develop more productive debate on basic income, it requires more sophisticated discussion and criticism from the point of view of the distributive justice; the debate on the sustainability of social insurance-centered welfare states; and debates on the political realization of basic income.

• Journal of Labour Economics
• /
• v.40 no.3
• /
• pp.57-77
• /
• 2017

To prevent the disincentive of labor supply under the current welfare system, we suggest the safety income system, a Korean version of negative income tax. Under the proposed system, for example, a household with four members whose annual income is less than 50 million wons will get financial support from the government. Under the safety income system, labor supply increases and so does the gross domestic product. The disposable income of low-income households increases, which alleviates the income gap among households. Analyzing the Household Income and Expenditure Survey data, we show that under the safety income system the disposable income differentials among households are reduced much more than under the current welfare system or under the universal basic income system.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare Studies
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.185-212
• /
• 2010

This study simulates the effects of basic income on income redistribution in Korea, and compares the redistribution effects of basic income models with the effect of the current welfare system. Using the Korea Welfare Panel Study(2008), absolute/relative poverty rate, poverty gap ratio, gini coefficients are measured. As a result of simulation, the basic income models reduced poverty more effectively than the current system. And among the three basic income models, the basic income model combined with flat-rate tax reduced poverty more effectively. And the basic income model combined with progressive tax reduced inequality more effectively. The results of the study reported in this paper confirm the paradox of redistribution which suggest that the effect of universal welfare program on redistribution is the most noticeable.

• 한국사회정책
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.3-35
• /
• 2018

This article critically reviews the arguments that deny the financial feasbility and effectiveness of universal basic income as an alternative to existing social security systems and makes some suggestions to design effective and efficient basic income schemes. Regarding the financial feasibility of universal basic income, I argue that replacement of the existing regressive tax expenditures with universal basic income without raising tax rates can effectively reduce tax burden or provide income support to a majority of people except the rich. Addition of basic income to the tax base and reduction of the number of beneficiaries of public assistance and the amount of cash payment for them can further help save money. Regarding the redistributive effect, I note that the targeting ability of the existing social security systems is not good and that "the paradox of redistribution" that universal-type programs tend to be more redistributive than selective programs applies to universal basic income as well. I demonstrate significant redistributive effect of a hypothetical revenue-neutral basic income scheme and reviews several empirical studies done in Korea and abroad to show that basic income can be more effective in redistribution than social insurances or public assistance programs. Lastly, I emphasize the need to construct a reliable tax-benefit microsimulation model to help researchers to study redistributive effects of basic income schemes and other taxes and social policies.

• Proceedings of the Korea Contents Association Conference
• /
• 2019.05a
• /
• pp.189-190
• /
• 2019

4차 산업혁명시대의 소득양극화와 불평등 해소를 위한 기본소득은 한국사회의 시급한 빈곤문제를 완화할 수 있는 소득보장정책일 뿐 아니라 시민들의 욕구를 투사해 복지 너머의 새로운 삶의 양식을 발명할 수 있는 가능성을 가진 정책 의제이다.

• 한국사회정책
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.31-55
• /
• 2018

The economic penalty of care and gender inequality reinforce each other. Unequal distribution and treatment of care are at the basis of gender inequality. Care creates economic penalty that deepen gender inequality. Those who perform care work tend to take the position of the vulnerable in socio-economic power relations. Due to their weak position, it is difficult for them to voice out a fair treatment and reward for their work. As a result, care workers both at home and in the public sector suffering from lower economic value of care are positioned in unequal gender relations with more vulnerable socioeconomic status. The basic income system may have the potential to mitigate multifaceted gender inequalities in our society. For the introduction of basic income to help realize the real freedom for women, it is necessary to understand unique natures of care work and tackle economic penalties of care work. This paper examines the relationships between care penalties and basic income, focusing on the debate on the introduction of the basic income system. We argue that if the economic penalties caused by unique natures of care work are not eased or resolved, the introduction of the basic income may not contributes to alleviating gender inequalities.

• Journal of Teachers' Pension
• /
• v.5
• /
• pp.137-190
• /
• 2020

최근 특수직역연금 가입자도 기초연금을 적용받고자 하는 요구가 증가되고 있다. 기초연금제도 시행부터 특수직역연금 가입자는 원천적으로 기초연금에 대한 법 적용이 배제되어 왔었다. 빈곤상태에 있는 65세 이상의 노인층을 특수직역연금 수급권자에 해당한다는 이유로 기초연금 대상자에서 제외하는 것은 노인의 생활을 지원하고 복지를 증진시킨다는 기초연금법의 도입 목적을 온전히 실현하지 못하는 측면이 있다. 그러므로 모든 공적연금 수급자를 대상으로 실제 소득이 기초연금 기준액보다 미달할 경우에는 기초연금을 받을 수 있도록 제도적인 개선이 마련되어야 할 것이다. 저소득의 특수직역연금 수령자들에게 보다 안정된 노후 보장을 지원하는 방안이 마련되어야 한다. 본 연구에서는 특수직역연금 가입자 중에서 사학연금 가입자를 대상으로 기초연금 선택적용에 대한 타당성 여부를 살펴보고자 하였다. 공무원연금과는 달리 사학연금 가입자 중에서 일부 유치원 교사나 간호사 직군의 경우에는 소득이 그다지 높지 않는 경우가 있다. 이러한 계층은 기초연금 적용을 고려해볼 필요가 있다. 특히, 유족연금 수급자의 경우에는 기초연금 선택적용을 적극적으로 고려해보는 정책적 검토가 필요하다고 본다. 본 연구는 다음과 같이 주장하고자 한다. 첫째, 사학연금 수령자 중에서 실제로 저소득자인 경우에는 기초연금을 적용하는 법안을 마련하여야 한다. 둘째, 해외에서의 기초연금 적용은 모든 가입자를 대상으로 적용하고 있다. 해외 사례와 같이 전 국민을 대상으로 모든 공적연금 가입자에게 기초연금 적용을 고려하여야 한다. 셋째, 유족연금 수급자 중에서 기초연금 지급액보다 낮은 연금액을 수령하는 자에게는 유족연금보다는 기초연금을 수령할 수 있는 방안을 모색해 보아야 한다. 넷째, 기초연금의 재원은 조세로 이루어지는 것으로서 국민연금 수급자와의 형평성을 고려하여 특수직역연금 가입자의 경우에도 기초연금을 적용하여 기본적 소득의 충족과 동시에 노후소득 보장을 더욱 강화할 필요가 있다. 본 연구는 사학연금 가입자를 대상으로 기초연금 선택적용에 대한 대한 기초자료를 제공하고자 하였다. 이와 같은 기초연금제도 적용은 우리나라의 사학연금 수급자의 노후소득 보장을 한층 강화하는 측면에서 긍정적이며, 기초연금 선택적용에 대한 타당성과 도입방안 등을 살펴보았다는 점에서 의의가 있다.

• Korean Journal of Health Education and Promotion
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.5-11
• /
• 1983

국민 소득수준의 향상은 복지사회를 이룩하기 위한 기본요건이지만 상대적으로 경제개발 및 근대화 과정에서 야기되는 사회문제나 건강생활에 저해되는 요인의 발생방지 대책이 결여된다면 이는 결코 이상적인 발전일 수 없을 것이다. 사회보장제도에서의 가장 중요한 기능이 물론 경제적 조건의 개선이지만 건강조건의 개선 역시 이에 못지 않게 중요한 기능의 하나인 것이다.