http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Liberal Taiwan Versus Illiberal South Korea: The Divergent Paths of Election Campaign Regulation
유종성,Jiun-Da Lin 동아시아연구원 2020 Journal of East Asian Studies Vol.20 No.3
South Korea and Taiwan have developed very different sets of election campaign regulations. While both countries had highly restrictive campaign rules during the authoritarian era, they have diverged since democratic transition. South Korea still imposes numerous restrictions on campaigning activities, but Taiwan has removed most of the restrictions. We explore the causes of these divergent trajectories through comparative historical process tracing, focusing on critical junctures and path dependence. We find that incumbency advantage and containment of new opposition parties were the primary objectives of introducing stringent regulations under the authoritarian regimes in both countries. The key difference was that, during the democratic transition, legislators affiliated with the opposition parties as well as the ruling party in South Korea enjoyed the incumbency advantage but that opposition forces in Taiwan did not. As a result, the opposition in Taiwan fought for liberalization of campaign regulations, but the South Korean opposition did not.
왜 보편적 기본소득이 필요한가?: 기본소득을 중심으로 하는 사회 보장 개혁의 방향
유종성 한국사회과학연구회 2020 동향과 전망 Vol.- No.110
This paper advocates the legitimacy and necessity of universal basic income, addressing several major questions surrounding the controversy over the merits of UBI that emanate from the competition with the existing social security system. I argue that UBI is more just and fair than social insurance or public assistance. UBI can have more redistributive effect than the current social security system, which reinforces dualism of the labor market and suffers from large blind spots. A low level of UBI may replace only the lower part of the existing income support programs, which will ensure that any poor persons will not lose due to an insufficient basic income replacing the previous generous benefits. I suggest various revenue sources including taxation and spending reforms to finance a ‘fiscally neutral’ UBI at the level of 10 per cent or 16 per cent of GDP, the latter of which will suffice to replace the existing income support programs. I also propose to simultaneously restructure the social insurance programs such as the employment insurance and the national old age pensions into ‘income insurance’ programs that are purely proportional to ones’ own incomes in terms of both contributions and benefits, eliminating redistributive function from them, which will ensure long-term financial sustainability as well as both inter- generational and intra-generational equity. 본고는 보편적 기본소득(universal basic income)을 둘러싼 찬반 논쟁, 특히 기존 소득 보장 제도와의 경쟁 관계에서 제기되고 있는 몇 가지 주요 질문들을 고찰하여 기본소득의 정당성과 필요성을 옹호한다. 기본소득은 사회 보험이나 공적 부조보다 정의롭고 공정하며, 기존 소득 보장 제도가 노동 시장의 이중 구조를 강화하며 많은 빈곤층을 사각지대에 방치하는 문제를 극복하여 더 높은 재분배 효과를낼 수 있다. 낮은 수준의 기본소득 도입 시에는 기존 소득 보장 제도에서 기본소득아래의 부분만 대체함으로써 빈곤층이 손해를 보지 않게 할 수 있다. GDP 10% 수준의 ‘재정 중립적’ 기본소득은 기존 재정 지출 구조의 개혁과 보편적 증세 및 부자 증세의 결합으로 충분히 가능하며, 나아가 기초 생활 보장 생계 급여를 완전 대체하는 GDP 16% 수준의 기본소득을 도입하는 것도 가능함을 보여 준다. 동시에, 기본소득 도입과 함께 고용 관계에 기반한 기존의 소득 보장 사회 보험(고용보험과 공적 연금)은 재분배 기능 없는 소득 비례의 ‘소득 보험’ 방식으로 전환하여 재정적 지속 가능성과 세대 간 및 세대 내의 형평성을 동시에 추구하는 것이 필요함을 주장한다.
백 세 시대의 연금 개혁: 재정 안정화와 노후소득 보장의 동시 실현을 위하여
유종성 한국사회과학연구회 2023 동향과 전망 Vol.- No.119
The pension reform in Korea must address the challenges of low birth rates and aging population, old-age poverty and inequality in retirement income, financial stability, and intergenerational and intragenerational equity issues simultaneously. The pension reform should support active aging, being accompanied by labor market reforms. A universal income insurance system should be established by automatically enrolling all adults and collecting insurance premiums from all sources of labor income, which will significantly increase the contribution base and the real income replacement rate. The part of the special occupational pension that corresponds to the national pension insurance premium is absorbed and integrated into the national pension. The earnings-proportional benefit of the National Pension Scheme (B benefit) should be adjusted to approach a benefit-cost ratio of 1, achieving fiscal sustainability, and a negative income tax-type basic pension system, financed by taxes, should be introduced in order to guarantee a minimum income to all elderly citizens, by integrating the redistributive benefit(A benefit) of the national pension and the existing basic pension. Through these reforms, the replacement rate of real income for an average earner can be increased from the current level of 24% to 40%, and an additional income replacement rate of 15% or over can be provided through occupational pensions and special occupational pensions that are not absorbed into the national pension. The maximum fiscal requirement for the negative income tax-type basic pension (A-benefit) is around 4.4% of GDP, which is just 1.4% of GDP more than the maximum required budget for the current basic pension. With this additional fiscal commitment, it is possible to achieve both financial stability of the National Pension and adequate old-age income protection for all.