Liberals Win as South Korea Votes on Social Policy!

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Oct 6, 2008
124,898
60,271
2,300
Brooklyn, NY
It is fascinating to me, how opposite the political scene in South Korea is when compared to the current one in the United States. See what you think:

1. "South Korea’s first vote on a social policy on Wednesday left in place a Seoul program providing free lunches for 810,000 elementary and middle-school students, a victory for the liberal opposition, which had urged a boycott.

2. Mayor Oh Se-hoon and his conservative ally, President Lee Myung-bak, urging more restraint in welfare spending, had called for voters to approve free lunches only for lower-income children, at an estimated savings of $100 million. The Liberal opposition urged supporters of universal free lunches not to vote, so the result would not be valid.

3. …only 25.7 percent of the city’s 9.4 million eligible voters had voted, lower than the 33.3 percent minimum, leaving in place the broad lunch program…

4. South Koreans have grown increasingly distressed over the widening gap between rich and poor, while also worrying about the world’s fiscal crises, which officials here attribute in part to profligate welfare spending.

5. Mr. Oh, of the conservative governing Grand National Party, had played on the fiscal anxiety, contending that supplying free meals to all the schoolchildren would ruin the city’s $19.1 billion budget. “We must fight welfare populism; it will ruin the country,” he said Sunday during a televised news conference, kneeling down tearfully to implore citizens to turn out for the vote.

6. Kwak No-hyun, the superintendent of the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education, who was elected on the liberal opposition ticket with a promise to provide all children with free lunches, argued that Mr. Oh’s approach would “divide our children into rich and poor.” “It’s a crime to ask poor children to eat rice in humiliation,” he said.

7. “This is the first time welfare has become a real issue,” said Jaung Hoon, a political scientist at Chung-Ang University in Seoul. “It’s a sign that South Korean politics are moving finally toward policy debates.”

8. After 10 years in power, the liberals lost the 2007 presidential election to Lee Myung-bak, who attracted voters with the traditionally conservative values of economic growth, pro-business measures and a harder line toward North Korea. Then, in June last year, the liberal opposition made a dramatic comeback in local elections by highlighting the need for more comprehensive state welfare.

9. Today, South Korea has one of the fast-growing rates of income inequality among the member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. In a July survey by the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, South Koreans cited income redistribution as the second most important political issue, after job creation.

10. President Lee, himself a rags-to-riches story, has not said how he voted, but he signaled his support for Mr. Oh when he too repeatedly warned against “welfare populism.” “We must learn lessons from countries in southern Europe where populist welfare pushed the governments to the brink of bankruptcy,” he warned during a radio speech on Monday.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/25/world/asia/25korea.html
 
Minimum wage there is about 3.50. You wantch Korean media, you get an idea of what that kind of wage means in real life.
 
What is fascinating is that Liberals the world over use the same kind of what-passes-for reasoning...

"Supporters of the 100 percent free lunch program say it's needed to prevent schoolchildren from discriminating against one another because of family income levels. They argue it would improve unity at a time when the psychological division between haves and have-nots is widening."
Seoul Mayor Oh Se-Hoon Vows To Quit If Free School Lunch Referundum Get Passed

So, we encourage some sort of sympatico by making sure all of the kids get government largesse, whether they need it -or want it- or not.
Do normal people actually subscribe to this kind of neurosis?

If so, we'd best make sure all the kids get the same sneakers, and go home to the same level of homes, and get there in the same kind of autos....
...heck, we don't want to discriminate.

For Liberals, feeling passes for knowing.

My peeps....(sigh)...they'll learn.
 
What is fascinating is that Liberals the world over use the same kind of what-passes-for reasoning...

"Supporters of the 100 percent free lunch program say it's needed to prevent schoolchildren from discriminating against one another because of family income levels. They argue it would improve unity at a time when the psychological division between haves and have-nots is widening."
Seoul Mayor Oh Se-Hoon Vows To Quit If Free School Lunch Referundum Get Passed

So, we encourage some sort of sympatico by making sure all of the kids get government largesse, whether they need it -or want it- or not.
Do normal people actually subscribe to this kind of neurosis?

If so, we'd best make sure all the kids get the same sneakers, and go home to the same level of homes, and get there in the same kind of autos....
...heck, we don't want to discriminate.

For Liberals, feeling passes for knowing.

My peeps....(sigh)...they'll learn.

The libs won't be happy till we are all as miserable as they are, With their philosophy were is the incentive? I love this story on the real Thanksgiving..


The history of the colony was chronicled by Governor William Bradford in his book, Of Plimouth Plantation, available at many libraries. Bradford relates how the Pilgrims set up a communist system in which they owned the land in common and would also share the harvests in common. By 1623, it became clear this system was not working out well. The men were not eager to work in the fields, since if they worked hard, they would have to share their produce with everyone else. The colonists faced another year of poor harvests. They held a meeting to decide what to do.

As Governor Bradford describes it, "At last after much debate of things, the governor gave way that they should set corn everyman for his own particular... That had very good success for it made all hands very industrious, so much [more] corn was planted than otherwise would have been". The Pilgrims changed their economic system from communism to geoism; the land was still owned in common and could not be sold or inherited, but each family was allotted a portion, and they could keep whatever they grew. The governor "assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number for that end."

Bradford wrote that their experience taught them that communism, meaning sharing all the production, was vain and a failure:

"The experience that has had in this common course and condition, tried sundrie years, and that amongst Godly and sober men, may well evince the Vanities of the conceit of Plato's and other ancients, applauded by some of later times; that the taking away of propertie, and bringing into commone wealth, would make them happy and flourishing, as if they were wiser than God."

Their new geoist economic system was a great success. It looked like they would have an abundant harvest this time. But then, during the summer, the rains stopped, threatening the crops. The Pilgrims held a "Day of Humiliation" and prayer. The rains came and the harvest was saved. It is logical to surmise that the Pilgrims saw this as a was a sign that God blessed their new economic system, because Governor Bradford proclaimed November 29, 1623, as a Day of Thanksgiving.

This was the first proclamation of thanksgiving found in Bradford's chronicles or any other historical record. The first Thanksgiving Day was therefore in November 1623. Much later, this first Thanksgiving Day became confused and mixed up with the shooting party with the Indians of 1621. And in the mixup, the great economics lesson was forgotten and then discarded by the time the Plymouth Colony merged with the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1691.

The Pilgrims recognized that the land itself was and should be their common community property, but that it is proper for the fruits of the labor of each person and family to belong to those who produced them. This was the great economics lesson the Pilgrims learned, a lesson that so impressed them that they commemorated it every year thereafter. This should have been a day to remember their vital economics lesson, but this lesson was later forgotten in the mixup with the shooting party with the Indians
!

Foldvary on Thanksgiving Day The True Story
 

Forum List

Back
Top