A형 백수
[스크랩] 서울대 이준구 교수님 Facebook 본문

작성자:웅냥하는노을이작성시간:21:42 조회수:1,203
댓글12


출처 : http://jkl123.com/sub5_1.htm?table=board1&st=view&page=1&id=18353&limit=&keykind=&keyword=&bo_class=
요즈음 주변 사람들에게서 제일 많이 받는 질문 중 하나가 소득주도성장 정책에 관한 것입니다.
“소득주도성장 정책으로 우리 경제가 크게 활성화될 수 있을까요?”라는 질문을 자주 받는 거지요.
잘 몰라서 경제학자인 내 의견을 들으려 하는 사람도 있지만, 마음속으로는 이미 답을 찾아 놓고서 짐짓 그런 질문을 던지는 사람들도 많습니다.
그 답이란 소득주도성장 정책이 좋은 결과를 가져오지 못할 것이라는 예상입니다.
보수언론은 현 정부의 소득주도성장 정책이 갖는 이런저런 문제점을 비판하기에 여념이 없습니다.
그들의 논조를 보면 지금 한국경제는 전대미문의 위기에 빠져 있고 그 주범이 바로 소득주도성장 정책입니다.
소득주도성장 정책을 당장 폐기하지 않으면 우리 경제가 하루아침에 거덜이 날듯 호들갑을 떨고 있습니다.
MB가 대통령이 된 이래 우리 경제는 10년 이상 줄곧 3%대의 경제성장률에서 허덕여 왔습니다.
이런 상황에서 한국은행이 내년도 전망을 2.9%로 고작 0.1% 하향조정하니 무슨 큰 난리라도 난 것처럼 떠들어 댑니다.
이 정부 츨범 직전 2015년과 2016년 두 해에 걸쳐 경제성장률이 겨우 2.8%밖에 되지 않았다는 사실은 까맣게 잊은 듯 말입니다.
만약 지금의 한국 경제가 위기상황이라면 그것은 이명박근혜 정권 이래로 계속되어 온 위기지 결코 이 정부의 소득주도성장 정책이 만들어낸 위기가 아닙니다.
한 가지 아이러니는 소득주도성장 정책을 처음 들고 나온 것이 바로 박근혜 정권이라는 사실입니다.
그때 보수언론이 그 정책을 지금처럼 맹렬하게 비판하고 나섰던 기억은 전혀 없습니다.
또 다시 “내로남불”이라는 말을 머리에 떠올리게 됩니다.
보수정권이 그걸 추진하면 문제가 없는데, 진보정권이 추진하면 문제가 되는 듯 말하고 있으니까요.
솔직하게 말해 그때 나는 소득주도성장이란 개념 그 자체에는 지지를 보냈습니다.
다만 그것을 구체적으로 어떻게 실행에 옮길지를 두고 당시의 정책을 비판했을 뿐입니다.
소득주도성장이 본격적으로 추진되기 위해서는 중, 저소득층의 소득이 획기적으로 늘어나야 하는데, 그것을 가능케 하는 그 어떤 구체적 정책의 뒷받침도 없었다는 게 문제였습니다.
고작 한다는 것이 배당을 늘리도록 유도한답시고 배당소득에 엄청난 조세혜택을 주어 재벌들에게 수십억, 수백억원의 예기치 않은 이득을 가져다 준 일뿐이었습니다.
또 한 번 솔직하게 고백한다면, 나는 문재인 정부의 소득주도성장 정책이 경제를 크게 활성화시키는 성공을 거둘 것이라고 전망하지 않습니다.
보수언론이 말하고 있는 것처럼 그것이 문제투성이의 정책이라고 보지는 않습니다만, 정부가 말하고 있는 것처럼 경제 활성화의 일등공신이 될 가능성도 크지 않다고 보는 것입니다.
이론적 관점에서 볼 때 한계소비성향이 상대적으로 높은 중, 저소득층의 소득을 늘려주는 것이 경기회복에 도움이 된다는 건 맞은 말입니다.
그러나 중, 저소듣층의 소득을 엄청난 규모로 늘려주지 않는 한 그와 같은 경로를 통한 부양효과는 그리 크지 않을 가능성이 높습니다.
그리고 이것은 어디까지나 단기적 부양의 성격을 갖는 것이고, 장기적 성장동력의 확충과는 직접적 관련이 없습니다.
그 동안 세계 각국에서 정부가 경제에 미치는 영향에 대해 관찰해온 결과를 정리해 보면 정부가 경제를 망치는 것은 비교적 쉬운 일입니다.
당치도 않은 포퓰리즘 정책이 나라 경제를 하루아침에 거덜을 내버린 베네주엘라 같은 나라가 대표적 예지만, 정부의 잘못된 정책이 경제를 망친 경우는 아주 흔하게 관찰할 수 있습니다.
그러나 정부가 단기간에 경제를 활성화시키는 것은 말처럼 쉬운 일이 결코 아닙니다.
수요의 부족으로 인해 경제가 일시적으로 불황국면에 빠져 있을 때 케인즈적인 확장정책을 통해 회복세로 돌려놓은 일은 상대적으로 쉽습니다.
그러나 정부의 정책을 통해 성장잠재력을 획기적으로 높이는 일은 매우 어렵습니다.
MB의 그 허황된 ‘747공약’의 귀결을 보면 잘 알 수 있는 일입니다.
한 동안 전 세계 시민들은 감세정책과 규제철폐 등을 통해 경제를 획기적으로 활성화시킬 수 있다는 신자유주의자들의 허황된 주장에 매료되어 있었습니다.
그러나 미국의 신자유주의 실험 결과가 의심의 나위 없이 보여주듯, 그들의 주장은 헛된 것으로 드러났습니다.
한 마디로 말해 신자유주의적 정책은 그들이 약속한 기적은 가져오지 못하고 분배상태의 악화라는 부작용만 가져왔던 것입니다.
여러분이 잘 아시듯, 현재 미국은 선진국들 중 가장 나쁜 분배상태를 보이고 있을 뿐 아니라, 역사상 가장 나쁜 분배상태에 접근해 가고 있습니다.
이와 비슷한 맥락에서 나는 소득주도성장 정책 역시 기적적인 경제활성화를 가져오지 못할 것으로 전망하고 있습니다.
그러나 지금 경제가 겪고 있는 몇 가지 문제가 소득주도성장 정책에서 비롯되었다는 주장에 대해서는 동의할 수 없습니다.
예를 들어 꽁꽁 얼어붙은 투자심리라든가 성장률의 하락은 소득주도성장 정책과 아무런 관계가 없습니다.
다만 정부가 너무 서두른다는 느낌을 주어 경제 전반의 불안 심리를 자극했다는 점은 인정합니다.
보수언론의 부채질 때문에 불안 심리가 너무나도 쉽게 확산될 수 있다는 점을 충분히 고려했다면 좀 더 신중하게 정책을 추진하는 현명함을 발휘할 수도 있었다고 생각합니다.
어떤 이유에 의해서든 국민이 정부의 정책에 대한 신뢰를 갖지 못하면 정책은 성공을 거둘 수 없습니다.
비록 소득주도성장 정책이 경제를 획기적으로 활성화시키는 결과를 가져오지 못한다 하더라도, 그 정책은 나름대로의 장점을 갖는다고 믿습니다.
나날이 양극화가 심해져 가고 있는 상황에서 중, 저소득층의 경제적 지위가 더 이상 떨어지지 않도록 노력한다는 것은 그 자체로 바람직한 일입니다.
실현되지도 못할 ‘낙수효과’(trickle-down effect)를 기대하고 부자를 더욱 부자로 만들어주는 정책을 쓰는 것보다는 훨씬 더 낫지 않습니까?
신자유주의적 정책이든 소득주도성장 정책이든 경제를 하루아침에 변모시킬 수 있는 묘약은 없습니다.
아무리 뛰어난 능력의 정부가 등장한다 하더라도 경제성장률을 단숨에 1% 포인트라도 뛰어오르게 만들 수 없습니다.
경제성장률에 대한 과도한 집착은 정책을 잘못된 방향으로 이끄는 원인이 될 수 있습니다.
생색이 나지 않고 시간이 들더라도 정부의 정책은 경제의 펀다멘탈을 튼튼하게 만드는 데 주안점을 두어야 합니다.
막힌 데를 뚫어주고 매듭진 곳을 풀어주는 한편, 공정한 게임이 이루어지도록 인도하는 심판의 역할에 충실해야 한다는 말입니다.
기본에 충실한 정부가 가장 효율적인 정부가 될 수 있음을 잊어서는 안 됩니다.
차제에 소득주도성장 정책은 아예 중, 저소득층의 소득을 보장하는 데 주안점을 두는 정책으로 전환되는 것이 바람직하다고 생각합니다.
이를 통해 획기적인 성장을 이룰 수 있다는 주장이 반대파의 공격을 불러일으키는 주원인이 되고 있기 때문입니다.
사회적 약자들의 삶을 적극적으로 개선시키는 데 정책의 초점을 맞추겠다고 하는 데 누가 감히 거기에 돌을 던지겠습니까?
영어에 “Slow and steady”라는 표현이 있습니다.
느리지만 꾸준히 어떤 목표의 달성을 위해 노력하는 자세를 일컫는 말입니다.
현 정부에게 절실하게 필요한 지혜가 바로 이것이 아닌가 생각합니다.
서두르다 모든 것을 수포로 돌리지 말고, 천천히 그러나 끊임없이 노력함으로써 국민에게 희망을 불어넣어 주어야 할 것입니다.
글ㆍ이준구
스크랩 원문 : ＊여성시대＊ 차분한 20대들의 알흠다운 공간신고
댓글 12
시드는 것이 아니라 변화할 뿐인걸21:44New메뉴
첫댓글언론들 뼈맞았다
ㅏㅏㅏㅏㅏㅓㅝㅡㅓ21:44New메뉴
어 경제학원론 ...! 이준구 이창용...
위로해줘21:46New메뉴
되게 좋은글이당
이끌든지따르든지비키든지21:46New메뉴
아 시원해.....언론뿐만 아니라 경제적 순환틀?에 고민없이 떠드는 사람들이나 하루아침에 그게 멀쩡히 잘돌아가고 무려 새로운 세상이 올거라고 믿는 사람들 보는거 괴로움.
답댓글이끌든지따르든지비키든지21:49New메뉴
문재인정부보고 삼성유착 걱정하면서 방향성을 의심하는 한겨레나 최저임금같은걸로 나라 거덜날것처럼 떠드는 조중동이나 그지같은건 매한가지. 경제는 경제주체자들의 심리도 중요한데 자꾸 부추기니까 될일도 안됨
답댓글아르테미스여신21:56New메뉴
2 무슨 마법이냐고 .. 그게 하루 아침에 다 되게 ㅋㅋ 최저임금 올랐다고 망할 나라였으면 벌써 망했게 ; 4대강 때 폭삭 가라앉았지
얄리얄리얄리21:47New메뉴
교수님,,..,!!!!!
말리화꽃-21:47New메뉴
매일 쳐 맞아야해 언론들은...
WindyWindy21:49New메뉴
경제학원론을 이교수님 책으로 배워서 넘 반갑네유,,,,
마기나디나다21:50New메뉴
느리지만 꾸준히 기본을 지키자
나세 히로오미21:52New메뉴
경개론 이준구 겨스님.............
(연)아 (까)면 사(살)21:56New메뉴
느리지만 꾸준한 정책이 5년단임제에서는 불가능하니 정부도 쫓기는 거겠지ㅠ 속상하네 쨋든 지금 정부가 진행하는 정책이 완벽하진 않지만 나름 괜찮다고 생각해...
카페 방문
이 카페 .txt 관련글

쿠팡에서 아이스크림 택배 시킨 썰.txt2018.07.17 댓글 390

이명박근혜가 남긴 엄청난 폭탄이 문재인 정부때 터짐.txt (최저임금, 경제불황)2018.07.17 댓글 150

하면 좋은 자기관리 종류들.txt2018.06.26 댓글 130
미스터 션샤인이 빼박 식민사관 홍보 드라마인 이유.txt2018.07.15 댓글 115

롯데월드 혜성특급 괴담.txt2018.07.13 댓글 79
[Scrap] [Politics] Lee Joon-koo, Professor of Seoul National University, Facebook. txt

By : The Great Full Moon : 21:42 View : 1,203
Comment 12


Source : http://jkl123.com/sub5_1.htm?table=board1&st=view&page=1&id=18353&limit=&keykind=&keyword=&bo_class =
One of the most asked questions I get from people around me these days is income driven growth policy.
Are we going to be asked a lot, " Can an income-driven growth policy boost our economy? "
There are some economists who want to hear my opinion, but in their minds they have already found answers and ask questions of interest.
The answer is that the income-driven growth policy is not going to do well.
Conservative media is intent on criticizing the income driven growth policy of this administration.
Their argument is that the Korean economy is now in an unprecedented crisis, and its main culprit is an income driven growth policy.
If we don't scrap our revenue-driven growth policy now, our economy is going to crash overnight.
Since MB became president, our economy has been growing at around 3 % for more than a decade.
Against this backdrop, the Bank of Korea has lowered its forecast for next year by only 0.1 % to 2.9 %, making a fuss as if there were some major disruptions.
It seems to have been forgotten that just two years prior to the government's rise, the economy grew only 2.8 percent in 2015 and 2016.
If the Korean economy has been dragging on since the regime are in crisis situations, it's imyeongbakkeunhye wigiji by no means the income growth initiatives of the government is created crisis.No.
One irony is the income growth initiatives for the first time came with the fact that the regime is Park Geun-hye.
I have no recollection of the conservative press criticizing the policy so fiercely at the time.
Again, the word " Naronam Fire " comes to mind.
If the Conservative government pushes for it, it doesn't matter, but if the liberal government pushes it, it does.
To be honest, I supported the idea of income-driven growth itself.
I was just criticizing the policy at the time on how to implement it specifically.
The problem was that in order for income-driven growth to really take shape, the incomes of middle and low-income brackets had to grow dramatically, and there was no support for any specific policies that made it possible.
The only thing that was to do was to give huge tax breaks to dividend income, which resulted in billions of won and billions of won in unexpected gains for the chaebol.
Moon Jae-in is a clean breast of it again, my income growth initiatives will greatly boost the economic success of the government would not.
I don't see it as a problematic policy, as the conservative press is saying, but I don't think it's as likely to be the top contributor to economic revitalization as the government is saying.
From a theoretical standpoint, while the marginal spending trend is relatively high, it is right that increasing income for the lower income bracket helps the economy recover.
But unless you increase the income of the middle and the low income levels on a massive scale, there's a good chance that the stimulus effect through that route will not be great.
And this is all about short-term stimulation, and not directly related to the expansion of long-term growth engines.
It is relatively easy for governments to ruin their economies, considering the results that governments have been observing in many parts of the world have had on their economies.
While the example is Venezuela, which lost its economy in one day, such as Venezuela, where the extraordinary populist policies destroyed the country's economy, it's quite common to observe cases where the government's wrong policies have ruined the economy.
But it is by no means easier said than done for governments to stimulate the economy in a short period of time.
It is relatively easy to bring the economy back to recovery with a Keynesian expansion policy when the economy is temporarily in recession due to a lack of demand.
But it is very difficult to dramatically increase growth potential through government policies.
MB's absurd " 747 " commitment is well demonstrated.
For a time, citizens around the world have been fascinated by the empty claims of neo-liberalists that can dramatically stimulate the economy through tax cuts and deregulation.
But as the results of neo-liberalism experiments in the United States have undoubtedly proved futile.
In short, neo-liberalist policies failed to bring about the miracle they had promised ; they only had the side effects of deteriorating distribution.
As you know, not only is the United States having the worst distribution in the developed world, but it is also approaching the worst distribution in history.
In a similar vein, I predict that an income-driven growth policy will not lead to a miraculous economic revitalization either.
But I can't agree with the argument that some of the problems facing the economy at the moment are income driven growth policies.
For example, frozen investment sentiment and declining growth rates have nothing to do with income-driven growth policies.
But I accept that the government has created a sense of urgency, triggering anxiety throughout the economy.
Given the fact that anxiety can spread so easily due to the fan of conservative media, I think we could have exercised the wisdom of more cautious policies.
For some reason or other, a policy can not be successful unless it has confidence in its policies.
Although an income-driven growth policy does not have a dramatic effect on the economy, I believe it has its advantages.
With the polarization continuing to grow, it is desirable for middle - and low-income families to try not to fall further.
Isn't it a lot better than having a policy that makes the rich even richer in anticipation of an unrealizable trickle-down effect?
There is no magic formula, whether neo-liberalism or income-driven growth policy, that can transform the economy overnight.
No matter how competent a government appears, it can not make the economy grow by one percentage point at a time.
Overconsciousness about economic growth can lead to policy drift in the wrong direction.
Even if it doesn't do well and takes time, government policy should focus on strengthening the fundamentals of the economy.
We need to break the blockage, break the finishing touches, and focus on the referee's role in guiding the fair game.
We must not forget that a base-oriented government can be the most effective government.
I think it is desirable that the income-driven growth policy should be changed to a policy that focuses on guaranteeing the income of middle and low income people.
The main reason for this is the claim that it can lead to groundbreaking growth, which has led to attacks from opponents.
Who would throw stones at policies that would focus on actively improving the lives of socially vulnerable people?
In English, there is the expression " Slow and steady. "
It refers to a slow but steady attitude toward achieving certain goals.
I think this is what the Government desperately need.
In our haste, we should not let everything go to waste ; we should bring hope to the effort.
Lee Joon Goo
Scrap : * Women's Era * The Inerrant Space Report of Calm Twenties
Comment 12
The New Menu
The first comment was met by the press.
- ㅝ 21:44 NEW MENU
Uh, economics theory ...! Lee Joon Goo Lee Chang-yong ...
Help me up 21:46 New Menu
It's a very good article.
 Lead or Follow or Exit 21:46 New Menu
Ah cool ...... seeing people talking about the economic cycle as well as the media, or people who believe it will work fairly well and a whole new world will come.
Answer comments or follow them or move away 21:49 New Menu
Moon Jae-in The government reported Samsung Hankyoreh or doubt the direction of the minimum wage, worried about collusion with countries such as folded up like noisy Chojoongdong or indeed is the same. Economy is important to economic leaders, but it's not a good thing because it keeps encouraging.
Reply comment  Artemis Goddess 21:56 New Menu
What magic? That's all in a day.
Yagliyaliyali 21:47 NEW MENU
Professor ...
Floral Flower - 21:47 NEW MENU
You should get hit every day. The press ...
 Wind yWindy 21:49 New Menu
It is very nice to learn about economics in professor Lee's book.
New Menu
Slow and steady on the basics
nase Hiroomi 21:52 New Menu
Kyung-ron Lee Joon-gu ...
Yeona (F) 21:56 New Menu
The government is being pursued because slow but steady policy is not possible in a single five-year term.
Visit a cafe
Articles about this caf.txt.

Comment 390

The government an outburst at the Moon Jae-in is a huge bomb left by the imyeongbakkeunhye txt (the minimum wage, economic recession,). 150 comments 2018.07.17

A good kind of self-management. txt 2018.06.26 Comment 130
Why is it a colonial officer promotion drama. txt 2018.07.15 Comment 115

Comment 79

By : The Great Full Moon : 21:42 View : 1,203
Comment 12


Source : http://jkl123.com/sub5_1.htm?table=board1&st=view&page=1&id=18353&limit=&keykind=&keyword=&bo_class =
One of the most asked questions I get from people around me these days is income driven growth policy.
Are we going to be asked a lot, " Can an income-driven growth policy boost our economy? "
There are some economists who want to hear my opinion, but in their minds they have already found answers and ask questions of interest.
The answer is that the income-driven growth policy is not going to do well.
Conservative media is intent on criticizing the income driven growth policy of this administration.
Their argument is that the Korean economy is now in an unprecedented crisis, and its main culprit is an income driven growth policy.
If we don't scrap our revenue-driven growth policy now, our economy is going to crash overnight.
Since MB became president, our economy has been growing at around 3 % for more than a decade.
Against this backdrop, the Bank of Korea has lowered its forecast for next year by only 0.1 % to 2.9 %, making a fuss as if there were some major disruptions.
It seems to have been forgotten that just two years prior to the government's rise, the economy grew only 2.8 percent in 2015 and 2016.
If the Korean economy has been dragging on since the regime are in crisis situations, it's imyeongbakkeunhye wigiji by no means the income growth initiatives of the government is created crisis.No.
One irony is the income growth initiatives for the first time came with the fact that the regime is Park Geun-hye.
I have no recollection of the conservative press criticizing the policy so fiercely at the time.
Again, the word " Naronam Fire " comes to mind.
If the Conservative government pushes for it, it doesn't matter, but if the liberal government pushes it, it does.
To be honest, I supported the idea of income-driven growth itself.
I was just criticizing the policy at the time on how to implement it specifically.
The problem was that in order for income-driven growth to really take shape, the incomes of middle and low-income brackets had to grow dramatically, and there was no support for any specific policies that made it possible.
The only thing that was to do was to give huge tax breaks to dividend income, which resulted in billions of won and billions of won in unexpected gains for the chaebol.
Moon Jae-in is a clean breast of it again, my income growth initiatives will greatly boost the economic success of the government would not.
I don't see it as a problematic policy, as the conservative press is saying, but I don't think it's as likely to be the top contributor to economic revitalization as the government is saying.
From a theoretical standpoint, while the marginal spending trend is relatively high, it is right that increasing income for the lower income bracket helps the economy recover.
But unless you increase the income of the middle and the low income levels on a massive scale, there's a good chance that the stimulus effect through that route will not be great.
And this is all about short-term stimulation, and not directly related to the expansion of long-term growth engines.
It is relatively easy for governments to ruin their economies, considering the results that governments have been observing in many parts of the world have had on their economies.
While the example is Venezuela, which lost its economy in one day, such as Venezuela, where the extraordinary populist policies destroyed the country's economy, it's quite common to observe cases where the government's wrong policies have ruined the economy.
But it is by no means easier said than done for governments to stimulate the economy in a short period of time.
It is relatively easy to bring the economy back to recovery with a Keynesian expansion policy when the economy is temporarily in recession due to a lack of demand.
But it is very difficult to dramatically increase growth potential through government policies.
MB's absurd " 747 " commitment is well demonstrated.
For a time, citizens around the world have been fascinated by the empty claims of neo-liberalists that can dramatically stimulate the economy through tax cuts and deregulation.
But as the results of neo-liberalism experiments in the United States have undoubtedly proved futile.
In short, neo-liberalist policies failed to bring about the miracle they had promised ; they only had the side effects of deteriorating distribution.
As you know, not only is the United States having the worst distribution in the developed world, but it is also approaching the worst distribution in history.
In a similar vein, I predict that an income-driven growth policy will not lead to a miraculous economic revitalization either.
But I can't agree with the argument that some of the problems facing the economy at the moment are income driven growth policies.
For example, frozen investment sentiment and declining growth rates have nothing to do with income-driven growth policies.
But I accept that the government has created a sense of urgency, triggering anxiety throughout the economy.
Given the fact that anxiety can spread so easily due to the fan of conservative media, I think we could have exercised the wisdom of more cautious policies.
For some reason or other, a policy can not be successful unless it has confidence in its policies.
Although an income-driven growth policy does not have a dramatic effect on the economy, I believe it has its advantages.
With the polarization continuing to grow, it is desirable for middle - and low-income families to try not to fall further.
Isn't it a lot better than having a policy that makes the rich even richer in anticipation of an unrealizable trickle-down effect?
There is no magic formula, whether neo-liberalism or income-driven growth policy, that can transform the economy overnight.
No matter how competent a government appears, it can not make the economy grow by one percentage point at a time.
Overconsciousness about economic growth can lead to policy drift in the wrong direction.
Even if it doesn't do well and takes time, government policy should focus on strengthening the fundamentals of the economy.
We need to break the blockage, break the finishing touches, and focus on the referee's role in guiding the fair game.
We must not forget that a base-oriented government can be the most effective government.
I think it is desirable that the income-driven growth policy should be changed to a policy that focuses on guaranteeing the income of middle and low income people.
The main reason for this is the claim that it can lead to groundbreaking growth, which has led to attacks from opponents.
Who would throw stones at policies that would focus on actively improving the lives of socially vulnerable people?
In English, there is the expression " Slow and steady. "
It refers to a slow but steady attitude toward achieving certain goals.
I think this is what the Government desperately need.
In our haste, we should not let everything go to waste ; we should bring hope to the effort.
Lee Joon Goo
Scrap : * Women's Era * The Inerrant Space Report of Calm Twenties
Comment 12
The New Menu
The first comment was met by the press.
- ㅝ 21:44 NEW MENU
Uh, economics theory ...! Lee Joon Goo Lee Chang-yong ...
Help me up 21:46 New Menu
It's a very good article.
 Lead or Follow or Exit 21:46 New Menu
Ah cool ...... seeing people talking about the economic cycle as well as the media, or people who believe it will work fairly well and a whole new world will come.
Answer comments or follow them or move away 21:49 New Menu
Moon Jae-in The government reported Samsung Hankyoreh or doubt the direction of the minimum wage, worried about collusion with countries such as folded up like noisy Chojoongdong or indeed is the same. Economy is important to economic leaders, but it's not a good thing because it keeps encouraging.
Reply comment  Artemis Goddess 21:56 New Menu
What magic? That's all in a day.
Yagliyaliyali 21:47 NEW MENU
Professor ...
Floral Flower - 21:47 NEW MENU
You should get hit every day. The press ...
 Wind yWindy 21:49 New Menu
It is very nice to learn about economics in professor Lee's book.
New Menu
Slow and steady on the basics
nase Hiroomi 21:52 New Menu
Kyung-ron Lee Joon-gu ...
Yeona (F) 21:56 New Menu
The government is being pursued because slow but steady policy is not possible in a single five-year term.
Visit a cafe
Articles about this caf.txt.

Comment 390

The government an outburst at the Moon Jae-in is a huge bomb left by the imyeongbakkeunhye txt (the minimum wage, economic recession,). 150 comments 2018.07.17

A good kind of self-management. txt 2018.06.26 Comment 130
Why is it a colonial officer promotion drama. txt 2018.07.15 Comment 115

Comment 79
Comments