Young-sun Park “Supply 300,000 units” vs. Jo Jung-hoon “Legonna toys”

Democratic Party candidate Park Young-seon and Candidate Jo Jung-hoon for the transition to the era met for the first time at a TV debate. Both parties plan to elect a single candidate on the 8th after going through a public opinion poll (100%) on the 6th and 7th. After that, it is expected to work on unifying pan-passport with Candidate Jin-ae Kim of the Open Democratic Party.

On the 4th, candidates Park Young-sun and Jo Jung-hoon held a fierce battle over △real estate policy △4.5 days a week and 4 days a week △support measures for small business owners at a TV debate co-hosted by Maeil Economic Daily and MBN. In particular, there was no concession on the real estate policy that would influence public sentiment and vote.

◆ 朴 “half price apartment” vs. 趙 “with toy Lego”

First, Candidate Park insisted, “We will supply half-price apartments worth 10 million won per pyeong for public sale.” By increasing the land leasing method and the floor area ratio of the underdeveloped public rental housing complex in Gangbuk, it is possible to supply 300,000 public housing units to Seoul. In response, Candidate Jo pointed out that “there is no need to wash and see the land to be supplied on a large scale,” and “There will be no apartment to be completed with the promised 300,000 units other than the toy Lego.” “We need to switch from supply to purchase,” he said. “In the short term, if the Seoul Urban Housing Corporation (SH) issues construction bonds and goes public in the long term, it can raise capital.

The Moon Jae-in administration also issued a slightly different message about the surge in house prices. Candidate Park asked for a cautious approach, saying, “The house price must land softly.” Candidate Cho agreed, but criticized the Moon Jae-in administration’s policy, saying, “If the government does not give (correctly) signals, confusion arises.”

◆ I agree with the purpose of the 4 days a week… Disagreements over speed and role of government

There was also a disagreement over the 4-day system per week and the 4-day system per week. This is because they agree with the purpose, but have different positions regarding the speed of policy and the role of the market and the government. Candidate Park aimed at the pledge of Candidate Cho and criticized it, saying, “The policy of providing incentives by creating a support center for four days a week (in Seoul) is excessive.” Candidate Park insisted that a limited 4.5-day week system should be applied to workers in the safety field at subsidiaries in Seoul.

Then, Candidate Jo replied, “I thought Park would receive the (Support Center pledge), but I was surprised,” and said, “Isn’t there a government to embrace people who couldn’t keep up with the transition going forward?” He then referred to himself as a modified marketist and pointed out, “If we leave the reduction of working hours to the market, the polarization of rest will be maximized, but will the government leave it to the market?”

◆ Basic asset vs. basic income conflict

When it came to supporting small business owners and self-employed people, opinions were divided on basic assets and basic income. Candidate Park, who insisted on basic assets, raised his voice that interest-free loans are possible through the Seoul Credit Guarantee Foundation. He said, “In Finland, the basic income has failed,” he said. “We will provide interest-free loans of 50 million won to all small business owners, and 20 million won in rent for one year to small business owners who are prohibited from collective or restricted business.”

Accordingly, Candidate Jo confronted him with a basic income. Candidate Jo argued that “a loan of 50 million won in basic assets is a basic debt in terms of accounting concepts,” and argued that “it is more effective to pay a basic income of 1 million won to homeless people every year.” In addition, “in terms of lifelong income, basic income is a bigger money and it can revitalize the economy.” “The 4 trillion won of financial resources only needs to be adjusted on a small scale without spending the natural increase in property tax, registration tax, and acquisition tax levied by Seoul city elsewhere. “Insisted.

[성승훈 기자]
[ⓒ 매일경제 & mk.co.kr, 무단전재 및 재배포 금지]