I object to the government's intervention in the market because if it intervenes in the economy, the government's failure will have more negative effects than benefits and cannot solve market problems.

First, it turns out that government intervention cannot alleviate societal inequality but rather intensifies the problem. The minimum wage system is a case in point. The system, implemented in 1986 to ensure a stable life for low-wage workers, has had side effects such as layoffs for labor costs and involuntary increases in unemployment for higher wages. The Korea Economic Research Institute has released a study showing that a rise in the minimum wage from 8,720 won to 10,000 won will reduce up to 304,000 jobs. The study supports that the employment of self-employed workers has decreased significantly over the past three years when the minimum wage has risen significantly. In addition, when the minimum wage rises by 1% in France, there is a case in which the employment of low-income jobs decreases by 1%. Government intervention has resulted in shrinking corporate job demand, which has led to deepening inequality.

Second, government intervention does not compensate for market failure. Historically, it was much more efficient to leave it to the market. Many socialist countries that tried to regulate the market failed and collapsed, like East Germany and the Soviet Union, and China introduced a market economy, reducing its poverty rate. It is important to improve the overall quality of life as the economy grows and becomes rich together. In fact, even in Korea, the government actively intervened in judging real estate demand and supply as a market failure, but the result of accelerating and deepening the problem shows that the government cannot beat the market.

Third, if the government intervenes, it is highly likely that the government's inefficiency will lead to government failure. In the book The Future of Wealth, futurist Alvin Toffler criticized the government's involvement in the government's intervention as the speed at which companies change is only 25 miles per hour, and public organizations are only 25 miles per hour. The economy is so large and complicated, but the government has difficulty collecting complete information about it, so it is difficult for the government to succeed in policy due to a lack of information. Public organizations also have inefficient, inflexible, and rigid organizational structures that make decisions based on political interests without prioritizing performance, making it difficult to intervene in fluid markets and produce successful results efficiently. In fact, the law on improving the distribution structure of mobile telecommunication terminal devices did not reduce communication costs but added an economic burden to consumers.

Finally, I am opposed to government intervention for this reason. First, government intervention cannot alleviate inequality in society. Second, government intervention does not compensate for market failure; third, they oppose it because there is a high possibility of government failure.

서영주 강남포스트 학생기자  webmaster@ignnews.kr

<저작권자 © 강남포스트, 무단 전재 및 재배포 금지>