[Public Opinion Briefing Vol. 40-2] Economic Solutions: Harmonize Polarization Reduction with Economic Growth

[Public Opinion Briefing Vol. 41] Challenges and Public Opinion for the Second Year of the MB Administration

[1] The Dual Challenges Facing the MB Administration in its Second Year

[2] How to Solve Economic Issues? "Harmonize Polarization Reduction with Economic Growth"

[3] If the MB Administration is to Succeed in Revitalizing the Economy...

[4] Security Threats the MB Administration Must Resolve

How to Solve Economic Issues? "Harmonize Polarization Reduction with Economic Growth"

"Growth-driven polarization theory" gains traction over the dichotomy of growth and distribution

While a majority of the public currently identifies revitalizing the economy as the paramount task of state affairs, there are differing views on the diagnosis and prescription for the economic crisis. Specifically, responses are divided between those who cite 'reducing economic polarization' as the task the current administration must resolve and those who cite 'economic growth'. In this survey, more respondents prioritized reducing economic polarization (33.9%) as the most important national task the government must address, compared to those who prioritized economic growth (26.6%).

"Growth-driven polarization theory" gains traction over the dichotomy of growth and distribution

- High support for 'growth-first policies' as a method for reducing economic polarization

From the Participatory Government era to the current administration, the political sphere has been sharply divided between those emphasizing 'reducing economic polarization' and those emphasizing 'economic growth' as the key task for economic revitalization. Generally, the stance that emphasizes economic polarization tends to stress welfare policies, while the stance that emphasizes economic growth tends to prioritize growth policies based on market principles.

However, the public appears to place greater importance on reducing economic polarization than on economic growth as the primary task for economic revitalization, while preferring growth-first policies over welfare policies as the means to achieve this. While 41.6% supported prioritizing welfare policies as the direction for economic revitalization, 57.7% favored growth-first policies. Furthermore, even among those who identified reducing economic polarization as the top national priority, those who believed economic policy should be growth-oriented accounted for 51.9%, a majority, indicating that growth policies are considered necessary even for reducing polarization, with a near-even split against prioritizing welfare policies (47.5%) [Figure 1].

Notably, even among supporters of the Democratic Party, which relatively emphasizes reducing polarization more than the Grand National Party's focus on growth policies, 54.9% favored growth-first policies, while only 45.1% favored welfare policies. Examining by social strata, while the upper class preferred growth-oriented policies at 63.6%, even the lower strata, who are more acutely experiencing the economic downturn, favored growth policies (56.7%) over welfare policies (41.2%) [Figure 2].

This implies that the dichotomy of 'economic growth = market-dominant growth policy' and 'reducing economic polarization = welfare policy,' as seen in the past, is no longer applicable. In other words, while the public desires the goal of economic revitalization to be focused on reducing economic polarization, which is directly linked to people's lives, rather than growth itself, there appears to be a growing perception that growth policies are necessary as a methodology to achieve the reduction of polarization.

[Figure 1] Preferred Economic Policies by Top National Priority Task (%)

[Figure 2] Preferred Economic Policies by Party Support and Perceived Social Strata (%)

Perception of Economic Impact Varies Significantly by Social Strata, Leading to Self-Deprecating Tendencies

- Upper strata household economy: 38% "worsened", middle strata: "42.9%", lower strata: "61.1%"

The phenomenon of economic polarization is clearly evident in the contrasting assessments of the economic crisis based on one's perceived social stratum. Among those who consider themselves to be in the upper stratum, 9.1% responded that their household economy had worsened over the past year, compared to 42.9% of those who identify as middle class. However, a striking 61.1% of those who perceive themselves as belonging to the lower stratum reported that their household financial situation had deteriorated [Figure 3].

The sense of social division and relative deprivation, as much as the actual economic disparities, can be seen as factors exacerbating polarization. Even among respondents with a household income of over 2 million won per month, which qualifies them as middle class or above according to OECD classification standards, a considerable number perceived themselves as belonging to the 'lower stratum.' More than half of those in the 2-3 million won income bracket perceived themselves as lower class, and 44.7% of those in the 3-4 million won income bracket also identified as lower class. Notably, even among the 4-5 million won income bracket and the upper income bracket of over 5 million won, the proportion perceiving themselves as lower class was significant at 27.9% and 20.3%, respectively. This ultimately indicates that many citizens are psychologically devaluing their socioeconomic status rather than their objective income level. This, as a result of psychological deprivation, creates room for perceiving the polarization phenomenon as more severe than it actually is [Table 1].

[Figure 3] Perceived Worsening of Household Economy by Social Strata and Size (%)

Note 1. Perceived worsening of household economy is the percentage of "worsened" responses among "improved," "maintained," and "worsened."
Note 2. "Don't know/No response" in size is not indicated.