Why taxing the wealthy and high-income earners is the trend of the times.JPG

Korea's elderly population has now exceeded 10 million,
and the number of basic livelihood security recipients is 3 million.
(Both are skyrocketing every year)
At the current rate, the elderly will make up more than half the population in the future.
Basic livelihood benefits, basic pensions, health insurance, etc.—
various social welfare resources
are increasing tremendously over time,
but the working-age population that pays taxes is plummeting.
(The dependency ratio per young person is increasing severalfold)
Ultimately, the problem is the availability of resources,
and the source of funds is, as expected, the wealthy and high-income earners.
Since there is plenty of money to be collected from a small number of people,
politicians will inevitably target this group.
If you conduct a public opinion poll in Korea asking if the wealthy
or high-income earners pay too little tax,
the results come out as: 70% Yes / 10% Don't know / 20% No.
However,
if you ask the common people who chose "Don't know" or "No"
"Then do you want to pay more taxes instead?",
they will be horrified and instantly change their stance.
Realistically, if a tax increase is necessary,
public opinion will inevitably be over 90% in favor of
taking it from the wealthy or high-income earners...
Then, people raise counterarguments like this:
"The wealthy and high-income earners already pay a lot,
and aren't the common people essentially free-riding due to low effective tax rates?"
As aging becomes more severe,
it will be unavoidable to squeeze more taxes from the common people,
and elderly welfare will also undergo adjustments.
But the common people are numerous and have strong tax resistance,
and since most of them have terrible disposable income,
even if you squeeze more, the actual amount is too small.
(Though it holds symbolic meaning in terms of tax burden sharing)
In short, public opinion will be crushed, but the available funds will be low.
It seems elderly welfare will be reduced,
but since the elderly vote is increasing, it cannot be cut significantly.
Even if we only provide support for survival,
the elderly population will become too large to handle.
Ultimately, taxes on real estate in Seoul,
asset taxes on the wealthy, and massive tax increases for high-income earners
will inevitably become increasingly harsh.