Voters relieving '747' nonsense all over again

By Kim Tong-hyung

For most people, the number 747 is synonymous with the iconic Boeing jumbo jet. But for Koreans, it also reminds them of expectations that fell spectacularly and the specter of disappointment that hangs over them.

Looking back five years, it's difficult to think of a sillier story than Lee Myung-bak punching his ticket to Cheong Wa Dae on lavish economic promises he branded as 747 _ 7 percent annual growth, $40,000 per capita income and Korea's emergence as a top-7 world economy.

For more level-minded voters, the motto sounded ridiculous enough in 2007. In the current economic climate, the prediction is regarded with as much reverence most people have for Mayan prophecies.

The 747 pledges never really got off the ground due to a disastrous vortex of hampered industrial activity, unemployment and spiraling household debt; the country is now in desperate need of political honesty and leadership to combat inequality without hurting economic growth. The last thing the country needs to hear is further distraction created from ''all bark, no bite'' approaches and presidents who think denial is a river in Egypt.

So it's regrettable that the presidential challengers of 2012 seem to be relying on the same speechwriter Lee appeared to have plucked from Pyongyang.

Predictably, the most shameless attempt at creating a 747 sequel came from the candidate of Lee's own party.

Park Geun-hye, daughter of the late military strongman Park Chung-hee and now carrying the presidential hopes for the conservative Saenuri Party, recently unveiled a package of economic plans for the next five years. What stood out most was a promise to increase the proportion of middle-class families to include 70 percent of all households.

This would obviously require improving the living standards of families on the wrong side of the widening wealth gap. However, Park claims her government will be able to provide a financial jolt of 135 trillion won (about $125 billion), or 27 trillion won per year, to smoothen the process.

That's great and all, but where exactly would that money be coming from? Park fails to provide a specified plan for sourcing the funds, but stresses it can be done without raising taxes. That is ludicrous and absolutely an insult to voters' intelligence.

However, Park is not a solo act. Her rivals Moon Jae-in, from the opposition Democratic United Party (DUP), and Ahn Cheol-soo, an independent candidate, have also been claiming blatantly that their governments will be able to tax like a small one but spend like a big one.

Another disturbing point of Park's news conference was that she was vague about who exactly should be considered as middle class.

The Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) defines the middle class as households earning within 50 percent of median income higher or lower. For instance, if the median income is measured at 35 million won, families earning within the range of 17.5 million to 52.5 million won are rated as middle class.

OECD data shows that the Korean middle class is shrinking at an alarming pace. Middle class families accounted for 75.4 percent of all households in 1990, but 71.7 percent in 2000 and 67.5 percent in 2012. The main culprit is the massive gulf between the rich and poor that was driven deeper by the serious economic downturns Korea has experienced since the foreign currency meltdown of the late 1990s.

And the average Korean, struggling mightily to cope with stagnating wages and the rising cost of living, may consider the OECD's class specification is too generous.

A recent Hyundai Research Institute (HRI) poll showed that more than half of the respondents refer to themselves as low-income earners.

Another survey by a job information website showed its users defining middle-class life as being paid more than 5 million won a month, owning a large-enough home, driving at least a mid-sized passenger car and keeping 100 million won or more in the bank. No wonder the ''poor'' journalists of this newspaper fall on offers of free donuts like city center pigeons.

The declining middle class can be attributed to increasing reliance by companies on precarious labor that has led to a dearth in well-compensated, regular jobs.

Low-wage work is widely defined as earning less than two-thirds of the country's median wage. Korea's proportion of low-wage workers was measured at nearly 26 percent in 2010, higher than any other developed economy in the OECD. The OECD-wide average was just over 16 percent, with the United States and Britain being the other countries showing 20-something figures.

There is no argument against the fact that widening inequality has been decimating consumer activity and cut off the country from an important road to recovery at a time when exports are waning under worsening global conditions.

The household debt mountain is essentially equivalent to an entire year's gross domestic product and the alarming number of working-age Koreans sidelined from the labor force poses a considerable threat to the country's financial stability.

It's plain as a pikestaff that the country needs to find a way to boost incomes more broadly. Creating more jobs is a must. But equally important is reducing the wage gap between non-regular and regular workers as well as between men and women. Lifting the minimum wage is a consideration as well.

So what are the options Park would be willing to consider as she, after consistently putting growth before anything else throughout her political career, attempts to recast herself as a pioneer of a new type of conservative politics that better protects the interests of working class Koreans?

It's hard to know. Despite the bold ''70 percent'' headline, Park's news release didn't include specific plans on wages and working conditions.