지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 연구보고서
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2021.10
- 수록면
- 1 - 150 (150page)
이용수
DBpia Top 5%동일한 주제분류 기준으로최근 2년간 이용수 순으로 정렬했을 때
해당 논문이 위치하는 상위 비율을 의미합니다.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This study explores the future direction of social security reform in Korea, including the introduction of universal basic income. It considers three options: (1) strengthening of the existing social security system, (2) implementation of a full basic income at the level of 25% of GDP, and (3) introduction of a partial basic income at the level of 10% to 15% of GDP and reform of the existing social security system.
We examine the possible effects of various policies to guarantee minimum income to all, such as make-up minimum income guarantee, individual-based and household-based versions of negative income tax, and basic income. A make-up minimum income guarantee scheme will produce work disincentives and encourage moral hazards, leading to negative growth. A household-based negative income tax scheme, or ‘safety income’, will encourage disintegration of families. An individual-based negative income tax scheme, or ‘fair income’, will be unfair because it will make middle-class workers subsidize economically inactive individuals of rich families. A universal basic income scheme is better than other policies in terms of absence of work disincentives and neutrality regarding household formation. Also, UBI can enjoy broad political support because more than 80 per cent of the population will gain.
With regard to social insurances such as employment insurance and public pensions, we propose to reform them into ‘universal income insurance’ rather than replacing them with basic income. In order to solve the problem of limited coverage of social insurances based on standard employment relationship and prevent moral hazard from the insured, we propose that flat-rate contributions should be collected from all sources of earned income and that the benefits should be proportional to one’s earnings and contributions. Thus, we envision a two-tiered social security system composed of partial basic income and contributions-proportional income insurance.
We show how the ‘paradox of redistribution’ works in the case of national pension in Korea. The supposedly ‘equal benefits’ that were designed to play a redistributive role are actually unequal, because the pension benefits based on ‘A-value,’ or the average income of the insured population, are proportional to the period in which the insured individuals have paid contributions. Since most of the poor are unable to build up adequate contribution records, they do not get those ‘equal benefits’ at all or receive only small amounts of benefits. Hence, introducing a basic income scheme that makes the ‘equal benefits’ truly equal to everyone regardless of contribution records, in parallel with a contributions-proportional public pension scheme can be a better solution.
We propose that the next administration should make a long-term plan for social security reform, or Vision 2060, which includes partial basic income and contributions-proportional income insurance. Gyeonggi-do can play an active role in the process of long-term planning with its experiences of implementing various basic income schemes. It can conduct evaluation studies of the basic income programs, run new pilot basic income programs such as rural basic income, and implement randomized controlled experiments of contributions-proportional income insurance in collaboration with the central government.
We examine the possible effects of various policies to guarantee minimum income to all, such as make-up minimum income guarantee, individual-based and household-based versions of negative income tax, and basic income. A make-up minimum income guarantee scheme will produce work disincentives and encourage moral hazards, leading to negative growth. A household-based negative income tax scheme, or ‘safety income’, will encourage disintegration of families. An individual-based negative income tax scheme, or ‘fair income’, will be unfair because it will make middle-class workers subsidize economically inactive individuals of rich families. A universal basic income scheme is better than other policies in terms of absence of work disincentives and neutrality regarding household formation. Also, UBI can enjoy broad political support because more than 80 per cent of the population will gain.
With regard to social insurances such as employment insurance and public pensions, we propose to reform them into ‘universal income insurance’ rather than replacing them with basic income. In order to solve the problem of limited coverage of social insurances based on standard employment relationship and prevent moral hazard from the insured, we propose that flat-rate contributions should be collected from all sources of earned income and that the benefits should be proportional to one’s earnings and contributions. Thus, we envision a two-tiered social security system composed of partial basic income and contributions-proportional income insurance.
We show how the ‘paradox of redistribution’ works in the case of national pension in Korea. The supposedly ‘equal benefits’ that were designed to play a redistributive role are actually unequal, because the pension benefits based on ‘A-value,’ or the average income of the insured population, are proportional to the period in which the insured individuals have paid contributions. Since most of the poor are unable to build up adequate contribution records, they do not get those ‘equal benefits’ at all or receive only small amounts of benefits. Hence, introducing a basic income scheme that makes the ‘equal benefits’ truly equal to everyone regardless of contribution records, in parallel with a contributions-proportional public pension scheme can be a better solution.
We propose that the next administration should make a long-term plan for social security reform, or Vision 2060, which includes partial basic income and contributions-proportional income insurance. Gyeonggi-do can play an active role in the process of long-term planning with its experiences of implementing various basic income schemes. It can conduct evaluation studies of the basic income programs, run new pilot basic income programs such as rural basic income, and implement randomized controlled experiments of contributions-proportional income insurance in collaboration with the central government.
목차
[표지]
[요약 및 정책건의]
[차례]
표차례
그림차례
[제1장 서론]
1. 연구의 배경 및 목적
2. 연구의 내용, 범위 및 방법
[제2장 한국의 소득 불평등]
1. 개인소득의 분포
2. 가구소득의 분포
[제3장 선별소득보장의 문제점]
1. 개요
2. 소득 역전
3. 근로유인 저하
4. 경제적 비용
5. 정치적 부담
[제4장 소득보장 사회보험의 문제점]
1. 사회보험 사각지대와 사회보장의 이중구조
2. 사회보장 이중구조를 심화시키는 이중 노동시장
3. 한국의 노동시장 및 사회보장의 이중구조
4. 노동시장의 이중화를 촉진하는 사회보험 제도
[제5장 사회보장 개혁의 방향]
1. 사회보장 개혁의 이론적 고찰
2. 한국 사회보장 개혁의 선택 가능한 세 가지 방향
3. 소결
[제6장 개혁대안(1): 보충형 최소소득 보장]
1. 개요
2. 분석
3. 시장소득과 가처분소득
4. 경제적 비용 추정
5. 평가
[제7장 개혁대안(2): 부의 소득세]
1. 개념
2. 가구 단위 부의 소득세: 안심소득제
3. 개인 단위 부의 소득세
[제8장 개혁대안(3): 기본소득]
1. 개요
2. 분석
3. 경제적 비용 추정
4. 개인단위 부의 소득세와 기본소득의 관계
5. 평가
[제9장 개혁대안(4): 보편적 소득보험]
1. 보편적 소득보험을 실현하기 위한 소득/기여 비례로의 보험급여 개혁방안
2. 보편적 소득보험을 실현하기 위한 사회보험료 체계 개편 및 징수 방안
3. 근로유인 및 사회보험료 지원 효과를 가지는 보편적 근로수당의 도입
[제10장 결론 및 정책제안]
1. 요약
2. 정책제안
[참고문헌]
[Abstract]
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
기본소득과 유사제도 비교 연구
정책연구
2021 .06
-
경기도 기본소득 5개년 (2022년~2026년) 종합계획 수립 연구
정책연구
2021 .10
-
한국의 상위 소득구조와 금융소득의 역할
사회과학연구
2021 .01
-
기본소득에 대한 조세법적 고찰에 관한 연구
세무회계연구
2021 .01
-
한국의 개인소득 분포: 소득세 자료에 의한 접근
한국경제의 분석
2016 .01
-
서울시민 소득안정성 제고 위한 소득지원체계 구축방향
서울연구원 정책과제연구보고서
2023 .02
-
경기도 청년기본소득 정책효과 분석(IV)
정책연구
2022 .11
-
기본소득제도의 논의배경과 한계에 관한 연구
미국헌법연구
2017 .12
-
가구주의 노동시장 특성에 따른 소득원천별 가구소득불평등과 요인분해: 2010년․2015년 소득분배상태의 변화
사회보장연구
2016 .01
-
근로조건 없는 소득의 증가가 노동공급에 미치는 효과 분석 : 한국 기본소득제도 도입을 위한 정책적 시사점을 중심으로
경제와사회
2017 .12
-
기본소득과 헌법상 양성평등의 실현
헌법학연구
2020 .01
-
안심소득제의 효과
노동경제논집
2017 .09
-
우리나라 소득불평등의 추이와 국제비교
사회과학연구
2018 .06
-
기본소득 도입논의와 사회보험과의 역할 재설정에 대한 탐색적 고찰
한국사회복지교육
2020 .01
-
Income mobility of Older People in England and South Korea
한국노인복지학회 학술대회
2016 .11
-
경기도 청년기본소득 정책효과 분석(II) : 사전 및 사후조사 비교
정책연구
2020 .12
-
기본소득의 법적 고찰
사회보장법학
2020 .06
-
인적용역 과세제도의 문제점과 개선방안
회계정보연구
2016 .01
-
Re-examining The Time-varying Relationship Between Health and Income Distributions
International Economic Journal
2022 .06
-
낮은 수준의 범주형 기본소득의 의미: 경기도 청년기본소득 수급 청년의 경험
사회보장연구
2021 .11
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2023-309-000109653