Korean Hugfest

Economics, Politics, Philosophy, History and Culture
Forum rules
Always add something of value to the discussion and have fun. Mind your language, no porn, no libel, no trolling and no personal attacks.

Please note, views expressed on the forum do not necessarily represent the views of Mises UK. the Mises UK Council, Mises UK Faculty or Mises UK members. Membership of this forum is open to anyone world wide who is interested in civil discussion.
User avatar
Neodoxy
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2018 4:05 am

Korean Hugfest

Post by Neodoxy » Mon Apr 30, 2018 9:01 am

Why isn't there already thread on this?

Image

Will North and South Korea be on lasting good ties?

Is the Donald a help or hindrance to these events?

Can the North Korean State remain intact?

Why don't the United States, South Korea, and Japan literally buy North Korea from Kimmy Un and the top brass of the country for a small amount of the cost of maintaining defensive procedures against NK and the potential costs of conflict?

Does China have an incentive to keep up distrust between the two areas?

Will the Korean Peninsula ever be reunified?

Will the events of the shitty video game "Homefront" come to pass?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homefront_(video_game)

User avatar
Tom Rogers
Posts: 149
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2018 5:55 pm
Location: The Atheistic Pagan Avatars' Own County
Contact:

Re: Korean Hugfest

Post by Tom Rogers » Mon Apr 30, 2018 9:42 am

[deleted]
Last edited by Tom Rogers on Fri Jun 29, 2018 2:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Physiocrat
Site Admin
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:25 am

Re: Korean Hugfest

Post by Physiocrat » Mon Apr 30, 2018 10:01 am

Before I saw who posted this thread I thought it was going to be spam.

I'm really not sure what to make of the current situation. I think you're right though, just buying out North Korea makes the most sense from a financial point of view although as Tom said, having the tensions between North and South do justify US presence there.

Whatever happens, unification is a very bad idea. It will likely cause the South to be economically drained by the North,just how East Germany leeches of the West. Rather an independent non-communist republic (unfortunately probably democratic but I don't see an viable alternative unless Kim wants to turn Pinochet) which has to stand on its own two feet would be far more preferable as it would encourage relatively more liberal policies to be pursued in the North. A unified democratic Korea is a just asking for the Northerners to vote for a Bernie/Corbyn figure who will give them free stuff at the expense of the South Koreans.
The atoms tell the atoms so, for I never was or will but atoms forevermore be.

Yours sincerely,

Physiocrat

User avatar
Tom Rogers
Posts: 149
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2018 5:55 pm
Location: The Atheistic Pagan Avatars' Own County
Contact:

Re: Korean Hugfest

Post by Tom Rogers » Mon Apr 30, 2018 1:04 pm

[deleted]
Last edited by Tom Rogers on Fri Jun 29, 2018 2:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
William
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2018 2:11 pm

Re: Korean Hugfest

Post by William » Mon Apr 30, 2018 1:46 pm

Physiocrat wrote:
Mon Apr 30, 2018 10:01 am
. A unified democratic Korea is a just asking for the Northerners to vote for a Bernie/Corbyn figure who will give them free stuff at the expense of the South Koreans.
Is that the trend in East/West Germany and other similar countries. I was talking to a German, he said that to this day East Germany is underdeveloped
I have come to feel strongly that the greatest service I can still render to my fellow men would be that I could make the speakers and writers among them thoroughly ashamed ever again to employ the term 'social justice'.
F.A Hayek

User avatar
Neodoxy
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2018 4:05 am

Re: Korean Hugfest

Post by Neodoxy » Mon Apr 30, 2018 2:52 pm

I realize that it's partly semantics but I don't think that the kind of redistribution we're talking about from SK to NK can fairly be likened to Sanders or Corbyn figure. At that point we're not talking about redistribution within a first world country, but redistribution from a first world to a third world country. I don't think you can cut the figures or be generous in such a way that the normal South Korean ISN'T at least twenty times better off than a normal North Korean. I am quite sympathetic to the plight of North Koreans, not nearly so much to the other groups. At any rate, if one Korean nation is going to exist policies to try and economically even out the country are going to have to happen, but I think that we all agree that full integration for economic reasons alone isn't viable, although I do find that very unfortunate.

Man would that kind of integration be fascinating for economic research though.

User avatar
Jon Irenicus
Posts: 149
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2018 9:36 pm

Re: Korean Hugfest

Post by Jon Irenicus » Mon Apr 30, 2018 3:44 pm

It’s tricky because it’s not the fault of South Koreans that the North Korean govt kept the latter population in penury. So it’d be a hugely unfair imposition on them, to enact any kind of redistribution policy. Possibly why they won’t accept reunification if it were on offer.
Former overlord of the original Mises forum.

User avatar
Neodoxy
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2018 4:05 am

Re: Korean Hugfest

Post by Neodoxy » Mon Apr 30, 2018 3:53 pm

It's not really the South Korean's fault they're wealthy and it's not really the North Korean's fault they're poor (speaking in collectivistic groupings). I can't really blame people trying to vote their way out of true abject poverty when given the chance. I certainly can't blame anyone for not wanting to immediately put their own money on the line to level such an awesome wealth disparity (although man is it fun to suggest such a thing to a champagne socialist!).

This is why statist politics are terrible.

At any rate, I agree that the only sensible solution would be some kind of partial union, and I would hope the South Koreans would be wise enough to realize this.

User avatar
Jon Irenicus
Posts: 149
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2018 9:36 pm

Re: Korean Hugfest

Post by Jon Irenicus » Mon Apr 30, 2018 4:39 pm

I think the other issue is, even if they were to unite and say institute some redistributionist policy, it would set a precedent and potentially further animosity between the two groups, both on the side of the donor and the recipient. A better strategy for South Korea might be to encourage its northern neighbour to institute free market reforms and invest in it. Ultimately it might be a cheaper price to pay. To this day, east Germany lags behind west Germany, and we're talking about relatively homogeneous populations, as would be the case with the two Koreas.

Another aspect is whether competition between two separate governments may work to the benefit of Koreans as a whole, seeing as it may encourage them to enact more beneficial regulatory and tax policy.
Former overlord of the original Mises forum.

User avatar
William
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2018 2:11 pm

Re: Korean Hugfest

Post by William » Mon Apr 30, 2018 6:44 pm

Neodoxy wrote:
Mon Apr 30, 2018 2:52 pm
I realize that it's partly semantics but I don't think that the kind of redistribution we're talking about from SK to NK can fairly be likened to Sanders or Corbyn figure. At that point we're not talking about redistribution within a first world country, but redistribution from a first world to a third world country. I don't think you can cut the figures or be generous in such a way that the normal South Korean ISN'T at least twenty times better off than a normal North Korean. I am quite sympathetic to the plight of North Koreans, not nearly so much to the other groups. At any rate, if one Korean nation is going to exist policies to try and economically even out the country are going to have to happen, but I think that we all agree that full integration for economic reasons alone isn't viable, although I do find that very unfortunate.

Man would that kind of integration be fascinating for economic research though.
There has to be some precedence for this stuff though. I was just wondering what some examples were. But intuitively I would think there would at least at first have to be a kind of "Korean Confederacy" or "Two Crown" system because the two countries are so dramatically different
I have come to feel strongly that the greatest service I can still render to my fellow men would be that I could make the speakers and writers among them thoroughly ashamed ever again to employ the term 'social justice'.
F.A Hayek

Post Reply