Revisiting the true meaning of fairness

Lee Geun-myeon
The author is a former Minister of Personnel Management.

The so-called 1,000-won ($0.77) breakfast offered at school cafeterias has been hugely popular on university campuses. Given the high inflation rate in Korea where a meal at a diner cost 10,000 won on average, a decent tray meal 10 times cheaper can only please students. The 1,000-won breakfast became subsidized by the Ministry of Agriculture from 2017 on the reason that the program helps the nutrition of young people as well as rice farmers. A student pays for the breakfast at 1,000 won, while the government chips in 1,000 won. The rest is subsidized by the university.

Soaring inflation has partly bred the demand for the 1,000-won breakfast. But what fueled the spread was the hefty government funding. The budget for the 1,000-won breakfast — which was set at 778 million won last year — more than doubled to 1.59 billion won this year. Universities that joined the program increased to 41 early this year from 28 last year. The number now reached 145 after the government invited additional applications from universities. Some colleges which jumped on the bandwagon now have to worry about its share of the cost.

Leaders of both ruling and opposition parties cheered along the program nicely pitched as “feeding college students and at the same time increasing rice consumption” by visiting campuses and elaborately trying out the meal. However, is the program really worth it? The ruling conservative party which criticized populist policies of the former liberal administration also has been trying to win favor with voters through state riches. Few seem to find a problem with their behaviors.

A policy aimed at enhancing social welfare and safety net for the people and populism aimed to win over voters may look similar at first glance, but are completely different in essence. The 1,000-won school meal is a typical byproduct of populism as it does not deserve to have the priority in budget or serve the principle of balance and fairness.

Can university students be really worse off than the elderly who must use the subway offered free of charge to make a long trip to get a meal offered by charity groups or those who have nowhere else to go than the hang-out place Tapgol Park for the elderly? Even if the young people’s future is more important than elderly poverty, the fairness of the 1000-won school meal program is doubted.

Still, there are many young people who have failed to enter colleges and those who opted to find work because they cannot afford university schooling. New recruits fresh out of college also won’t be any better off.

In the contest of populism, there is no difference between the governing and opposition parties. About a decade ago, the country was sharply divided over a free school meal at public elementary and secondary schools. Now the free school meal has become a norm. Still, few can answer the question why the state is paying for free lunch for children of rich families. But politicians go on enlarging the scope of free offerings. Once giveaway policy comes out, it stays and breeds more lavish actions. When uninterrupted, the society would be left with freedom of populism instead of free and fair distribution of funds.

The budget for the 1,000-won breakfast program may look small and transitory. But one day, it could lead up to lunch and supper at such affordable price. Some could demand the government pay entirely. Politicians could raise the idea first. To be truly fair, the jobless people, factory workers, and new recruits also should get a free meal.

The year is only half done, but tax shortage has already exceeded 30 trillion won. It is hard to tell if we are at the onset, or the peak, or at the end of an economic crisis. Despite the dark debt-financed uncertainties of the future, politicians continue to woo voters with generous policies under the pretext of welfare benefits. If spending increases despite limited resources, any household or corporation will go bankrupt.

Authorities must sit down and set priorities in spending with the budget coming from the blood and sweat of the people. We need politicians who care about the future more than votes from university students. The truth meaning of fairness and equality should be revisited.

Translation by the Korea JoongAng Daily staff.