The unemployment rate for those aged between 15 and 24 in South Korea in 2017 was high (10.7%). To reduce the unemployment rate among the age group, South Korean government set a plan to hire 65,000 new government employees in 2017. South Korean government’s ides is that the increased employment will boost income among the young adults so that their spending will boost national economy. In other words, the government attempt to boost national economy by enhancing income among citizens.
However, the government is using taxpayers’ monies to hire government employee. What economic theory support or does not support such South Korean government approach? And do you believe that South Korean government plan will be successful to boost national economy and to reduce unemployment rate in the long run?
Only if you need them. In Croatia we are experiencing a hifh disbalance between number of employees in government and private sector. It is not a good policy measure, especially in the long run.
Only if you need them. In Croatia we are experiencing a hifh disbalance between number of employees in government and private sector. It is not a good policy measure, especially in the long run.
Unemployment rates among younger workers tends to be relatively high (i.e., compared with older workers) in many economics. I am not certain what would be considered a "high" unemployment rate for South Korean workers aged 15-24.
As we think about unemployment as a transition process, as well as an event in people's lives, we should remember that unemployment is almost always occurs with initial entry into the labor force. Moreover, transitions in and out of the labor force connected with education and youthful activities has unemployment implications when these workers begin searching for another job. Often, this is called frictional unemployment and although we might prefer less friction (i.e., leading to starting a job more rapidly), the issue in these cases of frictional unemployment is not typically due to a shortage of jobs.
Government policy to create more jobs for young workers would have less impact if plenty of jobs for them already exist. It seems like the key to wise policy is to understand the underlying causes and in knowing the optimal target. Those who are more familiar with South Korean labor markets are in a better position to determine if the current unemployment rate among younger workers is excessive and if it is driven by a shortage of jobs for them or other factors.
Dear Rob,
You may be right. The unemployment rate among those aged 15-24 in South Korea is not too bad. Actually, the same country is doing better than many other OECD countries. South Korean government views it as a serious social issue so that increasing employment among young adults, specifically among college graduates, is the top national agenda. Thus, they are hiring many government employees.
Thank you.
Don
https://data.oecd.org/unemp/youth-unemployment-rate.htm
https://data.oecd.org/unemp/unemployment-rates-by-education-level.htm
It really depends on what "government employment" means here. In many countries, including Scandinavia, governments embark on public works programs to "get the youths off the street," while providing them skills to enable them enter the formal labor market. They are project-based interventions that must end at some stage. A quick survey shows that the youth in South Korea have a history of political militancy and governments there are wary of their reactions. In many African countries, the youth are rising to their political potential--and many governments are talking about what they should be doing for them. So keeping the youth busy might be as much a political as it is an economic impulse. Skm
Hi! Steve,
Government employees in my question primarily refers to firefighters and police officers for those who first start their careers in their ages of 20s and early 30s. Sorry about the confusion.
Don
As Rob points unemployment rates among young people tend to be higher compared to other age groups. In most countries 10.7% wouldn't be considered high and may not attract a lot of attentionq but of course the Korean case might be different.
Since this is a kind of market intervention it may distort the labour market to some extent and in general is not a good idea. It is justified only if it removes some inefficiency of the market, some market failure. So the right answer depends on whether this policy measure removes some market failure. Why so many young peaople are unemployed? Is it due to some inefficiency of the market? If yes, what kind of inefficiency is removed? What is the financial position of the budget? Where will the extra spending come from?
You have to look at the above questions to answer whether this is a good idea. If the young people are unemployed because they dont have the skills demanded by the private sector after the end of the program they will be unemployed again. In such a case training is a better idea rather than artificial empolyment.
Stefan,
Thank you so much for your input.
The current South Korean government uses socialist approaches to the economic issues. South Korean government views that private sectors do not create sufficient jobs so that they have decided to intervene the market economy. Traditional approach is tat boosting national economy by relying on free market economy principles, which results in creating jobs.
However, the current South Korean government argues that creating pubic employee jobs such as police officers, firefighters, and professional soldiers will stimulate national economy as they will spend their incomes.
South Korean government calls it income-led economy. It can be a subjective judgement, but many Koreans believe that South Korean government is hiring government employees more than actually they need in order to stimulate national economy.
As Mirna said, it looks like Croatia has attempted it, while creating unbalance of jobs between public sectors and private sectors. My concern is that the the government have to keep their employees until they retire once they start hiring government employees. In other words, the government will have a lot of financial burden to pay salaries to their employees. That is why I am concerning about? I do not know if any country was successful for stimulating national economy by hiring government employees more than they needed.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Medicine
- Epidemiology
- Age Groups