Journal 4

Journal 4

Street vendor, is it a tradition, or an obstructor of the street?

From: Nate Image

     I've heard that some nations rearranged their society, and as a method, they first did clean the street. For example, South Korean government shunted the street vendors and small and poor neighborhoods sideways in Seoul for the Seoul 88' Olympic. The government forced the street vendors to leave for their urban (city) planning. Chinese government also did this kind of work for the Beijing Olympic. Until now street vendors are frightened when they would be caught, where they should go etc.

    We certainly know that selling products in the street without paying tax is illegal. Street vendors also know that, but most of them are poor and don't have an ability to pay tax for trade, so they sell their products illegally for their living. But there are also some vendors who are not poor. Some sellers have enough money to pay for tax, but they do not. Some sellers earned enough money through this work, but they don't want to pay. What is the best choice? Should the government just take away the street vendors because they look not good in the street and disturb pedestrians?, or keep the vendors because they are poor and it's a series of tradition?  

    Our government supports the poor by offering 'giro' and opportunities of job. For that, the government spends a substantial amount of money. But by offering these type of jobs like street vendor, the weak and poor would be financially independent, and our government also could save some money, and could invest other parts of our pending issue by using the saved money. And I think that the street vendor is a series of tradition. Also, our government should protect the weak and the vulnerable. If they could be financially independent through the job, street vendor, we should support them.

    Instead, the government should make some rules for them. For example, the government gets 5% or 10% of their sales, and the money that is gathered could be used for the urban environment. If they couldn't sell nothing, they don't have to pay for government. And the government blocks some vendors who have enough money to operate stores or shops by searching their wealth and property. The street vendors themselves should get some education for the job because sometimes they really disturb the pedestrians, and destroy the traffic order. After the education, they get certified for the job. Through this procedure, they could keep their work, and the government could also save money. 

    To sum up, I support the street vendors because street vendor is a tradition, and the street vendors, especially the poor and weak, could keep their living by themselves through this work. And government could also save money which was used for supporting the poor and the low-income bracket. If the government blocks the whole street vendors, it would be overwhelming and difficult to deal with, and most of all should need lots of money for supporting them. This way is too inefficient. To catch two pigeons with one bean, to keep street vendors with reasonable regulations will be better than others.      

Journal 3

Journal 3

Minimum Wage of Korea

                                                                                                                             From: Nate Image

                                                                          http://ecotary.egloos.com/3651095

    

     As you can see above, Korean minimum wage was the lowest among OECD-21. That was 3,770 won in 2008, and the price was increased 8.3% as compared with the price of 2007. This tendency is not different from now in 2011. After I read Jungwee-Cho's journal about the minimum wage of Korea, some doubts came into my mind. Why has the minimum wage to be mainly related to the inflation of price in Korea? Are there any important factors which directly impact on workers' lives? After considering deeply, I could have a idea. 

     The regulation of minimum wage was made to protect the poor workers, the people of low rank, from vicious enterprisers. The definition of minimum wage is the least wage that is needed for managing humanlike lives of workers. According to this definition, we should consider not only the inflation of price, but also the gap between the rich and the poor. The inflation, of course, directly influences workers' lives, but the gap impact more seriously into humanlike lives of workers. 

     When our congress enacts a new minimum wage for workers, the congress should consider the gap of social wealth because the gap makes our society destabilize, and even break the social order. If our government won't be an arbitrator for narrowing the gap, the poor workers couldn't receive satisfaction because they feel miserable when they compare their lives with the rich, the high income bracket. As you know and hear from news, hundreds of crimes are happening because of the dissatisfaction about the differential. These kinds of crimes are becoming frequent and more serious. 

      Korean government should work for the welfare of the poor workers and also preserve the order of society. To sum up, the government should determine the minimunm wage for workers by considering not only the inflation of price, but also the gap between rich and poor.  Thanks.                  

Journal 2

                                The Jeju Naval Base Project

                                                                                                      http://news.nate.com/view/20111015n04706

    

         What is more important between protecting Jeju’s wonderful environment and firming national security? Through the presentation about the Jeju naval base project, I wondered what is a better choice for us? Is it possible to get these two things at the same time? After searching various news and considering this subject from various angles, I had a conclusion at last.

Although the South Korea Navy doesn't have an appropriate naval station, the first duty that we have to do now is to protect our environment. Jeju island has abundant resources, especially marine resources and gorgeous nature. Many visitors, not just Koreans but also foreigners, are impressed being in touch with Jejudo's great nature. Jejudo achieved a self-sustaining economy through sight-seeing. The slogan of Jejudo is 'peace', so establishing the base means destroying the jeju's policy and economic viability.

Korean government tries to foil North Korean neclear experiment, but the US troop gains electricity by using miniature nuclear reactor. Is it righteous to depress North Korean Neclear system while using the neclear reactor for Korean navy? Could North Korea trust us and accept our opinion and demand? 

This issue is not just about the environment, economy, politics, but also fame. The world takes note of Korea because on October 3, UNESCO named nine places on Jeju as 'geoparks.' World acknowledges Korean Jeju island as a wonderful eco-tourism spot. Nowadays world pays attention to nature, and that means we can get money and fame by protecting nature. Especially, Korean has lack of resources of tourism. If we lose this natural tourist attraction, we could miss the fame and money, of course.  

We should also concern about near countries such as China and Japan. They worry about the US naval base and doubt the intention of the US. These countries say that the flag-out reason to build the base is that the US troop wants to control the Pacific Ocean, so they appeal to us sincerely that we do not allow the construction of Jeju Naval base. Is there any legitimacy to confront these nations for the base? 

Other nations pour their efforts and money to recover their environment and nature, but Korea goes against the general. I'm sure that protecting our natural resources is the fist duty that doesn't have any altenatives, but we can find other altenatives for our national security. For our far future, I choose to protect our environment most of all.    

Journal 1

Journal 1

08129313

 Park Seulgi

In our ‘current events class’ in Week 5, I learned about the latest issue of diseases of the imported pork. We debated for solutions about the problems, so I’m going to think out and share solutions. This week's presenters talked and warned about the hazardous imported-pork. I was a little sorry they did only advert to the imported pork, but not our domestic pork. But, anyway I have three ideas about the matter.

First, when government is in the conclusion of a treaty with other country like FTA, they have to be more transparent about the procedure and content to the public. We need a closer inspection, and we should ensure and tighten the system of compensation like ‘recall system’ due to the occurrence of diseases. Thereby, the exporting nation will be more precautious about the hygiene. Our officials must pay attention in securing the documentary evidence about the compensation of damages due to diseases.

Second, our nation should more carefully check the pre (post) - censorship. We have to regularly, unexpectedly and personally visit the exporter’s farms, and inspect the farm’s surroundings, health control, etc. As providing advantages like ‘tax cut’ when the nation receives a favorable evaluation, we can make the nation exert itself to manage their farms a-fond.

Lastly, I want to talk about hygiene education. The government’s efforts for people's health are important, but every individual’s efforts are also weighty. Through specific education in every school and home, we can prevent the risk of sicknesses in some degree. Schools have to care about public health and personal hygiene, too, so they should send questionnaires to their students’ homes and research on home health each month. The government should try to provide beneficial information which is about sanitation, hygiene and cleanliness every year.

By these efforts between nations and individuals, we can protect ourselves from lots of hazardous diseases in a big way. Thank you for giving me your time and consideration.