Korean Presidential Candidates Clash on How to Raise the Birthrate
None of these ideas being proposed will do anything significant to raise the birthrate because they all simply involve throwing money at the problem:
![Democratic Party presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung pose for a photograph with children during his campaign in South Gyeongsang on May 14. [KIM SEONG-RYONG]](https://i0.wp.com/koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/data/photo/2025/05/21/c7b20866-be7b-428d-9bed-27c7c1e9d988.jpg?w=640&ssl=1)
Democratic Party presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung pose for a photograph with children during his campaign in South Gyeongsang on May 14. [KIM SEONG-RYONG]
The rival candidates, Kim and Lee, are seemingly on different paths regarding how to help couples conceive babies, strengthen child care and housing support and provide tax benefits for families with children.
While Lee only stated his promise to strengthen medical services for couples struggling with infertility, Kim suggested more detailed plans: the state health insurance covering costs of freezing sperm and ova and state funding for fertility testing.
Lee stressed “public” support in parenting services to establish a “society where everyone partakes in child care.”
Instead of the current scheme where elementary schools autonomously decide the service period and curriculum, Lee plans to reinforce the central and local governments’ direct responsibility for after-school child care services.
Kim kept his child care-related pledges brief. He promised to expand 24-hour and emergency care facilities and provide one-on-one care for babies and infants. When it comes to housing, Lee presented “public housing for newlyweds” as his key initiative.
Public housing, provided by state authorities, offers leases for 30 to 50 years for low-income families. Currently, a two-person household can apply for public housing if their combined monthly earnings are 5.89 million won or below.
However, as of Tuesday, Lee has not specified how many units will be supplied, nor potential locations.
Kim also promised to supply 100,000 housing units annually, which makes the residents receive state subsidies for their housing expenses. Newlyweds would qualify for three years of support. An addition of a single child will extend the benefit for three more years.
You can read more at the link.
To raise the birthrate Korea needs couples to marry earlier. Right now Korean women on average get married at 31.6 years of age. By the time women reach 40 they probably do not want to have children so this leaves effectively about 8 years to have kids. Then you throw in that many women now work and manage careers plus the high costs of raising kids that is why there is a low birthrate.
Besides reducing costs there needs to be a cultural change in South Korea for couples to marry earlier which would conflict with women pursuing careers early in life before marriage and having kids. As long as this remains the cultural norm Korea will continue to have a low birthrate.
Lee Jae Myung and his false promises. Always coming up with wild and utopian conclusions and not arguing or backing it up with rationale. Kim Moon Soo’s plan is at least more detailed and realistic.
yes, detailed and realistic… just call in the military and declare Martial Law. Where was Kim when Yoon tried to get rid of the National Assembly? Well?
Michael Breen on this very subject, debunks Joshua Lee and others:
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/opinion/columns/columnists/michaelbreen/20250522/we-need-to-stop-lying-to-ourselves-and-catastrophizing-democratic-politics
Korea Thing:
From your article:
“They believe that if DPK candidate Lee Jae-myung wins, which he almost certainly will, we’re headed down the road towards communist dictatorship.”
No they don’t.
They believe that if Lee Jae-myung wins, the interests of Korea and the Korean people will be replaced with the interests of the globalist agenda, which at this time, aligns with the interest of China and North Korea against South Korea (while they resist it for themselves).
We saw this during the Moon administration.
And we saw this during the Yoon administration where the leftist/globalists would rather see Korea lose than give Yoon any small win.
Lee Jae-myung has officially moved closer to the center to attract more voters but this is certainly insincere.
Once elected, he will likely follow through on his past promises to make small business and the independence that goes with that more difficult. He has dropped talk of discouraging a culture of productivity through such programs as universal basic income, but as we have seen with the American welfare system, slavery can be created both by making a man work for no pay or paying a man for no work.
Korea is not headed towards a communist dictatorship.
It is headed towards globalist no-choice democracy, exploitive crony capitalism for the elite, dependence and debt slavery for the masses, artificial restrictions on free enterprise, and a society that owns very little that gives long-term pleasure but is forced to subscribe to every instant gratification joy so every bit of their labor can be extracted.
Next time, we will talk about why this is a good thing.
…for me…
…not you.
Why are you putting Kim and Yoon together? If you’re implying that Kim was absent during the martial law period, then that should speak for itself. And “get rid of the National Assembly?” LOL, 으이그…
Joshua Lee and the Maggot crowd want to turn South Korea into another Trumpy USA 2.0, which is going down the drain rapidly.
Trump is now blocking and banning foreign students studying in US universities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfIFaKwrQ3w
Is this what Koreans want to see as well?
South Korea’s foreign student population hit an all-time high of over 250,000 and counting. The fortunes of countries can be dictated by how well they absorb foreign talent and foreign ideals. The US is shooting itself in the foot.
Ah yes, the ‘Trumpy USA 2.0’ prophecy—delivered with the usual flair for hyperbole and zero context. Always a treat.
Also, fun fact: U.S. universities are still full of international students, and last I checked, no executive order has built a wall around every campus. But hey, don’t let facts get in the way of a good panic post.
If you’re truly concerned about Korea’s future, maybe aim for thoughtful discussion instead of dramatic fan fiction. Just a thought.
Yah, take your own advice. Don’t let the facts get in the way.
This is from Reuters:
https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/trump-administration-may-target-more-universities-after-harvard-ban-on-foreign-students-101747945263629.html
Sounds all too familiar, blame it all on the dirty Reds conniving with the Chinese commies. Yoon with his Martial Law attempt, and Trump with his executive orders based on a baseless national emergency that he cooked up himself. What purpose is the US Congress for? They should just disband, since this is no better than martial law.
@KoreanMan:
Thanks for sharing the article. A proposed action targeting one university (which, for the record, is still under legal and public scrutiny) somehow becomes ‘Trump banning all foreign students’ in your version of events. That’s not a fact—that’s a screenplay pitch.
If you’re going to throw around accusations of martial law, CCP coordination, and the disbanding of Congress, maybe take a breath and ask whether you’re arguing from evidence or just auditioning for the role of X revolutionary.
We get it—you don’t like Trump. Totally fair. But if every policy move becomes a world-ending conspiracy, you’re not informing people—you’re just exhausting them.
@KoreanMan:
Also amusing that you’re howling about authoritarian overreach in the U.S. while completely ignoring Lee Jae-myung’s circus of politically motivated impeachments back home. Executive overreach only seems to bother you when it’s not your team doing it.
You say ‘don’t let facts get in the way’—and then immediately stretch a single, legally questionable action into ‘Trump is banning all foreign students.’ That’s not fact-based commentary; that’s cable-news fanfiction. And somehow we leap from that to disbanding Congress and martial law in Korea.
If this platform is just a hub of far-right propaganda and America is going down the drain, why are you here day after day rage-posting about it? Hate-watching the West isn’t the personality trait you think it is.
This was already laid out in Project 2025, and this article, written back in Oct 2024, already predicted the severe reduction and restrictions of international students in US universities:
Project 2025: Impacts on International Students If Trump Wins
https://cptdog.com/blogs/project-2025-impacts-on-international-students-if-trump-wins
Fascism doesn’t happen all at once, overnight. This disease creeps up little by little, bit by bit, until everything is overwhelmed. It’s like cancer, or it’s like a frog in a pot slowly getting boiled alive without knowing what’s happening.
@KoreanMan:
LOL, the frog-in-boiling-water metaphor. Always the go-to when nuance gives way to full-blown melodrama.
Yes, I’ve seen the Project 2025 talking points and the speculative pieces about its implications. It’s a policy wishlist… not a legally binding manifesto, and—newsflash—governing is a bit more complicated than bullet points on a partisan blog.
You warn of creeping fascism in the U.S., yet completely ignore the fact that Lee Jae-myung is currently running a real-time clinic on political weaponization—multiple impeachments, judicial manipulation, and the same type of institutional erosion you claim to oppose. Where’s the outrage for that? Or is authoritarianism only a problem when it’s wearing red hats and speaking English?
If your argument is that democracy dies in silence, maybe start by acknowledging it’s not just dying in the countries you don’t like. Otherwise, you’re not raising alarms—you’re just playing team sports in the comment section.
Lee Jae Myung climbed the tall fence on the night of December 3 2024, to stop Yoon from completing the takeover of South Korea through an illegal Martial Law. Without what the DPK party did in the National Assembly that night, South Korea would be back to a military dictatorship under Yoon. You’re conveniently ignoring that important fact, aren’t you? When I asked, where was Kim Moon Soo, I’m asking why he refused to vote for Yoon’s impeachment. Why didn’t he climb that same wall to get to the National Assembly vote that December night. But now he’s leading that same party of traitorous scoundrels backed up by far-right fake news. Americans are done and they’ll pay for their apathy and ignorance and hatred; but the South Koreans are wiser. Koreans still have a good chance to avoid Trump ideology ruining the country into a US-style downgrade.
@KoreanMan:
LOL.. Lee Jae-myung, lone hero under moonlight, scaling barriers to save the republic…
Let’s dial back the dramatics for a second. Let’s set the record straight: martial law, while controversial, is not illegal under South Korean law. It’s an extreme measure, yes, and one that should be scrutinized—but pretending it’s inherently unlawful just because it fits your narrative doesn’t make it true.
Even if you genuinely believe Yoon was orchestrating a military takeover (which, by the way, no credible institution has confirmed), you’re ignoring the inconvenient reality that Lee and the DPK have been pushing impeachments and investigations like a political hobby—ironically while accusing others of power grabs.
You demand outrage when your side loses a vote, but call it heroism when your party bypasses institutional norms and stages midnight stunts. That’s not democracy in action—that’s performance politics dressed up as resistance.
And accusing Kim Moon-soo of treason for not voting your way? That says more about your view of democracy than his. You’re not sounding the alarm on fascism. You’re just upset the world doesn’t follow your script.
Leftist/Globalist economic policies are tanking the economy and preventing couples from makibg more babies they can’t afford.
I never said he did it all himself, but he was one of the 182 lawmakers who risked their lives to stop Yoon. Those lawmakers were to be arrested and imprisoned in an underground makeshift bunker prison, as it was found out later.
Marital laws were designed for outside invasions, national calamities where there’s a complete breakdown of civil services. It’s not to be used for personal power grabs, with the excuse that he was just trying to scare the opposition into complying with the bill Yoon was trying to pass in the national assembly. Yoon’s entire defense line is that he DID NOT DECLARE MARTIAL LAW, that it was just a scare tactic or a joke. His entire defense was along that line. But here, you have fallen into a trap.
I beg your pardon? Why did the Supreme Court rule unanimously 8-0 to have him impeached? Supreme Court is no credible institution, then what institution you would accept as “credible”?
And they should, because they are right. You don’t think they have any right to demand that those responsible for plotting the illegal martial law, those involved in the arrest of the opposition, and those cooperating with the Yoon regime to set up a military rule, be prosecuted for helping Yoon?
Stopping a military rule of law by voting in the National Assembly, all 182 of them, is an act of democracy. Those Conservative politicians who refused to exercise their right to vote by boycotting the vote, should be ashamed of themselves. They could have at least voted “no” to impeach Yoon instead of just walking out of the National Assembly in mass. They were cowards to do even that. They were just looking out for their own political interests. That’s why they are going to be swept out of power next election. People remember what they did.
@KoreanMan:
You’ve now gone from political critique to full-blown dystopian fanfiction. Underground prisons? Lawmakers ‘risking their lives’?
Let’s get grounded in legal reality. Article 77 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea allows for martial law to be declared by the President in cases of war, insurrection, or similar national emergencies. Yes, it’s a serious measure—and also perfectly legal under defined circumstances. But in your version of events, even the mere possibility of discussion becomes proof of a coup attempt. That’s not a legal argument—that’s narrative inflation.
As for the Supreme Court: yes, they ruled 8–0, and that deserves scrutiny—but not blind worship. You don’t get to scream ‘credible institution!’ only when they back your guy, and then ignore their authority when they don’t. Either institutions matter consistently, or they’re political tools. You can’t have it both ways.
If 182 lawmakers sincerely believed they were stopping a dictatorship, fine—they voted. But boycotting a vote isn’t cowardice; it’s a political strategy. You don’t get to rewrite the rules of democracy to suit your preferred outcome and call everyone else a traitor.
You say, ‘People will remember’? I hope so. I hope they remember the difference between defending democracy and staging political theater. Because only one of those actually preserves it.
At the end of the day, you do you.
Yoon called in the military to shut down the national assembly, and the last time they did that, it led to the Gwangju 1980 massacre. It’s already a fact that Yoon had prepared a secret underground prison to arrest and imprison the opposition party members. That is one of the reasons why Yoon is facing an abuse of power charge.
Again, no war, no national disaster, no reason for martial law other than attempted power grab and abuse of power. The Supreme Court agreed with the impeachment.
Yoon’s entire defense was that he was faking martial law, not really declareing it. You, on the other hand, are saying he declared martial law. Are you aware you are contradicting Yoon?
LOL, you’re doing exactly what you’re accusing me of doing. Screaming, ‘no credible institution”.
Political strategy supporting someone who failed in an attempt to abuse power. It’s exactly the same scenario in US Republican politicians who remain silent while Trump abuses power. Terrible people, who should not be given any mandate to govern.
LOL, a supporter who is supporting a dude who tried to pull a military rule with a flimsy excuse, saying something something about ‘democracy’? Amusing. GTF out of my face, you’re a disgrace. And don’t worry, Koreans will remember what happened, that’s why it’s going to be a landslide victory for Lee. No, stop looking at your fake rightwing polls.
Ah, there it is—when the argument runs out of steam, the insults start flying. ‘GTF out of my face’ is a great closer when you realize you’ve overstretched your case and have nowhere left to go but name-calling.
Now let’s talk facts since you’re clearly not used to them holding still:
1. Martial law was declared. Not ‘pretended.’ Not ‘hinted at.’ Declared. The military was mobilized, special forces were deployed, helicopters landed on National Assembly grounds, and live ammunition was brought in. That’s not a joke. That’s not a scare tactic. That’s a constitutional event—whether you like how it happened or not.
2. No lawmakers were arrested. Yes, there were plans—alarming ones—but none were executed. Former defense and police officials were arrested after the martial law was lifted, not as part of some underground coup fantasy. If you’re going to reference “secret underground prisons,” please link to a source that doesn’t read like a fan-made Reddit thread.
3. The Supreme Court ruled 8–0 to impeach, and that’s serious. But again, the role of a thinking citizen isn’t to blindly submit to rulings—it’s to understand their context and ensure they’re not politicized. You revere the court now, but would be the first to denounce it if it ruled the other way. That’s not principle—it’s partisanship.
4. Comparing this to Gwangju 1980 is not just historically lazy—it’s deeply offensive to actual victims of military massacres. No civilians were shot. No one was tortured. The Assembly wasn’t dissolved. The system pushed back—as it should. That’s the real story here: the institutions worked, and martial law was overturned in under 48 hours. Not a military dictatorship—a constitutional crisis that got resolved legally.
5. And this obsession with “rightwing fake polls”? Sorry, but clinging to future fantasy landslide victories doesn’t make you a revolutionary. It makes you sound like the guy who refuses to admit his team might lose, so he blames the scoreboard.
You can keep ranting. But the difference between us is simple: I’m using facts. You’re throwing slogans and hoping volume will replace logic.
So no—I won’t ‘get out of your face.’ Not until you learn the difference between disagreement and disgrace.
Joshua Lee speaks great wisdom.
One point to add:
President Yoon’s actions were not Government vs Citizens. They were Government vs Government.
Introduced into the discussion should be the intention of his actions.
There is a difference between consolidating power to loot the treasury and trying to stop constant sabotage of anything that might help the country.
@ChickenHead:
Absolutely agree—and I appreciate you making that critical distinction.
Too much of this conversation has been warped into an emotionally charged “people vs dictator” narrative, when in reality, the December crisis was a case of inter-branch conflict: Executive vs Legislature. That framing doesn’t excuse everything Yoon did—but it does demand a more grounded analysis than the “second coming of Gwangju” rhetoric from Mr. Korean Man.
Your point about intent is essential. There’s a world of difference between consolidating power for personal gain and pushing back against what was, by all appearances, deliberate political sabotage. You don’t have to support every policy or action from Yoon to acknowledge that motive and context matter—especially when impeachment gets used as a political tactic, not just a legal remedy.
This is the kind of level-headed perspective that’s sorely missing when people reduce everything to buzzwords like ‘fascism’ or ‘traitor’ just to score points. Thanks for stepping in with real perspective.
Why Korea’s Birthrate Crisis Can’t Be Solved with Subsidies Alone
South Korea’s birthrate crisis has become a defining issue in its political discourse, yet many proposed solutions remain narrow in scope, focused primarily on financial incentives and welfare expansions. The recent clash between presidential candidates Lee Jae-myung and Kim Moon-soo underscores this pattern: both offer differing visions on how to “support” families, but neither confronts the deeper cultural dynamics that have driven the decline in births. While public housing, fertility subsidies, and expanded childcare services are helpful, they are ultimately insufficient without a broader cultural shift in how Korean society views family, marriage, and work.
At the heart of the issue is the timing of marriage and childbearing. South Korean women now marry, on average, at 31.6 years of age. With fertility sharply declining after 35, this leaves a narrow window to have children—especially multiple children. The reasons for late marriage are complex but largely tied to education, career ambition, and societal pressure to achieve financial security before settling down. These are not problems that money alone can solve.
Moreover, the tension between career and family is profound. Korean workplaces remain rigid, demanding, and often unfriendly to work-life balance, especially for women. Many young women see the sacrifice of marriage and children as incompatible with professional success and personal independence. Until that perception changes—until workplaces adapt and social expectations evolve—fertility rates will continue to stagnate, regardless of how generous government programs become.
Cultural values play a silent but powerful role. In today’s Korea, there’s a growing emphasis on individual fulfillment, urban living, and consumerism. Parenthood, once considered a natural phase of life, is now seen by many as a burdensome lifestyle choice. Childcare is expensive, housing is competitive, and social support systems, while improving, still fall short of what’s needed to make raising children feel viable and rewarding. In such an environment, policies that merely reduce costs don’t change the underlying calculus.
What Korea needs is not just a budgetary plan, but a national conversation. A reimagining of what it means to live a good life—where family is not an obstacle to success, but part of it. This would involve educational reform, workplace modernization, and media narratives that normalize and even celebrate earlier marriage and parenthood without framing them as limits on individual freedom.
In conclusion, South Korea’s birthrate crisis is not a financial problem—it is a cultural one. The country must confront the deeper values and structures that have led to widespread hesitation toward marriage and parenting. Without doing so, all the subsidies and incentives in the world will only delay the inevitable demographic decline.
It’s so surprising to me how much the culture of the ROK has changed since we lived there. Having and raising children is pretty fundamental to a society, and the country was pretty child-centric back then. That was the late 90s. Very soon after that we lived in Italy which had also experienced an extreme and similar cultural shift to not having children. We’d get a lot of tut-tutting with three kids. Not in a bad way, just a “wow, how do you do that?!” way. It was more admiration than admonition. I have about 50 cousins there and most have no children.
Huge cultural shifts can happen pretty fast.