문재인 정부 소득주도성장 평가.

2018.nov.12.  민주당 문재인 정부의 정책 평가. 민스키 책을 보다가 메모.

좌우파를 막론하고 정책역사를 공부하지 않으면 실효성이 떨어지는 정책을 내놓기 십상이다. 이론적 전제도 도그마에 그칠 확률도 커진다. 1933년만 해도 보통 미국인들에게 '노동소득'이 아닌 정부의 '복지 기금'은 듣보잡 혹은 금지어였다. 정부가 재정적자를 감내하면서 민간경제에 개입해 산출과 고용을 증가시킨다는 것도 경제상식이 아니었다. 

하이만 민스키가 설명한대로, 루즈벨트의 뉴딜의 동력, 정당성 확립, 방어논리는 '인도적 차원'이었다. 기존 경제학 공식보다는 '인도적 차원'에 기초를 두고 최대한 지적 능력을 창조적으로 발휘해야 한다는 교훈이다.

문재인 정부가 소득주도성장을 제시했을 때, 최소한 민스키의 '큰 정부' 개념을 도입할 것으로 기대했었다. 벌써 1년 반이 지났다.  시장과 자본주의적 사적 소유권을 존중하는 하이만 민스키류 정책조차도 문재인 개혁정부에서 실천되지 않는다면, 우리는 무슨 개혁을 기대할 수 있겠는가?

 

The reform and recovery efforts that began in 1933, when Roosevelt began his first term, preceded the appearance of Keyne’s “The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money”

 

(1933년 루스벨트의 경제개혁 재건 정책은 시작되었고, 이는 케인즈의 '고용,이자와 화폐에 관한 일반이론'이 출간되기 전이었다.):

 

Roosevelt’s second term began in January 1937. After Keyne’s “General Theory” appeared, some of its ideas were used to rationalize the effects of the government deficits that occurred during the recovery years.

 

However, the programs of the first years of Roosevelt’s New Deal were mainly motivated, rationalized, and defended on humanitarian grounds.

 

The unemployed needed income so as not to starve, and work was the way to provide income; the idea that money income could be distributed independently of work by means of a dole was anathema to both Roosevelt and the country.

 

The idea that a government deficit would increase output and employment in the private portions of the economy was not advanced as the reason for the government spending programs, even though some not well-formulated ideas that pump priming was a good thing were advanced.

 

Hyman Minsky, Stabilizing an unstable economy, 1986,p 134

 

문재인 정부는 '한국판 뉴딜'을 선거공약으로 내걸었고, 경기도지사 이재명은 'FDR 뉴딜'을 자기 스승이라고 했다. 문재인 정부는 '도시재생 뉴딜'을 말했는데, 2018년 종로구 고시원 화재로 자기집없는 노동자들이 자다가 죽었다. 

문재인 정부는 더 늦기 전에 진보정당의 경제개혁 정책들을 수용하고 실천해야 한다. 문재인 리버럴 개혁 정부의 정책이 실패로 돌아가면, 시민사회의 보수성은 더 강화될 것이다.