The Communization of South Korea's Real Estate Market: Background and Risks

The speaker said he has been trying to make clear how rapidly the current administration's policies are communizing South Korean society, and expressed strong concern. South Korea is based on a market economy, but he argued that the current policy direction shows the communist trait of the state controlling everything. He stressed that government intervention and tightened control in the real estate market can be read as signs of this communization.

He said he is working to show how much South Korea has been damaged and how fast communization is proceeding at high speed. He urged the public to recognize that this concerns not only economic problems but a fundamental change across society as a whole.

He analyzed that this public sentiment can work in the government's favor.

He said citizens tend to see rising prices not as failures of government policy but as the greed of individual homeowners. He suggested that policymakers can use this to escape responsibility, aim blame at a specific group, and secure justification for their policies.

He asserted that they are using citizens' negative emotions to achieve their own political goals.

He said the current administration understands the public's sentiment very well, and that in particular Lee Jae-myung's Democratic Party actively works to use citizens' anger for political gain. He emphasized that this is conduct in which politics stokes particular emotions to profit, rather than representing the will of the people.

The speaker claimed the government is blaming speculators for rising home prices and gradually widening the definition of who counts as a speculator. He said that even people who own one home but do not live in it are being pushed to sell by applying the concept of 'speculation' rather than 'investment.' He explained that this frame goes beyond targeting multi-home owners and casts most people who own property as potential speculators.

He said that the government blames speculators for higher home prices and, by widening that group, created the term 'one home, non-resident,' treating it as investment or speculation that must be sold, and labeling these people as speculators. He noted that this could be read as an attempt by the state to classify and control citizens for specific ends.

This suggests the real estate market is being used as a tool for expanding state revenue rather than for individual wealth growth.

He said the state intends to collect more taxes from them, meaning the government will take more of the result of rising home prices. He warned that the fundamental purpose of the real estate market is being distorted.

He argued that at every stage the state continuously profits through taxes. He criticized this tax structure as a classic example of communization, in which the state seeks to control every area that generates money.

He criticized the process in which we go out and work, pay income tax, use that money to buy a home and pay acquisition tax, pay property tax while we own it, and even take taxes when we sell. He said this shows a pattern in which the state intervenes at every stage of individual economic activity to profit.

He said that responsibility for rising home prices lies with the state, and declared this to be communization. He clearly defined communization as the state occupying an ever larger share of profitable areas and taking the most money. This points toward weakening the concept of private property and strengthening the state's economic dominance.

The speaker named as a feature of communist society a system in which the state decides on all money and distributes it, whether for welfare or anything else. He warned that this method is already advancing in South Korea today. This is framed as the state controlling the economy as a whole and restricting citizens' property rights and economic freedom.

He said that a communist society is one in which the state decides what the money goes to, whether welfare or anything else, and distributes it, and that this is happening in South Korea now. He argued that the state monopolizing wealth and redistributing it to citizens is a classic feature of communism.

The aim, he argued, is to shift the blame for policy failures onto a specific group, stir public outrage, and strengthen state control.

He said the current administration has no choice but to keep raising real estate taxes, and will keep demonizing homeowners and invoking non-existent multi-home speculators to justify the increases. He added that it will keep finding problems in real estate, set up oversight bodies, and keep demonizing these groups through public broadcasting.

The speaker said there are people in society who call for taking money from the rich and hitting them with heavy taxes. He said they argue that preventing homeowners from capturing all the gains is the 'normalization' of real estate, and a measure to normalize property prices.

He said there are people who say they will take the rich's money, hit them with heavy taxes, and stop homeowners from taking all their gains, calling this the normalization of real estate and a way to normalize property prices. This is read as an attempt to stoke class conflict within society and build support for taxing the wealthy.

He stressed the need to guard against attempts to mislead the public or justify specific policies by exploiting the ambiguity of certain terms.

He argued instead that such policies increased market uncertainty and produced side effects that pushed prices up.

He stressed that no administration has ever stabilized prices through regulation and raising taxes. He said historical fact shows that excessive government intervention backfired.

He stressed that this is proven by the 40-year history of apartments, and argued that the market has consistently responded in the opposite direction to what the government intended.

He said that when regulation and taxes were raised, prices did not merely rise but always soared. He said this phenomenon appeared across 40 years of apartment history, emphasizing that the market has repeatedly reacted in the opposite way from the government's intent.

The speaker warned that the current situation will take the form of property prices continuing to rise while communization advances at the same time. He explained that if this continues, supply of real estate will also fail to work properly, because regulation keeps increasing and tax bombs keep falling.

He said that prices rising alongside communization is all that will happen, and predicted that eventually housing supply will also stop. He cited the growing regulation and the tax bombs as the reasons. This expresses concern that government policy will paralyze market function over the long term.

He criticized the idea that a state that wins votes while taking taxes and also seizing the supply system cannot possibly run transparently. He cited the LH land speculation scandal, stressing that the claim that private firms are dirty while public bodies are clean is a myth. He argued this is a typical flaw of real estate supply systems in socialist or communist states.

He said this breaks down the real estate supply system: in a state that wins votes, takes taxes, and also takes the supply system, he questioned whether it can operate transparently. He noted the LH land speculation case was cleared and asked who could guarantee such cases will not recur. He added that the claim that private firms are dirty while public ones would be clean is a flaw inherent in the real estate supply system of communist states.

The speaker said South Korea has so far run its real estate market under private leadership, and that this is why rents have not surged, jeonse supply has been smooth, and apartment supply has continued for 40 years. However, he said this system has now stalled, and rather than fixing and revitalizing it, the government is strengthening regulation to a historic degree and raising taxes further. He strongly criticized this as no different from a 'screw you' attitude toward citizens. He harshly condemned it as nothing more than an experiment to see how much citizens are 'livestock.'

He said South Korea has run the real estate market under private leadership, and thanks to that rents have not surged, jeonse supply is smooth, and subscription and apartment supply have continued for 40 years. But now, instead of repairing the stalled system and reviving it, regulation is being tightened, to the most extreme degree in history, and taxes raised further, which he said is exactly like telling citizens to 'go eat it.' He added that it is nothing but an experiment to see how far citizens can be pushed as 'livestock.'

He stressed that even in those countries prices were not brought under control; the state simply controlled the market as it pleased. This suggests that excessive government intervention in a market economy does not lead to normal price regulation.

He said that no country in the world has brought real estate prices down by regulating real estate and raising taxes, except socialist or communist states. But he pointed out that even there it was not price control; they simply did as they wished. This means only coercive control was carried out, ignoring the essential function of the market.

He claimed that officials cannot fail to know, from 40 years of statistics, that this approach will not bring prices down but push them higher. This raises suspicion that the government, while aware of the policies' actual effects, is deliberately fostering the present situation.

He said he believes the probability that the current administration does not know that doing this will push property prices higher is 0%, and asserted that everyone in public office who holds 40 years of statistics knows it. This statement casts doubt on what lies behind government policy.

This leads to criticism that public officials are using policy for their own gain or deceiving citizens.

He questioned whether public officials sold their apartments and which ones they still hold, and criticized Lee Jae-myung's apartment sale as a show. He explained that Lee sold at the best possible time and for the best price, precisely when transfer of association membership status was allowed. This raises suspicion that a specific politician's conduct is not transparent and that hidden intentions may lie behind policy.

This carries a pessimistic outlook that excessive state market intervention and tightened control will ultimately destroy the economic system and bring greater suffering to socially vulnerable people.