From now on, we will talk about the real estate policies of the previous participatory government 먹튀. Still, those who supported the then government may sound as if they were criticizing the policies of the political establishment in question, and by extension the late president. As a citizen, I have a clear personal opinion about the policies and rooms of the then regime. I may prefer policies that suit my personal interests, but I also support policies that contribute to the welfare of many.
When I was a high school student, I went to a used bookstore to buy books for Marxism or Anakism (which I didn’t fully understand) and spent a night in the open square of Korea University on a historic day when Hanchongnyeon was inaugurated. After finishing his MBA in the U.S., he seriously considered a doctoral program in corporate governance. Nothing has changed much now, but I could see that governance was the biggest obstacle to Korean companies’ competitiveness at the time. That’s why he came to think, “I think we can find the significance of life as a springboard for the Korean economy to move on to the next stage by studying corporate governance.” However, it seems that now, rather than “I will change the world,” he has entered the life phase of “I will do my best in a given environment by adapting to the world.” For those who are just individual investors, not politicians, government policies are nothing but a given environment, not something to criticize and change. All they are doing is to find ways to understand and analyze the given environment and use it. In this context, there are three main reasons why certain administrations, which have already become past, are firmly rethinking their real estate policies.
The first is that the ripple effect was very dramatic as there were many extreme factors in the real estate policy of the Participatory Government. Compared to other administrations that operated relatively cautious real estate policies for fear of their impact on the economy as a whole, the participatory government’s real estate policies had some radical and bold aspects. This will be a tangible example of how to gauge a particular policy and its short- and long-term impact.
The second reason is that the ruling party, which seized power through the 19th presidential election, succeeded the participatory government. Already, Moon Jae-in, the president a presidential election pledge to much of the government’s real estate policies through participation. all I’m sure that haet Although he did not explicitly say that he would inherit the policies of the participatory government, the content shows that the participatory government’s real estate policies are in place. That’s because it was the people who created the policy during the Participatory Government. At this point in time, it is imperative to reflect on the real estate policies of the Participatory Government and recall their impact.
The third reason, ironically, is that I have benefited greatly from the participatory government’s real estate policy. On the part of the Part III policy, the view was that while the U.S. has consistent real estate policies, including taxes, it fluctuates not only in terms of taxes but also in terms of supply policies, depending on the situation of the real estate market situation. This is not necessarily to criticize that ‘American policy is desirable and Korea is a bad policy.’ This is because the purpose of the real estate policy is different.
Naturally, there is an opportunity to make excess profits when policies fluctuate more than they are consistent. When policies are consistent, the future may be relatively predictable and the results of judgement by individuals may not be large. However, if the policy changes from time to time, it will have mixed feelings depending on who predicted the trend better. Of course, the opposite can happen at any rate. It was during the participatory government when it was motivated to invest in real estate, and this enabled it to earn relatively large profits. Perhaps it would not have made such a profit if it had stayed in the U.S. and invested in the U.S. real estate market when it went abroad for the second time to study real estate. In a stable society, there are fewer opportunities for excess revenue.
Of course, it is also lucky to make a high profit in Korea. The opposite could have come out at any rate. As Unchilgisam said, no matter how much you study and analyze thoroughly, the moment of the final decision, and even if the goddess of fate had sold one eye for a moment, a whole different course of life would have unfolded.
