| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Saxiif
Joined: 15 May 2003
Location: Seongnam
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 7:07 pm Post subject: Do Koreans support the US Army financially? |
 |
|
| One of my adult student told me that Korean tax dollars help pay for the US forces in Korea. Is this true and if so how big of a financial contribution is it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
just because
Joined: 01 Aug 2003
Location: Changwon - 4964
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Are you joking???????????
More like the US is subsidizing the Korean military.
If the Us pulled out of Korea than do you know how much more the Korean government would have to spend to match the US contribution??
Frame that question to your adult student. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saxiif
Joined: 15 May 2003
Location: Seongnam
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well this is the same student who's proud of North Korea for being strong and standing up to Bush (not that I like Bush, but that's just goofy) so I don't think I'd make much headway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Pink
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Location: China
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| just because wrote: |
Are you joking???????????
More like the US is subsidizing the Korean military.
If the Us pulled out of Korea than do you know how much more the Korean government would have to spend to match the US contribution??
Frame that question to your adult student. |
No Korea does help pay for the US military presense here.
That is why on base a certain number of jobs have to be from "local" hires.
Look it up sometime. If the US were to leave, would Korea have to spend more? Maybe on equipment, but in the long run they might save money on defense costs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| just because wrote: |
Are you joking???????????
More like the US is subsidizing the Korean military.
If the Us pulled out of Korea than do you know how much more the Korean government would have to spend to match the US contribution??
Frame that question to your adult student. |
So your answer is that you don't know? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saxiif
Joined: 15 May 2003
Location: Seongnam
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| No Korea does help pay for the US military presense here. |
How much? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
just because
Joined: 01 Aug 2003
Location: Changwon - 4964
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gord wrote: |
| So your answer is that you don't know? |
Do you know?????
I can't imagine you could calculate the cost but everything from paying a decent skilled military a better wage than the crappy 13000 won they get now to having to build(or renovate) new bases to fill the US void to the economic costs for local people of the US military pulling out of Korea.
I'd imagine that Korea has not too bad a deal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| just because wrote: |
Do you know?????
I can't imagine you could calculate the cost but everything from paying a decent skilled military a better wage than the crappy 13000 won they get now to having to build(or renovate) new bases to fill the US void to the economic costs for local people of the US military pulling out of Korea.
I'd imagine that Korea has not too bad a deal. |
I used to know. If I recall correctly, basically Korea paid for the costs of actually being here while the U.S. encurred no real extra cost as they didn't buy extra hardware just for Korea but rather used it simply as a staging area.
It was of economic benefit to Korea as it's cheaper to build a warehouse to hold tanks and helicopters than it is to buy and maintain those tanks and helicopters. As for being a net loss to the U.S., not really. If they weren't here, they would be sitting in Japan instead. Same deal with the troops. If they weren't in Korea, they would still be on the payroll, just somewhere else.
Though we could argue it was a net loss for the U.S. if we could see that had there been no Korean deployment that such equipement and personal would simply not have been acquired in the first place.
I couldn't find the actual numbers in a quick search of Google, but they were published in the newspaper occasionally. Someone will eventually post them in this thread. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sojuman99
Joined: 30 Nov 2003
Location: Leaning Right
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I used to know this too.
As I recall it used to amount to about 50% of the total cost. As a result of the SOFA revisions of a few years back that number has changed, I think it got worse for Korea.
But the way I look at it, is if I could get the US military for a 50% discount, I'd be getting a hell of a deal.
Maybe Hardy or Tiny knows ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Pink
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Location: China
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 9:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My buddy who is in the service says 50% + Korea maintains all buildings and land on US bases. Korea pays for almost all buildings. I think barracks and commercial operations are not included in that. The Dragon Hill Lodge was paid for by MWR and will remain an American asset once Yongsan is returned to Korea. The new barracks were also paid for by MWR...and some soldier fund. Also because of SOFA, Americans have to hire Koreans to do about 75% of the civilian jobs on the bases. It's funny, my other friend works on Yongsan. He is incharge of about 10 Koreans. The only reason they hired him is by some type of law/order, they need an American citizen to supervise the Koreans.
I tried to find exact numbers, but I suck at net searches. I will ask my buddy when I talk to him, he's prolly got the link bookmarked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mr. Pink wrote: |
| just because wrote: |
Are you joking???????????
More like the US is subsidizing the Korean military.
If the Us pulled out of Korea than do you know how much more the Korean government would have to spend to match the US contribution??
Frame that question to your adult student. |
No Korea does help pay for the US military presense here.
That is why on base a certain number of jobs have to be from "local" hires.
Look it up sometime. If the US were to leave, would Korea have to spend more? Maybe on equipment, but in the long run they might save money on defense costs. |
While I am not familiar with the financial details of the military alliance, I know that investor confidence would take a battering if the US pulled out it's forces. Korea doesn't want that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lastat06513
Joined: 18 Mar 2003
Location: Sensus amo Caesar , etiamnunc victus amo uni plebian
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2004 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From my knowledge about the situation, by law, the Korean government has to put aside a certain amount (per year) to pay from such things as the upkeep of bases, the Korean worker's wages, and in some cases, the compensation for some of the mistakes done by USFK.
This amount depends on several factors, like inflation and the amount budgeted for defense (which gives a huge chunk).
As for the US supporting Korea?.....well, that was the case until Korea became a democracy in 1992. Since then, Korea has started (& has now a well established) an arms industry that supplies almost everything from assult rifles to tanks.
Also, Korea is responsible for the relocation of the main Yongsan base (bearing most of the financial cost), which is why Korea is B****ing about it alot these days.
But I have a question; Which is better?
a. Paying for the relocation of Yongsan to somewhere out of Seoul.
b. Having the US remove its military all together
~NOTE~ If you chose "B", this is what could happen:
- If USFK pulls out of Korea-
1. It would causing foreign investor's anxiety, thus causing them to rethink the stability of the country and maybe moving to more "safer" places,
2. Causing the Korean economy to collapse,
3. Causing the Korea currency to be worthless,
4. Causing students not to go to Hogwons because its too expensive,
5. Causing the hogwons to lay off teacher (including foreign staff)
This is just a possiblity, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scarneck
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Location: Seoul
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackbird
Joined: 28 Apr 2003
Location: Songtan
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
If I recall correctly, basically Korea paid for the costs of actually being here while the U.S. encurred no real extra cost as they didn't buy extra hardware just for Korea but rather used it simply as a staging area.
|
You imply that the US would simply move their military forces from Korea.
While this may be true for the air and naval assets, I suspect that the US would simply disband many of the surplus land units. (.....perhaps after the Iraq thing is over) You should also take into account the fact that many of the ground forces in Japan are tasked to defend Korea, so they must be included in the total cost of Korean defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Real Reality
Joined: 10 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Free Relocation, Now Free Housing?
The revelation that during negotiations about relocating the United States military installation currently located in Seoul's Yongsan neighborhood the US demanded that Korea build it 1,200 new housing units in Osan and Pyeongtaek shows you exactly how unprincipled and unequal the negotiations were. The US has taken the position that the Korean government should pay for everything, and even wants Korea to construct housing for US service members and their families.
http://www.hani.co.kr/section-001100000/2004/03/001100000200403240115001.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
