【正文】 g among all classes of the Korean population. Of the three classes surveyed, bluecollar workers remain the least well off, still spending the most on food items, the same as they did four decades ago. When improvements in the overall levels of consumption are considered, however, it is the bluecollar workers, who have achieved the greatest level of improvement in their standard of living. In 1963, they were 35 percentage points behind non laborers. In 2020, however, they were only 16 percentage points behind, indicating a gain of 19 percentage points over the period in question. Table V examines changes in the consumption structure of worker households after adjusting for the housing costs that were underestimated in the analysis reported by the government. Specifically, the opportunity cost of the lumpsum deposits and the imputed rents of owneroccupied housing were taken into account in order to estimate, accurately, the percentage figures for food and other consumption items. The most notable feature of Table V concerns steady and significant declines in the Engel coefficients from 55 in 1963, to 21 in 2020. As a result of such declines in food consumption, Korean workers have been able to spend more on such items as medical care, education, transportation, and munications. Of all those nonfood items, the relative level of spending has increased to the greatest extent in the “other” consumption category, which covers furniture, electronic equipment, and entertainment expenses. These items are generally considered to be luxuries rather than necessities. The sixfold rise in this category from 2 to 12 percentage points is evidence of the remarkable improvement in the standard of living of the Korean working class during the past four decades. Noheless, it should be noted that housing costs have bee the single most important item in the worker’s householdbudget. Housing and food costs together constitute almost half of How does the Korean workers’ standard of living pare with what has been observed in the other developed and developing countries? The World Development Report (here in after the WDR), published by the World Bank, provides relevant data for a crossnational parison. Table VI summarizes the consumption structures of sixtythree countries grouped into four categories: the lowine countries。據(jù)政府統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)的分析顯示在過(guò)去的四年收入和消費(fèi)一直有提高，同時(shí)貧困率也在降低。 根據(jù)數(shù)據(jù)顯示：收入、 消費(fèi)，和貧窮的時(shí)間序列數(shù)據(jù)的系統(tǒng)分析與韓國(guó)工人特別是經(jīng)濟(jì)生活的變化質(zhì)量分析基于兩個(gè)假設(shè)。人均國(guó)民收入足足漲了 20 倍，從 1966 年的 125 美元到 1966 的10000 美元。韓國(guó)國(guó)家統(tǒng)計(jì)局 （以下簡(jiǎn)稱國(guó)家統(tǒng)計(jì)局 ) (2020 年 ) 和韓國(guó)發(fā)展處的 Hakchung Choo博士 (1982， 1992)都同意收入不平等自七十年代末以來(lái)在農(nóng)村和城市地區(qū)已大為降低。在 1997 年經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)打擊該國(guó)前，收入分布不均衡性已經(jīng)往小的方面在移動(dòng)。因此，在 探討 1980 年代后期的情況，是不可 能將大量的非勞動(dòng)收入計(jì)算在偶爾的收入調(diào)查內(nèi)的。國(guó)家統(tǒng)計(jì)局報(bào)告 1988 年的基尼系數(shù)是 。 三、消費(fèi)結(jié)構(gòu) 我們?nèi)绾伪容^工人階級(jí)與非工人階級(jí)的每天的消耗的，本研究為了解決這一問(wèn)題與 1963– 2020 期間由國(guó)家統(tǒng)計(jì)局組織的城市家庭收入和支出調(diào)查委員會(huì)(以下簡(jiǎn)稱， UHIES)共同合作 。他們不得不在食品上花掉生活費(fèi)用的一半以上。在三類人員的調(diào)查中， 藍(lán)領(lǐng)工作人員的生活條件仍然是最不寬裕的，他們?cè)谑称飞匣ǖ腻X是 最多的。然而在 2020 年，他們只是落后指示 19 個(gè)百分點(diǎn)，同比增加 16 個(gè)百分點(diǎn)。食品消費(fèi)下降的結(jié)果，韓國(guó)工人已經(jīng)能夠 把錢花在更多的項(xiàng)目上如醫(yī)療服務(wù)、教育、交通和通信等。然而，應(yīng)指出的是房屋成本已成為工人的家庭預(yù)算中一個(gè)最重要的項(xiàng)目。按照世界銀行的數(shù)據(jù)，韓國(guó)目前屬于相對(duì)較高的中等收入國(guó)家組別。另一方面行（ 3）報(bào)告了調(diào)整住房費(fèi)用的數(shù)字。 (3)是 韓國(guó) 調(diào)整住房成本的整筆存款后。這一發(fā)現(xiàn)。 四、總結(jié) 在過(guò)去四年里韓國(guó)已非常成功地提高了工薪階層以及其他人的收入和消費(fèi)的平均水平。最近的經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)爆發(fā)已經(jīng)使它們處于更不利的地位。土地的高度集中和高價(jià)格是韓國(guó)社會(huì)財(cái)富不平等分配的主要原因。