The Legislative Yuan has passed the NT$20 billion budget plan for expanding public services and creating jobs. But it has postponed the review of the NT$50 billion budget plan for expanding infrastructure until its next session. The effectiveness of such programs, however, is unpredictable.
From the workers' perspective, the government's NT$20 billion budget can save a number of them from unemployment -- although no specific plan or evaluation method has yet been made. They certainly have no reason to object. Legislators dare not block the plan either.
In fact, not too many people really believe that the plan was proposed to enhance public services. Nor do they believe that the government can solve the unemployment problem by directly hiring about 10 percent of the more than 700,000 unemployed workers.
In my opinion, the NT$20 billion is simply hush money to silence about 70,000 or 80,000 of the unemployed, those who demand the government solve the unemployment problem,and those who criticize the government's performance.
The key to the matter lies in the unemployment rate. Think about it. Instead of paying the NT$20 billion to the unemployed directly, why would the government hire a small fraction of the them to carry out public services that have not yet been planned?
One reason is that giving NT$20 billion directly to the jobless would give each person just a little bit of money. A more practical reason is that direct subsidies are unable to help reduce the unemployment rate.
The government's goal is only to lower one-tenth of the unemployment rate, which at more than 5 percent, is the highest ever.
President Chen Shui-bian
To solve the unemployment problem, the government has to tackle both cyclical unemployment -- which is caused by the recession of market and production -- and structural unemployment -- which is caused by workers' lack of appropriate professional skills for industrial transformation.
To tackle the cyclical unemployment problem, we have to stimulate the economy, improve the investment environment and expand our effective demand as well. Tackling structural unemployment means assisting the jobless to learn new skills.
The NT$20 billion plan will solve none of these problems. Not to mention that providing public services and classes have a very limited effect on the unemployed. After finishing these services a year later, it will only be more disadvantageous for them to find their ideal jobs. This will further worsen the unemployment problem in the future.
According to the logic of the government's policy, the unemployment rate will immediately drop after one-tenth of the jobless take the hush money payouts and are employed -- albeit temporarily.
In that case, a policy aimed at keeping people quiet will be considered a successful one, since we can no longer blame the government for the problem.
However, the unemployment problem will not be solved even if the unemployment rate drops. I'm afraid that the nine-tenths of the unemployed population will be ignored. This will make the jobless even more disadvantaged than they were before.
Liu Ruey-hua is an associate professor in the department of economics at National Tsing Hua University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers