The NT$70-billion special bills hastily drawn up by the Cabinet to combat unemployment hit a snag during a review on the legislative floor. To be fair, the Cabinet must take full responsibility for this.
The plight of the unemployed deserves our sympathy and it is urgent that the unemployment rate be reduced. If the opposition parties had wanted to act irresponsibly, they could have followed the Cabinet's lead -- even to the extent of raising the stakes by shelling out trillions of dollars on a project that lasts several years to eliminate the unemployment problem. So why didn't the opposition act charitably and garner more votes at the same time?
In 2001, the DPP budgeted a NT$16 billion stipend program for senior citizens in a drive to make good on President Chen Shui-bian's (
The bill's crude contents and the procedures adopted by the Cabinet have enabled rational voters to clearly see the ruling party's bad habit -- that it will stop at nothing to attain its end as long as the goal is correct; that it can ignore whether a plan is reasonable as long as it is well-intentioned.
This is the source of chaos that has led to today's economic doldrums and high unemployment. A government notorious for policy flip-flops finds it difficult to win the people's trust and support. Who will believe that the Cabinet's program is not driven by political factors or electoral considerations?
A careful observation into the unemployment-relief proposal raises many questions. If the DPP administration had not sloppily halted major construction projects such as the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, undermining businesses' confidence in the government, the economy and unemployment might be in a less serious condition today.
Since the grave unemployment problem emerged two years ago when the economy took a nosedive, why didn't the government take steps then and put forth pragmatic programs to boost the economy and to combat joblessness? The government could have made a difference when making its budget for this year, but why did it choose to reduce the spending on economic development?
Why doesn't the government make effective use of the NT$20 billion Employment Security Fund? Why doesn't it improve the efficiency of the current construction projects before proposing a NT$50 billion public construction expansion program?
Where is the logic of creating unemployment on the one hand and granting relief funds to combat unemployment on the other? Since the government tried only to bring down this year's unemployment rate to 4.5 percent, what if these people become jobless again next year? Shall we forget about the matter until after the presidential election?
Many belt-tightening measures can expand domestic demand and create employment opportunities without increasing government spending -- for example, opening up direct links with China and allowing Chinese tourists to visit Taiwan.
Why would the government rather lavish money on missiles and warships to benefit other countries?
We still have plenty of monetary sources to cut down unemployment. Why has the NT$12 billion of the Employment Security Fund been left on the back burner?
Since the Cabinet could divert more than NT$30 billion for emergency use after the 921earthquake, why couldn't it do the same from the 2003 budget?
Before taking office, DPP officials said that carrying out reforms to reduce corruption could save up to NT$500 billion. Is floating debt the only way out now?
Some political parties have played the old trick by proposing to amend the Public Debt Law (
Trillions of NT dollars in debt -- ? from the 921 Earthquake Reconstruction Fund, dredging costs for the Keelung River, Financial Restructuring Fund, compensations for agricultural imports and the agricultural development fund, as well as non-business funds worth more than NT$600 billion -- ? has driven up the government debt beyond NT$5 trillion. There won't be a balanced budget in sight within a decade. This hidden worry for long-term economic development is also deemed a warning signal by foreign investors.
To boost its economy, Japan has carried out economic invigoration projects over the past decade, which in the end eroded the public's confidence in the government and resulted in a vicious cycle of economic stagnation. It is distressing to see that Taiwan is repeating its neighbor's mistakes.
We appeal to the government to reduce national defense and diplomatic expenditures and use the money for urgent needs.
In addtion, the government should stop dragging down the nation's economy by incurring more debt.
Yophy Huang is an associate research fellow at the Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research.
Translated by Jackie Lin
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