The central bank recently announced quarter-point interest-rate cuts for rediscount rates, rates on accommodations with collateral and short-term financing rates in order to ward off deflation. This has sent interest rates to an all-time low. The governor of the bank cited a research paper from the IMF at the press conference to announce the cuts, stressing that if a country is facing the risk of deflation, it must take precautions against it. But, is deflation really a problem?
The bank's worry about deflation is probably the result of the international media influence.
Japan began an economic decline 12 years ago. Its commodity prices began falling five years ago. Such a phenomenon has led to extensive international discussion about deflation in recent years.
Taiwan's consumer price index in 2001 registered year-on-year drops in four months. The wholesale price index fell in 10 months of the same year. Ever since then people have felt anxious about deflation.
To prove that the international worries over deflation are absurd, let's look at economic theory. From the viewpoint of microeconomics, deflation is actually a stupid problem.
On the basis of John Maynard Keynes' research, deflation might be a subject worthy of study. What requires our special attention, however, is that, as far as microeconomics is concerned, studying deflation is meaningless. The rise or fall of prices only mean that the market is changing the "signals" it sends out to reflect external changes. This couldn't be more natural.
For example, when the demand for a product falls, its price naturally drops, which can stimulate the demand and deliver a signal to manufacturers, informing them to reduce their supply.
In fact, it would deserve our concern if a worsening economy is not promptly followed by deflation. This situation would mean that the economic system might have become so numb that it could not appropriately respond to external changes.
If we assume that Taiwan started to enter an economic decline in 2000, then it has only taken little more than a year for the nation to see deflation. This is much faster than Japan's experience, where deflation began seven years after it entered economic decline. This is not necessarily bad news because the situation could mean that Taiwan's market functions are more apt to effectively respond to outside changes.
Of course, we have other reasons to support this explanation. With a system mainly built on small and medium-sized businesses, Taiwan is renowned for its quick response.
In contrast, Japan, with large enterprises as its mainstay, is more capable and likely to firmly hold on to the status quo for the sake of face and only accept failures after a longer period of time.
Microeconomics and the Keynesian school of economics hold diametrically opposite viewpoints because there is a fundamental difference in their research directions. Microeconomics takes a long-term view to analyze problems, but the Keynesian school focuses on the short-term.
Keynes had a famous quotation ridiculing the unrealistic long-term believers: "In the long run, we're all dead."
Our response to this quotation is: In the long run, we're all dead. But our posterity still has to face the difficult problems we leave behind.
This is why we should carefully map out policies from a long-term point of view.
A long-term way of thinking is more likely to allow us to ask the right questions. In the face of deflation, the question we should ask is: are Taiwan's market functions obstructed?
For example, if an economic system is equipped with good market functions, it would have a "self-healing" mechanism similar to that of an organism. An inorganic system, on the contrary, does not have a self-healing mechanism. If a stone splits open, it cannot automatically heal itself.
Japan's market functions were hindered by various monopolistic forces, leading to its economic slump. Deflation is just an accompanying phenomenon.
What Japan should work on is its market functions, not deflation.
I believe the major obstacles to Taiwan's market operations are the government's inappropriate interference -- the Labor Standards Law (勞基法) and the mandatory license system, for example -- and monopolistic forces such as the enterprises and unions of state-run businesses that have monopolistic power.
It is the government's core task to invest more efforts in removing these obstacles.
Chang Ming-chung is a professor of economics at National Central University.
Translated by Jackie Lin
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under