Taiwan's economic growth rate of about 5.9 percent for last year was the best performance in seven years. At the same time, the unemployment rate improved to just over 4 percent, its lowest level since May 2001.
Despite these improvements, policy makers insist that they have the means to make it better. It is expected that they will use public spending on the "10 New Major Construction Projects" plan to raise the nation's economic growth rate to 5 percent.
However, there are several flaws in their reasoning on policy responses to economic down-turns. In general, the aim is to manipulate overall demand. The methods used to achieve this goal are increased public-sector spending -- most often relying upon budget deficits -- and/or monetary expansions to cut interest rates.
In the first instance, government spending is not the driver behind economic growth. As such, public-sector deficits cannot bring a permanent improvement in economic trends.
Sustained economic growth requires more investment from the private sector, not more spending by the public sector. The false expectations of higher growth from more government spending are supported by the notion of demand-led growth that has deep roots in GDP calculations.
Calculations of GDP focus on the demand for final goods and services that implies that goods emerge simply because people desire them. If all that matters is the demand for goods, then the supply of goods can be taken for granted.
Thus, the various stages of production preceding the provision of final goods would be irrelevant. However, intermediate goods must be produced and used to produce tools and machinery until the final stage of production is reached. These stages of production must involve capital formation that depends upon the real stock of savings in an economy. Contrary to the GDP-mindset, it is savings and not consumption that drives an economy. And the best way to encourage private investment is to lower the tax and regulatory burdens imposed by government policies.
So, the first step in abandoning the assumption that the demand for final goods and services is at the heart of economic growth requires rethinking about GDP.
The exclusive focus upon final goods and services of GDP estimations implies that the availability of goods arises out of the desires of consumers. Yet these desires can only be accommodated if they are preceded by an act of production that provides their supply and income to labor as the means to satisfy demand.
By taking the supply of goods for granted, the GDP framework ignores the various stages of production that lead to the arrival of a final good. For example, interme-diate goods required in the produc-tion of final goods are not readily available and must precede the demand for the eventual output.
Ignoring these crucial aspects of commercial activity contributes to a misunderstanding of how an economy works. In particular, developments in the earlier stages of production are important determinants of business cycles, since they are especially responsive to changes in interest rates and technological innovations.
In the first instance, focusing on final output leads to the mistaken belief that consumer spending is more important than capital investment in an economy. This false conclusion is drawn from the fact that consumption expenditures account for around two-thirds of measured GDP.
But such a conclusion reverses the direction of causation. It is private business investment that drives economic growth while consumer spending is a consequence, rather than a cause, of economic growth. And so it is that entrepreneurs who innovate and use accumulated capital, along with technological change, that create new jobs and wealth.
The most essential flaw with GDP data is that it suggests that government spending can provide an autonomous addition to na-tional output. Under this misleading conclusion, new government spending can stimulate economic growth, even if deficits are the source of the funds.
Despite so many problems, there is a continued reliance upon GDP measures as an indicator of economic strength. This view supports the conventional wisdom that recessions result from sudden declines in household consumption. Unfortunately, it also provides governments and central banks with justifications for interfering in the economy through active monetary and fiscal policy.
Tampering with monetary and fiscal policies induces wealth producers to redirect their activities towards unsustainable activities once the so-called stimulus inevitably disappears. In fact, these expenditures on current consumption spending do not reflect a change in a household's long-term real earnings patterns and can't support sustained growth. So, it is not surprising that even ultra-loose monetary policy has failed to end Japan's economic drought.
Changing our thinking about GDP can have important consequences. It might lead to abandonment by governments of their dependence upon deficit spending. Similarly, central banks might not pursue their ruinous policies of credit expansions in response to economic downturns.
Christopher Lingle is a visiting professor of economics at Universidad Francisco Marroque in Guatemala and global strategist for eConoLytics.
Congressman Mike Gallagher (R-WI) and Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) led a bipartisan delegation to Taiwan in late February. During their various meetings with Taiwan’s leaders, this delegation never missed an opportunity to emphasize the strength of their cross-party consensus on issues relating to Taiwan and China. Gallagher and Krishnamoorthi are leaders of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. Their instruction upon taking the reins of the committee was to preserve China issues as a last bastion of bipartisanship in an otherwise deeply divided Washington. They have largely upheld their pledge. But in doing so, they have performed the
It is well known that Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) ambition is to rejuvenate the Chinese nation by unification of Taiwan, either peacefully or by force. The peaceful option has virtually gone out of the window with the last presidential elections in Taiwan. Taiwanese, especially the youth, are resolved not to be part of China. With time, this resolve has grown politically stronger. It leaves China with reunification by force as the default option. Everyone tells me how and when mighty China would invade and overpower tiny Taiwan. However, I have rarely been told that Taiwan could be defended to
It should have been Maestro’s night. It is hard to envision a film more Oscar-friendly than Bradley Cooper’s exploration of the life and loves of famed conductor and composer Leonard Bernstein. It was a prestige biopic, a longtime route to acting trophies and more (see Darkest Hour, Lincoln, and Milk). The film was a music biopic, a subgenre with an even richer history of award-winning films such as Ray, Walk the Line and Bohemian Rhapsody. What is more, it was the passion project of cowriter, producer, director and actor Bradley Cooper. That is the kind of multitasking -for-his-art overachievement that Oscar
Chinese villages are being built in the disputed zone between Bhutan and China. Last month, Chinese settlers, holding photographs of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), moved into their new homes on land that was not Xi’s to give. These residents are part of the Chinese government’s resettlement program, relocating Tibetan families into the territory China claims. China shares land borders with 15 countries and sea borders with eight, and is involved in many disputes. Land disputes include the ones with Bhutan (Doklam plateau), India (Arunachal Pradesh, Aksai Chin) and Nepal (near Dolakha and Solukhumbu districts). Maritime disputes in the South China