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.
The bird flu outbreak at US dairy farms keeps finding alarming new ways to surprise scientists. Last week, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) confirmed that H5N1 is spreading not just from birds to herds, but among cows. Meanwhile, media reports say that an unknown number of cows are asymptomatic. Although the risk to humans is still low, it is clear that far more work needs to be done to get a handle on the reach of the virus and how it is being transmitted. That would require the USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to get
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
On April 11, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida delivered a speech at a joint meeting of the US Congress in Washington, in which he said that “China’s current external stance and military actions present an unprecedented and the greatest strategic challenge … to the peace and stability of the international community.” Kishida emphasized Japan’s role as “the US’ closest ally.” “The international order that the US worked for generations to build is facing new challenges,” Kishida said. “I understand it is a heavy burden to carry such hopes on your shoulders,” he said. “Japan is already standing shoulder to shoulder
Former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) used to push for reforms to protect Taiwan by adopting the “three noes” policy as well as “Taiwanization.” Later, then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) wished to save the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) by pushing for the party’s “localization,” hoping to compete with homegrown political parties as a pro-Taiwan KMT. However, the present-day members of the KMT do not know what they are talking about, and do not heed the two former presidents’ words, so the party has suffered a third consecutive defeat in the January presidential election. Soon after gaining power with the help of the KMT’s