Two contrasting news items were reported on Monday last week. First, the government vowed to double Taiwan's per capita GDP to US$32,000 by 2015. The second news story said that the average salary in Taiwan has dropped over the past five years, regardless of employee educational levels. The latter serves as a negative footnote to the former.
Taiwan's economy has grown over the past five years, so why have average employee salaries dropped rather than increased? Obviously, all the benefits of Taiwan's economic development over the past five years have gone to business.
The reason for this is either a decrease in the demand for labor or an increase in the labor supply. Judging from the salary cutbacks, I am sure that it is the result of a falling demand for labor, caused by insufficient domestic investment. According to investment statistics, the lack of domestic investment is mainly caused by Taiwan's excessive investment in China.
If Chinese investment really is as complementary and beneficial to Taiwan's economic growth as those who advocate "actively going west" claim, then such investment should improve and upgrade Taiwan, and not result in the country's economy being undermined; nor should it replace Taiwan's salaried classes, but rather boost the demand for labor and bring about salary increases. Indeed, falling salaries in the face of economic growth is indirect evidence that excessive investment in China is bad for the nation's economy.
Several issues regarding the government's pledge to double Taiwan's GDP in 10 years also require clarification.
To begin with, doubling GDP does not automatically translate into doubling employee salaries. Whether salaries increase will depend on the policies used to advance the government's pledge. If the nation's economic policies from the past few years remain unchanged, with merely formal restrictions on China-bound investment and a tax system that encourages the outflow of capital, then the salaried classes might be further disadvantaged even if the goal of doubling Taiwan's GDP is achieved.
Further, the government's forecasts are calculated in US dollars. If the US maintains an annual inflation rate of 7 percent, then the US dollar will depreciate by the same amount, 7 percent, yearly.
In other words, even if Taiwan's real economic growth in dollar terms remains at zero over the next 10 years, the government can still reach its goal.
Finally, the government should amend its statistical methods and definitions in conjunction with its GDP goal.
The salaried classes, farmers and small vendors account for a major portion of Taiwan's total population. Since the incomes and expenses of salaried households are closely related to the incomes of farmers and vendors, one could say that the interests of the salaried households are also the interests of the people of Taiwan.
The goals of doubling GDP per capita and doubling salaries require very different economic policies. If a consensus on increasing the percentage of capital that a company is allowed to invest in China is reached at the Conference on Sustaining Taiwan's Economic Development, then the future of the salaried class will look even bleaker.
In the interests of the majority of Taiwanese, even a pledge to increase salaries by half is much more meaningful than a pledge to double the nation's GDP.
Lin Chia is an independent economics commentator.
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