"I don't care if the rich get rich. It doesn't bother me. They should get richer. I'm worried about the poor getting poorer and not getting richer. If there are several Bill Gates in the country, I don't care. Lifting the bottom of society is the most important." So said Muhammad Yunus, this year's Nobel Peace Prize winner, in a 1996 article in Britain's the Independent titled The Good Banker.
Yunus' philanthropy as the "poor man's banker" is commendable, and consequently Taiwan's United Daily News (
Perhaps some will say that banks serve their stockholders, and the state serves its politicians. But this editorial came to a different conclusion.
The whole article could have been trimmed to one statement: "Financial institutions have expanded but businesses are quickly going bankrupt and those in deep credit card debt have no way out. The essence of governmental service has been lost!"
If the rapid pace of business bankruptcies and growing numbers of "credit card slaves" are the result of the disappearing essence of government service, then it seems the article's premise is that the banks should serve their card slaves, and the state should serve industry. The entire editorial contains no statistics and simply reads like an attack on President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).
In fact,Yunus raises a point most worthy of Taiwan's attention: that "lifting the bottom of society is the most important."
What exactly does the bottom of Taiwanese society look like? According to the 2005 Survey of Family Income and Expenditure (
More tragic still was that of those low wage earners, more than half the heads of households were unemployed. Obviously, from the viewpoint of supply and demand, employment opportunities have decreased and the terms of employment have deteriorated. If we further consider Taiwan's foreign investment, we can see that the chief culprit is the shifting of production to China, or, in international diction, the more neutral globalization.
Some Taiwanese scholars have long argued that the three direct links with China are actually a question of class interests, and not a question of political identity. In January, Taiwan Thinktank conducted a survey on cross-strait trade that came to a similar conclusion.
It doesn't seem too far off the mark to further modify that argument to say that cross-strait trade is a question of class interests, and not a question of political identity.
Former Taiwan Confederation of Trade Unions member Lin Thung-hung (林宗弘) once summed up the trends of cross-strait commerce and globalization as the "consolidation of Taiwanese businesses, the marginalization of the working class, and the decline of the middle class."
Taking aim at the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration, he accused it of opening the floodgates for Taiwanese investment in China after it gave in at the National Economic Development Advisory Conference in 2001 with its "active opening" policy, adding that Taiwan already has had to deal with the employment crisis that followed excessive economic opening to China and its ineffective management.
Lin's comments may be over the top due to his pro-union stance, but the DPP administration has let the pro-China media lead it by the nose towards a philosophy of "Taiwanese business consolidation."
The working class has clearly suffered the most, and the situation is only deteriorating for the poorest 20 percent of society.
But thanks to alarms sounded by pro-localization media and think tanks, this year's Conference on Sustaining Taiwan's Economic Development managed to put the brakes on this trend when Premier Su Tseng-chang's (
Applying Yunus' hypothesis, policies centered around cross-strait trade may help the rich get richer, but the most important goal is to help lift those at the bottom of Taiwanese society's ladder. After all, the working class is the DPP's biggest base of support.
Lin Kuo-hua works in the finance industry.
Translated by Jason Cox and Marc Langer
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