Addressing the issue of wealth redistribution following the signing of an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) between Taiwan and China, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has said his government would control uneven distribution of wealth through taxes and social welfare measures.
These comments are in relation to the main concern surrounding the ECFA talks — that the rich will get richer, while the poor get poorer.
Today, the government is in a financial crisis. After repeatedly reducing taxes for the wealthy over the past two years, there is no room for debt financing.
By talking about taxes and social welfare measures, Ma is building castles in the air.
Early last month, the Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies at the Chinese University of Hong Kong released the results of a local public opinion poll, entitled Public attitudes toward the harmonious society in Hong Kong.
The results showed that the most serious social contradictions were those between the rich and the poor and those between residents and conglomerates.
Surprisingly, a quarter of the respondents agreed with employing “radical means” to force the government to respond to the problems.
Behind Hong Kong’s brilliant economic figures lies a serious income gap.
Despite Hong Kong’s per capita GDP exceeding US$30,000, an analysis by the Hong Kong Council of Social Service last year showed that the poverty rate was approximately 17.9 percent and that 1.236 million people in poor households with low incomes live below the poverty line.
The latest statistics show that Hong Kong’s Gini coefficient — a measure of wealth distribution where 0 describes perfect equality and 1 describes perfect inequality — has reached 0.533, the widest income gap among all developed economies.
Looking at Taiwan, Chiu Hei-yuan (瞿海源), an Academia Sinica research fellow, says that if Taiwan does not handle its cross-strait and industrial policies cautiously, the income gap is likely to be even worse than that in the next two or three years.
An ECFA is essentially the same as the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA) China signed with Hong Kong, as they are both free-trade agreements with “Chinese characteristics.”
That also means the approach to informing the WTO is handled with “Chinese characteristics” — that is, Taiwan’s leaders lean toward China. Putting aside any sovereignty concerns, an ECFA will mean increased social contradictions as the rich get richer the poor get poorer.
The director of China’s Taiwan Affairs Office, Wang Yi (王毅), said during an interview on March 30 that the signing of an ECFA was first proposed by Taiwan.
The process is the same as with the CEPA. With Taiwan’s initial request and China’s active cooperation, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party hope to duplicate the “successful experience” of the CEPA in Taiwan.
They also hope to boost Taiwan’s economy and Ma’s support ratings through a proposed ECFA, which is said to be even more preferential than the CEPA.
The vision the government promotes by proposing an ECFA is a mirage.
It will duplicate Hong Kong’s social problems by increasing the polarization between rich and poor and this will surely lead to tragedy as the ranks of the poor keep growing.
Hong Chi-chang is a former chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
RSS