The media are increasingly expressing worries about the growing poverty gap in Taiwan. They bemoan the fact that some people are enjoying the fruits of the economic recovery, while others have gained nothing. In contrast to the extravagant lifestyles of the wealthy elite, the poor cannot even afford a nutritious meal for lunch, they say.
Media commentators say one of the main reasons for the growing wealth gap is that triangular trade, in which orders are taken in Taiwan for goods made abroad (mostly in China), does not improve Taiwan’s employment situation or stimulate domestic demand. As companies move their production bases to China, there are fewer and fewer job opportunities for workers in Taiwan. As a result, the poor keep getting poorer, while only a few factory owners and traders reap the profits.
As long ago as 2000, skeptical commentators, such as myself, warned repeatedly that the trend toward taking orders in Taiwan for goods made in China was likely to have damaging economic and social results for Taiwan. However, China-friendly academics and media outlets took a different view, the foremost purveyor being the Chinese-language Commercial Times.
In 2002, the “order from Taiwan, made in China” business model had developed to the extent that 19.28 percent of all production by Taiwanese companies was carried out abroad. The Commercial Times said there was no need to panic, as this was a sign of industrial internationalization and was a good thing. The paper assured its readers that, while some low-added-value processing had moved to China, core management operations would still be carried out in Taiwan.
“Isn’t this exactly the result we wanted?” the paper asked.
Politicians who were convinced by such arguments came up with fantastic schemes like turning Taiwan into a “global logistics hub,” and they proposed offering tax incentives to operations centers. This, of course, amounted to encouraging companies to move their production bases to China.
Since that time, this business model has become even more widespread. Now overseas production accounts for more than 50 percent of the total output of Taiwanese manufacturers, compared with just 13 percent in 2000. Over the same period, real wages have fallen back to the level they were 13 years ago and more than 260,000 people now live below the poverty line.
Now that the harm has been done, the belated show of concern by the Commercial Times is not much help. Let’s hope that from now on they will discard their greater-China ideology and instead focus on Taiwan and its more than 20 million inhabitants.
Ten years ago the paper’s contributors portrayed the order from Taiwan, made in China business model as a wonderful thing. In reality, we have all tasted the bitter fruit of this policy —— climbing unemployment, shrinking pay packets and a floundering economy.
A decade later, history seems to be repeating itself; Taiwan signed the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with China in June.
Given the great difference in size between Taiwan’s economy and that of China, this kind of economic integration will obviously make Taiwan into just a Chinese island. Still, those who supported the order from Taiwan, made in China business model now support the ECFA and insist that the pact heralds “a golden decade for Taiwan.”
Will the ECFA really usher in a golden decade for this country? We need only look at what became of those earlier promises to see what the future has in store.
Huang Tien-lin is a former national policy adviser to the president.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs