The Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics forecasts that Taiwan’s economic growth rate for this year will reach 8.14 percent — the highest in 21 years. However, the same institution’s survey of household incomes shows that the average income of the 20 percent of households with the highest incomes now stands at 8.22 times that of the lowest 20 percent.
This wealth gap is the widest on record. As economic growth hits a record high and the rich-poor gap stretches wider than ever, many people can’t help asking exactly who is benefiting from this economic growth.
Three main factors have contributed to driving Taiwan’s wage and salary earners into this poverty trap. First, distorted government distribution of resources; second, the movement of productive industry offshore; and third, inadequate development of emerging industries and those catering to the domestic market.
In Taiwan, developmental statism, in which industry is guided by government, is the norm. Under this setup, governments often employ such distorted means of allocating resources as tax concessions and financial rewards for specific industries to stimulate investment in and development of those sectors. However, decisions about how to allocate capital don’t always take proper account of international comparative advantage. Some decisions are even the result of lobbying by particular interest groups. This development model tends to foster so-called “vegetable industries” and “zombie companies” that lack the ability to develop their own technology, require ever greater inputs of capital, make less and less profit over time and can only survive if the government pours more and more resources into them.
Because of their inability to upgrade technologically, such companies compete instead by fierce cost cutting. This is often achieved by moving production offshore, which removes job opportunities from Taiwan and widens the gap between rich and poor.
Those manufacturers who choose to stay in Taiwan and upgrade and restructure, generally become more capital and technology intensive.
Indeed, becoming more capital intensive is a necessary and inevitable trend in industrial development, so one of the things government must do to tackle unemployment and narrow the wealth gap is provide an optimal environment for the development of emerging and domestic-oriented businesses.
This includes fostering mechanisms that encourage people to set up new businesses, such as angel funds. What government must not do is repeat the mistakes of the past and allocate resources in a distorted way in order to prop up “vegetable industries” and “zombie companies.”
Unfortunately the government has so far failed to take any action to fundamentally correct the distortion of economic growth and resource distribution that leads to a widening gap between rich and poor. At the moment, all it is doing is copying the bad old ways of the past by designating six emerging industrial sectors and promoting investment in them through such means as tax concessions.
However, while existing industries follow a capital-intensive path and neither the environment for emerging and domestic-oriented businesses nor the existing political and economic system are improved, no matter how much capital is invested it will not result in more job opportunities or higher salaries, much less bring about a long-term narrowing of the gap between rich and poor.
Lu Chun-wei is a researcher at the Taiwan Thinktank.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past