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
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
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry