President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has a penchant for lecturing the public about economics. Earlier this year, his government insisted on raising the prices of gasoline and electricity, albeit reluctantly and after much hesitation. Now the Ma administration has once more demonstrated its singular economic talents in relation to another issue — the minimum wage.
The Cabinet gave Minister Without Portfolio Kuan Chung-ming (管中閔) the task of announcing its final policy orientation on the issue, saying that raising the minimum wage would squeeze employers by increasing their labor costs, which at a time of recession would probably have a negative impact on employment opportunities. Therefore, it was the wrong time to increase the minimum wage.
The strange thing is that other economists have a different opinion. In 2006, 650 US economists affiliated with the American Economic Association signed a statement calling for federal and state minimum wages to be raised. Their statement says that “modest increases in … minimum wages … can significantly improve the lives of low-income workers and their families, without the adverse effects that critics have claimed” — even during a recession.
Princeton University economics professor Alan Blinder, who is a former vice chairman of the US Federal Reserve, said in an interview in 2006: “My thinking on this has changed dramatically. The evidence appears to be against the simple-minded theory that a modest increase in the minimum wage causes substantial job loss.”
Blinder also questioned this theory in the 2006 edition of his popular introductory economics textbook, saying: “Some surprising economic research published in the 1990s cast serious doubt on this conventional wisdom.”
Even in 2009, when the financial crisis was at its worst, the US still raised the federal minimum wage by more than 10 percent. Around the same time, civic groups in Europe launched a campaign for a European minimum wage policy. European economists even proposed that the minimum wage should be at least 50 percent of the average wage in the various European countries.
What about Taiwan? The proposed minimum monthly wage of NT$19,047, which has now been put on hold, is nowhere near 50 percent of the average wage, which is around NT$45,000. If you take into account the serious fall in real wages that Taiwan has experienced in recent years, the ratio of these figures represents an even more sorry state of affairs in our society.
Many European observers are of the opinion that present-day economics has got bogged down with complex models, and that it keeps denying the reality that removing labor regulations and intentionally suppressing working conditions only serves to create greater negative effects.
These critics say that some economists only care about abstract scientific models and do not take the real situation into account or negative social effects.
The general equilibrium theory of the labor market on which Kuan bases his policy positions brings to mind what some people in Europe jokingly call “economic theology,” and the doctrine of this “theology” is the market.
The Ma administration has already shown itself to be pretty incompetent in the field of economics. If Ma now intends to deliver a lecture based on this kind of economic theory, perhaps it would be a good idea for everyone to skip class.
Lin Chia-ho is an assistant professor at National Chengchi University’s College of Law.
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.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US