The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) often blames the poor global economic climate for Taiwan’s sluggish economy, thereby shrugging off the responsibility borne by a ruling party that controls all branches of government. It is true that bad worldwide economic conditions will have a negative impact on the economies of all countries. However, subjecting the government to the principles of comparative performance evaluation is a good way of assessing how competent and diligent it really is. Sad to say, Taiwan’s economic performance lags behind that of most of its competitors.
Is the KMT really fit to govern? The “consensuses” that were announced when the National Conference on Industrial Development organized by the Ministry of Economic Affairs concluded on Dec. 21 are a useful starting point for discussing its competence in managing the nation’s economy.
The common thread connecting the “consensus” policies is the restriction of wages paid to workers. Examples include relaxing the minimum wage requirement for foreign migrant workers; relaxing regulations governing work hours, fixed-term employment contracts, dismissals and severance; and so on. From these “consensuses” one can see that not just the ministry, but the KMT too, govern the country according to the idea that economic development is purely a matter of companies making profits.
This mentality ignores that there are two ways in which companies can make money. The first is to increase revenue by producing added value on goods and services. The second method is to cut costs by holding back wage increases, and by demanding more subsidies and tax cuts from the government.
Businesses that successfully apply the first method will be able to raise employees’ wages, so that company owners and their employees prosper together. The first method requires entrepreneurs to have vision and courage, while only dimwitted bosses make money by using the second method.
When a governing party follows the same kind of ham-fisted policies as those dimwitted bosses, for example by helping company policymakers by cutting wages and providing tax breaks and subsidies, it will inevitably lead to two highly undesirable results.
The first is that such policies cannot make companies or nations more competitive. On the contrary, they will encourage company policymakers to be negligent and lazy, and in the long run become even more dimwitted. Dimwitted bosses will keep thinking of ways to cut wages even further, thus generating a vicious cycle under which Taiwan’s economy and wages will keep going from bad to worse.
The second unwelcome result is that they make income distribution unequal, which in turn leads to class conflict.
Who is to blame for Taiwan being bogged down in this sorry situation? Who else but those who hold power — the head of state and the heads of companies. After all, they are the chief executive officers of government and business organizations.
However, what about us common people — where does our responsibility lie? We hold shares in government institutions. As government shareholders, we have the responsibility to promptly replace this ham-fisted party and bumbling chief executive who have proved incapable of setting out a road map to a brighter future for Taiwan.
An important task for the next government chief executive, whoever that might be, will be to draw up a set of competitive rules that will quickly eliminate inefficient businesses.
Lin Wei-shong is an associate professor in the Department of Business Administration at National Taiwan University of Science and Technology.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
Gogoro Inc was once a rising star and a would-be unicorn in the years prior to its debut on the NASDAQ in 2022, as its environmentally friendly technology and stylish design attracted local young people. The electric scooter and battery swapping services provider is bracing for a major personnel shakeup following the abrupt resignation on Friday of founding chairman Horace Luke (陸學森) as chief executive officer. Luke’s departure indicates that Gogoro is sinking into the trough of unicorn disillusionment, with the company grappling with poor financial performance amid a slowdown in demand at home and setbacks in overseas expansions. About 95