The NT$70-billion special bills hastily drawn up by the Cabinet to combat unemployment hit a snag during a review on the legislative floor. To be fair, the Cabinet must take full responsibility for this.
The plight of the unemployed deserves our sympathy and it is urgent that the unemployment rate be reduced. If the opposition parties had wanted to act irresponsibly, they could have followed the Cabinet's lead -- even to the extent of raising the stakes by shelling out trillions of dollars on a project that lasts several years to eliminate the unemployment problem. So why didn't the opposition act charitably and garner more votes at the same time?
In 2001, the DPP budgeted a NT$16 billion stipend program for senior citizens in a drive to make good on President Chen Shui-bian's (
The bill's crude contents and the procedures adopted by the Cabinet have enabled rational voters to clearly see the ruling party's bad habit -- that it will stop at nothing to attain its end as long as the goal is correct; that it can ignore whether a plan is reasonable as long as it is well-intentioned.
This is the source of chaos that has led to today's economic doldrums and high unemployment. A government notorious for policy flip-flops finds it difficult to win the people's trust and support. Who will believe that the Cabinet's program is not driven by political factors or electoral considerations?
A careful observation into the unemployment-relief proposal raises many questions. If the DPP administration had not sloppily halted major construction projects such as the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, undermining businesses' confidence in the government, the economy and unemployment might be in a less serious condition today.
Since the grave unemployment problem emerged two years ago when the economy took a nosedive, why didn't the government take steps then and put forth pragmatic programs to boost the economy and to combat joblessness? The government could have made a difference when making its budget for this year, but why did it choose to reduce the spending on economic development?
Why doesn't the government make effective use of the NT$20 billion Employment Security Fund? Why doesn't it improve the efficiency of the current construction projects before proposing a NT$50 billion public construction expansion program?
Where is the logic of creating unemployment on the one hand and granting relief funds to combat unemployment on the other? Since the government tried only to bring down this year's unemployment rate to 4.5 percent, what if these people become jobless again next year? Shall we forget about the matter until after the presidential election?
Many belt-tightening measures can expand domestic demand and create employment opportunities without increasing government spending -- for example, opening up direct links with China and allowing Chinese tourists to visit Taiwan.
Why would the government rather lavish money on missiles and warships to benefit other countries?
We still have plenty of monetary sources to cut down unemployment. Why has the NT$12 billion of the Employment Security Fund been left on the back burner?
Since the Cabinet could divert more than NT$30 billion for emergency use after the 921earthquake, why couldn't it do the same from the 2003 budget?
Before taking office, DPP officials said that carrying out reforms to reduce corruption could save up to NT$500 billion. Is floating debt the only way out now?
Some political parties have played the old trick by proposing to amend the Public Debt Law (
Trillions of NT dollars in debt -- ? from the 921 Earthquake Reconstruction Fund, dredging costs for the Keelung River, Financial Restructuring Fund, compensations for agricultural imports and the agricultural development fund, as well as non-business funds worth more than NT$600 billion -- ? has driven up the government debt beyond NT$5 trillion. There won't be a balanced budget in sight within a decade. This hidden worry for long-term economic development is also deemed a warning signal by foreign investors.
To boost its economy, Japan has carried out economic invigoration projects over the past decade, which in the end eroded the public's confidence in the government and resulted in a vicious cycle of economic stagnation. It is distressing to see that Taiwan is repeating its neighbor's mistakes.
We appeal to the government to reduce national defense and diplomatic expenditures and use the money for urgent needs.
In addtion, the government should stop dragging down the nation's economy by incurring more debt.
Yophy Huang is an associate research fellow at the Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research.
Translated by Jackie Lin
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
After “Operation Absolute Resolve” to capture former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, the US joined Israel on Saturday last week in launching “Operation Epic Fury” to remove Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his theocratic regime leadership team. The two blitzes are widely believed to be a prelude to US President Donald Trump changing the geopolitical landscape in the Indo-Pacific region, targeting China’s rise. In the National Security Strategic report released in December last year, the Trump administration made it clear that the US would focus on “restoring American pre-eminence in the Western hemisphere,” and “competing with China economically and militarily
RSS