The economy is key to a country’s survival. A government’s duty in this area is not a matter of simply striving for better economic figures, but, more importantly, it is to make sure that the public as a whole gets to share in the fruits of a prosperous economy.
After the second transfer of political power, from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) to the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in 2008, the nation has made some economic progress — despite Ma’s failure to realize his “6-3-3” election campaign promise to achieve annual GDP growth of 6 percent, annual per capita income of US$30,000 and unemployment below 3 percent.
However, standing in stark contrast to this economic growth is the increasing polarization of Taiwanese society, which is tearing up the foundation upon which communities are built: mutual trust. The KMT is the main culprit in this situation.
Not long ago, Ma said that the gap between the nation’s rich and poor was not very serious compared with that of other countries. However, what happens if one compares the Taiwan of today to the Taiwan of the past?
According to the Ministry of Finance’s income data, the richest Taiwanese were 70 times richer than the poorest Taiwanese in 2009. By 2011, they were 94 times more wealthy, the data show. This is one of the problems that have resulted from the government’s negligence.
A second problem is that the government follows double standards in how it treats the public and how it treats large corporations.
The average person has to work very hard and finds it next to impossible to get any tax deductions, while the operators of large corporations who have good political connections can buy expensive mansions with fully financed bank loans. In addition, if these conglomerates should import and use tainted raw materials, the government helps them to find ways out of the ensuing scandal.
Comparing these two realities evokes a feeling of unfairness, and this feeling can in turn lead to hatred, anger and distrust. What is worse is that, based on rational economic considerations, society could deteriorate in the direction of opportunism as increasingly more people curry favor with the rich and powerful.
Although renowned economist Adam Smith sang the praises of the free-market economy, he also emphasized the importance of morals. However, he said that morality depends not only on self-discipline, but also on the government fulfilling its responsibility to provide controls. However, in today’s Taiwan, the government is negligent of its duties and Taiwanese have to suffer the consequences.
To save the nation from this crisis, Taiwanese do not only have to fight for economic development, they must also fight to create a fair economy.
Only by following the principle: “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need,” helping disadvantaged groups support themselves independently and by seeing to it that the government thoroughly implements the rule of law, will members of the public have a sense of fairness and be willing to trust the government and each other. If all these things can be brought about, then the Taiwanese community will grow closer and stronger, as it confronts the challenges posed by globalization.
Chen Tzu-yu is the vice director of the Democratic Progressive Party’s Department of Social Movement.
Translated by Eddy Chang
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS