The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has been criticizing the government’s plan to give people electronic coupons to spur the economy after the COVID-19 pandemic abates, calling ad nauseam for the government to give people cash handouts.
Even former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), of all people, yesterday urged President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration to provide cash handouts, citing the NT$3,600 (US$119.52) “consumer vouchers” that his administration distributed in 2009 in the wake of the global financial crisis, which he said were “very popular.”
True, people were happy to receive the vouchers, but did they really work in terms of revitalizing the economy?
The Ma administration pushed national debt up by NT$85.8 billion by issuing the vouchers, which only generated NT$36.3 billion in GDP.
As of December 2009, the Council for Economic Planning and Development, the precursor of the National Development Council, said the vouchers only contributed approximately 0.4 percent GDP growth — much lower than the estimated 0.66 to 1 percent.
This was the result of a widespread substitution effect — nearly 70 percent of the goods purchased with the vouchers were consumables such as daily necessities.
A major difference between Ma’s vouchers and Su’s coupons is that the latter would utilize mobile payment methods and would only be redeemable when the value of products people have committed to purchase reaches a certain sum.
Minister of Economic Affairs Shen Jong-chin (沈榮津) has said that the electronic coupons, which would have a combined value of NT$3,000 and would cost the government about NT$10 billion, are expected to trigger purchases worth four times their value and bring stores NT$100 billion in profits.
Rather than squandering taxpayers’ money by just giving the public cash equivalents to spend, the coupons are already looking more promising in terms of leveraging consumption.
Another KMT argument against the government’s economic stimulus plan is that the US, Singapore and Hong Kong have all pledged to give their citizens cash.
However, the government has reiterated its stance against giving out cash indiscriminately, saying that wealthy people do not need the money, and its many subsidy programs for sectors that have been hard hit by the pandemic all involve cash payments.
Yet despite the government’s repeated explanations of its bailout policies, the KMT appears deaf, as the party continues to call for cash handouts.
It is important that people not be tricked by the KMT’s deliberate obtuseness. Since it lost the presidency and a legislative majority four years ago, it has become a master of creating conflict and pitting personal interests against the public interest.
The KMT, knowing full well that the Public Service Pension Fund was headed for bankruptcy, supported protests against the Democratic Progressive Party administration’s pension reforms.
Similarly, the KMT knows beyond the shadow of a doubt that its cross-strait policy stance that the Republic of China is the “one China” is no more than a pipe dream, yet has touted that pipe dream for more than a decade, because it knows that only by creating conflict can it gain enough support to control resources, if only at the local government level.
KMT politicians are not the blind fools that many people think they are. They clearly have agendas.
The bottom line is that people should remain clear-headed in the face of the KMT’s rhetoric — a lesson that Kaohsiung residents have learned the hard way after the 2018 mayoral election.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath