US President Donald Trump’s tariff policy serves as an objective and as a tool for him. Its objectives are twofold: first, to ease the US’ debt burden through tariff revenue; second, to provide a tax base for the “One, Big, Beautiful Bill” tax cuts.
The execution lies in pressuring other countries to negotiate with the US and make concessions in exchange for tariff reductions. Yet Trump’s tariff policy cannot solve the US’ deeper challenges — widening income inequality, blue-collar workers forced into low-paying jobs after losing manufacturing positions, inflationary pressure and the inability to sustain a long-term confrontation against China.
The US faces several economic problems.
First, its deindustrialization has worsened inequality. Displaced blue-collar workers are unable to shift into other manufacturing jobs and instead, they are forced into low-wage service work. Imposing high tariffs on China without viable substitutes only fuels inflation and undermines the sustainability of these policies.
Second, excessively high education and healthcare costs raise living expenses and reduce living standards, leaving lower and middle-class families unable to advance through education and decreasing social mobility.
Third, the proliferation of drugs and firearms severely threatens public safety. Frequent homicides reduce the labor force and impose heavy social costs.
The most critical issue is deindustrialization — manufacturing accounts for only 10 percent of US GDP. This creates several problems.
First, income inequality continues to widen. High-wage jobs are limited to doctors, lawyers, accountants and specific service sectors such as information technology, telecommunications and logistics while most other service jobs remain low-wage.
Second, workers from the withering manufacturing industry cannot transition into related fields and are forced into low-paying service jobs, with little sense of satisfaction in their work. Manufacturing provides stronger industrial linkages and more job ladders, offering opportunities for advancement.
Third, with a gutted industrial base, there’s a lack of substitutes for Chinese goods. The US must still import from China and Southeast Asia, pushing up prices, worsening inflation and making tariff policy unsustainable — preventing the US from engaging in a long economic contest with China.
Trump’s call for reindustrialization could help narrow income inequality and ease the plight of blue-collar workers. However, Trump has ideas without effective strategies. Beyond pressuring semiconductor and automobile giants to invest in the US, he lacks substitutes for everyday consumer industries, which still depend heavily on imports from China.
Taiwan’s experience in helping China create 60 million to 80 million jobs could be replicated in the US. If Washington sets clear performance indicators such as the level of Taiwanese investment, number of jobs created, skilled workers trained and technical schools established, Taiwan could in return secure lower reciprocal tariffs, special economic zones (with looser restrictions on foreign labor, reduced union constraints and land or tax incentives), while introducing artificial intelligence, automation and robotics to cut costs. This would allow traditional industries to take root in the US, reduce import dependence, curb inflation and create more jobs.
At the same time, Taiwan could access parts of the US market and mitigate the impact of reciprocal tariffs on its domestic industries — a win-win strategy.
In the medical service area, Taiwan offers relatively affordable services. If bilateral agreements are established, some US patients with severe illnesses could seek treatment in Taiwan under international medical programs, significantly reducing medical costs for patients and the US healthcare system.
In education, establishing technical schools or programs and clear promotion channels could expand employment opportunities, reduce income inequality and even lower crime rates.
On drugs and guns, effective zoning laws could be introduced. For example, within particular zones, all firearms and drugs would be strictly banned. People who are caught with these items in those areas, would face heavier penalties. Such measures could curb the spread of drugs and guns. If these programs succeed, they could be expanded nationwide.
The US’ challenges — reindustrialization, high medical costs and expensive education — are deeply entrenched. Taiwan could help alleviate some of these problems by creating more manufacturing jobs, supporting blue-collar transitions, narrowing income inequality and building vocational institutions that lower education costs while providing immediate employment opportunities after graduation. With effective medical agreements, Taiwan could help reduce US medical costs, especially for low and middle-income families. Of course, such cooperation must be subject to volume controls to prevent resistance from US medical associations.
A broader Taiwan-US cooperation and strategic alliance could help mend the US’ deeper structural economic issues. This is a path worth considering by both governments as they seek a closer partnership.
Wang Jiann-chyuan is vice president of the Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
RSS