Taiwan's economy is going down the tubes. This is obvious, because it is what every politician and taxi driver in the country says. And if they say so, it must be true.
Of course, if you have even passing knowledge of economics, you might be tempted to disagree with this well-worn description of the nation's situation.
After all, the nation's five most prominent economic researchers project next year's GDP growth will be between 4.11 percent and 4.21 percent -- a respectable figure for any post-industrial economy. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate dropped to 3.86 percent in November, while the nation's leading stock index, the TAIEX, is hovering around 7,900 points and recently hit a six-year high.
But why let facts and figures intrude on groundless speculation borne from ignorance and politically motivated pessimism? After all, as any taxi driver or tea-house cashier can tell you, Taiwan is doing badly because its GDP growth is less than China's blistering hot -- as the international media loves to describe it -- double-digit percentage point growth.
Perhaps to an economist, it seems illogical to compare the GDP growth of a post-industrial economy to that of an emerging market. But why listen to people who base their opinions on expertise? It's not just easier, but emotionally rewarding to complain and blame everything on whichever political party you don't like.
It's a feature of Taiwanese politics that might mystify some people. Why do both the pan-blue and pan-green camps see fit to portray Taiwan as a nation on the verge of economic collapse? Isn't it in the interests of one or the other to play up Taiwan's solid economic performance? Why wouldn't the Democratic Progressive Party or the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) use the nation's healthy economic indicators to bash the other's economic policies?
As with other facets of local politics, the answer is that economic policy is filtered through a narrow ideological prism that has little to do with reality.
That ideological prism is cross-strait relations.
With this in mind, it is easy to see why everyone is so negative about the economy, despite the paucity of evidence supporting such views. Rational analysis has no place in a battle between opposing ideological extremes. And this is one of the few cases where the views are so extreme that they actually end up sharing ground on the fringe of popular debate.
Both unificationists and independence supporters stand to gain from portraying Taiwan's economic situation as dismal.
From the unificationists' view, Taiwan is lagging behind China, and the only way to catch up is to seek ever closer ties. Meanwhile, the independence camp seeks to demonstrate that Taiwan's economy is already suffering because of its ties with China, and hopes to limit interaction between the two.
But, as is usually the case with narrow ideas, both of these views fall far short of offering any kind of reasonable plan for Taiwan's economic future.
China is not a mountain of gold from which the nation's businesspeople can earn untold riches. The country has enough problems simply trying to lift its vast population out of abject poverty. Still, neither can Taiwan live in economic isolation. Although the popular press makes much of Taiwan's economic "dependence" on Beijing, the reality is that all major economies are, in some degree, dependent on China. And China is economically dependent on them.
Those who say "China will solve all of our economic problems," and those who say "China is the root of all of our economic problems" are wasting our time. What Taiwan needs is an honest debate about economic engagement with China, while considering how best to protect and expand the economic gains of the past 30 years.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of