When President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) clarified his “6-3-3” economic platform (GDP growth of 6 percent, 3 percent unemployment and per capita income of US$30,000) by saying the targets were to be achieved by 2016, his statement provoked accusations of reneging on election promises and sparked a sell-off on the stock market.
On Sept. 5, he again changed his tune, saying: “The US$30,000 target was always set to be achieved by 2016. The other two targets can be achieved within my first term.”
What Ma is telling us is that while we have to wait until 2016 for the US$30,000, his government will have a go at reaching the other two goals by 2012.
I find myself doubting whether Ma really understands his own policies, or what his repeated adjustments really mean in economic terms.
First, with regard to the economic growth rate, the original target of Ma’s election platform was presumably to maintain an average annual growth rate of 6 percent for four years, rather than to achieve 6 percent growth only in the last year of his term.
Leaving decimal points aside and speaking in terms of simple interest, if GDP were to fall 6 percent for each of the first three years of Ma’s term — thus shrinking 18 percent over the whole three years — only to grow by 6 percent in the fourth year of his term, would that mean that Ma’s economic policy had achieved its target? Of course not, because Taiwan’s economy would have declined by 12 percent during Ma’s presidency. Any president with such a record would surely be kicked out of office.
If, on the other hand, Ma means that he can maintain 6 percent growth on average over four years, then the target is unattainable. Why? Because if the growth rate falls below 6 percent in the first year, then it gets that much harder to achieve 6 percent average growth over the four years.
For the first 12 months for which Ma can be held accountable, that is, from his inauguration on May 20 to May 20 next year, it is already clear that the economy will grow by less than 4 percent. That means that growth would have to be 6.7 percent or more in each of the following three years to reach an overall average of 6 percent. Judging by Taiwan’s economic performance in recent years, GDP will not grow by 6.7 percent annually for those three years.
Second, Ma wants to bring unemployment down below 3 percent, which of course means keeping it below 3 percent on average over the four years, rather than only in the last year. To illustrate the point: if the unemployment rate in each of the first three years of Ma’s presidency were to be 10 percent, and then in the fourth year it were to come down to 3 percent, it would mean that many people were unemployed for the first three years and only found work in the fourth year. In Taiwan’s case that would not be an admirable achievement, but rather a miserable one, so it cannot be what Ma has in mind.
What we have seen, though, over Ma’s first 100 days in government, is that the employment situation keeps deteriorating. The target of bringing unemployment down far enough in the next three years to achieve an average of less than 3 percent for Ma’s term is, therefore, mere wishful thinking.
Third, if Taiwan’s per capita income for this year is US$18,000 and the figure grows by 6 percent each year, then in 2016 it would be US$28,689 — not far short of the promised US$30,000. If, however, the target is not met, then real per capita income would not reach US$30,000 even by the end of a second term in office, 2016.
In conclusion, either Ma is fooling himself or he is trying to fool the rest of us.
Lin Chia is an independent commentator.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS