A Cabinet proposal to release a cost of living index at regular intervals has become a subject of debate. Apart from the challenge of designing an index that reflects public opinion, it is necessary to clarify what the phrase “grassroots economy” means if the government hopes to alleviate economic hardship.
The first question is whether there is any need to promote a grassroots economy. Public dissatisfaction has built up after years of economic stagnation or even decline in living standards.
The government must therefore pay greater attention to creating jobs for the middle and lower classes and raising their incomes so a broader section of the populace can reap the benefits of economic growth.
Furthermore, the global economic crisis has dealt a heavy blow to consumption in Europe, the US and Japan, which has affected the nation’s exports. A grassroots economy implies developing the local economy, moving away from an export-based development model dependent largely on the electronics, information technology and telecommunications sectors. Instead, it requires focusing on local demand and locally driven growth.
This is in line with public opinion and would help transform and bolster the economy.
Understanding and monitoring the economic hardship faced by the public does not require compiling a cost of living index.
More important is formulating manufacturing and economic policies that can improve people’s lives.
The public’s desire for security is a key part of this. Public investment, community improvements, disaster reconstruction and water management — all of which are related to quality of life — must be discussed and planned with care.
Creating jobs and raising incomes are the most important aspects of a grassroots economy.
The government must pursue industrial development strategies that can improve the quality of living, including food, clothing, homes, transportation, education and entertainment.
Developing local services through public investment, promoting a manufacturing sector with local characteristics and establishing new manufacturing and service enterprises should all play important roles in economic policies.
With regard to spreading the benefits of economic growth, a grassroots economy must aim to achieve a high quality of life and high-quality products.
This includes making esthetic improvements to communities and providing public places that meet people’s needs.
Traditional markets should be renewed and communities should have sports and leisure centers.
If a grassroots economy is to help transform the economy, the government will need to sit down with enterprises and discuss how to develop technologies in all industries and apply them to new services and business models.
The goal should be to stimulate and respond to demand. For example, the government can encourage catering and service providers to adopt information technology and new forms of management.
A grassroots economy should be seen as a policy intended to meet the needs of the public and promote economic transformation.
The government should start by taking a critical look at its industrial and economic policies and then formulate a strategy that incorporates the idea of a grassroots economy.
Tsai Horng-ming is an associate professor in the Graduate Institute of International Affairs and Global Strategy at National Taiwan Normal University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
It is almost three years since Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin declared a friendship with “no limits” — weeks before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Since then, they have retreated from such rhetorical enthusiasm. The “no limits” language was quickly dumped, probably at Beijing’s behest. When Putin visited China in May last year, he said that he and his counterpart were “as close as brothers.” Xi more coolly called the Russian president “a good friend and a good neighbor.” China has conspicuously not reciprocated Putin’s description of it as an ally. Yet the partnership
Former US president Jimmy Carter’s legacy regarding Taiwan is a complex tapestry woven with decisions that, while controversial, were instrumental in shaping the nation’s path and its enduring relationship with the US. As the world reflects on Carter’s life and his recent passing at the age of 100, his presidency marked a transformative era in Taiwan-US-China relations, particularly through the landmark decision in 1978 to formally recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the sole legal government of China, effectively derecognizing the Republic of China (ROC) based in Taiwan. That decision continues to influence geopolitical dynamics and Taiwan’s unique
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) said that he expects this year to be a year of “peace.” However, this is ironic given the actions of some KMT legislators and politicians. To push forward several amendments, they went against the principles of legislation such as substantive deliberation, and even tried to remove obstacles with violence during the third readings of the bills. Chu says that the KMT represents the public interest, accusing President William Lai (賴清德) and the Democratic Progressive Party of fighting against the opposition. After pushing through the amendments, the KMT caucus demanded that Legislative Speaker
The ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu (孫子) said “know yourself and know your enemy and you will win a hundred battles.” Applied in our times, Taiwanese should know themselves and know the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) so that Taiwan will win a hundred battles and hopefully, deter the CCP. Taiwanese receive information daily about the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) threat from the Ministry of National Defense and news sources. One area that needs better understanding is which forces would the People’s Republic of China (PRC) use to impose martial law and what would be the consequences for living under PRC
RSS