The media are increasingly expressing worries about the growing poverty gap in Taiwan. They bemoan the fact that some people are enjoying the fruits of the economic recovery, while others have gained nothing. In contrast to the extravagant lifestyles of the wealthy elite, the poor cannot even afford a nutritious meal for lunch, they say.
Media commentators say one of the main reasons for the growing wealth gap is that triangular trade, in which orders are taken in Taiwan for goods made abroad (mostly in China), does not improve Taiwan’s employment situation or stimulate domestic demand. As companies move their production bases to China, there are fewer and fewer job opportunities for workers in Taiwan. As a result, the poor keep getting poorer, while only a few factory owners and traders reap the profits.
As long ago as 2000, skeptical commentators, such as myself, warned repeatedly that the trend toward taking orders in Taiwan for goods made in China was likely to have damaging economic and social results for Taiwan. However, China-friendly academics and media outlets took a different view, the foremost purveyor being the Chinese-language Commercial Times.
In 2002, the “order from Taiwan, made in China” business model had developed to the extent that 19.28 percent of all production by Taiwanese companies was carried out abroad. The Commercial Times said there was no need to panic, as this was a sign of industrial internationalization and was a good thing. The paper assured its readers that, while some low-added-value processing had moved to China, core management operations would still be carried out in Taiwan.
“Isn’t this exactly the result we wanted?” the paper asked.
Politicians who were convinced by such arguments came up with fantastic schemes like turning Taiwan into a “global logistics hub,” and they proposed offering tax incentives to operations centers. This, of course, amounted to encouraging companies to move their production bases to China.
Since that time, this business model has become even more widespread. Now overseas production accounts for more than 50 percent of the total output of Taiwanese manufacturers, compared with just 13 percent in 2000. Over the same period, real wages have fallen back to the level they were 13 years ago and more than 260,000 people now live below the poverty line.
Now that the harm has been done, the belated show of concern by the Commercial Times is not much help. Let’s hope that from now on they will discard their greater-China ideology and instead focus on Taiwan and its more than 20 million inhabitants.
Ten years ago the paper’s contributors portrayed the order from Taiwan, made in China business model as a wonderful thing. In reality, we have all tasted the bitter fruit of this policy —— climbing unemployment, shrinking pay packets and a floundering economy.
A decade later, history seems to be repeating itself; Taiwan signed the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with China in June.
Given the great difference in size between Taiwan’s economy and that of China, this kind of economic integration will obviously make Taiwan into just a Chinese island. Still, those who supported the order from Taiwan, made in China business model now support the ECFA and insist that the pact heralds “a golden decade for Taiwan.”
Will the ECFA really usher in a golden decade for this country? We need only look at what became of those earlier promises to see what the future has in store.
Huang Tien-lin is a former national policy adviser to the president.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS