Recently, fuel, electricity and general price rises have been a source of much public discontent. In the face of this public anger, several senior government officials have gone out of their way to defend the government’s economic policy, coming out with a whole range of interpretations of market mechanisms that stretch credulity. At the same time, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has been complaining that the public do not understand economics. I have strong feelings about what he says, not least because it reminds me of two episodes that occurred during the years I was studying in the US.
The first was my discussion with an economist who holds a doctorate from the University of Chicago on healthcare policy. During our discussion, this well-educated academic took me quite by surprise by claiming that it was wrong for physicians to obtain licenses in order to practice medicine, because it completely violates the free-market mechanism.
He believed that, through a process of elimination and equilibrium, as patients made the wrong choices, that the market itself would regulate the situation, retaining the good doctors and eliminating the bad ones. He backed up his argument with graphs and illustrations.
A little taken aback, I asked him: “How about human lives? What if someone dies?”
His answer was that a few lives do not matter and that the promotion of market efficiency is far more important.
The second episode took place in a macroeconomics policy class. The professor asked one of the students in the class to imagine for a minute that he were the government finance minister. He handed him some unemployment figures and asked him to interpret them.
The student proceeded to talk at length about the figures, comparing them with those of the previous year. He then went on to discuss changes in structural and non-structural unemployment in terms of the figures. When he was finished, the student was fully expecting the professor to offer praise for his brilliant analysis. His classmates were certainly suitably impressed.
To my surprise, the professor said that, when discussing the unemployment rate, a finance minister should first offer sympathy to the tens of thousands of people who have lost their jobs and dignity, and are struggling to make ends meet, then explain what he was going to do to get the rate down.
Economics is a social science and as such it has to start from the welfare of the general public. If it does not, it is little more than dry theories and formulae and those who implement policy are mere bureaucrats and bean counters.
Ma and senior government officials are supposed to be highly educated and should know what they are talking about. If they ignore what people are going through and even go as far as to complain that they do not understand economics, it is time they go back to school and learn what economics is really about.
Lin Hsuan-chu is an associate professor at National Cheng Kung University’s department of accountancy.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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