Despite repeated promises from the government that it would do everything it could to improve the lives of ordinary people, it seems to be doing just the opposite.
Official figures released by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics show that as many as 1.68 million families in the nation have seen their incomes decrease over the past seven years, but the Ministry of Economic Affairs is nevertheless trying to halt a plan to raise minimum wage.
On the same day that the figures were released, Minister of Economic Affairs Woody Duh (杜紫軍) said that he had made a phone call to newly sworn-in Minister of Labor Chen Hsiung-wen (陳雄文), asking him to reconsider the plan to raise the minimum wage, and had received a positive response from Chen.
Apparently, Duh had made the phone call under tremendous pressure from the business sector, as business leaders who were invited to attend a meeting to discuss raising the minimum wage protested by refusing to appear. The Chinese National Federation of Industries also released a statement that strongly condemned the government for even considering to raise the minimum wage.
Duh said that he made the phone call because he had received many complaints from business and industry leaders, and agrees with them that the Ministry of Labor’s handling of the issue was inappropriate, adding that Chen agreed to show more “goodwill” to businesses.
While it is to be expected that businesses would try to lobby the government and lawmakers to maximize their profits, it is unacceptable to think that they might succeed in turning a policy decision around just by calling Duh and having him persuade Chen to change his mind, despite several promises by President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to take good care of workers and the latest pledge by Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) to raise the minimum wage.
It might also remind people about how difficult it is for workers who have been laid off or are owed salaries or retirement payouts to ask for a meeting with officials or plead for help from the government.
Although labor authorities on central and local government levels have admitted that there were some administrative errors behind several labor disputes that triggered street protests in recent years, officials often insist that they were acting according to the law, and that, while they sympathize with workers, they could not make any exceptions.
Yet exceptions suddenly become possible when business and industry leaders want them.
When business leaders want to meet with officials, whether it is the president, the premier, ministers, or local government officials, meetings are quickly arranged; when business leaders ask for tax cuts, the government quickly arranges them; when business leaders express their desire for relaxed labor regulations, government officials come up with an idea that satisfies both their needs without breaking the law; and now, when business leaders are upset about the government’s plan to raise the minimum wage, they simply call the minister of economic affairs, who persuades the minister of labor to reconsider.
Businesses always argue that if the government grants them what they want, they would make more profit, in turn benefiting workers. However, history tells us that most of the promises from businesses are empty, as are those from government officials.
While the government’s favorable treatment of businesses might help them grow, businesses that rely so much on government policies are obviously not healthy and not truly competitive.
It is time for the government to honor its own words to the public, including workers, and let some businesses be eliminated through competition. Then those that survive would be truly competitive.
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