Promoting Plebiscites vs. Growing the Economy

Promoting Plebiscites vs. Growing the Economy
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
September 20, 2007

While receiving Taiwan business representatives the other day, Chen Shui-bian criticized a Blue Camp television advertisement. In this Kuomintang produced ad, a Korean businessperson criticizes Taiwan, saying it has become too politicized, and that the government has neglected the economy. He says that Taiwan's competitiveness is the lowest among the four Asian dragons. In fact, he says, Taiwan no longer qualifies as an Asian dragon. In response to this ad, President Chen cited economic growth rates, consumer price indices, unemployment rates, and the reactions of global economic fora. He said the data proved that Taiwan's economic performance was actually better than South Korea's. Therefore the Blue Camp ad was a typical case of "Poormouthing Taiwan."

Over the past year, President Chen Shui-bian has repeatedly contradicted himself. His public remarks have been riddled with internal contradictions. People have become so accustomed to his doubletalk, they no longer consider it noteworthy. Even Uncle Sam considers him a headache. Many people tune him out in order to spare themselves the frustration. But when A Bian gushes about Taiwan's economy in such glowing terms, and dismisses anyone who complains as "Poormouthing Taiwan," we have no choice but to respond.

When appraising a nation's economy, one usually relies on certain economic indicators. These include GDP growth rates, price indices, unemployment rates, and consumer confidence indices. If one wishes to examine an economy in greater detail, one must include consumer spending, investment outlays, and exports. Only then can one discern the significance of the numbers. As everyone knows, the numbers for Taiwan's GDP growth over the past few years don't look that bad. But most of that growth was derived from exports. Domestic consumption and investment growth were extremely low. Fourth quarter investment grew slightly last year. But compared to growth in the distant past, the discrepancy was huge. Let's look at the unemployment figures. What's behind these numbers? To what extent do Taiwan's numbers reflect the Executive Yuan's artificial stimulus packages? This needs clarification. Unemployed workers hired by the government and assigned to data entry or spraying insecticide to prevent Dengue fever are "employed" in the short-term. But long-term their inclusion in the ranks of the employed is fraudulent.

If we really want to diagnose Taiwan's economic health, we must look at all the data, not just those that catch the eye but whose significance is dubious. Taiwan's economic growth is concentrated on export sales. Domestic consumer spending and investment is clearly in decline. This reflects serious problems. Why do Taiwan's consumers lack confidence? Even if Taiwan's wage inequality is less serious than South Korea's, why has it suddenly worsened in recent years? What is the potential risk when Taiwan's GDP growth depends solely on exports? Why are domestic and foreign enterprises unwilling to list on the TAIEX, but instead opt for Hong Kong or Singapore? Why is Taiwan's financial market unable to make the world's top 100 list? Once the ASEAN plus Three free trade region takes shape, what will happen to Taiwan's export dependent economic engine? If this single engine falters, how can Taiwan's economy continue to fly? These are hidden concerns beyond the one-sided data President Chen cited. If people voice doubts, whether they are South Korean or African, the government should graciously respond "Thank you." If it reflexively rejects all dissent as "Poormouthing Taiwan," or lashes back with the accusation "You don't love Taiwan," then it is acting remarkably like a fascist regime.

Over the past two weeks, this newspaper has issued special editions investigating Taiwan's prospects. On September 10 we pointed out that it is natural for Taiwan to want to build its own brand. It is natural for Taiwan to want to seize the initiative and get a leg up in the knowledge economy. But a brand cannot be disconnected from it means of production upstream or its markets downstream. Therefore brand building must be international in nature. That was the theme of our September 17 edition. Take Acer as an example. It must set up production in the most suitable location in the world. It must take advantage of every opportunity to market its products to every corner of the globe. Only then can it become a great brand. If the government forbids a business to shift its production to certain locales, or market its products to certain regions, even if its restrictions seem minor, it will impose an intolerable burden on a business's brand strategy. For Taiwan's economy it amounts to a knife through the heart.

The Democratic Progressive Party has been in power for over seven years. Has it has been a benefit or a detriment to Taiwan businesses? Don't bother dredging up economic statistics. Just look at all the businesses leaving in droves, and the market mired in recession. If economic problems weren't so difficult to solve, why would A Bian bother provoking Uncle Sam with his meaningless "Plebiscite to Join the UN?" After seven years in power, all the DPP can do is demagogue the "nativization, rectification of names" issue. Is this not an open admission that economic issues are too difficult and painful for the government to tackle?

中時電子報
中國時報 　2007.09.20
辦公投與拚經濟：虛實之間的取捨
中時社論

　陳水扁總統日前在接見台商代表時，提出他對藍營某一件電視廣告內容的批評。在該件國民黨製作的廣告中，某一位韓籍商人透過口述指台灣最近幾年政治議題太多，而政府整體之經濟建設不力，以致於台灣在競爭力方面落在亞洲四小龍之後，甚至是掉落在龍群之外。對於這樣的批評，陳總統則以經濟成長率、物價指數、失業率、世界經濟論壇等總體指標作回應。他認為這些數據都顯示台灣經濟表現其實優於韓國，所以藍營的廣告是標準的「唱衰台灣」。

　在過去一年中，陳水扁總統前後不一、內容矛盾的發言所在多有，各界都已經見怪不怪。對於這樣一位連老美都感到頭疼的總統，許多人民原本對其言論都寧願視而不言，以免自尋煩惱。但是阿扁把台灣經濟講得「甲勇」，更把對台灣經濟有意見的人描述為唱衰台灣，我們就不得不加以評論了。

　評估一個國家經濟的好壞，一般常以若干經濟指標做基礎，包括ＧＤＰ成長率、物價指數、失業率、消費者信心指數等。如果要再細分細看，則ＧＤＰ成長率之中又包含民間消費、投資支出與出口等項目，分別可以探討其個別數據的意義。如所周知，過去幾年台灣的ＧＤＰ成長在數字上看還不算差，但是絕大多數的成長率都是來自於出口，而國內消費與投資的成長卻是非常低。即使是去年第四季投資成長小有提升，但是與早年動輒兩位數相比，還是有天壤之別。再以失業率的數據來看，台灣的數字背後究竟有多少是來自於行政院促進就業方案的浮面刺激，也有待釐清。如果有失業人口被政府雇去輸入電腦資料或噴灑登革熱藥水，他們短期會被歸為就業，但就中長期而言，這些就業人口絕對是虛假的數字。

　我們要強調的是，如果真的要分析台灣經濟的體質好不好、衰不衰，就要把各種統計數據全部攤開來看，而不是只抓少數亮眼的、意義不足的、在年份上截頭去尾的數字來討論。當台灣經濟成長集中在外銷且國內消費投資明顯衰退時，它當然反映一些嚴重的問題。為什麼台灣消費者信心不足？即使台灣的所得分配不均目前仍較韓國為優，為什麼最近幾年在急劇地惡化？當台灣以出口單一引擎勉力支撐ＧＤＰ成長時，會有什麼潛在的風險？為什麼國內外企業都不願意在台灣掛牌上市，而選擇香港、新加坡？為什麼國際上將台灣金融環境排到世界百名以外？一旦東協加三自由貿易區成型，會不會衝擊到台灣的出口引擎？如果單一引擎受損，台灣的經濟要怎麼飛？凡此種種，都是在陳總統所引片面數據之外的隱憂。如果有人提出疑慮，不論講話的人是韓國人或非洲人，政府都該感謝雅言才是。如果對於異音就打為「唱衰台灣」之輩，再加上「不愛台灣」的隱喻，這就像是法西斯作為了。

　在過去兩周，本報系都以專刊的方式探索台灣的希望。在九月十日我們指出，台灣當然希望建立品牌，俾能在知識經濟時代掌握先機與優勢。但是品牌無論如何不能脫離上游的生產與下游的市場，因此品牌的建立，必須要以貼近國際為前提，這也是本報九月十七日的探討主題。就以宏碁為例吧，它必須在全世界最適合代工的地方生產、以各種行銷方式銷售到全世界最有機會的每一個角落，才可能成就宏碁品牌。反過來說，如果政府不准企業去特定地點生產銷售、或是訂下種種不合理的運輸限制，即使只是一小部分的拘束，對企業的品牌策略都是難以承受之重，對於台灣經濟則是錐心刺骨之痛。

　民進黨執政七年多來，對台灣企業的全球布局是利是弊，也許我們不必拘泥經濟數字，只要看看廠商出走與上市上櫃的蕭條，就已經一葉知秋。坦白說，如果不是經濟議題難以著力，阿扁又何必去炒作一個惹怒老美、虛無空泛的入聯公投呢？如果七年執政下來，就只能炒「本土、正名」這一道虛菜，這不是恰好驗證了其他經濟議題的沉痛與不堪了嗎？