Ma Administration Financial and Economic Policies Should Consider the Common Man

Ma Administration Financial and Economic Policies Should Consider the Common Man
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
December 2, 2010

During the recent five cities elections, the KMT retained control over three cities. But it received 400,000 votes fewer than the DPP. This was partly due to the Yang Chiu-hsing Effect in Kaohsiung, which split the Blue vote. But no matter how one runs the numbers, at least 30% of County Chief Yang's support was his own. Therefore, the Blue Camp lost by at least 100,000 votes. Such an outcome is a clear warning sign that bodes ill for Ma Ying-jeou's re-election prospects. The reasons for this outcome deserves careful analysis by the current administration.

One month ago, the US held its midterm elections. The Democratic Party under by Barack Obama suffered a disastrous defeat. Outside observers attributed this to a sluggish economic recovery and long-term unemployment. Economic issues such as these dragged down the ruling Democratic administration. But this was not the case on Taiwan. A few days before the election, the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics announced the economic growth figures for the first three quarters. GDP growth for this year will exceed 10%, thanks in part to a low baseline last year. Not only did Taiwan's growth reach a new 20 year high, it outpaced the other Asian Tigers. The unemployment rate was not bad either, falling below 5% in October. The Executive Yuan supported a range of short-term employment relief programs. In any event the numbers were much better than in the US. Why were the rejuvenation of the economy and the stablization of cross-Strait relations not reflected in the election outcome?

A closer look at the Ma administration's economic policies suggests a single answer: "Pride goeth before a fall." The Ma administration's general thrust has been to break the bonds imposed upon the nation during the DPP era, to promote the normalization of cross-Strait economic and trade relations, and Taiwan's formal integration into the global community. The DPP has invariably opposed Mainland China at every turn. It has welcomed other aspects of globalization without hesitation. But it has refused to "go west" toward the Mainland. Although its recalitrance applied only to the Mainland, given Taiwan's geographical situation, such recalcitrance effectively precluded the possibility of global integration. The Ma administration's policy addresses this gap. It enables businesses to fully integrate with the global economy. Naturally it has provided a major boost to the economy.

The Ma administration's business policy however, has not necessarily benefitted the common man. The experience of governments the world over has shown that under globalization entrepreneurs are invariably the ones who profit. Disadvantaged workers often become victims. Globalization often widens the gap between rich and poor, and between high-tech talent and low-skilled labor. Therefore, although the Ma administration's cross-Strait policy was sound overall, it ignored the differing impacts on different segments of society. It failed to compensate for them. The most obvious example was the government's liberaization of cross-Strait trade, The government welcomed globalization. It threw the doors open to entrepreneurs, providing them with tax cuts. It dared not touch the capital gains tax. It greatly reduced business taxes and inheritance taxes. By comparison, the disadvantaged felt exploited.

When the Ma administration liberalized cross-Strait exchanges and signed ECFA, it threw open the doors. It boosted economic momentum. But it ignored micro level concerns. The gaps in its policy were glaring. If the Republic of China was a totalitarian nation, such gaps would have no aftereffects. But the Republic of China is a democracy. Therefore the feelings of ordinary people will find expression come election time. The Ma administration implemented only one end of the fiscal policy spectrum. Needless to say ordinary citizens who failed to benefit found little to agree with.

We wholeheartedly agree with the Ma administration's liberalization of relations across the Taiwan Strait, and abandonment of isolationism. But the more ambitious the policy, the more it demands close attention and detailed implementation. It must never be implemented in haste. Take the 17% business tax cut for example. It contravened decisions already made by the Executive Yuan. It ignored the need to balance mid-term and long-term government revenue and expenditures. The result? Most people feel the government was only "looking after Big Business." Such policies make ROC tax rates the lowest in the world. The Ma administration simply will not have the funds required to care for the socially disadvantaged. This may be why so many people feel discontent. Some government officials are single-mindedly populist in their thinking. The Presidential Advisory Group on Finance cabinet members failed to correct them. The results, needless to say, were regrettable.

The Ma administration's economic policies have focused on cross-Strait liberalization and tax cuts. But they neglected the welfare of the common man. Think of economic policy as the structure of a house. Current policy has only the steel skeleton, but no walls or floors, let alone interior spaces. Such a financial policy has breadth and depth, but lacks flesh and blood. It fails to relate to the common man.

The Ma administration has just over a year to redress these shortcomings. By then the 2012 presidential election will no longer be about who is elected president. It will be about whether the Open Door Policy can be maintained. If the current administration loses, and a Closed Door Policy is reimposed, that will be Taiwan's tragedy.

馬政府財經政策 應考量庶民感受
2010-12-02 中國時報

此次五都選舉國民黨贏了三都，但得票數卻輸給民進黨四十餘萬票。此中雖然有大高雄楊秋興分票效應，但再怎麼低估，楊縣長總有個三○％的自力票源，故淨估算藍軍還是大輸十餘萬票。這樣的票數對馬英九的連任之路絕對是個警訊。為什麼會產生這個結果，實在值得主政者仔細分析檢討。

一個月前美國期中選舉歐巴馬所領導的民主黨慘敗，外界咸認為其原因是因為美國經濟復甦緩慢，失業率長期偏高，是經濟問題拖累了民主黨政府，但台灣的情況似乎卻不然。台灣主計處在選前數天公布了前三季的經濟成長率，部分拜去年基期數較低之賜，今年全年ＧＤＰ成長率可能破十％，不但是廿年來新高，且在亞洲四小龍中亦為不俗。就失業率來看，十月降低至五％的表現也不算差，雖然背後有行政院種種短期就業方案的支撐，但總是比美國數據要好看太多。為什麼回春的景氣、穩定的兩岸關係，也無法反映在選票上呢？

大體而言，馬政府的財經政策左看右看，就只有「亢龍有悔」一招，其大方向就是破除民進黨政府時代的鎖國，推動兩岸經貿關係正常化，將台灣正式融入全球化的大布局中。由於民進黨始終抵拒中國大陸，其操作一向是逢中必抗必反，故台灣雖然在其他面向迎接全球化毫不遲疑，唯獨對於西進大陸板塊躊躇不前。這雖然只是西進大陸的局部猶疑，但就台灣地緣而言，就形同全球布局的戰略破功。馬政府的政策恰好補此闕漏，對企業而言不啻使其面對的全球視野完整化，對總體經濟當然是一大利多。

但是前述對企業布局有利的總體政策，不必然與庶民的整體感受有任何關係。全世界所有國家的經驗都顯示，各國面臨全球化之後，都是大企業家獲利、不少弱勢勞工經常反受其害。也因為如此，全球化常使所得分配惡化、高技術人才與低技術勞工的薪資差距擴大。因此，雖然馬政府開放兩岸的總體政策方向正確，但顯然忽視了社會上不同群體之間的衝擊差異，未能有所補足。最明顯的事例，就是在政府開放兩岸經貿、迎向全球化之餘，又全開對企業家大幅減稅之門，一方面不敢觸碰資本利得稅，另一方面卻又大減營所稅、遺贈稅，在在使弱勢民眾感到相對受到剝奪。

簡言之，馬政府開放兩岸、簽訂ＥＣＦＡ的政策固然是大開大闔、氣勢宏觀，但卻忽略了局部防守，以致招式的洞隙清楚明白。如果台灣是一個極權國度，這樣的落差尚不致引發後遺症。但我們畢竟是民主國家，庶民的感受終究會在選舉投票時一一呈現，而馬政府僅執一端的財經政策，當然就得不到基層選民認同了。

開放兩岸、拋棄鎖國當然是我們衷心贊成的政策，但是政策越是格局宏大，就越要有可長可久的配套構思、顧慮周全，萬萬不能倉卒從事。以營所稅降至十七％為例，其既違反行政院已然做成之決策、又完全不顧慮中長期政府收支之平衡、更使大部分民眾徒生「照顧大企業」的反感。這樣的政策幾乎使台灣的租稅負擔率居全球最低，根本不可能承擔馬政府所想要照顧的社會弱勢支出，恐怕也在不少人心中種下了若干不滿的因子。部分政府官員思考單線而民粹，而總統府財經諮詢小組、行政院財經閣員都無法有所補正，結果當然令人遺憾。

整體而言，馬政府的財經政策著重「兩岸開放」、「大幅減稅」兩項，但對於庶民福祉的提升，卻欠缺關照與論述。如果將經濟布局比喻為建房子，則當前的政策只有鋼架卻沒有牆面樓板，更不見內部裝潢規畫。這樣的財經格局大則大矣，但卻無血無肉，與庶民感受當然有距離。

要振衰起敝，馬政府還有一年多的時間。屆時二○一二大選，倒不是誰當總統的問題，而是開放政策能否延續的問題。萬一失去江山再走鎖國回頭路，那就是台灣的悲哀了。