It's a good thing when the government is willing to give money to the people to subsidize their livelihood. Logically speaking, it would seem that no one should object.
But if the government is so poor that it has to borrow money to get by and lacks funds even for normal expenditures, then it would be best if it didn't try to squeeze out the extra money needed to subsidize people.
The DPP administration has once again raised the idea of a NT$3,000 monthly subsidy for people aged 65 and over who are not receiving other government subsidies. It is planning to begin paying out the money to over 400,000 people next January.
Of course this is a good deed. But given the government's increasingly tight financial situation, stubbornly insisting on digging up NT$16 billion of taxpayers' hard-earned money and distributing it as subsidies which aren't absolutely necessary obviously contravenes the principle of doing good where it is most needed.
Taiwan's society is steadily aging. The population of people aged 65 and older is already approaching the 2 million mark. Every politician must confront the issue of the expanding numbers of the elderly, regardless of whether he or she is motivated by administrative concerns or trying to win votes. That is, he or she must do some good for the elderly.
But in doing good for the elderly, the government should consider two basic prerequisites. Do the financial resources exist? And how urgent is the matter? Doing good isn't wrong, but doing good where it isn't most needed is a mistake.
First, consider the financial resources or lack thereof. The Executive Yuan decided not to distribute subsidies to the elderly last year because it lacked the money. The government is even poorer now, with the general budget deficit for next year rising to NT$500 billion.
Second, consider the question of urgency. Although providing subsidies for the elderly was one of A-bian's (
Furthermore, comparing the needs of the economy, which is in dire straits, and 400,000-plus seniors, who are not impoverished, we see that subsidies for the elderly are obviously not a top priority.
Third, take a look at Japan. At the same time Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi presented his economic reform plan, he re-minded the elderly that belt-tightening would affect their welfare benefits and they would have to accept the pain brought on by the reforms like everyone else. Otherwise, it would be very difficult to achieve structural reform of the economy.
The DPP administration always considered subsidies for the elderly as a transitional policy, the long-term structural policy being the National Pension Program (
At a time when structural crises are staring us in the face, for the government to rashly push any transitional policies will only worsen and hasten those crises. The DPP administration couldn't be so dumb that it is unable to comprehend this bit of common sense.
Some NT$16 billion isn't small change. If used in an election campaign, it will have the effect of "buying" goodwill from 400,000-plus seniors. But if the result of the campaign is to finish off the economy, then how is the government's good deed different from an evil one?
Wang Chien-chuang is president of The Journalist magazine.
Translated by Ethan Harkness
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with